Would You Play a Realisitc War Game?
- Thread starter Eggsnham
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yep. Ever heard of Red Orchestra (WWII realism game) or Operation Flashpoint: 2 (2011 bullshit oil war realism game)? Both are fun, and pretty realistic. There are, of course some unrealistic things (it IS a game), but the one-shot kill thing is largely true, unless it's in a leg or arm.
Whenever someone claims that CoD is a "very realistic" game, I die a little inside. They're fun, but certainly not realistic.
Whenever someone claims that CoD is a "very realistic" game, I die a little inside. They're fun, but certainly not realistic.
I have to say hell yes, cause if I just say yes I go on probation for "Lack of Content" posts.....
I would assume a realistic war game would only let you play until you die, then delete your save, destroy the disc, and destroy any discs or downloads of the game you try to get your hands on later.
In short, war sucks. The closer a game gets to actual war, the more it sucks.
In short, war sucks. The closer a game gets to actual war, the more it sucks.
These are the two FPS games that came to my mind when you say "realistic war game". Especially ARMA II. Curse those VTOL aircraft...Sketchy said:
IF you are looking for a realistic RTS game, there are already plenty of mods for many games that make them very realistic. The Total War games are quite realistic even without mods, but Stainless Steel for Medieval 2: Total War is especially realistic.
If you want a realistic WW2 RTS, you have two main options: get Company of Heroes and the Battle of teh Bulge Mod, or buy Men of War(this one is especially realistic, with you needing to ensure each of your infantry men have the right weapon, ensure your tanks are using the right shell, keeping your tank armor at the right angle so enemy shells don't penetrate, engaging enemy tanks with AT guns and your own tanks at ranges to can extend to about 4 screen lengths, etc)
I always liked Insurgency Mod for Half-Life 2.
Challenging game, sometimes exploited though- and retains some of the unrealism that will always be in games these days.
Personally, I don't think I would play a realistic war game maybe more than once. Why would I? If it really was realistic, it would mentally taxing and not all that fun. Both are kind of against the reason I play games. The mentally taxing isn't always that bad- but I like fun through challenge- and knowing that it's a game. War isn't really something that would be fun
Challenging game, sometimes exploited though- and retains some of the unrealism that will always be in games these days.
Personally, I don't think I would play a realistic war game maybe more than once. Why would I? If it really was realistic, it would mentally taxing and not all that fun. Both are kind of against the reason I play games. The mentally taxing isn't always that bad- but I like fun through challenge- and knowing that it's a game. War isn't really something that would be fun
In this game: ultra realistic. Would you have to sit for a couple hours everytime you get shot and wait to exsanguinate?
You mean a game where you get shot once, die, and then it corrupts the disk forever? No, I find that to be too much pressure.
If by "realistic" you mean it involves supply lines, tactics and not being a disembodied camera in the sky.
That's the thing: It isn't the bullet ITSELF that kills you, it's the wound, and more often than not battlefield injuries are quickly treated with battle dressings, or you just ignore them and keep on fighting and get the wound(s) taken care of afterwords.[/quote]Pyromaniac1337 said:
Not too many people are likely to stay in action after some quick treatment with after taking a shot to the chest. Even if you do survive, you're sure as hell out of the fight.
