Why don't FPS games have real damage locations anymore?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Midnightshade29
Midnightshade29

6003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 301

User Lists: 0

#1 Midnightshade29
Member since 2008 • 6003 Posts

I remember playing a few games last gen, (soldier of fortune, deus ex1) that had real hit locations. You shoot someone in the arm they have a chance of either dropping their gun, clutching their arm in pain or brushing it off for a accuracy modifier. Shoot someone in the leg and they will limp and slow down their movement. Shoot someone in the torso and they need to hold thier guts in with their other hand while attempting to shoot. All of this adds realism and should be a standard in fps's now. I want to be able to shoot a gun out of someones hand. Shoot out a light to make a room dark and stealth kill. These really are not in any games this gen, besides a few fps rpgs... why?

Why has it all been dumbed down cod fps games... no tactics, no ghost recon, no brothers in arms style squads.. all just run and gun bs.. Which was fine back in the day as quake and ut... hell even those games had more depth than cod. I miss last gen's pc games.. And i wish more devs would stop catering to the cod crowd. Would anyone else like these features. Anyone know of games this gen that have real damage or are tactical besides hell's highway and last gen games? (no graw, and rainbow 6 vegas don't count, they changed this gen.)

Avatar image for funsohng
funsohng

29976

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 funsohng
Member since 2005 • 29976 Posts
They all die in two hits anyway, what's the point.
Avatar image for stereointegrity
stereointegrity

12151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 stereointegrity
Member since 2007 • 12151 Posts
because cod thinks 2 shots to the foot kills anyone
Avatar image for KC_Hokie
KC_Hokie

16099

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 KC_Hokie
Member since 2006 • 16099 Posts
The Fallout games have that. I'm playing though Fallout New Vegas now (since the latest patch was just released).
Avatar image for Wasdie
Wasdie

53622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#5 Wasdie  Moderator
Member since 2003 • 53622 Posts

Well... outside of a few games, all of the biggest FPSs ever don't have that.

Quake, Doom, Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Battlefield, the original Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault...

So I wouldn't call that "dumbed down".

Hell, even the games you mentioned, Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Brothers in Arms, don't have damage locations on the model.

Avatar image for iBeShowtime
iBeShowtime

48

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 iBeShowtime
Member since 2011 • 48 Posts

Well... outside of a few games, all of the biggest FPSs ever don't have that.

Quake, Doom, Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Battlefield, the original Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault...

So I wouldn't call that "dumbed down".

Hell, even the games you mentioned, Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Brothers in Arms, don't have damage locations on the model.

Wasdie
At least in games like Counter Strike/SOCOM you have to go for the head (or at least the upper bod). Shooting them in the arm/leg does nothing unlike in games this gen where two toe shots = a kill. It might not be to the extent TC mentioned of getting shot in the arm and dropping your gun but it's definitely better than games now.
Avatar image for Wasdie
Wasdie

53622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#7 Wasdie  Moderator
Member since 2003 • 53622 Posts

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Well... outside of a few games, all of the biggest FPSs ever don't have that.

Quake, Doom, Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Battlefield, the original Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault...

So I wouldn't call that "dumbed down".

Hell, even the games you mentioned, Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Brothers in Arms, don't have damage locations on the model.

iBeShowtime

At least in games like Counter Strike/SOCOM you have to go for the head (or at least the upper bod). Shooting them in the arm/leg does nothing unlike in games this gen where two toe shots = a kill. It might not be to the extent TC mentioned of getting shot in the arm and dropping your gun but it's definitely better than games now.

Shoot somebody in the legs in CoD compared to the head.

It's still there. Trust me.

Avatar image for iBeShowtime
iBeShowtime

48

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 iBeShowtime
Member since 2011 • 48 Posts

[QUOTE="iBeShowtime"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Well... outside of a few games, all of the biggest FPSs ever don't have that.

Quake, Doom, Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Battlefield, the original Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault...

