Medal of Honor Multiplayer Beta

By Dan Whitehead Published 22 June, 2010

Kabul and wireless.

In all their interviews regarding Medal of Honor, the folks at DICE have been adamant that just because they've been brought in to create the multiplayer component doesn't mean it's going to be a clone of Bad Company 2. While that may be technically true, you'd be forgiven for thinking the two games were twins, at least.

Created using DICE's proprietary Frostbite engine, and now snuggled up in a beta test for PC and PS3 players (Xbox 360 has been delayed, but should kick off this week), Medal of Honor's modern-day makeover can't help but look a lot like its nearest genetic relative. Partly, this is because DICE is pretty hot at FPS multiplayer, and if it ain't broke, blah blah blah.

That certainly explains why the two maps on show in the beta - Kabul City and Helmand Valley - bear all the hallmarks of the Swedish developer. These are organic, sprawling locations, jam-packed with hidey-holes, rat runs and sniping spots that change the gameplay on the fly. They're fun to discover, and even more fun once you've memorised some of the more useful spots and start to lure enemies to their doom in confined alleys or bullet-hell bottlenecks.

Visually, though, they couldn't be more distinct. Helmand is all scorched grassland and sun-bleached wreckage, a desolate rural hellhole dotted with ramshackle outposts. And where Helmand is all open skies and broad horizons, Kabul City is dense and claustrophobic, with ruined and half-built structures tumbling into abandoned market squares. Cover is plentiful but mostly small and ineffectual, forcing you to dash from one spot to another, minimising your profile from the enemy snipers that have surely made their nest in the scaffolds above.

'Medal of Honor Multiplayer Beta' Screenshot 1

You can tell he's an insurgent by his delicate porcelain fingers. Wait, what?

Both maps are fun, and lend themselves to the sort of ebb and flow of combat that DICE seems to capture instinctively. Already in this beta I've experienced instant tactical connection with other players, where the action moves beautifully, seemingly through your own actions but in reality thanks to the subtle hand of the designers - guiding you into the most exciting situations with their sly player funnels.

What is missing is the epic environmental damage that Frostbite brought to Bad Company 2. No doubt the decision to leave it out was to better differentiate the two, but it's sorely missed. For a game that looks and feels similar, being able to shrug off RPG attacks by crouching behind a small wall feels weird.

In terms of options, things are deliberately simple. You get three combat classes - Rifleman, Special Ops and Sniper - and each does exactly what you'd expect. Rifleman is the standard infantry choice, the all-rounder for holding ground. Special Ops are the heavy lifters, the ones with the big guns that move into enemy territory and force the frontline backwards. Snipers, well, we know what they do: headshots.

'Medal of Honor Multiplayer Beta' Screenshot 2

This can't be good.

Each class has 14 levels to move through, with a new unlock at each threshold that can be equipped in the relevant weapon slot - Rail, Barrel and Base - before you head into battle. New kickass guns and vital inventory boosts are the norm, and you'll notice the difference once you start earning better gear.

Two modes are available, one for each map. Kabul City plays host to Team Assault, the straight deathmatch option. Helmand Valley is where Mission takes place. Mission is, frankly, the same as Rush in Battlefield: Bad Company 2. One team defends, the other attacks. As each control point falls, the defenders are pushed back. If the attackers advance far enough, they win.

Control is nimble and intuitive, though DICE's continued aversion to the prone stance will surely stir up more debate as players weigh up the advantages of being able to hit the ground to avoid fire against the potential for campers to make themselves even harder to spot. Personally, I always miss it, if only because dropping to the floor is such an instinctive response. Maybe these soldiers have really dodgy knees.

It is, surprisingly, the weapon handling that feels skewed at the moment, but for now we're happy to file that under the "it's a beta test" defence. Minor lag issues mean that it's possible to be shot by an enemy before you actually see their weapon fire, and I emptied five sniper rounds into one foe to no effect while he polished me off with an impressive 150-foot headshot using an assault rifle.

Explosive splash damage also feels weak, meaning that RPG and grenade hits have to be very precise if they're to have any effect. Given DICE's pedigree, and the amount of time to go before the game ships, it seems fair to trust that such balancing quirks will be ironed out.

