Skip navigation
Up to Discussions in Forums

FORUMS_

22878 Views     22 Replies
22878 Views 21 Replies Latest reply: Oct 26, 2012 5:21 PM by Marn RSS
EndofGame Novice 38 posts since
May 1, 2012

Black OPS 2 vs Medal of Honor Warfighter

Posted by EndofGame on May 1, 2012 5:26 PM

I think BO2 looks alright so far, but why would I buy it over Danger Close's FPS releasing a few weeks earlier?
Warfighter has upgraded to FrostBite 2 with incredible visuals, yet this game looks like something we'd see in 2009. And it has been cutseens, which usually look BETTER than the actual gameplay.

 

And with MOH having it's usual incredible storyline, why would I buy another Micheal Bay over the top action storyline from Treyarch?

Not to mention MOH's multiplayer, allowing 12 Tier 1 SOF's to play as!

 

Please, someone explain why you would take this, over Warfighter.

22878 Views     
  • lilbaily2 Novice 402 posts since
    May 24, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    lilbaily2     May 1, 2012 5:29 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    zombies

    • EndofGame Novice 38 posts since
      May 1, 2012
      Currently Being Moderated
      EndofGame     May 1, 2012 5:31 PM (in response to lilbaily2)

      Still not something that will keep people playing long. Plus Warfighters Blue vs Blue mode looks sick..

  • OP_ELIT3 Novice 47 posts since
    Dec 2, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    OP_ELIT3     May 1, 2012 5:32 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    i think il be buying them both

    • EndofGame Novice 38 posts since
      May 1, 2012
      Currently Being Moderated
      EndofGame     May 1, 2012 5:34 PM (in response to OP_ELIT3)

      I guess, but personally I don't want to pay $120 for two FPS games.

      Unless BO2 multiplayer really has something to impress, I see Warfighter as the clear better game to buy.

       

      Even the trailer blew the BO2 trailer out of the water.

  • [pgz]dahawk Novice 115 posts since
    Sep 22, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    [pgz]dahawk     May 1, 2012 5:38 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    MoH Warfighter. Better engine, better storyline.

  • OP_ELIT3 Novice 47 posts since
    Dec 2, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    OP_ELIT3     May 1, 2012 5:41 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    here we go again the great game battle lol i dont mind paying the money i enjoy fps

  • Blackop2fan Apprentice 292 posts since
    May 1, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    Blackop2fan     May 1, 2012 5:42 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    Go for BO2

  • afflictedmed Novice 179 posts since
    May 24, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    afflictedmed     May 1, 2012 5:43 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    I have to go with Warfighter as well.  Just lightyears better tech.  Only concern is will it get the proper support (IE depth in MP..maps, guns, etc).  

     

    CoD is a multi-billion dollar franchise and the fact it doesn't have the best engine out there is laughable.  Just shows their priorities.

    • EndofGame Novice 38 posts since
      May 1, 2012
      Currently Being Moderated
      EndofGame     May 1, 2012 5:47 PM (in response to afflictedmed)

      The last MOH (2010) was made my DICE for the multiplayer. They were in the process of MANY projects, including the hit game Battlefield 3.

       

      Danger Close is making Warfighter's new Multiplayer, and this is their ONLY project. So expect it to have much more content. The addition of the SOF teams just adds to it.

       

      I agree. COD should have the best engine possible, and buy the looks of the trailer, it has barely been upgraded. The engine is so important in an FPS, it needs to be a priority.

      • afflictedmed Novice 179 posts since
        May 24, 2011
        Currently Being Moderated
        afflictedmed     May 1, 2012 5:51 PM (in response to EndofGame)

        I do like your analysis of MoH 2010.  Danger Close did a fantastic job on the single player, and the MP did show that DICE was stretched too thin to support it properly.

         

        I think Danger Close has an opportunity to really make a name for themselves and they are going for broke.

        • EndofGame Novice 38 posts since
          May 1, 2012
          Currently Being Moderated
          EndofGame     May 1, 2012 5:53 PM (in response to afflictedmed)

          Yep, and the MOH 2010 campaign was short, but fantastic. It was made by Danger Close.

          I love how important authencity is too them. They want to honor the soldiers, and not have things like the Empire State Building colapsing.

  • Blackop2fan Apprentice 292 posts since
    May 1, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    Blackop2fan     May 1, 2012 5:44 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    Because treyarch made blops and it sold like crazy and people still play it if 3arch does good this time as well you can expect it to be awesome.