So I wouldn't call that "dumbed down".

Hell, even the games you mentioned, Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Brothers in Arms, don't have damage locations on the model.

Wasdie

At least in games like Counter Strike/SOCOM you have to go for the head (or at least the upper bod). Shooting them in the arm/leg does nothing unlike in games this gen where two toe shots = a kill. It might not be to the extent TC mentioned of getting shot in the arm and dropping your gun but it's definitely better than games now.

Shoot somebody in the legs in CoD compared to the head.

It's still there. Trust me.

Last CoD I played was MW2. Headshots do more damage but that's about it. Getting shot in the chest is the equivalent to getting shot in the leg in MW2.
Avatar image for Wasdie
Wasdie

53622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#9 Wasdie  Moderator
Member since 2003 • 53622 Posts

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="iBeShowtime"] At least in games like Counter Strike/SOCOM you have to go for the head (or at least the upper bod). Shooting them in the arm/leg does nothing unlike in games this gen where two toe shots = a kill. It might not be to the extent TC mentioned of getting shot in the arm and dropping your gun but it's definitely better than games now.iBeShowtime

Shoot somebody in the legs in CoD compared to the head.

It's still there. Trust me.

Last CoD I played was MW2. Headshots do more damage but that's about it. Getting shot in the chest is the equivalent to getting shot in the leg in MW2.

Well that's one. I know for a fact BC2 isn't like that.

I wouldn't be so quick to say "ALL FPSs TODAY SUCK AND THIS IS WHY" and only be refering to like 2.

Avatar image for iBeShowtime
iBeShowtime

48

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 iBeShowtime
Member since 2011 • 48 Posts

[QUOTE="iBeShowtime"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Shoot somebody in the legs in CoD compared to the head.

It's still there. Trust me.

Wasdie

Last CoD I played was MW2. Headshots do more damage but that's about it. Getting shot in the chest is the equivalent to getting shot in the leg in MW2.

Well that's one. I know for a fact BC2 isn't like that.

I wouldn't be so quick to say "ALL FPSs TODAY SUCK AND THIS IS WHY" and only be refering to like 2.

I'm not saying that or even implying it. I was just pointing out that in most games it's like that. I'm not sure what other games suffer the CoD syndrome because I always aim for the head. CoD is the only game where I shot at the legs just to show people how much of a joke the game is.
Avatar image for CwlHeddwyn
CwlHeddwyn

5314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 CwlHeddwyn
Member since 2005 • 5314 Posts

the reality is any kind of gunshot wound that isn't a scratch is gonna cause you problems. you get shot in the arm, you might not die but I don't think you'll be in a hurry to fight. And I think you'll need to see a doctor to stop the bleeding etc.

wounds that might not be fatal will almost certainly require medical care and stop or severely limit your ability/will to fight. only 1 or 2 bullets is needed to do this.

Avatar image for RandomWinner
RandomWinner

3751

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 RandomWinner
Member since 2010 • 3751 Posts

I think they should change the way FPS's work in general in terms of hit detection. If you shoot someone in the arm, accuracy goes down. In the leg, you can't move as quickly and sprinting hurts health. If your hit in the head you die. And these consequences could be more permanent until you pick up health, keeping people from getting these 25 kill streaks by camping. The longer your player is in battle, the more he should deteriorate.

Avatar image for topgunmv
topgunmv

10880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#13 topgunmv
Member since 2003 • 10880 Posts

You can do all that in the new AVP game.

Avatar image for PS2_ROCKS
PS2_ROCKS

4679

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 PS2_ROCKS
Member since 2003 • 4679 Posts
One hit anywhere would generally stop a person if not kill them.
Avatar image for Midnightshade29
Midnightshade29

6003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 301

User Lists: 0

#15 Midnightshade29
Member since 2008 • 6003 Posts

I think they should change the way FPS's work in general in terms of hit detection. If you shoot someone in the arm, accuracy goes down. In the leg, you can't move as quickly and sprinting hurts health. If your hit in the head you die. And these consequences could be more permanent until you pick up health, keeping people from getting these 25 kill streaks by camping. The longer your player is in battle, the more he should deteriorate.

