Don’t Go, Daddy: Medal Of Honour Trailer

There’s a rather touching new trailer for EA’s CoD-spoiling reinvention of Medal Of Honour. (And yes, RPS continues to pioneer in ignoring how games are spelt in favour of inserting rogue ‘u’s.) There’s mere seconds of what might be in-game footage, but building up to it is a well performed, smartly filmed sequence in which we see one of the game’s soldiers effectively humanised.

This taps into something for me – a reason why I still feel so much affection for the first Call Of Duty game. Obviously there’s a lot of possibly unnecessary controversy over the use of historical war in the background of games. (Few complain if it’s a pre-20th century war, of course – deader humans are less important.) But a healthy degree of respect goes a long way. Call Of Duty took the slightly more flippant Medal Of Honour series into much more moving territory, the deaths feeling meaningful, the conflict horrendous, the fall of the enemies a tragedy alongside the victory. I’d love to see a new MoH taking a similar tack – although clearly without preaching. The trailer implies the human side of things, albeit in not altogether the most sophisticated way. It’s obviously little more than the scene where the neatly-haired young gentleman promises his wife and daughter that he’ll be back from the war in no time, and they’ll all go to the seaside that very day, before walking out the front door and getting a rocket in his head. But still, I think it’s done well, and that’s what counts.

The game’s due to be with us on 12th October this year, which is a very specific date this far ahead.


  1. N says:

    Maybe, just maybe, we’ll get a level as good as the Omaha beach section from the first one.

    • Colthor says:

      That was good?
      I thought it was the second worst bit of the game, after the sniper village.

      The rest I forget completely.

    • Rich says:

      Damn I hated that sniper village. Baby sitting missions are the bane of my gaming existence.

    • Nick says:

      Yeah, the beach was terrible.. as was quicksave reload village. In fact, I hated the whole damn game with a passion.

    • N says:

      Since you don’t even have the decency to say WHY you don’t like the d-day section, I’ll tell you why I think it’s a memorable and ground breaking fps level. I’m cool like that.

      All you see at first are the grey walls of your landing craft, bobbing left and right under the heavy waves and mortar shots. You look around the shitty little dingy and you see other vertex grunts filling in the same role as you. Cannon fodder. You look over the edge and you see other landing craft, with other vertex grunts, with the same purpose and immediate ventilated destiny.

      The landing rig clicks in it’s scripted slice of shallow water, you hear a whistle, the front drops, and all those little grunts get hammered by a wall of hmg suppression fire.

      That’s you’re enemy, that’s what you’re up against, a faceless dense wall hidden in the fog, a wall that shovels shrieking lead at you constantly. You hide behind the first dragon’s teeth, bullets tinging on the metal, your officer yelling crap about getting of the beach. Other landing crafts are doing the same stuff all around you, sending poly meat to the grinder. And it is fucking GRAND. It’s 2002, you’re in front of a monitor, and you haven’t seen anything like this before.

      So you advance, and you make your way through mortar shots, hiding behind chunks of metal hoping those flying instakill turds will murder one of your brother’s in arms instead of you. You see the guys crouching, holding their helmets on their low-poly skulls, shaking their heads in that iconic/cliche’ “we are fucked” manner, all the while your officer yelling all sorts of useless crap.

      You make it pass the sad slob of a radio guy calling for air support or whatever, using his magnificent phone refrigerator strapped to his back. Then you hit the dune right in front of the hulking grey wall of fuckin murder. You are practically in pissing range. Bangalore pissing range. You get the goods and your guys blow the crap out of the barbed wire, you go through the minefield and you make your way towards one of the bunkers.

      So you go in, and there they are the krautfuckheads, mowing down grunts, and you realize this is the first time you actually see them in the level. You never actually saw these mofos, and now you get to kill them. And you do, loving every second of it. You look at the beach, and you get this whole new perspective on things, you even see other krautfuckheads still firing their hmg’s from the other bunkers. Man what a trip this was, through this grey horrid slice of sand, but you’ve made it, and you’ve murdered the fuck out of those pricks that gave you such a hard time.

