All comments

AHHHHH I HATE COMMERCIALS! Other than that the game looks amazing. Reminds me of Battlefield, but looks better imo or maybe it was just the fact that the guy playing was good lol.

I had a good time with the beta. I know it's pretty much a Battlefield/MW2 clone, but is that really such a bad thing ? Both Battlefield and MW2 are highly successful games(I'm sure i don't need to tell anyone that), but having a hybrid of the two really isn't such a bad thing imo. Sure, i would have liked something different and unique, but this is what we got and i think it's pretty good.


To be honest.. I was never a huge fan of MW2, so it's either this or Blackops for my break from Reach this winter. I'm gonna try like hell to chose one or the other, but i have a feeling i will pick up both games as usual lol.

The only thing i hated about the MoH beta was how wooden the guns felt when you fired and reloaded, also firing a grenade felt meh!

Saying that i will be buying this come release for the PC.

Could the ragdoll be fixed and not TOTALLY broken, like in the beta?

I read on a Belgian gamesite the fixes they were implementing based on the feedback from the beta. The list was pretty extensive and was well thought of. I'm confident that the multiplayer will be much better than the beta.

It looks great in this video.

Yeah, nice SCENARIO driven gameplay here..

Call of Field or BattleDuty ???

XD

That had none of the intensity on the BF series. Everything there lacked "oomph", IMO...

This trailer looks quite good, but after the beta I don't think the game will do anything for me. It played like battlefield for simpletons and having put over 100 hours into that I think my taste might be more suited to the battlefield vietnam expansion.

what is this mode?

is it like some sort of co-op?

cos it looked like a single player mission against AI. yet had very multiplayer-esque pop ups like "10+ head shot", and all that bollocks?

looks like great..

It's multiplayer.

It still just doesnt seem to feel right making a product of "entertainment" based on a conflict that people are still losing their fathers, and sons, in today.
Gamers can support a game, that lets be honest EA's marketing team have aimed for controversy with, as no different than the countless WW2 games that came before it...but those have the benefit of time on their side.
Enough time has passed now that Nazi's have become almost mythical creatures..no more related to German's as zombies are. Same as MW2's Russians - camped up cartoon versions, distancing themselves from any country of real threat today.

This just feels far too cynical. EA profiting on misery going on right now on both sides, and kids getting entertainment from it. It's a real conflict - thats EA's selling point. I just don't know if thats a good thing. The single player will no doubt be very Pro flag waving America.. it will be interesting to see if it verges on almost popaganda.. like a modern version of the loony toon cartoons they used to play into american homes during ww2

Anyway, the beta was shit and completely broken. I've little hope of it being fixed in time, so... regardles of controvery, in the name of gameplay it doesnt interest to me now.

Agreed they should just change Al-Qaeda to Al-Qaedo and Afgahnistan to Alfganistan. Everything will be perfect then and I won't need to feign moreal outrage. This "it's bad because they used real names" is fucking stupid and intellectually dishonest. If you're against the way real word FPS use war as a playground, then it should be universal. Not because of something arbitrary like names. That's like saying you're only offended at genocide movies when it has to do with Nazis and Jews.

it's not bad because they're using real "names". It's questionable because they're using a current conflict. Theres a world of difference.

when will it all end?

I understand your arguments, and agree to some degree. But, what bothers me, is that these arguments are only used when it's about US soldiers or Brittish soldiers.
It doesn't matter if you kill thousands of iraq people, germans, koreans, japanese people, as long as you don't kill americans and brittish people in a video game.
The fact that this conflict is still going on, is true, but what happens in the game is pure fiction. There are movies about the conflicts out there. But again; the americans have to be the good guys. If they are not depicted as good guys, the controverse starts.
A vietnam shooter is still dodgy, because there are still PoW there if you use your arguments. Fighting against the koreans is still dodgy because of the highly explosive situation over there.
And what about games about murders? Like Max Payne. Etc...

i dont agree with that. I dont think that these arguements are only there when it's US/UK soilders. Fact is we've not seen any other games based on current events to single out any sort of hypocrisy.

It's true that other mediums have been selling the conflict to us as forms of entertainment. But then i think it comes down to an issue of taste, how delicately its handled... you wont watch a movie and get "HEAD SHOT" followed by a number of points displayed on screen every time you see somebody die.

Ok, but that has nothing to do with MoH. That's in every multiplayer FPS where you kill 'people' (talking about headshot and points).


And your other argument that there aren't any other games where the Germans eg are the 'stars' of the game, or the japanes, or the vietnamese people, doesn't that ring a bell? Not 1 publisher would dare to publish such a game because it would get bashed for being immoral.

Hows it nothing to do with MOH? we're talking about making entertainment out of current events - MOH is the ONLY game making entertainment out of current events. It matters not that other games offer points for how you choose to kill people.. theres no issue of sensitivity there - thats the point.

I've never even mentioned that as an argument?

Nice video. Looks good

I think that comes down to motivations. If you made a modern game with the Japanese as a "bad guy" I think people WOULD have a problem with it. Perspective will always be an issue, but if you are playing as the Taliban that's different. We see the Taliban as the "bad guy" because of the overly oppressive methods they use when they are in power( read: getting lashed because you want to shave your face, destroying any educational material that isn't Religious, suppressing women, killing people who are giving humanitarian aid because they are Chrisitan, etc), let alone the Military reasons we are fighting. I do think a modern Germany as an antagonist wouldn't roll well either with people( most people know that the Nazi's weren't Nazi's because they were German). Places like Russia or China are often picked as enemies because they are the only Nations with the power to go head to head and keep it an even battle full scale...

I don't agree. Homefront is about North Korea invading the US. I haven't heard a single complaint about that. Why not? Because North Koreans are the 'bad guys'. North Koreans aren't bad guys, their government is.
What you are saying about the Taliban is propaganda by the US. Yes, Afghanistan have a completely different culture than we 'civilised' countries have. But that doesn't make the Afghan people bad. Afghanistan was invaded by Russia. The USA have trained and supported the Taliban with weapons to fight the Russians. And now suddenly they are the bad guys? Al Qaida is a better term to describe the terrorrists active in Afghanistan. But Al Qaida does not exist like we are told to believe. There is no organisation with Osama Bin Laden at the head of that organisation (btw the family of the Bin Ladens were friends with the Bush administration). And I could go on for hours, but that would become very boring.

The fact is that we as western countries are meant to believe we are the good guys, and the middle east are the bad guys. At the same moment, the middle east is meant to believe they are the good guys and the western countries are the bad guys (and actually they have far more reasons to believe this when every couple of years, western forces + Russia are invading their countries for commercial reasons, being oil and the weapons industry).

But for video games: it has to fit the picture of western=good, eastern=bad.

really? was it against bots or something? it looked really scripted. like a mission, rather then a multiplayer map.