I would actually like to see a company do that make a crazy balls to the wall crazy level that was an hour but they go to town on it and then put it up fior DL on the online services price it competitively and i'll bite.
Single player is completely rote. Game starts out with
drive in a car only to get it ambushed.
Basically anything that was in MW2, is in this. Artillery? Check. Slow motion breaching? Check. Dudebro team-mates? You get the idea. Good thing about MoH is that the gunplay feels pretty good. Guns pack a punch and I never got bored of whatever weapon I was using. Grenades are pretty useless though. Also, enemy AI is terrible. Even on Hard (not really Hard - game feels super easy.) Graphics look worse than MW2. Some awful textures, bad pop-in and average explosions. All around, pretty underwhelming - especially if it's only 4 hours as advertised.
Multiplayer has its charm. Basically BF2 without vehicles. I know the game isn't officially out, but there's some pretty egregious lag right now. Snipers feel kind of over-powered. Maps and level design is pretty meh; also feels like there are only 4-5 maps right now and obviously they all look the same. Still, the gunplay is awesome and of course, the game has perks. I can see myself sticking with MP for a few weeks before Black Ops hits.
This game will not get a 94 on GR. I think it'll review around 7.5/10 and I agree with that so far.
Wait, I thought multiplayer servers were down, also, some of the multiplayer modes have vehicles. Also, some maps are in the mountains with mud huts, some are in city areas.
Wait, I thought multiplayer servers were down, also, some of the multiplayer modes have vehicles. Also, some maps are in the mountains with mud huts, some are in city areas.
A) Servers were up.
B) Only played team DM. No vehicles.
C) Mud huts or city areas = not a lot of variety like I said. This may be the greyest game ever made. Also playing map twice in a row just to swap teams = wack.
But hey maybe I just dreamt I played it last night....
A) Servers were up.
B) Only played team DM. No vehicles.
C) Mud huts or city areas = not a lot of variety like I said. This may be the greyest game ever made. Also playing map twice in a row just to swap teams = wack.
But hey maybe I just dreamt I played it last night....
A) Odd, they weren't up when my buddy was trying to get on yesterday.
B) So you didn't really explore the multiplayer options in depth.
C) There's not a lot of variety in Afganistan color wise they could do. It's going to be a pretty brown game.
Typically I expect a bit more "research" from someone who is going to assign a predicted score for a game.
It may well be underwhelming to many, but a lot of the complaints (color palette) are pretty absurd. Also the game is based in real events, with characters based off of actual military, military ops, and attitude. People saying "MOH is copying COD" are pretty absurd in their remarks. COD didn't invent the military, military attitude, military ops, or military speak.
Everything I have seen of this game is pretty close to authentic. CoD while enjoyable is more akin to an over the top action movie.
It's called first impressions for a reason. But hey, next time I won't post before I put 20 hours into the game.
It may well be underwhelming to many, but a lot of the complaints (color palette) are pretty absurd. Also the game is based in real events, with characters based off of actual military, military ops, and attitude. People saying "MOH is copying COD" are pretty absurd in their remarks. COD didn't invent the military, military attitude, military ops, or military speak.
The gameplay itself feels completely boiler-plate and done-to-death. The military speak and realism have absolutely nothing to do with how generic and played-out the set pieces, environments and action sequences are.
Everything I have seen of this game is pretty close to authentic. CoD while enjoyable is more akin to an over the top action movie.
4 to 8 hours is not "normal" for a shooter - there's a big difference between 4 hours and 8 hours. Average length for a FPS used to be around 8 hours. Then both Modern Warfares came in at 6 hours, and everyone seemed to be fine with it for some reason and 6 hours became acceptable. Now, Medal of Honor drags it even lower to 4, and that's supposed to be acceptable as well? How about a game that's just one hour-long battle, but has really terrific production values?
Hard to do when there's 75 players online and 70 are playing Team Assault.
From what I've played, the maps aren't as well designed as BFBC2 and aren't as varied or nice to look at like MW2.
It's called first impressions for a reason. But hey, next time I won't post before I put 20 hours into the game.
The gameplay itself feels completely boiler-plate and done-to-death. The speak and realism has absolutely nothing to do with how generic and played-out the set pieces, environments and action sequences are.
So playing 3 hours is too judgemental yet you're rating it's authenticity on some videos you've watched? Cool.
2. First impressions don't usually end with a score prediction.
3. Clearly the game isn't for you if you are judging the story the way you are. It's been marketed as a game showing authentic missions from special operations in Afganistan, clearly that isn't your thing, since you seem to be looking for something else. They went over the top as it is, I'm glad it's more restrained. That said, I thought some of the set pieces were awesome
like the Apache run, and the thermal sniper missions.
