Poll: "Realism" in shooters.

[paislyabmj]

ballistics don't really bother me but I can see how it would be a plus in a game based around sniping.on the whole i think realism n shooters is a dumb idea.you want a really realistic shooting experience?go outside and shoot people, extremely realistic.there is even a whole justice system based around it to help your immersion.

i am one of those doom,painkiller,serious sam oldies who insists that game were much more fun before they decided to copy real life.writing physics programs for bullet ballistics in any game other than one based solely around sniping seems like a massive waste of time.i was playing halo reach online once when i got the sniper rifle.when shooting it at the metal walls i realised the bullet ricochet of in a movement that probably took a physics programmer hours to get working on something I was the probably the only person ever to notice and would never be useful.

 

[Gunrunner]

When it comes to Sniper Elite V2, I have mixed feelings. I know its just a demo but it didn't have that stealthy, sniper feel like in the first game. I appreciate the better graphics and the awesome kill cam, but it did feel really linear and I felt I was being funnelled to go in one direction only, the AI was also really patchy at times.

For example there was a German soldier taking cover behind a car and I walked up to him and shot him without a reaction from him as if I was invisible. On the other hand, one thing I did see was when I wounded a soldier and his friend grabbed him and dragged him out of the way. Well i guess we'll just have to see how the full game turns out.

 

[Waaghpowa]

I just think that if you are already putting the whole thing in a military, present day environment, you may just as well make use of bullet drop and what not.

This is essentially how I feel. For me though, as a general rule, I don't like the "in betweens". To clarify, I want my shooters to either be realistic, or not at all. It's one of the reasons I hate Call of Duty so much, it looks like it's try to make itself realistic with the setting, lingo, weapons etc, but it's just insane on the mechanics side.

No game can be fully realistic it just wouldn't work.
I mean in the video you took what 4 shots when taking on the guy on the high level, you should've been dead from the first if not second shot if it was realistic.
No one can constantly hold their breath shot after shot and remain constantly steady, you'd maybe pull that two or three times max every minute, especially firing from the shoulder like that. With no support for your gun, shoulder firing, and just holding your breath you would never get accurate shots like that.
Oh and that AI how awful, after the first two shots a couple of blocks should be descending on your ass, but realism is having a solider see his buddy get his head blown off and just dropping to the ground in the open and facing away from you until you shoot him too.
Oh yea and realism is having your eye gain 2x magnification when you line up a head shot.

I know it's unreasonable to expect everything to be realistic, but I would like shots to behave realistically rather than defy gravity, which is what I was getting at. Call of duty you can stab a persons foot and get an instant kill, battlefield you have to risk getting shot with an animation from behind while frontal attack gets you capped. Call of duty your shots look like a laser traveling across the screen while battlefield you have to constantly lead your target and judge for drop rather than point and click.

 

[Sean Hollyman]

I really hate realistic games, I prefer to have fun.

 

[Unsilenced]

There's kind of a limit to realism barring the use of neural interface and insanely powerful computers capable of simulating pretty much all of reality.

It's nice to have a few little things like ballistics or token "realistic" health systems to increase immersion, but the idea of a game being "totally realistic" is just silly.

If games were totally realistic, a lot of players would start a mission, then find out the enemy had moved out weeks ago and now they were stuck there until new orders came. Also, it would be mostly a uniform-folding sim.


OOOH SO HARDCORE!!!111!!ONEONE!1

 

[Waaghpowa]

I really hate realistic games, I prefer to have fun.

The two dont always cancel eachother out you know?

Not just that, but I get the feeling that people are either misreading or not reading the OP. Having bullets behave realistically != total realism.

 

[Racecarlock]

I say replace the regenerating soldiers with regenerating terminator robots that have wrist rocket launchers, laser eyes, and machine gun arms. That would be awesome

 

[ElPatron]

I voted depends because whilst it's fine for this game, I wouldn't want it for a game like Halo. If I'm playing as a badass superpowered space soldier I don't want to have to worry about all that stuff, I just wanna shoot alien mo'fuckas in the face.

Say what?

What difference does it make if a game uses a hitscan method or a ballistic simulator?

It would allow for more balance because the game would calculate ballistic properties and developers could use those results to prevent weapons from being too powerful or too weak.

