• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Medal of Honor Warfighter - October. Danger Close. Frostbite 2.0

I

IdreamofHIME

Member
Cudder said:
Hope they keep the groundedness of the single player from the last game. Dat mission when you're on the bottom of the hill and have to survive..DAT MISSION
Click to expand...

That is a very emotional moment in the game and done really well. I couldn't imagine what it would be like to be pinned down in such a situation...and in real life there's little chance an attack chopper would come to the rescue at the last moment.
 
S

Samurai Penguin

Member
Loved the last game. Cannot wait for this :D

Though the pic needs more lens flare.

EDIT: I will miss this seeing things like this though now that they're using FB 2.0

bildschirmfoto2010-10-mh0u.png
 
D

Dibbz

Member
God damn. People in this thread have no idea what they are talking about. MoH had an great SP because it wasn't all, fuck shit up, blow buildings, fighter jets, Micheal Bay shitfest like other FPS out there.

The first game put down a solid foundation. As long as this game builds on that it should be great.
 
M

Mechazawa

Member
Dibbz said:
God damn. People in this thread have no idea what they are talking about. MoH had an great SP because it wasn't all, fuck shit up, blow buildings, fighter jets, Micheal Bay shitfest like other FPS out there.
Click to expand...

The gameplay was still really...I don't want to use the word generic, but it was pretty traditional stuff. It even had a couple of it's own Chernobyl moments.

Best thing MoH had going for it was the atmosphere and dialogue. Felt like they really nailed that part.
 
D

Dipswitch

Member
Mechazawa said:
Best thing MoH had going for it was the atmosphere and dialogue. Felt like they really nailed that part.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree completely with that. I also thought they did a good job portraying the spec ops guys as the quiet professionals they are. And the bond they share as a result of their training and mutual respect for each other. No need for any of this "Let's go Delta!!" ooh rah bullshit with them.
 
2

2San

Member
Dibbz said:
God damn. People in this thread have no idea what they are talking about. MoH had an great SP because it wasn't all, fuck shit up, blow buildings, fighter jets, Micheal Bay shitfest like other FPS out there.

The first game put down a solid foundation. As long as this game builds on that it should be great.
Click to expand...
I guess I'm spoiled then. The SP bored me to tears.
 
T

The Nature Roy

Member
Dug the campaign a lot. I've played through it numerous times which is rare for me.

They did a whole lot right in the first one but there's a lot of room for improvement as well. Tons of potential here.
 
T

The Nature Roy

Member
BTW, I remember when they were finishing MoH, Greg Goodrich expressed an interest in expanding the scope to showcase some international Tier 1 units alongside Delta and ST6 in any potential sequel. I think he specifically mentioned the SASR.
 
M

matt05891

Member
I personally thought the campaign was good; atmospherically at least. It also followed the real story of the team ( I haven't played it since 2010 so maybe I am wrong about how closely it follows the truth). I liked that at least. Multiplayer while fun was EASILY forgettable. If they follow the realistic aspect of true stories again I will look forward to it for campaign. Multiplayers up in the air.

And WARFIGHTER? I sincerely hope they change the name.
 
D

Dead Man

Member
I expect this to be nothing special, but those hating on the name may want to read current US military documents. They love their jargon, and 'warfighter' is one of the current words of choice. Blame the culture of stupidity in the upper echelons of the US military.

8eO1d.png
 
H

HotHamWater

Member
Dead Man said:
I expect this to be nothing special, but those hating on the name may want to read current US military documents. They love their jargon, and 'warfighter' is one of the current words of choice. Blame the culture of stupidity in the upper echelons of the US military.
Click to expand...

So, you're saying we're lucky it's not called Medal of Honour: Oscar Mike Actual?
 
D

Deleted member 80556

Unconfirmed Member
Is it bad I am actually more excited about this than anyother announcement from this year? I am looking forward to GDC for this more than the new Maxis game.

Also, MOH's SP campaign was freaking awesome, online was the part that was kinda bad and tackled. Dice really didn't have interest in it.
 
