Iron Edge
Iron Edge => Other Games => General discussion (public) => Topic started by: Snowié on November 09, 2009, 10:38:20 pm
-
Suprisingly I don't see any thread about it here yet... So I thought I'd do the honours.
It arrived early this morning for me, making it a day before release date. Only managed to do the first few missions before Uni but it seems truely epic. On a large/HD monitor it is almost cinematic, and multiplayer looks like it has ALOT of life in it.
I would highly reccomend it , and if anyone wants to play it on Xbox live add me (xGoWithTheFlowx).
It has has a co-op storyline/mode which looks like a laugh to try out, so I might torrent it and play it on hamachi a bit too if anyone is interested.
-
No dedicated servers!!!!!!
-
I guess I'll be getting this one for the single-player at least.
Never did play COD4 MP, which I'm told was the real killer -- but the single-player was so, so good in my opinion!
-
I guess I'll be getting this one for the single-player at least.
Never did play COD4 MP, which I'm told was the real killer -- but the single-player was so, so good in my opinion!
The MP on cod4 was certainly very decent but I never really got past lvl 40 (not very far by my gaming standards).
The new one pushes the barrier on the MP so I'm told and I'm already engrossed in the singleplayer one mission in, it's incredibly intense and defenitely worth at least torrenting.
-
Definitely interested in the torrent co-op stuff. Give torrent.
-
I think it will most likely be 2 player co-op , I'll check it on xbox version tmrw. I dont believe its the full campaign but rather some 'spec-ops' extra campaign.
-
...idling in my corner for almost two weeks... but there are Dragons to kill first. I think... I actually didn't see a dragon yet but in one cinematic...
-
(http://i33.tinypic.com/2mgqzw3.png)
-
...idling in my corner for almost two weeks... but there are Dragons to kill first. I think... I actually didn't see a dragon yet but in one cinematic...
I found my first dragon. It raped my face.
-
Firemeteorball?
-
Ya. I have a plan, though. Glyph of Neutralsomethingsomething. Gonna be epic.
-
A console shooter, it can gtfo my pc. Not that my current PC could run it anyway, it struggles with WoW in a 25 man raid. Roll on the January sales.
-
Very much not worth the pennies for a PC gamer. If you play FPSes on a console, it might be a good proposition.
This may seem a little unkind, but it's actually a fairly good simplification of why it's so profoundly upset so many fans of mw1 on pc.
(http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/5709/xp524hjpg.png)
re. pirating to play online in any form, it may be a bother to try, as there's no lan game option in mw2 (same as SC2), as those are also handled by (you guessed it) IWnet. So hamachi won't be an immediate fix there. singleplayer is piratable though, and the recommended way of playing it if you want to get it on PC (if you're used to PC fpses, you aren't likely to want to stick around long in mw2's p2p online offering)
-
Meh it gives me something to do with irl mates, and its playable at least. SP is also very impressive.
-
Meh it gives me something to do with irl mates, and its playable at least. SP is also very impressive.
And 3 hours long?
-
what the
that's not a spy in your avatar!
wait
OR IS IT?!
-
Will probably pirate it to play the single player. Definitely not worth buying for the PC. And I never like playing FPSers on the console, but if you are going to get it, get it on console.
-
And 3 hours long?
I think it took me 6-7h to play throu the SP campaign (without the special ops missions which I might play later).
Definetely fun, thou there are some extreme awesome maps (the restaurant/parking lot one, the Gulag mission, the ones in the Brazilian(?) slums) and some that just annoyed the f*ck out of me (running throu the 2 faction mayhem airfield where getting shot or not seemed to be 99% random based).
As in MW1, it's awesome what they do with the audio. Constant gameplay-reactive radio chatter from your team/base command and the combat zone background; though very "american" it really is something special. Streaming huge maps like the Gulag is also impressive.
Still I don't think it reaches the awesomeness of the HalfLife games; MW seems always a bit too hectic for my taste, often I don't know what the hell is going on with everything going apeshit around me. But maybe that's intended. It's not Modern Teaparty 2, is it.
-
I'm about 3/4 through I think. Enjoying it a lot.
Definitely a bit hectic. Definitely don't get everything that's going on, but I assume that's part of it. I think I pick up on a lot more via audio/visual cues than I think I am -- makes it more of an EXPERIENCE I guess.
