When will I see realistic results in Shooters?

The Donut said:
The main reason for not having body parts that come apart from each other is the ESRB rating. If they have such graphical violence be it bloody or not, they'd have to raise the rating of the game.
Click to expand...


Theres plenty of games with decapitation and gore well beyond the realms of BF2 or even HL2 and Doom3. ESRB rated M games is going to get M as long as theres no sex.

Last games i knew of coming out with full body dismemberment was FEAR and DNF. But there have been plenty out within the last year or two that simply allow you to decapitate and do other horrible things.

Look at Postal 2. I think another was, Devistation.


Realistic games take up a very small and elite market. Last one i played that was any good was Hidden and Dangerous 2 on the hardest difficulty setting. AI could of been smarter but if you got cought, you were pretty much dead.
 
Can you people not grasp "realism" in a GAME and not in reality?

Yes , we "could" join the military, but we don't want to REALLY experience it.... :rolleyes: we simply would like it to look realistic.

How would it not "be as fun" to see someone have a wound where they are struck by a bullet? or some blood, etc when they're hit.
 
Stiler said:
Can you people not grasp "realism" in a GAME and not in reality?

Yes , we "could" join the military, but we don't want to REALLY experience it.... :rolleyes: we simply would like it to look realistic.

How would it not "be as fun" to see someone have a wound where they are struck by a bullet? or some blood, etc when they're hit.
Click to expand...

exactly... I want to see intestines, bone fragments & random limbs raining from the sky after some cockbag eats one of my grenades!!! :)
 
Stiler said:
Can you people not grasp "realism" in a GAME and not in reality?

Yes , we "could" join the military, but we don't want to REALLY experience it.... :rolleyes: we simply would like it to look realistic.

How would it not "be as fun" to see someone have a wound where they are struck by a bullet? or some blood, etc when they're hit.
Click to expand...


I'm talking about the gameplay would not be as fun.. bf2 is afast paced die respawn get shot up by bullets till you health bar is empty unless a medic pack is thrown at you to magicly heal your bullet wounds...
 
I would like to see a FPS thats so realistic and gory that it stuns it's players. Ex: It's raining and you're driving a T-72 tank (full with crew) up a hill and mud is being thrown all over. Then, off in the distance, you see a chopper ready to open fire. When the anti-tank rounds hit the tank, the gunner and loader are instantly killed, and their blood and guts cover the electronics (which then begin to malfunction). The commander then shouts something in Russian and you bail out.

Like I said, something so realistic that it is simply amazing. Brothers in Arms came close to what I am talking about.
 
kick@ss said:
You should try console gaming. Many games are developed for people of your same mentality.
Click to expand...

That's pretty funny considering you know nothing about me yet you choose to make judgements on my character based on an exaggerated forum post. For the record I do play console games. I also play PC games and handheld games. I play games for fun, regardless of what console or OS they are running on. And it just so happens that I like to be immersed in the experience, and when I shoot a soldier in the face and I see no physical damage or at the very least blood spray, I get drawn out of the experience. It's not like I'm going to stop playing a game because it doesn't have these things, it's just I would prefer it if they were there. And if it offends some people developer's can always include an option to turn realistic gibs and blood off.

I'm not some 12 year old playing GTA because you can "OMG KILL HOOKERS". If that was the case my favorite PS2 game wouldn't be Amplitude, I wouldn't play Mario Kart like a fiend, and one of my favorite PC games wouldn't be Darwinia. It appears that you don't hold console games in a very high regard for whatever reason, and I think that is a mistake. Games are games regardless of what you are playing them on. It doesn't matter if the main character is a fluffy bunny with gumdrops for eyes or a rough and tumble outlaw who eats babies for breakfast, if the game is fun I'll play it. Based on your post it seems that isn't the case for you, and I think that speaks volumes about your mentality.
 
ManCannon said:
That's pretty funny considering you know nothing about me yet you choose to make judgements on my character based on an exaggerated forum post. For the record I do play console games. I also play PC games and handheld games. I play games for fun, regardless of what console or OS they are running on. And it just so happens that I like to be immersed in the experience, and when I shoot a soldier in the face and I see no physical damage or at the very least blood spray, I get drawn out of the experience. It's not like I'm going to stop playing a game because it doesn't have these things, it's just I would prefer it if they were there. And if it offends some people developer's can always include an option to turn realistic gibs and blood off.

