*TLDR Version at bottom*
This has been on my mind for months and months, but I finally broke down like the little ***** that I am and decided to post about it; people are constantly referring to the shooters that are on the market now and people/press are calling them "realistic" and I am just sick of that when of course the fucking things are far from it.
Lets make a list of some of the loads of crap that crammed into these things:
Every enemy having a seemingly endless supply of grenades which they will throw at you constantly, forcing you to charge through harms way without rest or a reasonable chance to fire back (through enemies that shoot at you and only you, but we'll get to that soon), even in games set back in the early wars when (this still applies now, but not nearly as heavily) not only would a person be limited to one or two grenades, but that person would often need to prove that they would be adept at using them and atop that they may also have needed to have been a certain rank depending on shortages, because quite frankly private; you aren't worth the trouble.
AI Allies being useless; this load of bullshit is as old as the gaming industry itself (and it does apply to other genres as well of course, but it is quite prevelent here), however it's not because of technological limitations anymore that we're getting moronic AI but because of a few factors; One being poor/lazy programmers (looking at Capcom here, it's not a shooter but DR1 is a prime example), budget, but a good team can often pull something tolerable out of this and lastly, but most importantly, is a team not knowing how to realistically draw the line between a domineering AI which blows the shit out of your enemy, thereby making the players useless and a useless asscricket who is there to make it appear as though you aren't actually 100% alone against 15 enemy soldiers. A difficult line to draw, so often teams will choose the latter and make them immune to damage so that the sheer idiocy that you're fighting alongside doesn't cause you to lose the game. This could be worked out by closely working with the testing team, but that would take far too much time and effort wouldn't it?
Shotguns: This has to be one of the biggest gripes of all for me. I'm a gun owner and I happen to own a shotgun which I use for target practise quite a lot (not live of course) and they're a lot more accurate than they're always portrayed, sure they're nowhere near as accurate as a rifle, but they're a medium range weapon and you can easily nail a target from some distance away with one (For an actual damaging shot I mean, I don't refer to a lone, stray pellet striking the target, I'd say it could reach 60 meters easily, but I wouldn't quote me on that, merely an estimate off the top of my head) The spread may be wild, however it's not actually very wide, so the buck may all fly off toward the left, however it's still very much on target. Also a shotgun doesn't lose nearly that much power over such a short distance, yes it does indeed lose power much quicker than your standard gun, but it will still clear the distance of your standard sized western (by which I mean western cultured as in Australia, America, Canada etc) house and have more than enough power to knock a man onto their ass. There's a simple reason for this change actually: Game balance, but that's the problem, we're being promised realism and quite frankly reality is far from balanced, and neither is the rest of the gameplay involved in these messes.
Oldest complaint in the book here: Enemies aim for you and only you, without going into too much detail here like I have with every other complaint, the enemy isn't going to single out a sole, nameless private for shits and giggles and coordinate around blowing their fucking brains out.
Regenerating health is actually something I like, but it doesn't match the genre, neither does healing of any sort (well, in the near future that sort of front line tech will be available, for a simplified example of this sort of tech you can search the escapist for a news article of a healing gun that has a special medical gel for use onlifethreatening wounds, there are many others out there, but that's just an easily found example), but you're trying to feed me this bullshit about being realistic when you clearly are anything but. This of course comes back to game balance, how else are you going to get back on your feet when every enemy is bumrushing you?
Guns not having weight behind them, meaning players can get a spot-on aim the second they see something twitch, this is admittedly not the fault of programmers, but the fault of the PC (consoles are able to work around this, but allow me to explain). The mouse isn't something that would allow for the veeeery slow amd realistic movement of certain guns and weaponry (an example of this would be the cannon at the very begginning of Call of Juarez (spelling?): Bound in Blood), whereas consoles allow for this slow movement because of how players must aim with the analog sticks. Not something that can be easily dealt with.
Instant enemy aiming; yeah, that fucking NPC sniper (hell sometimes it's just some ***** who is somehow really good with a pistol, so good he'll make you his ***** from 7 miles away) knowing exactly where and when you will come out and will shoot you square between the eyes the split second you poke your head out there. It's a poor attempt at balancing out the issue caused by players being able to aim so fast that only ends with players being pissed off.