I'm trying to work out if it's better than HL2 and/or Portal. It's damn close.
Different kind of game though I suppose. Very, very exciting. Such a range of missions too.
-
I'm trying to work out if it's better than HL2 and/or Portal. It's damn close.
NEVER!
-
Yeah, we played a lot of the single player campaign at the LAN, and it was pretty epic.
The suburbia/diner level was pretty cool, and the brazillain slums, was just pure intensity (the buggers come from everywhere!), and it just builds, and gets better and better.
The squad calling out (sometimes pretty descriptive) where the enemy was to you, was pretty cool too. Its designed to be very, very intense, to reflect the chaos of real warfare, and does a good job of it. Even at normal, its quite a challenge, compared to most FPSers .
When you first start, and it tells you there are levels that some people might find upsetting that you have the option of skipping, i was like "Eh?", but when you get to it you see why, felt like such a dick doing them.
Anyway, pretty epic, and worth it just for the single player.
-
When you first start, and it tells you there are levels that some people might find upsetting that you have the option of skipping, i was like "Eh?", but when you get to it you see why, felt like such a dick doing them.
Refering to the 'Airport-level'?
That was kinda extreme
-
When you first start, and it tells you there are levels that some people might find upsetting that you have the option of skipping, i was like "Eh?", but when you get to it you see why, felt like such a dick doing them.
Refering to the 'Airport-level'?
That was kinda extreme
Yeah. I think i had to redo it about 8 times, before i got the patience to not just turn around and gun down the nearest Russian carring a machine gun. Even as a video game it felt really wrong, and i did not enjoy that level.
-
i didnt realy have a issue with that level i mean its just a game but i can see why people could have issues with that
-
Hugman also cried when Bambi's mother died!
-
MW seems always a bit too hectic for my taste, often I don't know what the hell is going on with everything going apeshit around me. But maybe that's intended. It's not Modern Teaparty 2, is it.
i fucking love you, you bastard.
-
I thought the airport scene was pretty cool! But maybe that's my inner monster speaking.
That scene was deleted from the Russian version of the game, incidentally.
Finished it last night. Loved the frantic 'F' hitting in the last scene.
Am told there's a bonus Nuke Scene if you finish it on Veteran? I'm not good enough/don't have enough patience to do that sadly... but would love another Nuke Scene...!
Great game. Think MW1 had more impact on me. But some truly fantastic sequences in MW2.
-
Shittiest lobby system in the world ever. Oh My God!
-
Haven't tried multiplayerstuff yet.
Campaign was short :(
-
Shittiest lobby system in the world ever. Oh My God!
he speaks the fucking truth
-
It's good to see i'm not the one liked "No Russian" mission - I think.
I was like "Screw the debriefing, i'm gonna kick Makarov's ass!" but when they start shooting at crowd... Well noone seen kinda thing in other FPSes, and i'm pretty sure we won't in long run. I heard some kinda rumors which Infinity Ward is going to remove that mission from game, but damage done already. FREAK KIDZ!
Attempting to finish it on veteran but i swear that enemy bullets have auto-aim thing. Gotta atc like you are really fighting there. I'm about to steal Bear Grylls' role in "Man vs. Wild". It won't be against the wild but... Soon he'll get unemployed! Campaign was "real" short. Haven't played on Online but Multiplayer option is honor of FPSes i bet it's great too.
Gotta defend Washington D.C. now damn Russians!
-
Is the Russian mission at the start of the single player campaign? Cos I went straight into basic training and then into some middle-east city. Or is it in the spec ops bit? Or what?
-
It's in Act 2, mission called "of their own accord". That Middle-East city is in Afghanistan and it's just beginning of the game.
You should play more. :P
-
Yeah... Been playing too much multi-player :P
-
It's the 4th mission of the 1st act, called "No Russian".
Anyway, interesting to see people how get offended by this.
People get shot. People get shot all the time in the game and in other games, or in movies. Bit hypocritical to play tons of missions shooting Russian soldiers etc for enjoyment, but then at this scene "gasp omg how could they". Apparently it's ok to kill the "bad guys", but when "good guys" get it it's an outrage?
-
Hopefully we'll see a similar mission which involves marching into the White House and mowing down CIA/the president. That'd be pretty emotive.
-
It's the 4th mission of the 1st act, called "No Russian".
Anyway, interesting to see people how get offended by this.
