Talk:Medal of Honor (2010)

beta release date?

When will 360 beta be out? I keep hearing within a week but have seen no announcements by the company.

http://twitter.com/medalofhonor

http://twitter.com/pottan

weapon balance

i just saw the 12 round beretta mentioned i think they did that for balance reasons. Another game too focused on fairness. God forbid you unlock a gun later on that just owns.

-k9870

Yeah its kind of annoying when its that balanced, at least you could pretend its the .40, but I wouldn't even know what to do with the Grach, its named the Tariq (which is something else) and has 12 rounds too, when its supposed to have 17. Wait, couldn't they both just have been 16 to be in between? If I WAS going to make an overly balanced system like this, I'd try to make it close, why take them both down to 12? Alex T Snow 19:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Pretend it's the .40 too

Haha too bad there isn't one... WAIT! If you really want to stretch it you could pretend its the compact MP-448, 12 rounds of 9x18mm lol :D Alex T Snow 03:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I hate when the do something like "the m4 has 20 power and 30 fire rate, the AK has 30 power and 20 fire rate, so there balanced. Then they go weapon x is more accurate than weapon y since its weaker and needs an advantage. I wish when you leveled up you had guns with good advantages that just own.

-k9870

I want a game that keeps the round in the chamber, keeps track of your extra mags (not the one big number bullshit), all the functions to be right, none of the guns to be set in a firing mode they're not in, the ability to switch modes to whatever that weapon has, the correct attachments (no AKs with ACOGs, or M14s and G3s with M203s), the correct animations for reloads, correct fire rates, correct mag capacities, correct zooms on scopes and no zoom on reflex sights/irons sights, its not really too much to ask I don't think. The only thing that would be arguable would be damage stuff does, but for the MOST part if you used the calibre measurement as the damage it would work (i.e. 5.56mm does about 22 damage, 7.62mm does 30, .50 does 50) it's not perfect but I at least want the guns with the same calibres to do the same damage... Rant done. Alex T Snow 22:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

There is a game for you, it's called ArmA. Mainstream arcadey FPS won't have all these features. But I agree at least counting bullet up the pipe would be nice touch. That always bugged me too. I have no idea why CoD games still doesn't have this. Anyway, ACOG (or any other weaver optic) on AK is not a problem via special mount. 203 on G3 and M14 is possible too.

Oh believe me, I wouldn't need ALL that, I still play the mainstream FPSs, it would just be nice, I just kept going with the list ;) And I do know you can technically put an ACOG on an AK or a 203 on the M14 or G3, but it would be nice to see the things that are supposed to be there... there, like the HK79. The attachments thing certainly wouldn't be as important to me as the round in the chamber, and I don't think guns of the same calibre having the same damage would be too much, its not that would take any extra effort... Alex T Snow 05:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Same caliber doesn't always do same damage when shot from different barrels. M16 and M4 is a good example. In case with M16 bullet tumble and fragment thus making more damage, but when the same ammo shot from M4 it does not.

I knew that but didn't want to make my posts too long ;)That's fair, I meant more the stuff that doesn't make sense, like a 12 gauge that does more damage than another 12 gauge because it's pump action vs semi-auto, or like in Modern Warfare 2, which is the game I'm mostly complaning about, the F2000 has a 15.7" barrel and does 30 damage, while the TAR-21 has an 18.1" does 40, I know the idea of damage as a numerical system like this isn't realistic in a lot of ways, but it's the best anyone has been able to come up with so far, and I wouldn't think 2.4 inches of barrel would make that much of a difference. Put it this way, out of the 9 assault rifles in that game there are only 3 different damages, the 30, 40, and 55, keep in mind that the calibres here are 5.56, 7.62, and 7.62 NATO: the M4, ACR, and F2000 do 30, the FAMAS, SCAR, TAR-21, M16A4, and AK-47 do the same (lol what?) at 40, and the FAL does a whopping 55 (because its semi). But the single worst is the UMP and Super V, both .45s with a comparible barrel length, the UMP does 40 (again) and the the Super V does... 25. I know there should be differences but this makes NO SENSE. Sorry, I know this is the Medal Of Honor page, but everyone here seems smarter... Alex T Snow 07:34, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not a simulator. They needed to differentiate gun's performance. Besides, most people playing it doesn't know shit which caliber it shoots. So probably it's better to just get over it. Try playing hardcore mode and weapon damage won't bother you so much.

