Balance Vs Realism

Black Ops forum

I wanna see some BUILDING and GROUND blow up! i mean really, Realism is FTW... I am Pretty sure if you held 2 Model 1887 Shotguns THEN shot them, that you would break your wrists... This is realistic! They have Game Engines that have to capiblity to have Exploding buildings or terrain... this is what i want from CoD not BFBC and BFBC2 :clan: :clan: :clan:
Shrub1
Likes: 0
Posts: 13
Registered: ‎24-08-2010

PirateNinja wrote:

 

Balance all the way



I dont care if the Spas 12 does have a kill range of 25 yards (it doesnt) it shouldnt have it in the game. All weapons should have advantages and disadvantages.



Low range, high damage = shot guns! This is balanced.



Pistols should be short range and mid power but very accurate. This is balanced.



SMGs should be short range, low damage but have a high ammo size and good fire rate. This is sometimes balanced in some games.



Assault rifles should be mid range, mid power, low accuracy but a decent fire rate.



Sniper rifles should be LONG range, high damage, but should NOT ever be useful in short ranges. This is why quick scoping should be eliminated it destroys the checks and balances of the weapon hierarchy



I dont care if their are super weapons in real life, no one should dominate because they managed to get the best weapon or learn the cheapest kill methods



SPAS 12 range is 40m.. . . .. . .
lightshadow4555
Likes: 3
Posts: 24
Registered: ‎22-07-2010
Well said Pirate Ninja I think SMGs should have mid power though, there are some SMGs that are just beast, and with a higher then average fire rate, there's no reason why you shouldn't die before me if I dump half my clip into you, but you can kill me with 2 hits with your assault rifle with stopping power. Not to mention akimbo weapons.( like the MW2 P90's.) The fire rate is ridiculous, and I can get half my clips of BOTH guns into you in a CQB before you can pull the trigger, (full solo P90 clip?) and all you hear is thump-thump-thump-thump of your bullets on target and see hit markers popping up like porn spam, then die when you get one burst of M-16 in your legs. Low range and low damage makes them useless for anything other then CQB. And because of that you see most people just use a shotty. (and why not) Then they wonder why everyone uses Assault Rifles all the time....
fwip
Likes: 1
Posts: 798
Registered: ‎15-06-2011
You cant get too realistic, I agree with it only concerning attachments and stuff. Its ridiculous to think you can accuratley predict bullet drop in a game, when there's so much that goes into finding your zero point for sniping. Not to mention having to use other FORMULAS (yes,math) to determine wind speed, gravity, the earths rotation, and a million other things before you can gauge in on your target the right way. And to think you can accuratley gauge whether your target is 200 yards or 1200 yards away in a GAME on your 36 inch tv isnt realistic. Just adding gravity to affect "bullet drop" is an insult to the claim of trying to make it more realistic (BFBC2) when now it comes down to just aim a little above the head for a head shot regardless of range. Before games try to make it more realistic, they should concentrate on balancing the weapons first, although I do understand its hard to make real life gun stats translate into a game you want to be one of two ways, arcade or "realistic". You cant make everyone happy, because if you get shot point blank in the chest with ANY gun in the game in real life, you're going to die, no hit markers, no stopping power needed to make it a one hit killer, INSTANT DEATH! So you have to make some concessions with the stats, making some guns better then others in each catagory, however, balancing the guns will make the games waaaay more "realistic" faster then any gimmick like "gravity" or some such folly....
fwip
Likes: 1
Posts: 798
Registered: ‎15-06-2011
You just have to pay attention to the fine line separating Reality and Fantasy. A Video Game is what? A video GAME. A game will never be realistic. A GAME is supposed to be played for fun.
nisioisin
Likes: 0
Posts: 194
Registered: ‎09-08-2011
Realism.



Gun stats shouldn't be that hard to produce.

Damage is load at speed over range.

Magazine size is given.

Fire rate can be measured. Selectable fire rates (when applicable) should be available.

Accuracy can be measured at every range.

Penetration can be measured (through different materials) at every range.

Reload can be timed.

Weight can be measured.

Aim down sights time can be measured (which is also affected by mobility).



Personally, instead of the Primary/Secondary/Equipment selection. I think that the player should have an inventory grid. Whatever you fit into it, you can have, this includes guns, attachments, extra ammo, and equipment. Players can equip attire such as vests/helmets/belts to increase armor/storage/camouflage. Total weight affects mobility.



