Anyone played BiA: Hell's Highway?

[Morgoth]

I've never played any of the Brother in Arms games, because WW2 shooters never really appealed to me (both gameplay-wise and the superficial portrayal). Today however I tried out the Hell's Highway demo from PSN, with no great expectations, but coming from the guys who made the best Expansion pack of all times (Opposing Force for Half-Life), and the same people who are also responsible for the upcoming Alien Colonial Marines, I thought I should give it a shot.

Well, I was really positively surprised. There's no wild and brainless shooting, rather it plays very slow and tactical, with the main goal to always advance your squad into certain positions and trying to outflank the enemy. Sounds simple (and it was in the demo, actually), but I see there's some potential in that mechanic. I also kinda liked the presentation of the characters, and the overall feel of the game.

So, anyone already played the full version and can give some impressions? I seriously lean toward picking it up next week.

[Nightshape]

Seen it not played it... From what I have heard they've made it easier.

[Morgoth]

The demo was easy indeed, but that's because I've played it in N00b mode. Anyway, not having played any of the predecessors this was actually a quite refreshing take on WW2 shooters.

[Llyranor]

I can't attest to this particular one, but from what I played of BiA1 (a few hours), while the concept (flanking, suppression, etc) was nice, the execution wasn't that well done. It was too obvious where the devs intended you to be. Wait, Germans in this positions! Oh, look, there's an alley on the left side where you could flank them, let's go there! It got repetitive. They might have improved their level design since then, I suppose.

[Bokishi]

I'm getting it for PC next week

[Wrath of Dagon]

I can't attest to this particular one, but from what I played of BiA1 (a few hours), while the concept (flanking, suppression, etc) was nice, the execution wasn't that well done. It was too obvious where the devs intended you to be. Wait, Germans in this positions! Oh, look, there's an alley on the left side where you could flank them, let's go there! It got repetitive. They might have improved their level design since then, I suppose.

It had a fairly gentle learning curve, it did get harder though, especially on the high difficulty setting.

[Morgoth]

Anyway I'm gonna pick it up next week for the PC. I just hope it won't be too easy, because FPS made primarly for consoles tend to be too easy.

[Krookie]

I've never played any of the Brother in Arms games, because WW2 shooters never really appealed to me (both gameplay-wise and the superficial portrayal). Today however I tried out the Hell's Highway demo from PSN, with no great expectations, but coming from the guys who made the best Expansion pack of all times (Opposing Force for Half-Life), and the same people who are also responsible for the upcoming Alien Colonial Marines, I thought I should give it a shot.

Well, I was really positively surprised. There's no wild and brainless shooting, rather it plays very slow and tactical, with the main goal to always advance your squad into certain positions and trying to outflank the enemy. Sounds simple (and it was in the demo, actually), but I see there's some potential in that mechanic. I also kinda liked the presentation of the characters, and the overall feel of the game.

So, anyone already played the full version and can give some impressions? I seriously lean toward picking it up next week.

 

I've got it. Llyranor's right, the orignals were pretty linear in terms of where they wanted you to flank, but in this one it's a bit more difficult. They put in like 2 tank missions which are sort of annoying but they do provide a good break from the squad control missions.

[Matthew Rorie]

I've never played any of the Brother in Arms games, because WW2 shooters never really appealed to me (both gameplay-wise and the superficial portrayal). Today however I tried out the Hell's Highway demo from PSN, with no great expectations, but coming from the guys who made the best Expansion pack of all times (Opposing Force for Half-Life), and the same people who are also responsible for the upcoming Alien Colonial Marines, I thought I should give it a shot.

Well, I was really positively surprised. There's no wild and brainless shooting, rather it plays very slow and tactical, with the main goal to always advance your squad into certain positions and trying to outflank the enemy. Sounds simple (and it was in the demo, actually), but I see there's some potential in that mechanic. I also kinda liked the presentation of the characters, and the overall feel of the game.

So, anyone already played the full version and can give some impressions? I seriously lean toward picking it up next week.

 

I've got it. Llyranor's right, the orignals were pretty linear in terms of where they wanted you to flank, but in this one it's a bit more difficult. They put in like 2 tank missions which are sort of annoying but they do provide a good break from the squad control missions.

 

I really want to try this game out - the reviews have been really good. I might wait until I can get it from Blockbuster, though. I did play the first BIA but it's been a while.

 

I'm curious why Pandemic never made another Full Spectrum Warrior. Similar gameplay mechanics to BIA, but set in the modern world. Really fun, for the most part.

[Moatilliatta]

As in another one besides Full spectrum warrior: Ten hammers?

 

They might still be making one but just haven't said anything yet.

[Krookie]

Ten Hammers was the sequel wasn't it? There was an original I think.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Really disliked the first BiA. It was supposedly super realistic, but lacked corner leaning, the prone position, weapons that performed less realistically than some action games, unbalanced multiplayer and even featured respawning enemies on certain levels. I also hated how the game artificially made you miss perfect aim-down-the-site shots trying to force you to play the game's way, which was to use your squad in every single situation.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Interesting article on how third person cover changed the game: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20560

 

Being in third-person means there is no more aiming down the ironsights of the gun.

I'm definitely not getting this piece of crap now, won't even bother with the demo. Picking off enemies with my Garand's iron sights was the most awesome part of the first game. Gearbox can shove their Gears of Duty in Arms. This guy is from Raven, huh, they better not fup Wolfenstein. Edited October 10, 2008 by Wrath of Dagon

[Morgoth]

Don't know what you mean with third peson. The game is played in First person view, only when you dig in and want to aim you have the over-the-shoulder-look, which isn't bothering me at all.

