Biggest Complaint

2006-02-15 12:16:08

#1

wannabe_tank_whore: Member; +5|6812

My biggest complaint is the complainers who complain about it being/not being realistic.

First on my list is... Respawning. You die then you can respawn in 15 seconds. Realistic huh?
Second: Reviving. You're mortally wounded and yet a medic can revive you to full health. Realistic?
Third: It's a video game. Enough said.
Fourth: Jump shooting. Who in the hell can't jump and pull the trigger in real life?
Fifth: Grenade Launcher. They're deadly... get over it. Remember number 1 and sometimes number 2 and move on with life.

I can go on and on like when you are shot you can still run at full speed. A medic pack reheals your health by walking over it. Lag on the 'battlefield'. etc.

Now we have a total noob game coded for total noobs to appease total noobs.

2006-02-15 12:27:29

#2

Deathscope: Member; +2|6680

You defineltly did not think reason 1 out to well because if we couldn't respawn it be difficult to simulate a battle. Perhaps if players payed for BF2 like Everquest and games like that they could have no respawns and it wouldn't be a laggy piece of shit, but I am unaware of if it possible to have hundreds of players and solve the lag problem.

2006-02-15 12:39:29

#3

wannabe_tank_whore: Member; +5|6812

The majority of complainers have complained about the game not being realistic with the way things were prior to the latest patch. Respawning is not realistic and never will be realistic so you have no point.

2006-02-15 12:50:44

#4

Deathscope: Member; +2|6680

My point is it isn't really possible yet so ofcourse those who complain about realism would not adress respawning. It is tolerable unrealism

Last edited by Deathscope (2006-02-15 13:02:27)

2006-02-15 20:35:05

#5

twiistaaa: Member; +87|6703|mexico

why dont people just play americas army if they want realism?

hardly anything in this game is realistic. in battle soldiers dont just run in unorganised, medics dont fly jets, snipers dont drive tanks, big boxes full of ammo dont just float down within seconds and metres upon request, vechiles dont just appear from no where, guns jam, swapping from knife to pistol to gun to grenade and back to knife doesnt happen in under 3 seconds, helicopters dont fly over known AA, uncapturable bases are capturable in real life (no matter how big they paint the red circle with a line throught it),mines arent placed on heavy traffic friendly roads and if they are everyone going into battle is told about it,

people who complain about the realism must think that these things happen in real life. cus they are just that dumb.

2006-02-16 14:43:43

#6

Deathscope: Member; +2|6680

I agree twiista and I think they should make it as realistic as possible

2006-02-16 15:12:08

#7

Raevin: Member; +0|6684

Hmm....what would happen if EA took it even further? Let's say that a sniper could destroy a tank with a track shot (there are technically anti-tank sniper rifles in existance)...that would make the game even more unrealistic, right? Of course it would. Would you complain that it's too unrealistic and be ok with somebody telling you that the game is made for fun vs. having any kind of realism? Of course you would. So, exactly where does one draw the line between too much realism, not enough realism, etc, etc...

It appears as though everybody has their own opinion on the subject.

2006-02-16 16:29:51

#8

Deathscope: Member; +2|6680

I have heard that the M95 has the power to de-track a tank so how would this be unrealistic and what's wrong with wanting as much realism as possible within reason?

2006-02-16 16:36:11

#9

Ty: Mass Media Casualty; +2,398|6809|Noizyland

Wow, that sounds like it's copy/pasted from a post I did on a similar topic a while back. It's not, but I raised the same points. Good show. Fuck reality.

[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon

2006-02-16 20:15:53

#10

twiistaaa: Member; +87|6703|mexico

Deathscope wrote:
I have heard that the M95 has the power to de-track a tank so how would this be unrealistic and what's wrong with wanting as much realism as possible within reason?

depends, if it is detracked it shouldnt blow up. thats stupid.

2006-02-17 13:01:46

#11

Deathscope: Member; +2|6680

Yeah true I didn't read what he said thouroughly enough it would stop it not destroy it.

2006-02-17 13:20:43

#12

Raevin: Member; +0|6684

Deathscope wrote:
I have heard that the M95 has the power to de-track a tank so how would this be unrealistic and what's wrong with wanting as much realism as possible within reason?

Actually, nothing is wrong with it...which was my point. It's just that there are varying degrees of what people want in regards to realism. One person might argue that it's not realistic enough and then another person might come back and argue that the game isn't about realism and the first person should just "stfu and stop complaining"...however, if the roles are reversed then the person that just said "stfu and stop complaining" would probably start complaining about realism, too.

The game NEEDS a certain amount of realism...otherwise we might as well just load up Quake and be done with it.

BF2S Forums Biggest Complaint

Deathscope wrote:

Deathscope wrote:

Board footer