MOH is BFBC2 without vehicles, good gunplay, or fun maps

Do not buy. It's fine as a game, but after playing the beta for the past three or four days, I can safely conclude that it is several steps behind BFBC2. Y'all probably knew that anyway, but I just felt like posting here. It's been a while since I traversed these boards; don't worry, I haven't forgotten about y'all!

Hello Pegasus!

But yes, I played the Beta, and it was awful.

The beta I played back in the beginning of summer vacation had a weird hit/death time lag where you'd be standing their one minute and the next you'd be on the ground unsure of what just hit you.

Honestly it felt like COD, since game developers pump out a new COD every year what's the point of them putting another on the market?

Yah dice really dropped the ball on MoH multiplayer.

Did not even play BETA and all the frowning about this game made me to stay away from it completely.

Crimson Exitus wrote:The beta I played back in the beginning of summer vacation had a weird hit/death time lag where you'd be standing their one minute and the next you'd be on the ground unsure of what just hit you.

Honestly it felt like COD, since game developers pump out a new COD every year what's the point of them putting another on the market?

Because they must've thought they could put out a BF like game that plays like CoD...but we all know how that turned out.

BF game that plays like CoD is a nightmare...

Not to mention the fact that it takes 10-15 body shots to kill, but only ONE headshot, so it turns the game into a luck based game. Also, your sniper starts off with a RDS, then you eventually get a BA, then you get a shitty scope, then you get a normal scope after a LONG time.

Thats a nightmare scenario for me again. LoL

Lol, yeah, it's horrible. I would strrongly recommend against buying it, let alone playing it.

BTW, the amount of bullets needed to kill someone reminds me of SWAT in Halo. LoL

At least in Halo, it makes sense, because your guy is a huge cyborg type of guy with a huge suit of armour.

Something that baffles me is that the helmet can withstand dust particles traveling 5000m/s in space, while they cannot prevent much less damaging bullets fired from kinetic weapons. All bullets fired in rifles in Halo (besides sniper rifle) are basically magnum ammo used in current day sniper rifles.

Because it's a video game.

Man am I the only one actually looking forward to it?

The gameplay might not be up to snuff but I like the setting of the game more than battlefield or COD. In COD Id replay the single player missions where the russians are attacking the capitol all the time just because I like to feel as a part of something big like that. And the battlefield setting just makes no sense honestly along with a weird weapon selection. Finally in a game set in modern times do I actually get to play like an american soldier.

And Im sorry to bring up politics but gameplay is just like politics in my eyes. People are always complaining about something. Too many bullets to kill someone or to little. To much government involvement or to little. Cant please everyone.

Too much dumb Florida lawyer involvement or too much.

All the animations felt like they were ripped directly from BC2 as well.

I'm still on the fence when it comes to Black Ops but I can definitely guarantee a none purchase from myself.

If only someone at that study held onto their balls and kept the Taliban in the game.

They changed the name from taliban to opfor not because they are "censoring" something like the kiddies think on GFQs but because they are lessening any offensiveness about it. People need to realize just because something is not offensive to them it might be offensive to someone else in another situation.

Perspective. Learn it. Love it. Do it.

Its part of the problem with society today. People only look at how something effects them in their own little world. Newsflash. The world is a big place and you are very insignificant.

Is this a new PC beta you guys are playing? I was really hoping it would be hugely improved over the console beta.

And it takes a lot of shots to kill somebody? This seams weird because they were going to raise the damage from the 1st beta and it didn't take many shots to kill then (seemed less than BC2, maybe 1 more than CoD)...

zk50 x erk wrote:They changed the name from taliban to opfor not because they are "censoring" something like the kiddies think on GFQs but because they are lessening any offensiveness about it. People need to realize just because something is not offensive to them it might be offensive to someone else in another situation.

Perspective. Learn it. Love it. Do it.

Its part of the problem with society today. People only look at how something effects them in their own little world. Newsflash. The world is a big place and you are very insignificant.

My solution to the name change is similar to what Infinity Ward did for it's "No Russian" level, leave the option up to the player.

When opening up the multiplayer for the first time you're given two options: Which name would you prefer for the certain team, OpFor (Oppressing Force) or Taliban. This way it's up to the player and if someone is offended then they don't have to play under that team name.

From what I've read all DICE is doing is replacing every mention of"Taliban" with OpFor, yes it's still in the game but it's up to the individual whether or not to use it.

But the thing is if your not offended by it, what is the difference between naming a team Taliban or opfor? What do you gain by playing as the taliban? Why does it matter what the name is? For the people who dont care if it is taliban, why does it matter if they change the name?

I don't get why it really offends people. "OH NO! THE TALIBAN!" Honestly, they act like you only get to play as the Taliban and kill Marines. It's a two sided coin; they KILL EACH OTHER! If it's so bad that they have to rename the Taliban "OpFor", they should rename the Marines to something else, because Taliban players may get offended that they have to fight Marines. See how stupid that sounds?


Also, in CoD4, I was kinda pissed that they pitted the SAS vs. the Spetnaz, and made the Spetnaz dressed in terrorist type garb, and made them look like the bad guys. Realistically the Spetnaz is an ANTI-TERRORIST FUCKING FIGHTING FORCE. They are "GOOD" people.

I see where your coming from but if you look at the kind of things the taliban has done to innocents, there is nothing to benefit from by having them in the game. When you have American citizens fighting and dieing to these guys, why would you want them portrayed in a game right now? Put yourself in the 40s. Would you want your kid pretending to be a Nazi while your other kid is in France fighting with them? You would want your kid pretending to be at most some un named enemy right if hes not going to play as an American right?

Were in the middle of a war right now, is it really necessary to pretend to be the people that we are fighting? It all comes down to supporting the troops. If the soldiers or the families of soldiers are un happy about something like this who are you to tell them they are wrong?

It doesn't really matter if anyone gets why some people are offended. The fact is, they are (or could be) and it does literally zero harm to the game to change the name of one team.

It's not censorship or a case of right or wrong, it's good business. You don't want to cripple sales because buyers may find it in really poor taste, especially when a large part of the target audience may be military themselves.

Metalzoic wrote:It doesn't really matter if anyone gets why some people are offended. The fact is, they are (or could be) and it does literally zero harm to the game to change the name of one team.

It's not censorship or a case of right or wrong, it's good business. You don't want to cripple sales because buyers may find it in really poor taste, especially when a large part of the target audience may be military themselves.

Probably the very large part of the sales indeed.

I would think so.