While I am ranting on about unrealistic map designs I have to touch on the obvious: Realistic objectives. I can not fathom how many games have come out that are designed around realism and yet have 'capture point A-E,' or other variations of point based themes, to explain why two armies are fighting. No plausible reasons for why we would even bother to take that little mud hut which has no tactical advantage aside from being in the centre of a linear map. Ridiculous 'get a suitcase to that weapon cache' objective when you could easily just drop a grenade, or some C4 you re carrying, to do the same bloody thing... or why it is vital you take out box of Stingers against an army to stupid to pick one up and shoot down a heli anyway while achieving the same end with RPG and MG fire in any case.
I honestly get a laugh at the idea that our military are going 'right, lets get to point A and stand there for 30 seconds and then we go to B and do the same and when we reach E we win the battle!' Or that they would put such vital importance on taking out a single use man-portable weapon system that dozens of people dying is considered a necessary waste. Let alone why they would want you to use a pipe bomb in a suitcase to do it!
Yes COD4, I am glaring at you.
So why cant we upgrade the MP elements to include objectives that would be quite real, that you would expect to be handed in any mission briefing before you went onto the battlefield. It is quite interesting because a lot of objectives from single player games, designed around 'story telling' elements, could so easily transfer over to MP games and give some more depth to explain why army A and B are battling each other over this strip of desert or throughout this tiny little section of town.
I am also curious what elements would add to a game for realistic objectives?
Myself: Replace 'ammo boxes' with AA guns, Artillery pieces, anti-tank emplacements and even NPC controlled machine gun nests, pillboxes, damaged but not out armoured, or any other 'oh shit, they are going to slaughter our advance if we don't take that position out' weaponry and then have us destroy them with whatever we have at hand.
What do you mean none of our team brought the C4... I told you to pack some, damn idiots!
I honestly get a laugh at the idea that our military are going 'right, lets get to point A and stand there for 30 seconds and then we go to B and do the same and when we reach E we win the battle!' Or that they would put such vital importance on taking out a single use man-portable weapon system that dozens of people dying is considered a necessary waste. Let alone why they would want you to use a pipe bomb in a suitcase to do it!
Yes COD4, I am glaring at you.
So why cant we upgrade the MP elements to include objectives that would be quite real, that you would expect to be handed in any mission briefing before you went onto the battlefield. It is quite interesting because a lot of objectives from single player games, designed around 'story telling' elements, could so easily transfer over to MP games and give some more depth to explain why army A and B are battling each other over this strip of desert or throughout this tiny little section of town.
I am also curious what elements would add to a game for realistic objectives?
Myself: Replace 'ammo boxes' with AA guns, Artillery pieces, anti-tank emplacements and even NPC controlled machine gun nests, pillboxes, damaged but not out armoured, or any other 'oh shit, they are going to slaughter our advance if we don't take that position out' weaponry and then have us destroy them with whatever we have at hand.
What do you mean none of our team brought the C4... I told you to pack some, damn idiots!