The unanswered question is what Medal of Honor will be bringing to the multiplayer party that we haven't seen already. In its present state it seems like a promising riff on a familiar formula, but nothing that would demand your attention over the current market leaders, especially with DICE's Vietnam expansion for Bad Company 2 arriving a few months after Medal of Honor hits.

'Medal of Honor Multiplayer Beta' Screenshot 3

Experienced players can unlock a special gun that sends a real live phoenix to burn the enemy's face off.

This might well be enough, but it would be a shame for DICE to be reduced to performing its multiplayer party piece in other people's games rather than moving the genre forward.

A less tangible complaint, and one that still lingers after I've put the joypad down, is the general matter of taste. The hardcore online FPS crowd is not known for its tact, and I can't help but wonder just what sort of epithets will be flying across PSN and Xbox Live when armchair Andy McNabs are shooting at players openly identified as Taliban.

Watching virtual Coalition troops gunned down by insurgents in the ruins of Kabul, I felt more than a little weird, especially since a friend lost his brother in Afghanistan only a few weeks ago.

'Medal of Honor Multiplayer Beta' Screenshot 4

The game features vehicles, but most are burned out husks. The occasional tank is all you get in the beta.

This is a real war that is happening right now, real blood is being shed, and simulating that for fragfest fun while being rewarded for kill streaks... Well, there's just something a bit icky about that. In single-player, there can be a story that adds context and meaning to the carnage. In multiplayer, it's all just for fun. At least the World War II games have the distance of history, and the fact that their conflict has been absorbed into popular entertainment for over 60 years.

Even the likes of Modern Warfare 2 and Bad Company hide their bloodlust behind a figleaf of fictional "what if" scenarios. Medal of Honor turns a real tragedy into a social shooting gallery, and is going to have to tread carefully to avoid belittling the reality it borrows for our amusement.

Medal of Honor is due out for PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 on 15th October.

Picture of Dan.

About Dan Whitehead

Dan has been writing for Eurogamer since 2006 and specialises in RPGs, shooters and games for children. His bestest game ever is Julian Gollop's Chaos.

Read more articles from Dan by visiting the Dan Whitehead archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (82) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • ignatiusjreilly #1 2 years ago

    New ideas please. How long are we going to be playing the same game over and over?

  • Gambit1977 #2 2 years ago

    Didn't get my beta code :(

  • monkie_king #3 2 years ago

    30fps like BFBC2, presumably?

  • menage #4 2 years ago

    I only heard negative feedback about this from users, that coupled with the tasteles subject matter (for a multiplayer at least) and it's kinda heading for crash.

    Then again, I find games like MW2 also tasteless, no matter how fictional your universe is, still shooting "evil" arabs in the head.
    I don't care if the war is real or not, MW2 is exactly the same.

  • Eraysor #5 2 years ago

    Why on earth did they cut out the environmental destruction?! That would have been the only thing to separate this from MW2...

  • Avarice36 #6 2 years ago

    i am in the beta eurogamer and i can tell you that it is horrible it is not as fun as you make it out to be

  • berelain #7 2 years ago

    barely had chance to play the beta so far (it crashed several times on my PC and hung on a loading screen) but what I have played was... pretty meh. There was nothing interesting about it, and of course the subject matter is highly questionable.

    And it looks awful, even on highest settings.

  • IronGiant #8 2 years ago

    Not very impressed with this to be honest, nowhere near as responsive or graphically impressive as MW2 and its nowhere near as much fun as BFBC2. Sorely misses the destructible environments and just feels like a poor immitation of the other two games. Dropped off my to buy list.

  • Vic #9 2 years ago

    @ berelain

    How did you get a beta code? And why does it look so bad? I thought it would match MW2's beta in terms of graphics.

  • Avarice36 #10 2 years ago

    @ vic

    he probably got a command and conquer code like me, or he might have pre ordered

  • BadDevotions #11 2 years ago

    hmm this doesn't sound good at all. i didn't really have any expectations about this initially, then started seeing some previews and heard that DICE were involved and my expectations rose. Now they have fallen again. It just doesn't sound fun.

  • muscleblade #12 2 years ago

    The picture in the heading is ugly looking.

  • Tuffty #13 2 years ago

    "Then again, I find games like MW2 also tasteless, no matter how fictional your universe is, still shooting "evil" arabs in the head."