      Such a section has NOT been done before gentlemen. It is akin to the “monorail ride” in HL1 if you will, it’s that good, and it was that new at it’s point of creation. The build up, the whistle, the sudden stream of large caliber rounds illustrated as flashing luminescent javelins of fuckin death. The advance, the barrage, the delicious moments of joyful carnage at the end. Fuck. That is GRAND.

      And all this simply because of the subject matter. This is why the section is so powerful, because of the real life events that prepared it’s making. You’re not some dude firing green disco balls from a tractor engine at strogg, nor some four eyed lunatic running down corridors with a crowbar. You’re this wimpy guy, fighting a war circa 1940, in 2002. ;)

    • N says:

      Can’t edit my typos. :( sad weasel.

    • battles_atlas says:

      You have a point N, it was a pretty memorable moment, though more as an interactive cut scene than a game per say.

      Also the ‘real events that prepared its making’ were in this case actually the first twenty minutes of Saving Private Ryan.

  2. jockey says:

    It’s interesting how I went from “Not another MW2”-trailer one to “Wee, I’m interested now”-trailer two.

  3. Quasar says:

    MoH is nowhere near as good as CoD, for the simple reason that it will be impossible to make hilarious jokes, like expressing a preference for HaDDoCK or something.

  4. poop says:


  5. the wiseass says:

    That’s the first trailer for a war-game I’ve seen in a long time, that actually made me feel something. If they manage to pull off anther Omaha Beach, I’ll so be there:

    • the wiseass says:

      Maybe I should add that this trailer abuses all the dirty trick to trigger an emotional response, so yes, that my above statement with a grain of salt.

    • battles_atlas says:

      Was that something you were feeling a difficult to suppress yawn, or annoyance at the hackneyed voice acting by the soldier? Or just anger that American children exist? That gets me everytime.

  6. Sam Crisp says:

    I now have 100 GameTrailers Points. Does this mean anything to anyone?

  7. Gap Gen says:

    This is something World in Conflict did really well (to the point of doing the phone conversation thing continuously throughout the cutscenes as a way of humanising the characters). Conversely, Company of Heroes’ treatment of the soldiers kinda put me off – they all seemed like gruff, unflappable slabs of meat rather than volunteers and conscripts caught up in something beyond their control.

    • Metalfish says:

      Apart from the Volksgrenadiers -those guys were terrified, even with the soothing tones of their world-weary sarg.

      With the British it was hard to tell what was going on as it was about 90% swearing which seems accurate.

    • Corrupt_Tiki says:

      Mate you don’t get fear in today’s modern army’s. It is weeded out, only the strong get to be on the pointy end, you can’t have someone cowering in a corner covering his ears & closing his eyes, while his mates get shot.

      I can’t speak for other army’s but in ours it’s beaten into you what has to be done.

      Trailer does look good imo

    • Gap Gen says:

      I dunno, people are still people. And there are plenty of psychological problems that ex-soldiers have in modern armies after being in conflict. I think the point of World in Conflict, though, was that the fighting was sudden and unexpected, so people had to deal with their lives being uprooted. Hell, even the strongest-willed soldier still calls home, talks to friends or wonders about stuff, rather than just wandering around going “I IS MAN”. Compare, say, Company of Heroes’ depiction of soldiers to Brothers in Arms / Band of Brothers.

  8. Springy says:

    That was really, really good. The tone is a million miles away from MW’s Semper Fi Nu Metal Fist-Bump twaddle.

  9. John says:

    Will they humanise the brown people you spend the whole game killing too?

    • poop says:

      of course not!

    • Rich says:

      That would be something.

    • CMaster says:

      Imagine if you could talk to the Jihadists

    • Sobric says:

      “The Kingdom” did this at the end of the movie, and it caught me completely by surprise. Significantly improved it in fact. Don’t see why they can’t do it in a game as well.

      They won’t though.

    • Jimbo says:

      Confirmed: RPS readers hate Freedom.

    • Corrupt_Tiki says:

      replace ‘humanize’ with ‘demonize’ and your 100% correct ^^

    • the wiseass says:

      I’d love that to happen but I’m afraid they won’t have the guts to pull this off.

