FIELD OPERATIVE

CALL OF DUTY, BATTLEFIELD & F.P.S. blog

Archive for First Person Shooters

COD:BO Domination Survival Guide is here!

Some might think I’m a COD hater but that’s not true! I just hate the fact that the console versions don’t have dedicated servers. COD4 being my favorite video game ever, I also got fed up by MW2’s glitches and unbalanced camper-oriented gameplay  rather quickly and never looked back.

The truth is that COD:BO is the best COD game since COD4… So, BFBC2 being rather dead by now, with no new maps since Vietnam and extremely irritating players populating the servers (at least for the Xbox version),  I started playing COD:BO again. I even purchased the Escalation map pack which is pretty cool.

I am playing mostly Domination, so I wrote down a Survival Guide. Check it out! And who knows, maybe one of these days I will try to publish my unfinished COD4 Headquarters Guide that I’ve been working on for months!

Crysis 2 (Xbox 360) or the sempiternal inconvenience of host-based console F.P.S.

Crysis 2 multiplayer is lots of fun. Really. I like the armor/cloak gimmicks, I like the weapons, I like the game modes, I like the graphics, I like the maps.

What I don’t like is that Crytek must surely think console players, as opposed to PC gamers, are dumbasses. There is no other way to explain the fact that they dare to claim that they achieved a hi-tech, top-notch FPS when they don’t have dedicated servers.

I have lag most of the time and obviously there is a clear advantage for the host (if you press START and there is just one person with a connection of 4 green bars, that’s him). I even got the host once, which is totally ridiculous because I have a crap 2mbps ADSL connection.

Dear Crytek, DICE & Guerilla pwn you in the console territory. Ask your boss, EA, for dedicated servers next time…

Dear Crysis 2 console player, if you can’t stand to play with lag, there is just one way out: switch to a FPS with dedicated servers.

Dedicated servers means that there is no lag, or if there is a little bit all the players lag the same – there is no advantage for the host.

For a host-based title, the game picks up the player with the best connection and makes him/her act as the server. All the other players connect to him. He has a clear advantage because for example he can see other players before they see him.

If the host quits, then the game must migrate to another host. This procedure is known as host migration and it doesn’t work all the time. Actually it works half of the time at best.

All host-based games do not have the same network code. The C.O.D. games are notorious for having worst netcode than the HALO games or -more recently- CRYSIS 2.

The worst of them all was COD 4: Infinity Ward was supposed to get host migration to work which has never happened. Each time the host was getting pissed off because he was getting pwned (=that’s called “ragequitting”) or because his mom/wife was calling him, the game ended abruptly and the rest of the players were losing the kills they had make and their score. At least in Crysis 2, I observed that you don’t lose the count of kills you made if the match ends following a failed host migration…

For your convenience, you can find below a non-exclusive list with the host-based and server-based console FPS games.

Please do not hesitate to share with us your experience with console multiplayer F.P.S. games.

HOST-BASED CONSOLE F.P.S. GAMES

  • CALL OF DUTY series
  • HALO series
  • CRYSIS 2
  • GEARS OF WAR 1+2
  • RAINBOW SIX: VEGAS 2

CONSOLE F.P.S. GAMES WITH DEDICATED SERVERS

  • BATTLEFIELD: BAD COMPANY 1+2
  • KILLZONE 2+3
  • M.A.G.
  • HOMEFRONT
  • MEDAL OF HONOR
  • GEARS OF WAR 3 (supposedly – to be confirmed)
  • RESISTANCE 1+2

HOMEFRONT is an ugly motherfucker (single-player X360 review )

HOMEFRONT, being developped by KAOS, a team comprising ex-Battlefield 1942 modders Team Trauma, is the game that a lot of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 fans have been waiting in order to fill the gap until Battlefield 3.

Back in 2008, Frontlines: Fuel Of War their debut game, obtained some pretty decent feedback and was a perfectly enjoyable game both in single-player and multiplayer.

Watching the pre-release HF videos, we sort of had high expectactions about the game. I have played the full single-player campaign and booted shortly the offline multiplayer (System Link) on Xbox 360.