    Ah but you're also shooting at evil Russians and Americans as well! It's all about the equal opportunity shooting.

  • berelain #14 2 years ago

    @ Vic

    Same way Eurogamer did. Why does it look so bad... well, everything just looks pretty bland. The textures, geometry, effects, everything is just... OK. Might be to do with the small size of the download- perhaps they're saving the high-res graphical assets for the finished product, I guess. But there's just not enough detail, not enough... well, anything, really. Need to play it more to be able to give a proper opinion, though.

  • Nephirion #15 2 years ago

    @menage

    The reality is that coalition forces are trying to bring freedom and democracy in a country which drugs which helps to buy arms and finances terrorist attrocities throughout the western world. If a game depicts you removing such scum from the gene pool then not find that tasteless. Maybe Super Mario Galaxy 2 would be more your thing?

  • cianchristopher #16 2 years ago

    Call of Duty > Battlefield!

    60fps > ~25fps with tearing!

  • beastmaster #17 2 years ago

    I would assume they took out environmental destruction for a reason. I would assume that the processing needed to handle such things has been put to 'better' usage. Whatever that means.

  • ignatiusjreilly #18 2 years ago

    @Nephirion

    Wow, you must struggle in multiplayer games when it's time to switch sides :D

  • KayJay #19 2 years ago

    Its totally a Beta.
    They need to polish up a few things, but on the whole it stands its ground. The freezes' are a pain but we cant complain to much. it kinda turns into a different game once you unlock the red dot scope's, they tend to be pretty leathal.
    Dont know if its me (playing on a 40" LCD @ 720p) but I find it quite difficult to make out Freindly & Enemy players, They seem to really blend into the enviroment. Which I suppose is good in one way but not in another.

    Also, I didnt realise Battlefield Vietnam was taking so bloody long to come out. /sulks

  • KillerMonkey #20 2 years ago

    @cianchristopher "Call of Duty > Battlefield!

    60fps > ~25fps with tearing!"

    Not sure which Battlefield you're playing, but mine runs at 60+ FPS at higher than HD (Uber-D?) resolutions. ;)

  • cianchristopher #21 2 years ago

    @menage

    Wow, that "white guilt" you're carrying around must be really heavy! Maybe set it down for a bit!

  • KayJay #22 2 years ago

    @ Nephirion

    Oh dear....

  • superstu1337 #23 2 years ago

    So this article was good... Then you started preaching.

  • mashk #24 2 years ago

    Another person who's bemused by the fact they've removed the environmental damage. That was this games 'ace in the hole' as far as I was concerned.

    Now it's just COD in another engine.

  • geeza2020 #25 2 years ago

    read up to the point where it says there are no destructible environments = FAIL

    The destructible environments are one of the reasons i love playing BFBC2 so much.

  • Machetazo #26 2 years ago

    I was looking forward to MoH, but the no destructability thing's a bit of a buzz-kill. Maybe, I don't get any big online shooter this year, the way it's looking. Brink's fallen back to 2011, Rage won't be out till then, but there are other genres.

  • menage #27 2 years ago

    @Nephirion

    All I meant to say that games based on a real life conflict get tasteless real quick when turned into a deathmatch.

    And you really should read up on some history if you think it's really about spreading Western freedom and democracy.
    Edited by 2 at 22/06/10 @ 11:43

  • local_celebrity #28 2 years ago

    "I emptied five sniper rounds into one foe to no effect while he polished me off with an impressive 150-foot headshot using an assault rifle."

    Things like that used to happen to me in BFBC2 all the time, which is why I gave up on it. I don't know why that game is so exalted on these boards. At least MW2 feels *fair* when you play it. Battlefield, on the other hand, is so tit-for-tat and predictable. Kill someone, get killed, kill someone, get killed. Repeat. Ad infinitum. No opportunity to progress, no opportunity to shine through a bit of nimble footwork and clever anticipation. It just ends up being a skill-free slug fest of the worst kind: one where it takes umpteen hits to down people.

  • KillerMonkey #29 2 years ago

    @local_celebrity

    Sure, if you suck. If you try to play Battlefield as if it were COD, you will of course suck. No surprise there.

