Bad command structure, faulty engineering, strange tactics and more.

[gl1koz3]

It's one of those things where realism is sacrificed for dramatic effect or to try and make it more fun. A hardcore military sim may appeal to some people, but not the market of "people who would probably shoot their own nuts off if given a gun" demographic the devs are aiming for. A lot of game developers probably weren't prior service either, so they're working in the dark.

I remember in Call of Duty 1 seeing a squad with two captains in it, and the sergeant was giving the orders and people called him 'sir.' That's really jarring.

The effect of seriously executed and realistic tactics is ten times as dramatic. I don't see the how dumb things can get dramatic at all. There's also nothing "in the dark" with sending the most a armored vehicles in front... and not charging into enemy lines as an idiot.

I'd think these games wouldn't take themselves seriously, when doing this, and as per your idea of demographics they target, but, man... these games execute themselves so seriously. Yet they all do those things.

 

[Anarchemitis]

good strategy is not nescesarily boring.

Which is not to say that according to emulation of real life, it would take a short amount of time to plan.

 

[Trillovinum]

When it comes to cutscenes... we could certainly do better. I agree with you there. However programming Friendly and Enemy AI for in-game situations is very hard to do. Making it so that they charge straight into each other is simple, making them take cover properly is a bit tougher, but advanced or even normal tactics are very hard to do.

F.E.A.R. showed us what could be done years ago, but we can still improve.

I understand what you mean. I see the limitations of the AI limit our abilities. But that's not really the point. In COD for instance the friendly AI are programmed to move to a certain point before they actually become involved. What the developers seem to miss is that the paths they program for the characters lead straight through enemy fire.
In which case its the developers own fault.
Modern AI can do better than this so why don't they just do it?

 

[Hader]

It's all for show. And a way to draw out a story. Ace Combat 6 was a good example in this way. The very first mission, you stop the enemy invasion force dead in its tracks, in like, the first hour of the war. But once they launch some super missiles that shoot down some of your planes, everyone is forced to evacuate and abandon the capitol city? Not a sound choice but whatever, a more glorious the re-conquest of our lands throughout the rest of the game.

 

[Blue_vision]

MGS does its tactical plays quite well.

But while I was playing Black Ops two days ago, I did think it was kinda stupid that we were just running around shooting each other rather than doing some tactical play. I think that requiring players to think and act tactically would improve a lot of the more gritty realistic FPSes by a longshot (probably most easily done by ramping up damage even more and not having recharging health.) Because running around a map and shooting other players when you see them really doesn't appeal to me. Coordinating with your team to clear out a building or assault a bunker does.

 

[Mckeown]

to be honest, i wouldn't be all that surprised if the american military did any of those things, especially after that whole debacle a year or two ago where their artillery fire killed half a squad of their english allies and landed nowhere near the enemy. america's history is replete with instances such as this, and i fully expect more stupidity in the years to come.

why, yes, i am british. why do you ask?

 

[smearyllama]

That's funny, I've never encountered starnge tactics before...

OT: How in Bethesda RPGs, sneaking is so much more effective that it'll kill any enemy instantly, even when the same blow from the same weapon would only do a tiny amount of damage against the same enemy.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

I am quite sure there is some kind of technical difficulty that prevents them from doing this. The most interesting example I know is in the very first CoD where Russian forces actually plan to just charge straight into machine gun fire. I thought it was a nice parody. Anyways I am sure there is something bothering the producers since it hardly seems like you would do this on purpose.

That wasn't a parody, that was their actual strategy in that battle. Russia was using the famous "Screw the rules, I have reinforcements" gambit.

 

[L4hlborg]

I honestly don't mind if the tactics are realistic, I only mind if they make sense in the given situation. What I hate most in games when I try to be sneaky and tactical, my team mates (NPC or players, doesn't really make a difference) tend to go fuck it up. Two examples:

The last mission of Halo Reaach starts of with you having to move through massive enemy armies to get this thingy to a certain location. Now this thing is valuable and looks kinda fragile (just like my character, as it was legendary), so I decide to sneak past my enemies in a stealthy manner. Unfortunately, I have Emil "helping me out" by opeing fire with his shotgun at long range when I'm sneaking past enemies.