RandomWinner
This is excactlty what I am talking about, and those are some great ideas! Why they don't add depth to hit mechanics and ai is ridiculous. I am sorry but spamming more enemies out of a never ending spawn point until you either shoot a certian amount or move forward enough is not innovation, it's old hat, and its just plain not fun. This stuff would work wonders on multiplayer as well adding some much needed depth. It seems like every game is taking things out of games instead of adding depth, and it's starting to piss me off. It's happening in every genre. How did the industry get this way?
Avatar image for tutt3r
tutt3r

2865

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#16 tutt3r
Member since 2005 • 2865 Posts

Your comparing SP games to MP games.

Avatar image for mitu123
mitu123

155290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

#17 mitu123
Member since 2006 • 155290 Posts

Too much work, but some shooters this gen have it.

Avatar image for Midnightshade29
Midnightshade29

6003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 301

User Lists: 0

#18 Midnightshade29
Member since 2008 • 6003 Posts

You can do all that in the new AVP game.

topgunmv
REally? I must check it out. That came out last year right? I am sure its dirt cheap by now..
Avatar image for topgunmv
topgunmv

10880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 topgunmv
Member since 2003 • 10880 Posts

[QUOTE="topgunmv"]

You can do all that in the new AVP game.

Midnightshade29

REally? I must check it out. That came out last year right? I am sure its dirt cheap by now..

Probably. Got it for 5$ in a steam sale.

Enjoyed it more than halo reach.

Avatar image for superfluidity
superfluidity

2163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 superfluidity
Member since 2010 • 2163 Posts

The problem is that if the point is to increase the level of simulation, it isn't exactly easy to simulate how a person reacts to being shot. I guess I can see doing it just to add some tactical depth to the game, but it probably wouldn't be realistic at all.

Avatar image for deactivated-594be627b82ba
deactivated-594be627b82ba

8405

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 31

User Lists: 0

#21 deactivated-594be627b82ba
Member since 2006 • 8405 Posts

The problem is that if the point is to increase the level of simulation, it isn't exactly easy to simulate how a person reacts to being shot. I guess I can see doing it just to add some tactical depth to the game, but it probably wouldn't be realistic at all.

superfluidity
well it's still more realistic then two shots in someone's toe nail and they die
Avatar image for tehsystemwarior
tehsystemwarior

1812

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 tehsystemwarior
Member since 2009 • 1812 Posts
Because it wouldn't work in any fast paced MP game. And this is not something you would want in a MP, and see as single player and MP games tend to have tghe same xact gaemplay, that's not gonna happen.
Avatar image for yellosnolvr
yellosnolvr

19302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#23 yellosnolvr
Member since 2005 • 19302 Posts
borderlands had good edmg models imo
Avatar image for EvanTheGamer
EvanTheGamer

1550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 EvanTheGamer
Member since 2009 • 1550 Posts

Goldeneye/Perfect Dark seemed to be the pinnacle of FPS features.

Avatar image for superfluidity
superfluidity

2163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 superfluidity
Member since 2010 • 2163 Posts

[QUOTE="superfluidity"]

The problem is that if the point is to increase the level of simulation, it isn't exactly easy to simulate how a person reacts to being shot. I guess I can see doing it just to add some tactical depth to the game, but it probably wouldn't be realistic at all.

da_illest101

well it's still more realistic then two shots in someone's toe nail and they die

Not the case unless they implemented an extremely complex system that accounted for everything from shock, pain, fear, and incredibly specific disabling affects.

It's a better simulation to simply have different areas cause different amounts of damage rather than to put in place a few simplistic local damage mechanics that would recur in an unrealistic manner and be different in every game.