    • Vitamin Powered says:

      Yeah, you could have a mission where you have to get a wounded reporter to a hospital, all the while dodging apache gunships.

      Yes, yes I went there.

    • Dum de dum dum dum says:

      @Vitamin Powered

      Obvious troll is obvious.

  10. Premium User Badge

    Bozzley says:

    If they re-introduce enemies throwing your grenades back at you, then I’m there.

  11. Nimloth says:

    Am I going crazy, or did every single guy on that Chinook look exactly the same? Maybe that was intentional, I don’t know. Anyway; looks pretty cool. Maybe they’ll pull it off.


  12. Sev says:

    The game strikes me as Killzone 2 set in the modern day – I could be entirely wrong, and that’s definitely not to say it isn’t doing anything different (it certainly is), but it just reminded me pretty strongly.

    Overall, I’m just glad to see a game follow in BC2’s footsteps and challenge MW2 properly – with decent gameplay, not just a lot of explosions. From what I’ve seen, it’s shaping up pretty good. Having DICE work on it helps quite a bit too.

    • Springy says:

      Aren’t DICE just working on the multiplayer? Have we been treated to any details or footage of that?

  13. tigershuffle says:

    makes me wanna play Love Vigilantes by New Order

  14. Robert says:

    “And yes, RPS continues to pioneer in ignoring how games are spelt in favour of inserting rogue ‘u’s.”

    I prefer to see it as doing a favour to the game’s editors.

  15. Ben Darlow says:

    Another FPS with pretensions of grandeur. Look, you’re not making The Pacific; less of the clichéd message to the family back home exposition and more why this game is worth playing, please.

  16. Wordy says:

    I like how everyone is saying “ohemgee it’s going to be amazing” after watching that trailer.

    Let’s face it, the game could be very good or it could be a steaming pile of manure on the back of that trailer, for the simple fact that it failed to show anything whatsoever. No gameplay, no features, just pre-rendered footage with a half-assed attempt at a clichéd, pseudo-emotional storyline with some pro-US military propaganda thrown in for good measure. Hoorah.

    I don’t really see why they would choose to make a touchy-feely trailer like this for a game like this, since the primary audience for these type of games is young males who probably couldn’t care less about their fictional gun-toting character’s wife and kid. They just want to see how big the explosions are and how much more of a testosterone-filled frenzy it will be than the last game in the series (or a similarly-themed, differently-titled series for that matter).

    Overall, I’d rate the trailer a C- for effort. Give me more of the epic beard man and we might be looking at a B+.

    • the wiseass says:

      I doubt the majority of RPS readers are conforming to the “young male” stereotype you just described. You know it’s not only (!) the shooty shooty bang bang that makes a game great, it’s the setting, the tone, the atmosphere and yes, even the story. Take a look at Deus Ex, Portal and Half-Life, for example.

      That’s the reason why I did not care about MW at all, even the No Russian part was lacklustre because the whole setting simply did not allow for something like this to work well. Also you are seem to be criticising the young male for their lack of care but at the same time you only seem to care about a bearded guy that’s just there to look cool… you’re contradicting yourself matey.

    • Wordy says:

      I agree, but the developers don’t make trailers for RPS readers, they make them to appeal to their target audience, which I doubt is teenage girls, middle aged professionals, or retired pensioners. I was also using hyperbole to make a point; I do realise stereotyping is moronic, but unfortunately the vast majority of marketing campaigns work off stereotypes.

      You also use some bad examples of games to compare this one with. Deus Ex, Portal, and Half-Life are all examples of games with exceptional gameplay combined with a gripping, immersive storyline – and that’s what makes them great. I feel safe in saying that I have never, not once, been taken in by the storytelling of a MoH or CoD game, mostly because today I am unable to remember any parts of those games beyond what I probably learned in History class at school, of which my memory is also fuzzy. They certainly don’t hold the same place in my heart as Black Mesa or the Citadel at any rate. For me, the earlier MoH games probably came the closest in terms of memorable gaming experiences, but if you want to compare them to those above you might as well lump all FPS games into the same boat.

