Freshly fallen snow lines the streets of the deserted Lakeside town, crunching beneath their boots as they move towards the buildings towards the centre of what had once been some sort of resort. The four scavengers move cautiously but quickly, worried that reports of Fireflies encroaching further and further into their territory might mean a hard fight for what would probably turn out be a measly amount of supplies. Wordlessly, the Hunters split up and take up positions that allows them to maximise coverage of the snow-laden resort.
Climbing to the roof of a low-slung cottage, the man with the sniper rifle scans the area thoroughly, looking out for the garish yellow uniforms of the Fireflies. Seeing no signs of life, he signals the others that the town is all-clear. The other three peel from cover and move in a V formation towards their first target, a large lonely cottage separated from the rest of the little lakeside commune. From his perch, the sniper continues to scan the area, determining that the reports must have been wrong or that the Fireflies had given up and gone home. Dropping noiselessly to the snow-covered ground, he makes his way into the house he was previously standing on top off through a conveniently-open window. Once inside, he searches for supplies and after meticulous searching of the small cottage, finds nothing of interest or utility. Worried that he's been away from the others for too long, he makes for the window to catch a glimpse or even establish contact with them.
As he approaches the window, he hears a shot ring out in the distance and all hell breaks loose. He hears the retort of gunfire from the house where he last saw his fellow Hunters. Snatching frantically at his sniper rifle, he dives to cover below the window and prays that nobody has seen him yet. Cautiously, he peeks through the window, scanning the area for targets. On the far side of the town, he sees a glint that can only be from a rifle scope and gingerly, he lifts the rifle to the window and peers through his own scope. From the magnified image of his scope, the Hunter manages sees a Firefly behind the glint with another Firefly probably acting as a spotter next to him. Breathing in, he lines up the shot and gently squeezes the trigger. The rifle adds a loud retort to the symphony of gunfire erupting across the idyllic whitewashed town as the man holding it attempts to bring the weapon back to bear for another short. One eye still glued to the scope, he sees the head of one of the Fireflies releasing a pink mist into the crisp winter air and satisfied with the result of his marksmanship, moves the weapon ever so gently to target the second Firefly.
Cannily, the other Firefly has dropped behind cover and grabbed his fallen compatriot's weapon. Moving frantically towards better cover, he scrambles across the snow with a rifle in one hand and a pistol in another, shooting wildly with the pistol out of sheer panic. The sniper takes a breath and leads the shot, slowly putting pressure on the trigger, waiting for the perfect moment to fire. The Firefly trips and the man with the sniper rifle pulls the trigger. Almost instantaneously, the round enters the Firefly's leg, causing him to shout in pain and fall even deeper into the snow. Cursing, the sniper works the bolt and loads another round into the chamber of his trusty weapon, sending another shot towards the fallen Firefly. Another one down and an unknown number to go. Peeling away from the window, the sniper moves cautiously towards the door, scanning the area ahead of him with his revolver in hand. With the area seemingly clear, he moves quickly towards the house his comrades are holed up, attracting the attention of the other Fireflies in the area. With a fusillade of shots whizzing past him, the Hunter increases his pace and dives through a window to escape the blizzard of lead headed his way. Grunting, the sniper gets back on his feet and moves further into the house, following the sound of gunfire coming from within the house. In the living room, he comes across his allies, two still up and one writhing in pain on the floor. As he approaches his compatriots, a nail bomb sails through one of the windows and detonates, killing his friends and sending various bits of shrapnel into his arms and legs.
to be continued
Showing posts with label Multiplayer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Multiplayer. Show all posts
Saturday, 12 October 2013
Tuesday, 26 March 2013
Call of Duty: Black Ops II (PS3) Multiplayer Review
Competitive Multiplayer
Gameplay
Controller-wise, Black Ops II sets the industry standard for shooters due to how smooth, intuitive and precise the controls are. Unlike many games in the same genre, input lag seems to be completely non-existent, at least for the copy I played. Now, moving on to the fun stuff. A great gameplay feature that returns from Black Ops is the ability to dolphin-dive, which is visually pleasing because it looks cool when someone else does it and also provides the player a means of getting low quickly in order to avoid enemy fire. Another fun use for diving is combining it with Theatre mode to do cool montages using dive kills or to make your own short little action movie which wouldn't be complete without a slow-motion dive!
Bringing it back to actual competitive gameplay though, Black Ops II comes across as a very casual shooter, a game that almost anyone can pick up and play without prior experience. In my opinion, this simplicity and ability to appeal to such a wide audience serves as the game's biggest strength and its biggest weakness. The beauty of the Call of Duty series is that anyone can play the game regardless of their skill level. It is something that you can just pop in at the end of a hard day at work to relieve some stress because it doesn't require you to think, just to play. Unfortunately, the fact that you don't really need to think also represents the game's biggest weakness as gameplay becomes deeply monotonous in the sense that it becomes a competition of speed and reflexes rather than a battle of wits. You don't have to think tactically if you want to win in Black Ops II, you just need to be able to play at the highest sensitivity, react quickly to any movement and fire indiscriminately at the enemy before he/she can fire at you. And therein lies the rub, there is little room for tactics or strategy in Black Ops II. While other games do not necessarily require you to be very good to succeed, Black Ops II is a whole different ballpark where teamwork rarely matters and where the strength of the individual players on a team matter more than unit cohesion. Don't get me wrong, you can play as a team and do quite well but ultimately, it's the quick-drawing and fast-firing players that will succeed.
