Brothers in Arms : Hells Highway

[Blackhawk 0]

So..it's finally here, the long awaited sequel to Road to Hill 30 and Earned in blood, Some people are calling it the worst game in the series and others the best.

Quote[/b] ] Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway is the third entry in the Brothers in Arms series of video games which follows the men of the 101st Airborne Division (502nd Parachute Infantry Regiment). This game once again puts players in the role of Staff Sergeant Matt Baker during Operation Market Garden in the later stages of World War II.

There has been a lot of gameplay improvements in the game, the option to dig in for example has saved my butt a number of times, the ability to command 3 teams at one including the new Bazooka and MG teams, AI has improved a lot and now flank you and try and defeat you in any way possible.

One bit I like about this game is the developers did not try and  make you feel like a COD4 player, they don't want you to concentrate on the objective so much, but on your squad mates, if one of them dies it can make life harder for you. The cleverly made cutscenes allow you to get to know your mates and their characteristics. To round it up the story is less focused on the war and more on the people around you. Also lots of questions from the last two games have been answered, like how did Allen and Garnett really die?, What happens to the newly promoted Mac or Cole (Two people who were not in the original squad but played important roles in RTH30).

If you haven't played the first two games, play them before playing this, as they will really help you understand whats happening.

But, there are bad bits, and Multiplayer is a dump, really unrealistic, gung ho and all that. So if you love MP, this is not for you.

Trailer

Your thoughts?

[gsleighter 0]

I thought it was an awesome single player experience. I don't play most games MP, so I can't touch on that, but it was like blasting my way through a WW2 miniseries.

Character development was very good, my only gripes are with the enemy AI. They weren't aggressive enough, and I was never actually flanked by the enemy, even when they had 2-3 more soldiers in the firefight than I did.

[Halochief89 0]

Story mode is great but the multiplayer was extremely disappointing.

[Blackhawk 0]

I thought it was an awesome single player experience. I don't play most games MP, so I can't touch on that, but it was like blasting my way through a WW2 miniseries.

Character development was very good, my only gripes are with the enemy AI. They weren't aggressive enough, and I was never actually flanked by the enemy, even when they had 2-3 more soldiers in the firefight than I did.

Are you playing on Authentic because in that setting you can get enemies to flank you, I think. It works for me.

[gsleighter 0]

I got back up to the second mission on authentic, and Fallout 3 came out.

I'm not a big fan of the completely missing interface, there's things you can't see in a game that are there in real life and game interfaces help to bring you that information, also the friendly squad icons are nice. Having the hardest AI with the interface from normal would be ideal, I think.

[soul_assassin 1723]

top game. too much fun playing it. For casual gamers like me recommended 100%

[Baff1 0]

Shoddy graphics from another 1 year development game here.

If you played the last one, you know exactly what to expect.

The essential gameplay mechanics are fun and enjoyable.

In the same way as Star Wars Galatic Commando and any of those other shooters where you control a team of fire support.

It's simple and fun to do. That little bit more thougt required than a standard tunnel run linear shooter.

(although that's what it still is underneath).

The theme is nice. The road to Arnhem.

The missions are all pretty much identical. Kill yet another identical 88 gun. At the end of yet another identical street over and over and over map after map.

I think that road was essentially one long set of tank traps historically and the game certainly represents this.

What really kills this game is the very same thing that killed the last one.

It has a bloody pathetic and horrible storyline that could only intrest an eleven year old male american war comic fanatic.

The cutscenes take up 40% of actual play time and they are not skippable.

(Actually about 1/3 of each cutscene is skippable, but insultingly, skipping a cutscene seamlessly takes you to the next cutscene which is not skippable, clearly it is beyond the animators imagination that the fruits of his labour is total shit that people don't want).

I suggest to you that over 50% of the development budget went into making cutscenes. The animator obviously see's video games as his career path to Hollywood.

Only he is a twat.

Sub par this game. No Triple screen support either. No co-op again. Pathetic multiplayer sane as before.

No customisation for PC. Just a standard cheap port of a cheap game. Re program the key layouts so that the zoom becomes intuative (The focusing part of the zoom is a highlight of this game and something other FPS's could learn from).

Since no effort has been made to convert this game to PC however be aware that any changes you make to the key settings will not be remebered and you will have to un console it again each time you launch it. (It has no desktop icon or start menu launch. Put the CD in and use the autorun).

The gameplay is actually rather enjoyable, but the over all quality makes it a bargain basement buy only and the incessant, prolonged, tiresome, unenjoyable, dramaless, humourless cut scenes that just go on and on and on even more than I do, make the "game" elements few and far between.

Pick it up from the bargain bin for your son's 10th birthday.

[max power 21]

Animators don't make design decisions like that, I don't think. I think you're thinking the creative director.