    • poop says:

      it is pretty amazing how all a developer needs to do is tack on the most generic possible war is hell morality message and a billion nerds will feign love for it because FINALLY GAMES ARE ART

    • Corrupt_Tiki says:

      Replying to the comment just above, ‘Games are art thing’ – This sort of talk, makes me want to get The Void, and Dear Esther, to see what all the fuss is about. But IMO im a tight ass so I’ll probs stick to C&C atm.
      If I see either one for cheap I might pick it up.

      Should be a bit different from the old. Get ambushed by units at location (x), mad dash to location (y), awesome gun at location (z), boss fight at location (xy) roll heavily scripted cliffhanger ending, so we can make Call Of Milking: Modern Pastuerisation 42

    • the wiseass says:

      @ Wordy, that reasonable enough for me, can’t argue with that.

      @Poop, are you deliberately trying to be an asshole? Who said this was art? Who said this trailer was ground-breaking and the best thing since Full Metal Jacket? You’ve got to put this into perspective and compare it with other games. At least there is some morality to be seen here, even if it’s only a cheap one.

      You know, over the top silliness works in games like Serious Sam and Just Cause because the games itself don’t take themselves seriously. I have yet to see a war-game pulling that off. MW failed in this aspect because it had this over the top campiness AND wanted to look serious and that simply didn’t work. Based on the trailer, MOH seems to take a step back from that and even if it’s only a little one, I applaud that.

      Do you like arguing against strawmans?

    • Sobric says:

      @ Corrupt_Tiki

      Dear Esther is a free mod. I believe you only need something with the Source engine (or maybe specifically Episode One? Can’t remember).

      However, I strongly suggest holding off until Robert Briscoe (a level designer who worked on Mirror’s Edge) finishes his overhaul.

    • PleasingFungus says:

      @Corrupt_Tiki: The Void is actually a very well disguised strategy game, so if you like C&C, it should be right up your alley!

    • poop says:

      @wiseass im more saying that people (esp games journalists) are just going to use terrible manipulative shit like this trailer to try to rationalise the fact that they actually just love bad shooters like MOH

  17. Magic H8 Ball says:

    Anonymous Coward said:
    Mate you don’t get fear in today’s modern army’s. It is weeded out, only the strong get to be on the pointy end, you can’t have someone cowering in a corner covering his ears & closing his eyes, while his mates get shot.

    And you actually have real combat experience to confirm that?

    • Corrupt_Tiki says:

      Only live training, I’ve been deployed to East Timor but not much goes on over there(starts up over night, back to normal next day sort of shit), been in tense situations, but no haven’t done a D-Day yet.

      You don’t have time to think about whats going on, just your task.

      I’m not a regular though, Im weekend warrior

  18. eoin says:

    I was just about to ask the same…

    Cut scene of family working on a small farm in a dirt hut, father, wife, son and daughter. The boy and his father are called to a community meeting and with tearful farewells they retrieve the family heirloom, a soviet ak74 and go to fight for the independence of their homeland and freedom to practice their religion.

    yeah, I can really see that selling really well.

    • sasayan says:

      Or a game where you play as a translator, trying to explain to a local family why the army that just sent a rocket through their front window is better than the one that occasionally comes by and demands money or a few young men.

    • JB says:

      @ eoin

      I’d actually really like to play something like that. Being technologically behind the enemy, having to use canny tactics to even the playing field, scavenging better weapons from the enemy you do manage to kill. Thinking about it reminded me a bit of certain parts of Operation Flashpoint’s Resistance campaign.

    • JB says:

      I was just thinking about what I wrote in my previous post.

      “Being technologically behind the enemy, having to use canny tactics to even the playing field, scavenging better weapons from the enemy you do manage to kill.”

      Not only does it remind me of parts of OpFlash:Resistance, but also sounds a lot like UFO: Enemy Unknown. I wish someone would do an up-to-date remake.

