Preview: Medal of Honor Beta Hands On
- Thread starter Steve Butts
- Start date
Looks a lot like BFBC.
Take control of certain points with a timer / blowing them up, and finally getting an airstrike? Seems familiar...
Also, the vid was somewhat funny because it seemed like you were only ever dieing!
Personally having both MW2 and BFBC2 I doubt I'll be picking this one up, looks pretty darn generic.
Take control of certain points with a timer / blowing them up, and finally getting an airstrike? Seems familiar...
Also, the vid was somewhat funny because it seemed like you were only ever dieing!
Personally having both MW2 and BFBC2 I doubt I'll be picking this one up, looks pretty darn generic.
Basically this. It just looks like a boring rip-off, so I won't be bothering with it. Even if it wasn't, that video made it look rubbish. The BFBC2 graphics are better, the gameplay looks better, and "serious" FPS games set in the Middle East are just old hat now.FallenJellyDoughnut said:
The game looks very much like Battlefield because of the same developers, the same game engine, and the leveling up class system. Does it feel the same as bad company 2?Steve Butts said:
Two things. First off, to all those who keep commenting/complaining about how the multiplayer looks very similar to Bad Company 2, that is because it was designed by the same people who did Bad Company 2. And, really, the multiplayer in Bad Company 2 rocks. I find it much more entertaining than Modern Warfare 2 because it makes you think about what you're doing instead of relying on purely twitch reactions. You need to be tactical and work as a team otherwise you will lose. As always, you will have your griefers and your spawn-campers, but, overall, it does not detract from the game.
Medal of Honor looks like it has refined that multiplayer experience into something comparable, if not downright better, than Bad Company 2. All things aside, though, I just wanted to get across the point that yes, the multiplayer looks the same, because it essentially is the same. Now, please, enough with that.
Honestly, though, I'm not sure such a comment was needed for the multiplayer content. I mean, you obvious that it gave you pause for a moment or two and you felt it important enough to mention, I just don't know if doing so in regards to the multiplayer was the way to go. It doesn't seem like it would give people any more pause than playing the Axis side in WWII-based games, or playing the Militia side in MW2. I'd be interested to see what your thoughts on the topic are after the single-player is released, though.
My two cents.
Medal of Honor looks like it has refined that multiplayer experience into something comparable, if not downright better, than Bad Company 2. All things aside, though, I just wanted to get across the point that yes, the multiplayer looks the same, because it essentially is the same. Now, please, enough with that.
Secondly, it's interesting that Steve decided to mention the issue of the political content. We hear all manner of praise for games like Modern Warfare and the like, but the political ramifications and commentary voiced by such games is never really discussed. It's only when games like Six Days In Fallujah come to light that people start to talk about it, and it's usually to decry the issue as anti-patriotic and brand it as taboo.Steve Butts said:
Honestly, though, I'm not sure such a comment was needed for the multiplayer content. I mean, you obvious that it gave you pause for a moment or two and you felt it important enough to mention, I just don't know if doing so in regards to the multiplayer was the way to go. It doesn't seem like it would give people any more pause than playing the Axis side in WWII-based games, or playing the Militia side in MW2. I'd be interested to see what your thoughts on the topic are after the single-player is released, though.
My two cents.
Since the game obviously is nowhere near completion, and is in CLOSED BETA TESTING of only the online play I'm willing to say that people shouldn't be giggling at the graphics, they will most likely be smoother out a lot before release, especially the character models.
I personally despised the online multiplayer of both MW (1 and 2) and BFBC2, the game was meant to be like a war between players, instead it's a clusterfuck of a small group of people running around hoping to kill a ton of people by surprise before dying. People don't normally like dying in real life, so a game that aims to portray something along those lines fails miserably when it's the only real way to play properly. BFBC2 was practically the same as MW only with more irritating characters and some of the most pathetic scenery destruction I've ever seen (anyone with the physics knowledge of a retarded 4 year old can tell you that shit just doesn't work that way; realistic scenery destruction will most likely not be here for at least a decade, because programming it now would take around 10 years before it was release ready, and by then there would be a new console generation).
I liked the more serious nature of this review compared to some others that have been posted on the escapist which will often just make me stop and cringe due to hearing some horrendously aggravating puns. The Escapist has always shown itself as a far less biased games site than others, even going as far to flat out say that someone that they promoted was lackluster (Alpha Protocol for one). But bringing up the political ideals was something I liked, but I do hope that it doesn't portray the soldiers are pure-heart heroes (some were downright monsters, but most were good men who went into a situation with next to no information). I personally think that it's nice to say where things are happening, quite frankly, if I were from one of the eastern nations that these modern games constantly reflect I'd be more offended by the annoying piss-ants tip-toeing around them insulting me instead of just coming out and saying it with what MIGHT be a fair story.
I may consider picking it up purely for the single player as I do on occasion enjoy playing MW and MW2 for their single player modes (and special ops mode is something I'd LOVE to see more of) when they aren't the most terribly gimmicky pieces of garbage (you know the sections I mean).