While dexterity and great reflexes tend to be the prime determinants of success in Black Ops II, it does not mean that there is no room for teamwork or tactical gameplay. To the contrary, there are many opportunities where unit cohesion or a strategic mind can give you an edge over enemy opponents. For example, in objective-based game modes, teams that can communicate and work together well will almost always have an edge over a team composed of lone-wolf players. However, the likelihood of ending up on a team where everyone is willing to work together rather than just playing like it's every man for himself ranges from very low to nil. The only real way to find a good enough team that you can work well with is to form your own team from friends or being a part of a clan. Then again, this is no real guarantee because of the various issues with party matchmaking which usually sees one or two members removed from your party and put into the other team. Similarly, one can play tactically by constantly moving, flanking the enemy and taking the less beaten path to outmanoeuvre the enemy but most plans you attempt to execute get thrown right out the window the moment you engage in a firefight with a player with faster reflexes and a better weapon.
To clarify, I'm not saying that the game is bad because it focuses on the individual more than the team, rather, I'm trying to elucidate the idea that this makes gameplay extremely narrow and repetitive where every match and every firefight boils down to two things, how fast you can move the right analog stick and how fast you can pull the trigger. Black Ops II's focus on the individual is not necessarily a bad thing though, seeing as it does provide players the opportunity to play the game how they like through the various customisation options present in the game. The one thing that I've always loved about the Call of Duty series is the ludicrously deep level of customisation available since Modern Warfare. In the past, this customisation system was given the unimaginative names of Create-a-Class and Create-a-Class 2.0. Treyarch has now changed the name of this system to the similarly dreary Pick Ten. Don't let the completely boring and uninspired name fool you though, the Pick Ten system can be barrels of fun, for someone who enjoys customising weapons and equipment to give it that personal touch. This new system works by giving each custom class a maximum of ten allocation points whereby each element costs one allocation point. An element, in this case, can refer to primary weapons, secondary weapons, attachments, perks, grenades and Wildcards. I know what you're thinking, "What the heck is a Wildcard?" Well, let me explain. A Wildcard is an element that allows the player to further modify other elements allowing an extra attachment for the primary weapon or allowing a primary weapon to be used in the secondary weapon slot or allowing an additional perk from one of the three perk tiers. The catch is that usually, you'll have to forgo at least two allocation points you could have used in order to play the Wildcard and attach the extra element (based on whichever Wildcard you chose) to the class.
While I do love the ludicrously deep level of customisation afforded by the Pick Ten system, there is this sense that it is ultimately pointless because the gunplay is so balanced-out that whatever you do to modify your weapon feels like it has little effect other than aesthetics and minimal contribution to recoil, hipfire accuracy or other such elements. Let me clarify, I'm not complaining about the gunplay itself. It's fantastic and extremely well-implemented, probably a lot better than the previous games. The problem I have is with the guns themselves and the things that Pick Ten let's you do to them. Every gun feels almost the same without attachments and when you do add attachments or pick perks that affect them, then the effects on them are roughly the same. Other than the way the guns look and sound, they feel a lot like the same gun. This is good in one sense as there aren't very obvious overpowered weapons or overpowered combinations that you see every "pro" running with but at the same time, it detracts from the sense of freedom and creativity that has become intertwined with the Call of Duty series.
In terms of game modes, we're given the classic buffet of first-person shooter staples including a hearty serving of deathmatches (i.e. Team Deathmatch, Free-for-All), a smorgasbord of objective-based gameplay (i.e. Kill Confirmed, Domination, Demolition, Capture the Flag, Headquarters, Search and Destroy) and a delightful dessert menu in the form of returning Wager Matches (Gun Game, Sticks and Stones, One in the Chamber, Sharpshooter) albeit with XP rewarded instead of the now-scrapped CoD points. Combat Training also returns with a slightly larger range of gameplay options in the form of Bootcamp (mixed teams of players and bots taking on each other), Objective (only unlocked at level 10, basically the same as bootcamp except with objectives) and Bot Stomp (much like the original Combat Training from Black Ops except without any rewards). The only new game mode, if you can call it that, is Hardpoint which is basically just a moving version of King of the Hill.
Presentation
Apparently, the game runs in the magical 60 frames per second that graphics whiz-kids consider to be the pinnacle of graphical effects. Personally, I don't really see any difference between a game with 60 frames per second and a game with 30 frames per second. Black Ops II is definitely more colourful than its predecessors, in the sense that it has a blend of colours rather than just 50 shades of brown. Like I mentioned in the single-player section of the review, there's a lot of shoddy copy-paste looking jobs in terms of textures but it ultimately does look pretty good. On a side note, I cannot comprehend how the developers can forget to animate/render rounds in fresh magazines (to be fair, they do animate/render rounds into SOME magazines but very few of the magazines are actually loaded). It makes me look like I'm shooting a gun with no ammunition and that makes me feel stupid. Considering that the multiplayer factions represent uber-badass special forces commandos, it makes them look even more stupid for not loading ammunition into their magazines.
