Medal of Honor

Retr0gamer · 13-10-2010 4:20pm

Weiland79, stop trolling.

Dcully · 13-10-2010 4:32pm

weiland79 wrote: »

Oh Sh!t he's inadvertantly stumbled into the PC forum........

If he's really really quite maybe console boy can escape with his life.
But he will have to be quick because he's heard that these guy's are super fast with a keyboard and mouse.

Pew pew!!! Oh no It's too late for console boy, he's been rumbled by Sheriff DCULLY and with a press of his index finger Sheriff DCULLY makes brown bread of console boy.

THE END

( i bought it for the 360) Ruuuuuun awaaaaaay!!!!!

I was trying to help you by saying it was available for a cheaper price elsewhere, hence why i asked for your format incase you wanted it for pc.
Sorry i tried to assist you at all now lol.

weiland79 · 13-10-2010 4:35pm

Dcully wrote: »

I was trying to help you by saying it was available for a cheaper price elsewhere, hence why i asked for your format incase you wanted it for pc.
Sorry i tried to assist you at all now lol.

I know that guy's i was only taking the mick i wasn't trying to troll or offend anyone. I started the feckin thread for fecks sake.

Friends?:):):)

Tyrant^ · 13-10-2010 4:38pm

I declare this game a fail !

...based on 10 mins of youtube videos and reading half this thread ! :pac:

Seriously hardly seems worth buying this did they just copy / paste BC2 code ?
Not paying for some new skins / maps / weapons / "Smoother gameplay

"

weiland79 · 13-10-2010 5:08pm

Can anyone suggest a games forum that the yanks might use so i can get some first hand accounts of the game.

marco_polo · 13-10-2010 5:32pm

So essentially we have a game with a four hour single player campaign even though DICE developed the the entire multiplayer part separately.

It begs the question of exactly how short the single player campaign would have been if Danger Close studios had to develop it all in their own.

heebusjeebus · 13-10-2010 5:44pm

weiland79 wrote: »

Can anyone suggest a games forum that the yanks might use so i can get some first hand accounts of the game.

NeoGaf

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=409477&page=17

Fnz · 13-10-2010 6:32pm

tman wrote: »

Erm, I was comparing two different games... One (this) which seemingly should have got 6 or 7 out of 10, then 'Vania which based on the review itself should have got 9.
There might not be that much difference between an 8 and a 9, but there's a huge gap between a 6-7 and a 9!

Oh, I really thought you were using the "it got an 8 when the text read like a 9" as it's own, separate indictment of Eurogamer. When arguing over such minutia is usually the action of internet trolls and true-believer fanboys.

Never mind, so.

Retr0gamer · 13-10-2010 6:41pm

TBH the eurogamer reviews seem to be very very fishy for the last while. I find reading Julian Rignalls comments about what he thinks about the game in the platform face-offs a lot more reliable. I too thought that Vania read like a high 9/10 game while MoH was a terrible review that told you very little about the game and slated it yet it got a higher mark than I expected. Not saying there's any brown envelopes going on just that some of their reviewers are not very good while others like ellie gibson you can rely on.

Retr0gamer · 13-10-2010 6:44pm

All you people that thought Frontline was a good game will be in for a shock to see just how bad it really was

krudler · 13-10-2010 6:51pm

Star Bingo wrote: »

yeah it don't look good. Edge gave it a 7, which is ok but

they lost me there, isn't that the way of essentially all (US) military shooters? whilst you play as the 'good' guys so the need to mention it here strikes me. had lofty ambitions of campaign missions as Taliban when the game was announced, well that was never likely but clearly something went horribly wrong

MW2 did a good job of not painting the US military as whiter than white,

the main villain in the game is an American general sure

DARK-KNIGHT · 13-10-2010 9:04pm

so confused whether to buy this or not... what do u guys think buy it or leave it on hmvs shelf? gotta say i always loved the MOH games but airborne made me think as it was very bad IMO!

SeantheMan · 13-10-2010 9:49pm

I bought mine months ago on the day of the pre-release....so have to go with it

Read the previous posts, should help you make your mind up

Grim. · 13-10-2010 9:56pm

played trough it there the other night thought it was pretty bad finished it in about 4 hours on hard unimpressed with the terrible story crap gfx the seemingly invincible american troops and the many many bugs

WolfForager · 14-10-2010 9:31am

Seems like i'll be waiting to pick this p for cheap post black ops! Can see alot of retailers dropping the price then.

Dcully · 14-10-2010 10:14am

Guys Dice didnt even make the single player, SP uses an ancient engine. Dont judge the multiplayer based on the single player garbage, two entirely different games effectively.
Having said that it was a bizzare move to have 2 different engines and 2 different dev teams work on seperate components.
If SP was good then its not a problem but i can see a lot of people not buying the game thanks to the poor single player and who can blame them especially if they are not interested in MP.

This guy sums the multiplayer up pretty well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_0q4o0bUdg&feature=player_embedded

decent MP gameplay footage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYCX1dOGi90

youtube embed refuses to work for me on boards, wonder ifs its a browser issue.

TheFairy · 14-10-2010 10:47am

Cully it smacks of money grabbing gits to me! They had a SP game, and basically added BFBC2 MP to it in an attempt to grab monies from us! I shake my head at DICE. They started as a modding team, modding BF1942 giving us Desert Combat, and now they are releasing games with little or no support and very few maps. Shame on them tbh!