S

Sojgat

Member
Are the people saying that they liked the single player for the last game all being sarcastic. I thought it was fucking awful, even worse than COD. Bad controls, bad scripting bugs, bad graphics etc, etc. It just felt rushed. The only reason I purchased was because Dice was involved with the multiplayer (and that sucked as well).

Could not be less excited for this garbage.
 
S

soultron

Banned
I'm pumped. This is a reminder that I still need to play the first one. I think it's Y2Kev or Stump who keeps saying it's pretty great in SP.
 
D

Dibbz

Member
Mechazawa said:
Best thing MoH had going for it was the atmosphere and dialogue. Felt like they really nailed that part.
Click to expand...

Dipswitch said:
Yeah, I agree completely with that. I also thought they did a good job portraying the spec ops guys as the quiet professionals they are. And the bond they share as a result of their training and mutual respect for each other. No need for any of this "Let's go Delta!!" ooh rah bullshit with them.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I loved the contrast between the Tier 1 guys and the Rangers. The first time you play as a Ranger you can instantly tell just how good the Tier 1 guys are in comparison to the Rangers thanks to the dialog and the level design.

One of the standouts from MoH and other games is they did not throw wave after wave of bad guys at you. In most games you enter a building and there is 100's of guys to fight. Made the game much more believable and fun imo.

EDIT: Sojgat, Bad graphics?
moh4sza6.jpg
Click to expand...
 
LQX

LQX

Member
Hopefully it goes back to its roots. And I'm glad MP is not being done by Dice. The last game felt too much like a BF game which was my biggest worry. Could not get into it at all.
 
S

soultron

Banned
Dibbz said:
Totally agree. I loved the contrast between the Tier 1 guys and the Rangers. The first time you play as a Ranger you can instantly tell just how good the Tier 1 guys are in comparison to the Rangers thanks to the dialog and the level design.

One of the standouts from MoH and other games is they did not throw wave after wave of bad guys at you. In most games you enter a building and there is 100's of guys to fight. Made the game much more believable and fun imo.
Click to expand...

One thing I've never really understood in games, really any game, is that why they can't have uniquely designed encounters. I don't mean this in the sense that this guy has helmet A, face B, and the same body as the next guy. Not superficial visual variety.

I mean really intimate encounter design so that, as a player, your narrative can be something like, "So the dude in the track suit was hiding a knife behind his back and tried to take a swipe at me. Took that dude out, then everyone in the bar got really pissed, tried to fight me, and one dude pulled a baseball bat from behind the bar." Extend this into FPS games by cutting down the number of dudes you have to fight, instead focusing on having fewer enemies but make them really interesting to fight. Make them have separate behaviours; they can have the same weapons, but make one guy a head on charger while one guy tries to out-manoeuvre you by taking high ground. Something like that.

Probably a pipe dream since it's easier just to spam dudes, have them hide behind the same 3 pieces of cover, and call it a day.

I'm pretty interested in playing MOH for the reasons you guys have listed, however.
 
S

Sojgat

Member
EDIT: Sojgat, Bad graphics?
Click to expand...

I played on 360, obviously it must have been a lot better on pc judging by that screenshot.
Best thing MoH had going for it was the atmosphere and dialogue. Felt like they really nailed that part.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Not throwing 100 guys at the player at once like COD and being able to clear out an area was also good, but the control felt clunky and it just wasn't fun.
 
D

Dibbz

Member
soultron said:
One thing I've never really understood in games, really any game, is that why they can't have uniquely designed encounters. I don't mean this in the sense that this guy has helmet A, face B, and the same body as the next guy. Not superficial visual variety.

I mean really intimate encounter design so that, as a player, your narrative can be something like, "So the dude in the track suit was hiding a knife behind his back and tried to take a swipe at me. Took that dude out, then everyone in the bar got really pissed, tried to fight me, and one dude pulled a baseball bat from behind the bar." Extend this into FPS games by cutting down the number of dudes you have to fight, instead focusing on having fewer enemies but make them really interesting to fight. Make them have separate behaviours; they can have the same weapons, but make one guy a head on charger while one guy tries to out-manoeuvre you by taking high ground. Something like that.

Probably a pipe dream since it's easier just to spam dudes, have them hide behind the same 3 pieces of cover, and call it a day.

