PDA

View Full Version : OT:Metal of Honor Airbourne



BrotherVoodoo
08-28-2007, 06:13 PM
Demo Available, release in 1 week. Any FPS fans? Not ARMA but looks fun.

Link to trailer and demo.
http://www.ea.com/moh/airborne/index.jsp

VW-IceFire
08-28-2007, 06:15 PM
Looks pretty interesting actually. Might be willing to give it a shot...especially given the non-linear approach to level design.

BillyTheKid_22
08-28-2007, 07:04 PM
http://medalofhonor.totalgamingnetwork.com/images/misc/boxart.jpg



http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-28-2007, 07:11 PM
It does look good although I did not see any iron sight action. It was nice to see no crosshair and I did not see any bunnyhopping. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

S!

Choctaw111
08-28-2007, 08:03 PM
I pre-ordered 3 copies of it for my sons and I. That thing looks like its going to be a lot of fun and a GREAT way to for us to take out our aggressions on each other http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif With 3 sons and two of them starting to go through this adolescent thing, the tensions can get quite high sometimes. I seem to remember that way back when...

Buster_Dee
08-28-2007, 10:06 PM
I hated the demo at first, but it was just because I wasn't giving myself a chance to get used to it. My PC is a bit old for it, so 800x600 is all I can use if I want to turn up the graphics.

Now, I play the heck out of it and love it. I keep trying to find ways to extend the mission. About all I can do is ignore the last objective and look for any AI I haven't plugged yet.

I think I'll be getting it.

mbfRoy
08-28-2007, 11:56 PM
The demo is fantastic. Also, I love the "Gears of War"-like system to shoot through cover, although it takes a bit (for me at least) to get used to keep the aim button pressed instead of the classic toggle. The motion blur and other effects add a lot of eye candy too!

choxaway
08-29-2007, 02:36 AM
I've played the demo through several times and think it's a great improvement on previous versions. My system (AMD6000,8800GTS, 2gb DDR2), lets me run it full wide screen with everything maxed and the visuals are really richly coloured and far, far more detailed than earlier episodes in the series.

The gunfire sounds are a tad weak compared with previous versions - the Garand M1 sounds almost like a silenced rifle and the Thompson chatters rather than clatters but the recoil effects are pretty authentic. I find that having to grip the mouse quite tight and holding the right button down constantly in order to maintain iron sights view gives me cramp after a while but that's down to my age more than anything else - suffer a bit with arthritis - poor old sod . . .

Tried it on hard settings, hoping the enemy AI might improve but some (not all) of them do seem a bit stupid. I shot my way into a room and the Italian behind the upturned table kept standing up and looking the opposite way despite my shooting at him from just a few feet off. One thing that does annoy me with any FP shooter is the way the enemy heavy machine gunner, tank etc always fixes a bead on me no matter how well I'm concealed. I could be approaching from behind buildings, crawling through undergrowth or, as in this demo, across tiled roof tops - my mates are able to approach virtually unscathed on the ground whilst I'm always picked out for intensive attack by an enemy machine gun that couldn't possibly see me in the dark and especially with so much distracting activity all around. Just for once I'd like to approach stealthily and quietly without the full force of the Axis army picking on me - I'm starting to take it personally now . . . I only have to barely poke my head above a roof tile in the demo and soldiers down below who were facing the opposite direction shooting at someone else (and it's set at night) suddenly turn around and start popping off at me with deadly accuracy, whilst my own rifle takes at least two hits for the other guy to wince, let alone fall over.

The animation of people is quite well done apart from an occasional tendency to move about rather too quickly as though the tape's running slightly too fast at times (is that bunny hopping - never understood what that meant?), if that makes sense - that's always been a problem with the MOH series. A guy moving left to right fully loaded with backpack, rifle etc suddenly develops instant sprinting techniques that would win the Olympics so I can't keep a consistent bead on him at all. Another runs up some stairs ahead of me and suddenly whips along at an amazing speed with no slowing down at all to go round corners - again just as if something got suddenly sped up for a second or two. There's no sense of weight to the figures and if hit, instead of any sort of inertia taking effect, whereby the body recoils from the strike and is knocked off his feet (almost a slight slow motion effect), he sort of gets instantly whacked to the ground as though he weighs just a couple of ounces rather than the real heavy poundage of a six foot soldier. I think the game's figure movements should all be slowed down just a fraction to dampen the movements and add an illusion of weight to the figures.

