EA's modern day Medal Of Honor is entirely set in Afghanistan between 2001 and 2004 - and its developer believes the game's weapons and tactics set it apart from its rivals.
That's according to a spiffing new preview in GamesMaster magazine - on sale now.
The mag, which was allowed access to the title at an early stage of development, reveals that MoH's gunplay is 'slick and smooth', with players doing battle with Chechen rebels, amongst others.
Modern Warfare-esque Elite ops levels are complemented by huge-scale 'Sledgehammer' campaigns - which GM says bear more resemblance to EA's own Battlefield series.
Greg Goodrich - exec producer of the game - hinted the title's warfare 'set it apart' from its rivals.
"I can't go into details, but let's just say you'll be surprised by how some of the enemies respond to you, both in terms of tactics and the weapons they use," he added.
Medal Of Honor is being co-developed by studios EALA and DICE.
This is only a good thing for this genre of game! maybe now Call of Duty will think about charging silly prices for there games now aswell as this I can only see the games getting better and better as there trying to out do each other!
While I'm not a big fan of the normal MoH games, the fact that Dice are on board with this means it could be amazing. BF2 was great, BF:V was (IMO) underrated, BF:BC has taken a little bit of a tangent on the original idea but is still a solid game.
Agreed, some healthy competition would be very welcome.
As long as they do not take the gamers for granted (yeah i'm looking at you Kotick) then we should come out on top with some truly awesome games.
However, judging by the recent handling of the community, IW/Acti will just continue to operate in their own happy little gilded dream world. It's only until they start getting a backlash from the 360 market will they sit up and take notice (a la the EA backlash of a couple of years ago).
Well with the recent attitude that EA have been showing, i'm willing to cut them a little slack and see how 2010 pans out. Lets just hope they've learnt their lesson that you cannot take your consumer base for granted.
Christ I never thought i'd ever type that about EA!!! And have a disdain for Activision! Gotta be the first sign of the apocolypse.
Ok, so it seems every article written about this game has to reference Modern Warfare, great... not bored with that already.
Is it possible for 'professional' journalist that write about games, or the developers who are supposed to be selling their game to actually give us more details about the thing than continually reference that it's similar to or different to another? I expect the usual pathetic "looks like MW to me" type comments from forum posters, but how about a slightly more professional approach by the press and developers.
Imagine how dull and pathetic movie-reporting would be if every time a film came out the director constantly referenced similar genre movies or if the movie press constantly had to reference the similiarities of one movie to another. Is the games industry still so young and amateur that there's no way of talking about a game without saying "it's like halo" or "just like Modern Warfare".
Maybe it's me, maybe I should accept that the gaming press is full of young and no doubt pretty inexperienced writers that have to constantly reference other games. Maybe this is done because it's assumed gamers are so brainlessly dumb the only way we could possibly understand the concept of another game is to reference a similar one from the last year or so!
Ok, so it seems every article written about this game has to reference Modern Warfare, great... not bored with that already.
Is it possible for 'professional' journalist that write about games, or the developers who are supposed to be selling their game to actually give us more details about the thing than continually reference that it's similar to or different to another? I expect the usual pathetic "looks like MW to me" type comments from forum posters, but how about a slightly more professional approach by the press and developers.
Imagine how dull and pathetic movie-reporting would be if every time a film came out the director constantly referenced similar genre movies or if the movie press constantly had to reference the similiarities of one movie to another. Is the games industry still so young and amateur that there's no way of talking about a game without saying "it's like halo" or "just like Modern Warfare".
Maybe it's me, maybe I should accept that the gaming press is full of young and no doubt pretty inexperienced writers that have to constantly reference other games. Maybe this is done because it's assumed gamers are so brainlessly dumb the only way we could possibly understand the concept of another game is to reference a similar one from the last year or so!
I know what your saying here. But for someone to give a good review of a game they would have to put some serious game time in to give it justice!
I think alot of game journalists only get to see a working demo or a video compilation of the game! So maybe they can't say much else really!?
Ok, so it seems every article written about this game has to reference Modern Warfare, great... not bored with that already.
Is it possible for 'professional' journalist that write about games, or the developers who are supposed to be selling their game to actually give us more details about the thing than continually reference that it's similar to or different to another? I expect the usual pathetic "looks like MW to me" type comments from forum posters, but how about a slightly more professional approach by the press and developers.