The sound is a little hit and miss with the score carried over from the campaign being a highpoint and everything else being a low point. Guns sound generic and bullets striking different surfaces give off the same sound regardless of the material of the surfaces you've fired on. The weapons don't sound like they should at all, in fact, they sound a lot quieter than their real-life counterparts (except the fictional weapons, of course, since they have no real-life counterparts).
Zombies
Without a doubt, my favourite part of any Treyarch-made Call of Duty game (at least from World at War onwards) will have to be Zombies. From its humble beginnings as a fun little distraction where you and/or three other players defended a building from unlimited waves of Nazi Zombies, the Zombies game mode has become a full-fledged part of the series that has travelled far and wide (even to the Moon!) as well as adding a fantastic backstory that players can learn about if they pay attention and find all the easter eggs Treyarch have hidden in the maps.
Gameplay
As with the campaign and competitive multiplayer aspects of Black Ops II, the controls are fantastically well designed and generally brilliantly thought-out. In terms of controls, there's no difference that I can think of from previous games. On the subject of actual gameplay though, many things have changed since the earliest version of Zombies from World at War. For one, as well as the basic Survival game mode present in all maps since Nacht der Untoten, the game contains two new modes called TranZit and Grief. TranZit is in many ways similar to Survival albeit with the added ability for players to travel between different parts of the map known as Green Run. Players can travel between locations either on foot (not recommended due to demon babies and the general zombie population) or by bus (recommended but be sure to bring lots of ammunition and planks to beat off the attacking zombies and fixing whatever holes that the zombies climb through). Grief is a nifty new game mode where two teams of players (CDC and CIA) are vying for victory but are unable to directly hurt each other. To win, at least one member of a team must survive while the other team is decimated by the veritable horde of zombies both teams must face. While teams cannot hurt each other, they can "grief" the other team by tossing grenades to down them or throwing a special power-up (like Boomer Bile from Left 4 Dead 2) that attracts zombies.
When it comes down to battling the hordes of the undead, there's not much different from previous incarnations of the series. You shoot zombies (aiming at the head to cause maximum damage), board up windows, get better weapons and perks, run around to find the mystery box and generally survive. Also, you get a lot of red on you. Not sure if you can go to the Winchester, but you definitely spend a lot of time getting red on you. The series continues the narrative in the background in lieu of an overt storyline. If you want to learn more about the story, you have to really dig deep, pay attention to the dialogue and discover the easter eggs. Unfortunately, there are a lot of easter eggs. I haven't found any of them personally but I have been told by others and through watching YouTube videos with them. TranZit mixes things up in letting you move around between various locations and providing even more doors/obstacles that you can waste your hard-earned money/experience points on! The fantastic thing about TranZit is that it alleviates (to a certain extent) the boredom that sets in from getting to ridiculously high rounds and running around the same area to kite zombies then kill them. By providing players the ability to change locations, the game forces them to develop new tactics and approach the situation in a different way to stay alive, providing far more hours of gameplay. Grief is an interesting new approach to Zombies and competitive multiplayer in general providing an outlet for players' mischief, allowing them to carry out some creative and imaginative forms of mayhem since they cannot actually hurt enemy players. To be honest, I've only played three or four games of Grief and I've had quite a lot of fun but I suspect the game can be quite frustrating when playing it often, especially since the map becomes a grenade fest around any player that gets downed.
The main criticism I have for Zombies is that there's no tutorial or explanation regarding the new mechanics of the game. Seasoned Zombies players who've gone through the various DLC maps probably know their way around but I've always really only played vanilla Zombies and only understand the mechanics of Survival. I'm sure there are other players like me who were initially confused in TranZit by the bus and why it wouldn't work. In addition to that, the new crafting system is confusing as well and has no real explanation regarding how it works. Arguably, it's to make the game more challenging since providing a blueprint probably kills the point but I missed the crafting table entirely when I first played through a match and only found about it through a friend I was playing with. Keeping on with that criticism is the problem of finding parts, I for one have no clue whatsoever what parts can be used to make what. Admittedly, one could go on the internet to find this out but I like playing games without additional help in order to provide more of a challenge, which means I'll be bumbling around like a moron trying to figure things out while trying to navigate around a zombie apocalypse. As well as that, Survival once again suffers from the same problem of getting extremely boring and repetitive in the later rounds as you kite zombies and lead a rotting flesh train while periodically shooting at them to stay alive. The characters for Black Ops II Zombies also don't strike a chord with me and I'm not a particularly big fan of their voice work. I'd much rather play as Tank, Nikolai, Takeo or Richtofen and listen to their fantastically voiced dialogue recorded by industry legends Steven Blum, Fred Tatasciore, Tom Kane and Nolan North respectively.