Nobody seems to get wounded and left wriggling on the ground. A first hit at long'ish range seems to have no affect at all but the second shot invariably kills no matter where the soldier's hit. At point blank range the other guy does get blasted across the room quite convincingly (although on several occasions I fired at pretty close range and appeared to constantly miss - maybe I'm a rubbish shot but I have fired all these weapons on the range and don't feel I'm quite that bad), but hit him in the shoulder and he doesn't spin round but merely falls down dead, which does seem a mite odd.
Sorry if this is sounding way too critical because the game is a major step forward in visual terms and I already have it on order from Play.com. The overall sounds are superb and create an extremely vibrant and cinema-like effect. With all the bells and whistles switched on, the detail is superb and my high-end system doesn't struggle at all, so I'm luckily able to enjoy its cinematic appearance and sound full on. Even lower spec systems will still provide the player with a pretty intense simulation of the noise, confusion and danger of war. You do feel totally involved and immersed in the action, despite my criticisms of the way some things are done. I guess we're getting so used to the improvements in visual techniques that we now expect perfection, where once we would have been happy with all sorts of rubbish just to be able to play the games. I also have the next episode of Brothers in Arms on order so am similarly looking forward to that one.
Don't be put off by my nitpicking as it promises to be a great game that isn't as linear as past versions and therefore allows you to approach tasks from different routes or directions and in different sequences without coming up against invisible barriers sending you a strict path. Probably too many health packs and an annoying slow motion blurred sequence when you attain marksmanship points at some stages that rather suggests it's aimed at the younger market - not sure that's a healthy thing, but that's another subject entirely.
Worth the cost, in my humble view.

SeaFireLIV
08-29-2007, 02:58 AM
It`s an FPS for the masses, choxaway. And as such will always suffer from the unrealistic elements you just described. Red Orchestra is a far better realistic FPS.

Still, i`ve tried the others in the series, may as well try this, but your good description lets me know what to expect... pretty much the same as before but with better graphics. ho hum.

Love the title picture. Nicely done by the artist and the angle view is great.

HotelBushranger
08-29-2007, 03:20 AM
It looks great, but to me the 101st/82nd Airborne thing is been done waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much, takes floggin a dead horse to a whole new extreme.

leitmotiv
08-29-2007, 03:23 AM
Concur with SeaFire. The classic FPS games turned me off with the very things detailed by choxaway---esp getting blown to bits no matter how well I concealed, crawled, etc. I used to love having my head blown off over and over when I would take a fast peek at a MG42 from 50 yards, behind plenty of cover, in the dead of night, with no illumination! I found there was just too much game in the game with the classic FPS titles.

And, concur with HotelBushranger, U.S. Airborne done to death---enough BAND OF BROTHERS already!

choxaway
08-29-2007, 03:59 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Red Orchestra is a far better realistic FPS.


Don't know much about that game as I'd presumed it was designed as an online shooter. Any more info?

neural_dream
08-29-2007, 04:06 AM
Arcade.

wwiionline contains still the only true online wwii infantry simulator.

spacefrogs
08-29-2007, 04:11 AM
Does this supports TrackIR??

choxaway
08-29-2007, 04:31 AM
Just downloaded a movie trailer from the game and it looks rather old-tech to me. Realise trailers aren't the best way to appreciate the game itself but not overly impressed with what I saw. It's only 9.99 delivered from play.com so I may give it a whirl.
I enjoyed H&D2 for its extremely atmospheric sounds and reasonably detailed graphics but was never convinced by the one-shot kills at ridiculous distances and with no allowance for windage, bullet trajectory, drop etc. Whereas I thought Brothers in Arms went too far the other way - you could aim steadily at a bloke less than twenty yards away and have virtually no chance of hitting him, whereas he could knock you down at 100 yards with no difficulty. Again, enemy tanks or machine guns sought you out with deadly accuracy - even the mortar firers could pinpoint you even if you were hidden inside a building - how stupid is that!