OOOH SO HARDCORE!!!111!!ONEONE!1

Insulting people who want realism in gaming. Wow, so edgy.

snip

I'm sorry, but your point consists on pure hatred... based on ignorance.

Misjudging a WHOLE market in the FPS genre because you have never played it? I can tolerate ignorance. But insulting everyone who enjoys that kind of shooter?

What games do you play? I want to insult you too and give my opinions on that genre like they were facts.

 

[ElPatron]

I say replace the regenerating soldiers with regenerating terminator robots that have wrist rocket launchers, laser eyes, and machine gun arms. That would be awesome

Except we are talking about ballistic simulators, not realism as in "Private FNG of the 23rd Infantry Division and his adventures fighting the Russian Army"

Mr. L Jackson can be a bit rude sometimes, please excuse his potty-mouth.

 

[Unsilenced]

OOOH SO HARDCORE!!!111!!ONEONE!1

Insulting people who want realism in gaming. Wow, so edgy.

My problem isn't realism. It's the "realism=quality" mentality. Games are not fully realistic representations of real life. If they were, they'd be just as shitty and boring as real life. What adding realism does is bring a sort of familiarity to the player so they can feel more at home in the environment of the game. If things look and act somewhat like they do in real life, the experience can be more immersive. It's kind of like special effects. It's hard to pull off something serious with wax models that geyser blood when they get a paper cut, but a movie where the action hero breaks his leg on the first stunt jump and spends the rest of the movie recovering an hospital would suck.

The point is to make environments believable, to avoid stretching the suspension of disbelief. Realism for the sake of realism is, in my opinion, pointless, and has a both technical and creative limits on how far it can go.

 

[ElPatron]

If they were, they'd be just as shitty and boring as real life.

The "cinema is life without the boring parts" issue.

Doesn't happen in gaming. I think that in Red Orchestra if you jumped from a roof you'd really break your legs instead of getting a red screen. So much for the "main protagonist is crippled" argument.

It's not a good analogy. Some of the best movies ever hardly have any action - and they are a great experience. Realistic shooters are usually packed with action, because unlike movies, they require player input.

The movie Tears of The Sun is as much as enjoyable as Predator. Realism doesn't make something automatically boring. Normally in games it increases the complexity and therefore makes the game "last more" since you can just speed-run it, lets you try a multitude of strategies and many times even includes editors and quick missions. It also makes success more enjoyable but this is purely an opinion.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Em is the game supposed to be realistic(Arma, Flashpoint)? Then yes I do and it would piss me off if it didn't but if you asked me would I like realistic ballistics in Halo I would laugh and walk away.

 

[Hagi]

I think they're a tool like any other in a game designer's toolbox.

For some games you're better off using it and you'll be able to create the better game. For other games you'll end up crippling your game and ruining it.

It depends entirely on the game in question.

 

[ElPatron]

Em is the game supposed to be realistic(Arma, Flashpoint)? Then yes I do and it would piss me off if it didn't but if you asked me would I like realistic ballistics in Halo I would laugh and walk away.

Why? It would allow different weapons to fire different projectiles with different ballistic properties.

That way weapons can be balanced to never become too powerful.

I think they're a tool like any other in a game designer's toolbox.

For some games you're better off using it and you'll be able to create the better game. For other games you'll end up crippling your game and ruining it.

It depends entirely on the game in question.

How does ballistics cripple a game?

Okay, if you're introducing it into an old engine it's going to screw up the frame rate with all the calculations, but other than that I can't see any drawback compared to hitscan.

 

[Risingblade]

Would I still need to use up an entire clip to kill an enemy? I don't want realistic ballistics unless it includes realistic damage

 

[Waaghpowa]

Would I still need to use up an entire clip to kill an enemy? I don't want realistic ballistics unless it includes realistic damage

Well, it doesn't show it in the video I posted, but in my later playthroughs, it actually accounted for vital organ damage with my shots. It did a slow mo cam of a shot going straight through a German soldiers heart and another shot going through his lungs and kidney.

 

[Torrasque]

Halo is still my favorite shooter of all time, with Time Splitters 2 following close behind.
I think that says enough about what I think of "realism".