The level with the "church" was the best right strubes
Medal of Honor Airborne
- Thread starter lord kino
- Start date
Well had the game so let's see... You had 1 lvl at Peral Harbor (that first part was nothing but a tutorial). Then, you had one in the Phillipenes, two in the Jungles of Guadalcanal, then one in Singapore, 2 more in some jungle (i don't remember which) and one on a carrier. My point is basically half of the levels were in jungles, but they weren't even jungles that looked different, they seemed exactly the same. There were levels out side the jungles, but I just got so sick of seeing the exact same terrain over and over again. 8)Strubes said:
Its not so much jungles I have a problem with. Its just a lack of variety in terrain. If you have a game that is basically all jungles, but the jungles have some kind of variety to them, that would be okay, (like Crysis which looks awesome) but the jungles in Rising Sun looked almost exactly the same and you played through the in the almost exact same way. 8)Jack said:
The only MoH game I've played was Frontline for PS2. I had a lot of fun with that, but I agree with Strubes here about Wii and FPS games not mixing.
The wii certainly has the potential to make great shooters. Sure all shooters to come out for the wii thus far have sucked, but the wiimote is perfect for shooters. Don't dismiss wii shooters just yet. 8)Retro Hero said:
Hell Scyth
Rock Hard, Dead or Alive
Homicidal Cherry53 said:
Of coruce they all looked the same and that the majority was in the jungle. Thats because thats where most the war had taken place. And the jungle was pratcically the same everywhwere, thats what made it difficult and gave and advantage to the enemy. Watch some old war documentires if you want more proof. You'll be surprised at just how accurate MoH really is.
blacklemons
The Freeman
SpartanEvolved said:
i dont think its a multiplatform game
Strubes said:
1st person shooters are the wiis best genre.........its the best and most obvious use for the controller.....
Hell Scyth
Rock Hard, Dead or Alive
Strubes said:
WHAT!!!!!! WHY CAN'T I HAVE TEACHERS LIKE YOURS AT MY SCHOOL!!!!!!
Nintendo's best games will always be it's first party games unless they get more support from companies like Sqaure Enix.
Yeah. Almost all of the islands were jungles. They could have picked other battles though. Instead of having two missions about searching for some guys gold, they could have done something involving the fighting when the U.S was trying to take back the Phillipeano (spelling?) capital. Although much of the campaign took place in jungles, there were plenty of opportunities to change the terrain. The terrain wasn't my biggest problem with the game anyways. It ways its numerous other flaws. 8)Hell Scyth said:
I love games with an outside terrain. T'is why Metal Gear Solid 3 is my favourite one.
stealth toilet
Moderator
The terrain could have been great, if the level design didn't suck. The problem wasn't that you wer ein jungle, the problem was that the "jungle" you were in still acted as a hallway. It was no different that being inside a building. The actual terrain didn't change the level design ata ll, which is why it sucked. The multiplayer in that game was awesome though.
The new MOH game is actually doing something different from the rest. I wasn't impressed with any of the WWII shooters that came out on the new systems because they were still the same old games with amped up graphics. In this game, because of the paratrooper story, They've actually created entire "areas" and you decide where you start in the level because you jump out of the plane when you want to. They've also created dynamic AI that tries to take high ground and hold well defended spots from you. Essentially, instead of having you run down a designated path and essentially jump through the hoop, they've created active battlefields which means you get to make more choices in how you're going to defeat the enemy.
Well, I haven't played this game so I don't know how well it's going to turn out, but at least they're trying to do something different and (in my opinion) something much needed to the first person shooter genre.
The new MOH game is actually doing something different from the rest. I wasn't impressed with any of the WWII shooters that came out on the new systems because they were still the same old games with amped up graphics. In this game, because of the paratrooper story, They've actually created entire "areas" and you decide where you start in the level because you jump out of the plane when you want to. They've also created dynamic AI that tries to take high ground and hold well defended spots from you. Essentially, instead of having you run down a designated path and essentially jump through the hoop, they've created active battlefields which means you get to make more choices in how you're going to defeat the enemy.
Well, I haven't played this game so I don't know how well it's going to turn out, but at least they're trying to do something different and (in my opinion) something much needed to the first person shooter genre.
SpartanEvolved
SpartanEvolved
Call of Duty 2 was the best in the series, but the first and third were solid too.
Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway is going to be great, I hope, but overall developers need to take a break from World War 2.
Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway is going to be great, I hope, but overall developers need to take a break from World War 2.
I gotta agree with you in basically every way there. The single player in CoD 2 was vastly better than in the first and third, and I am SO sick of WWII games. The genre is basically dead. The only way another WWII game will be new and interesting is if they make all the enemies zombies like they did in Castle Wolfenstein. 8)SpartanEvolved said: