Nightcrawler
Member
I like first person shooters. Actually, right now they're the only kind of computer games I play.
However, I like some more than others. My favorites are not necessarily the most realistic ones, but I like story-driven shooters. Ones where you can do things besides run around and kill badguys.
(Though that has its own merits.)
One of the biggest beefs I have about them, though, is the weapons you see in many of these games. While a game doesn't have to be super-realistic to be fun, I don't like games where the badguys can take and inordinate number of hits. Oftentimes games will do this for "balance", and "gameplay", but coming from the "one shot, one kill" school of thought.
Games that have bugged me like this?
-Deus Ex: The one sore spot in an otherwise great game. Took no less than SIX hits from the (supposedly 7.62x51mm chambered) carbine to drop a badguy.
-Medal of Honor: Three hits from the M1 Garand to kill your typical Nazi. I don't know of too many guys that'll take a .30-06 through the sternum at 10 feet and shrug it off. Must be those aryan supermen... In any case, the bolt action rifles killed with one shot because their rate of fire was slower.
-Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Granted, a game like this isn't going to be super-realistic to begin with, but come on, it shouldn't take three or four 7.92mm Mauser rifle rounds to drop an unarmored Nazi at close range (with center-of-mass hits).
Games that have been good in this regard:
-Rainbow Six 3: Granted, this is supposed to be a "super realistic" shooter, but one or two shots will usually do it, if you hit the torso.
-Hitman 2: One of the few games where bullets overpenetrate; I like it.
One thing I have to wonder about, though. In some mods for games (especially the Rainbow Six games) you end up with a huge variety of weapons, which is cool, but can a computer game actually model the practical differences between .40S&W and 9mm? 10mm and .45? FMJ and JHP?
The only way I could think of to do it would be to, I don't know, have one round be more likely to incapacitate given a hit at the same range at the same location. For instance, a 10mm would have, say, a 70% chance of incapacitation assuming a center of mass hit at 10 feet, where as a 9x19mm would have only a 50% chance.
Just some early morning ramblings.
However, I like some more than others. My favorites are not necessarily the most realistic ones, but I like story-driven shooters. Ones where you can do things besides run around and kill badguys.
(Though that has its own merits.)
One of the biggest beefs I have about them, though, is the weapons you see in many of these games. While a game doesn't have to be super-realistic to be fun, I don't like games where the badguys can take and inordinate number of hits. Oftentimes games will do this for "balance", and "gameplay", but coming from the "one shot, one kill" school of thought.
Games that have bugged me like this?
-Deus Ex: The one sore spot in an otherwise great game. Took no less than SIX hits from the (supposedly 7.62x51mm chambered) carbine to drop a badguy.
-Medal of Honor: Three hits from the M1 Garand to kill your typical Nazi. I don't know of too many guys that'll take a .30-06 through the sternum at 10 feet and shrug it off. Must be those aryan supermen... In any case, the bolt action rifles killed with one shot because their rate of fire was slower.
-Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Granted, a game like this isn't going to be super-realistic to begin with, but come on, it shouldn't take three or four 7.92mm Mauser rifle rounds to drop an unarmored Nazi at close range (with center-of-mass hits).
Games that have been good in this regard:
-Rainbow Six 3: Granted, this is supposed to be a "super realistic" shooter, but one or two shots will usually do it, if you hit the torso.
-Hitman 2: One of the few games where bullets overpenetrate; I like it.
One thing I have to wonder about, though. In some mods for games (especially the Rainbow Six games) you end up with a huge variety of weapons, which is cool, but can a computer game actually model the practical differences between .40S&W and 9mm? 10mm and .45? FMJ and JHP?
The only way I could think of to do it would be to, I don't know, have one round be more likely to incapacitate given a hit at the same range at the same location. For instance, a 10mm would have, say, a 70% chance of incapacitation assuming a center of mass hit at 10 feet, where as a 9x19mm would have only a 50% chance.
Just some early morning ramblings.
I think they had some pretty good advisors in the weapons department. Its a fun addictive game.