  • GRAPHICS

What stroke me first of all were the ugly graphics.  They look past-gen and are a big disappointment after recent console blockbusters like Halo:Reach and Killzone 3.  Shit, they even look uglier than COD4’s! They are lifeless and pale. It’s hard to believe that major publishers dare to release console games so ugly and visually unpolished like MEDAL OF HONOR or HF. I started the multiplayer component in system link, and the graphics are at the same disappointing levels. I am just wondering: haven’t these guys took a look at what is being released these days? Just from the demo Crysis 2 looks gorgeous on consoles!

If you took a look at the official screenshots and thought they were looking great, well it’s not what you’ll get on a Xbox 360 (or a PS3 for that matter). Obviously they come from the PC version

  • SCENARIO/SETTING

The scenario is half-decent, eventhough completely unrealistic (Korea invading the US in case you didn’t know it), but the campaign is flawed with bad scripting. The NPC’s will often repeat the same sentence over and over again pissing you off. They will also give dumb instructions in a loop like “grab those frags”, while the frags are in the next room which is full of enemies. They will also take ridiculous poses, like waiting with the face up against the wall (complete with the gun immersed inside the wall).

Not only  scenario-wise but in general, the game tries very  hard to mimick the Modern Warfare series. This is often pathetic and reduces any sort of impact that the setting might have had.

The whole America invasion type of thing has already been done in a unrealistic but blockbuster way in Modern Warfare 2 and it was very cool. HF’s battles in suburbia feel weak and unconvincing compared to MW2 level “Wolverines!” or “Exodus”.

There’s a few half-memorable moments and  some others where the characters reflect about the meaning of violence, which is something that I appreciate.

  • WEAPONS

Weaponry is almost identical to MW2. You get the M4, ACR, M16 (single shot), TDI Vector, SCAR, etc. But there’s less weapons in total than in the COD/MW/BF series. Shooting has a lot of recoil, which I think is a welcomed change. It makes you aim carefully and practically disables spray-and-pray gameplay.

  • LEVELS/GAMEFLOW

Unlike Frontlines which presented an open gameplay where you chose your path in order to accomplish the objectives, like in BFBC1+2, HF has a strict scripted approache like the COD games. KAOS in general fails to built suspense and tension like the COD games.

  • GIMMICKS

The story happens in the near future, ie. 2 or 3 decades from now. The weaponry being the same, there’s a few elements that help diffrentiate HF from modern shooters and hopefully render the experience more interesting. There’s the Goliath, an armed drone vehicle with a heavy MG and rockets. It has an artificial intelligence, runs around shooting at enemies and you just mark the targets for the rockets. Honnestly it’s nothing special – in the gadget genre we’ve seen better. The Koreans have also sentry drones/towers which block your path. In order to take them down you have to flank them by avoiding taking too much damage, then throw a grenade at their rear where their fuel tank (BTW we never see them move around, so what’s the point of a fuel tank?).

  • CONCLUSION

You don’t have to be Albert Einstein to understand that a 2011 military F.P.S. with worst graphics than 2007’s Call Of Duty 4 goes nowhere. At best it will make a decent weekend rental. What is really sad is that HOMEFRONT gives a worst impression than previous KAOS game Frontlines: Fuel Of War…

MEDAL OF HONOR CAMPAIGN REVIEW (XBOX 360) – part#1

Eventhough I am primarily an online gamer, I am always on the lookout for a powerful single player experience. It has a lot to do with the fact that I got back into gaming when my close friend Kostas, after pouring me a glass of Metaxa the afternoon after his civil marriage, handed me over a Dualshock and invited me to play BLACK on his PS2. I got instantly hooked, a couple of weeks later I was buying a second hand xbox1, and the rest is history.

I believe that a game with a good multiplayer component must be able to hook you up with its campaign. That’s what happened to me with BATTLEFIELD: BAD COMPANY 2. From the first minutes of single player action I knew that I would LOVE its multiplayer, and I quit overnight Modern Warfare 2! And let’s not talk about CALL OF DUTY4, whose single player made me wanna go online and buy an Xbox live subscription…

Not having received yet the M.O.H. copy  I preordered from play.com, I couldn’t wait and started the campaign with a copy rented from a video club. Below are my first impressions from the first couple of hours.

