senordesol said:
'The Bridge' in MW1. It was sort of a blissfully sad moment. Zachiev's plan was thwarted and the day was saved, but we still needed to get out of dodge. As it happened, it was a 'bridge too far'.
Watching Griggs, Gaz, and (what seemed apparent at the time) Captain Price bite it one by one drove home the idea that we truly weren't in this for personal glory -that our training allows us to make our sacrifice meaningful (rather than avoid sacrificing ourselves outright).
We could all die on that bridge and the world would never notice: as it should be.
I completely agree, but the reason it doesn't win it for me is because it just isn't realistic, it is all very 'hollywood', if you get what I am saying. It is very drawn out and you are (or at least I was) very aware that it wasn't real. Whereas Adams' death in ArmA made me forget for a few seconds that it wasn't real. It really puts across the fragility of life in a warzone too. One second it looks as if he's going to be a main character for most or all of the game, then without warning, he's dead. And the following events and dialogue ('I'm sorry about Adams, Kerry, but if we heard that explosion from here, the AAF sure as hell did, you have to get moving') shows how there really isn't chance at the time to lament, and how you have to deal with it and that's war, or else you'll be next.
I'm not saying you're wrong though, obviously, just saying why I personally find the ArmA 3 one better.