I'm not some 12 year old playing GTA because you can "OMG KILL HOOKERS". If that was the case my favorite PS2 game wouldn't be Amplitude, I wouldn't play Mario Kart like a fiend, and one of my favorite PC games wouldn't be Darwinia. It appears that you don't hold console games in a very high regard for whatever reason, and I think that is a mistake. Games are games regardless of what you are playing them on. It doesn't matter if the main character is a fluffy bunny with gumdrops for eyes or a rough and tumble outlaw who eats babies for breakfast, if the game is fun I'll play it. Based on your post it seems that isn't the case for you, and I think that speaks volumes about your mentality.
Click to expand...
Exaggeration such as that does not translate well over the internet, especially with no emoticon or caps usage. Based on my post it isn't the case for me? WTF are you talking about? If you even read any of my posts you'd very, very clearly understand that I think core gameplay elements are the most important and that fluff should take a back seat.
 
as long as i had gallons of blood and guts, i could care less about the rest of the graphix.... sh!t, bring on Mortal Kombat 1 !!!!
 
kick@ss said:
Exaggeration such as that does not translate well over the internet, especially with no emoticon or caps usage. Based on my post it isn't the case for me? WTF are you talking about? If you even read any of my posts you'd very, very clearly understand that I think core gameplay elements are the most important and that fluff should take a back seat.
Click to expand...

Well then why take cheap shots at me because I'd like to see some realistic gore in a game? What does me wanting to see bullet wounds and blood splatter when I shoot a character have to do with console games? It's quite apparent you were insinuating that I wasn't very bright and that "dumbed down" console games would be more suited to my "immature nature". As far as I'm concerned that makes you a petty PC elitist. There are as many PC games that are all about gore and violence as there are console games that feature the same subject matter.

For the record I do want to see brutal results when I shoot an enemy character in the head, but I was exaggerating about limbs flying through the air and having my screen covered in blood :D.
 
I don't think we will see any sort of realistic results in games for a while due 100% to economical issues and the lack of market for it..

First off we would have a huge removal of fun to be shot in the leg, then limp along (as in rainbow 6) at 1/4 speed or not being able to fire a wep anymore in BF2 being you got shot in arm etc etc.. that's not fun.. Also the pace of a one shot one kill game is far from main stream.

then you have a marketing issue being they would not be able to put the game into wal-mart and so on due to rating issues. Would be harder to cross market it with other products or companies. Never mind the effort level it would take to code in and add the damage effects and the over head on the game to have a guy splatted all over the place. All of that coming with more of a down side then a plus side $$$ wise.. Much the same way we don't see "realistic" effects in that many films if it's going to cost them from going to a NC17 vs a R rating or even from PG13 up to an R. Same reason you don't see main stream films with hardcore sex, even if it was just a B grade level film. They could do it now, they don't being it's not cost effective, at all....

This negative economical effect is going to be there way after the games have the cpu power to make stuff photorealistic and so on.. For me, it's just a game, I'm 100% happy with good soild game play and would rather see the effort going into that then how some guys arm gets taken off by a tank..
 
I often wonder if people know what the hell they are blabbering about in here or not.

Wal mart sells M rated games.

Just go to your wal mart, you're likely to find that games like, Soldier of fortune/gta/Halo/half life 2 etc all are sold at wal mart.

And not "mainstream?"

Yea....Rainbow six series hasn't became mainstream, it isn't like it wasn't one of the Xbox's best selling/most online played titles....The swat series..operation flashpoint....yada yada.

I think most of you are pretty much pulling things out of thin air.

Lets look at GTA:SA, you can eat/workout/gain skills, why not entirely realistic it added a lot more "realism" in a sense then the other GTA's, but did it sell poorly? no.

There are PLENTY of realism fans, it's not a "niche" market.
 
Stiler said:
I often wonder if people know what the hell they are blabbering about in here or not.

Wal mart sells M rated games.

Just go to your wal mart, you're likely to find that games like, Soldier of fortune/gta/Halo/half life 2 etc all are sold at wal mart.

And not "mainstream?"

Yea....Rainbow six series hasn't became mainstream, it isn't like it wasn't one of the Xbox's best selling/most online played titles....The swat series..operation flashpoint....yada yada.

I think most of you are pretty much pulling things out of thin air.

Lets look at GTA:SA, you can eat/workout/gain skills, why not entirely realistic it added a lot more "realism" in a sense then the other GTA's, but did it sell poorly? no.

There are PLENTY of realism fans, it's not a "niche" market.
Click to expand...
That's not realism in the sense people are talking about. Realism is randomly getting killed by flying shrapnel that you can't see or dodge after something blows up. Realism is getting killed or disabled after one shot. Realism is getting knocked out after driving a car too hard and crashing it. There's a good reason these are not in games - these "features" are not fun.
 
Did you even read what I said/my past comments?

I said "why not entirely realistic it added SOME realism to the game."

As far as one shot kills, etc, yes there are PLENTY of people that love that.

