It's the ultimate question for FPS fans - How real do you like your shooters?
I've played Red Orchestra, and I've played Spec Ops : The Line. There's realism, and there's realism. I personally don't prefer it - the hard conditions, the limited arms, the limited ammunition, the fear, the crowded space, the panic - not knowing where the next bullet would come from, always checking behind your shoulder, always checking up on your mates - it's frightening. How can you enjoy it? War isn't fun. Shooting demons with a shuriken gun is fun in a wacky way. It's unreal.
Do you want the full experience? Holding the rifle, handling it, managing your ammunition, your equipment... Always on the alert, always ready - praying that your luck doesn't run out. In reality, it's a lot depending on sheer luck, not just skill. Putting that factor into gaming isn't a good idea, which is also why I think that most games who boast 'realism' aren't that real. Who wants to play a game where you can get shot in the head by a sniper you didn't even notice a block away after just ten seconds? But that's reality. Who wants to play a game where a charge blasts you away to pieces of meat without warning? But that's reality. Who wants to play a game where after the adrenalin had run out and you've been pumping yourself with medkits, you spend the next eight months in an army hospital?
There's another issue - You can die easily in war. Going with one character all through the battles and skirmishes in a war is likely - many had survived conflicts all the way through - but none had been in all of the battles. Do you want to grow attached to the person you're directing - or do you want to be in the middle of the fire? In these shooters, are you playing a soldier, or are you playing yourself?
Anyway, that's about it for my rant. What do you think about it? Do you prefer Realism, or non-Realism? Is there a compromise for you somewhere?
I've played Red Orchestra, and I've played Spec Ops : The Line. There's realism, and there's realism. I personally don't prefer it - the hard conditions, the limited arms, the limited ammunition, the fear, the crowded space, the panic - not knowing where the next bullet would come from, always checking behind your shoulder, always checking up on your mates - it's frightening. How can you enjoy it? War isn't fun. Shooting demons with a shuriken gun is fun in a wacky way. It's unreal.
Do you want the full experience? Holding the rifle, handling it, managing your ammunition, your equipment... Always on the alert, always ready - praying that your luck doesn't run out. In reality, it's a lot depending on sheer luck, not just skill. Putting that factor into gaming isn't a good idea, which is also why I think that most games who boast 'realism' aren't that real. Who wants to play a game where you can get shot in the head by a sniper you didn't even notice a block away after just ten seconds? But that's reality. Who wants to play a game where a charge blasts you away to pieces of meat without warning? But that's reality. Who wants to play a game where after the adrenalin had run out and you've been pumping yourself with medkits, you spend the next eight months in an army hospital?
There's another issue - You can die easily in war. Going with one character all through the battles and skirmishes in a war is likely - many had survived conflicts all the way through - but none had been in all of the battles. Do you want to grow attached to the person you're directing - or do you want to be in the middle of the fire? In these shooters, are you playing a soldier, or are you playing yourself?
Anyway, that's about it for my rant. What do you think about it? Do you prefer Realism, or non-Realism? Is there a compromise for you somewhere?