I'm pretty interested in playing MOH for the reasons you guys have listed, however.
Click to expand...

There are a few titles that have tried this with AI. Killzone 2 and 3 has some pretty intelligent AI on the hardest difficulty. Thing is though most games don't give the AI or the player many choices in gunfights which results in the same type of shootout.

If games support more objects with physics enabled that would be a step in the right direction, but AI has to be able to respond in the right manner to those situations.
 
N

Neuromancer

Member
soultron said:
One thing I've never really understood in games, really any game, is that why they can't have uniquely designed encounters. I don't mean this in the sense that this guy has helmet A, face B, and the same body as the next guy. Not superficial visual variety.

I mean really intimate encounter design so that, as a player, your narrative can be something like, "So the dude in the track suit was hiding a knife behind his back and tried to take a swipe at me. Took that dude out, then everyone in the bar got really pissed, tried to fight me, and one dude pulled a baseball bat from behind the bar." Extend this into FPS games by cutting down the number of dudes you have to fight, instead focusing on having fewer enemies but make them really interesting to fight. Make them have separate behaviours; they can have the same weapons, but make one guy a head on charger while one guy tries to out-manoeuvre you by taking high ground. Something like that.

Probably a pipe dream since it's easier just to spam dudes, have them hide behind the same 3 pieces of cover, and call it a day.

I'm pretty interested in playing MOH for the reasons you guys have listed, however.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree with you more. I've been saying for years shooters would be more interesting if they dropped enemy count drastically and gave the enemies smarter and more dynamic AI. Unfortunately like you said it is harder, also the unwashed masses don't care. They're perfectly happy mowing down hundreds of dudes single handedly it seems.
 
S

smr00

Banned
Deadly Cyclone said:
First one had a bunch of awesome single player levels, but no story. Fix that and I am game.
Click to expand...
The one level where it's you and a few teammates against endless waves of people, ammo running out and having 0 hope was chilling.

One of the best levels i have ever played in a video game.
 
N

NBtoaster

Member
First game was alright.

Got it for $10, the gameplay in the sequel would need a decent twist for me to pick it up for more. Getting tired of short, linear, military fps.
 
T

TheSeks

Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
KareBear said:
Glad the MP is not been done by DICE but its a shame they are using Frostbite.
Click to expand...

No offense, but why? Frostbite is the best engine on the market currently for shooters and variety in matches. Only issue is the "freeze" that's been all but nearly eliminated in 2.0.

You're probably butthurt because DICE phoned in the MoH multiplayer and expect their engine to be similar, which is not going to be the case since EA practically demanded DICE to outsource the engine to all EA in-house companies.
 
R

RedSwirl

Junior Member
BigDes said:
I think the intention is always to have a military shooter to compete with CoD

So MoH one year, BF the next.

This will also help with series fatigue in some ways as unlike CoD there won't be one of a particular series every year
Click to expand...

There probably won't be a Battlefield 4 for a while.
 
M

Massa

Member
TheSeks said:
No offense, but why? Frostbite is the best engine on the market currently for shooters and variety in matches. Only issue is the "freeze" that's been all but nearly eliminated in 2.0.

You're probably butthurt because DICE phoned in the MoH multiplayer and expect their engine to be similar, which is not going to be the case since EA practically demanded DICE to outsource the engine to all EA in-house companies.
Click to expand...

Here's what Frostbite 2.0 looks like to me:

166115482_200.jpg


It also looks kind of bad on consoles compared to even UE.
 
A

AlphaTwo00

Member
Cudder said:
Hope they keep the groundedness of the single player from the last game. Dat mission when you're on the bottom of the hill and have to survive..DAT MISSION
Click to expand...
Three pages late, but yes. I have to say that sequence (and one of the later ones where you're moving to the different LZs as you're being chased) are some of the more grounded setpieces that sets this game apart.
 
J

jet1911

Member
smr00 said:
The one level where it's you and a few teammates against endless waves of people, ammo running out and having 0 hope was chilling.

One of the best levels i have ever played in a video game.
Click to expand...

Just played this mission like 30 minutes ago. Great tension, when the Apaches showed up I got goosebump on my arms lol. Great mission. The on after in the Apaches was pretty good too.
 
