Here's a Look at Medal of Honor: Warfighter's Multiplayer

I've never heard of a game where dudes shoot each other!

yep.

WARFAC- oh...

I actually liked the campaign in the previous one, more than most people probably. When I pick up this game on sale it will be for that and not the multiplayer

shooting seems fine, i'm more interested in their loadout and progression systems.

Hmmmmm. . . ..

I was impressed from what they showed at E3, this looks pretty good too.

Maybe i'll pick this up if it gets some good reviews.

Medal of Honor: Battlefield Call Your Duty.

Looks very colorful. :) I'm in.

You have to love how they fucked up the Canadian flag in the end.

Shit.

I was about to say 'in before the massive cynicism,' but I can see that I am not.

@Schuultz: Wait, what's wrong with the Canadian flag?

that looked pretty cool. it looks and sounds great

Ass

Comparing this to BF3 is just dumb. Ohhh but it's got the Frostbite engine! So did The Run, look how that turned out.

This looks pretty good. Is it the same engine as BF3?

Regardless, this could fit into a good niche that combines the perks/in-round bonuses and fast pace of CoD with the audio/visual effects and physics of BF3 games. I'm definitely interested to see how it develops.

Especially because the CQ update to BF3 just showed me how poorly it works to try to pour BF3 into the CoD mold. Watching the QL of it completely turned me off of CQ. However, if the maps are sized right, and the gameplay tweaked properly, then I could see WarFighter finding the right mix of closer/faster maps and bonuses with the general feel/look of the BF series.

Would I prefer a new Bad Company singleplayer campaign above all? Yeah, probably...

@KirePDX said:

This looks pretty good. Is it the same engine as BF3?

Regardless, this could fit into a good niche that combines the perks/in-round bonuses and fast pace of CoD with the audio/visual effects and physics of BF3 games. I'm definitely interested to see how it develops.

Especially because the CQ update to BF3 just showed me how poorly it works to try to pour BF3 into the CoD mold. Watching the QL of it completely turned me off of CQ. However, if the maps are sized right, and the gameplay tweaked properly, then I could see WarFighter finding the right mix of closer/faster maps and bonuses with the general feel/look of the BF series.

Would I prefer a new Bad Company singleplayer campaign above all? Yeah, probably...

Yeah, the CQ TNT was set up badly. We thought it would be better if it was 28 player as more people would be able to participate, but it was just a fustercluck. If you play the maps on 8v8, they're actually really enjoyable.

I already own several Call of Duty games, bro.

Looks very nice, as expected. However, I already don't like that they are keeping the Battlefield 3 glare, bloom, and specks on your view. It looks like I'm looking through a camera lens rather than eyes. If someone can correct me that those specks can appear in regular eye sight, then I will be humbled.

I see Hellfire missiles and a little tank bot. Checking stuff off the list.

Damn, it does look really pretty.

Heard more than one "Get the fuck down" 's in that trailer... quality FPS dialogue.

Honestly looks like a BF3 mod, a very minor mod at that!

@KirePDX:

The colors are inverted

EDIT: Not on the flag hanging from the "ceiling" but on the flag on the chest of the soldier to the right of the 'murican.

I might check this out. I loved BF3, but the way DICE has set it up recently with custom servers has kinda ruined it for me.

This game might fill the gap nicely.

@Schuultz: dude the fact that you noticed that tiny flag on the guy is crazy

Look like every other shooter ever made, ever... ever

I don't like the Frostbite engine for competitive games. I favour clarity over special effects.

LOL "Warfighter". Gets me every time.

Looks like a pretty good, standard multiplayer game, but I'll probably stick with Battlefield 3.  Hopefully the singleplayer is good.

I appreciate the inclusion of countries that aren't the U.S. and Russia... but I kinda couldn't care less about the game itself. I already have Battlefield 3.

Follows Giant Bomb's game trailer parody to a fucking TEE

@AssInAss: where did that come from? I have never seen it that super awesome

Can't wait to see gameplay from a console....

