Oh man thank you for reminding me that game existed and that it was awesome.AvsJoe said:Neither are realistic. The closest a game came to realism was Bushido Blade for the PS1. It was a 1 on 1 sword-fighting game where most sword hits were either lethal or they injured/disabled arms and legs.
For the same reason that people like Heinlein and Stephenson more than cheesy pulp sci-fi. It's not so much realism as it is plausibility, trying to make the world not seem cartoony, shallow, weightless and inconsequential. People who say "games shouldn't be realistic" know nothing of narrative theory. If you're going to have an FPS that follows moon logic, you might as well turn every 3D model into a colourful cube and call it a puzzle game. But instead, they give us settings, context for our shootouts, objectives to complete, and a game gets extra praise if the shooting feels real/visceral/satisfying. Isn't that realism? Doesn't it enhance what the game is already doing?GeorgW said:Health bars are more realistic, but neither are realistic, as has been established. But this always irks me, why the **** are people always talking about how realistic video games are?? Video games aren't supposed to be realistic, that's the whole point!! Who would play CoD if you'd have to go through 2 years of rehab after every shot that hits you??
yeah and one lady fell from 30,000 feet during Lockerbie, and survived, but she wasn't fucking jumping round afterwards. just because people can take rounds and survive does not mean that its normal. one hit one kill is real becuase in reality its one hit one "ow!" and fall over, whether they die or not.psivamp said:And, on the other hand, people have taken entire clips and lived because none of the rounds hit anything immediately life-threatening. I don't want to play a multiplayer game with realistic damage modeling -- that would be ass-balls. But I could play a single player game with it as long as the AI was sophisticated enough to not cheat and know my location all the time.HotFezz8 said:one hit kill is realistic. other than that - ITS A GAME!Xavisam said:What do you think is more realistic: health bars or regenerating health? and why if you care to explain
True, but really, the way we handle death is always ridiculous. A shot to the subclavian artery will kill you, but it won't do it immediately. A shot to the head that misses the brain stem means you might twitch before total brain death and therefore still shoot your gun, or pull the pin on the grenade you were about to throw.HotFezz8 said:yeah and one lady fell from 30,000 feet during Lockerbie, and survived, but she wasn't fucking jumping round afterwards. just because people can take rounds and survive does not mean that its normal. one hit one kill is real becuase in reality its one hit one "ow!" and fall over, whether they die or not.psivamp said:And, on the other hand, people have taken entire clips and lived because none of the rounds hit anything immediately life-threatening. I don't want to play a multiplayer game with realistic damage modeling -- that would be ass-balls. But I could play a single player game with it as long as the AI was sophisticated enough to not cheat and know my location all the time.HotFezz8 said:one hit kill is realistic. other than that - ITS A GAME!Xavisam said:What do you think is more realistic: health bars or regenerating health? and why if you care to explain
I'm not sure either is really any more realistic than the other as long as there is some relatively easy way to regain health.Xavisam said:What do you think is more realistic: health bars or regenerating health? and why if you care to explain
EDIT: Can we establish that neither are very realistic ? , that was a error on my part.
But please continue this is a enthralling forum if I may say so.