Presentation
Much like the other two components of the game, Zombies looks good enough but is showing the signs of age coming with using a fairly old engine that's only been given minor updates and upgrades over the years. The colour scheme is dark and foreboding, adding to a nice foreboding atmosphere. In addition to that, the sound design is brilliant, using a combination of eerie sounds and creepy music to make even the most stoic gamer squirm a little bit in his/her seat.
Conclusion
Black Ops II offers a robust selection of multiplayer that should keep most standard variations of gamers entertained for a long time. However, some players may feel that the game is all too familiar and get a dreary sense of "been there, done that" which can detract from overall enjoyment of the game.
Pros:
Classic fast-paced Call of Duty gameplay.
Pick Ten allows for insane class customisation.
Fantastic controls.
Scorestreaks now reward you for playing the objective instead of being a mass murderer.
Incredible weapon balancing.
Zombies is bigger and better than ever.
Cons:
A majority of textures, weapons and sounds copy-pasted from previous games.
Gameplay can become stale incredibly fast.
No teamwork, too much emphasis on one-man army style gameplay.
Tactics? What tactics?
The IW engine showing its age.
No innovation despite ridiculous marketing campaign calling the game revolutionary.
Community is still mostly whiny tweens complaining about lag and yelling obscenities.
Gameplay
Controller-wise, Black Ops II sets the industry standard for shooters due to how smooth, intuitive and precise the controls are. Unlike many games in the same genre, input lag seems to be completely non-existent, at least for the copy I played. Now, moving on to the fun stuff. A great gameplay feature that returns from Black Ops is the ability to dolphin-dive, which is visually pleasing because it looks cool when someone else does it and also provides the player a means of getting low quickly in order to avoid enemy fire. Another fun use for diving is combining it with Theatre mode to do cool montages using dive kills or to make your own short little action movie which wouldn't be complete without a slow-motion dive!
While I do love the ludicrously deep level of customisation afforded by the Pick Ten system, there is this sense that it is ultimately pointless because the gunplay is so balanced-out that whatever you do to modify your weapon feels like it has little effect other than aesthetics and minimal contribution to recoil, hipfire accuracy or other such elements. Let me clarify, I'm not complaining about the gunplay itself. It's fantastic and extremely well-implemented, probably a lot better than the previous games. The problem I have is with the guns themselves and the things that Pick Ten let's you do to them. Every gun feels almost the same without attachments and when you do add attachments or pick perks that affect them, then the effects on them are roughly the same. Other than the way the guns look and sound, they feel a lot like the same gun. This is good in one sense as there aren't very obvious overpowered weapons or overpowered combinations that you see every "pro" running with but at the same time, it detracts from the sense of freedom and creativity that has become intertwined with the Call of Duty series.
Speaking of things that have become so ingrained with Call of Duty, killstreaks return in Black Ops II in the slightly revamped form of scorestreaks. Instead of rewarding awesome offensive and defensive capabilities through maintaining an extremely long murder spree, the system now revolves around players earning awards by achieving a certain amount of points through actions that provide you with a score such as kills, assists and capturing objectives while that player is alive. When a player dies, the score is reset and players have to start from scratch. Most of the scorestreaks are generally insignificant as they are killstreaks that return from previous games (e.g. RC-XD, UAV, Counter-UAV, Care Package, K9 unit and EMP) or are futurised versions of previously featured killstreaks (e.g. the Lightning Strike replacing the Air Strike, the Hellstorm replacing the Predator, the Orbital VSAT replacing the SR-71 Blackbird, the Escort Drone replacing the AH-6 Overwatch, the Lodestar replacing the AC-130 and the VTOL Warship replacing Chopper Gunner). There are a few new and interesting rewards that incorporate existing and in-development technology such as the Guardian (loosely based on the Active Denial System), the Dragonfire (a militarised take on commercial quadrotors), the A.G.R (an autonomous unmanned ground combat vehicle) and Swarm (a pack of hunter-killer drones probably based off autonomous drone technology currently being developed). Personally, I like the scorestreak system a lot more than the killstreak system because I'm not an uber-1337 MLG player who is able to sustain 25-kill killstreaks. Aside from benefiting my general lack of skill, the scorestreak is also a great step forward for the series because it rewards players that play the objective as well as rewarding those excellent players that are able to cut down the enemy team with ease.
In terms of game modes, we're given the classic buffet of first-person shooter staples including a hearty serving of deathmatches (i.e. Team Deathmatch, Free-for-All), a smorgasbord of objective-based gameplay (i.e. Kill Confirmed, Domination, Demolition, Capture the Flag, Headquarters, Search and Destroy) and a delightful dessert menu in the form of returning Wager Matches (Gun Game, Sticks and Stones, One in the Chamber, Sharpshooter) albeit with XP rewarded instead of the now-scrapped CoD points. Combat Training also returns with a slightly larger range of gameplay options in the form of Bootcamp (mixed teams of players and bots taking on each other), Objective (only unlocked at level 10, basically the same as bootcamp except with objectives) and Bot Stomp (much like the original Combat Training from Black Ops except without any rewards). The only new game mode, if you can call it that, is Hardpoint which is basically just a moving version of King of the Hill.