Look at WWII games, there are a shitload of people that are still waiting for just ONE freaking realistic WWII game(which we thought Brothers in arms was going to be...).

As I said, there's a reason why series like R6/swat/op flash/etc sell enough to have sequels and series.

It's not a "niche" market, it's just the problem with people not grasping the fact.

To plenty of us those things ARE fun.

A lot of anti-realism/arcade only fans like to take a realism fans views and twist them to some absurd viewpoint.
 
Stiler said:
Did you even read what I said/my past comments?

I said "why not entirely realistic it added SOME realism to the game."

As far as one shot kills, etc, yes there are PLENTY of people that love that.

Look at WWII games, there are a shitload of people that are still waiting for just ONE freaking realistic WWII game(which we thought Brothers in arms was going to be...).

As I said, there's a reason why series like R6/swat/op flash/etc sell enough to have sequels and series.

It's not a "niche" market, it's just the problem with people not grasping the fact.

To plenty of us those things ARE fun.

A lot of anti-realism/arcade only fans like to take a realism fans views and twist them to some absurd viewpoint.
Click to expand...
Realism is a significantly smaller market than everything else - especially when it comes to online play. Also, people always say they want "realism," but when they get a taste of it a lot of people start saying the game sucks. Your idea of plenty, in reality, is "a small minority."
 
we could see realistic wounds, holes in body, missing a finger, etc. as games progress. but that would only be cosmetic or only after the kill shot. being wounded, like getting shot in the leg and then having to be in the prone position for the rest of the round is just not fun. they could probably do stuff like that now, but it would be a very boring game, unless they made it a fast paced deathmatch with 1 shot kills always. i know i wouldn't want to get shot in UT2k4 and then walk at half speed for the rest of the game, it's just not fun, that's why it hasn't been done.
 
I think as the graphics in games get more realistic it will certainly be possible to make more realistic wounds and battle damage but i know that would take the fun away for me. Playing the Half Life 2 demo this weekend (i'm eventually making my way to playing the whole game) i was disturbed by the headcrab zombies screaming "Help me!" when i set them on fire. Maybe i'm just squeamish tho. :p
Perhaps as games get more realistic looking there will be a movement back towards more cartoonish games. Like a lot of people have already said, super realistic games aren't fun for me. I don't want to worry about one shot killing me. At the same time tho, i do get frustrated when i shoot someone in the face and they don't die. I guess that's partly hypocritical of a lot of gamers, but we want to win the game! I wouldn't want to slog my way through a brutal firefight only to get taken down by a random piece of shrapnel.
 
A tank shell hitting a person would just be gross.

So would a tank running over a person (!!!!!!!!!!!)

I want a fun game, not something thats going to stop me and make me go ewwwwww every 5 seconds.

Not to mention the fact that most of the 'realism' want wouldn't really show up as the texture resolution isn't high enough to deal with hit scan bullets rendering properly.
 
uhh......A LOT of older games had one hit kills (for non player things) enemies, etc.

I think a lot of people would still like to at LEAST see realistic damage for the bad guys.

How many of you honestly like to shoot someone in Moh:AA in the chest just to have them fall down and then get back up and fire away like nothing happened?

I think there could be a balance, diffculty wise.

Selecting easy = player character has arcade like HP, but hard = same as enemy.

As far as "dropping" and going prone, operation flashpoint had that, and it had many expansions, sold very well. There's a second operation flashpoint coming out aswell as a version on the xbox.
 
Stiler said:
And not "mainstream?"
Yea....Rainbow six series hasn't became mainstream, it isn't like it wasn't one of the Xbox's best selling/most online played titles..
Click to expand...

what does that have to do with being able to shoot a guy's hand off or a tank squishing some one into red paste? You are doing the typical internet argument thing of picking a few words and dog piling on them picking apart a word looking for a meaning with in a meaning.. You can't even jump in games like Raven Shield and you never bleed out, you just get gimped once you get shot. It's far from realistic it just that some parts, some very small parts, of that game is more realistic-ish then other games out there.

The idea of a game, as many here joked about, that is almost flight sim like realistic and a shooter is a nitch market. Sorry but that justs seems like a fact being as you can see here most who posted don't want to have a slow 1:1 real life run speed, get gimped by one shot, bleed out slow etc ect etc etc.. So that's the end of the realistic meaning "real life" sort of game play..

That just just leaves the idea of "realistic" as lets say a cpu FX glossy cover over normal none realistic but fun arcade game play as we have in BF2 now. Just add in a head popping off or an arm this or that and so on.. Ok again, that is not being done due to marketing issues (as I first said).. EA already said some where the reason they don't have blood in BF2 now is to watch the game ratings. Walmart does pass on a lot of game too, just because a few are rated M and in the store does not mean they would carry a super bloody realistic one..