It would be great to have a truly realistic game with stunning graphics, sounds and realistic gunnery - but then I suppose it could become too much like the real thing, making it uncomfortably brutal to play and thoroughly depressing - just like real war . . .

SeaFireLIV
08-29-2007, 04:33 AM
Originally posted by choxaway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Red Orchestra is a far better realistic FPS.


Don't know much about that game as I'd presumed it was designed as an online shooter. Any more info? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is true. There is an offline maps Russian vs German, but the AI isn`t great. Maybe they`ve updated that, I must check. The graphics may not be perfect, but I`d much rather be doing stuff like reloading, driving tanks or gunning, using binocs to call arty, getting tired, getting wounded, aiming etc thatcan be done in a realistic game than stuck with eye candy where you do almost nothing except point and shoot.

But it`s even worth a quick run offline just for the atmosphere...

JimmyBlonde
08-29-2007, 04:37 AM
Originally posted by HotelBushranger:
It looks great, but to me the 101st/82nd Airborne thing is been done waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much, takes floggin a dead horse to a whole new extreme.
\
Yeah whatever happened to the action at pegasus bridge? The same as every amphibiousD-Day FPS goes ashore at Omaha.

Hello

Do the words Gold, Sword and Juno mean anything to you?

leitmotiv
08-29-2007, 04:57 AM
Originally posted by choxaway:
It would be great to have a truly realistic game with stunning graphics, sounds and realistic gunnery - but then I suppose it could become too much like the real thing, making it uncomfortably brutal to play and thoroughly depressing - just like real war . . .

There are: the infantry simulator game designed from the USMC training simulator: FIRST TO FIGHT, and the infantry simulator game designed from the U.S. Army infantry training simulator: FULL SPECTRUM WARRIOR. Both are deadpan realistic with none of the b.s. of your usual FPS games. Both bombed because, I suppose, they were completely unscripted, deadly, and required tactical cunning to play, not quick trigger fingers. I didn't particularly care for them because both were about urban fighting ca. 2003, and I prefer WWI/WWII. They mirrored the real situation perfectly---it was very easy to end up dead (no health bars, no revival packs, etc---once hit you were in bad shape).

SeaFireLIV
08-29-2007, 05:57 AM
Interesting I was considering this game in the store the other day, but my experience with such games has been disappointing. I expected this to be another arcade fest, but if it is as you say i`ll defintely check it out.

leitmotiv
08-29-2007, 07:53 AM
If you want "full realism" and no Hollywood b.s., they are the real deal. The first time you go into an urban ambush, make a mistake, and get capped along with your squad, you know it is not playtime.

P.S. Both are dirt cheap from Amazon vendors.

Airmail109
08-29-2007, 10:21 AM
Join the infantry if you want to play a realistic shooter

SeaFireLIV
08-29-2007, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by Aimail101:
Join the infantry if you want to play a realistic shooter

But then it would be a real shooter, not a realistic shooter.

Any more bright ideas, sherlock?

neural_dream
08-29-2007, 11:00 AM
wwiionline for wwii and arma for modern. As simple as that. moh is for kids and Red Orchestra is better than moh, but still has the moh feel.

Airmail109
08-29-2007, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
Join the infantry if you want to play a realistic shooter

But then it would be a real shooter, not a realistic shooter.

Any more bright ideas, sherlock? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I cant see how any fps game is even vaguely realistic?

At least with flight/driving sims the human interface is correct

Bewolf
08-29-2007, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by neural_dream:
wwiionline for wwii and arma for modern. As simple as that. moh is for kids and Red Orchestra is better than moh, but still has the moh feel.

Man I am glad I still have my inner child inside me. Else I couldn't enjoy MoH or CoD like games as short fun expirience the same way I enjoy ArmA, IL2 or the Silent Hinter series as long term endevours =)

Anybody tried the Bioshock Demo yet?
I NEED THAT REALISTIC SIMULATION OF A CRASH SURVIVOR FINDING AN UNDERWATER UTOPIA GONE TO HELL CUZ OF GENETICLY BODY ENHANCING SEABED DRUGS!

I always considered it fascinating how much ppl are able to restrict themselves in their ways to have fun.

archermav
08-29-2007, 11:16 AM
Well,
I thought it was great fun, looks good, sounds good, non-linear. I'm in line to buy it.

