Medal of Honor Adoption discussion

[GhostMjr]

So the beta is over.

Now the game has been released what do we think of it?

The singleplayer I have completed and its around 4-6 hours long only and not a very good standard at all to put it blunty

Whats the multiplayer like people and how many people have the game?

• Can we play it on lan?
• Is it dedicated servers as in can we host our own servers?
• Could it run in conjunction to bc2?

cheers guys,

[Blunt]

The singleplayer I have completed and its around 4-6 hours long only and not a very good standard at all to put it blunty

Whats the multiplayer like people and how many people have the game?

• Can we play it on lan?
• Is it dedicated servers as in can we host our own servers?
• Could it run in conjunction to bc2?

cheers guys,

Aw, you're missin me:wub:

just bought the game, will let you know

[TeaLeaf]

Single player is reported to be good, but too short.  MP is said to be nasty.

When I played the Beta the things I really liked about this game were the mechanics - the guns shot where you aimed, there were no fps problems and things moved in a very fluid predicatable way which enahanced you game experience.  Tbh I was so impressed with those aspects (as so few games get them right) that I overlooked the major problem with MOH:

The maps are real small.

Stick 24 online players in a small map and you get bedlam, particularly when you respawn immediately after death.  It was fun during beta as it was fast-paced and fluid movement, but the cramped maps will not do anything for the game's longevity.  Imagine putting 24 players in an area not much bigger than the size of the mincer on de_dust and you get an idea of how little space you have to work with on some maps.  Current EA reports for the online experience are not great, but I await Blunt's review of the released version of the multiplayer game.  Perhaps things have changed and the maps have increased in size?

[sulky_uk]

saw it at the lan, looked so much like COD4, the weapons, way the guys ran and such, even the terrain looked nearly identical, i say stick to cod 4

[T-Bag]

Single player and multiplayer are completely different. There's not much to link them. I read somewhere they're even on different engines. Anyway, I sound the SP disappointing in the end. It started well and then becomes more and more like a bad mod. There are too many scripted sequences that require you to be in the right place for action to continue etc.

But that's not important, it's the multiplayer. I like it, it is very fast to load, and joins servers nearly instantly. It doesn't feel like CoD, but is obviously competing for the same share of the market. I think you could squeeze a dmw game out of it, but frankly it's not worth it. The game is good, but we still have an active CoD 4 group. It plays well and has the numbers that are needed to run. BC2 was a completely different game on larger maps with more capability for teamwork etc. MoH doesn't really have an angle for us to adopt it by. Black ops might if it brings MW2 improvements without removing all the most important features like dedicated servers etc, but I'm not really pushing for us too take this one up.

[Snokio]

I'm finding single player pretty bad tbh, but MP better, the majority of the maps do seem to be pretty small, I think a creepy sever might make it more tactical, but on a full server (and they fill pretty quick atm) its pretty much run and gun, one bad point is you can't choose who to spawn on like you can in BC2 (only at base or frontline)
 
It's still good fun, but with black ops on the way in around 20 odd days, I feel this might just be a flash in the pan.
 
Ohh, and it uses Punkbuster! :doh:

[Fazer Erazer]

Have just got the game, will let you know once i've played through it.

[Tutonic]

The MOH multiplayer is ok, but it's far too similar to COD4 and BC2 - both of which are superior imo.

[BrotherTobious]

The MOH multiplayer is ok, but it's far too similar to COD4 and BC2 - both of which are superior imo.

Have to agree.