Chrange said:
:lol
You should really play it before saying it's anywhere near authentic. I'll say more on Tuesday
Single player is completely rote. Game starts out with
drive in a car only to get it ambushed.
Basically anything that was in MW2, is in this. Artillery? Check. Slow motion breaching? Check. Dudebro team-mates? You get the idea. Good thing about MoH is that the gunplay feels pretty good. Guns pack a punch and I never got bored of whatever weapon I was using. Grenades are pretty useless though. Also, enemy AI is terrible. Even on Hard (not really Hard - game feels super easy.) Graphics look worse than MW2. Some awful textures, bad pop-in and average explosions. All around, pretty underwhelming - especially if it's only 4 hours as advertised.
Multiplayer has its charm. Basically BF2 without vehicles. I know the game isn't officially out, but there's some pretty egregious lag right now. Snipers feel kind of over-powered. Maps and level design is pretty meh; also feels like there are only 4-5 maps right now and obviously they all look the same. Still, the gunplay is awesome and of course, the game has perks. I can see myself sticking with MP for a few weeks before Black Ops hits.
This game will not get a 94 on GR. I think it'll review around 7.5/10 and I agree with that so far.
Thanks for the quick impressions. Definitely not buying this anymore with only a 4 hour MW2 inspired campaign and meh MP features but not sure if I even want to rent now. Has anyone confirmed how long the "trial" period is for the online pass?
What is so offensive about a score prediction? Get off your high horse.
3. Clearly the game isn't for you if you are judging the story the way you are. It's been marketed as a game showing authentic missions from special operations in Afganistan, clearly that isn't your thing, since you seem to be looking for something else. They went over the top as it is, I'm glad it's more restrained. That said, I thought some of the set pieces were awesome
like the Apache run, and the thermal sniper missions.
Watching a game = more than a few videos which is what the comment was addressing. I know what the game is, in its entirety, minus control issues. So yeah, unless the game CONTROLS like shit, I know the game.
The AI isn't any worse than CoD lemming AI, since that's what you seem to be comparing it to. Worst in years? It's that kind of hyperbolic statement that makes you impossible to take seriously.
Edit: Anyway, I have a wedding to go to, and further discussion is irrelevant anyway.
I would actually like to see a company do that make a crazy balls to the wall crazy level that was an hour but they go to town on it and then put it up fior DL on the online services price it competitively and i'll bite.
Watching a game = more than a few videos which is what the comment was addressing. I know what the game is, in its entirety, minus control issues. So yeah, unless the game CONTROLS like shit, I know the game.
The AI isn't any worse than CoD lemming AI, since that's what you seem to be comparing it to. Worst in years? It's that kind of hyperbolic statement that makes you impossible to take seriously.
Edit: Anyway, I have a wedding to go to, and further discussion is irrelevant anyway.
But you haven't played the game. Just make to make that clear. You act like this game is ARMA 2, all I see are enemies that act like headless chickens and identical set pieces that were in MW2. At least the gunplay is fun. Enjoy your wedding!
Reviews are embargoed until the launch of the game, but let me put it this way: I'm not surprised the ex-Infinity Ward folks were quickly snapped up by EA.
Ok I just started watching the stream and holy mother of texture pop-in! :lol
<Goat of the year>
Seriously Unreal Engine sucks. And if you know as a dev that the engine has problems like this avoid scenes like this!
Seeing as that the core of Infinity Ward that left Activision was was once from 2015, the dev who made the best Medal of Honor game, I'm not surprised either.
I am thinking about picking this up just because I have a lot of coupons from Kmart but it doesn't seem to be looking that good. Kind of sounds it could have used a little more time but they probably wanted to get it out before Black Ops.
The god of war games made this into formula. And most people don't even play more than a few hours (if they even get there) of ANY game they buy, so... why the fuck not? It's what we used to do in the arcades anyway.
/offtopic though
@ the goat. Nuke it from orbit, even when I realise the texture would have popped in 900 ms later.
I know it's not what the original poster meant but the gun sounds in the beta are fucking awful. They made the rifles sound like rapid fire cannons. :lol
This game has looked offkey since it's E3 showing. I remember their were whispers about it being delayed as it looked so rough.
I'm into 'military shooters' but this just doesn't grab me. I was watching that SP stream earlier and EA promised 'authenticity' i saw 'all ghillied up' and 'one shot one' kill OTT action.
I mean the level even had a bit where an a group of enemies cross a bridge and two stop so one can take a piss and you and your solider buddy take out 1 enemy each. :lol
Add onto that the beta was lacklustre some people have said they have improved it from earlier this year but i only really have time to game on three FPS's Halo Reach,Bad Company 2 and Black Ops are my chosen ones this season.
Each offers something slightly different in terms of play.