Also enjoyed the Bioshock demo, so wil get that as well.

neural_dream
08-29-2007, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by Bewolf:
I always considered it fascinating how much ppl are able to restrict themselves in their ways to have fun.
Really? But it's the most common thing.

Airmail109
08-29-2007, 11:24 AM
Bioshock rocks beowulf, great shooter up there with HL2

The atmosphere, graphics and the cinematic expirence is sublime. The story line is great to

leitmotiv
08-29-2007, 03:55 PM
Originally posted by Bewolf:

Man I am glad I still have my inner child inside me.
I always considered it fascinating how much ppl are able to restrict themselves in their ways to have fun.

http://www.astronerdboy.com/comic-strips/images/toons/ZippyStillLife.jpg

SeaFireLIV
08-29-2007, 04:04 PM
Originally posted by Bewolf:


I always considered it fascinating how much ppl are able to restrict themselves in their ways to have fun.

Surely you know, Bewolf that as with everything, everyone has their own view of what is `fun` to them? what`s `fun` to you to in your world is not necessarily `fun` to someone else.

Seems fascinating to me how some can be so limited as to think that there can only be one kind of `fun`.

Bewolf
08-29-2007, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:

Seems fascinating to me how some can be so limited as to think that there can only be one kind of `fun`.


Oh, neat to know you agree.

neural_dream
08-29-2007, 06:20 PM
Bewolf, I think you misread SeaFireLIV's post.

Bewolf
08-30-2007, 12:41 AM
Really? So what did he mean then?

neural_dream
08-30-2007, 02:44 AM
Not accepting other people's way of having fun believing that one's own is the only one. This is quite the opposite of your

I always considered it fascinating how much ppl are able to restrict themselves in their ways to have fun.
Most people do "restrict" their ways of having fun, especially in this forum, where the majority would never go near an arcade no-cockpit flight "sim". Restricting one's wants as she becomes older and older is a direct result of the reduce in her experimentation and the reduce in her free time. This is why I say it is the most common thing to "restrict" our ways of having fun as we grow older, starting from right after highschool and finding a job. I agree, it is fascinating in a way.

Bewolf
08-30-2007, 04:20 AM
Oh, I never argued that. Actually, I was directly referring to the unwillingness of people to broaden their horizone in accepting "more" then one way of having fun. As people rightfully put, there are ddifferent ways of having fun. Concentrating on one only is what fascinates me despite the many more options one has, thus enriching expiriences. FB is a perfect subject to review this. I never understood how ppl could, for example, concentrate on full realism servers "only", despite the much broader and easily accessable variety offered, even making a lifestylle out of it or taking pride in doing only one thing. CoH and ArmA are completly different expiriences as well. Nevertheless most are willing to go for only one.

Highly fascinating indeed.

SeaFireLIV
08-30-2007, 04:52 AM
Originally posted by neural_dream:
Not accepting other people's way of having fun believing that one's own is the only one. This is quite the opposite of your
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I always considered it fascinating how much ppl are able to restrict themselves in their ways to have fun.
Most people do "restrict" their ways of having fun, especially in this forum, where the majority would never go near an arcade no-cockpit flight "sim". Restricting one's wants as she becomes older and older is a direct result of the reduce in her experimentation and the reduce in her free time. This is why I say it is the most common thing to "restrict" our ways of having fun as we grow older, starting from right after highschool and finding a job. I agree, it is fascinating in a way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Didn`t realise the conversation was still going on.

Why is it so fascinating that people resritct themselves to have fun? Why do you think that a `restriction` means less fun? They don`t. You and Bewolf must get out of this mindset.

Sometimes unrestriction can be fun, but it`s often a fun that`s very short-lived. You start a game with unlimited ammo, WW view, invulnarability, radar mode and consequently `pwn` everything in sight. But after 5 hours of that he gets an empty, bored feeling. where`s the challenge? Suddenly he`s not having fun any more... it`s boring smacking everything with ease.

That`s when the absolutely understandable restrictions start coming in. Limited ammo, limited view, the possiblity of dying in game... He has to be more cautious now, he needs skill to win... NOW the real fun begins! And it`s longer lasting.