Avatar image for RandomWinner
RandomWinner

3751

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 RandomWinner
Member since 2010 • 3751 Posts

[QUOTE="RandomWinner"]

I think they should change the way FPS's work in general in terms of hit detection. If you shoot someone in the arm, accuracy goes down. In the leg, you can't move as quickly and sprinting hurts health. If your hit in the head you die. And these consequences could be more permanent until you pick up health, keeping people from getting these 25 kill streaks by camping. The longer your player is in battle, the more he should deteriorate.

Midnightshade29

This is excactlty what I am talking about, and those are some great ideas! Why they don't add depth to hit mechanics and ai is ridiculous. I am sorry but spamming more enemies out of a never ending spawn point until you either shoot a certian amount or move forward enough is not innovation, it's old hat, and its just plain not fun. This stuff would work wonders on multiplayer as well adding some much needed depth. It seems like every game is taking things out of games instead of adding depth, and it's starting to piss me off. It's happening in every genre. How did the industry get this way?

You get it sir!

My issue with my own plan is the strategy, obviously step one is more bullets to kill someone, but its very difficult to hit someone in the arm or the leg on purpose, kinda eliminates the strategy in it. But it does make a game more balenced, so someone that completely owns everyone can eventually be taken down. I feel like if a developer made a multiplayer game that didn't come down to who has the fastest reflexes or the best aim but who best understands the spacial awareness in a map. I think a game like Brink has a shot at doing this. Well atleast that applies to MP. In SP, I just want enemies to drop their guns like they do in Red Dead and limp like they do in Fallout.

And why did the industry get this way? Its a fad, like WWII shooters were. CoD4 changed everything. I haven't been gaming long enough to know, but if games were originally more complicated, required more strategy, that was abandoned for accessability. A consistent level playing field if you will. Then CoD4 changed everything by keeping the accessibility and adding a system that abandoned a level playing field for upgrading. If I were a betting man, perks will stay for a long time, and I think the next thing to materialize will come with a game like Brink. The team objectives could add another huge layer to MP that doesn't punish the inexperienced players as much as it rewards the experienced players.

I feel like every evolution in MP will come with systems that reward the greatest number of people and punish as little as possible. Call of Duty brought a reward after reward for every level you gain. I'd like to think a game like Brink will add the next step, where players are rewarded for working together with more points, but those who go it solo aren't punished. I want more games that are about winning the game with a team rather than your personal K/D ratio. But I dream.

Pretty sure I got very off topic there.

Avatar image for cabose38
cabose38

1162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 cabose38
Member since 2005 • 1162 Posts

I know the old OFP games did it, so ARMA2 might. Either way, if you want a more realistic game, then go for ARMA2.

Avatar image for sethman410
sethman410

2967

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 sethman410
Member since 2008 • 2967 Posts
[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Well... outside of a few games, all of the biggest FPSs ever don't have that.

Quake, Doom, Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Battlefield, the original Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault...

So I wouldn't call that "dumbed down".

Hell, even the games you mentioned, Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Brothers in Arms, don't have damage locations on the model.

I played cod and mohaa and I can't recall they had these damage locations?
Avatar image for FearNoAngel5
FearNoAngel5

83

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 FearNoAngel5
Member since 2011 • 83 Posts

Because FP's are going casual.

Avatar image for WithoutGraceXII
WithoutGraceXII

1797

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#30 WithoutGraceXII
Member since 2007 • 1797 Posts

because cod thinks 2 shots to the foot kills anyonestereointegrity

This is what immidietly came to my mind as well. No reason to put damage indicators all over the model when they're going to die no matter where you hit them.

The SUPER INTENSE IN YOUR FACE ACTION fps is what's hot right now. I think eventually CoD and the CoD clones will start to loose popularity, and we'll see slower/more tactical squad based or stealth based shooters make a comeback...hopefully all with co-op support.

