Why don't more FPS games feel like you are part of a war?

[The Bum]

Because real war sucks its not fun it the worst thing humanuty has devised.

Would a game be fun fun if it required many of your best frends to die? Maybe even You

Also you can't hide behind a wall waitin for your arms to grow back

 

[GRoXERs]

*cough cough*

*cough*

 

[Danny Ocean]

It seems like the general rule of thumb for deciding if a game gives you a real sense of being part of a larger battle:

1. There are roles which allow you to aid your team without any possibility of getting kills. E.G. Transport Helicopter Pilot, Transport truck driver, Spotting UAV, Proper Recon, and so on.

2. It takes a f*cking age to get anywhere without the aforementioned vehicles.

I love that support role:

<3

 

[Geekosaurus]

Because 'crap, we're being attacked, best retreat and call in air support' gets repetitive after a while.

 

[omega 616]

snip

I just watched a guy run, lay down and fire aimlessly for 5 minutes ... maybe get a kill then die.

Where's the fun in that game? It's like those flight sims ... take off (crash?), fly around (crash?) crash/land.

Ok for 5 mines but anything longer and your thinking "whats the point", unless your fanatical about planes or the army and can't be doing either for various reasons.

On topic. Joe Public don't want realistic, they want to kill people while it has realistic elements (physics, graphics etc).

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

It seems like most gamers have little idea of what actual war typically is... There is an old saying that war is 90% monotonous boredom and 10% bowel-evacuating terror. A game where you are waiting around for 90% of the gameplay time would not sell very well, neither would a game where engagements can last between 5 seconds and 4 hours and you may still never see an enemy combatant.

Listen to this man, for he speaks truth. Watch the movie 'Jarhead' to get a pretty good example of what he means.