What misconceptions and mistakes (scientific, etc) really bother you in games? - Games

well duh they stop your heart

Flamethrowers shooting for like three meters and then the fire simply disappears.

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;23867258]well we are renowned as having one of the greatest marine corps and our special air service is the best of the best.[/QUOTE] Still you have fucked up every war you have ever been into after the world war 2.

[QUOTE=Falchion;23867354]Still you have fucked up every war you have ever been into after the world war 2.[/QUOTE] No more than America has. Besides the SAS aren't involved in direct warfare. But you're attempting to bait me into an argument so I won't bite

When a gun who uses the same caliber as others is more powerful than the others.

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;23867376]No more than America has. Besides the SAS aren't involved in direct warfare. But you're attempting to bait me into an argument so I won't bite[/QUOTE] Oh wait. Rate me dumb because I mistook you for an american.

[QUOTE=Falchion;23867401]Oh wait. Rate me dumb because I mistook you for an american.[/QUOTE] ah no problema, a simple case of mistaken identity

I'll probably not be alone in this; I always cringe when I [U]hear[/U] an explosion in space.

People made of Kevlar.

[QUOTE=LasPlagas;23867468]I'll probably not be alone in this; I always cringe when I [U]hear[/U] an explosion in space.[/QUOTE] I cringe when I see smoke movement from spaceships in space, no matter which direction the fuckers moving the SMOKE SHOULDN'T REALLY MOVE AT ALL, INSTEAD CLUSTER INTO A HUGE FUCKING BALL. [editline]12:27PM[/editline] Plus WHY THE FUCK IS THERE SMOKE IN THE FIRST PLACE, THIS IS SPACE GOD DAMN IT.

Australian's being in almost no games, and when they are, usually just a guy with an accent or a mention of a city or character. That being said, the Australian marines in Halo are awesome.

[QUOTE=Dejarie;23867714]Australian's being in almost no games, and when they are, usually just a guy with an accent or a mention of a city or character. That being said, the Australian marines in Halo are awesome.[/QUOTE] well games can't be in australia, why should australia be in games

[QUOTE=LasPlagas;23867468]I'll probably not be alone in this; I always cringe when I [U]hear[/U] an explosion in space.[/QUOTE] Mass effect is the only game i have played that got it right.

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;23866381]it's funny because the majority of the things people have posted in this thread are for balancing reasons or to improve the gameplay experience. Explosions in space? more exciting. Silencers that actually make your guns quiet? well if they didn't stealth sections would be shit. Shotguns not working at distance? if they did they would be unbalanced alongside other weapons. It's pretty simple.[/QUOTE] Yeah this is what I think reading the thread as well. People taking realism too seriously, most irritatingly gun realism. You do realise it's a video game, not an imitation of real life. I doubt it makes a whole lot of difference whether or not a game calls mags clips, or whatever.

[QUOTE=nightlord;23867739]Mass effect is the only game i have played that got it right.[/QUOTE] And then Mass Effect 2 and it's opening shattered all that to pieces.

I hate it when my friends play a game like CoD then they think they are fucking marines with super high knowlage of guns because they are at the highest level.

[QUOTE=nikola631;23858228]the m95 does like no damage to a tank its a fucking anti tank rifle![/QUOTE] no, no it's not

[QUOTE=nikola631;23858228] Also how the m95 does like no damage to a tank its a fucking anti tank rifle![/QUOTE] It's actually an 'Anti-material rifle', just thought you'd like to know that. Used for destroying un-exploded ordinance, taking out light vehicles and taking out long range targets. That being said, games that have tanks and instead of giving them decent armour and weapon penetration values, they go all 'Hurf, let's just say this gun does x amount of damage, and slap a modifier to the ass saying it does twice the damage.'

[QUOTE=mercurius;23866145][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCWYW_bhYkQ[/media] You can modify the mechanism inside the gun or completely replace it.[/QUOTE] doesn't mean every tec-9 ever is automatic

Shotgun and other powerful guns sends people flying.