Imagine how dull and pathetic movie-reporting would be if every time a film came out the director constantly referenced similar genre movies or if the movie press constantly had to reference the similiarities of one movie to another. Is the games industry still so young and amateur that there's no way of talking about a game without saying "it's like halo" or "just like Modern Warfare".
Maybe it's me, maybe I should accept that the gaming press is full of young and no doubt pretty inexperienced writers that have to constantly reference other games. Maybe this is done because it's assumed gamers are so brainlessly dumb the only way we could possibly understand the concept of another game is to reference a similar one from the last year or so!
Do you not think you're over reacting a bit there?. Both games have practically the same history, of course they are going to be compared to each other at some stage. Are you telling me that when a new movie comes out it's never ever compared to another movie?.
While I'm not a big fan of the normal MoH games, the fact that Dice are on board with this means it could be amazing. BF2 was great, BF:V was (IMO) underrated, BF:BC has taken a little bit of a tangent on the original idea but is still a solid game.
I'm interested to see where they go with it.
BF: vietnam was an awesome game!Nothing better then flying your chopper with ride of the valkyries blasting out the radio
Nothing better then flying your chopper with ride of the valkyries blasting out the radio
I was a big fan of grabbing a gunship and playing Nowhere to Run
Gotta agree with both of you. In a Huey, packed with your buddies, hanging out of the door with 'Paint it Black' blaring, flying 20ft above the Mekong River, then landing in a paddy field with tracers zipping about and a couple of mates laying waste to the tree line with the Cobra.
Priceless!
Lets hope Acti give Treyarch some rope and have some fun with the next CoD. but i'm not holding my breath.
Hope the production values and visuals go up, MW 2 looks a lot better than this, after watching that trailer. Hopefully it plays fairly well and we get big rooms a'la Socom. I'm bored with puny maps and frenetic game play.
flash501 I'm not sure what you mean about both games having the same history. I'm sure there are examples of movies being compared to others by the press, but I think it's rare. In that industry we all know there are different genres, so a new romantic comedy doesn't need to reference the latest one to be released. A new sci-fi action movie doesn't need to reference the last big movie of that genre. It's not unheard of to read of references other movies, but with videogames it's the absolute norm. You'd get the impression that describing a first person shooter set roughly in a modern day era, with the gamer playing an elite soldier just couldn't be explained without saying "it's just like Modern Warfare".
I may be completely wrong, but I'm convinced the gaming community is made up of as many gaming savvy enthusiasts as the movie watching community is of savvy film watchers. And equally people who read about games certainly know the subject well enough to not need treating like incapable halfwits!
When describing a movie like Wall-E for example, do you think the movie press felt the need to explain the main character was a bit like R2D2? Or when the Batman movie came out the press had to reference the Spiderman movie assuming people might not know what an action movie based on a comic book character is like.
We know full well that if a game were to use the game-mechanic of a recharging shield we'd be told "like in Halo or Modern Warfare". The games industry rarely does something so out of the ordinary it needs these simplistic references.
Do you see where I'm coming from? It's either an insult to the intelligence of gamers, or pretty weak writing. I was only saying that gamers aren't actually as dumb as the writing often appears to suggest. Maybe you're right, and without reference to Modern Warfare nobody would understand what the new Medal of Honour game is. Perhaps "a first person modern day military shooter" is a description beyond internet-reading gamers comprehension. I happen to think not.
Bad Company was crap, lets not beat around the bush here. Modern warfare has always outscored Bad Company, and always will because it's pretty crap...
And as for this lame attempt to steal away Modern warfare players, it's going to take more than putting warfare in the title. Game will suck, just like most Medal of honour games.
CBA to read that ^ BUT I think the gist is that they are completely different and shouldn't be compared. To me that's like not comparing FIFA to PES. Lets face it, MoH has seen what success has bought COD:MW and they want a piece. Is that a bad thing? Depends how it turns out but I think the MoH games have past there sell-by-date but would loved to be proved wrong.
Bad Company was crap, lets not beat around the bush here. Modern warfare has always outscored Bad Company, and always will because it's pretty crap...
And as for this lame attempt to steal away Modern warfare players, it's going to take more than putting warfare in the title. Game will suck, just like most Medal of honour games.
MW is predetermined rollercoster ride for lemmings.
theres a reason its the biggest selling game of all time...
