Medal of Honor (Modern Era version) revealed

Ballotechnic wrote:

I came across this great article in the NY Times (via Twitter) regarding realism in war themed video games, something we touched upon earlier in this thread. I found the article very interesting, especially the parts about the now defunct game Six Days in Fallujah. Enjoy.

Video Games That Bring Afghanistan Home - NYTimes.com

I read that article yesterday, and it's really good—the kind of video game journalism that you don't get in, well, video game journalism. There's nothing I can say about it that won't retread what I've said about military shooters already, but Suellentrop goes over all the issues pretty thoroughly. I'm still not convinced that EA that has the spine to make MOH be something more than a puerile thrill ride. I would be very happy to be wrong.

A video-game documentary about Iraq or Afghanistan is inevitable, whether it is a Medal of Honor sequel, or Six Days in Fallujah, or another game altogether, Read Omohundro told me.

“I think that eventually it will be permitted,” he said. “And if it becomes permitted, it will be accepted. It’s just going to take a while.”

Permitted by whom, I wonder? Publishers?

Gravey wrote:

Permitted by whom, I wonder? Publishers?

Probably the general public, given enough time. Just like WW II or Vietnam games don't garner outrage, given enough distance it will be more open subject matter.

Ballotechnic wrote:
Gravey wrote:

Permitted by whom, I wonder? Publishers?

Probably the general public, given enough time. Just like WW II or Vietnam games don't garner outrage, given enough distance it will be more open subject matter.

Public sure, but they're fickle. I imagine publishers are a more immediate barrier. The independent Kuma\War, and Six Days being dropped by Konami, spring immediately to mind. I think there's an audience for what the MOH producer in the article calls a "bummer game" (as much as that misrepresents what that work could be capable of evoking—The Thin Red Line or Full Metal Jacket are 'bummer movies'). I mean, it's not a big audience, certainly not a blockbuster-maker and definitely not the typical shooter audience—hell, maybe it's just me.

I'm not even asking for a game that's critical of war or explicitly anti-war or political. Just a war shooter that tilts toward "accurate and realistic" (on more than a tactical level) rather than "authentic and plausible" (without necessarily recreating actual scenarios if that hits a nerve), or toward the horrible side of Bogost's horrible/badass description.

Apparently there is a new open beta on PC starting 4th October.

liquid wrote:
Thin_J wrote:
ranalin wrote:
liquid wrote:

I love how they make it so that it looks playable.

Thats the way the beta played for me. My biggest issue was with hit boxes and the sight reticules not always lining up. Wasnt an all the time thing, but it was annoying when it did happen.

Yeah, my play sessions looked pretty much like the videos they're showing too. I don't know what the heck all the "omg unplayable" stuff is about with this one.

Did you play it on console? Nothing in that game worked on the PC for me. The game would crash randomly when getting kill streaks, it would crash just for the lolz, if you press the chat button you can't hide the chat window until the game ends, the "avatar" movement was bad, you could hardly strafe and of course no lean, the whole UI was just abysmal, there were bugs that prevented you from doing anything in the menu if you select certain options (don't remember the exact bug anymore).
Not to mention that you don't get a sniper (what they give you doesn't count, that's just a rifle with red-dot sights) until you're some huge level and leveling was super slow.
It took the worst parts from CoD and [b]BC2 and added a bunch of game breaking bugs. And they never fixed them either, not even one patch. All in all, there were only a few games where I played for more than 5 minutes without being kicked back to the desktop.

I played on PC. I didnt chat though almost never do. If i want to talk to anyone its through vent. I may have crashed once the entire time and was able to map the keys i wanted. Its beta so i expected an unfinished UI. Hell the BC2 UI was abysmal during beta and demo times. In fact BC2 gave me more problems with crashing and bad performance during that time than that MOH did. I never had problems with movement either. Like i said before the play parts was smooth.

Leveling was not slow it was way too damn fast. Thats why the new fixes stretched some of that out.