  • Machetazo #30 2 years ago

    Few greater examples can be found supporting KM's opinion than: http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=zcZ3wXF3r14

  • Hog-lumps #31 2 years ago

    "No opportunity to progress, no opportunity to shine through a bit of nimble footwork and clever anticipation. It just ends up being a skill-free slug fest of the worst kind: one where it takes umpteen hits to down people. "

    Sounds like you're playing it wrong - lone gun 'rambos' will always suck on BFBC - it's team based shooter with job classes for a reason.

  • metalangel #32 2 years ago

    The MOH series has always treated sensitive subjects with the appropriate dignity, so I'm not concerned about shooting "towelheads" and feeling bad about it. It's not like you get to bayonet children, "accidentally" destroy villages and stuff like that, now, is it? Alas, no prone + EA's current DLC policy means no sale to me.

  • DUFFKING #33 2 years ago

    Did someone just call Battlefield lacking in skill compared to CoD?

    Have I died and woken up in an alternate dimension?

  • menage #34 2 years ago

    @metalangel

    I agree that it will probably be not real in that sense. But I just have this strange nack of not treating real life conflicts like games. It's not that I'm offended, just think games in where the main focus is on shooting people I prefer to stay in the fictitious world. just seems wrong turning them into games for some reason.

    Also, that stuff does happen in real lfe, so it's only romanticized even more that way.

  • KayJay #35 2 years ago

    @DUFFKING
    Totally agree.

  • bratmandu #36 2 years ago

    No destructible scenery - no deal!

  • Haloboy #37 2 years ago

    I got my beta code two days ago. I uninstalled the beta two days ago. No medal for me then.

  • flaming-carrot #38 2 years ago

    I am glad to hear that Eurogamer are having better luck with this beta than I am.

    I played three times yesterday - the first game I was landed in had just one player (myself) wandering around. The second game was the same, on a different map. The third time I played, I actually found an active game, but my console froze after four kills, requiring a hard reset.

    My big disappointment (after from the game not working) was the lack of destructible scenery. I couldn't even damage a huge wooden cable reel with my grenade launcher. Not even a mark on it. I think the destructible environments in BC2 have spoiled me for every other FPS.
    Edited by 2 at 22/06/10 @ 13:11

  • onezeonx #39 2 years ago

    Enjoyed this but crashes more than Diana on a night out!!

  • icematt12 #40 2 years ago

    This is how bad the beta is, playing as a terrorist you have to suicide to prevent the console having a full lock up. It happens when you unlock the first "killstreak" at 40 points, so you basically have to kill 2 or 3 and then get yourself killed. The American troops don't have this, I was quite happy using my 3rd streak in one life in a game. The HUD is bigger than the screen, you have adjust the screen size everytime you start the beta as it doesn't remember that or your loadouts. Now I know why it was delayed on xbox, Microsoft probably saw how bad it was and refused to make it downloadable in the current form.

    When it does work, it's good though. Visual things I can let slide.
    Edited by 1 at 22/06/10 @ 13:25

  • Pinky_Floyd #41 2 years ago

    Icematt it's a beta. Do you know what that means? It's NOT a demo.

  • icematt12 #42 2 years ago

    I fully realise it's a beta, I have been in enough. However, a lot of these things could have been found out internally before letting the public in. They could have delayed it to fix aspects or created a list of known issues.

    It is different to what was demo'ed at E3. The beta has a melee attack where you do a vertical swing, like using a hammer. The E3 build has a thrust similar to holding a tactical knife with the sidearm in MW2. Don't understand why they didn't use that or some version of it.

  • glaeken #43 2 years ago

    Sounds aweful. How could they take the destruction out? That is just madness. I really cannot play FPS with indestructable environments anymore. It's just so silly to have walls that are RPG proof.

  • bodypopper #44 2 years ago

    Setting it during the current Afghan conflict is indeed bad taste I think.
    As a videogame though the multiplayer looks somewhere between CoD MW and Battlefield BC2 minus the best bits of either. What is the point of that?

  • onezeonx #45 2 years ago

    @icematt

    Are you mad??
    I presume you have not been involved in many beta's and if you have your the type who only play to have fun and not actually report any issues your having??

    Beta's are made so the makers can fix any problems and in some cases totally change some things the gamers want!
    The beta will be a million times different to the final release im sure!