BC is class. maybe it doesnt have the shiny graphics to ignite an interest in your stupid magpie brain, but its the better game.
Bad Company was crap, lets not beat around the bush here. Modern warfare has always outscored Bad Company, and always will because it's pretty crap...
And as for this lame attempt to steal away Modern warfare players, it's going to take more than putting warfare in the title. Game will suck, just like most Medal of honour games.
MW is predetermined rollercoster ride for lemmings.
theres a reason its the biggest selling game of all time...
BC is class. maybe it doesnt have the shiny graphics to ignite an interest in your stupid magpie brain, but its the better game.
I never did have a go at BC, which I really should have done given my love of all the other BF games. What was the multiplayer like? Same sort of thing as standard BF multiplayer - large scale combat, vehicles etc?
CBA to read that ^ BUT I think the gist is that they are completely different and shouldn't be compared. To me that's like not comparing FIFA to PES. Lets face it, MoH has seen what success has bought COD:MW and they want a piece. Is that a bad thing? Depends how it turns out but I think the MoH games have past there sell-by-date but would loved to be proved wrong.
I think you are wrong. I think the Call of Duty series had run it's course in the WWII theatre of war and a backlash was imminent so IW went the modern route and we saw COD4 as the result, huge and successful game. End of story.
The Medal of Honour games also ran their course and Airborne tried to introduce some new mechanics to that game with the parachutes etc. but ultimately it felt like another WWII shooter. I think it's commendable that EA are trying to do something different and after watching the trailer for this believe they might very well pull it off.
A month ago I had never heard of it, now I am very interested to see if this delivers the game MW2 should have been. I know a lot of you believe MW2 to be the holy grail of gaming, but in reality the campaign is bad and nothing new, while the multiplayer is an expanded COD4 with more perks, more imbalance and more pandering to the casual player. Tell me a power weapon in the game that needs months of practice to perfect, there isn't. Once you get the power weapons you let rip and kill everyone in sight with ease.
its hectic yet at the same time expansive, a big open map. but the vehicles but everyone within reaching distance.
tactics play a big part in the game. with enemies in the air and destructible buildings.
its a brilliant multiplayer to get into. much less throw-away than COD's.
Comparable to BF1943, would you say (on the multiplayer side of things)?
I've been really getting into BF1943 at the moment, after being hesitant about there being a drop from the PC version to only 24 players, but it's very well balanced and just as epic in scale as BF2 on the PC.
If the BC multiplayer is as good then I'll likely pick it up, or go straight to BC2.
Gotta agree with both of you. In a Huey, packed with your buddies, hanging out of the door with 'Paint it Black' blaring, flying 20ft above the Mekong River, then landing in a paddy field with tracers zipping about and a couple of mates laying waste to the tree line with the Cobra.
Priceless!
Lets hope Acti give Treyarch some rope and have some fun with the next CoD. but i'm not holding my breath.
If you like your choppers you're going to love BC2.
Do you not think you're over reacting a bit there?. Both games have practically the same history, of course they are going to be compared to each other at some stage. Are you telling me that when a new movie comes out it's never ever compared to another movie?.
tbh that guy has a really good point that I never really noticed. Whenever I do read a film review from critics who mean smthg then no you never really do get specific comparisons but a simple breakdown of the story, acting, dialogue etc.
What does probably warrant some sort of comparison is when it comes down to what game should be bought due to similarities and limited cash flow.
Ok, so it seems every article written about this game has to reference Modern Warfare, great... not bored with that already.
Is it possible for 'professional' journalist that write about games, or the developers who are supposed to be selling their game to actually give us more details about the thing than continually reference that it's similar to or different to another? I expect the usual pathetic "looks like MW to me" type comments from forum posters, but how about a slightly more professional approach by the press and developers.
Imagine how dull and pathetic movie-reporting would be if every time a film came out the director constantly referenced similar genre movies or if the movie press constantly had to reference the similiarities of one movie to another. Is the games industry still so young and amateur that there's no way of talking about a game without saying "it's like halo" or "just like Modern Warfare".
Maybe it's me, maybe I should accept that the gaming press is full of young and no doubt pretty inexperienced writers that have to constantly reference other games. Maybe this is done because it's assumed gamers are so brainlessly dumb the only way we could possibly understand the concept of another game is to reference a similar one from the last year or so!