[Wrath of Dagon]

That's what I said, third person cover. If you never played the first one, I don't see why it would bother you. But the thing is, it was going for an authentic feel, and had the best implementation of iron sights I've ever seen. It really felt like you were using a real weapon. After playing it, I didn't want to go back to crosshairs again, but of course you need them for more arcady shooters. That's why having crosshairs forced on you (and you'll need to stay in cover most of the time, just like the article says) makes it an instant don't care for me.

[Monte Carlo]

Full Spectrum Warrior =

 

Problem was that it was a thinking person's game wearing a sexy, button-mashing disguise. Not for me, perhaps, but it might explain why it wasn't as big as it deserved to be.

 

I find myself unmoved by the prospect of a WW2 version, though, for some reason. Probably because there have been so many WW2 FPS / squad tactics games.

[Wrath of Dagon]

The things that made BiA so good aside from the iron sights and authentic weapons was how well they recreated the locations you were fighting in, and a lot of the battles were based on real battles, it was almost like a history lesson. The tactical part was really fun, not quite as complex as FSW but since you also get to shoot you really got the best of both worlds.

[Walsingham]

Capsule 6/10 on standard difficulty. 9/10 on authentic difficulty

 

I'm slightly perplexed by GreasyDogMeat's criticism. In reality, guns, especially guns you pick up off the floor next to a dead jerry, don't shoot straight! I'm actually quite annoyed to see that in this latest release they've wussed out, and you mostly shoot dead on. There's now virtually no damn point in using any tactics whatever. It's become (to quote Yahtzee) a point and click adventure game, where the only puzzle is "Use gun on man". I must have been the most popular fething NCO in the 101: "Don't you worry, lads. I'll just go take the hill and give you a shout when I'm done."

 

Second problem I would definitely agree with is level design. This has improved. There are now two or three different ways to attack a position. But it still feels forced. Or, I should say it might, if I wasn't basically able to snipe Germans who were behind a wall from 100 metres with a carbine. several maps I completed without moving more than six feet from my starting position. So really we're back to problem one. If your bullets go precisely where your crosshairs are pointing then maps and individual tactics are pointless.

 

HOWEVER, having completed the basic campaign you earn the right to play on full difficulty. This is far FAR FAR better. No crosshairs unless you use iron sights. Bullets deviate properly. Tactics actually matter. The only thing which really stops this being a 10/10 is that the storyline is a bit cheesy, and all the historic grit of the previous games has gone.

 

 

BOTTOM LINE: It's going to be popular as a fine shooter. But may annoy fans of the previous games in a curious marketing move.

 

THOUGHT: When is someone going to make a war sim where you can play alongside your mates through the actual story line? Alternatively, have the storyline as a server, where fresh logins are fresh recruits, and anyone who dies stays dead, and if you logout then you have been wounded and sent to hospital, maybe to return later.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Capsule 6/10 on standard difficulty. 9/10 on authentic difficulty

 

HOWEVER, having completed the basic campaign you earn the right to play on full difficulty.

That's total bs, hard difficulty should be available from the start.

No crosshairs unless you use iron sights.

Can you confirm if iron sights can be used while in-cover?

[Morgoth]

You know that you also can play on Veteran and switch all "noob features" like crosshair, compass, icons and any other helpers off. Mind you this isn't some super real simulation, it's a FPS first, realism second.

[Zoma]

Can you confirm if iron sights can be used while in-cover?

 

With the exception of sniper rifles, nope. No iron sight at all. It simply zooms in towards the invisible cross hair.

 

And you know what? Gearbox said in their forum that its a FEATURE! Geez. Sigh. Their reasoning does little persuasion in convincing me that its a flawed design.

Edited October 17, 2008 by Zoma

[GreasyDogMeat]

I don't mind inaccuracy, but BiA was ridiculous. Iron siting, standing perfectly still for 10+ seconds without enemy fire coming at me in a crouched position and the bullet would land a good 10 feet to the right or left. That is absolutely . It was a cheap tactic to force the player to rely on the squad almost exclusively.

 

If they were to match up the gun in your hand with the accuracy you got in BiA, the gun would flail around manically in the player's hands, even when iron siting. It was completely unbalanced from gun to gun also. A sniper rifle maintained near perfect pin point accuracy while every other game wobbled like you were controlling a crack addict on withdrawal.

 

It was claiming to be super realistic and it was just all over the place. Mounted MGs that could fire indefinitely without a reload or overheating, reload animations that were inaccurate, lack of prone position (one of 3 firing positions taught in the military), lack of leaning around cover, red cheat circles over heads, horrible voice acting and some character actions that would make the real people ashamed (YOU WANT ME? #&$&ING TAKE ME!) and annoying cut scenes that could not be skipped. How many freaking times did I have to listen to the main character repeat the same whine over and over.

Edited October 17, 2008 by GreasyDogMeat

[Wrath of Dagon]

Can you confirm if iron sights can be used while in-cover?

 

With the exception of sniper rifles, nope. No iron sight at all. It simply zooms in towards the invisible cross hair.

 

And you know what? Gearbox said in their forum that its a FEATURE! Geez. Sigh. Their reasoning does little persuasion in convincing me that its a flawed design.

I finally tried the demo. Looks like it may be possible to play the game without digging in, and thus using iron sights only. One problem is, unless you're zoomed in, iron sights don't work like before, the crosshair is way to the left, so you can't really aim through the sights. Also zoomed in sights don't look realistic anymore, they don't drift at all, and recoil is very wimpy. Not sure about the sound, sounds much worse but I have a far inferior sound system connected to the 360, I just realized how much I need to upgrade. Also health is gone and checkpoints seem to be more frequent, other than that gameplay seems mostly in tact.