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24300

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24300 Posts
[QUOTE="superfluidity"]

The problem is that if the point is to increase the level of simulation, it isn't exactly easy to simulate how a person reacts to being shot. I guess I can see doing it just to add some tactical depth to the game, but it probably wouldn't be realistic at all.

da_illest101
well it's still more realistic then two shots in someone's toe nail and they die

If I got shot twice in the foot I'd probably fall over and drop my gun too...
Avatar image for skrat_01
skrat_01

33767

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 skrat_01
Member since 2007 • 33767 Posts

I'd just like to say Bulletstorm had good hit locations, the game was based around them mechanically.

Pretty great shooter.

They all die in two hits anyway, what's the point.funsohng
Exactly, thank you Call of Duty. Shooters in general have damage locations they're just not great, what does irk me is howstupidly overpowered, accurate weapons and items are and how vulnerable (to being quickly killed) players are in many shooters, which only gets worse with recharging health.

Anyway it would be interesting if more shooters had a Dead Space styled hit location system, where you actually got a proper reaction depending on where you shoot a target. GTA IV kind of did this with its Euphoria physics, even if NPCs generally stumbled about and fell over.

Avatar image for sonny2dap
sonny2dap

2209

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 sonny2dap
Member since 2008 • 2209 Posts
[QUOTE="locopatho"][QUOTE="da_illest101"][QUOTE="superfluidity"]

The problem is that if the point is to increase the level of simulation, it isn't exactly easy to simulate how a person reacts to being shot. I guess I can see doing it just to add some tactical depth to the game, but it probably wouldn't be realistic at all.

well it's still more realistic then two shots in someone's toe nail and they die

If I got shot twice in the foot I'd probably fall over and drop my gun too...

Shots to the arms or legs from most of the wepons in the games being slagged off, would have high probability of rupturing either the femoral or radial arteries causing serious, serious problems coupled with splintered bones etc. so technically for the purposes of the game you may as well be dead after sustaining those kind of injuries, you certainly wont be fighting anyone.
Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24300

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24300 Posts
[QUOTE="locopatho"][QUOTE="da_illest101"] well it's still more realistic then two shots in someone's toe nail and they diesonny2dap
If I got shot twice in the foot I'd probably fall over and drop my gun too...

Shots to the arms or legs from most of the wepons in the games being slagged off, would have high probability of rupturing either the femoral or radial arteries causing serious, serious problems coupled with splintered bones etc. so technically for the purposes of the game you may as well be dead after sustaining those kind of injuries, you certainly wont be fighting anyone.

Yeah, I mean you may not be technically dead yet but sure you won't be running about capturing any flags anytime soon!
Avatar image for lordreaven
lordreaven

7239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 lordreaven
Member since 2005 • 7239 Posts

Red Orchetrs 2 is doing it. And it was in Red Orchestra Ostfront: 41-45.

Avatar image for MrJack3690
MrJack3690

2227

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#36 MrJack3690
Member since 2004 • 2227 Posts

[QUOTE="iBeShowtime"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Well... outside of a few games, all of the biggest FPSs ever don't have that.

Quake, Doom, Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Battlefield, the original Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault...

So I wouldn't call that "dumbed down".

Hell, even the games you mentioned, Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Brothers in Arms, don't have damage locations on the model.

Wasdie

At least in games like Counter Strike/SOCOM you have to go for the head (or at least the upper bod). Shooting them in the arm/leg does nothing unlike in games this gen where two toe shots = a kill. It might not be to the extent TC mentioned of getting shot in the arm and dropping your gun but it's definitely better than games now.

Shoot somebody in the legs in CoD compared to the head.

It's still there. Trust me.

