Poll: "Realism" in shooters.
- Thread starter Waaghpowa
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Ok you want realistic ballistics in Halo? So you want to take into account penetration, moisture of the air, angle of the armour(affects penetration), shield strength, speed of bullet, degradation of bullet speed and energy as per distance travelled due to air resistance, different round types, realistic plasma burn, realistic penetration through environment and possibility for rounds to bounce. Those are just things off the top of my head. Sorry, but that has no place in a game like Halo but if want to change around how certain guns work for balance that is fine but not realism in Halo. A game about a genetically engineered Space Marine fighting against Aliens in space it just doesn't suit the setting and the tone of that game.ElPatron said:
I like some bits of realism in my shooters but ballistics is not one of them, mainly because I am not a trained rifleman...that and it is difficult to judge distance in 2D without any semblance of depth perception.
Some people can do it, but we have sims for those "Some" people. For most people, however, I think we should stick with "Bullet goes where I point"
Games like Sniper Elite are suited for it because realistic sniping mechanics are the entire point of the game.
Some people can do it, but we have sims for those "Some" people. For most people, however, I think we should stick with "Bullet goes where I point"
Games like Sniper Elite are suited for it because realistic sniping mechanics are the entire point of the game.
ME3 uses fictional technology, so I am not sure what they are called.Risingblade said:
What? Different round types? I am almost sure Halo already includes a system that allows different projectiles, otherwise every gun would do the same damage and have the same speed.Glademaster said:
Even CoD's hitscan system has a distance drop-off on damage.
And what does the theme of the game have ANYTHING to do with the way projectiles behave?
If a rifle is zero'ed properly, it will shoot where you point at.RagTagBand said:
I don't think you have fully understood what we are talking about. Military rifles are designed so that the lowest common denominator in a society can point one.
We are talking about bullets taking time to reach a spot, having the game calculate the damage of a hit by confirming which vital organs were hit, bullets having ricochets, etc.
Battlefield 3 had bullet drop. Thats about as far as I want to go with realistic bullet behavior.
Did you even read half the variables? An arbitrary damage drop off due to distance is easy and balance-able a realistic one is not. How would you like in Halo for a shot to bounce off someone's armour because you were too far away, didn't hit at the right angle(given that they are 100% armoured) and didn't use Armoured piercing rounds rather than something like Hollow point rounds.ElPatron said:
A round from a Needler and a round from an Assault rifle is not a different round type in this context. This is have a choice between many different types of bullets for the Assault Rifle alone.
A games theme and how it is set has a lot to do with how realistic things are and how they should behave. So in a game where you can jump higher than a person while wearing armour that is 450kg I think realism was abandoned long ago.
Again, someone who didn't read the thread.Blargh McBlargh said:
What the hell does the system used for the ballistics has to do with the theme of a game?
ATTENTION EVERYONE!
REMEMBER SOLDIER OF FORTUNE? YEAH, IT HAD A PRETTY AWESOME DAMAGE SYSTEM.
This is what ballistics calculation does. It's a simple example, the way the bullets have an effect on the game have NOTHING to do with the theme.
It depends on the title really. If I am playing something like CoDfish Modern Flounder or Hat Fortress 2, I don't care because I am too busy running around as a one man army or using a minigun. If I am playing Battlefield, I want there to be the bullet drop and leading and such like in more recent titles.
To be clear: the first game is just like this and just as awesome.
You can stealth-snipe as well, where you time it with the explosion of artillery nearby, and you get the slow-mo bullet-cam too.
Although it also has wind and gravity (which really come into play post-200m), whereas ArmA just has gravity and ricochets.
You can stealth-snipe as well, where you time it with the explosion of artillery nearby, and you get the slow-mo bullet-cam too.
Although it also has wind and gravity (which really come into play post-200m), whereas ArmA just has gravity and ricochets.
You do know you need to add my name so you can actually quote me? I was asked should Halo be realistic and I gave my answer pseudo-realism or light realism like BF 3 with bullet drop is not realism. A couple of realistic bits here and there =/= a realistic game. If you want to know what a realistic game looks like look at Arma, Flashpoint or Red Orchestra.Anthraxus said:
When did I ever say realism was bad in all cases? Don't put words into my mouth because you haven't read my original post or do not look like you have. Yes, if you have common sense you would realise making something like Halo with the way it sets itself out to be realistic is silly. It is like making 40k not an over powered, scaled to the extreme laughable parody.
It really depends on the title. Sometimes I want to play Serious Sam or Painkiller in which case, realism be damned, but in games like Stalker, where tension and fear are key, realism (bullet drop, low health, and no regen health). Both games result in different tactics and play styles, and so have their respective uses.
In the majority of shooters? No. In those that are more tactical? Yes. A game like, say, Half-Life, where the majority of shooting happens in tight corridors or rooms it would be meaningless for there to be bullet drop-off for the few times you might shoot at someone from long range. A game like Stalker, which IIRC does have bullet drop-off, where there's lots of open space, yes. It makes things more interesting, if a bit frustrating, when trying to take out a base full of mercs or soldiers with a sniper rifle when you have to take more into consideration.
And now you know: most times the military develops ONE kind of round, which is the standard, or ball ammo. Then you have AP or Tracer ammo.Glademaster said:
Hollow points are banned from conventional warfare by the Houge convention. Guess what? Due to the nature of Halo armor, the ball ammo may actually be armor piercing.
You're just introducing Red Herrings on this argument.
Even without drop off, there could be a ballistics calculator. Why? For example, realistic ricochets - it would fit with HL2's physics.wintercoat said:
We have a winner. Actually, Quake 3 used that principle. There is only one true hitscan weapon in the game, the weak machine gun everyone spawns with. This means that every decent weapon can be dodged. Progamers consider even the weak machinegun to be overpowered for this reason.ElPatron said:
Contrast say Counterstrike and a lot of other games which have an overpowered sniper rifle because it is a one hit kill, super accurate and impossible to dodge, allowing a good player to instakill anything he sees. The Quake 3 railgun is a one hit kill but it is a projectile that can miss.
Of course, that's only an argument for projectiles vs hitscan. Bullet drop is less important, because it's only the really long ranges where compensating for it becomes an art and few games have much fighting at that range. Shorter range fighting is generally more fun. I enjoyed Delta Force, but I generally prefer ranges that don't require scoping.
Most movies that are "realistic" like that aren't action movies. I guess you could say that "Dear Ester" plays realistically (avian transformations notwithstanding) in that sense, but since we're talking mainly about action-based games, it's not really relevant.ElPatron said:
IIRC, you just die really quickly falling off things in Red Orchestra. If you "broke your legs" and had to wait out the rest of the match sitting in a corner without respawning, just waiting to be killed or until the round ended, it would suck. Even more so if every time you started up the game again it showed the inside of a army field hospital. Respawning does allow games to get away with it a bit more than movies because it's basically saying "oh nevermind fuck that guy here's the REAL protagonist" until you get shot again, but there are still limits. In a movie you can have a protagonist locked in a cellar for 2 hours and have a really interesting movie. If you try that in a game you'll just have a really angry player.
"Realistic" mechanics can provide depth, but so can unrealistic ones. That's an issue of freedom, not realism. Being able to hold your breath to steady sniper shots adds variation to gameplay in pretty much the same way that being able to call down lazors from space does. Realistic or not, it's just another option you have in your toolbox.