Poll: Do FPS games with "realistic" damage take skill?
- Thread starter Guitarmasterx7
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Not necessarily, I generally think of skill as game-specific (i.e. skill in Halo, skill in Bioshock) but reaction time and strategy are more... I don't know, attributes? Like, you have good reaction time but weak strategy.sindremaster said:
to be honest that totally makes sense to me but i dont know about anyone else its probably really incorrect or confusing
Ha, realistic shooters... that's a good one. Anything where you can get high scores by sprinting around the map with a bagful of rockets and blast anyone you see is not a realistic game.
Anyways, such games are easy to play decent and hard to play well. Yes, it's mostly a matter of reflex on some parts, but when you put groups of skilled players together you don't find such stuff as much. They rely a lot more on teamwork, covering their backs to prevent flanking, etc. etc.
Anyways, such games are easy to play decent and hard to play well. Yes, it's mostly a matter of reflex on some parts, but when you put groups of skilled players together you don't find such stuff as much. They rely a lot more on teamwork, covering their backs to prevent flanking, etc. etc.
It takes twitch-reflexes and luck (unless you can control when you meet someone). Take that however you want.
No. The weapon damages are all over the place, even for weapons that fire the same caliber. That loses it for me right there. CoD4 had more consistent damage.Zildjin81 said:
How do you put tactics and camping under the same option? I consider camping not moving. Tactics involve communicating with your team and moving certain ways to kill the enemy.
Wouldn't realistic damage be rather hard to code?
For realism, a game would use the amount of blood in someone's body instead of a health bar. Below a certain amount of blood, the player faints, and can be revived by bandages and a transfusion before they bleed to death. Being shot in the heart once causes someone to die within seconds, with subsequent shots reducing their lifespan further. A headshot is an insta-kill, barring occasional lucky players who get their skull grazed and are knocked down, but survive. Shots to limbs can disable the limbs, but the bleeding can be stopped by bandages.
I personally think this sort of gameplay would be very cool, but it's harder to make. It would take various independent hitboxes to keep track of what vital organs are hit, and the system would be even more complex if you wanted to keep track of bullet ricochets through the body. The current system in video games treats bodies as spongy sacks that take set amounts of damage when shot, which is ridiculous.
For realism, a game would use the amount of blood in someone's body instead of a health bar. Below a certain amount of blood, the player faints, and can be revived by bandages and a transfusion before they bleed to death. Being shot in the heart once causes someone to die within seconds, with subsequent shots reducing their lifespan further. A headshot is an insta-kill, barring occasional lucky players who get their skull grazed and are knocked down, but survive. Shots to limbs can disable the limbs, but the bleeding can be stopped by bandages.
I personally think this sort of gameplay would be very cool, but it's harder to make. It would take various independent hitboxes to keep track of what vital organs are hit, and the system would be even more complex if you wanted to keep track of bullet ricochets through the body. The current system in video games treats bodies as spongy sacks that take set amounts of damage when shot, which is ridiculous.
There are no FPSs with realistic damage. In the real world if you get hit anywhere on your body with a bullet you're pretty much out of "the match." That, however, wouldn't be very fun, so allowing a player to get shot in the leg and keep running (rather than fall over and roll around in pain) is the norm.
The only way a shooter could ever be realistic is if it fully immersive, as in 3D with peripheral vision, completely traversable, and in terms of multiplayer, lag free. Once they can figure all that out, then they can work on realistic damage. Sorry to say, but that won't be happening anytime soon.
I would say 60% tactics and 40% skill. Yes generally whoever sees the other person first gets the kill but if two people meet in a standoff sort of situation, the more skilled player will win.