  • The graphics are average. They are certainly worst than those of MW2, Killzone 2, BFBC2, and after the technical prowess of recent console blockbusters Uncharted 2 & Halo Reach they are even more disappointing… Please notice that I’m talking Xbox 360 here, huh.
  • The animation is average too. It simply isn’t realistic and well polished.
  • The controls feel awkward. The first hands-on experience with the game controls is certainly not sweet.
  • The action is not intense and overall the gameplay is not exciting. It feels a lot like a Call Of Duty clone, which struggles hard to match the original but fails.
  • The scenario doesn’t help the action. I really had a good feeling about the Afghanistan setting. I have seen many documentaries about the current conflict, including the excellent “Ross Kemp In Afghanistan” series, and from the videos and pre-release information, I had the impression that the campaign would be killer. At least for the first couple of hours it’s not. The story is mediocre and lacks the momentum of the latest three Call Of Duty games or the fun of Battlefield: Bad Company 1+2.
  • The levels are -guess what?- average. It’s way too linear, there’s almost no room for some exploration like in the other military FPS’ I mentionned until now. There’s plenty of invisible walls and a few bugs in the scripting. I shutted down my Xbox 360 after I reached an objective,  a gate, which would not open eventhough there were not any more enemies to kill in that area. Next to that area, behind a fence, endless allies and Talibans respawned, shooting each other standing (not even going prone), dead bodies disappearing pronto.

I will continue one of these days and really hope that the rest of the campaign is not as bad as its beginning…

Kotaku’s Visual Guide To The First-Person Shooter

Check a nice Kotaku feature, their Visual Guide To The First-Person Shooter.

MEDAL OF HONOR BETA GENERAL IMPRESSIONS: COD KILLER

Hardware: PS3

Kit: 80gb “fat” model

GENERAL IMPRESSIONS

  • The positive

This early look at the multiplayer component of the game, confirms that M.O.H. will be the first CODkiller, aka the first arcade military shooter able to compete with the Modern Warfare series.

DICE uses servers, unlike Infinity Ward and Treyarch who use a peer-to-peer scheme, which is source of injustice since the player who is chosen as the host has a huge and unfair advantage.

The stripped-down framework from Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is working well. The weapons, their mods, and the progression of the characters are well thought and balanced.

  • The negative

This piece of software is broken! You are not able to finish but half of the matches. For the rest, the console freezes and you have to reset from the I/O button. It is impossible to have a consistent gameplay experience in these terms. That would be almost OK, if this beta was not accessible  only to those who have preordered…

Technical issues apart,  what DICE should probably focus the most on, would be the maps. There’s just two maps in the beta, one for each mode. The are quite good, especially Helmand Valley. But I am not sure yet, that they can match the awesome battlegrounds that were those of Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, which is clearly the game that is to be matched here in terms of gameplay.

Kabul City Ruins for example, is enjoyable and everything, but it feels somehow not a match to Ambush or Crash if you know what I mean. In general there is a claustrophobic feeling, since the maps are rather small. This is good on one hand, because there cannot be too much camping going on and the action is more intense. On the other hand, if the general size of the maps is small like that, we can only hope that there will be a ton of them.

Medal Of Honor beta “coming soon”!

As you know, we are talking about forthcoming Medal Of Honor game, because it is somehow BFBC2’s little brother since DICE is doing the multiplayer component. We also hope it does right what MW2 did not, letting down hardcore COD4 players.

The recent “Leave A Message” trailer features very little gameplay, but on the end it announces that there is a BETA coming soon! It is reasonable to assume that if you preorder you’ll get automatic access. What about BFBC2 players? I would not be surprised if there was a way for them to get in as well…

Concerning public betas, all major recent military FPS’  had one (COD4, COD:WaW, BFBC1, BFBC2, M.A.G.) except MW2, which was also the one that was the most riddled with glitches and cheaters!