Brothers in Arms playtest
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:52 am
[b]<span style=\'font-size:30pt;line-height:100%\'>Brothers in Arms playtest</span>[/b]
Well, the Dire Straits gags have all been used to death, which is just as well because the subject matter of Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30 is hardly a suitable topic for humour. On the surface, Brothers in Arms appears to be yet another WWII first person shooter ala the Medal of Honor series and Call of Duty, however upon popping the disc into your PS2 and settling in for a few hours of battle you\'ll quickly reassess your initial perceptions and discover that Brothers in Arms is everything those aforementioned war games are, and a hefty bit more.
Run and gun (and think)
In Brothers in Arms you step into the well-worn combat boots of Sgt. Matt Baker, an American soldier from the 101st Airborne Division who lands behind enemy lines in France, separated from his squad while the rest of the Allied forces simultaneously storm the beaches of Normandy on D-Day. From then on you are charged with reassembling a makeshift platoon and building up your leadership qualities on the fly in an effort to lead your men to victory.
It\'s during the first few tutorial-style levels that you realise just how different Brother in Arms is from your typical WWII shooter. While the game is viewed predominately from a first person perspective, at any time during the action you can freeze the battle and switch to a third person \'god view\' from above in order to plot your next move such as attempting flanking manouvres, ordering soldiers to provide suppressing cover fire and various other battle strategies for your squad members. It would be fair to say that Brothers in Arms is somewhat a happy medium between the ultra-strategic Full Spectrum Warrior and the more hands-on gunplay of the Rainbow Six series.
Success in battle relies heavily on how you manage one of your squads for suppression techniques, and the other for flanking and assault. However, unlike Full Spectrum Warrior you\'re actually able to aim your weapon and fire in the first person view, just like you would in Call of Duty or Medal of Honor, with the main difference being that enemies in your sights will have little guages above their heads that display the level of suppression they\'re facing. Coordinate your teammates to suppress them sufficiently and then you can go in to take them out, or vice versa.
Better than the real thing
Brothers in Arms is an undeniably authentic recreation of the gritty atmosphere and terror of a war environment. The character development is exceptional, particularly for a first person shooter, and you really get a sense of the overall comradery among soldiers - from the nervous chatter between your squadmates during combat to the subsequent goofing off during the quiet moments. Of course, if you want a really authentic experience you can disable onscreen aids such as targetting reticules and the suppression indicators. Then the only thing providing you comfort will be the armchair you\'re sitting in, because thanks to the AI, Brothers in Arms is an incredibly intense battle simulation.
Of course when it comes to replay value, a WWII FPS is only as good as its multiplayer mode, and fortunately Brothers in Arms remains consistently brilliant for two players in the splitscreen mode or for up to four players online. Each player gets a squad of three soldiers to control, effectively bringing the number of combatants in an online match to a total of 16 in the battlefield. All of the squad-based flanking and cover strategies employed in the single player game are all apparent in the online mode - it\'s by no means dumbed down for some mindless action.
The onus in the online mode is definitely on teamwork; the four human players are paired off into two opposite sides, with each respective side having one person in charge of the fire/suppression team and the other person heading up the assault team. It certainly takes some getting used to at first, particularly if you\'re used to a steady diet of deathmatches and capture the flag in other FPS games, but you really won\'t find this much multiplayer strategy in a war game short of shelling out a couple of thousand dollars for a PC.
Enlist for service
The developers, Gearbox Software, apparently spent countless hours researching for the game with military historians, including Col. John Antal - author of some of the Army\'s own tactical textbooks - and it shows, as Brothers in Arms easily trumps all those before it in delivering the most authentic WWII shooter ever. Some might have viewed the innovative command system and strictly non-traditional multiplayer modes as a risk for the development team, but the proof is in the tasting - and Brothers in Arms indeed tastes good, even if it is hard to swallow thanks to that lump in your throat (from the nerve-striking relationship between your troops). Pick up a copy from your local retailer this Thursday, and find out why the WWII genre may never be the same again.
[url=\"http://au.playstation.com/news/brothersinarms_playtest.jhtml\"]Source[/url]
Well, the Dire Straits gags have all been used to death, which is just as well because the subject matter of Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30 is hardly a suitable topic for humour. On the surface, Brothers in Arms appears to be yet another WWII first person shooter ala the Medal of Honor series and Call of Duty, however upon popping the disc into your PS2 and settling in for a few hours of battle you\'ll quickly reassess your initial perceptions and discover that Brothers in Arms is everything those aforementioned war games are, and a hefty bit more.
Run and gun (and think)
In Brothers in Arms you step into the well-worn combat boots of Sgt. Matt Baker, an American soldier from the 101st Airborne Division who lands behind enemy lines in France, separated from his squad while the rest of the Allied forces simultaneously storm the beaches of Normandy on D-Day. From then on you are charged with reassembling a makeshift platoon and building up your leadership qualities on the fly in an effort to lead your men to victory.
It\'s during the first few tutorial-style levels that you realise just how different Brother in Arms is from your typical WWII shooter. While the game is viewed predominately from a first person perspective, at any time during the action you can freeze the battle and switch to a third person \'god view\' from above in order to plot your next move such as attempting flanking manouvres, ordering soldiers to provide suppressing cover fire and various other battle strategies for your squad members. It would be fair to say that Brothers in Arms is somewhat a happy medium between the ultra-strategic Full Spectrum Warrior and the more hands-on gunplay of the Rainbow Six series.
Success in battle relies heavily on how you manage one of your squads for suppression techniques, and the other for flanking and assault. However, unlike Full Spectrum Warrior you\'re actually able to aim your weapon and fire in the first person view, just like you would in Call of Duty or Medal of Honor, with the main difference being that enemies in your sights will have little guages above their heads that display the level of suppression they\'re facing. Coordinate your teammates to suppress them sufficiently and then you can go in to take them out, or vice versa.
Better than the real thing
Brothers in Arms is an undeniably authentic recreation of the gritty atmosphere and terror of a war environment. The character development is exceptional, particularly for a first person shooter, and you really get a sense of the overall comradery among soldiers - from the nervous chatter between your squadmates during combat to the subsequent goofing off during the quiet moments. Of course, if you want a really authentic experience you can disable onscreen aids such as targetting reticules and the suppression indicators. Then the only thing providing you comfort will be the armchair you\'re sitting in, because thanks to the AI, Brothers in Arms is an incredibly intense battle simulation.
Of course when it comes to replay value, a WWII FPS is only as good as its multiplayer mode, and fortunately Brothers in Arms remains consistently brilliant for two players in the splitscreen mode or for up to four players online. Each player gets a squad of three soldiers to control, effectively bringing the number of combatants in an online match to a total of 16 in the battlefield. All of the squad-based flanking and cover strategies employed in the single player game are all apparent in the online mode - it\'s by no means dumbed down for some mindless action.
The onus in the online mode is definitely on teamwork; the four human players are paired off into two opposite sides, with each respective side having one person in charge of the fire/suppression team and the other person heading up the assault team. It certainly takes some getting used to at first, particularly if you\'re used to a steady diet of deathmatches and capture the flag in other FPS games, but you really won\'t find this much multiplayer strategy in a war game short of shelling out a couple of thousand dollars for a PC.
Enlist for service
The developers, Gearbox Software, apparently spent countless hours researching for the game with military historians, including Col. John Antal - author of some of the Army\'s own tactical textbooks - and it shows, as Brothers in Arms easily trumps all those before it in delivering the most authentic WWII shooter ever. Some might have viewed the innovative command system and strictly non-traditional multiplayer modes as a risk for the development team, but the proof is in the tasting - and Brothers in Arms indeed tastes good, even if it is hard to swallow thanks to that lump in your throat (from the nerve-striking relationship between your troops). Pick up a copy from your local retailer this Thursday, and find out why the WWII genre may never be the same again.
[url=\"http://au.playstation.com/news/brothersinarms_playtest.jhtml\"]Source[/url]