I also think that as you gain experience as a player, you also gain experience with the equipment that you are using. You will be able to reduce recoil, reload faster, ADS faster, and throw explosives further.



A few more thoughts:

Getting shot slows you down (on foot, reloading, ADS) and increases recoil.

Getting shot in the arm removes you from ADS.

LMGs cannot be ADS unless when prone or bipod mounted.

Alternative ammo types available for applicable guns.

No akimbo shotguns.





Any thoughts?
djwyattwood
Likes: 0
Posts: 17
Registered: ‎15-10-2008

djwyattwood wrote:

 

Realism.



Gun stats shouldn't be that hard to produce.

Damage is load at speed over range.

Magazine size is given.

Fire rate can be measured. Selectable fire rates (when applicable) should be available.

Accuracy can be measured at every range.

Penetration can be measured (through different materials) at every range.

Reload can be timed.

Weight can be measured.

Aim down sights time can be measured (which is also affected by mobility).



Personally, instead of the Primary/Secondary/Equipment selection. I think that the player should have an inventory grid. Whatever you fit into it, you can have, this includes guns, attachments, extra ammo, and equipment. Players can equip attire such as vests/helmets/belts to increase armor/storage/camouflage. Total weight affects mobility.



I also think that as you gain experience as a player, you also gain experience with the equipment that you are using. You will be able to reduce recoil, reload faster, ADS faster, and throw explosives further.



A few more thoughts:

Getting shot slows you down (on foot, reloading, ADS) and increases recoil.

Getting shot in the arm removes you from ADS.

LMGs cannot be ADS unless when prone or bipod mounted.

Alternative ammo types available for applicable guns.

No akimbo shotguns.





Any thoughts?







I agree to an extent on the grounds that if someone used a weapon more than any other it should improve your performance with it...maybe not alot but I do believe it needs to improve. However I do think that in a game such as Call of Duty if getting shot slowed you down or knocked you out of ADS then it would be a very annoying mechanic and a lot of people would simply not play I'm sure. However I do hate that a assault rifle may be able to aim at me while I am hitting him with an LMG.
An_Anthro_Fox
Likes: 0
Posts: 115
Registered: ‎28-02-2009

Kickimanjaro wrote:

 

Now on to realism. The M1 Garand looked great, sounded great, but the reload animation/function was not realistic. It's en bloc clip that holds 8 rounds, was designed to eject once all bullets had been fired and the user should not be able to remove the clip while there were still bullets in it. This is not a huge issue, but it would have been a nice addition that would have helped to add more distinction to the gun.







Actually you're half right. you COULD reload the M1 with half a clip left but it was awkward and often soldiers would just finish the clip for ease of reload.
hewhoishere
Likes: 0
Posts: 19
Registered: ‎09-10-2011
It goes without saying that there is no way to fully replicate combat in a video game. The game designers have to strike a very delicate balance between making the game 'somewhat' realistic but still playable and fun. Often the most most realistic aspects of a video game are the graphics and weapons performance (to a degree).



If realism was the key, then the OpFor or Militia in MW2 wouldn't be able to call in stealth bombers or Harriers - a leg shot with a Barrett (imagine a bullet larger than a fat man's thumb punching through your thigh) would immediately put you down - and a riot shield would break apart after a set number of rounds.



For me, I can deal with most unrealistic aspects of a FPS like COD or MOH because they make the game enjoyable, but there are some that go too far. I'm specifically taking about single-handing a pair of shotguns or lunging half-way across the map with a knife. That's why I play MW2 on Hardcore modes - it brings a slightly more degree of realism (weapons damage, use of sights and no radar) but still the thrill of using the killstreaks and perks.



From what I understand, Black Ops intentionally got rid of some of these sillier aspects (nukes, commando, etc.).
combatvetizaf
Likes: 92
Posts: 939
Registered: ‎25-05-2011
OK fair enough the snipers in MW2 may have been over powered, but dont you think in real life if you have a sniper you can shoot someone pretty accurately without having to look down the sight at close range? I mean, theres no sight in paintballing but we are pretty accurate at shooting them arent we?
Magyarking2
Likes: 0
Posts: 26
Registered: ‎30-08-2010

Studios