Last I played Black Ops I didn't even have to be hitting the player to get a kill :P

Avatar image for topgunmv
topgunmv

10880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#37 topgunmv
Member since 2003 • 10880 Posts

[QUOTE="da_illest101"][QUOTE="superfluidity"]

The problem is that if the point is to increase the level of simulation, it isn't exactly easy to simulate how a person reacts to being shot. I guess I can see doing it just to add some tactical depth to the game, but it probably wouldn't be realistic at all.

locopatho

well it's still more realistic then two shots in someone's toe nail and they die

If I got shot twice in the foot I'd probably fall over and drop my gun too...

You may not be as combat effective, but in a firefight your adrenaline would be so high that you would wonder why your foot wasn't working right, not even realizing you've been shot.

Avatar image for SaltyMeatballs
SaltyMeatballs

25165

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#38 SaltyMeatballs
Member since 2009 • 25165 Posts

[QUOTE="iBeShowtime"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Well... outside of a few games, all of the biggest FPSs ever don't have that.

Quake, Doom, Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Battlefield, the original Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault...

So I wouldn't call that "dumbed down".

Hell, even the games you mentioned, Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Brothers in Arms, don't have damage locations on the model.

Wasdie

At least in games like Counter Strike/SOCOM you have to go for the head (or at least the upper bod). Shooting them in the arm/leg does nothing unlike in games this gen where two toe shots = a kill. It might not be to the extent TC mentioned of getting shot in the arm and dropping your gun but it's definitely better than games now.

Shoot somebody in the legs in CoD compared to the head.

It's still there. Trust me.

Head does more damage but it's not even a one shot kill, at least it is in Rainbow Six Vegas. Chest and foot = the same, only makes a real difference for snipers.
Avatar image for Jonzey123
Jonzey123

356

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 Jonzey123
Member since 2005 • 356 Posts

Goldeneye/Perfect Dark seemed to be the pinnacle of FPS features.

EvanTheGamer
Goldeneye, not so much, but defo Perfect Dark. If you ask me, it's ridiculous that over 10 years later, all the features PD had have not only not been topped, they're not even standard.
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#40 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="iBeShowtime"] At least in games like Counter Strike/SOCOM you have to go for the head (or at least the upper bod). Shooting them in the arm/leg does nothing unlike in games this gen where two toe shots = a kill. It might not be to the extent TC mentioned of getting shot in the arm and dropping your gun but it's definitely better than games now.iBeShowtime

Shoot somebody in the legs in CoD compared to the head.

It's still there. Trust me.

Last CoD I played was MW2. Headshots do more damage but that's about it. Getting shot in the chest is the equivalent to getting shot in the leg in MW2.

You can say the exact same thing for counter strike.. Hell if you get insta killed if shot in the foot or leg with a AWP.. If not you lost like 85 health.

Avatar image for lawlessx
lawlessx

48753

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#41 lawlessx
Member since 2004 • 48753 Posts

Red Orchetrs 2 is doing it. And it was in Red Orchestra Ostfront: 41-45.

lordreaven

music games don't count..........:P

Avatar image for Ninja-Hippo
Ninja-Hippo

23434

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#42 Ninja-Hippo
Member since 2008 • 23434 Posts
There was a craze for ultra-realistic shooters last gen. This gen there is a craze for blockbuster action-movie shooters, that's all. Last gen there was Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, Brothers in Arms, Full Spectrum Warrior; all fairly brutal to varying degrees with an emphasis on tension and realism and the fear of death. Then it got kinda saturated and Modern Warfare dropped and people seemed to jump over to more instant-action run and gun games.
Avatar image for lawlessx
lawlessx

48753

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#43 lawlessx
Member since 2004 • 48753 Posts
[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]There was a craze for ultra-realistic shooters last gen. This gen there is a craze for blockbuster action-movie shooters, that's all. Last gen there was Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, Brothers in Arms, Full Spectrum Warrior; all fairly brutal to varying degrees with an emphasis on tension and realism and the fear of death. Then it got kinda saturated and Modern Warfare dropped and people seemed to jump over to more instant-action run and gun games.

instant gratification is the new kid on the block this gen.
Avatar image for sandbox3d
sandbox3d

5166

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 sandbox3d
Member since 2010 • 5166 Posts

MGS3 was my favorite title that did that. Was it necessary? Nope, but it did make things a bit more interesting after a big shoot out, or a near death escape seeing the remaining soldiers limp from being shot in the leg, holding their wounded arm. Shooting a gun out of an enemy soldiers hand and watching him go for the pistol is great, especially when he is nervously shooting with a shakey arm. And of course there is nothing more fun than shooting a radio out of a soldiers hand before he can call for back up.