I know :) it doesn't really matter too much, it would just be nice, but I'm not expecting it though lol Alex T Snow 06:40, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

seriously, no 1911 very disapointing. it might be outdated but Special Forces still use them. Dirtdiver6421 00:11, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Who said there won't be a 1911 in the final game? This isn't the final game. Alex T Snow 00:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

First Part

This game looks very promising in terms of realism and graphics compared to the other games. I'm excited to see that the game developers are working with REAL special forces operators. The game comes out in Fall 2010. CAN'T FREAKIN WAIT!!!!!!- ArmoredMason619

I've always had a soft spot with this series. I really hope they knock it out of the park with this one.

I'm guessing the guy on the front cover is a Green Beret?-- John Ryder

For some reason I though the guy on the front page was a PMC --AdAstra2009 05:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Na he is a Green Beret. That's the way they look when they are in a combat zone. They have to grow out a beard and dress like the civilians/insurgents in that particular area.-ArmoredMason619

A World War II shooter series is switching to a modern setting? It'll never work.

Your kidding right...and sign your posts --AdAstra2009 23:25, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The graphics appear to be on par with America's Army 3, though hopefully it'll have less problems and a better weapon selection. Orca1 9904 23:36, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The trailer had what looked like an M249 SAW variant fitted with an EOTech red dot sight, but I only saw it for a second looking down the sights in first-person mode so couldn't determine wether it was a standard SAW or specialized version like the Paratrooper or SPW. Orca1 9904 23:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I added a screen of the M4A1 and the Minimi/SAw possibilty. --TheCrazyGunNut

Ah, cheap EA.. This is so obvious that they are doing this because of MW success. Won't buy just because of this fact.

Or because WWII has been overdone and they wanted to do something else. --Crazycrankle 02:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

20th century saw so many wars. They could pick any one. The most suitable would be Vietnam war. I can't recall many good games about this conflict. It could be about SF also.

How about Vietcong? http://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Vietcong In my personal oppinion the best PC game from Vietnam conflict up to date. I know that the Vietcong wasn't perfect but other games usually wasted their potential (e.g. Conflict Vietnam, Men of Valor) ended as a low quality budget (first Shellshock 67 and many others) or as some crazy VC/NVA-zombie kill fest (recent Shellshock 2).

I agree that there were many other "interesting" conflicts or suitable theathers for FPS games but "supply is influenced by demand". The "anti-terrorist" theme is actual and developers don't want to risk introducing a game that "nobody would want to play". Remember it's all about the money. Actually it's quite strange that if I look backwards I can't recall any good or partially realistic FPS from Afganistan or Iraq theatre - Modern Warefare, appart from other parts of the story, was set partialy in the Middle East but in some fictisious country (and that *** spoliler *** nuking of the whole Marine division *** spoiler *** was complete bullshit) and Modern Warefare 2 was about hunting down some crazy Russian ultranationalists (and *** spoiler *** one rouge American general *** spoiler *** that was bullshit as well). No offence to Call of Duty but I personally hope that Medal of Honor would not turn into such killfest of stupid AI NPC duchebags thrown in absolutely ridiculous waves into a single coridor where you have to kill more than 70 opponents on less than 100 square feet ...

Wow, so doing something original is bullshit? I mean, come on; I'd rather shoot 70 guys in a single cooridor than simply go from cave to cave, shooting the occasional militant, or riding about in my vehicle until I hit a bomb and get ambushed. Generic examples I know, but put simply, fighting a military-trained, fully-equipped soldier is a lot more exciting than some fanatical militant using 30-year-old weapons. Heck, even America's Army created a fictional enemy for the US Army to fight.

Judging by what I'm seeing in the trailer this is going to be far from any CoD style of modern warfare. This shit looks seriously hardcore in terms of trying to replicate some actual Iraq/Afghanistan gameplay. I guess only time will tell. Hopefully by then they fix the damn gas block thing. Fuck that pisses me off. These guys are working with tier 1 operators but they don't want to model the damn gun correctly. Anybody with even slight knowledge of an AR-15 platform would notice this error. It's a big frickin error.ShaDow XPS

"replicate actual Iraq/Afghanistan gameplay"? So coalition forces playing in a sandbox there? And duh, there is a gas-block, it's just too low-profile and you cannot see it.

Even if the gas block isn't there, does it really matter? The average gamer probably doesn't know, or care, what a gas block is, let alone whether it's actually there or not; and the Medal of Honor series goes for what looks cool (such as the Flak Tower in Airborne), not what's realistic.

Don't change the intent of my words. Let me rephrase :::"replicate some actual Iraq/Afghanistan fighting into gameplay." There happy? As well the use of a low profile gas block seems like an excuse. What are the chances that every M4 has a low profile gas block when there are attached optics?ShaDow XPS

Why not? It's a game about hi-speed low-drag tear1 omfgd3ltasealz special forces operators.