S

soultron

Banned
Dibbz said:
There are a few titles that have tried this with AI. Killzone 2 and 3 has some pretty intelligent AI on the hardest difficulty. Thing is though most games don't give the AI or the player many choices in gunfights which results in the same type of shootout.

If games support more objects with physics enabled that would be a step in the right direction, but AI has to be able to respond in the right manner to those situations.
Click to expand...

I need to try these games. I liked KZ1 but for all the wrong reasons; mainly the weapon designs and the real sense of hefty weight they had. (Although I'm sure most people thought that was stupid, cumbersome, and not fun. I get that.)

Agreed to your second point.

All that said, I know that what the two of us are asking for is possible, but not only is it a lot of work, most shoot-y games' enemies have a lifespan of a few seconds upon contact so it's a lot of work for developers to code complex behaviours into something that's so easily dismissed. You might not even witness or have a chance to appreciate higher level behaviours since dudes die so fast, basically.
 
NinjaBoiX

NinjaBoiX

Member
Sunwheel said:
Was anyone else pissed off with the way bullets hit you in single player, both in MoH and BF3? If you're crouched you stand up for a second and in the next milisecond you have at least 3 bullets lodged in you. The worst part (and you can see it in all its glory if you play co-op in BF3) is that the enemies don't even aim at you. They stand stand there, hiding, and bullets fly at you from some place you cannot fathom.
Click to expand...
I agree about the bullet hit animations, it was too violent, I physically whinced when getting shot. I mean, I guess they nailed it in that respect, but it was a little "too close for comfort" if you know what I mean. Very evocative and realistic (not that I have any frame of reference) but kind of off putting. As I say, I'm pretty sure it was an artistic design choice, to really feel in danger, but they maybe took it too far.

It's just a game! I don't want to actually get hurt!
 
F

Foliorum Viridum

Banned
Massa said:
Here's what Frostbite 2.0 looks like to me:

166115482_200.jpg


It also looks kind of bad on consoles compared to even UE.
Click to expand...

DICE really did fuck up the fact they had great tech with HORRIBLE art design. The lens flare and dirt on the screen was the most horrible design choice artistically I've seen in ages.

If MOH2 avoids that, it will be worth a play just to see what the engine is like without it.
 
T

The Xtortionist

Member
soultron said:
One thing I've never really understood in games, really any game, is that why they can't have uniquely designed encounters. I don't mean this in the sense that this guy has helmet A, face B, and the same body as the next guy. Not superficial visual variety.

I mean really intimate encounter design so that, as a player, your narrative can be something like, "So the dude in the track suit was hiding a knife behind his back and tried to take a swipe at me. Took that dude out, then everyone in the bar got really pissed, tried to fight me, and one dude pulled a baseball bat from behind the bar." Extend this into FPS games by cutting down the number of dudes you have to fight, instead focusing on having fewer enemies but make them really interesting to fight. Make them have separate behaviours; they can have the same weapons, but make one guy a head on charger while one guy tries to out-manoeuvre you by taking high ground. Something like that.

Probably a pipe dream since it's easier just to spam dudes, have them hide behind the same 3 pieces of cover, and call it a day.
Click to expand...

Not sure if this is would fit your description, but Resident Evil 4 is one of the few shooters I've played where every single enemy feels relevant and worth paying attention to. Brilliant, well-paced and varied encounter design throughout the whole thing. Maybe check that out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Phil Spencer interview - Says that their intent is for all Xbox games, including Call of Duty, to be available on Xbox Game Pass Day One
2 3
102
6K
Kenneth Haight replied
[PC Gamer] How Cyberpunk 2077 clawed its way back from disaster to complete one of the greatest redemption arcs in gaming history
Opinion News 2
99
6K
EDMIX replied
Circana (NPD) Full Year Software Top 20 Results from 1995 to 2022 (Ranked by Revenue)
Sales-Age
16
1K
onQ123 replied
'Deathloop,' 'It Takes Two,' And 'Forza Horizon 5' Lead Nominees For GDCA 2022
Event
14
1K
jaysius replied
Article - Battlefield Franchise Undergoes Major Shake-Up
2
93
7K
Outlier replied
Top Bottom