[Guest]

(It has no desktop icon or start menu launch. Put the CD in and use the autorun).

Are you familiar with how to create your own?

Anyway.

I like the game, its the same thing as the releases before this one but it gives me what I am wanting.......just some BIA fun in SP for a couple of days.

I never bought the game for MP and have no dirty fantasy actually thinking this game could be fun in MP for longer than a few hours anyway.

But yeah, the game is nothing special. Nothing to write home about. Same deals as with the others, same fun, same annoyences.

I do still like seeing the enemy get torn to pieces though, thats fun everytime

[SHWiiNG 0]

I played it during the summer before any of it was even released

I must say i did quite enjoy it.

The graphics are good, but they do feel quite cartoony, i like to have saturated colours, something that makes me think im looking at the game through a 1940's colour camera, not a 21st century HD camcorder.

[sparks50 0]

The colorfulness is actually one of the things I liked about this game.

[Journeyman 0]

Pick it up from the bargain bin for your son's 10th birthday.

I doubt he would like it either if it’s anything like the last two!

I felt that the other two titles were just two structured and repetitive, everything done by the book not enough wartime chaos like in other war games. Flank this, flank that oh, and those stupid suppress/awareness decals over the enemies heads! ... What was all that about? There went realism out of the window for me straight away! And then commanding a group of morons unable to think for themselves how more anti realism is that!

It was supposed to be a fecking war not a chess game!!  

[Second 0]

Suppression meter could be taken off, made game much more interesting and demanded situational awareness

But true. Basically it's chess game (while maps are puzzle-like). It likes to keep player in control of situation, with reactive enemies.

But i really like how battles plays out. Lots of powder burned without much results if no opening moves are made.

[lecholas 2]

I think I'll wait for the game to get older and cheaper before I buy it. I liked the two previous parts but as you say they were too much of a chess for me (and a chess in which you can't loose a single pawn). A few years ago when the first Rainbow Six was released I thought: can't anyone combine Close Combat series with Rainbow Six? Medium maps (a few square kilometers) and medium level combat scale (platoons to companys), realism in tactics and in damage (one shoot one kill on equal terms - for you and for the enemy; BTW do your allies have health bars in BIA:HH, as they had in previous series?). And in 3d, first person. When I saw a first announcement of BIA:RTH30 I thought: at last. But I think the idea was wasted.

[sparks50 0]

lecholas: what difficulty were you doing? I belive the opposition gets more offensive and will try to flank you at higher levels.

[MehMan 0]

I think I'll wait for the game to get older and cheaper before I buy it. I liked the two previous parts but as you say they were too much of a chess for me (and a chess in which you can't loose a single pawn). A few years ago when the first Rainbow Six was released I thought: can't anyone combine Close Combat series with Rainbow Six? Medium maps (a few square kilometers) and medium level combat scale (platoons to companys), realism in tactics and in damage (one shoot one kill on equal terms - for you and for the enemy; BTW do your allies have health bars in BIA:HH, as they had in previous series?). And in 3d, first person. When I saw a first announcement of BIA:RTH30 I thought: at last. But I think the idea was wasted.

Ever tried Combat mission?

[Blackhawk 0]

BTW do your allies have health bars in BIA:HH, as they had in previous series?). And in 3d, first person. When I saw a first announcement of BIA:RTH30 I thought: at last. But I think the idea was wasted.

In HH The player and his squad do not have a health bar and can be killed with one shot.

[lecholas 2]

Ever tried Combat mission?

Ofcourse. Great game. But it's not in first person. And one-minute 'rounds' have disadvantages.

In HH The player and his squad do not have a health bar and can be killed with one shot.

Good to know. Thanks for info.

[Second 0]

lecholas: what difficulty were you doing? I belive the opposition gets more offensive and will try to flank you at higher levels.

I can't remember missions where enemy would have tried that... They always acted defensively. They never seemed to turn into offense (get into exposed flanks). AI on offense seemed to be more controlled by waypoints given to them -> it tried to use always same routes even if player was there to cut them down with MG and there would have been alternative routes of approach. Atleast quickbattles seemed to be like that, i played them more than actual campaign missions.

With better difficulty they seemed to be better aware of players attempts to flank them and they reacted sooner and were more resistant to suppression attempts.

lecholas: I too wait something like what you described to come.  

[GeneralCarver 0]

Have not played it.

I'm burned out on World War 2 games for the moment. Anyone else?

They are going to have to make something different than the standard run around and shoot game to get my interest.

Yeah and I agree, the cut scene's for that game series are generally lame. I was not impressed

When I played the other game, I had the feeling like I was moving around tiny toy soldiers on a large chess board. There is some kinda weird sense in scale in the world design that is unsettling to me. "feels" unnatural.