People get shot. People get shot all the time in the game and in other games, or in movies. Bit hypocritical to play tons of missions shooting Russian soldiers etc for enjoyment, but then at this scene "gasp omg how could they". Apparently it's ok to kill the "bad guys", but when "good guys" get it it's an outrage?
Murder is murder, and you are right that, video games are very hypocritical in that the "hero" of most games at the end tends to be a mass murderer of at least one particular race or group. But before you go like "OMG HUGMAN IS LIKE SAVE THE KOOPAS AND WANTS US TO STOP PLAYING MARIO CAUSE HE FEELS ITS MASS MURDER!1!!" etc, obviously every game needs an opponent, and some (normally massively outnumbering you) villains in order to defeat, for the game to be in anyway challenging or fun.
But the difference is this. Shooting lots of "bad guys" (which is debatable, as in war, who the bad guys are, is just a matter of option and perspective) in a game about war, who have guns, and are attempting to kill you. Or walking into a heavily packed airport, pulling out a high calliber machine gun, and then gunning down dozens of innocent unarmed civilians, (who as the game is designed, realistically attempt flee for there lives, screaming, crawl off wounded and beg not to be killed) alongside several other wankers who are also gleefully butchering these people (Goza can has no empathy?). And you have to do a whole level of this, and cannot kill the wankers or you fail the level.
Well yes, its just a game, and a very good one at that. However, its a game in which basically one of its main selling points, is the fact that it tries to be as close to reality as possible, to ensure a immersive, interesting and challenging game. However that doesn't mean they had do put in a level which invites you to participate in the realistic butchering of dozens of innocent civilians, while also preventing you from turning the gun on the knobjockeys who are doing this.
Yes, the level is relevant to the plot (as the war wouldn't have started without this), and yes it gives you the option to skip it, at the beginning of the game, but even so. Why point this in as a level at all? Why not just make it a cut scene?, this would carry the plot just fine, and work the player up to some righteous vengence against these wankers. It just seems they seem to be doing it to pander to some wierd sick fantasy, or some emo teenager who hates his life, and wants to kill people, to make himself feel better. Or they put it in, to drum up media controversy and get headlines to sell more. Either way its pretty stupid.
Lets be real here, its not like I am some uber-conservative 50 year old dude, who has never played a video game in his life, and is lobbying to get it banned, "to protect the kids from video game violence, and prevent them shooting up a school" etc, or other such bollocks. I have been gaming for 20 years, and played games which have more violence or more controversial. However this level did make me go "eh? that's just wrong!". For a game which prides itself on realism, to put in a level, where there is this type of content, and not allow you to do what any sane person wielding a gun, would do in that situation; i.e. dive into cover, and attempt to gun down the wankers committing this butchery, is pretty dickish.
Anyway, that is my opinion on it, and despite the massive wall of text I just wrote, I am not really worked up about it. MW2 is still an awesome game, and when you look at it, just the fact that this game has content, which can provoke intelligent discussion regarding this subject, is interesting in itself.
P.S. Bambi's mom didn't die, she travelled north and married Rudolph. My mum told me so.
-
is the fact that it tries to be as close to realism as possible
You lost me there T_T.
Also,
(http://forum.berryth.nl/uploads/augustus2008/20081115_012827_moraalridder.jpg)
-
is the fact that it tries to be as close to realism as possible
You lost me there T_T.
Also,
(http://forum.berryth.nl/uploads/augustus2008/20081115_012827_moraalridder.jpg)
Gratz, you managed to find the one significant wording error I made in the whole thing, and then ignore the rest.
How nice for you.
-
Many of the soldiers you would be theoretically killing in video games were forced into it because of poor economy -> unemployment so no other choice, indoctrination or just because they believe their fight is the 'good fight'.
If you were to feel guilty for killing sussposedly 'innocent' people you should feel guilty for killing pretty much everyone :P
-
You are not forced to actively partake in shooting the civilians at the airport. I didn't shoot anyone, just followed. So, basically it is just an (more or less interactive) cutscene, an option which apparently would be fine with you. Until the cops arrive, which you have to fight. Btw, I have not seen anyone complain about that 2nd half of the level so far, anywhere.