    • Grape Flavor says:

      I’m just going to assume you mean the young man is signing up for the Afghan National Army because that’s the only way your post makes any sense. Because that’s the only Afghan force fighting for the sovereignty and independence of the fledgling democratic state. And because last time I checked Islam was still legal in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

      Unless of course, by freedom to practice their religion you mean the batshit insane version of it that involves a lot of floggings and beheadings of anyone who happens to take a more moderate view of the faith. Because if that’s what he’s fighting for I hope someone shoots him in the head before he can hurt anybody.

    • TeeJay says:

      The conflict in Afghanistan also has a large elements of internal civil war, political conflict, power struggle and drug/mafia war alongside any “jihadism” or “nationalism”. Pashtuns make up c. 40% of the population but only 3% of the Afghan National Army. There are also conflicts within Pastuns for example between the Popalzai clan and others – google “Ahmed Wali Karzai” (Karzai’s brother) to see what I mean.

      It isn’t a simple “good guys versus bad guys” scenario – General Dostum, an Uzbek, head of the Northern Alliance who provides key support to Kazai has said he could wipe out the Taliban ‘in six months’ if he was allowed to raise a force of 10,000 veterans. He is also suspected of killing 2,000 prisoners in 2001. Kazai only *barely* won the last election (if he genuinely won at all) and the Afghan parliament hasn’t wanted to confim his cabinet appointments.

      Anyone who wants to reduce the conflict to a simple “good versus evil” is being misleading or being misled. You have to be very careful not to get fooled into taking sides in a way where you are being exploited to settle others people’s vendettas, lining people’s pockets, proping people up or making the conflict even worse and go on for longer than it would do otherwise.

    • Grape Flavor says:

      Very excellent post. It’s always important to not oversimplify a complex reality. Sorry if my post seemed like such. Yeah, the Afghan government is corrupt as hell and incompetent to boot, hardly shining examples of “good guys” in any sense whatsoever. But sometimes you just have to find the lesser evil and go with it. I’m reminded of that ugly reality every time I vote. :(

      What I can say for sure though is the flat-out Taliban apologism / American vilification I see every time this game comes up is certainly inappropriate. But hey, that’s free speech, right? You can say whatever dumb shit you want. :)

    • JB says:

      @ Grape/TeeJay

      I know this is on a thread about a MoH set in Afghanistan, but eoin didn’t actually mention a specific place/conflict. I was certainly talking generally in my replies. Still interesting points from you both though.

    • eoin says:

      @Grape Flavour: hi, I didn’t mean to pass any comments on the current conflict in Afghanistan, basically because I’m pretty uninformed about it. I’ve never been there and I don’t know anyone there. The only information I have about it is from the media (different outlets having their own biases…).

      The last thing I want to do is get into a political pissing contest on a gaming blog about a conflict I will cheerfully admit I know little about.

      Without sympathising or justifying the locals behaviour, maybe some of the terrorists do believe that the central Kandahar government is a corrupt puppet for the western powers and a return to traditional religious values is important for them. They don’t just decide to go out killing for fun (probably not).

      What I was trying to highlight is that we never (very rarely anyway) see an anti-western viewpoint in games. Which is obvious since the companies making them are usually based in and trying to sell to the west. (i.e USA & EU)

    • Grape Flavor says:

      Dammit, stop being so reasonable! You’re ruining my outrage!

      Moving on, yeah you’re probably never going to see an anti-Western mainstream game – who’s going to try and sell a game that offends its target audience? GTA, etc. doesn’t count, “target audience” being the key phrase.

      There have been a few non-mainstream themed shooters. I cant remember the name but someone did make a white supremacist shooter where you shoot blacks and such, and I think some Iranians made a genuinely anti-West game. IIRC both sucked hard, and looked worse than Half-Life. Nothing too interesting.

      Maybe someday someone will make something decent gameplay-wise with a real budget (or talent, for that matter: mod teams make great free stuff all the time). I think it would be interesting to play such a game even if you abhorred the viewpoint it put forth.

    • Rich says:

      I’m not sure if I’d be interested in an anti-western shooter. Something that shows both or more* sides of the story would be interesting though. Preferably without being either biased and manipulative, or simpering and apologist. I don’t need to be told how to feel, thanks.