"Looks the same, if not better than BF 3" ?? Far Cry 2 already did that beforehand, even before BF BC 2

So, should we expect the same low detailed environments with extremely high contrast ratio,thus having way too bright outdoors and way too dark indoor areas, exaggerated lens flare effects and also, depending on the map, a strange blueish/greenish/sepia hue to them, basically turning everything in a blinding head ache mess? And all that without mentioning the glitches, the clipping and pop-in problems

Also , charging 60 bucks for the core game (without mentioning the pre-order price) and then charging another 50 for multiplayer maps and other perks 6 months later when the game actually begins to be playable .But the community would already fuck up all the fun experience by then due to numerous exploits and glitches.

Nonetheless, it will still receive 9s, 10s, 4/5 or 5/5 stars from most publications because it's EA, and EA is the biggest player in the industry (bigger than Activision for some childish fanboys) and the "journalists" need to bring food on the table.

Guys, I smell GOTY material here.

That looks like a first person shooter.

Generic trailer for a generic game another COD clone please end this awful trend in FPS shooters.

It all depends on if they try to make a good shooter or they try to make CoD. Last game they fell in between those two goals and it was a mess so hopefully they've at least committed to something this time.

That did not look better than BF3. I am more interested in Planetside 2, and Arma 3. I will check it out if I hear good things, but it honestly looked very average.

more of the same old shit. i'll pass.

Get rid of the ugly ass nametags (and they take center screen space, potentially overlapping with enemies, giving misinformation - center screen is for seeing and shooting, not for taking names - nametaking is for the killfeed/killcam, do a better job at that).

I feared EA would misconstrue Battlefield 3's success with having 'done it right'. Many of BF3's major annoyances are to be found in the upcoming Medal of Honor Warfighter, such as the tac-light, color desaturation, overly bright light and overly dark shadows - in short, shit visibility and noisy picture (which is hated by many BF3 players with a fiery passion, and is embraced by few - it is a dealbreaker if it's in the game, and definitely not a necessity for those whom do like it...)

Pretty much all of BF3's success beyond what BF:BC 2 was, is due to having done the groundwork for a groundswell of community support with BF:BC 1 & 2 and BF 1943 - which put Battlefield on the map outside of the PC market, as well as spending an indecent amount of cash on marketing.

Way to differentiate Medal of Honor from Battlefield... NOT! Should have more prominently featured the slide move (assuming that's now in the multiplayer game, that'd at least be something that'll set them apart, because the visual style alone is way too similar). I love the idea of silhouetting, not sure if it should apply to enemies though (that's just way too cheap) - seems like a halfbaked fix to a self-inflicted problem. Namely shitty visibility.

@Binman88 said:

I don't like the Frostbite engine for competitive games. I favour clarity over special effects.

Shitty visibility has to be a deliberate desgin decision, and not a technical necessity. Need for Speed The Run looks plenty different from Battlefield 3.

@triviaman09 said:

I was about to say 'in before the massive cynicism,' but I can see that I am not.

Yep.

The last one was pretty good (really enjoyed the single player) and the multiplayer was not bad, just really easy.

@HellBound said:

The last one was pretty good (really enjoyed the single player) and the multiplayer was not bad, just really easy.

My feelings towards MOH2010 are a bit weird, in general I'd say it was pretty mediocre, but that doesn't quite feel fair, as it seemed to honestly try to do interesting things in the single player campaign, but for one reason or another just didn't work out as planned. There was the bugs of course, many experienced the breaching glitches where your team would run through closed doors and leave you on the other side, but the constant switching between characters just resulted in that I didn't connect with any of them, neither could I keep up with which one I was playing as at any given time. It just ended up confusing, and when it tried to be emotional I could really see how the scenes could have been really powerful, but they all fell flat.

As for the multiplayer, I'd say it was pretty bad. It tried to blend Battlefield and COD, but the gameplay and level designs didn't play to the strengths of either, with an extreme abuse of invisible walls making the maps feel small in all the wrong ways.

looks kinda like battlefield 3 only without the tactics, large maps, teamwork, recoil, and structure

pass

There's still time for them to make this game interesting by allowing you to be a Warfighter, fighting war as a peace activist.

I wanna play as a peace fighter.

oh, so it's a bizzaro BF3 where the all the devs who would have worked on the vehicles said "fuck it" and worked on design instead. got it.

god isn't everyone sick of these fucking games yet?

eh

the previous medal of honor mp was absolute trash... having no expectation for this