I remember when I first played MOH:AA at one of the first cyber-gaming cafe type places in my hometown. They had their own servers with the game running in multiplayer mode. I had to get it and play the campaign. I loved the historical references, and accuracy of the storyline, and I even liked the multiplayer shoot-em-up. The Conflict series was similar for historical and technical accuracies, which made the campaign that much more intriguing. The historical parody gives it a sense of realism. Of course, like MOHAA, if you run around shooting everything that moves, you're as good as dead. The difference between this game and MOHAA is that you are required to foster cooperation between squad mates, and you are required to gain proficiency with all of them in first person mode, each one taking the lead at different times to tackle different obstacles. MOHAA was more about timing and aim, rather than strategy of a team. Conflict: Desert Storm pushes you to deal with obstacles as they arise, with limited sets of gear, strategizing how to use each weapon, at the right time and in the right amount of force, in order to be capable of surpassing other obstacles later. Sometimes you have to improvise and use tools beyond their recommended purpose, which adds to the realism and the feeling of accuracy in the chaotic nature of warfare. This isn't a first person shooter, per-se. I'd add a new category called the strategic squad-based shooter. On top of the standard bells and whistles and those above, the cooperative modes on consoles allowed players to select their person, and work together to accomplish the missions, which made it easier, and often changed the "impossible" feeling about an obstacle into just "Difficult". At times you need to move one squadmate at a time into position. Be ready for long play missions.
