[PerrinV2]

no time to comment

[K.O.Kiki]

More US Navy Seals wank for the yanks, I see.

[gizmo]

I must have been one of the few people who preferred the MoH campaign to the ones in CoD. Not that the latter is a particularly good comparison but still, it did get remarkably worse reviews. I take it multiplayer wasn't as good?

[Dcully]

I take it multiplayer wasn't as good?

Think infantry gameplay in BF3 and its very similar.
The problem was the maps were pretty poor and the included game modes, the actual gunplay is almost identical to BF3.

[hightower1]

The campagn was meh but I actually enjoyed the multiplayer. Very similar to BF but with smaller maps. It wasnt stellar as BF style of gameplay, weapons, balance and controlls learn twords open maps rather than tighter ones but it was serviceable.

Ill pick it up and give it a fair chance alright, just wont be expecting much

[ShadowHearth]

Originally Posted by gizmo

I must have been one of the few people who preferred the MoH campaign to the ones in CoD. Not that the latter is a particularly good comparison but still, it did get remarkably worse reviews. I take it multiplayer wasn't as good?

i liked medal of honor. i found it really fun. more down the ground compared to cod super human big balls in your face marathon.

i liked the online too. i dont know why, but when i played it o9nline it felt like real war when you were pushing your line. it felt more positional war, then running around shooting ****. i swear to god a lot of times i would be sitting in cover and see others up ahead in cover. they will run to next cover and i would run in to their cover. It felt like everyone valued their live and did not had a mind set to " **** it, i will respawn in 10 seconds anyway ".
ofc in some team deathmatch games you would have a spawn rape scenarios. then very very sneaky cheap weapon progression! there were only 3 weapons per class, then you get enemies weapons and one unique weapon for both sides. it was a lazy move, though i guess they wanted to make it more realistic and use only those weapons that were used in Middle east during the conflicts.

still, i am looking forward to it.

[Grumpypants]

I loved the first game i've played it through 5 or 6 times now and it still keep me interested, thought it was refreshing as it didn't pander to the 13 year old COD/BF player who thought it was boring because it was realistic and didn't have some insane story with nukes and James Bond style set pieces.

Little bit worried from looking at the trailer with the speed boat section etc that it might be more like BF3 and less MOH.

Multiplayer was very solid but as DICE made it it was just BF light. Hopefully Danger Close look after it themselves this time as they are much better at capturing the feel of being a modern soldier.

[ShadowHearth]

Originally Posted by Grumpypants

I loved the first game i've played it through 5 or 6 times now and it still keep me interested, thought it was refreshing as it didn't pander to the 13 year old COD/BF player who thought it was boring because it was realistic and didn't have some insane story with nukes and James Bond style set pieces.

Little bit worried from looking at the trailer with the speed boat section etc that it might be more like BF3 and less MOH.

Multiplayer was very solid but as DICE made it it was just BF light. Hopefully Danger Close look after it themselves this time as they are much better at capturing the feel of being a modern soldier.

agree. i loved single player. i really felt more connected to characters then any recent modern shooter.

plus ofc a big beard. you cant go wrong with that. +50 sexyness