Dcully · 14-10-2010 12:06pm

Money grabbing indeed, just like every other company unfortunately.
Personally what i played of the beta its similar visually to BC2 but sharper, the weapons however feel totally different, easier to kill and die,id prefer to see more recoil but overall it feels different enough to me personally to not see it as BC2 reskinned.
Apart from the dodgy shotguns and my own dislike for vehicles i see very little wrong with BC2, im still enjoying it on infantry only servers.

The latest MOH beta was an improvement over the previous one.
Overall multiplayer plays well, feels decent and is actually quite enjoyable to me personally.
Whatever people feel about the MP of the final product is one thing but forming an opinion of it based on SP or reviews focusing on SP is a big mistake imo and a lot of people seem to be doing exactly this.
Personally im happy to see a new shooter that you cant simply run and gun around the place ala the joke that is MW2 and its seriously childish perks and akimbo weapons.
It plays like a mix COD 4 and BC2 to me which isnt a bad thing.
Bottom line i found multiplayer to be fun in the beta, ive not played the full game yet but those that enjoyed the beta seem to be loving the full game.
The game can be bought for 29.99 euro on G2play.net, a bargain imo.
But who knows i might hate the full game when i get to play it

daredevilfan · 14-10-2010 12:55pm

has the release date been broken yet??
Anyone got it yet

weiland79 · 14-10-2010 1:28pm

Just cancelled my pre order there is just no way i can justify picking it up tomorrow with all the bad vibes. I fear it may end up sitting on the shelf like operation flashpoint.

Blazer · 14-10-2010 2:02pm

I'll get it for the multiplayer as I like it but prob will never play the single player..

Dcully · 14-10-2010 2:19pm

Sc@recrow wrote: »

I'll get it for the multiplayer as I like it but prob will never play the single player..

+1

SeantheMan · 14-10-2010 2:40pm

Ill play the Singleplayer,,,for 4 hours at least...or so Im told.

SeantheMan · 14-10-2010 2:43pm

DarkJager wrote: »

MOH was never about mulitplayer - it was a single player game before everyone decided to start ignoring the actual gaming experience of their titles for fancy multiplayer modes. .

This is wrong

Mohaa was all about the Multiplayer.......my favourite multiplayer ever probably. Its still played to this day, and its 2 expansions Spearhead and Breakthrough added tons of new maps and gametypes to its multiplayer.

DarkJager · 14-10-2010 2:54pm

SeantheMan wrote: »

This is wrong

Mohaa was all about the Multiplayer.......my favourite multiplayer ever probably. Its still played to this day, and its 2 expansions Spearhead and Breakthrough added tons of new maps and gametypes to its multiplayer.

MOH: AA wasn't the first MOH title.

SeantheMan · 14-10-2010 2:56pm

On PC it was , their first real chance for online Multiplayer obviously...which they nailed I may add

You can hardly system link 10 PS1's

Dcully · 14-10-2010 3:17pm

DarkJager wrote: »

MOH: AA wasn't the first MOH title.

It sure was, i played it to death back when i was on 56k dial up.
I remember there were servers for 56k only, if you had a ping of below 100 you were kicked

DarkJager · 14-10-2010 3:25pm

Dcully wrote: »

It sure was, i played it to death back when i was on 56k dial up.
I remember there were servers for 56k only, if you had a ping of below 100 you were kicked

Forgetting about Medal Of Honor 1 and 2? Those were single player games with a small multiplayer element added on. This new one seems to have forgotten its root and tried instead to appease the "online" community.

If things don't start improving on the SP end of things I'm just going to stop buying games which laud their multiplayer aspects over everything else.

As I said before, I pay €50 for a title to be entertained by it, not to have a few hours of play before seeing the credits and being prompted to go online with it.

SeantheMan · 14-10-2010 3:36pm

I think there was a discussion recently on here about games being made primarily for multiplayer with a singleplayer tacked on.

This seems to be the case with most Modern shooters.

COD:MW2/MOH/BC2 (did anyone even try the Bad Company 2 campaign ?)

I take it as a given that if I buy an FPS for the PC, that multiplayer will be a huge if not the main aspect of the game.

The only ones in recent memory I can think of that dont hold true to this are Half Life 2 and Bioshock, maybe Crisis.

People have already condemned this, which i find unfair. Im looking forward to giving it a good and fair go with my clan on our server, I'll make my mind up then

Liber8or · 14-10-2010 3:39pm

Dcully wrote: »

It sure was, i played it to death back when i was on 56k dial up.
I remember there were servers for 56k only, if you had a ping of below 100 you were kicked

MOH:AA was NOT the first MOH title. Medal of Honor was released in 1999 on the Playstation. MOH:AA was released in February 2002 on PC.

Secondly, it was not a multiplayer only or orientated game. It was very much a single player game, but the multiplayer was given extra attention after it proved to be a noteworthy success amongst the PC gaming community. Multiplayer is so important today because many, many countries around the world now have the technology to allow people to go online. 8 years ago (as the quoted poster has shown) the majority of people only had 56k, if anything at all.

Medal of Honor

Comments