      TV and film have become quite good at achieving this, but games (particularly AAA titles) tend to be stuck at the Die Hard 4.0 level of intellectual and emotional maturity.

      *It’s rarely as simple as there being only two sides

  19. Corrupt_Tiki says:

    I’ve been hurt too many times lately, I refuse to allow myself to get sucked into the hype machine.
    I will raise my interest level to DEFCON 3 though

  20. Mario Figueiredo says:

    Beautiful. Look at me all teary-eyed as I kill everything in my path to complete the mission, gather new achievements and complain about lag.

    Humanize that.

    • Clovis says:

      How about the game includes random citizens running around. When you kill one it triggers an emotional scene where the PC watches the citizen die.

      Oh, and you lose a randome achievement (and the gamer points) whenever that happens.

      Now they will feel the pain!

    • Mario Figueiredo says:

      Yup. Losing points or achievements should do it.

      Also very effective: When you kill a Jihad soldier, his face suddenly turns into yours (pc camera required) and through face recognition technology (quad-core required) distort it in agonizing pain and slow motion expressions of sadness to the sound of Albinoni’s Adagio in G Minor. It then intercepts at regular intervals with the face of the Jihad soldier as the player comrades in arms keep battling in the background (4 Mb RAM minimum).

      The point is, of course, to have the player avoid killing anything because the cut scenes are too long.

    • PleasingFungus says:


      You MONSTER!

  21. Magic H8 Ball says:

    Games will be art when they’ll make one with WAR IS FANTASTIC! message.

    • Tei says:


      Realization of the week:
      I am looking forward for Art to become more like videogames.

    • DD says:

      I am now a loyal follower of Tei. You make more sense with english then I do, and its my first language!

  22. Mad Doc MacRae says:


  23. Radiant says:

    Places I no longer want to be in a shooter:

    1) A fucking jungle
    2) Iraq
    3) The god damn Whitehouse after an EMP blast.
    4) Somebody’s corridor

    Some how I don’t think this is going to change any time soon.

    • Rich says:

      It doesn’t matter where you are, there’ll always be crates, which when broken open contain almost nothing except a few bits of paper and a health kit, and barrels of impossibly unstable chemical stacked precariously. It’s a universal constant, as sure as in any car chase there must be two guys carrying a huge sheet of glass, a cart full of caged chickens and an alleyway stacked with empty cardboard boxes.

    • Rich says:

      Oh yeah, and “I’m too short for this shit!”

    • Radiant says:

      We better stop.
      Somewhere out there a developer is looking at his work and crying because he knows he’s letting us two down.

    • suibhne says:

      Somewhere out there a developer is looking at this thread and getting new ideas.


  24. benjamin says:

    To be honest, it didn’t do anything for me, it’s not as if people dying in a war is news…Ok, yes, my black and twisted heart just can’t cope with any emotionally involvement.

    • westyfield says:

      Reminds me of an old Private Eye headline: “SOLDIERS DIE IN WAR SHOCK”.

      It seems insensitive or callous, but I see the point.

  25. Purple0limar says:

    Who is…
    (Cue dramatic music.)
    The Bearded Douchebag?

    • stahlwerk says:

      I seem to remember (TV knowledge..), that for some armies/soldiers in Afghanistan it’s not uncommon (or even encouraged?) to grow beards, hard to meet on eye level with the locals if even your translator thinks you look like a little boy.

      Well, when in Rome, I guess.

    • Corrupt_Tiki says:

      I don’t know about the American Green Berets or Rangers or any other countries Special Forces, But in the British, Australian, New Zealand SAS regiments if you are deployed, you are not allowed to shave, and also the Australian Cdo Regiments do this as well, they also don’t have their name on their uniform(if they are wearing a uniform at all) and do not participate in Marches and other televised events, they don’t even let them get congratulated by the public, or whoevers ass they saved. Can’t speak for any others though.

  26. Vadermath says:

    Hitting the reset button on MoH is starting to seem like one helluva good move to me. If they manage to do this one right (as in, not the utter blandness that was Airborne), they might get a lot of the gaming crowd off of MW. Which, seeing all of the recent drama surrounding CoD, might be a good thing.