What you're talking about happens in every medium review, it's called context. Are you telling me you have never read a review for a movie, or an album, that references another piece of work to help guide your cognitive path into recognition?
Conkers, I'm not suggesting it never happens in movie reviews. I certainly don't remember any specific examples as it's so rare, from my experience. Can't say with regards music, but if you're suggesting every album review references another album then I'm glad I steer clear of the music press. I was making a comment that it happens all the time in videogame articles. Maybe I give gamers a little more credit than you and don't feel the majority of gamers require such blatantly unnecessary references or to be spoon-fed comments references other games of a similar nature.
It's a good job you're around to remind me that gamers wouldn't understand what Medal of Honour is without the Modern Warfare reference. I actually assumed some of us might be able to comprehend a description without referencing a similar product!
Anyway I'm off for the evening... Gonna make myself a cup of coffee... that's a bit like a cup of tea, but instead of being made with dried tea leaves it's made with coffee beans... they're like the baked beans you have on toast, but they're harder, darker and roasted... like what you do with meat or potatoes when you're making a roast dinner... which is a bit like...
Needs to be an absolute beast online if its gonna compete with IW's masterpiece, good luck to EA, competition is healthy, they could pull another Dead Space out the hat!!
Needs to be an absolute beast online if its gonna compete with IW's masterpiece, good luck to EA, competition is healthy, they could pull another Dead Space out the hat!!
I have never considered COD multiplayer a masterpiece. Stop talking like it's the Holy Grail. COD multiplayer is a casual gamers online shooter.
COD takes little skill to get into, rewards camping and gives you power weapons that take no skill to master. It just throws kills at anyone half competent in the shooter genre.
sucks to be activision this year what with treyarch developing this years CoD.....still not like it will harm their sales but it terms of overall gameplay, it will be a good time for EA to get in and compete.
sucks to be activision this year what with treyarch developing this years CoD.....still not like it will harm their sales but it terms of overall gameplay, it will be a good time for EA to get in and compete.
No offence there matey but I wish people would stop bashing Treyarch. CoD:WaW, although not a patch on CoD4, was still very well put together, the SP was ok (to the same quality of CoD2 imo) and the MP was still hella fun.
Also, it's a damn sight better than MW2 is by a long shot (on PC that is) due to *yawn* the dedi servers, the fan maps, the console etc etc. I know the console guys are rolling their eyes now, but it did and does make a difference to us PC'ers.
Just be interesting to see if Treyarch are bound and gagged by Acti as IW did (although very willingly).
Conkers, I'm not suggesting it never happens in movie reviews. I certainly don't remember any specific examples as it's so rare, from my experience. Can't say with regards music, but if you're suggesting every album review references another album then I'm glad I steer clear of the music press. I was making a comment that it happens all the time in videogame articles. Maybe I give gamers a little more credit than you and don't feel the majority of gamers require such blatantly unnecessary references or to be spoon-fed comments references other games of a similar nature.
It's a good job you're around to remind me that gamers wouldn't understand what Medal of Honour is without the Modern Warfare reference. I actually assumed some of us might be able to comprehend a description without referencing a similar product!
Anyway I'm off for the evening... Gonna make myself a cup of coffee... that's a bit like a cup of tea, but instead of being made with dried tea leaves it's made with coffee beans... they're like the baked beans you have on toast, but they're harder, darker and roasted... like what you do with meat or potatoes when you're making a roast dinner... which is a bit like...
It’s nothing about giving someone credit for being able to think for themselves, it’s just called using context, if you can’t understand that then you’re far too obtuse for your own good!
You’re turning what is a simple use of reference against some similar material into some kind of statement that people are idiots, which is quite frankly a little silly.
And tea is not like coffee, they're each a whole different experience in a mug of joy.
ww2 n modern warfare have been done 2 death ! i love shooters but sum 1 b original ! so has sci fi were 2 go?
Well that's the big question isn't it. Sci-fi is catered for by yer Halos/GoW's. Modern by the above mentioned, WW2 by pretty much every FPS not sci-fi from 1998 to 2008.
The only way is possibly Nam as to be covered in CoD7. Or maybe Korea (but that's just WW2 weapons with added jets).
WW1 won't really appeal due to the lack of spray n' pray weaponary, and the same goes for any wars before that.
I'd like to see a proper stab at some steampunk type era. Victorian/War of the Worlds type machinary. But outside of that, it's all been done.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
you're going to love BC2.