    As a 1st stage beta IMO its a very solid start....but will only get better

  • sneetch #46 2 years ago

    @glaeken
    Sounds aweful. How could they take the destruction out? That is just madness. I really cannot play FPS with indestructable environments anymore. It's just so silly to have walls that are RPG proof.

    Yeah, Bad Company 2 was an eye opener for me, on the first modern day mission I hunkered down behind a concrete block to begin my "shoot everyone in the head before moving to the next bit of cover" routine (estd. 1992), then the concrete block exploded and I died and I realised I'd have to play this one a bit differently. Disappointed at the exclusion here, although I did think that some substances in BC2 should have been a bit tougher it added a lot.

  • Bleedingplums #47 2 years ago

    You make it sound like the combatants in Afghanistan on both sides aren't having tons and tons of fun!

    Roll on Medal of Honor! So the real soldiers can quit hogging all the excitement.

  • metalangel #48 2 years ago

    @menage: I agree with where you're coming from. I think so long as the subject (even if it is real) is treated with respect then there shouldn't be a problem. I am glad they are finally able to make games about this conflict (certainly it's already been in plenty of books, movies and TV shows) because otherwise it feels a bit like denial... we don't have a fantasy conflict, you have to think this is what our troops are really have to deal with every day.

    It's for this reason I was very disappointed that the Fallujah game was cancelled. Yes, real war is not a game but people should understand what happens and WHY it's not a game, and one way of getting that across (indeed, I think one of the best ways) is to simulate it with a game like this. Yes, there'll always be idiots who just chuckle with glee as they shoot another evil ey-rab in the face, but I'd hope the rest of us take away something a bit better than that.

    You know? Don't glorify war, but don't deny it.

  • menage #49 2 years ago

    @metalangel

    I'm all for progress in video games don't get me wrong, and I do think games can have an immersive factor which can get a message across, Sadly, I don't think MW or MOH are going to be remembered for that. MOH at least tries to take the "we're carefull" angle. MW had a FAG video which completely destroyed any goodwill they may have had with some of their ideas.

    In the longrun, most people just want to blow shit up. And then it get's tasteless. I would love a wargame which goes a bit deeper. Maybe they'll get it right in the SP.

  • geeza2020 #50 2 years ago

    there is no fucking war in afghanistan or Iraq. Its peace keeping thats going on over there, basically policing like in Northern Ireland a couple of decades back, but with the danger of being blown up turned up a few notches. I'm not sure a game about being a bobby on the beat with a machine gun waiting to have your legs blown off by a roadside bomb would really be that fun. So the devs generally make up some imaginary concept of American/British troops up against a force that has a serious chance of causing the people in the UK/USA harm (which is of course preposterous). So we end up with another tired, stale, boring fps, where the only colours are brown and grey and we all play the game through until its tediously inevitable finale. I can't wait :-(

  • n30n666 #51 2 years ago

    Not BFBC2 clone but sure as fuck MW2 clone. God damn laser guns are stupid. Why its easier to kill someone 100 meters away with assault rifle then sniper rifle is beyond me.

  • carlitoswagon #52 2 years ago

    Dice, if you are reading these postings could we please have some more maps? Thank you.

  • Avarice36 #53 2 years ago

    you guys do know that betas are for fixing netcode and tweaking some of it, the way this game is now they should scrap it and start from the beginning

  • Ryuken #54 2 years ago

    A bit hilarious some folks feel uneasy with this game when BF2 did nearly exactly the same in 2005. Sorry lads but it's a game, whether it's portraying a recent/ongoing conflict or one from over 50 years ago shouldn't matter at all (if you think that it doesn't matter for WWII games then you're being even more of a hypocrit). You're shooting at polygons, you ain't killing someone's brother in RL or whatever, period.

  • Vic #55 2 years ago

    @ Ryuken

    Agreed. It's a game. Leave politics out of it.

  • SilentNinja92 #56 2 years ago

    I understand not having destructabilty but it'll be annoying.

    It really got rif of so many cheap tactics that we all used, like sitting at the top of stairs to kill anyone trying to get up. In that COD4 dusty map wit the sniper building at crossroads people just sat at the stairs making it impossible to take out the snipers at the top easily.