Why must I be the one to push forward? Why do the enemies spawn endlessly until I charge 20 metres or so forward in completely open terrain where I will undoubtably get my shit wrecked a thousand times over. Normally people don't follow that one private in the field who's name no one remembers, it's normally behind a sergeant or because there's an order that's been given, and if such risky orders are constantly given to the same man/men then investigations can and will happen (in some much earlier wars that America was involved with some less than scrupulous officers would force people of color (not sure if this is the best way of saying it, I'm not american and it applies to more than just african-americans) up front, meaning they'd either die, be discharged much sooner or be wounded and sent home early, meaning that they would now be in command of a company of their choosing). "No Major, you cannot force Billy to charge up front in such missions endlessly because he fucked your wife".
Destructible cover, it's a fantastic idea, however in this day and age it will NEVER look right, at least not without spending an ungodly amount, an example of this would be Battlefield: Bad Company (I don't like the game personally, but that's not the point), being able to level a building with a tank is a good idea, but the problem is the physics and damage done to ALL structures are bad enough to make a 5 year old giggle until they piss themselves, To go into detail would take a very long time, however I'm sure you understand what I mean. A bullet doesn't have that kind of affect against a concrete wall, not even an armor piercing one. A knife will not make a door shatter like glass with a single stab to it's center. Maybe one day this sort of thing will be financially viable and won't look hilariously bad, but that's not today (It WORKS fine, I won't deny that, but it looks hilariously awful).
What's your opinion on the matter?
EDIT: People seem to be getting the idea I'm after a realistic game, I don't, my problem is that they're constantly marketing the games as "realistic", but it seems more or less like the development team got to pick and choose which parts were realistic and which parts got to enjoy a big, delicious, chunky spoonful of crap.
EDIT2: People seem to be getting the idea that I'm not enjoying the current games, I'm having a ton of fun but my bitchfit has nothing to do with that.
TLDR: They aren't realistic and I've just stated some of the more obvious complains, state your opinion and other problems with the games that stop them from being anywhere near realistic.
This has been on my mind for months and months, but I finally broke down like the little ***** that I am and decided to post about it; people are constantly referring to the shooters that are on the market now and people/press are calling them "realistic" and I am just sick of that when of course the fucking things are far from it.
Lets make a list of some of the loads of crap that crammed into these things:
Every enemy having a seemingly endless supply of grenades which they will throw at you constantly, forcing you to charge through harms way without rest or a reasonable chance to fire back (through enemies that shoot at you and only you, but we'll get to that soon), even in games set back in the early wars when (this still applies now, but not nearly as heavily) not only would a person be limited to one or two grenades, but that person would often need to prove that they would be adept at using them and atop that they may also have needed to have been a certain rank depending on shortages, because quite frankly private; you aren't worth the trouble.
AI Allies being useless; this load of bullshit is as old as the gaming industry itself (and it does apply to other genres as well of course, but it is quite prevelent here), however it's not because of technological limitations anymore that we're getting moronic AI but because of a few factors; One being poor/lazy programmers (looking at Capcom here, it's not a shooter but DR1 is a prime example), budget, but a good team can often pull something tolerable out of this and lastly, but most importantly, is a team not knowing how to realistically draw the line between a domineering AI which blows the shit out of your enemy, thereby making the players useless and a useless asscricket who is there to make it appear as though you aren't actually 100% alone against 15 enemy soldiers. A difficult line to draw, so often teams will choose the latter and make them immune to damage so that the sheer idiocy that you're fighting alongside doesn't cause you to lose the game. This could be worked out by closely working with the testing team, but that would take far too much time and effort wouldn't it?