As to why they include the level: I don't think there is a single cutscene in the game, apart from some short ingame sequences where control is taken off your character for drama. I actually welcome making that scene playable, better than a cheap cop-out of "we'll keep that in, but just watchable". This is an 18+ rated game. You said it yourself: "its a game in which basically one of its main selling points is the fact that it tries to be as close to realism as possible".
Of course, another major reason is prob to have this huge free marketing due to controversy.
Regarding "and not allow you to do what any sane person wielding a gun would do [...] attempt to gun down the wankers committing this butchery": IIRC you are not allowed to do this due to story elements as you are undercover, I remember some audio introduction about sacrifices for greater benefits. Does not mean I consent to this, but it makes you think about how some organizations might think.
-
Many of the soldiers you would be theoretically killing in video games were forced into it because of poor economy -> unemployment so no other choice, indoctrination or just because they believe their fight is the 'good fight'.
If you were to feel guilty for killing sussposedly 'innocent' people you should feel guilty for killing pretty much everyone :P
Both very true.
You are not forced to actively partake in shooting the civilians at the airport. I didn't shoot anyone, just followed. So, basically it is just an (more or less interactive) cutscene, an option which apparently would be fine with you.
Fair enough I guess. But the fact you are in control of you character, are able to fire you gun, yet prevented from stopping the butchery of these people, does annoy me so. Maybe it is just me.
Regarding "and not allow you to do what any sane person wielding a gun would do [...] attempt to gun down the wankers committing this butchery": IIRC you are not allowed to do this due to story elements as you are undercover, I remember some audio introduction about sacrifices for greater benefits. Does not mean I consent to this, but it makes you think about how some organizations might think.
Yeah I am aware of the story elements "preventing" you from stopping it, in order to catch this madman. But even so, a person dedicated to stopping people like these, standing by as they gun down dozens of innocent civilians, right in front of him? When he could possibly prevent it? For the justification of "well we need you to keep your deep cover, in order to bring this madman down"? No for me at least, it pushes the boundaries of realistic behaviour too much. Why not (even thought its vary dangerous, as you are being watched) attempt to shoot him and end it there? Standing by and watching it happen, while you could have done something about it, is just as bad as doing it yourself.
I remember some audio introduction about sacrifices for greater benefits. Does not mean I consent to this, but it makes you think about how some organizations might think.
Yeah unfortunately this could be very true to life.
Anyway I probably have gone to far on debating this, the moral implications of a plot line in a video game 8) so I will leave it at that.
/demount moral high horse
-
I'm still uncertain as to the importance of shows like Spooks or games like MW2.
Both depict people in a position of trust -- spies, governmental agencies, soldiers, etc. -- performing really depraved acts, 'for the greater good'.
I think it's just one of those 'ignorance is bliss' things. Who knows if such things are REALLY going on, to prevent a nuclear holocaust on a daily basis?
I think it's pretty amazing that we're still here today, as the human species. I have no idea how much weird shit goes on -- like undercover butchery at an airport -- but you have to assume that the watchers are doing their job.
Then there's the classic who-watches-the-watchers argument but... well, this is the world we live in. Huge amount of power in the hands of just a few men.
But as I said, the fact that we're still here and not trying to survive a nuclear winter proves that it WORKS. Just about.
-
Yeah I am aware of the story elements "preventing" you from stopping it, in order to catch this madman. [...] Why not [...] attempt to shoot him and end it there?
Yes, now that you mention it again, I thought that myself. If you're just hunting this guy (and not some hidden nukes he is going to lead you to after the massacre), you could just shoot him in the face right there and be done. Story hole!
-
Hug, I don't think Ino was pointing out the wording error, more the absurdity of considering the plot and action in MW2 to be realistic or even intended to be. It's slightly less realistic than Die Hard. At a stretch.
The point in the level was to kick up a fuss, to make people make some noise. It achieved that goal spectacularly :P Sure, they might have achieved a slightly better effect for the player if you'd, say, played as a civilian running and hiding and so on (Press 'A' to hide under corpse pile), but wouldn't have been in the same league for publicity.
-
Goza the Butcher.
Hugman the Wuss-human emathizing-mommys boy.
-
Thanks for your valuable input to the discussion, Kage.
-
That actually would've been quite fun, Kawe...
Well, not 'fun', but... interesting, certainly.
Imagine a game where it's basically a string of hostage/terrorism situations. On a train, up the World Trade Center, in an airport...
Not sure people would actually play it though :P