In Alpha Protocol, there is a mission where you need a friend to create a destraction for you to move forward. This seems awfully stupid, as I had upgraded my characters stealth to max, basically giving me the ability to turn invisible for 30 seconds. Why the fuck do I need a distraction if I can turn invisible? I am confused.

I can't think of other acts of pure stupidity at the moment, but I do face these quite often.

 

[Mouldy Oldy]

I am quite sure there is some kind of technical difficulty that prevents them from doing this. The most interesting example I know is in the very first CoD where Russian forces actually plan to just charge straight into machine gun fire. I thought it was a nice parody. Anyways I am sure there is something bothering the producers since it hardly seems like you would do this on purpose.

Oh God.


Did you miss your history lesson in WWI?

Here's a quick recap - 12 million dead, battle sphere less than 12 miles across (along a long front), trenches, lots of charging into machine guns.


@OP

Play the original Operation Flashpoint. Other than that, stop masturbating over military realism - in real life, it isn't fun, it usually involves massive airstrikes and killing civilians and if you really believe that West Point tactics apply once you're fighting in an urban setting you're deluded. USA military spends god knows how many millions of dollars on training for asymmetrical warfare because it is all twich based and cannot follow conventional tactics.

Last time there was a conventional war, the USSR won it, not the Americans. [and they won it in places such as Stalingrad / mass tank battles where superior technology, not tactics basically determined the outcome. I'd point you to historically documented battles where Axis German anti-tank guns took out 50+ units / gun lost, and then to when Soviet armour was immune to said guns and wiped out entire divisions of Axis armour... but that would require thinking and research which I suppose are radically new concepts for you. And the OP)


P.s.

This is why China has lots of Army based hubs practising in online gaming.


p.p.s.


Seriously. Your IQ is enough to join the grunts, but no higher. Durr.

 

[MikailCaboose]

It's a video game. It's going to be more action oriented, "heroic" over what real life would use. Hell, even the Battlefield series is questionable in tactics employed.

 

[maturin]

It gets worse in Operation Flashpoint 2, because that prides itself on realism. Now I'm no expert, but consider this scenario:

They don't pride themselves on anything. The game was developed by a completely different company that seized the brand in a lawsuit and lied through their teeth about what was going to be included in the game. Just pretend it was published and developed by EA and judge it accordingly.

Last time there was a conventional war

Uh, WWII was the last conventional war?

And designers don't do this stuff because it is more entertaining so much as that it is easy.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

snip

Uhhh I think he was being sarcastic dude.

As for WWII being the last conventional war, how do you define conventional?
Because to me it was more unconvential than Vietnam and Korea.

 

[Geekosaurus]

Yes but sensible military tactics are 'oh crap! Enemy soldiers! Take cover, return fire, retreat and call in an air strike'.

That's just boring.

 

[Trillovinum]

I am quite sure there is some kind of technical difficulty that prevents them from doing this. The most interesting example I know is in the very first CoD where Russian forces actually plan to just charge straight into machine gun fire. I thought it was a nice parody. Anyways I am sure there is something bothering the producers since it hardly seems like you would do this on purpose.

Oh God.


Did you miss your history lesson in WWI?

Here's a quick recap - 12 million dead, battle sphere less than 12 miles across (along a long front), trenches, lots of charging into machine guns.


@OP

Last time there was a conventional war, the USSR won it, not the Americans. [and they won it in places such as Stalingrad / mass tank battles where superior technology, not tactics basically determined the outcome. I'd point you to historically documented battles where Axis German anti-tank guns took out 50+ units / gun lost, and then to when Soviet armour was immune to said guns and wiped out entire divisions of Axis armour... but that would require thinking and research which I suppose are radically new concepts for you. And the OP)


Seriously. Your IQ is enough to join the grunts, but no higher. Durr.

First off CoD isn't the first world war. Look it up before you start flinging insults about someone's historical knowledge

second; russian tecnology wasn't at all superior. They just outnumbered the germans. And not a single tank in the entire 2nd world war could stand up against a german 88mm gun.

(I do need to say russian T-34 tanks had revolutionary sloped armour. I also need to say they outnumbered german tanks 6 to 1)

Third; don't start calling people stupid when you don't even get your own facts straight.