First post was asking when and IMO my explanation why there is not more realistic issues in games is 100% spot on. So is the example of why we don't have mroe realistic movies and and so on.. It's money and marketing forces that dictate what a company looking to make the most money does.. Period.. You could make a NC17 Star Wars film now too, sep it will never happen.. Would the same question be asked as to when, when, when!? no.. would anyone be asking why we don't have NC17 Star Wars? Nope being it would clearly be due to marketing issue.

they days of --they can't do that-- were over years ago as far as cpu power.. EA could have made BF2 with SOFII level of gore x10 if they had wanted to.. They clearly did not. Why? Money, as I first said.. So as the first post goes "When will I see realistic results in Shooters?". Clearly it's not for a long time being nothing is going to change about companies marketing of games to the widest market area they can cover.

Same for cross promotion with other companies of your product. I can beat this dead horse for hours but the simple fact is they could do realistic now and the fact they don't speaks volumes.
 
If you want to add a little realism to an FPS then go download the Firearms mod for original half life. I used to be addicted to it. Its a great mod, i hope they make a hl2 version of it.
 
I'd aslo like to see more realism in vehicles. Tanks should be more vlunerable from behind, threads coming off, turret jamming, etc. Same stuff for aircraft and other vehicles. A vehicle being destroyed constantly from the same number of shots is so 1990's.
 
ehZn said:
Ever played Soldier of Fortune II? Fully skinned people that allows target specific damage (being shot in the foot wont kill you, but you will limp) and limbs can be damaged and eventually blown off (with an explosion or a shotgun, for example).

But this was one of the few games I'd seen with anything like that, and it's not perfect, but it's a start.
Click to expand...

No kidding. That game was AWESOME. Not so much for the game itself, but the carnage was brilliant.

Shoot some guy in the head, you get a nice little entry, and the back of his head goes running down the wall.

The Ghoul II system in SOFII and Jedi Knight II Jedi Outcast (Hidden feature) would allow destructable models. They had 48 damage points, and 16 dismemberment zones. Plus lots of death animations and some great chunky salsa sounds when shit got blown off.
 
DeadLamb said:
what does that have to do with being able to shoot a guy's hand off or a tank squishing some one into red paste? You are doing the typical internet argument thing of picking a few words and dog piling on them picking apart a word looking for a meaning with in a meaning.. You can't even jump in games like Raven Shield and you never bleed out, you just get gimped once you get shot. It's far from realistic it just that some parts, some very small parts, of that game is more realistic-ish then other games out there.

The idea of a game, as many here joked about, that is almost flight sim like realistic and a shooter is a nitch market. Sorry but that justs seems like a fact being as you can see here most who posted don't want to have a slow 1:1 real life run speed, get gimped by one shot, bleed out slow etc ect etc etc.. So that's the end of the realistic meaning "real life" sort of game play..

That just just leaves the idea of "realistic" as lets say a cpu FX glossy cover over normal none realistic but fun arcade game play as we have in BF2 now. Just add in a head popping off or an arm this or that and so on.. Ok again, that is not being done due to marketing issues (as I first said).. EA already said some where the reason they don't have blood in BF2 now is to watch the game ratings. Walmart does pass on a lot of game too, just because a few are rated M and in the store does not mean they would carry a super bloody realistic one..

First post was asking when and IMO my explanation why there is not more realistic issues in games is 100% spot on. So is the example of why we don't have mroe realistic movies and and so on.. It's money and marketing forces that dictate what a company looking to make the most money does.. Period.. You could make a NC17 Star Wars film now too, sep it will never happen.. Would the same question be asked as to when, when, when!? no.. would anyone be asking why we don't have NC17 Star Wars? Nope being it would clearly be due to marketing issue.

they days of --they can't do that-- were over years ago as far as cpu power.. EA could have made BF2 with SOFII level of gore x10 if they had wanted to.. They clearly did not. Why? Money, as I first said.. So as the first post goes "When will I see realistic results in Shooters?". Clearly it's not for a long time being nothing is going to change about companies marketing of games to the widest market area they can cover.

Same for cross promotion with other companies of your product. I can beat this dead horse for hours but the simple fact is they could do realistic now and the fact they don't speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

Ok first off, if you read the previous posts.

I said that, then the other guy picked it apart and talking about GAMEPLAY. So I mentioned that, now we're back to square one again.
There are plenty of games with "bleeding" in them, and IMO as time goes in they will start to get even more realistic.

However , as i've said, there are things that both Realism fans and arcade fans can agree aren't fun (like going to the bathroom, etc) which some arcade only fans like to stretch into an argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top