Medal of Honor Warfighter - Page 3

Its like MW3 and BF3 had a baby.......

Fast paced...but still Tactical.

The mp in this MoH is worse than the last MoH.
That means that the sp campaign in this MoH is probably just as bad or worse than the last MoH.
I was looking forward to getting this game because I thought that the developers listened to the community and realized how crappy the first MoH was, so they would make a better game. It seems like the same 'rushed before CoD comes out to cash in' fps game.
Horrible:mad:
Edited by GR1MM - 10/9/12 at 7:27pm

I tried, but I just can't get into it. In 2012 I just expect a higher quality of game, this feels like a B or C level title like homefront. I have no idea what is going on with all the countries and kits, it just seems overly complicated for no good reason. I know EA desperately wants to have a shooter every year like activision, but they need to do better than this. They should just retire MoH and double down on battlefield.

Not very impressed. Congrats on being the only major FPS to change the look/move controls between default and southpaw on the controller. Retarded.

Yeah, I mean don't get me wrong, it seems ok, good enough to have a decent time with a bunch of friends, but nothing about it excites me like BF or COD. Unless I'm missing something? It just seems really generic for the hour or so I played it.

I will agree that the menus are very convoluted and all of the different nation stuff is too much. Just give me the different guns and change my nationality depending on the MP map we are currently playing (i.e. CoD). They don't just look convoluted, but the are confusing to navigate also. It is too much. It may be a little too late to change that now, but it could definitely be made more intuitive.

I was also having issues with getting kicked from EA Online after every match, then I'd have to join back in and hope that I was on the same team. Also, I ran into a weird glitch a few times where my entire screen would go black and I'd have to quit the game and rejoin.

The graphics were nothing special, but I wouldn't say they were bad. I'd imagine that Danger Close Games (I thought DICE developed this, learn something new every day) will make some optimizations to the graphics before release. If I remember correctly, BF3 didn't look as good as it does now during its beta either. MoH runs on the Frostbite 2 engine, but I did not notice any destructible environments. The static nature of the elements in the map seemed very CoD-esque. But, I also think this is due to the beta.

Now, after all that, I had a blast playing once I got the hang of the game. The first few rounds were bad. but after that it was a lot of fun. As fun as BF3... not sure yet, Battlefield is pretty special to me. I've never put 300 hours into any game not named Fallout or Final Fantasy before. I definitely enjoyed this beta more than MW3. It's been a while since I played BLOPS, but I put a lot of time into that and really enjoyed that game. The pace is good, and except for once or twice it never took too long for me to find someone to shoot at. As always, people will learn how to play the game as annoyingly as they know how, but I didn't run into that too much either. If you are having issues, try out one of the other soldier types. I really started enjoying the game when I unlocked the spec ops guy. He's very fast and he has high fire rate weapons. The point man is also a nice choice for the more aggressive player.

Other issues I have with the game are more trivial and may be addressed when the game comes out: it seems like it takes too long to unlock gun attachments and new weapons, the map choice for the beta makes the sniper kit unusable, and they really need to tone down the in game wall hacks. That red halo should only last for 1 second. You are lit up for way too long.

Can someone explain the way the nations and operatives work? It's completely baffling to me. I picked some sort of navy seal and the only gun I could use was the m4. Are the guns locked to certain countries or units? If I keep playing with the seal would I unlock more nations, units within the nation, more guns? Are there difference between the nations, units, etc? I can't tell if its really deep and awesome or just arbitrarily restrictive.

Unfortunately, the reason I run southpaw on all my FPS is because l like to ADS with the right trigger and fire with the left. No other FPS also switches the movement and look with that config. There is no reason to make change just for the sake of change, this is like BF3 reversing the actions on the D pad from BFBC2 for absolutely no reason - change for change's sake.

In the end, there is no reason these games shouldn't allow us to edit controller mapping as we see fit. It's already being done in some games

I'm with BD2003 on this one. I just don't see anything that makes me want this game. To me, it doesn't do anything great, just kind of a middle of the road shooter. It needs something that people will get excited about to pull them away from the two heavy hitters in FPS games. I doubt I will pick it up, if anything I will gamefly it to check out the story.

The nations, I'm not sure exactly. I think you pick one nation as a starting point. The rest become unlocks. So you essentially unlock all 6 classes quickly, but maybe I think you get the German heavy gunner first, and the Canadian spec ops first. Over time, you end up unlocking all nations for all 6 classes. The only difference between them is how they look and the guns? (Don't quote me). For the beta, the assault class you can unlock multiple guns, the other 5 you can only unlock 2 guns.

Aside from national pride or visually, I don't believe there is any difference between what nation you choose. The 6 classes are very different in abilities, scorestreaks, speed, etc.

Also, I read a tweet last night they are streamlining the menu system based on the beta feedback. That is a plus.

I agree. A game that's designed to be fun IF you work as a team sucks if you just happen to jump in as a lone wolf. Then again, maybe that's not the best premise for a video game-to be built ENTIRELY around that concept. It limits the games appeal to a narrow demographic. Good teamwork/communication usually promotes winning even in COD/BF3, but you can still win/have fun w/o it to some degree. Right now we're all so-so on it because it's new/takes time to get used to. What's keeping it down a notch for us I think is that during that newness phase, you've got those very busy-looking menus, countries, etc., SLOWING the process of assimilation down A TON. I think if you can get in a game w/ some people who really know the menu system(willing to coach you), it'd make a big difference in your perceptions. It's very difficult to enjoy a FPS when the menu system creates info overload.

What in particular about it requires/induces teamwork? BF had the healing, repairing, two seated vehicles, javelin etc - stuff that literally required teamwork. This seemed every bit as run and gun as cod in the little I played, only slower and more methodical.

Your Fire team buddy in that you can both heal each other and replenish each others ammo and the fact you can see each others killer. The more you stick together and help each other, the better both of you will do.

It's not REQUIRED, but it definitely makes a difference, plus spawning too.

Yeah, they should def strive to differentiate. I didn't really see it in my playtime though, don't even know what a fire team is, didnt see any reference to perks. Whatever they're doing, they're doing an awful job surfacing those differences in a clear way.

I guess I don't see where they are trying to make you work together. I mean, on COD we have a group of 6, and we all work as a team. I don't see that the fireteam thing is really going to force people to work together, just because you can heal your buddy.

Nothing will force anyone to work as a team. (Maybe if someone implemented team killstreaks?) The point is using the game mechanics provided to help those who do work together. Healing, ammo, etc. In COD, there is no game mechanic I am aware of where you can help a teammate. Granted, I haven't played in over a year so there may be now. The best thing you can do is have a mic and call out enemies...right? Or not die alot?

Not in such a direct way as healing or dishing out ammo, no. Theres nothing youre directly reliant on other teammates for. But there's plenty of room for teamwork in coordinating various streaks and equipment, especially in objective games. Ex- waiting to plant the bomb until your teammates can bank up airstrikes and turrets over it, bringing the full weight of your team on the objective at the crucial moment. Teamwork is still the major factor between which side wins and loses....but it's entirely optional.

Yeah, and not to mention that usually when you play against a team or clan that works together on COD, you get your butt handed to you. On Black Ops, we had a 6 man team for Hardocore CTF, and almost never lost. We coordinated everything we did. I guess I am just not seeing how this game will be any different. Every other shooter comes out, and every one claims this one will be about teamwork, not like call of duty, but in the end it is up to the people on your team to actually work as a unit, instead of lone wolfing it.

I have been having fun with the beta, but I'm not quite sure I want to buy this yet. I don't know why though. Maybe I'm just a bit scared that between BLOPS 2, Halo 4, and the BF3 buffs that the FPS players will be spread too thin and MoH will get the short end of the stick. I used to play FPS just for the single player, but now I don't even finish the single player campaigns. It's all about the multi-player. Even if I do finish the single player story, I really can't see myself replaying it. I need these games to have a healthy number of players online to make it worth my time. Everybody buys CoD, and Halo has an almost cult-like following so I am very sure those will have more than enough players. I can probably still easily find a game in MW2 and Halo 3; the last MoH game is pretty dead (I'm not sure how that game was received).

I'd just like to encourage everyone to give the beta a real chance (not saying anyone here did not, just in general) and give it some time to grow, level up your character, and figure out the map. Those things are all very important to enjoying the game and only playing for an hour or two really doesn't give you enough time to make an informed decision.

Pretty much anyone licking their chops for Black Ops 2 won't find anything here to get this instead, and probably not get both. What would be the point if you know for a fact you are going to log 300 + hours in BO2. Anyone looking for COD alternative may be interested. That the niche it fills for me. I love BF3, but sometimes I just want some good ol fashion faster paced action. I love Rush in BF, but it seems more AVSrs prefer Conquest. Sometimes CQ bores me to tears. The close quarters map pack is a little too over the top. MOH seems finds a nice middle ground for me.

Yeah, for me it's really that simple. I could justify buying both BF3 and MW3 because they're so radically different. I can't justify full price for this with blops 2 around the corner. I'd probably play the hell out of it for two weeks if it was $15 though...I'll probably still pick it up 6 months from now when it is.

Beta tweaks

New Server Update for Beta

By: seeson Posted: 3 hours ago 38 comments
Thank you all for your continuous feedback! We’re a little over the halfway mark of our beta and have learned a ton so far. The team at Danger Close is constantly reading over community reports and comments from the Battlelog forums, and consistently watching over in-game telemetry. Apart from this feedback helping us fine-tune the main game, we’re also making changes throughout the beta itself. Our latest server update that just rolled out focuses on matchmaking and spawning issues.

Specifically:

Fallback Spawn - We’ve received a ton of feedback on our spawn mechanic! It was clear that the initial system occasionally placed players too close to harm’s way. This new update changes where you spawn in vs. the proximity of enemy players when using fallback spawn. We are also investigating Fireteam spawns for the final game.
Weapon Tuning - We’ve listened to your feedback regarding weapons and have tweaked them accordingly.
Player Dropout – We’ve addressed some issues regarding player connectivity and should have a more stable connection to game servers.
Results looked great during internal testing, so please leave any and all feedback here on the Battlelog forums.

There were numerous reports about “invisible weapons” and “invisible characters” showing up. The team has verified that this is a beta-specific unlocks issue and has confirmed that this is not an issue in the final version of the game.

Keep the feedback coming and remember that there’s just 3 days left to rock the beta! See you online.