• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

No Realistic Games Anymore..

Coldkilla

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2004
3,944
0
71
I'm one of those guys who doesn't follow the idea of sci-fi everything. One minute your on a remote planet in the universe, the next your fighting aliens in zero gravity.

I'm the OFP (Operation Flashpoint), ArmA (Armed Assault), kinda guy. Those games follow the line of "realistic FPS". But no one else really does. Most of America's Army's battlefields are ether too small or entrenched with hackers. The only thing I've seen aside from OFP2, was ArmA2 and ArmA2 will suck more yang than the first. Are these the only two games that are considered realistic FPS's? By realistic I mean: You get shot in the leg, once, you cannot walk. You cannot strafe left and right at will. You cannot bunny hop. You cannot pick up a 'health pack' or 'regenerate health' after 10 seconds.

With all the kidees today and their addiction to this unrealistic 'hitpoint' bs has really got me fearing the future of games being nothing more than aliens, goons, counterstrikes, unreals, and other senseless BS that cannot be any more unrealistic. But I do suppose, as the PC gaming market isn't near the same sales points as consoles, and the younger generation are the ones with most of the consoles, means only unrealistic sci-fi bogus. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a good story and some good sci-fi MP fun, Crysis for example. But most of the time, I'm ready to look at a map, plan an attack, order my men into position, and execute the operation. But it seems no one is interested in stuff like that are they?
 

VashHT

Platinum Member
Feb 1, 2007
2,669
290
126
People would probably take you more seriously if you didn't generalize everyone who didn't play realistic games as "kidees". I'm not a kid and I think realistic games are boring as hell, so that kinda shatters your whole theory. Ntm I'm sure there are plenty of other people on here who feel the same way.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Red Orchestra
Red Orchestra is notable for its emphasis on realism in comparison to other WW2-based FPS games. There is no "crosshair" for a player to aim with in the middle of their screen; instead, the player must aim down three dimensional simulated iron sights, compensating for the breathing of the character and natural sway from holding the gun. The player must also keep track of their ammo usage mentally unlike many other FPS games, most of which use an ammunition counter. Additionally, the player's health status is not represented by "health points" as many other games use, but by a diagram of the player's body with reddened sections that show where he or she has been wounded; there is no way to "recover" wounds, although after a brief period of time, the player will function at 100% again. Receiving wounds will temporarily slow the player down, especially if they receive a wound to the legs or feet; receiving a wound to the hands causes the player to drop their currently held weapon on the ground. The bolt-action rifles in the game can often kill a player in one shot if it connects with any part of the torso or head.
Discussion
those that prefer bunny-hopping, circle-strafing games, look elsewhere; this game is not for you, especially those people making comparisons to DOD or CS. This game will require more time and attention than arcade players can possibly hope to invest. [/b]
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
33
91
Uggg, yet another WWII game. Something modern would be cool. Ghost Recon may probably be the closest, but IMO still isn't realistic enough.
 

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,540
16
0
Red Orchestra was pretty good. SWAT 4 was half way there being more realistic than your average shooter.

If you want realism why stick to shooters. Try Dangerous Waters, IL-2 1946, or maybe even some racing games like GTR 2.
 

Anubis

No Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
78,716
414
126
what about the rainbow 6 games? those always seemed more realistic then say something like unreal or CS

im not a kid but i hate realistic games

i liek being able to take a rocket to the face and not die
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
114
116
<--- not a kid (or "kidee")

Being crippled from one shot in an FPS just does not sound fun to me. I like to be able to get health packs and continue moving, because it's a game that I am playing, not a sim and not real life.

That does not mean I hate strategy in FPS games. Even TF2 which is quite over the top with respect to realism still requires a good amount of strategy for success.

That said, there are still games out there for the uber-realism lovers (as other have indicated) but the fact of the matter is most people play games for fun and they do not want to have to work very hard to do so.

KT
 

JAG87

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
3,921
3
76
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,806
44
91
so what do you do when you happen to get shot in the legs by a stray bullet and you're stuck in some alley and can't move and no one knows where you are to finish you off?

thats real fun, spending half the game sitting in an alley...

or say you do get wounded and can't move. your team finds you and then sends you to the hospital. you spend the next 3 months recovering, another year in physical therapy only to have that fail and you become wheelchair bound.

I'm all for more realism in games but at some point realism ends up not being fun and people aren't going to want to play.
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,806
44
91
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
umm....no
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
umm....no
Any game that allows you to jump high in the air, go prone and execute from the belly midair headshot is not realistic.
 

JAG87

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
3,921
3
76
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
umm....no
Any game that allows you to jump high in the air, go prone and execute from the belly midair headshot is not realistic.
you must both be bad at BF2 :D

the game is amazing and its by far the closest experience to modern warfare, and the graphics still hold up after so long. one of the best engines ever created.
 

VashHT

Platinum Member
Feb 1, 2007
2,669
290
126
Originally posted by: JAG87
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
umm....no
Any game that allows you to jump high in the air, go prone and execute from the belly midair headshot is not realistic.
you must both be bad at BF2 :D

the game is amazing and its by far the closest experience to modern warfare, and the graphics still hold up after so long. one of the best engines ever created.
If you think BF2 is close to modern warfare then you must be crazy. When was the last time the US marine corps pulled off the nade spam tactic, or spawn camping or any of the other BS in BF2. I'm not going to argue about the game being fun or not, but the graphics engine was weak when it came out and looks even worse now that better engines are out(and i play it on max settings).