Presentation
Apparently, the game runs in the magical 60 frames per second that graphics whiz-kids consider to be the pinnacle of graphical effects. Personally, I don't really see any difference between a game with 60 frames per second and a game with 30 frames per second. Black Ops II is definitely more colourful than its predecessors, in the sense that it has a blend of colours rather than just 50 shades of brown. Like I mentioned in the single-player section of the review, there's a lot of shoddy copy-paste looking jobs in terms of textures but it ultimately does look pretty good. On a side note, I cannot comprehend how the developers can forget to animate/render rounds in fresh magazines (to be fair, they do animate/render rounds into SOME magazines but very few of the magazines are actually loaded). It makes me look like I'm shooting a gun with no ammunition and that makes me feel stupid. Considering that the multiplayer factions represent uber-badass special forces commandos, it makes them look even more stupid for not loading ammunition into their magazines.
Zombies
Without a doubt, my favourite part of any Treyarch-made Call of Duty game (at least from World at War onwards) will have to be Zombies. From its humble beginnings as a fun little distraction where you and/or three other players defended a building from unlimited waves of Nazi Zombies, the Zombies game mode has become a full-fledged part of the series that has travelled far and wide (even to the Moon!) as well as adding a fantastic backstory that players can learn about if they pay attention and find all the easter eggs Treyarch have hidden in the maps.
Gameplay
As with the campaign and competitive multiplayer aspects of Black Ops II, the controls are fantastically well designed and generally brilliantly thought-out. In terms of controls, there's no difference that I can think of from previous games. On the subject of actual gameplay though, many things have changed since the earliest version of Zombies from World at War. For one, as well as the basic Survival game mode present in all maps since Nacht der Untoten, the game contains two new modes called TranZit and Grief. TranZit is in many ways similar to Survival albeit with the added ability for players to travel between different parts of the map known as Green Run. Players can travel between locations either on foot (not recommended due to demon babies and the general zombie population) or by bus (recommended but be sure to bring lots of ammunition and planks to beat off the attacking zombies and fixing whatever holes that the zombies climb through). Grief is a nifty new game mode where two teams of players (CDC and CIA) are vying for victory but are unable to directly hurt each other. To win, at least one member of a team must survive while the other team is decimated by the veritable horde of zombies both teams must face. While teams cannot hurt each other, they can "grief" the other team by tossing grenades to down them or throwing a special power-up (like Boomer Bile from Left 4 Dead 2) that attracts zombies.
When it comes down to battling the hordes of the undead, there's not much different from previous incarnations of the series. You shoot zombies (aiming at the head to cause maximum damage), board up windows, get better weapons and perks, run around to find the mystery box and generally survive. Also, you get a lot of red on you. Not sure if you can go to the Winchester, but you definitely spend a lot of time getting red on you. The series continues the narrative in the background in lieu of an overt storyline. If you want to learn more about the story, you have to really dig deep, pay attention to the dialogue and discover the easter eggs. Unfortunately, there are a lot of easter eggs. I haven't found any of them personally but I have been told by others and through watching YouTube videos with them. TranZit mixes things up in letting you move around between various locations and providing even more doors/obstacles that you can waste your hard-earned money/experience points on! The fantastic thing about TranZit is that it alleviates (to a certain extent) the boredom that sets in from getting to ridiculously high rounds and running around the same area to kite zombies then kill them. By providing players the ability to change locations, the game forces them to develop new tactics and approach the situation in a different way to stay alive, providing far more hours of gameplay. Grief is an interesting new approach to Zombies and competitive multiplayer in general providing an outlet for players' mischief, allowing them to carry out some creative and imaginative forms of mayhem since they cannot actually hurt enemy players. To be honest, I've only played three or four games of Grief and I've had quite a lot of fun but I suspect the game can be quite frustrating when playing it often, especially since the map becomes a grenade fest around any player that gets downed.
The main criticism I have for Zombies is that there's no tutorial or explanation regarding the new mechanics of the game. Seasoned Zombies players who've gone through the various DLC maps probably know their way around but I've always really only played vanilla Zombies and only understand the mechanics of Survival. I'm sure there are other players like me who were initially confused in TranZit by the bus and why it wouldn't work. In addition to that, the new crafting system is confusing as well and has no real explanation regarding how it works. Arguably, it's to make the game more challenging since providing a blueprint probably kills the point but I missed the crafting table entirely when I first played through a match and only found about it through a friend I was playing with. Keeping on with that criticism is the problem of finding parts, I for one have no clue whatsoever what parts can be used to make what. Admittedly, one could go on the internet to find this out but I like playing games without additional help in order to provide more of a challenge, which means I'll be bumbling around like a moron trying to figure things out while trying to navigate around a zombie apocalypse. As well as that, Survival once again suffers from the same problem of getting extremely boring and repetitive in the later rounds as you kite zombies and lead a rotting flesh train while periodically shooting at them to stay alive. The characters for Black Ops II Zombies also don't strike a chord with me and I'm not a particularly big fan of their voice work. I'd much rather play as Tank, Nikolai, Takeo or Richtofen and listen to their fantastically voiced dialogue recorded by industry legends Steven Blum, Fred Tatasciore, Tom Kane and Nolan North respectively.
Presentation
Much like the other two components of the game, Zombies looks good enough but is showing the signs of age coming with using a fairly old engine that's only been given minor updates and upgrades over the years. The colour scheme is dark and foreboding, adding to a nice foreboding atmosphere. In addition to that, the sound design is brilliant, using a combination of eerie sounds and creepy music to make even the most stoic gamer squirm a little bit in his/her seat.
Conclusion
Black Ops II offers a robust selection of multiplayer that should keep most standard variations of gamers entertained for a long time. However, some players may feel that the game is all too familiar and get a dreary sense of "been there, done that" which can detract from overall enjoyment of the game.
Pros:
Classic fast-paced Call of Duty gameplay.
Pick Ten allows for insane class customisation.
Fantastic controls.
Scorestreaks now reward you for playing the objective instead of being a mass murderer.
Incredible weapon balancing.
Zombies is bigger and better than ever.
Cons:
A majority of textures, weapons and sounds copy-pasted from previous games.
Gameplay can become stale incredibly fast.
No teamwork, too much emphasis on one-man army style gameplay.
Tactics? What tactics?
The IW engine showing its age.
No innovation despite ridiculous marketing campaign calling the game revolutionary.
Community is still mostly whiny tweens complaining about lag and yelling obscenities.
Multiplayer Score = 38/50
Total Score = 73/100
Thursday, 13 December 2012
Medal of Honor Warfighter Multiplayer Review (PS3)
This post contains Part 2 of my Warfighter review, this time focusing exclusively on multiplayer. Now, this is going to be a proper scrum. At its core, Warfighter is a very solid shooter using pre-established mechanics but adding its own little twists to the first person shooter genre.
Multiplayer
Gameplay
Like in single-player, the controls for Warfighter are precise, intuitive and generally well thought-out. In terms of movement, Warfighter employs three fairly unique (for the FPS genre in general and if considered as appearing together in a single game rather than multiple games) gameplay mechanics in the form of leaning, sliding and diving. The lean mechanic present in singleplayer is also present in multiplayer and is just as useful for checking a corner before proceeding or leaning out of cover to take a few potshots at the enemy. There's also the option to slide into cover or dive into cover by either tapping or holding the crouch button while running. Sliding or diving is great for escaping a firefight if there's cover readily available and also provides some pretty hilarious ragdoll physics if you're killed while performing said slide or dive during the killfeed. As well as that, sliding can be insanely fun to use, sometimes resulting in some pretty spectacular kills if employed properly.
Having gotten the controls and mechanics out of the way, let's turn to some discussion about Warfighter's multiplayer. The biggest selling point of the multiplayer for me was the ability to play as various special forces units from around the world. While the differences between said units is quite superficial in that they only have different accents, languages and appearances, it is a step in the right direction as it recognises that the United States isn't the only country with special forces. On a more personal note, it's nice not to play all the time on the Western good guy faction or on the ethnic or Russian bad guy faction. Furthermore, the units picked to appear in the game represent what are basically the most important special forces units due to their recent activities and contributions in the War on Terror (which is what the game is examining, in case anyone wasn't paying attention). As well as representing a realistic take on the factions involved in the War on Terror, these different units from all over the world also inspire the sense of nationalism and patriotism that is brought out by war. This is further enhanced by Warfighter Nations which is run on Battlelog and basically encourages competition between nations through the contribution of tokens earned while playing multiplayer. While Warfighter Nations is nothing innovative or awe-inspiring, it is an interesting integration of the multiplayer conception of national competition on a more global scale.
Continuing with the talk about the national units, there are some distinct features that separate the different factions although they are few and far in between. One of the distinctions I noted was in the way that different operators from different countries handled their weapons. For example, when reloading with a magazine that still contained ammunition, the Polish GROM operator would take out a fresh magazine pointed downwards then hold it next to the magazine already attached to the gun which they would then detach and flip upside down so that they could insert the fresh magazine before keeping the half-empty magazine. Meanwhile, the American Navy SEAL operator would just detach the half-empty magazine, keep it then take a fresh magazine and insert it into the gun. On a side note, it's pretty clear that Danger Close has invested a lot of effort, time and passion into this game as there are so many little details that people don't necessarily pay attention to such as the use of Mechanix Workwear gloves (reportedly favoured by most special forces operators), the different types of grips that operators use when holding their weapon and the types of camouflage used by different countries. It's in these little details that Warfighter truly shines through.
Next up, I'll talk about the classes. The types of soldiers you can use are subdivided into six classes with their own individual appearances and special abilities. There's the sniper who, unsurprisingly, wields a sniper rifle and whose special ability consists a remote spotter that helps players spot enemies when the bipod is deployed. In addition to the sniper, there is the assault class which employs assault rifles and has a 40mm grenade launcher as his special ability. Next up is the demolition class which uses sub-machine guns and shotguns as well as having the special ability to deploy ballistic armour which gives them extra protection from gunfire and explosions. Following that, there's the heavy gunner who is armed with a machine gun and has the ability to deploy a bipod for said machine gun which gives it unlimited ammunition (but does still overheat). The point man is armed with assault rifles as well but has the ability to use Heavy Hitters (a special type of ammunition that does more damage but causes higher recoil). Finally, there's the spec ops class which uses carbines and has a very special ability called Signal Scan which gives the player a brief thermal vision sort-of thing where you can see through cover to where enemies are. All in all, the classes feel balanced and cater to all kinds of playstyles. If you want to run and gun, then you can use the point man or spec ops classes as they have the edge in speed over the other classes. If you want an all-rounder that can hit at most ranges if used carefully, then look no further than the assaulter. Maybe you want to stay in one-spot and provide covering fire for your teammates? If that's you, then the sniper or heavy gunner are right for you. What's that? You want to be a tank and draw fire for your teammates? That's possible with the demolition class!
From a tactical perspective, Warfighter gives you some sense of freedom to approach a problem from your own angle albeit in a more limited fashion than say Battlefield. However, just like Battlefield, the game rewards skill and strategy over firepower. In my experience with the game, approaching a situation cautiously and taking time out to analyse the situation and formulating a plan usually ends better than running in blindly. Another thing I noticed is that accuracy plays an extremely big factor in helping players to win a firefight. From the 20-30 hours I've sunk into the game, I've found that aiming down sights before opening fire usually ends up with me coming out of the firefight alive. Another tactical component available in multiplayer is the ability to use support actions that can be unlocked through achieving a certain amount of points through kills or objective-based actions. There are 4 levels of support actions divided into offensive actions and defensive actions that differ with each class with the exception of the last support action which is always a controllable Apache helicopter gunship. The support actions feel a little more balanced than the killstreaks present in Call of Duty as most of them aren't powerhouse offensive weapons that can basically wipe out the other team. Furthermore, the game incentivises players to use defensive streaks more than offensive streaks since they provide more points and are usually more beneficial to the entire team. That is not to say that offensive actions are lame, they're pretty potent in the right hands. One well-placed cluster bomb and you can take out the entire enemy team guarding an objective.
In terms of gunplay, Warfighter excels as it really provides a sense of satisfaction when you manage to kill another player. Unlike other first-person shooters, the damage profiles are slightly different in that it requires more hits to kill. While this is a strange tweak to the genre, it does provide more intense and satisfying firefights which require skill and accuracy rather than raw power provided by the guns themselves. Meleeing is fairly well balanced as it takes time to actually swing the tomahawk and said tomahawk will only kill in one hit if you manage to sneak up behind or beside an enemy and activate the execution animation. The one thing that does bug me about the gunplay is the MacMillan TAC-50 which is a .50 calibre sniper rifle available to the sniper class as it literally takes only one shot to kill from the torso upwards. While there is nothing wrong with a gun with such high damage, the problem is that the gun is far too easy to use. The scope sway is manageable, the scope-in time is the same as other rifles, the accuracy is pretty much dead-on, racking the bolt takes about the same time as other rifles and the reload speed is fairly the same as well. Now, the ease of using the gun presents a problem because it provides no incentive for snipers to use any other weapon available. Dare I say it? Yes, I do. It is overpowered and using it is just cheap.
Next up, I'll talk about the classes. The types of soldiers you can use are subdivided into six classes with their own individual appearances and special abilities. There's the sniper who, unsurprisingly, wields a sniper rifle and whose special ability consists a remote spotter that helps players spot enemies when the bipod is deployed. In addition to the sniper, there is the assault class which employs assault rifles and has a 40mm grenade launcher as his special ability. Next up is the demolition class which uses sub-machine guns and shotguns as well as having the special ability to deploy ballistic armour which gives them extra protection from gunfire and explosions. Following that, there's the heavy gunner who is armed with a machine gun and has the ability to deploy a bipod for said machine gun which gives it unlimited ammunition (but does still overheat). The point man is armed with assault rifles as well but has the ability to use Heavy Hitters (a special type of ammunition that does more damage but causes higher recoil). Finally, there's the spec ops class which uses carbines and has a very special ability called Signal Scan which gives the player a brief thermal vision sort-of thing where you can see through cover to where enemies are. All in all, the classes feel balanced and cater to all kinds of playstyles. If you want to run and gun, then you can use the point man or spec ops classes as they have the edge in speed over the other classes. If you want an all-rounder that can hit at most ranges if used carefully, then look no further than the assaulter. Maybe you want to stay in one-spot and provide covering fire for your teammates? If that's you, then the sniper or heavy gunner are right for you. What's that? You want to be a tank and draw fire for your teammates? That's possible with the demolition class!
