Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by brumgrunt, 10 Oct 2012.
I think EA have something special with the MoH series, however in its current form i don't believe it has what it takes to play alongside COD and BF.
MoH would be more suited to playing alongside Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon. Remember the SWAT series maybe moving in that sort of direction. Slow paced and tactical.
I think the lack of variation you mentioned on Home Run isn't just for this gamemode, or even this game. Battlefield 3 suffers from the same rigmarole in certain game modes, and that never got marked down on it. There's either a clear leaning towards BF3 on this site simply because of the "MOAR BIG MAPS!" ethos of first-person games, or maybe people just seem to forget that BF3 had these flaws because they don't want to acknowledge the problem in it.
Personally, from what I've seen, MOHW is turning into something that could possibly rival my gaming of BF3, as I've grown bored by the lack of fast-paced gaming that is very often missing in BF3 and its almost borderline infuriating focus on "if you're not in a vehicle, you're useless".
I have played the Beta for this on the Xbox as the PC/PS3 players don't get one because apparently it doesn't need testing.
I like the game as it's a mixture between COD and BF, but it has more of BF in it than anything.
MOH was originally the same as COD, and IIRC was out before COD but why can't developers stick to a recipe that made a game popular and improve it rather than turning it in to a different game.
That's exactly what I'd hoped it would be. Excellent.
What i'm hoping for is a gripping and challenging single player. BF3 and COD focus so much on the multiplayer, that the single player is just a linear shooting range. COD single player may as well just sit you in a roller-coaster cart and take you round the level while you shoot at pop up targets.
it took me something like 4 hours to get up the beach on the original MOH, constantly getting mowed down by the mg42 nests, sometimes not even making it off the landing vehicle (i was horrified when i later played it on a playstation and was able to run around the beach like the greased up deaf guy from family guy). You could take different routes through town to come up behind people and cap them in the back of the head, or take them out from long range with the springfield, it was your choice. I want my choice back.
As a mostly SP gamer I don't really care about the MP side, and is largely wasted content for me.
I recently went on a big SP FPS offensive to play my backlog of games I had been avoiding (or was distracted from) over the years, including MOH: Airborne, COD: WW, COD: MW2, COD:Blops, COD: MW3, and the MOH reboot.
I was quite shocked at MOH, as I wasn't expecting much. It was as attached to rails as I expected, and the story is as generic as you'd expect, but it was a surprisingly tight game and not offensively cartoon-like in the way COD is. Not very long, and with a horrible turret sequence in a helicopter, but it was good fun and the missions and combat felt professional and grounded.
It helped that I paid a grand total of $1.40 for it. At that price I was even able to put up with Origin.
The biggest problem I have with COD is that it seems to want to do the Mass Effect-like epic missions with the fate of human-kind at stake, but it is set here and now where such missions are implausible and ridiculous. I can only suspend my disbelief so far.
The best later SP COD for my money is World at War.
I think I rage-quit twice on that part myself! It was just so random, and then you had to run the minefield straight afterwards. Grrr.
Expensive Battlefield 3 DLC.
Looks like every other modern warfare fps ever.
I enjoyed the last MoH game even if many didn't so I'll be picking this up once they discount it. Won't be paying full price for it that's for sure.
Separate names with a comma.