Outside of practical play it also just made for hours of entertainment toying with the enemies. Sneak up un a patrol, draw your pistol and make him reach for the sky. Take all of his items and shoot him in the leg and his shooting arm. Place a TNT charge on his back and sneak off while he thinks you're still there. Then go rig up the ammunition and provisions store houses with C4. Then find a good vantage point to hide and watch everything play out. Detonate the C4 and watch back up come running. When they surround your hostage and start questioning him detonate the TNT and the map is clear, plus enemies in the next few areas will be hungry and low on ammo since you blew up their supplies.

And wow I just got way the hell off topic lol. I just like these types of things. They may not be necessary, but they do add a whole new dynamic to a game.

Avatar image for Midnightshade29
Midnightshade29

6003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 301

User Lists: 0

#45 Midnightshade29
Member since 2008 • 6003 Posts

MGS3 was my favorite title that did that. Was it necessary? Nope, but it did make things a bit more interesting after a big shoot out, or a near death escape seeing the remaining soldiers limp from being shot in the leg, holding their wounded arm. Shooting a gun out of an enemy soldiers hand and watching him go for the pistol is great, especially when he is nervously shooting with a shakey arm. And of course there is nothing more fun than shooting a radio out of a soldiers hand before he can call for back up.

Outside of practical play it also just made for hours of entertainment toying with the enemies. Sneak up un a patrol, draw your pistol and make him reach for the sky. Take all of his items and shoot him in the leg and his shooting arm. Place a TNT charge on his back and sneak off while he thinks you're still there. Then go rig up the ammunition and provisions store houses with C4. Then find a good vantage point to hide and watch everything play out. Detonate the C4 and watch back up come running. When they surround your hostage and start questioning him detonate the TNT and the map is clear, plus enemies in the next few areas will be hungry and low on ammo since you blew up their supplies.

And wow I just got way the hell off topic lol. I just like these types of things. They may not be necessary, but they do add a whole new dynamic to a game.

sandbox3d
That they do! Mgs3 is the only metal gear game I haven't played, I own the game , should go play it. My favorite game that did this stuff and had an amazing Level of freedom was the original Dues Ex. I am afriad Eidos/SE have made it "accessible" in other word dumbed down. Last gen not only had these mechanics but last gens shooters also had real single player campaigns. It pisses menoff that more attention isn't given to single player games. The newer cod type games also brigs out the bro gamers and instant gratification junkies... Arggh. I guess I need to dust off my old PC shooters or buy on steam. I don't see things Changing :(
Avatar image for RyanShazam
RyanShazam

6498

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 RyanShazam
Member since 2006 • 6498 Posts

I dont see that working very well in a MP game. I mean if it had stealth gameplay or was a single player game then it would work a lot better. When you see an enemy in a MP game you want to KILL them. I dont want to leave them brutaly injured on the field. Even then, if they are injured enough to where they cant fight, then they might as well be dead anyways.

A game like COD would not benefit from having realistic damage locations like the TC wants. Thats a game trait that would be accepted in a slim variety of games.

Avatar image for ionusX
ionusX

25778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#47 ionusX
Member since 2009 • 25778 Posts

operation flashpoint 3: red river

fallout: new vegas

avp 2010

singularity

dead space 1 & 2

resident evil 4 & 5

tada.. lookee what i did i made a list :D