Shotguns: This has to be one of the biggest gripes of all for me. I'm a gun owner and I happen to own a shotgun which I use for target practise quite a lot (not live of course) and they're a lot more accurate than they're always portrayed, sure they're nowhere near as accurate as a rifle, but they're a medium range weapon and you can easily nail a target from some distance away with one (For an actual damaging shot I mean, I don't refer to a lone, stray pellet striking the target, I'd say it could reach 60 meters easily, but I wouldn't quote me on that, merely an estimate off the top of my head) The spread may be wild, however it's not actually very wide, so the buck may all fly off toward the left, however it's still very much on target. Also a shotgun doesn't lose nearly that much power over such a short distance, yes it does indeed lose power much quicker than your standard gun, but it will still clear the distance of your standard sized western (by which I mean western cultured as in Australia, America, Canada etc) house and have more than enough power to knock a man onto their ass. There's a simple reason for this change actually: Game balance, but that's the problem, we're being promised realism and quite frankly reality is far from balanced, and neither is the rest of the gameplay involved in these messes.
Oldest complaint in the book here: Enemies aim for you and only you, without going into too much detail here like I have with every other complaint, the enemy isn't going to single out a sole, nameless private for shits and giggles and coordinate around blowing their fucking brains out.
Regenerating health is actually something I like, but it doesn't match the genre, neither does healing of any sort (well, in the near future that sort of front line tech will be available, for a simplified example of this sort of tech you can search the escapist for a news article of a healing gun that has a special medical gel for use onlifethreatening wounds, there are many others out there, but that's just an easily found example), but you're trying to feed me this bullshit about being realistic when you clearly are anything but. This of course comes back to game balance, how else are you going to get back on your feet when every enemy is bumrushing you?
Guns not having weight behind them, meaning players can get a spot-on aim the second they see something twitch, this is admittedly not the fault of programmers, but the fault of the PC (consoles are able to work around this, but allow me to explain). The mouse isn't something that would allow for the veeeery slow amd realistic movement of certain guns and weaponry (an example of this would be the cannon at the very begginning of Call of Juarez (spelling?): Bound in Blood), whereas consoles allow for this slow movement because of how players must aim with the analog sticks. Not something that can be easily dealt with.
Instant enemy aiming; yeah, that fucking NPC sniper (hell sometimes it's just some ***** who is somehow really good with a pistol, so good he'll make you his ***** from 7 miles away) knowing exactly where and when you will come out and will shoot you square between the eyes the split second you poke your head out there. It's a poor attempt at balancing out the issue caused by players being able to aim so fast that only ends with players being pissed off.
Why must I be the one to push forward? Why do the enemies spawn endlessly until I charge 20 metres or so forward in completely open terrain where I will undoubtably get my shit wrecked a thousand times over. Normally people don't follow that one private in the field who's name no one remembers, it's normally behind a sergeant or because there's an order that's been given, and if such risky orders are constantly given to the same man/men then investigations can and will happen (in some much earlier wars that America was involved with some less than scrupulous officers would force people of color (not sure if this is the best way of saying it, I'm not american and it applies to more than just african-americans) up front, meaning they'd either die, be discharged much sooner or be wounded and sent home early, meaning that they would now be in command of a company of their choosing). "No Major, you cannot force Billy to charge up front in such missions endlessly because he fucked your wife".
Destructible cover, it's a fantastic idea, however in this day and age it will NEVER look right, at least not without spending an ungodly amount, an example of this would be Battlefield: Bad Company (I don't like the game personally, but that's not the point), being able to level a building with a tank is a good idea, but the problem is the physics and damage done to ALL structures are bad enough to make a 5 year old giggle until they piss themselves, To go into detail would take a very long time, however I'm sure you understand what I mean. A bullet doesn't have that kind of affect against a concrete wall, not even an armor piercing one. A knife will not make a door shatter like glass with a single stab to it's center. Maybe one day this sort of thing will be financially viable and won't look hilariously bad, but that's not today (It WORKS fine, I won't deny that, but it looks hilariously awful).
What's your opinion on the matter?
EDIT: People seem to be getting the idea I'm after a realistic game, I don't, my problem is that they're constantly marketing the games as "realistic", but it seems more or less like the development team got to pick and choose which parts were realistic and which parts got to enjoy a big, delicious, chunky spoonful of crap.
EDIT2: People seem to be getting the idea that I'm not enjoying the current games, I'm having a ton of fun but my bitchfit has nothing to do with that.
TLDR: They aren't realistic and I've just stated some of the more obvious complains, state your opinion and other problems with the games that stop them from being anywhere near realistic.
