I play computer games 10~ hours a day. "omg dood dats not healthy!1!!!1eleven!1!", you say? Shut up, that's not my concern.
Anyway, I've always had a hard time finding a game to play. I've played so many, but I get bored of them so quickly.
"dood, world of warcraft is wat ur looking 4"
"omg play counterstrike it roxxorz teh interwebz!"
"runescape! u never get bored wif runescape!"
"i know i know! play call of duty, it's teh biggest, bested, greatest ---"
Yeah yeah yeah, I've heard it all, tried it all, they fail. They all have significant flaws.
World of Warcraft or Runescape - simply boring. Get a quest, kill the guy, rinse and repeat until the end of time. It gets old - fast. Not to mention all of the little kids who don't have the decency to name their character properly. "sexysteve" is not a name belonging in an MMOG. It's revolting. And they type so improperly it's borderline incoherent.
And then you got crap like Call of Duty where you can switch your Thompson to single shot. Uhh, hello?? That's impossible.
And single is a disgrace. There's no freedom, there's just a closed in box full of pre-placed enemies with a bush or two to hide in, and by the end of the campaign your character has killed hundreds and hundreds of enemies. For the love of God, the average Russian soldier in WWII was lucky to get a freakin shot off.
And then there's junk like Battlefield 2142. Wow. Just unbelievable. Soldiers seemingly have innate knowledge of how to fire and operate every single weapon and vehicle in the game. You can hop in a huge Titan, use its weapons, steer the ship, hop on a little transport, parachute out - 10 feet above the ground (but hey, who cares it's a game right? Uh huh.) and then you shoot some guy with your assault rifle and then grab his sniper kit and use it to perfection until it runs out of ammo. Now you hop in a jeep, shred some guy with your .50 cal and then speed off to grab a tank. You (Yes, JUST you!) move and fire the tank. At the same time. You then die, but hey who cares! You respawn. Sigh.
And now we get to the epitome of FPS disgraces. Even worse than 2142 (and I thought that was genuinely impossible).
Counter Strike: Source. What a freakin joke this game is. It's so woefully unrealistic it hurts. It just completely ruins the game. Unrealism - back on the shelf. Now, I don't mind silly names or disgusting chat habits, it's not an MMOG it doesn't bother me. What bothers me in unrealism. It is not realistic to shoot at long ranges... with hip shots. You aim down the scope. And yet in Counter Strike: Source, you don't even have the option to aim down your sights. The entire friggin game is hip-shots. And grenades. A grenade can detonate two feet from you and you keep walking as if nothing happened. There's no sprinting or even proning! What idiot thought up an FPS game where you can't even prone to get behind cover? For christ sake, it's insanity Yet again, you're stuck in a square little box with 31 other people, all squished in there like a TV dinner. Oh and don't ask why the Terrorists use flashbangs or why the Counter-Terrorists just don't bomb the **** out of them like we usually do. No, no - no, this battle just must be a smallarm fight. Mmhmm. Here's a list of 10 of the most absurd aspects of Counter Strike: Source that I put together.
1) Terrorists have flashbangs. Ask any soldier who has fought in Iraq, and he'll tell you that the enemy does not utilize flashbangs.
2) Purchasing of firearms. In Counter Strike: Source, you have to pay money to purchase weapons.
3) You can actually jump while still aiming down the scope with a sniper. Anyone who's ever looked through a scope in real life knows that this is simply impossible. You would have to take your eye away from the scope and then jump, and then take another second or two to aim again.
4) Headshots. The frequency of headshots is just woefully unrealistic. Only your head is poking out, and you're camping behind a crate or something... Before you even have a chance to line up your sights to the enemy who just appeared 50 feet away from you, you're dead after a single bullet entered your head. The enemy just fired one bullet, just one and he didn't even continue to fire afterwards, as if he knew that that one shot would kill. This is not a hacking problem, this is not because I suck, I do very well in Counter Strike: Source. The problem is also not that headshots are (often) instant kills. The problem is body shots. It takes several shots to the body to kill a man in Counter Strike: Source, while only 1 headshot may be needed. If you increased the damage of body shots, it would provide reason to shoot for the body.
5) Frequency of snipers. I'd estimate that 20% of the team chooses a sniper when the round starts. This is modern warfare. This is in urban areas, snipers simply are not practical. In reality, probably less than 2% of the team would carry a sniper rifle.