I personally despised the online multiplayer of both MW (1 and 2) and BFBC2, the game was meant to be like a war between players, instead it's a clusterfuck of a small group of people running around hoping to kill a ton of people by surprise before dying. People don't normally like dying in real life, so a game that aims to portray something along those lines fails miserably when it's the only real way to play properly. BFBC2 was practically the same as MW only with more irritating characters and some of the most pathetic scenery destruction I've ever seen (anyone with the physics knowledge of a retarded 4 year old can tell you that shit just doesn't work that way; realistic scenery destruction will most likely not be here for at least a decade, because programming it now would take around 10 years before it was release ready, and by then there would be a new console generation).
I liked the more serious nature of this review compared to some others that have been posted on the escapist which will often just make me stop and cringe due to hearing some horrendously aggravating puns. The Escapist has always shown itself as a far less biased games site than others, even going as far to flat out say that someone that they promoted was lackluster (Alpha Protocol for one). But bringing up the political ideals was something I liked, but I do hope that it doesn't portray the soldiers are pure-heart heroes (some were downright monsters, but most were good men who went into a situation with next to no information). I personally think that it's nice to say where things are happening, quite frankly, if I were from one of the eastern nations that these modern games constantly reflect I'd be more offended by the annoying piss-ants tip-toeing around them insulting me instead of just coming out and saying it with what MIGHT be a fair story.
I may consider picking it up purely for the single player as I do on occasion enjoy playing MW and MW2 for their single player modes (and special ops mode is something I'd LOVE to see more of) when they aren't the most terribly gimmicky pieces of garbage (you know the sections I mean).
I'd rather have a hole drilled in my head than have anything to do with another generic brown mess of another modern warfare wannabe.
Godamnit, we get it already. It looks like Bad Company 2. WE KNOW. If you don't have anything else to add please shut the fuck up.
OT: I personally am glad they finally got the balls to put a name on the setting. I'm getting pretty sick of unspecifiedistan.
OT: I personally am glad they finally got the balls to put a name on the setting. I'm getting pretty sick of unspecifiedistan.
Actually, besides the icons, it looks like MW2, not BC2. Because it was basically DICE attempting to rip off MW2.matrix3509 said:
There are no walls or structures being blown up, there are all the retarded and obnoxiously obtrusive messages everytime you do ANYTHING at all, maps seem relatively "boxy", guns seem to kill in 2-3 bullets, gameplay seems dumbed down a lot (e.g.: no recoil)... etc.
So upset DICE got to work on it. It looks like a BC2 clone shot for shot.
Also, why would the Taliban have air strikes and mortar strikes to that degree? If it's going to be genuine, the Taliban need to have a terrain advantage, and no support. But of course DICE will just reskin them, give them AK's and call it a day. I loved BC2 Multiplayer. But I don't want another one so soon.
Also, those are supposed to be US Army Rangers? They are wearing US Marine camouflage. Army wears ACU Digital.
And is that Taliban guy using a copy and paste MG emplacement from BC2? Pretty sure the Taliban don't have any heavy machine guns with armored shields and bullet proof glass.
Also, why would the Taliban have air strikes and mortar strikes to that degree? If it's going to be genuine, the Taliban need to have a terrain advantage, and no support. But of course DICE will just reskin them, give them AK's and call it a day. I loved BC2 Multiplayer. But I don't want another one so soon.
Also, those are supposed to be US Army Rangers? They are wearing US Marine camouflage. Army wears ACU Digital.
And is that Taliban guy using a copy and paste MG emplacement from BC2? Pretty sure the Taliban don't have any heavy machine guns with armored shields and bullet proof glass.
It's still the most pertinent observation. This just looks like a hybrid of MW and BFBC2. I can't see ANYTHING there that sets it apart - what else is there to comment on? There's not even been enough time since MW2 let alone BC2 to warrant yet another straight-forward modern multiplayer-centric FPS.matrix3509 said:
In short, that video was bleh. Nothing new, nothing exiting, just a shameless re-hash of the most recent popular shooter.
quite simply the reason for the lack of realism there is that if they copied the taliban in actuality. The taliban would have all of 5 weapons, no vehicle support, and pretty get their asses kicked. I think the developers just decided that gameplay was more important than realism (wish mw2 took note of that sometime)Mcface said:
Looks like another BC2
I judge an FPS game by how well designed the viewmodels on the weapons look (You may laugh, but it works surprisingly well). Considering that they look just as much like duplo blocks as bad company 2, you're at a terrible start. Iron/optical sights (if the game uses them) also are an excellent indicator, and these ones look like shite.
I judge an FPS game by how well designed the viewmodels on the weapons look (You may laugh, but it works surprisingly well). Considering that they look just as much like duplo blocks as bad company 2, you're at a terrible start. Iron/optical sights (if the game uses them) also are an excellent indicator, and these ones look like shite.
You can make it balanced without that junk.Pebsy said:
Giving everyone the same weapons with different skins is a cop out.
Taliban are going to be defending. They have that advantage already, they are sitting in wait. They can have IEDs, AP mines, RPGs, grenades, grenade launchers etc.
Americans are attacking, they get an armored vehicle. But they are fighting uphill, or into a town packed with places someone would ambush them from.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,494
- 3,445
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
it looks cool but having to take out aa is the dry hump of military quests, not an air force in the world is really that worried about aa, I mean we have air craft that specialize in taking sam sights, in desert storm we had the wild weasel variant of the f4 phantom knocking down so many sam sights that the operators were worried about even turning on the radar