Poll: Let's finish this.
- Thread starter Idon'tcareanymore
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Fair point, Bloodlines is more RPG than Shooter by a long shot, but it sure as hell isn't Sci-Fi.octafish said:
PrinceOfShapeir said:
I think that was a joke. He was poking fun of the notion that only two types of shooters exist and whatever cannot be categorised as "realistic" would therefore be "sci-fi". At least I hope so.lacktheknack said:
OT: Gee, so really either "realistic" or "sci-fi", really? Really? And Mass Effect is a sci-fi shooter. If TC doesn't come back soon to clarify his statement, I'm going to go and assume it's a flamebite - a misleading title, a poll that doesn't make much sense, ditto for the OP.
Define terms better- I'm pretty sure FEAR and Deus Ex are more 'realistic' in gameplay than CoD. This thread either asks "Do you prefer hardcore or stylized" or "Scifi or modern?"
Well, both... Realistic shooters I usually play for brainless fun, and sci-fi for awe and story.
They really are not that realistic
You should try America's Army, they built that game around being realistic.
You should try America's Army, they built that game around being realistic.
It depends on my mood. I love a good sci-fi space marine romp as much as the next guy but lately I've been in the mood for a realistic tactical shooter. I just bought SWAT4 off of amazon and I'm waiting for it to arrive. So... both?
LastGreatBlasphemer said:
This.Daystar Clarion said:
Am I missing something? Is there yet another new kind of petty war going amongst gamers...? Are you trying to start one?
Personally, I like all shooters that don't suck.
Very much sci-fi. Realism is not why I play video games. It can be fun to go play a MW2 death match every now and then (I say MW2 because it's actually playable/enjoyable since it doesn't have a busted spawning system) but really the sci-fi shooters tend to have much better stories, environments, enemies, and guns.
This got me thinking, why aren't there fantasy shooters?
OT: As long as they're good, I play them.
OT: As long as they're good, I play them.
Just saying, a bullet does not always go where you point the barrel, many of today's shooters may be more or less realistic about the over-all combat setting but games that at least try to go for actual ballistics realism are few, even more so evident with games allowing modification where the mod communities do their best to bring it closer to actual real life values.
To be on topic however, it does not matter to me in what setting the game takes place, sci-fi, contemporary or historical, or fantasy, as long as the game-play mechanics are at least somewhat realistic to the setting and actually work.
Above may be disregarded in the case games that are by nature more for shts and giggles than serious business.
To be on topic however, it does not matter to me in what setting the game takes place, sci-fi, contemporary or historical, or fantasy, as long as the game-play mechanics are at least somewhat realistic to the setting and actually work.
Above may be disregarded in the case games that are by nature more for shts and giggles than serious business.
Meh, I can't say it really matters to me. As long as the story and gameplay are done well, I could care less the setting. A well made game is a well made game. BUT, if I was forced to make a choice, I would say sci-fi, since there is a greater potential for originality and things we haven't seen before. A weapon that shoots laser cats? Sure, definitely seems plausible in such a setting.
Fuck shooters. RPGs are where it's at.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have some dragons to Shout at.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have some dragons to Shout at.
You shouldn't have called those games realistic as they are not realistic and not even in setting. Modern would have been better. Russian invades every city in Europe at once and Unspecifiedestan are not realistic setting but you might call them modern given the stuff like the Invasion of Iraq. Although Russian as a villain is hardly a new thing nor that realistic.
OT: Since you are going realistic as a modern setting I would have to say Sci-fi to be perfectly honest.
OT: Since you are going realistic as a modern setting I would have to say Sci-fi to be perfectly honest.
In FPS anyway I don't really know. I mean a mix of both is what I would prefer but I guess that sounds crazy. Sorta like how RAGE and Fallout are sort of realistic in some ways but in a form of Sci-Fi setting...that said I'm excited for Prey 2 and the Metroid Prime series are my favourite FPS games ever
In TPS I prefer Sci-fi full on, can't stand the realistic third person shooters and much prefer an interesting and vibrant world to look at
In TPS I prefer Sci-fi full on, can't stand the realistic third person shooters and much prefer an interesting and vibrant world to look at
With "realistic shooter" I guess you mean CoD/Battlefield-style games aka not-very-realistic-at-all-but-they-involve-american-soldiers-and-terrorists-fuck-yeah-shooters? Because a realistic shooter would be something like Operation Flashpoint or early Rainbow Six-games.
Anyways. The non-realistic ones are more fun. I don't say "sci-fi" because they can be steampunk or medieval for all I care, although favorites like Unreal, Tribes and Serious Sam are most definitely sci-fi. They're faster and require more skill than the "realistic" ones, who again are faster than the actually realistic ones.
Anyways. The non-realistic ones are more fun. I don't say "sci-fi" because they can be steampunk or medieval for all I care, although favorites like Unreal, Tribes and Serious Sam are most definitely sci-fi. They're faster and require more skill than the "realistic" ones, who again are faster than the actually realistic ones.
Okay, preparing myself for this but...
I really wish EA would redo BF2142 in Frostbite 2. Please? I'll give them money.
I really wish EA would redo BF2142 in Frostbite 2. Please? I'll give them money.