From a tactical perspective, Warfighter gives you some sense of freedom to approach a problem from your own angle albeit in a more limited fashion than say Battlefield. However, just like Battlefield, the game rewards skill and strategy over firepower. In my experience with the game, approaching a situation cautiously and taking time out to analyse the situation and formulating a plan usually ends better than running in blindly. Another thing I noticed is that accuracy plays an extremely big factor in helping players to win a firefight. From the 20-30 hours I've sunk into the game, I've found that aiming down sights before opening fire usually ends up with me coming out of the firefight alive. Another tactical component available in multiplayer is the ability to use support actions that can be unlocked through achieving a certain amount of points through kills or objective-based actions. There are 4 levels of support actions divided into offensive actions and defensive actions that differ with each class with the exception of the last support action which is always a controllable Apache helicopter gunship. The support actions feel a little more balanced than the killstreaks present in Call of Duty as most of them aren't powerhouse offensive weapons that can basically wipe out the other team. Furthermore, the game incentivises players to use defensive streaks more than offensive streaks since they provide more points and are usually more beneficial to the entire team. That is not to say that offensive actions are lame, they're pretty potent in the right hands. One well-placed cluster bomb and you can take out the entire enemy team guarding an objective.
In terms of gunplay, Warfighter excels as it really provides a sense of satisfaction when you manage to kill another player. Unlike other first-person shooters, the damage profiles are slightly different in that it requires more hits to kill. While this is a strange tweak to the genre, it does provide more intense and satisfying firefights which require skill and accuracy rather than raw power provided by the guns themselves. Meleeing is fairly well balanced as it takes time to actually swing the tomahawk and said tomahawk will only kill in one hit if you manage to sneak up behind or beside an enemy and activate the execution animation. The one thing that does bug me about the gunplay is the MacMillan TAC-50 which is a .50 calibre sniper rifle available to the sniper class as it literally takes only one shot to kill from the torso upwards. While there is nothing wrong with a gun with such high damage, the problem is that the gun is far too easy to use. The scope sway is manageable, the scope-in time is the same as other rifles, the accuracy is pretty much dead-on, racking the bolt takes about the same time as other rifles and the reload speed is fairly the same as well. Now, the ease of using the gun presents a problem because it provides no incentive for snipers to use any other weapon available. Dare I say it? Yes, I do. It is overpowered and using it is just cheap.
Moving on, the game modes are the same basic game modes you would usually see in a first person shooter. There's Team Deathmatch, Combat Mission (it's like Rush mode in Battlefield), Homerun (basically Capture the Flag with the twist of only one life per round), Sector Control (Domination), Hotspot (similar to Combat Mission where opposing teams try to win 3 rounds out of 5) and Real Ops (Hardcore). Most of these modes do require quite a lot of teamwork and this is where the Fireteam Buddy system comes in. Your Fireteam Buddy is basically your best friend in the game. You can fully replenish your ammunition and instantly heal yourself by interacting with him as well as having the really useful option of spawning on him instead of spawning all the way back at the other end of a map. In addition to that, you get additional points for killing enemies or having your buddy kill an enemy when you are in close proximity. While I am a huge fan of the Fireteam system, it does come across as very frustrating as the emphasis on teamwork makes it extremely difficult when saddled with a lone wolf as your Buddy. Most matches I played were with friends and were extremely satisfying as we worked together well and managed to outmanoeuvre and outgun the enemy through solid teamwork. However, there were also a lot of matches where I was playing with randoms that had no idea what teamwork meant. They would run off into the distance and refuse to stick to cover so I could spawn on them to help out. As well as that, I found myself forced to use my sidearm quite often because I would run out of ammunition for my main weapon and be unable to replenish ammo from my buddy who would be dead or all the way across the map.
Presentation
The graphics are alright but nowhere near as stunning as single-player or Battlefield 3 which shares the exact same engine. This disappointed me a little bit but as I've stated before, graphics don't really matter that much to me. The rendering of the weapons and equipment is superb though and that does claw back some points for the graphics department. While the maps tended to look alright, the game does tend to suffer some frame rate drops on certain maps when the action gets really hectic. As well as that, the screen sometimes has a white box that blocks out more than half your vision which can be extremely annoying.
In terms of audio, Warfighter once again excels in the music department as well as the sound department. Weapons sound like they are supposed to and bullets hit targets with a deafening thud. As well as that, range from the object making a sound also seems quite accurate whereby the nearer you are, the more details you can hear in the sound. The music borrows from the campaign and is as sharp and as beautiful as in the single-player portion of the game.
Probably the biggest problem with Warfighter is the user interface (UI) and heads-up display (HUD). They are hideously cluttered and contain way too much information for any player to handle. Furthermore, selecting or customising weapons and units is deeply confusing as the buttons to do so are counter-intuitive and difficult to get used to. The user interface is especially bad as it is confusing and extremely hard to figure out. The HUD fares no better as it presents a mass of information to take in which can be disconcerting when approaching a situation due to the vast amount of data you need to sort through quickly in your head before approaching a firefight.
Conclusion
Warfighter's multiplayer carves an interesting niche into the modern multiplayer first-person shooter market. In my opinion, it brings something unique to the table and does very well in trying to be its own game rather than a knock-off midpoint between Battlefield and Call of Duty.
Pros:
Excellent gameplay and gunplay.
Fantastic attention to detail.
Some of the best audio I've heard in a game for years.
The lean mechanic.
The Fireteam Buddy system and the teamwork it encourages.
Cons:
Unlimited ammunition for sidearms.
Graphics are a bit of a letdown.
Extremely cluttered and confusing UI and HUD.
Multiplayer Score = 40/50
Overall Score = 70/100
Overall Score = 70/100
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)