I`ve seen people ( a friend of mine) cheat their way through entire games on cheats to the point that they`re literally asleep and just moving the joystick with the fire-button constantly pressed down. At the end they move onto the next with no sense of accomplishment or `fun` at all.

It`s that kind of logic that fascinates me. restriction is not bad just because it `restricts`, sometimes it`s good.

Still, everyone has their own view of what `fun` is.

A second reason, is as he becomes older and understands the restrictions of life that we are all in, he realises he wants his games to closer emulate that stark reality. Thereby having a little more meaning for him. But it takes particular individuals with this reason.


A third reason is that logically, everything must have rules - a restriction, or the whole thing falls apart. Football, cricket other sports. no one likes the referee, but there`d be no game without him!

leitmotiv
08-30-2007, 05:22 AM
Well said, SF. I like challenges. Challenges are fun, too. Toys bore me to tears. I like the unpredictable. Combat flight sims are just about the most unpredictable computer games there are. That's why I love 'em.

Bewolf
08-30-2007, 06:04 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neural_dream:
Not accepting other people's way of having fun believing that one's own is the only one. This is quite the opposite of your
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I always considered it fascinating how much ppl are able to restrict themselves in their ways to have fun.
Most people do "restrict" their ways of having fun, especially in this forum, where the majority would never go near an arcade no-cockpit flight "sim". Restricting one's wants as she becomes older and older is a direct result of the reduce in her experimentation and the reduce in her free time. This is why I say it is the most common thing to "restrict" our ways of having fun as we grow older, starting from right after highschool and finding a job. I agree, it is fascinating in a way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Didn`t realise the conversation was still going on.

Why is it so fascinating that people resritct themselves to have fun? Why do you think that a `restriction` means less fun? They don`t. You and Bewolf must get out of this mindset.

Sometimes unrestriction can be fun, but it`s often a fun that`s very short-lived. You start a game with unlimited ammo, WW view, invulnarability, radar mode and consequently `pwn` everything in sight. But after 5 hours of that he gets an empty, bored feeling. where`s the challenge? Suddenly he`s not having fun any more... it`s boring smacking everything with ease.

That`s when the absolutely understandable restrictions start coming in. Limited ammo, limited view, the possiblity of dying in game... He has to be more cautious now, he needs skill to win... NOW the real fun begins! And it`s longer lasting.

I`ve seen people ( a friend of mine) cheat their way through entire games on cheats to the point that they`re literally asleep and just moving the joystick with the fire-button constantly pressed down. At the end they move onto the next with no sense of accomplishment or `fun` at all.

It`s that kind of logic that fascinates me. restriction is not bad just because it `restricts`, sometimes it`s good.

Still, everyone has their own view of what `fun` is.

A second reason, is as he becomes older and understands the restrictions of life that we are all in, he realises he wants his games to closer emulate that stark reality. Thereby having a little more meaning for him. But it takes particular individuals with this reason.


A third reason is that logically, everything must have rules - a restriction, or the whole thing falls apart. Football, cricket other sports. no one likes the referee, but there`d be no game without him! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now, with all due respect, it is you who falls short.

I once shared a very similiar attitude. Getting away from casual games to open up to more "realistic endevours". Cuz, everybody knows, more realism means a more mature and grown approach, more "meaningful", as you put it, the "real" fun, as you stated. I suppose that is a life philosophy there coming into play. If this is what you define as "meaningful", then that shall be it. Been there, done that.
By now I go by "life's too short to miss out." Challenges come in many forms. Realism is one kind of challenge. II find it curious that you imply everything else is not a challenge. Add to that, nobody ever mentioned anything about "cheating". That is completly yourself reading anything about this into it.

Finally, you appear to confuse rules and restrictions "within" a game to make it work propperly with personal self imposed restrictions that work on a psychological level.
Completly different areas.

I let the conclusions to take out of all this to you. I made mine.

danjama
08-30-2007, 06:39 AM
i think you are both confused

whats wrong with all of us just doing what we enjoy

reminds me of when i was younger i started rollerblading, and we hated skateboarders

now im older i realise we are all just doing what we enjoy, so we talk to the skateboarders, and then we respect each other and enjoy the extra company, now we just have to deal with all the little kiddie skaters and skateboarders who havnt realised this yet.

just enjoy life for yourself.