That's Tier 1. And even a low-profile gas block would still be visible on the barrel where the standard FSP would be due to the length of the gas tube. Spartan198 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

North American release date is October 12, 2010. Europe is October 15.-- John Ryder

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFpgNJZ8Fhc&playnext_from=TL&videos=vd-xeQ7FyHw ^ At 0:56, 1:04, 1:16 you can see a stock, body, and barrel of a M14 EBR. At O:43 you can see what I believe to be some kind of M240.*EDIT: Mk 46 Mod 0* All along the trailer are M4s with optics and different accessories. -DeltaOp

Was the Mark 14 EBR even fielded yet in 2002? Spartan198 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

- Nope. EBR was designed around that date - 2001/2002 but first units (mostly from Navy Seals) were issued this rifle later on in 2004. So it's probably another game inaccuracy.

Who said it was set in 2002? And the gas block isn't removed for optics like in Call Of Duty, it's removed when the M203's flip up sight is on top, I'm thinking it's not to block that, not that I think it would block it, but that's when it's not there, not because of optics. EDIT: Wow my bad, it is set then, and I was thinking the M203 was an attachment, but its fixed on like in BFBC2, wow, I feel dumb lol. EDIT #2: I figured it out, the M16 removes the front sight for optics, but the M4 doesn't. Odd. Alex T Snow 08:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Green Beret on cover

It's Cowboy! [1] Spartan198 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Lmao. Oh i didnt think of that one. -Winn

Anyone think its kinda odd that the Rangers seem to be doing alot of the work. along with the Green Beret. Wouldnt Delta Force/Navy SEALs be doing most of the stuff?

1st SFOD-D and Navy SEALs are, let's say, "equal" to Special Forces concerning their roles within US SOCOM. They are highly trained operators used for specific and "delicate" stuff. Rangers are more like muscless used for more "dirty" tasks. In reality, you would rather send a Special Forces A-Team to do cool things like - to recon the enemy airfield, to pin point potential high-value targets, to set observation post for calling CAS missions or to set sniping posts with 18B class operators with sniper rifles; while few C-130s packed with Ranger chalks would wait to "go-order" so they can jump in, do all the hard work and blow the enemy to pieces. Special Forces (Delta/SEALs etc.) are too valuable for such things. Even though, they are capable of kicking some serious ass, it is not practical to "mass" several A- or SEAL teams for a task, which bunch of Ranger squads could do better.[Ragnar]

okay thats true, but i just dont see why there wouldnt be SOME Operators or SEALs, think about this. Rangers are like the backbone of USSOCOM, Green Berets, are trained in Reconaissance, but if u want to kick some serious Taliban ass, u send in Operators or SEALs, because they excel at kickin' the door down, and opening up some whoop-ass. Dirtdiver 6421 00:40, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Who is the "Operators"?

Delta "Operators". Pz.Abt.100 22:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

but really, i no Delta is more of a mission specific unit, but seriously what is America's best military asset? 1stSFOD-D. why? because they have close to 500 Operators, the best in the world. and officially they dont exist. political bull shit in the way, no problemo. they dont exist. its denieble if you send them in.71.194.219.9 19:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Guns revealed in multi-player demo at E3

(These are just what I could spot while watching it on TV)

• Beretta 92FS/M9 (not a 92SB like in CoD, had the squared-off trigger guard)
• Pump-action shotgun I couldn't identify (they only showed it from the back)
• Bolt-action sniper rifle, presumably a Remington M24 (only saw it from the back and right side as the player was working the bolt)
• Not actually a new gun, but the M4A1 also had a low-profile front BUIS mounted on the RIS is some scenes

Spartan198 22:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

If you check the kill feed immediately after the kill with the sniper rifle, the identifies the unknown rifle as a Sako M57. --HashiriyaR32 16:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I found some footage: http://videos.pcgames.de/v/MuuqC3iXMpw/Medal-of-Honor/Multiplayer-Gameplay-E3-2010/ (the shotgun is a TOZ-194)

More confirmed weapons. I recommend you keep your eye to the left of the screen, below the radar, to see some weapons we have missed while watching the video.

RPK-Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

RPG 7-In-game footage

AK-47-Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

AT-4 (I think by the ingame footage)

M9- From ingame footage

SVD Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

M249 Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

TT-30 Seen ingame

MP7A1 This one was very hard to see (Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

M-21 Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

870MCS Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

M60 Can be seen as a weapon that killed the player on the screen (look left of gameplay)

Knife: I need a confirmation but in the "Leave a Message" trailer one of the Rangers seems to be equipped with a Coyote Brown Gerber LMF II knife.