  • Acrid #57 2 years ago

    I'm getting this just for the phoenix gun

  • devilmyarse #58 2 years ago

    Yeah, I got a beta code for this (you can apply for a beta code for C&C4 on from Gamespot, and then use that code to get a MOH beta code) and installed it, it looks crap, plays like crap and is buggy as hell. I tried several times blow the road block up, and it would get to 100% and stay there. Tried several times getting it to 100% and then getting shot in the head. Gave up.

  • ghiest #59 2 years ago

    I've had the beta since the 17th (ish), and although I love the graphics and the sound system is astonishingly good the game is piss poor really. Never in my 10+ years of online FPS gaming have I had so many times where I've come face to face with an opposition for us both to kill ourselves with so called assault weapons, I get 3-4 times a 7-15 minute match (especially on the TDM map). The weapons feel decent, but my sniper seems to damn weak compared to everyone elses (I have the unlocked version with high powered ammo as well) always two hits to kill someone minimum and I always get taken out by single shot (can't always be a head shot surely?).

    I will keep playing the beta to see if it's improved but I'm pretty confident in saying hte frostbite engine is balls for FPS gaming, it happened in BF2BC2 and happens in MoH as well, it just feels horrible how combat plays out, which is why I stopped playing Bc2 a while ago. I was dearly hoping this would put Call of duty series in the grave but unfortunately I can say it's no where even close still. Dice, please CAN the frostbite crap and get a real engine.

  • riceNpea #60 2 years ago

    i have the beta after pre-ordering the game from the US Amazon store, the only way i know to get it now if you live in England i think. Get the code and cancel the order. Our beta starts in July so ive pre-ordered from Play.com too.

    the game itself is quite playable apart from the frequent console freezes that require resetting the console. i've noticed it happens only with the terrorist faction so far but it is annoying enough to stop you from wanting to play. it is a beta so i fully expect to have issues playing it.

    so far these are:
    poor sniper round collision detection from distance.
    poor tank round collision detection, damage and explosive round splash damage.
    console regularily freezing.
    hud settings not saving resulting in most information being off screen even after adjusting values.
    difficult to distinguish enemy/friendly from distance.

    as for gameplay, it's hard to say. it really seems to me like a COD/BFBC combo. the small maps force confrontations and allow for less strategy but having said that having multiple objectives it is like a 'BFBC lite'.
    there are in-game rewards for kill streaks, offensive weaponry as well as commendations. the tanks are slightly less controlable then BFBC's and are underpowered. the smaller maps mean that they're basically stationary weapon platforms and not very good ones at that.
    the weapons aren't very distinctive at the moment and the range and accuracy need much tweeking.
    animation is ok although dying is a bit disjointed.
    the graphics are quite bland and washed out but there are some nice spot effects like the little puffs of dust from distant builings when bullets hit.
    audio is ok. the usual generic voice-overs, and a pleasingly punchy audio clue as to when you've earned a reward to use.
    load times are quicker then BFBC as is matchfixing.

    overall, when it isn't freezing, i quite like the beta and am glad i got a code. i'll keep playing it and will reserve judgement on the game as it's far from being the finished product. it's less twitchy then COD, which pleases me no end even though i'm rather good at COD, and therefore not as fragmented.
    you get a decent feeling of ebb and flow from it so if you can get a code i think you should try it out and keep an open mind

  • Feanor #61 2 years ago

    The controversy over Six Weeks in Fallujah seems a bit ridiculous now.

  • smithdown #62 2 years ago

    I know its a beta and I have played in a few (CoD4 and B:BC2 to name only two), but this is FAR from a finished product. The freezing, stuttering, laggy gameplay will presumably be fixed soon enough, perhaps even by a patch during the beta. But the uninspired visuals, limited classes and linear gameplay style just mark it as a fail for me. After playing B:BC2 with it's vehicles and class abilities, MoH feels weak, more like a poor CoD clone without the polished graphics and 60FPS.

    I was impressed by the singleplayer videos I've seen though, which looked to be 60FPS and very smooth indeed. I understand the MP and SP are running on different engines though, so it may well end up a game of two halves.
    Edited by 1 at 22/06/10 @ 16:33

  • Zaiz #63 2 years ago

    I'm probably not going to get this game, I'm pretty bored with FPS, and BFBC2's server system was so bad it made it difficult to play for me, even though it was a brilliant game.

