SaSSharp's forum posts

Avatar image for SaSSharp
SaSSharp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 SaSSharp
Member since 2011 • 25 Posts

AA3 has some authentic and realistic traits, however it isn't a terribly realistic representation of combat. It's a recruitment tool and game first and foremost.

ArmA 2 is - It's military training version is Virtual BattleSpace 2, which is used by a variety of forces.

Red Orchestra (2 is upcoming) is realistic as well (same with WW2 Online). the original

Rainbow Six games are as realistic as counter terrorism gets.

-

BC2 isn't realistic at all, nor is it authentic, and your way of judging realism is... odd. Reality is firefights usually happen over 100ms and it's more about getting your bearings or getting the drop on the enemy than ridiculous manshoots.

skrat_01
I apologize as I did forget to mention Arma 2 combat wise although the weapons used are a little sketchy, although they might have been used they weren't terribly common. Also when I said battlefield bad company was realistic I meant in terms of health, and it is the most realistic big name game for the Xbox 360 or Ps3 compared to Call of duty which is a fun game... some times, but is horrible at portraying realistic combat, health, or actual weapons. Commando probably doesn't exist and they like to make up damage almost all assault rifles in the game probably fire the same round so the damage would be the same, although the grooves in the barrel might change the muzzel velocity as they cannot be the same in every rifle basically same stopping power. Also I favor AA3 over Arma2 because arma has so many buttons and awkward ones and I find the graphics in arma worse than that of AA3. Also the movement in Arma feels clunky and weird.
Avatar image for SaSSharp
SaSSharp

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 SaSSharp
Member since 2011 • 25 Posts
So I just made this account only to post this one thing. I read a post about realistic games and call of duty and counter strike were mentioned and I threw up. For the computer the only realistic game is Americas Army 3 on account of it only uses real us army weapons unlike call of duty where only guns that have never been used in the US armed forces and where you can take around 6 shots to the chest with no body armor and live and a shot to the head with most guns and live. Also AA3 have realistic battlefield medical attention. Lets say you fall of a building and brake your ankle a teammate will have to go to you look at your symptoms and splint your leg. And its made by the US army to recruit soldiers so you no there not going to do anything unrealistic. And I don't even have to tell you anything about counter strike its shockingly unrealistic. Although black ops still takes the title of the second most unrealistic game in the world behind Halo were the pistol does more damage than an assault rifle and you can take 20 bullets to the head and live. For the Xbox360 and PS3 I would say Battlefield BC2 is the most realistic combat wise except for the weapons used almost none of them are used or have been used in the armed forces. But I would Wait for BC3 the weapons in the trailers looked like regular military guns like AT4, M4a1, and m16's so I would say the game have very much potential realism wise, but only in hardcore mode core is just like call of duty, there is no suck thing as radar that tells you were the enemy is when ever you fire. So a recap AA3 most and probably only realistic computer game and Battlefield for the Xbox360 and PS3, But most of all if you say call of duty is realistic you should shoot yourself in the face with a handgun and see if you live like you do in call of duty or maybe try 7 shots to the chest with no armor.