[QUOTE=Hullu V3;23868100]Shotgun and other powerful guns sends people flying.[/QUOTE] Sledge's Shotgun was the ultimate fun weapon. [editline]01:12PM[/editline] Go into a duel with someone, get them to jump and shoot them with it, they go FLYING.

[QUOTE=MegaJohnny;23867751]Yeah this is what I think reading the thread as well. People taking realism too seriously, most irritatingly gun realism. You do realise it's a video game, not an imitation of real life. I doubt it makes a whole lot of difference whether or not a game calls mags clips, or whatever.[/QUOTE] Then why do games with bad physics get such poor ratings? Why is Big Rigs the lowest-rated PC game ever? People want it to be realistic (and so do I). The thing is, not only is this shit overdone, but there is little reason to keep it that way. Why show gamers things that aren't even true when you can change a term, modify an animation and tweak the gameplay slightly? I actually didn't know some of the things that were said in this thread.

Being able to put a suppresor onto a gun that has a supressor built into it.

[QUOTE=Rolond Returns;23868155]Sledge's Shotgun was the ultimate fun weapon. [editline]01:12PM[/editline] Go into a duel with someone, get them to jump and shoot them with it, they go FLYING.[/QUOTE] That shit was fun as hell.

[QUOTE=Tabarnaco;23868387]Then why do games with bad physics get such poor ratings? Why is Big Rigs the lowest-rated PC game ever? People want it to be realistic (and so do I). The thing is, not only is this shit overdone, but there is little reason to keep it that way. Why show gamers things that aren't even true when you can change a term, modify an animation and tweak the gameplay slightly? I actually didn't know some of the things that were said in this thread.[/QUOTE] The thing games need isn't necessarily realism, it's believability. The trucks in that game quite obviously weren't believable and were no fun to drive. Whereas smoke plumes in space or inaccurate reload animations are tiny little details that don't affect the gameplay at all.

[QUOTE=Pandemix;23868389]Being able to put a suppresor onto a gun that has a supressor built into it.[/QUOTE] Talking about the WA2000 in MW2? Yeah...

[QUOTE=MegaJohnny;23868835]The fact that space smoke acts as if it's in an atmosphere or that when you reload on an empty clip the animation is the same, doesn't seriously alter the believability of the game. They're little details that don't affect the gameplay or anything.[/QUOTE] I'm sure it would if you went in space before, the only reason why it's believable is because you've never, or rarely seen how it actually works. If you had never seen a car outside of Big Rigs before you would probably think that they work like that too. I'd like games to actually teach people something that isn't false, for instance how physics work in space. That particular example would probably require a pretty significant change in the gameplay, though. But small things like how the guns work wouldn't be very hard to change.

[QUOTE=Fofilolipop;23861873]Then how fun would a game be if all shots where insta kills?[/QUOTE] see SWAT 4 not exactly instant kills, but 2-5 shots.

[QUOTE=Tabarnaco;23868880]I'm sure it would if you went in space before, the only reason why it's believable is because you've never, or rarely seen how it actually works. If you had never seen a car outside of Big Rigs before you would probably think that they work like that too. I'd like games to actually teach people something that isn't false, for instance how physics work in space. That particular example would probably require a pretty significant change in the gameplay, though. But small things like how the guns work wouldn't be very hard to change.[/QUOTE] I'm not playing a game to be taught how a gun works when you reload it. If they want to make it realistic then that's fine by me, but I don't care. Guns aren't a part of my everyday life. Even if I did know a lot about guns, and could pick out all the ways the game got it wrong, I wouldn't care either. Because it's a game. If people take the game literally and use Counter Strike as their source of what different guns are like, that's their fault.

I loved how in inFAMOUS you could revive a person who has been gunned down/electrocuted/tossed of a 5 story building back to perfect health with a dangerous looking electric shock.