EDIT: I don't know if your post was sarcastic or not, because the more I think about all the time I've spent with BF2, the more crazy I think you are for saying its even close to realistic. Come on, in real war you cant dive-bomb out of jet, parachute 20 feet above the ground, and then magically appear in the drivers seat of a tank, and control the whole tank by yourself. BF2 might be fun online, but its not even close to realistic, stop giving it credit where its not due.
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
14,016
3,815
136
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
BF2 is more of an arcade shooter than anything else... whether it's dive-bombing jet fighters, parachuting from 20 ft, spamming grenades, bunny hopping, mid-air prone headshots, or spawn camping, it's hardly realistic.

The DICE engine also is quite terrible.
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,806
44
91
Originally posted by: JAG87
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
umm....no
Any game that allows you to jump high in the air, go prone and execute from the belly midair headshot is not realistic.
you must both be bad at BF2 :D

the game is amazing and its by far the closest experience to modern warfare, and the graphics still hold up after so long. one of the best engines ever created.
i don't see how being good or bad at the game has any relevance to it being realistic or not.
 

Fullmetal Chocobo

Moderator<br>Distributed Computing
Moderator
May 13, 2003
13,704
7
81
First Person Shooter, not First Person Simulator. :) I play games because they are more fun than real life anyway. :D
 

Anubis

No Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
78,716
414
126
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
no its not

when was the last time you saw someone start humping a dead guy in the middle of a battle
 

swaytech

Senior member
Jan 17, 2006
451
1
0
Originally posted by: VashHT
People would probably take you more seriously if you didn't generalize everyone who didn't play realistic games as "kidees". I'm not a kid and I think realistic games are boring as hell, so that kinda shatters your whole theory. Ntm I'm sure there are plenty of other people on here who feel the same way.
Agreed, realistic games are just not entertaining imo.
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Originally posted by: JAG87
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
umm....no
Any game that allows you to jump high in the air, go prone and execute from the belly midair headshot is not realistic.
you must both be bad at BF2 :D

the game is amazing and its by far the closest experience to modern warfare, and the graphics still hold up after so long. one of the best engines ever created.
I wouldn't say I was good or bad, better than average which is what I am at most games. The reason I listed that specifically is because it's cheap and actually caused me to stop playing the game. This was years ago, probably 3 months after release and I haven't looked back.

Other people have listed their gripes, I just prefer playing games where cheap kills are kept at a minimum. If a person can't perform a certain maneuver in real life then it shouldn't be included in a game for me to consider said game to be realistic(within reason of course).

 

PingSpike

Lifer
Feb 25, 2004
21,603
456
126
Originally posted by: JAG87
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
umm....no
Any game that allows you to jump high in the air, go prone and execute from the belly midair headshot is not realistic.
you must both be bad at BF2 :D

the game is amazing and its by far the closest experience to modern warfare, and the graphics still hold up after so long. one of the best engines ever created.
Whether they are bad or not is irrelevant, that game is not realistic. There's nothing wrong with a computer game being unrealistic, but don't delude yourself into thinking that BG2 some how is an accurate representation of actual armed combat. I mean, come on.
 

Vonkhan

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2003
8,198
0
71
Red Orchestra ... doesn't get any better than that when it comes to realism
 

EvilComputer92

Golden Member
Aug 25, 2004
1,316
0
0
Originally posted by: JAG87
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: JAG87
BF2 is by far the best compromise between realism and gameplay. bullet drop, limited sprinting, limited jumping.

yes you can pick up health packs, but you thats what the medic class is for. and if you didn't have medics you would spend more time waiting to re-spawn than playing the game.
umm....no
Any game that allows you to jump high in the air, go prone and execute from the belly midair headshot is not realistic.
you must both be bad at BF2 :D

the game is amazing and its by far the closest experience to modern warfare, and the graphics still hold up after so long. one of the best engines ever created.
Are you joking? There is no way you can call BF2 realistic with the multitude of ridiculous things that go on every game. I played the game for over an year and got to first sargeant before quitting. Bunny hopping and Dolphin Diving is rampant. Kamikaze Jeeps and fighting over jets is a commonplace. How about the fact that anti tank weapons take five hits against a tank to kill it? What about the medic pads that can heal you even after you've been hit by 500 LMG shots?

Take a look at Rd volx's video, who was the #1 player on the BF2 leaderboard for about an year. Then tell me about how BF2 is realistic.
 
Oct 18, 2007
25
0
0
After cutting my FPS teeth playing Quake, Team Fortress, Tribes 2, and Unreal Tournament, I've been pretty disappointed in the PC games industry. There just haven't been any good twitch-shooters released since UT2K4.

Now, we're finally getting some love, after a 3+ year dry spell of nothing but tactical shooters.
 

JAG87

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
3,921
3
76
Ok guys... first of all I was joking when I said you are bad at BF2. see the grin beside the statement... its a joke dont take it to heart.
second of all you all seem to miss the keyword here which is COMPROMISE. its a compromise between realism and fun in the modern warfare genre of games.

1) Its realistic because you can do so many things in that game, without making it silly. you can use tanks, jets, helicopters, and they all behave quite realistic. its also realistic because you have limited stamina, limited health, and such. its realistic because you can make squads and commanders, and not have 64 players running around like headless chickens.

2) Its FUN because the unrealistic parts of the game have been well integrated into the gameplay. for example, medics can heal you and revive you, but you must have a medic near you or you will die. support can refill you, and you can have unlimited supplies, but you must have a support player near you. so those aspects that would make the game boring, such as dying constantly, or running out of ammo, or having a retard t-bone you and take away half of your armor health, those things can all be repaired without wasting your time. yes its unrealistic... what sick bastard would hop out of his T90 and whip out his wrench in the middle of the battlefield, but those things are needed to make the gameplay FUN.

overall its the best modern warfare FPS experience you can have. unless you are some nutjob who loves to waste time waiting to re-spawn instead of having fun. after having said that, I realize I might be posting my opinion in the wrong thread. I apologize in advance.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY