Poll: Do FPS games with "realistic" damage take skill?

[archvile93]

Games like Modern Warfare and Bad Company go on about realism, but regenerative health is less realistic than medkits.

Med-kits aren't any more realistic.

It depends. If you had to take them out and apply the bandages and that sort of thing to your wounds, it would be more realistic rather then walking over it and gaining 30+.

Yeah because wrapping bandages on a wound is the best way to fix a shattered leg.

 

[GL2814E]

if it was realistic you would die after being shot once

Not necessarily. Everyone is different and I was warned before deploying to Iraq that some guys may not go down automatically even if their heart was shot. They just keep going for a few moments... Besides IBAs, (The armor that American Soldiers wear in combat) can take up to seven rounds(Nine?) from over one hundred yards(Meters? I forget) so it is possible to take more than a few rounds. My drill sergeant described the sensation as getting punched in the chest really hard. (I never got shot, but that is what I was told.)

 

[blaberer6]

Videogames can't take "skill", only reaction time and strategy.

And ping.

 

[MR T3D]

"realistic" damage puts a focus on playing 'smart' (cover, etc.) to do well, while twitch shootans like quake and unreal focus on almost exclusively aiming skill.
to say neither requires skills the other focuses on is stupid though, because higher levels of quake and the like rely on map control, just as quick aim is needed in higher levels of, say, battlefield.

Its a user preference, really:
do you like shooting in itself, or tacticool planning and advancing, but neither take more or less total skill, and both are needed to truly excel at an FPS.

 

[psivamp]

Someone already brought it up, but even with 'Hardcore' and 'Realistic' modes there really aren't any realistic multiplayer shooters. One round to the head is almost definitely a kill, a round through the cerebellum is the only way to drop someone so that they don't even twitch. If we assume that every character in an FPS is wearing Kevlar or Spectra body armor, than a regular soft-core round to the chest will leave bruises and maybe knock them back - might take a whole clip to puncture depending upon the round. On the other hand, a single steel-core 7.62mm round will punch through Spectra like it's a freakin' T-shirt. I've yet to see a game where you can incapacitate limbs in multiplayer - on the contrary, I've definitely killed people in MW2 by shooting them in the foot.

(By the way, Spectra is a similar woven compound to Kevlar but it's more fine and dense and therefore a superior product. Other styles of body-armor use ceramics like Dragon Skin, but Dragon Skin's protective abilities are up for debate. Future Weapons tests made it seem far superior to the military's existing armor, but the DoD claims that it doesn't meet standards.)

I don't think that I would be hooked on a fully realistic shooter, but I would definitely have to give it a shot - pardon the pun.

 

[Rajin Cajun]

Modern Warfare 2 is realistic? Since when?

 

[bobknowsall]

Games like Arma 2 and Operation Flashpoint 2 are more "realistic" than CoD:MW2, and they do take some skill to play online. They're more focussed on group tactics and suppressing fire than pinpoint accuracy, and are consequently more fun. They're of a far slower pace, though.

 

[Necromancer1991]

Frankly I hate CoD multiplayer, camping is annoying and snipers doubly so (especially those damn quick-scopers). Battlefield is the only "realistic" shooter series I like, mainly because camping is a bad idea (collapsing building = death). I prefer Halo (No, I'm not an Xbox fanboy) because the shields give you enough time to turn at your attacker and fight back (unlike in CoD where knives mean instant death).

 

[slipknot4]

Yes, they take skill.

COD4 on veteran is very different to MW2, you can't camp as you can only cut off the spawns by moving forward.

Not as much as something like I Wanna be the Guy, but skill nonetheless.

If there was no skill involved in the multi, then good players wouldn't be able to dominate the way they do.

I disagree, I am rather good, but still. I get killed like crazy some games because people use m203's and grenades. So, does that mean i am a bad player? I would say no, even if there are players who would say something like: "I will use and abuse as long as it's there" there won't be any skill in their tactic.

 

[Olikunmissile]

if you think modern warfare 2 is hard, you'd be fucked if you tried playing s.t.a.l.k.e.r.

its either kill or be killed, shoot first or die first.

LOL. If you play on master you also want to really watch out for the scenery too. On master if you walk into an anomaly you have no hope in hell... Who put them in the MULTIPLAYER!? Honestly, 3 times I've back peddled into a vortex or a Whirligig.

Anyway, at the moment they thought "I KNOW! AKIMBO UMP'S" Realism went out of the window with that game. It's more of an arcade shooter.

Seriously, Go actually try hitting anything on a range with a weapon in both hands. I tried it with Colt Pythons, no hope of hitting anything accurately. Let alone two automatic guns.

 

[Misterian]

Well, the closest to the so-called realistic shooter I really got into that takes skill might be Peter Jackson's King Kong: the movie, the game.

In that game, ammo is scare, you'll find yourself ducking into stone shelters whenever you're chased by a T-Rex, and through there's regenerating health, it's so substandard you might as well not take any chances.

And that's assuming you don't play as Kong, were it's almost the opposite.

 

[ArcWinter]

Videogames can't take "skill", only reaction time and strategy.

try playing portal

I did, I beat it.

But I was referring to "videogames" meaning the genre of the title, that is, FPS games.

And Portal is a puzzle game. Which doesn't take skill, just ingenuity and strategy.

although literally everything takes strategy in some way try eating or pooping without strategy its impossible

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Yes, they take skill.

COD4 on veteran is very different to MW2, you can't camp as you can only cut off the spawns by moving forward.

Not as much as something like I Wanna be the Guy, but skill nonetheless.

If there was no skill involved in the multi, then good players wouldn't be able to dominate the way they do.

I disagree, I am rather good, but still. I get killed like crazy some games because people use m203's and grenades. So, does that mean i am a bad player? I would say no, even if there are players who would say something like: "I will use and abuse as long as it's there" there won't be any skill in their tactic.

Of course it doesn't mean you're a bad player, COD is random and no-one can do consistently really well on it. Hell, I recently went 33-3 in one TDM game and then struggled to go positive for the rest of the night.

But there are people who are really good at the game, and do well more than others.

Take this guy for example... he clearly has some skill:


There are some players like Hutch, Blame Truth, Seananners... look em up on Youtube, they are all very skilled COD players.

 

[PurpleSky]

There is no game more realistic to this day than Reality Project for battlefield 2


And it's not point towards the enemy and shoot first in real life,as I'm sure you all inteligent people realize.There's alot of factors,but mostly luck.


Teamwork,on the other hand.....

 

[Flying Dagger]

Knowing where people go is skill.
It's not luck that causes people to end up at choke points.

It's just a different skill to the one you've perfected. Learn the maps, learn how people think, correlate how people act to how they are most likely to play, and if you've got the smarts, you'll get the kills, regardless of how good or bad your twitchy trigger finger is.

 

[sindremaster]

Videogames can't take "skill", only reaction time and strategy.

an isnt that two types of skills

 

[direkiller]

the poll is a bit confusing

Yes, They're mostly tactics and camping
No, They take skill

tactics take skill
and your outer option is for they take skill
so um its a very unclear poll

thought ive allays hated the regeneration in current FPS at least with older ones every bullet you took had consequences now unless you die it can be shrugged off

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Ok, so I've been playing MW2 a lot for the last few days, and I've come to the conclusion that it's impossible to be "good" at it because it's more of a complicated game of hide and go seek than a measure of skill.

Spoiler: semi long block of supporting evidence

So lets look at it this way. There are basically 3 scenarios for MW2, Confrontation (both players see each other) Flanking (one player sees another unsuspecting player) and Camping (one player stays in one spot and either one of these scenarios can be the result)

Confrontation is the closest thing to a competition of skill games like this have. Basically, because you both see each other, the first person to aim and fire is going to win. Most people like me have been playing mostly FPS games for the last 3-6 years, and can pretty much immediately look down the sights of their M16 and kill someone, so two players of functional level of skill doing this would leave the victor to be the person who's reticule was closer when the two players encountered each other.

Flanking really gives no chance to the player who can't see the other player. Unless by some miracle you're unknowingly already on a running path to some very near cover, you get shot from somewhere you can't see and you're dead before you even have the chance to react. On games like Halo or TF2, yes, having someone sneak up on you is a disadvantage, but unless you let the person get literally within punching distance it's still possible to try to retaliate or retreat in some way when you're being shot at.

Camping is pretty much making your whole strategy about taking someone out before they see you. So obviously if you don't see a camper and they see you, you have zero chance to defend yourself. Likewise, if you sneak up on a camper they usually die before knowing you're there.

Now you might argue that the skill aspect comes into play with where you're going to position yourself or how you're going to sneak up on the other players. I would say that isn't skill, because you really have no idea where the other players are going to go or what they're going to do, so if you manage to kill them that's pretty much all luck. Even if you work out a really good strategy, tactics don't have anything to do with skill. Sure, a professional UFC fighter could beat the crap out of me head on, but if he didn't know where I was and I had a gun it doesn't matter how good at fighting he is.

Anyways this is why I find it strange when people say halo takes no skill and then bring up CoD as a counterpoint, or when people back in CoD 4 would ***** and moan about juggernaut making it possible to survive 3 bullets instead of 2. When I point this out most people retort with something something like "WELL THEN GO PLAY HARDCORE PUSSY" which doesn't really make sense to me because removing the radar makes the game even more "hide and seek" oriented, and it's not that I suck at the game because I usually come out of games with a K/D of like, 24/17, but of those deaths 9 out of 10 times it's from somewhere offscreen. Maybe it's just my playstyle? I dunno.

I could probably go off about this all day but this is getting way too lengthy as is so

TL;DR version
Since you die so quickly in games like this it gives you no chance to defend yourself if you get shot from offscreen, and any player worth his salt can immediately aim and kill a player he does see, making the game more of a "who sees who first" scenario then a competition of skill.

Do you agree, or is there something I'm missing here?

Disclaimer: I actually like MW2 because it does feel very satisfying when you kill someone and it is a fun game to play. It's just not one that I think should be taken seriously. But hey, it's a videogame right?

Just to point out Call of Duty is a far cry from realism something like Arma or Red Orchestra or Flashpoint are realistic as you have to take bullet drop and much other stuff into account. In Red Orchestra if you get shot in the leg your movement speed is reduced, etc. No Call of Duty even somes close to this bar the CoD1 and its expansion in which if you get shot in the hand you drop your weapon to regenerate you have to use med packs. These take time to use it is not as simple as walk over one. Also you can throw in Admiral Mod for CoD2 as that brought back all that stuff it took out like cooking grenades.

 

[Bat Vader]

Playing Operation Flashpoint means you have to have a strategy, patience, and skill. Operation Flashpoint has realism in it. If you get shot once in the head you die, get shot enough times in the legs you lose the use of your legs, and can bleed to death as well. There is no regenerating health either.