SeaFireLIV
08-30-2007, 07:06 AM
Originally posted by Bewolf:


I let the conclusions to take out of all this to you. I made mine.


Now you`re just arguing for arguing sake with no substance at all. I wasn`t saying how anyone `should` play their game to have fun just why some people don`t see fun the way you do and how fun can be fun with restrictions. A pity, I thought you`d understand.

neural_dream
08-30-2007, 07:19 AM
I play IL2 1 life per week offline and 1 online. If I die I play again next week. I find it to be the most rewarding for me. It's given me so much self-control that I can even derive lessons from there for my real life.

Bewolf
08-30-2007, 07:27 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bewolf:


I let the conclusions to take out of all this to you. I made mine.


Now you`re just arguing for arguing sake with no substance at all. I wasn`t saying how anyone `should` play their game to have fun just why some people don`t see fun the way you do and how fun can be fun with restrictions. A pity, I thought you`d understand. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Kay, if you want to walk this path of arguing, you may want to take a look into the mirror before posting. Beeiing the dissapointed guy who just tried his best to point something out does not suit you.
I assume you read me wrong, intentionally or not, as my sole initial statement was a simple "fascinating" towards this topic. It was you who obviously associated something negative with that.
If you want to blame me of something, then it is me playing along.

spacefrogs
08-30-2007, 10:42 AM
Just a question to those who played the MOHA demo. Does the uniform buttons also shine like hell to your configuration?? I´m not sure what it caused it (graffic card conf maybe) but it seems the had bright white LEDs instead of buttons to me!!! Anybody??

Deedsundone
08-30-2007, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by spacefrogs:
Just a question to those who played the MOHA demo. Does the uniform buttons also shine like hell to your configuration?? I´m not sure what it caused it (graffic card conf maybe) but it seems the had bright white LEDs instead of buttons to me!!! Anybody??

Yeah,It shines on my demo.Look strange indeed.

choxaway
09-12-2007, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
Red Orchestra is a far better realistic FPS.
.

I bought Red Orchestra on the recommendation of those who said it was far more realistic than the usual FPShooters.
Well I'm not getting it at all. There is no single player game, merely practice sessions with severely limited troop numbers, dumb AI who often follow one another around like lost sheep, you run out of ammo with nowhere to replenish it and you can't pick up other weapons when you do run out. There's a time limitation on each mission - did I say mission? What missions? There are no apparent objectives that I can perceive and no indication to tell me where I'm supposed to be going or what to do should I get there, so I just blunder about the places looking for some sense of purpose and something to shoot at, which all gets very tedious after a while. Just to enliven things a little, every now and again a Russian voice mutters something and subtitles of no apparent bearing on anything that I'm involved with pop up on screen as if some separate war's going on some place else.
Enemy tanks seem to have x-ray vision and start machine gunning me at 1000 yards, even when I'm just peeping round a wall and there are others much closer to shoot at. Much of the graphics is mundane at best - I could go on. Finally a popup tells me the allies have captured something or other and then it's all over.

The only redeeming features are the sound quality, which does have an authentic feel to it, and a pretty accurate representation of recoil and ballistics according to the range, which are far better than most other games. But that's about it.
Oh and I was really hacked off at buying a game only to find I had to then download an installation of Steam and agree to sign my life away before I could subsequently download a whole batch of guff (took for ever even on my high end system) that then permitted me to play the flaming thing. What exactly was I paying for in the first place? I don't recall seeing anything on the CD box or online publicity blurb saying I had to sign up to an intrusive piece of gubbins before being 'permitted' to play it. It wasn't an expensive purchase at 9.95 but to be frank I'd rather spend the money on a can of petrol to set fire to it.

Okay - had my moan - can someone explain to me precisely what it is I'm missing here?

