Science Fiction Film Weapons

[Crakkerjakk]

I've got a Tom Clancy FPS, and even though it models weapons fairly well, by the time I finish the game I must have killed almost a thousand bad guys. Me and my three man team. I like playing the game on "realistic" mode, where getting hit more than twice tends to ruin your day, but it's frustratingly difficult when the enemy hordes just keep coming.

I hear the old SWAT games were good for realism and putting you up against a reasonable number of foes, with a large part of the game focused on planning your insertion.

[SuedodeuS]

Originally Posted by Molokh

Well, I was always curious why the high-accuracy pistol trope is so often copied by computer games.

It's been mentioned somewhat, but it basically boils down to player expectations. If you are using a weapon that isn't highly inaccurate, you expect the bullet to hit where the targeting reticle is. It gets annoying when it doesn't do so. Annoying your players is never a good idea.

The reason for this expectation probably has to do with the earliest FPS games (or at least the ones I've played) lacking any sort of scatter mechanic. With the minigun in Doom, the bullets hit where the reticle is pointed. Now, eventually automatic weapons gained spread to balance them a bit better and prevent strange situations (like sniping with a machine gun on full auto), but the pistol is generally already weak enough without adding in spread. The pistol tends to be a fallback weapon, as it should be, barring strange exceptions (like the chargeable blaster pistol of Jedi Outcast, or the infamous scoped pistol of Halo; note that in both cases the assault rifle has low damage and ridiculous scatter). So, you maintain a high-accuracy pistol as a legacy effect in modern shooters. Sometimes you get some very strange results (the pistol in Metal Gear Solid 2 is better than the sniper rifle, due to the rifle's reticle moving around if you don't take meds first), but for the most part it works.

[lachimba]

Originally Posted by Ragitsu

Yes, because 100% completely realistic weapons would have enhanced the game.

The main problem with the SMG/grenade launcher combination isn't the issue of there not being enough room to mount one underneath, but the fact that it is nonexistent!

From memory in Hightech one of the HK Carbines is about SMG size and can come with a grenade launcher.

[Ragitsu]

Originally Posted by lachimba

From memory in Hightech one of the HK Carbines is about SMG size and can come with a grenade launcher.

It isn't as small as the MP7A1. Seriously, do you think that thing can hold an AG36 or equivalent as is?

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Ragitsu

It isn't as small as the MP7A1. Seriously, do you think that thing can hold an AG36 or equivalent as is?

M203 really isn't that big. Basically just a metal cylinder about a foot long and three inches in diameter. Little bit bigger than a paper towel tube.

[Ragitsu]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

M203 really isn't that big. Basically just a metal cylinder about a foot long and three inches in diameter. Little bit bigger than a paper towel tube.

I am aware of that.

Even if you manage to get an AG36/M203 onto the MP7A1 (look up pictures of all three), there's the problem of additional bulk that robs the SMG of it's maneuverability and increases it's size (harder to conceal).

Then again, that is probably why the grenade launcher was made invisible :-P.

[Phoenix_Dragon]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

M203 really isn't that big. Basically just a metal cylinder about a foot long and three inches in diameter. Little bit bigger than a paper towel tube.

It's aproximately the same size as the MP7 itself. You could mate them together, but you're definately not fitting one in the MP7 :>

[Mateus]

Great job.