  • glaeken #64 2 years ago

    I forgot they actually have vehicles in this. That makes the lack of destruction even worse. Nothing more silly than an Abrahams defeated by a wooden fence. The battlefield games themselves always used to feel a little silly before they had destruction as tanks were often defeated by indestructible fence posts and other such nonsense. Of course that was down to not actually having the tech yet so was excusable at the time.

    Edited by 1 at 22/06/10 @ 17:00

  • Chufty #65 2 years ago

    Lots of complaints about the lack of destructible terrain. I find that quite odd. It's not normal for a game to have it, and just because DICE made the multiplayer of MOH doesn't mean it should be a gimme.

    I understand it's one of BC2's party pieces, and I'm a big fan of the game. However, on the face of it, I'm not playing it to demolish a few walls.

    If you guys think all games from now on will have destruction engines, you're going to be disappointed.

  • humble #66 2 years ago

    Was I the only one reminded of the glorious Operation Wolf by the second picture in the article? Now there's an IP that could do with a resurgence! War games need more fun and less grit, imho!

  • menage #67 2 years ago

    @Ryuken

    "A bit hilarious some folks feel uneasy with this game when BF2 did nearly exactly the same in 2005. Sorry lads but it's a game, whether it's portraying a recent/ongoing conflict or one from over 50 years ago shouldn't matter at all (if you think that it doesn't matter for WWII games then you're being even more of a hypocrit). You're shooting at polygons, you ain't killing someone's brother in RL or whatever, period."

    Period my ass. who says I didn't complain back then as well? I don't even touch most war stuff and certainly don't buy it. I never got the need to replay incidents where millions actually died and call it fun. Yes WW2 games too. I just don't think it's good form to make it only about fucking shooting stuff and going WhooHah while cracking open a beer while some poor smuck lies bleeding dead with a bullet in his shoulde for realr.

    @Vic

    I want to, but games like these keep bringing em in. Certainly this game,

    See I'm not against games like these. Hell everyone should doi whatever they fuck they want. But I certainly won't stop voicing my opinion on my distaste of these things. As long as these fucking games only get me to experence the thrill of the kill instead of real stuff it's just freaking weird. Period.



    Edited by 2 at 22/06/10 @ 18:58

  • Pablo2k5 #68 2 years ago

    "A less tangible complaint, and one that still lingers after I've put the joypad down"

    Fail.

    FPS belong on PC.

  • himynameisnathan #69 2 years ago

    @ local_celebrity

    Oh yeah, I know exactly what you mean, kinda, in MW it'; get killed, get killed, get killed...get killed....get killed...........get killed by some racist 14 year old "sniper"

  • Absolvus #70 2 years ago

    @Chufty

    Destructible environment is the future now that one game did it properly. Get on with the times or make 2nd grade games. Clearly the technology exists so if you are not capable then it's just bad programming.

    My though why MOH doesn't have destructible environment in multiplayer is that since the singleplayer engine is not capable they didn't want to have it in multiplayer either, would have made SP look bad. Though there's some consideration for gameplay too since small maps and wall destruction tends to change things radically.

  • MinerWilly #71 2 years ago

    Been playing since Saturday with all the BFBC2 VIP's , it really shows because players stick together and cover each other unlike when the MW crowd get in and just start running around on their own being abusive to everyone .

  • SupremeSkill #72 2 years ago

    This game is able to suck before its even released.
    It's also so weird that it has different engines separately for SP and MP.
    Generally I don't like this real-life war layout at all, so it's a 'not buy'.

    Waiting for Starcraft 2 and Fallout New Vegas.

  • SFG_Clan #73 2 years ago

    The last comment from the author of the article, the general taste part. Im saddened that you only mentioned coalition troop deaths in the real war, you didn't go on to mention the countless dead civilians chalked up to coalition air strikes - nor the questionable perception that the taliban are insurgents. This implying most of them are from outside the country - when the fact is they are a loose association of Afghan tribal groups.

    can't wait to try the beta; sadly I am but a lowly 360 owner and not fit in DICEs eyes to play, or even claim my code, for the beta until a deferred date
    Edited by 1 at 22/06/10 @ 21:50

  • Turbotim3 #74 2 years ago

    This is just 2 maps and 2 gameplay modes. You would be stupid to judge the game this early. Plus the single player looks amazing and it will be nice to play a single player military gps that's worth a crap. Also the multiplayer game modes sound like alot of fun and very original