By contrast, I bought MOHAirborne and thoroughly enjoyed most of it, despite some of my misgivings about the demo. Once I got into it the action was neatly done, the locations looked superb compared with earlier versions of the game but my only annoyance, if I'm being really picky, was towards the end of the game when there appear on the scene some ubertroops in black SS clothing, gasmasks and carrying MG42s. They were like some genetically enhanced superbeings who are almost completely bullet proof at normal shooting ranges. They can withstand grenade explosions and it took forever to get repeated head shots to finally vanquish them.
I downloaded the codes to give me godmode just to see what could be done. I could approach these creations with a shotgun and firing at point blank range they'd take two barrels full of buckshot before finally being blown off their feet. An explosion from a heavy duty grenade that would knock out a tank had little effect first time and again required at least two to make them even twitch a bit.
Aside from this, however, the overall experience was great and in an entirely different league compared with Red Orchestra. In fact I'd rather fight the London Philharmonic Orchestra brandishing trumpets and bassoons than the motley assortment found in RO . . . mutter, mutter . . .

SeaFireLIV
09-12-2007, 07:06 AM
I must apologise, choxaway.

Steam. yes, I hate Steam too, I should`ve mentioned it. I do everything to avoid ANY game with steam after RO. RO is good online imho, but steam makes me feel like I have a collar around my neck! Sorry about that.

As far as the offline aspect, I thought I made it pretty clear it was not great offline. But the atmosphere I liked...

Still Airboune sounds too arcade by far, especially the `super-nazis` you described. Maybe when it halves in price.

TgD Thunderbolt56
09-12-2007, 07:35 AM
I'll get it. I enjoy all the FPS games including Unreal Tournament and all its iterations, MOH, COD AA...whatever. I find them to be a fun, stress-relieving and all a bit interesting in their own way.

Some are tiresome, repetitive and poorly done, but I still sometimes get them just the same. Like Choctaw, I have 3 boys and we oftentimes do a mini-LAN or team up and go online as a team...even my youngest (10 y.o.) is bad@ss and we're a tough little team.

COD4 looks to be a nice difference from the traditional Nazi-killing spree and is supposed to be representative of modern warfare.

UT3, COD4, MOH:Airborne...yeah, I'll get them.


TB

choxaway
09-12-2007, 07:51 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I must apologise, choxaway.

Steam. yes, I hate Steam too, I should`ve mentioned it. I do everything to avoid ANY game with steam after RO. RO is good online imho, but steam makes me feel like I have a collar around my neck! Sorry about that.

As far as the offline aspect, I thought I made it pretty clear it was not great offline. But the atmosphere I liked...

Still Airboune sounds too arcade by far, especially the `super-nazis` you described. Maybe when it halves in price.

No need to apologise - you did describe the offline play pretty much as it is, I just read more into it and others' responses. Buyer beware etc!
My colleague wasn't sure if he wanted it or not and wouldn't have paid the full retail price to find out. With the No CD thingy (that nobody's apparently supposed to mention - a bit like 'you know who' in Harry Potter) he can borrow my installation DVD and play it himself, otherwise he'd simply play it here.

As an aside, I often wonder why there's so much fuss about No CD cracks - we all know they exist and most gamers have them eventually as they're freely available at various sites. I find games load quicker with them and there's no annoying background whizzing as the system randomly accesses the CD or DVD.
In the case of IL2, one of my CDs self destructed in my old machine and without the crack, I couldn't play the game without repurchasing it.
I bought all my games and have no guilty conscience - neither does my colleague since he wouldn't have paid for it in the first place so they've lost no income. But I won't start a debate on that one . . .

Jure_502
09-12-2007, 08:44 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif, but I really need ur help. How do you destroy roving tiger in first mission in Holland,...at that Nijmgen (?) bridge. I just can't find any antitank weapon nearby. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif
Any help is apriciated...

choxaway
09-12-2007, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by Jure_502:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif, but I really need ur help. How do you destroy roving tiger in first mission in Holland,...at that Nijmgen (?) bridge. I just can't find any antitank weapon nearby. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif
Any help is apriciated...
I think in that mission you need to find a green box (if you haven't already)containing heavy explosives - the large black grenades. You press the Grenade key(G)and go through your number keys until it flips from the US to German to large grenade - three or four of these thrown to land at the sides, rear or underneath the tank will eventually explode it.
Hope that helps.

Jure_502
09-12-2007, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by choxaway:
I think in that mission you need to find a green box (if you haven't already)containing heavy explosives - the large black grenades. You press the Grenade key(G)and go through your number keys until it flips from the US to German to large grenade - three or four of these thrown to land at the sides, rear or underneath the tank will eventually explode it.
Hope that helps.

Thanks a lot! Problem solved!