    • EndofGame Novice 38 posts since
      May 1, 2012
      Currently Being Moderated
      EndofGame     May 1, 2012 5:48 PM (in response to Blackop2fan)

      So I should buy it because it sold a lot?
      I buy games for quality, not popularity. (Just like in modern day music)

      • Blackop2fan Apprentice 292 posts since
        May 1, 2012
        Currently Being Moderated
        Blackop2fan     May 1, 2012 5:55 PM (in response to EndofGame)

        Not saying that at all. I guess we will all just have to wait and see. But if it is popular it might mean that its fun.

        • EndofGame Novice 38 posts since
          May 1, 2012
          Currently Being Moderated
          EndofGame     May 1, 2012 6:07 PM (in response to Blackop2fan)

          I guess, but some of the great games of all time like Uncharted sell about 1/4 the amount as games like COD... I still have yet to see any improvement of graphics, engine capabilty, or sound quality from this trailer.

           

          And the graphics will only get worse when they aren't cutscenes. Sure the game could end up looking better at release, but it won't be able to hold a candle to FrostBite 2. Not to mention DICE is helping DC get the best graphics out of it possible since DICE has worked with it before.

           

          I know it is early to be comparing which will be better, but from this point of view the actual gameplay in Warfighter looks better than cutscenes in Black OPS2.

           

          We will see a lot more at E3 in June, however.

  • rankismet Master 10,956 posts since
    May 23, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    rankismet     May 1, 2012 6:10 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    EndofGame wrote:

     

    I think BO2 looks alright so far, but why would I buy it over Danger Close's FPS releasing a few weeks earlier?
    Warfighter has upgraded to FrostBite 2 with incredible visuals, yet this game looks like something we'd see in 2009. And it has been cutseens, which usually look BETTER than the actual gameplay.

     

    And with MOH having it's usual incredible storyline, why would I buy another Micheal Bay over the top action storyline from Treyarch?

    Not to mention MOH's multiplayer, allowing 12 Tier 1 SOF's to play as!

     

    Please, someone explain why you would take this, over Warfighter.

     

    MoH relaunch sucked.

     

    Nothing I have seen makes me think MoH:WF will be any better... and it's called Warfighter.

     

    That alone makes me cringe.

    • JJM1824 Newbie 12 posts since
      Apr 3, 2012
      Currently Being Moderated
      JJM1824     Oct 2, 2012 6:15 PM (in response to rankismet)

      well they slapped the name Black Ops 2 on Camping Parafise 2.0 EA actually has a brain and imagination and they will be using a new engine which Cod hasn't changed in years so yeah MoH Warfighter clearly the winner

    • JJM1824 Newbie 12 posts since
      Apr 3, 2012
      Currently Being Moderated
      JJM1824     Oct 2, 2012 6:16 PM (in response to rankismet)

      well they slapped the name Black Ops 2 on Camping Parafise 2.0 EA actually has a brain and imagination and they will be using a new engine which Cod hasn't changed in years so yeah MoH Warfighter clearly the winner

  • tnarg44 Newbie 34 posts since
    Aug 12, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    tnarg44     Jun 7, 2012 10:46 AM (in response to EndofGame)

    I think I might go bops2 because unlike what someone said earlier the engine isn't everything. Fun to play is another big aspect and blackops1 had a lot of that. Another reason is that moh looks a lot like bf3 and blops2 at least is visually different. The argument of every cod plays the same isn't valid because so does every battlefield and that's the way it should be. My last thing is I like making multiple class load outs and u can only have 1 for each type in bf3 and that will be the same in moh. I'm also getting halo 4 and a few other games which deters me from a different game where as I know I will get my money's worth on a cod made  by Treyarch.

  • Marn Newbie 1 posts since
    Oct 26, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    Marn     Oct 26, 2012 5:21 PM (in response to EndofGame)

    They both look great; if you are a 'Call of Duty guy' I would say to get :Black Ops II, if you are a Bad Company, BF3 and Medal of Honor fan, get it if that's what keeps you happy.

    Call of Duty: Black Ops II looks great fun. But. It does not seem to bring anything new to the table. People are raving over the re-introduced 'Zombies', but that has been in 2 games; the graphics are said to be better/improved but I'm yet to see any difference in their 2+ year old engine.

    MoH: WF seems to bring more, if you looked at both games... you would be stupid or ignorant to pick Black Ops II but then again, Black Ops II seems that it will be more enjoyable in most senses with the amazing gameplay and Kill-cam's. Me, myself could not pick which one is better; i'm so tempted to buy Black Ops II over MoH: WF but i'm being biased since I have played and loved every Call of Duty there is.

Bookmarked By (0)