    • Rich says:

      I was initially really interested in Airborne, until I found out it was all a series of commando missions. Sneaky/one-man army levels have always been a bit boring to me.

  27. Sobric says:

    @ Springy

    DICE are just working on the Multiplayer, yeah.

  28. plugmonkey says:

    I thought that was all a bit hackeyed and hamfisted myself. Not really sure what all the fuss is about.

  29. Superbest says:

    I’d prefer trite, cliched sentimantalism to AMERIKKA FUCK YEAR! or Soulless Automata Waging Boring War. Less due to inherent superiority of the former and more because I’ve seen little of it and a lot of the other two, probably.

    I loved the Omaha Beach mission, by the way. ı don’t know why people complain, hell I had a save at the beginning just so I could play that mission over and over again.

    • EvaUnit02 says:

      I maybe able to shed some light on people’s hatred for MoH:AA’s Omaha Beach landing (I dunno about the console game MoH:Frontline’s equivalent, since I’ve never played that game):-

      It pretty much required quick-save/quick-load mashing to get through it on Normal and Hard. Similar to how Sniper Town was.

    • Chaz says:

      It’s actually quite easy, all you have to do is hit the sprint key plus a little bit of straffing left and right. Always did it for me.

  30. Fullbleed says:

    This looks promising, I’m still not quite sold but I’m far more intersted and I hope they carry this tone through out. Its really quite something a shooter trying to make a sad trailer and actually doing a half decent job of it, rather than the Gears style of sad music and wahsed out grey tones while mutated slabs of meat in armour run around grunting “Where’s my wife!”.

    What I really want to see is an anti-war video game, mostly its in the same vein of Saving Private Ryan and in the end the bad guy always loses and the americans always win. It’s probaly too much but I want to see the Full Metal Jacket or Apocalypse Now of videogames.

    • TeeJay says:

      “What I really want to see is an anti-war video game”

      What would be the player’s objective – how would they ‘win’ or complete the game?

    • Sonic Goo says:

      By finishing the story. You make it the same game as always, except you show the consequences of your actions, the families of the people you kill, people who are wounded and screaming rather than urgh-aaah-dead, the dehumanising of your friends, etc. etc. It can be done in a game. I doubt any major publisher would take the risk, though, and I don’t see many indies making full on FPSs.

    • Corrupt_Tiki says:

      I think I’ve thought of something fantastic, A game, where you play a hippie, and travel to hippie music festivals, get high on drugs which increases your stat points, and then go throw rocks at the riot police and get your colon stomped. Sounds awesome, it might even get GOTY =D

  31. Devan says:

    You know, the name looks awkward without the ‘u’ anyway. What did the early Americans have against such a well-balanced letter?

  32. SAY HOOO says:

    Nice circlejerk guys, that trailer was camp as a row of pink tents filled with muscular oiled men bumming each other

  33. Deuteronomy says:


    You’re right. There no good guys or bad guys. Lets glass the fucking place.

    • nil says:

      But it’s strategically important, or something!

      Let’s just fill it with automated killbots and call it even?

  34. Brendan says:

    Over done, and then some, with some of the most cliche elements known to script writing.

    “I love you wife, I love you baby, reference to home, reference to neighborhood & friends, goodbye.”

    Maybe with some better voice acting and less of a “I WAS EDITED FOR 30 HOURS” script and it will be good.

    Give me stuttering, breathing, pausing. Give me a fucking human if you want me to believe someone is a human.

  35. Kevbo says:

    Ahhh I love this site. Not only are the articles witty and informative, the comments are f*kin hilarious :)
    Please don’t change RPS, this keeps my sanity during work!

  36. nate says:

    This is the squalid, or moving, part of the story, and the scene changes.

    Then, suddenly, almost ecstatically, he felt sleepy. You take a really sleepy man, Esme, and he always stands a chance of again becoming a man with all his fac– with all his f – a – c- u – l – t – i – e – s intact.

  37. Rich says:


    Anyone else confused?