I wasnt a fan of the TDM map though. It was way to small and the way they cycled respawns was too easy to time and adapt to. Kill x many in location y wait z time and move to new location to repeat. If you were on the receiving end of that against good players it was hard to break out.

Scratched wrote:

Apparently there is a new open beta on PC starting 4th October.

I'm going to give it another try and hope for the best.

Kerplunk wrote:
Scratched wrote:

Apparently there is a new open beta on PC starting 4th October.

I'm going to give it another try and hope for the best. :|

Link for the open beta. New maps and game types this time around.

http://www.medalofhonor.com/pcopenbeta

Shaikot Mountains Map

Objectives on Shahikot Mountains:
•Neutralize chopper wreck.
•Neutralize ammo depot.
•Assault stronghold.
•Destroy mortar station.
•Neutralize anti-aircraft gun.

Tactics on Shahikot Mountains:

Coalition

Take control of the high points and make sure to cover your advance with smoke grenades. There will be many insurgent snipers waiting to take you out so laying suppressing fire while advancing is a must. The key to break through the chokepoints are smoke grenades with consistent rushing from cover to cover while taking out any snipers in the hills.

Insurgents
•The coalition will try to come from all directions to get an advantage, make sure to find a good spot where you can see them first to take them out.
•Rushing the coalition forces is not recommended since they will come in groups and can spawn near friendly units.
•Take advantage of the choke points on the level to create a barrier that the coalition need to break through.

Kunar Base Map

Tactics on Sector Control:
•In sector control you need to control at least 2 of the 3 sectors to take control of the map so this is your first objective.
•When you have secured a sector try to cover it from a distance instead of standing at it where you can be struck with grenades or a mortar strike!
•Make sure to take advantage of the few high points that exist on this level such as the towers and roof tops.
•Sneaking through the barracks while clearing the rooms with a hand grenade is a great way to get around and ambush the enemy forces.

Hopefully you PC folks will have better luck with the beta this time.

93_confirmed wrote:

I'm one of the biggest Socom fans on the site (Legion is the other) and have been waiting ages for a 3rd-person shooter on par with Socom but up to date with next-gen technology. I'd love a game 100% dedicated to special ops and Navy Seals with a focus on stealth, tactics, loadouts, etc. instead of the over-the-top, balls to the wall, nonsense that we get forcefed every holiday season.

I just wanted to add a "this" for posterity. I still look back with sadness to the days when Ghost Recon/Rainbow Six figured that there wasn't money in methodically planning your attack and making gunfights actually dangerous, and instead went with the "LOL TERRORISTS IN VEGAS" venue.

In retrospect, SWAT 4 has grown in my estimation, from just a game to more of a astonishing outlier.

Taliban 2: Electric Boogaloo

Despite the gamer-rage over at Kotaku, the change (or cave, if you will) this one really strikes me as a "meh". I understand, for a lot of the people, it's the "principle" of the thing, but while the Taliban probably are one of the largest and most notable groups fighting in Afghanistan today, they're certainly not the only ones. Although I do think the argument that doing this is actually worse as it plays into the "Middle East/Arabs = Terrorists" stereotype may have some legs.

Really, after CoD:MW2, i'm more interested/terrified as to the story EA's going to attempt to tell about a real and ongoing conflict. Given that supposedly their decision to change the name is about sensitivity to soldiers and families of the fallen, one can only hope the story will have the same sense of nuance.*

[size=1]* - Chances of this are absolutely zero, I know.[/size]

EDIT: Or, you could just read Gravey's opinions in my voice, since they're essentially the same.

Anyone know will the PC beta show up on Steam automatically like it did before?

The problem is that once out of control nutjobs get a foot in the door, they'll never take it out.

We're going to have people complaining about every game now because it offends their sensibilities in some way, and they've seen that companies will bow to pressure if you complain long and loud enough.

EA has set gaming back a good ten years at least by caving in to a bunch of hysterical housewives.

I can't wait for the discussion about how the next Mortal Kombat game is too violent.

Lard wrote:

We're going to have people complaining about every game now because it offends their sensibilities in some way, and they've seen that companies will bow to pressure if you complain long and loud enough.