  • Turbotim3 #75 2 years ago

    Hey sfg_clan he also did not mention the thousands upon thousand of afghan the TALIBAN kill on a regular basis. If they think you are gay or if you do something they think is wrong they will exacute you in a mass public exacution

  • sherpa1984 #76 2 years ago

    The good:

    - Runs super fast on PC. Might be down to the lack of destructible environment. If so it's worth the pay off
    - Combat is clean. You see each other, you shoot each other, ala Counter-Strike. Less- though still some- annoying artillery barrages, armoured vs infantry combat etc
    - Actions are more responsive. Makes a world of difference to the PC players.
    - Netcode improved.

    The bad:

    - We've seen it all before
    - I'm thick skinned when it comes to games, but I grumbled when I saw the resistance fighters are actually called the Taliban.

  • icematt12 #77 2 years ago

    I will take the umm... criticism on the chin as I did focus on the rather apparent unpleasantness. Unintentional, but I'll say I was wrong. Wipe that stuff off the surface, and there is some good items under under there. The removal of destruction does make sense, given the size and contents of the TDM level. Theres only like 4 buildings on the map you can go inside, only takes like 20 seconds to sprint from one side to the other. Maybe less in some areas, like by the outside steps of the largest building.

    From my PoV the network/connection side, surely the most important part of a MP beta, seems practicly like that of a finished product. No disconnections, no teleporting players. As for being a MW clone, let's see what other goodies they have in store. If anything, I will say that the MP has the potential to be more balanced (and thus in my eyes somewhat better) than MW2.
    Edited by 1 at 22/06/10 @ 22:49

  • aphexstwin #78 2 years ago

    i was interested in this but it sounds a bit ordinary. the thing that got me interested was the lack of destruction: any longtime bf2mc player will know what i mean, its the whole spawn raping thing, if you can hold a base then you have a chance. also putting me off is this idea of shitting on noobs, getting better weapons as rewards. i hate it. if you rank up, that should be enough. you play cod for long enough you will reach prestige. so, like bf2mc, i admire the points per hour system. if youre good enough to be a 5 star general with 100pph, you dont need a silly reward to tell you so. okay, im old school and proud but i like knowing that i can join a game and have it on a level playing field, even if i buy it a year later. and as a former army kid, the subject matter is incredulously terrible.

  • gjgjg #79 2 years ago

    I agree Dan, there is something distasteful about the whole concept of making mild entertainment about the ongoing suffering of real life. yes its a game, but the whole 'keep poitics out of it' bs is just a cop out line for those too lazy / ignorant to actually be a part of the real world.
    if someone would release a mainstream game about fighting against isreali occupation, planting a bomb on a london tube or the ira bombings or tibet or something without portraying the cruel tradegy /consequences of it i think it would highlight the nature of games like these.
    i cant imagine how it must feel to have lost your family or limb or something to a western invasion of your country and to find them playing these kinds of games at home for fun.
    im pretty pisd off now!

  • Bibbo #80 2 years ago

    I'm glad they left tactical destruction out of it. Don't want Medal of Honor stealing BC2's thunder. Frostbite 2 is what I love about BC2, and all the COD boys coming over expecting to spawn camp you. Funny moment: guy kills friend, friend says "He's hidden in the corner of the house, camping, what the fuck... Blow him the fuck up man" So we rig half the building with C4, pop a smoke grenade in there, then pop the house. It's moments like that I want to stay on Battlefield.

    It's obvious DICE done the multiplayer aiming for the MW2 boys, wonder how it will take off. As said earlier, people are moaning like bitches, threatening to "Cancel" their pre-order because the BETA is broken. Well... that's why it is called a beta... is it not?

  • Soton4084 #81 2 years ago

    DICE did a brilliiant job with BFBC2 and I'm looking forward to the Vietnam expansion pack. The real question is, will the Medal of Honour multiplayer be different enough to justify a purchase? There's no doubt that it will be well polished and technically as good as BFBC2, but if it feels the same then what's the point? Still, I am looking forward to it and won't make my judgement until I've read the reviews.

  • Luckz #82 2 years ago

    Cancelled my preorder after playing the beta.