Realistic Shooting Video Games?

[MattyDienhoff]

The Main complaints i have with OF (which is a game that i do love to death nonetheless) is that the gun sounds aren't very good, no handguns (though i think they were added in the resistance expansion) and even though AI die fairly quick the sometimes don't react from a bullet as expected.

The Resistance expansion does add handguns, among other things. See here. If you still have any interest in playing OFP, I strongly suggest you get Resistance. Not only are its features very substantial for an expansion, almost every mod under the sun needs it, so it really is a must have.

hi all new member here
I really like the firearms in COD 4 and as for STALKER i found the guns looked impressive but they lacked the hitting power, i mean i was head shooting a standard soldier with a British L85 with SUSAT scope on it and i was still not killing them.

[Chaosut27]

Originally Posted by AdAstra2009

If you've played Rainbow Six:Raven Shield you'd understand.

The Vegas series was made by a completely different company and sold out of the original realism of the series in order to cash in on the mainstream gamer.

Yeah, i wasn't a huge fan of Vegas either. Raven Shield was probably the last game in the series that actually felt like a Rainbow Six game. Whist Vegas 1 & 2 are decent games, you can tell they take more inspiration from Gears of War than the predecessors in the series. I didn't actually mind the new focus on taking cover (i didn't love it either though). The part i disliked most was how scripted the levels were. The game just felt too linear for a Rainbow Six game.

Originally Posted by MattyDienhoff

The Resistance expansion does add handguns, among other things. See here. If you still have any interest in playing OFP, I strongly suggest you get Resistance. Not only are its features very substantial for an expansion, almost every mod under the sun needs it, so it really is a must have.

Thanks for the recommendation, i think i'll check it out. I used to play OFP to death lol, but I never really got round to playing the expansion packs. Resistance sounds pretty cool .

Originally Posted by aus_shooter

hi all new member here
I really like the firearms in COD 4 and as for STALKER i found the guns looked impressive but they lacked the hitting power, i mean i was head shooting a standard soldier with a British L85 with SUSAT scope on it and i was still not killing them.

Hi . Although STALKER is one of my favourite games, it's still a very very flawed one. I've always found the damage to be a bit wonky. Whilst you yourself die pretty quickly, the AI seem to take quite a bit of punishment. I remember shooting a guy in the face and he didn't even flinch, just kep on shooting back lol. Also, shooting an AI in the legs, arms or even chest just seems too underpowered. Though when i play STALKER i often use mods that adjust some of problems i have with the game (such as the damage). I personally wouldn't consider COD 4 particularly realistic, but it did have a nice selection of guns (and mostly with the real gun names ).

Agreed the tactical merits of COD 4 a limited but for on line shooting fun it takes the cake.
STALKER was very dissapointing to me because i was so looking foward to all the different firearms but like you put the battle damage on the bad guys sucked.

[LoneSniperJim]

This is a older trailer for Project Reality but the best 1 i think

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXNksCRglFc

Heres the new 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2zQIYyCY5s

[Excalibur]

My views on shooters now is the same as comparing to real life gun battles to movies. Games are for entertainment. If the damage for every rifle is bang bang to the chest and you're dead, than that's no fun. The point of playing shooters however realistic or unrealistic is to get away from real life. Some games try to put more so called realism, but they tend to fall back on the usual trends of gameplay

I remember a lot of shooters have a life bar or a percentage of health. Nowadays, a LOT of shooters you don't have a life bar. You get hit, you take cover and you're back to full health.

[joffeloff]

I remember a lot of shooters had no life bar or a percentage of health.. You'd either be injured, which meant you'd be gimpy and easier to kill for the rest of the round, or dead at once.

I tried playing a mod for half-life 2 the other day that had almost the rainbow six type of health system. It adds a certain tension because you know you only get one chance to screw up, no picking up a health pack or jumping behind cover (silly console shooters started with that stupidity). I had almost forgotten how much fun such games were until then.

[Kinzer]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

My views on shooters now is the same as comparing to real life gun battles to movies. Games are for entertainment. If the damage for every rifle is bang bang to the chest and you're dead, than that's no fun. The point of playing shooters however realistic or unrealistic is to get away from real life. Some games try to put more so called realism, but they tend to fall back on the usual trends of gameplay

I remember a lot of shooters have a life bar or a percentage of health. Nowadays, a LOT of shooters you don't have a life bar. You get hit, you take cover and you're back to full health.

For some people, that's true. Games like Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4 are fine with them. However, there are a considerable amount of people out there who would like to a have a more realistic shooter. Yes, games are there to get you away from real life, but they do that by letting you experience something that you probably never will. For instance, most of us aren't going to be on an Elite Counter-Terrorist team, doesn't mean we wouldn't like to pretend we are in a game. And the realism just makes it more believable and essentially more fun.