List

I'm gonna put all the ones I've seen down, so we've got one big list (this is all from the 11 minute long multiplayer video, both seen on screen and on the killfeed) If the names are given (killfeed ones) I'm writing them exactly as they are named in game. For the ones that aren't named I'll name them what they are.

M16

M203

AK-47

GP-30

M249

PKM

M4

AKS-74u

870MCS

TOZ-194

AT4

RPG-7

M21

SVD (NOTE: Has a straight .308 magazine)

M24

SV-98

M9

MP-443 (NOTE: Appears as the Tariq, which I thought that was an Iraqi-made Beretta clone...)

(From here down is not in the Beta)

RPK

MP7A1

M240

M60

M14 EBR (Seen in other videos. It is NOT the same as the M21 like it is in certain other games, the M21 has a normal M21 type body and stock, BOTH are in this.) Alex T Snow 04:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Spliting into sections

Wont it make sence to make two sections ? One with MP´s guns and one with SP´s guns. I think it will - because they dont use same engine, so guns can be different.

Why would the single player and multiplayer use different engines? That makes no sense. It would make the modelers have to model everything twice, and take up twice as much space on disc. No. We're not going to do that.-protoAuthor 19:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It USES different engines. MP is running on frostbite, and SP is running on UT3 one.

Not sure if i'm doing this right, but yes it uses different engines, and the modelers do not have to model everything twice, they can easily import it from a common format to both engine's formats, PSK Mesh (or something) for UT3, and a new version of bundledmesh contained in RES files for frostbite. You don't have to model it twice, you just export within both engines.

It still makes no sense to split up the page. But thank you for enlightening me to something that still makes no sense to me. Why would they do that?-protoAuthor 16:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The only reason i could possibly see would be to make a comparable multiplayer experience for BFBC2 players, And they might have already started building singleplayer on the unreal engine, which most if not all of the previous MoH games used. In my opinion, it shouldn't be split either, means some firearms would be listed twice. btw this isn't the original poster, this is the guy from the post before proto's last.

Ok than. It doesnt have to be split, but there should be atlest writed to each screenshot " This is from Multiplayer/ Singleplayer". And just one little BTW: They modelled it twice. As you can see, M4 or MK46 HAVE different models.

That's because the M4 and Mk. 46 are different guns, silly.-protoAuthor 04:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh. I mean that M4 looks different in SP and MP. Same with Mk.46

They do look different but I think its just because one sets from that first trailer a while ago, game's graphics always get better as develpment keeps going, but you might be right to, I was just throwing that out there. Alex T Snow 08:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

LMG Special Weapons

In the sniper class you get C4, in the special ops class you get a rocket, and with an assault rifle in the rifleman class you get a launcher... so what do you get if you equip an LMG? Alex T Snow 09:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

more ammo?

Absolutely nothing. You have 2 spare 150 round mags (in the beta, with the PK).

You have self-destruct vest.

Is that a joke or can you actually be a suicide bomber, cause what would the American gunners get? Alex T Snow 21:14, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

C4

It is then? Okay cool, I figured but I wasn't sure, I can't check because the 360 beta was delayed :( Alex T Snow 19:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Best of 3 shooters?

I have to say, out of the 3 FPS games that will be coming out in Q4 (this one, Spec Ops: The Line, and CoD: Black Ops), I am looking forward to Medal of Honor the most. From what I've seen about the other two, they look like they're filled with sensationalist b.s. . -Any Mouse

MoH looks WAY to much like Bad Company 2, and I think it's EAs fault. They want to capitalize on the modern warfare craze so much, they're using another popular series to boost sales. To be honest, MOH looks like BC2 with Taliban, and I'll most likely not be getting it. M14fanboy

Medal of honor is not going to be way too much like BC2 because the gameplay will be much more tactical and realistic. Like real modern warfare.

Says you man. Face it, it's going to be bought by the same type of people who buy MW2 and BC2, mostly idiot kids ranging from 10 to 15 who just wanna get four man sprays and noob tubes across the map. This is a console FPS that can be bought by anyone, and has nothing to offer that will make it overly unique, so it will end up like MW2 and BC2, noob weapons will arise, and it will just be another chaotic FPS. M14fanboy

You got a point there.

Spec Ops: the Line is a third person shooter, not an FPS.

Sorry, my bad. I thought it was one of those deals like Fallout 3 where you could switch from first-to-third-person and back -Any Mouse

Animations

I know this is off-topic, but am I the only one bothered by the way your character moves? If a gun is bouncing around in your hands while you move like that, there's gotta be something wrong...