6) Probably the most ridiculous of all - You are required to retract the bolt of an assault rifle even though there's still a bullet in the chamber. Anyone who has the slightest clue as to how firearms work knows that you don't have to retract the bolt if there's still a bullet in the chamber. If you shoot the gun dry and then reload, yes you have to retract the bolt, but if you shoot 20 rounds and then reload, there's already a bullet in the chamber, due to the self-loading mechanism present in almost all modern firearms. And yet in Counter Strike: Source you have to retract the bolt despite the presence of a bullet in the chamber.
The same holds true for sidearms. If you shoot 6 bullets from a Desert Eagle (the clip of which holds 7) the slide locks back. Again, anyone who knows how pistols work knows that the slide does not lock back unless every round is fired. If you shoot 6 bullets from the Desert Eagle, there's still one left in the tube.
To make matters even more bizarre, one of the only guns in the entire game which you don't have to retract the bolt is the Ak-47. Even if you shoot that gun dry, you don't have to retract the bolt in Counter Strike: Source. That is just stupid.
7) Rounds, not clips. The amount of ammunition that you hold for a gun is accounted for in the number of rounds, not the number of magazines. Let's say you have an Ak-47. You have one full mag (magazine) loaded in the gun, and 5 more mags ready to be loaded when needed. This is a total of 180 rounds, and possibly 181 rounds, but we'll assume 180. If you shoot 20 bullets and reload, you have 160 rounds left. The mag that you unloaded still has 10 rounds left in it though. Let's say you're conservative and you choose to save that 2/3 empty mag. A firefight ensues, and you use 4 full magazines, shooting every round from all 3, for a total of 80 more rounds. You now have one full mag and one 2/3 empty mag, a total of 40 bullets left. You load the full mag and fire 23 bullets before unloading the mag. But oh no! You have no more full mags, just one mag with 10 rounds left and one mag with 7 rounds left. You have a bullet in the chamber. You have a total of 18 rounds left. So what happens in Counter Strike: Source? You "reload" and you get 17 rounds total. What the hell? Did you magically just... just combine those two mags into one? Jesus Christ.
8: A bullet left in the chamber is not accounted for. Let's say you have a full clip of 30 bullets, but none in the chamber. So you retract the bolt and you load one into the chamber. There's now 29 rounds in the mag. You fire 26 rounds and discard the mag (which only has 3 rounds left) onto the floor. But remember, since you did not fire the gun dry, there's one left in the chamber. So you grab a fresh mag and you load it in. In real life, you now have 31 bullets ready to fire. In Counter Strike: Source though; you only have 30, because it does not account for the one in the chamber. The same holds true for pistols. Only one bullet doesn't seem like much of a loss for an assault rifle, right? Correct, but let's take a look at the Desert Eagle. It has the least amount of rounds of any gun in Counter Strike: Source, it has only 7 rounds. If you shoot 5 rounds and discard the clip (which has only 2 rounds left) and you load in a fresh one, in real life you would have 8 rounds total now. In Counter Strike: Source... you still have 7. 1 round may not mean much for an Ak-47 which has 30 rounds, but for a gun like the Desert Eagle which has a mere 7, one extra round can mean the difference between life and death.
9) You are required to retract the bolt when swapping weapons. Say you switch from your Ak-47 to your Glock, the moment you switch back to the Ak-47 you have to retract the bolt. This is illogical, there's already a bullet in the chamber, and therefore it would be an unnecessary action. And don't give me that crap about "they want to add delay to switching". Piece of cake, you just make it so that it takes a second or two to reach back and grab the weapon.
10) Weapons only take up less than 1/4 of your screen. this is pathetic, a gun (even when held at the hip) would be more apparent on your screen than that. It seems like they did this just because they don't want to piss people off by having the screen too cluttered.
I don't mind unrealism in FPS games (Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory is one of my favourite FPS games and it's one of the most unrealistic FPS games out there) but when a game is imitating realism, like Counter Strike: Source, stupid things like the above mentioned flaws just ruin it. There's absolutely no excuse for the minor things like having retract the bolt when swapping weapons, and the gun just "magically" destroying the bullet that is still left in the chamber.
So I don't know what to do. It seems that all games I've tried suffer from the same moronic dumbing down of games. Because after all, little 11 year-old Johnny doesn't want to have die if hit by a grenade blast, so they wouldn't put that in. Oh no, God no, that would hurt the sales wouldn't it? Sigh.
I'm at a loss, what do I do?
Log in to comment