So I've been watching some gameplay of Tom Clancy's The Division and at one point an enemy, wearing nothing but a head-scarf, was shot more than 10 times in the head before dying.
Another recent example is Fallout 4, where human enemies without head protection can often be shot many times in the head without dying.
Obviously in real life, people die when they are shot in the head. Seeing normal, unarmoured people being shot many times in the head without dying breaks our expectations of reality and breaks the player's suspension of belief. When the player character, who is usually weaker, dies from less grievous injuries, this can also lead to frustration, since it becomes more obvious that the player character is operating on a different set of rules.
From a RPG design perspective however, it can be seen why head-shots do not always kill in one shot. If player damage is determined by stats that the player can invest in, it becomes pointless to invest in these skills if the player can over-come any challenge by learning how to aim. This undermines the RPG system and creates problems of game-play progression. The difficulty cease to increase.
I think one way around this is to tie the player's stats with accuracy , rather than the damage. For example, increasing the sway whilst aiming or making the hit chance percentage-based even if the bullet connects. But this creates the problem of putting an artificial limit to a player's skill. Players can feel cheated if they feel like they have the skill to aim for a head-shot but are unable to do so in the game. This impacts the enjoyment and feel of the gunplay.
So my question is: In a first or third person shooting game where at least some enemies are normal humans and where some degree of realism is present, should head-shots kill in one-shot? Where should the balance be held between the player's expectation of realism and gameplay progression? What better ways are there to achieve both?
P.S I'm open to the idea of a 3 shot kill. Just not 2 or 4. 5 is right out.
Another recent example is Fallout 4, where human enemies without head protection can often be shot many times in the head without dying.
Obviously in real life, people die when they are shot in the head. Seeing normal, unarmoured people being shot many times in the head without dying breaks our expectations of reality and breaks the player's suspension of belief. When the player character, who is usually weaker, dies from less grievous injuries, this can also lead to frustration, since it becomes more obvious that the player character is operating on a different set of rules.
From a RPG design perspective however, it can be seen why head-shots do not always kill in one shot. If player damage is determined by stats that the player can invest in, it becomes pointless to invest in these skills if the player can over-come any challenge by learning how to aim. This undermines the RPG system and creates problems of game-play progression. The difficulty cease to increase.
I think one way around this is to tie the player's stats with accuracy , rather than the damage. For example, increasing the sway whilst aiming or making the hit chance percentage-based even if the bullet connects. But this creates the problem of putting an artificial limit to a player's skill. Players can feel cheated if they feel like they have the skill to aim for a head-shot but are unable to do so in the game. This impacts the enjoyment and feel of the gunplay.
So my question is: In a first or third person shooting game where at least some enemies are normal humans and where some degree of realism is present, should head-shots kill in one-shot? Where should the balance be held between the player's expectation of realism and gameplay progression? What better ways are there to achieve both?
P.S I'm open to the idea of a 3 shot kill. Just not 2 or 4. 5 is right out.