I'll make sure to revisit this comment when the announce the first batch of DLC for Medal of Honor.

Prederick wrote:

Really, after CoD:MW2, i'm more interested/terrified as to the story EA's going to attempt to tell about a real and ongoing conflict. Given that supposedly their decision to change the name is about sensitivity to soldiers and families of the fallen, one can only hope the story will have the same sense of nuance.*

[size=1]* - Chances of this are absolutely zero, I know.[/size]

The Taliban/OpFor swap is only for multiplayer, and I agree with you that it's basically a "meh" change, and something they probably should have done in the first place. Multiplayer is not a space where any sort of respectful handling of the war is going to occur. Multiplayer is not a space where a respectful handling of anything is going to occur. Less cynically, if multiplayer is treated at face value as an exercise, then what's good for the military—calling the enemy in exercises OpFor—is good for the gander.

On the other hand, does this keep shaking my confidence in EA's spine regarding the single-player? Absolutely. I still want to believe that Danger Close want, at some level, to do something Important with MoH, but I'm no less afraid now than I was before that EA the publisher won't allow it.

Prederick wrote:

EDIT: Or, you could just read Gravey's opinions in my voice, since they're essentially the same.

I've got a low, mumbly monotone, so I'll probably read my own comments in your voice too.

how about changing the name "american soldiers" to american invaders.

I mean if EA changed it because of the family of the US soldiers, how about those from the afghan family side?
Oh dear! I forgot.... american lives are more valuable than those of middle eastern ones.

liquid wrote:

how about changing the name "american soldiers" to american invaders.

I mean if EA changed it because of the family of the US soldiers, how about those from the afghan family side?
Oh dear! I forgot.... american lives are more valuable than those of middle eastern ones.

That's hardly fair. If it were a dispute between two regions with high console penetration, I'm sure they'd be eager to show respect for both sides. Lives of people from XBox Live served countries are more valuable than No XBox Live countries.

I, too, find confidence in the ideas underlying the project being shaken.

El-Producto wrote:

Anyone know will the PC beta show up on Steam automatically like it did before?

Not sure it's going to be on Steam.

I went ahead and downloaded it from EA and installed it and ready for Monday.

There are no keys involved for the open beta, so besides steam being the download/install manager there is no difference.

ranalin wrote:
El-Producto wrote:

Anyone know will the PC beta show up on Steam automatically like it did before?

Not sure it's going to be on Steam.

I went ahead and downloaded it from EA and installed it and ready for Monday.

It's on Steam. http://store.steampowered.com/app/47...

Dr._J wrote:
Lard wrote:

We're going to have people complaining about every game now because it offends their sensibilities in some way, and they've seen that companies will bow to pressure if you complain long and loud enough.

I'll make sure to revisit this comment when the announce the first batch of DLC for Medal of Honor.

The difference being I just ask for the content to be on the disc, not altered, smartypants.

I'll be playing this tonight when i get home. I'll be hanging out on vent when i do.

It still has the screen adjustment option. Am I being really dense in thinking that PCs don't need that?

Scratched wrote:

It still has the screen adjustment option. Am I being really dense in thinking that PCs don't need that?

Depends. I sometimes use a tv/monitor combo and connect via a hdmi-dvi cable and can use that option if i for whatever reason decide to play on it. I usually dont, but having that option there is cool.

Screen adjustment is built into the nvidia drivers when you connect up to a TV.
And joy of joys, a server browser without any filters. It's less use than a wet paper bag if I'm just scanning through page and page of 24/24 full servers. Another DICE release with their hallmark UI quality.
edit again: Oh wait, they're there, but hidden until you stop it scanning servers.

Scratched wrote:

Screen adjustment is built into the nvidia drivers when you connect up to a TV.

Sure, but if you play games in a different resolution than you keep your desktop, then it might be helpful to have a separate in-game setting, no?

When I had my PC hooked up to a 1080p TV and my videocard wasn't so up to date I occasionally ran games in 720p with higher levels of AA/AF because it ended up offering higher performance. I can remember a time or two when having a few other settings available inside games would have been helpful.

I don't think I'll be getting this. It feels better than the last beta, but I still don't find it fun.

Ian Bogost has a great write-up on Medal of Honor viz the November U.S Supreme Court case on games and the First Amendment. Specifically regarding MoH, I want to spotlight this passage:

Restrepo and The Hurt Locker also deemphasized geopolitics in favor of the experience of soldiering, but neither set of filmmakers would ever have argued that their respective settings and contexts were irrelevant to that experience. Yet in an interview on this site, Goodrich makes precisely this claim, that he intends the game to be "devoid of politics or political discussion or debate."

I think we've always approached [the game] in the sense that it's not about the war itself. We've not approached as a game about Afghanistan, or a game about Al Qaeda. This is not a game about the Taliban. This is not a game about local tribal militias or warlords.

Instead, Goodrich suggests that the game is about "individuals doing their job," a kind of milquetoast soldier's homage: "Let's support them, let's get them home."

So let's review. Electronic Arts made a war game about the U.S.-led war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, but that game is not about war, not about Afghanistan, not about the Taliban, not political, and not interested in making or supporting any discussion.

Instead, Medal of Honor is just another well-produced first-person shooter, one that invokes a recent war as a marketing gimmick to accompany an equally generic plea to "support our troops." Playing as the Taliban never mattered anyway. It was just a menu item, so no big deal to remove or rename it. Just a marketing tag on the box. Just a clever hook to spin free publicity, and just an inconvenient but essentially irrelevant feature to drop when the Army brass raised its eyebrows.

There seems to be some conflation about where reference to the Taliban is being removed—as far as I know, it's multiplayer only. But the general attitude of EA basically declaws the game, as an expressive work, in toto. To wit: it's not meant to express anything (except what Chris Remo might describe as "fun funny fun fun").

Bogost ties MoH into the larger free speech issue, the subject of the article:

[T]he very structures that drive the operation of the most visible and influential circles of the commercial video game industry [the major publishers and console manufacturers who license their games], the ones that have raised the ire of governments like California's, simultaneously resist the expansion of the mass market video game console into the domains of the speech the First Amendment was created to protect. . . .

Free speech is defended in courts, but it is practiced on the streets and in the media by people who want to intervene in their world, not just to occupy it. Commercial video games deserve a place at that table, to be sure. Whether they will ever choose to show up for dinner is an open question.

So i tried the PC beta...and i weep for the MoH series. Whoever designed that map is a sadist. The whole goddamn game felt like a spawn campers wet dream.
Definitely not going to get this one.....even though DICE made it.....which reminds me, they are also making BF3.../cry

Compared to the last beta, my experience so far has been a marked improvement. The menu screens don't freeze up, joining games are more of a breeze, (even the matchmaking option works) and I didn't crash once in the hour that I played. Gameplay seems a bit better, but nothing revelatory if you didn't like it already.

One thing I'll mention is on the map Shahikot Mountain, smoke grenades seem paramount in order for the U.S. forces to move up, otherwise they would be caught in a hail of gunfire running to the capture checkpoint. It was nice for once having a team that understood tactical advance with the use of smoke grenades and not idiots stupidly running one by one into the fray.

Kerplunk wrote:

Compared to the last beta, my experience so far has been a marked improvement. The menu screens don't freeze up, joining games are more of a breeze, (even the matchmaking option works) and I didn't crash once in the hour that I played. Gameplay seems a bit better, but nothing revelatory if you didn't like it already.

One thing I'll mention is on the map Shahikot Mountain, smoke grenades seem paramount in order for the U.S. forces to move up, otherwise they would be caught in a hail of gunfire running to the capture checkpoint. It was nice for once having a team that understood tactical advance with the use of smoke grenades and not idiots stupidly running one by one into the fray.

Shahikot is a blast either side your on. The other one is like the TDM map. While i dont see a problem with spawn camping its just too damn small.

I've had one crash but i was doing multiple alt-tabs and moving steam chat windows around.