I think that only happens in multiplayer due to it being a different engine, but yeah it is weird

Full Auto M16A4

Wouldn't having an M16A4 on full auto make it a C7A1? I know there are a few other differences, but they're all internal, it's the only difference visible in some way. Alex T Snow 18:23, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Well I would have said M16A3, but those didn't have rails. So yes, the only M16 variant that has an RIS system and goes full-auto is the C7A2, so indeed this new game uses a C7. M14fanboy

M16A4 with FA lower - what could be easier

Personally, I wouldn't call "full-auto" M16A4 a C7A2. C7A2 has some, more or less significant, differences - e.g. ambidextrous fire selector or retractable stock. Plus Canadian military did not use full length RIS systems (e.g. like King Arms M5 on M16A4) on their C7s. Full-auto M16A4 is just another game-developer inaccuracy created by lack of knowledge about firearms. Unfortunately, it's a trend in nowadays mainstream FPS like Modern Warfare or Battlefield Bad Company. Game developers just give a sh*t about this stuff. 13-year-old kids screaming and b*tching in multiplayer would not notice the difference. [Ragnar]

3-burst is for nubs that can't cut it by themselves.

The M5 RAS on the M16A4 is made by KAC, not King Arms. Spartan198 11:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course I realize that having it full auto is just a screw up, like in most movies, and I'm not talking about the C7A2, with the green furniture and ambi controls, I meant the C7A1, which is the same in terms of appearance. Here's one without an ELCAN, because I know someone will complain about that: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/7/76/20080716042205!C7A1_with_IronSights.JPG Oh and you can put the KAC Rails on any M16-length AR, so that's not really an issue, some of the C7A1s (like the one pictured) had them put on before the C7A2 was introduced with the TRIAD. Alex T Snow 18:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

It could be a C7, but really, it's just EA's lack of knowledge about weapons, cause full auto is what every assault rifle shoots, right? Man, games like Call of Duty 4 tried their best to keep weapons accurate, now it's all about tacticool weapons that fire full auto and have cool sights and nice finishes. M14fanboy

Yeah I know, and guns don't need to be re-chambered after they run empty too :p in this and Bad Company 2, it's kind of distracting when I'm playing to be honest, well, I've gotten used to it a little more by now. Okay what I don't get is why can't it be listed as a C7A1? Or at least mentioned... If there was an gun listed as an M4 (not A1) and it was firing full auto you guys would have no problem saying it's actually an M4A1, or an AK-47 is really an AKM, so why can't the M16 really be a C7? I realize it's just a mistake on the developer's part, but that doesn't stop us pointing out the other ones... Alex T Snow 16:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea if we mentioned that in reality, this would class it as a C7A1 etc. Hoot471 18:26, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Has there even ever been any instances of a burst-firing M4 used in any movie or video game? At any rate, I think just noting that it's inaccurately portrayed as full auto is enough. Spartan198 20:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Well if you talk to the Green Beret on Deadliest Warrior, he'll tell you the M4 can go burst AND full auto! But yeah, just classify the M16 in MOH as a C7A1, cause in reality that's what it is. M14fanboy

http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/1009334.page

Best 5 minutes of my life reading this! Hoot471 20:01, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Well if you talk to the Green Beret on Deadliest Warrior, he'll tell you the M4 can go burst AND full auto! - Believe it or not, 4-position selectors for AR-15 type rifles exist. There should be a link to the patent in the Season 2 discussion. --HashiriyaR32 22:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

The so-called "Green Berets" on that show were idiot actors who didn't do their research, so I don't really give a crap about what they say. The M4A1 as used by the US military is safe/semi/auto, no burst. 4-pos selectors may exist, but the US military does not use them. That also wasn't an answer my question. Have there ever been any instances of a burst-firing M4 used in any movie or video game? By "burst-firing M4", I mean the M4 with M16A2/A4 trigger group as issued en mass to regular US Army troops. Spartan198 07:01, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I only know of two games that have M4s with the A2/A4 trigger group. There's one of the Call of Duty Modern Warfare games for the Nintendo DS, and then there's the Battlefield 2 mod Project Reality, where it features both burst-firing M4s for the Americans and full-auto M4A1s for the Israelis.--HashiriyaR32 16:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, that did answer my question. Also, lol @the thread on EA Forums. That was a pretty entertaining read. Though I quite disagree with the guy who claims you can't know anything about an M16 or other firearm without having handled or used one. I've never handled an M16, but I still know the difference between an A1, A2, A3, and A4. Good thing I quit bothering with that place within the first few days I registered, otherwise I'd probably be ankle-deep in that ****storm. XD Spartan198 22:52, 5 July 2010 (UTC)