PDA

View Full Version : Why do developers never get this right?



FREIGHTz
08-27-2008, 07:43 PM
New console footage (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/39189.html)

So I just watched this video and I noticed that when he reloaded the rifle, he loaded a round into the chamber as if it was empty. Now what I don't understand is why so many games do this (i.e. Battlefield: BC) because it is completely wrong. If you were to take a clip of ammo, shoot half of it, and then reload with a new clip: you would still have a bullet ready in the chamber. Thus, you would not need to **** the hammer (not sure if that terminology is correct, but hopefully you get what I mean).

Why do developers miss this? Seems like a simple enough deal: If you use the whole clip, run the animation; if you do not use it, no need for that part of the animation... Is this just laziness or pure misunderstanding of weapons?

Then again, I may be entirely wrong and if that is the case: don't be mean. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

FREIGHTz
08-27-2008, 07:43 PM
New console footage (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/39189.html)

So I just watched this video and I noticed that when he reloaded the rifle, he loaded a round into the chamber as if it was empty. Now what I don't understand is why so many games do this (i.e. Battlefield: BC) because it is completely wrong. If you were to take a clip of ammo, shoot half of it, and then reload with a new clip: you would still have a bullet ready in the chamber. Thus, you would not need to **** the hammer (not sure if that terminology is correct, but hopefully you get what I mean).

Why do developers miss this? Seems like a simple enough deal: If you use the whole clip, run the animation; if you do not use it, no need for that part of the animation... Is this just laziness or pure misunderstanding of weapons?

Then again, I may be entirely wrong and if that is the case: don't be mean. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Supreme_321
08-27-2008, 07:48 PM
When you shoot a nmormal gun a bullet is atomatic rounded to the chamber unless a sniper rifel in old sniper rifel games. This meanis you getting shot at then you can quickly shoot back instad of jumping and running like a grasshopper from a bull frog for your life.

FREIGHTz
08-27-2008, 07:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Supreme_321:
When you shoot a nmormal gun a bullet is atomatic rounded to the chamber unless a sniper rifel in old sniper rifel games. This meanis you getting shot at then you can quickly shoot back instad of jumping and running like a grasshopper from a bull frog for your life. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So I am right...?

What gives UBISOFT!!!!

Supreme_321
08-27-2008, 07:55 PM
yes, but this is real life stuff here and is completly correct unless if you want them to make this more unreal because theree is uslaly always a bullet on rerady unless if your gun is empty.

Want2Snipe
08-27-2008, 09:17 PM
I imagine this is purely for the "Eye Candy/Hollywood" Effect and they really don't shoot much in real life to know the real aspects of a weapon.

keithsprout
08-27-2008, 09:44 PM
The Call of Duty series and Crysis got this accurately. I think Left 4 Dead might, I'm not sure. It's probably something developers don't really think of often because most people have never fired an automatic weapon. It's not really something that matters much in games.

Jorge-Fonseca
08-27-2008, 09:49 PM
You are right, but I think it is done just to make reload time pretty consistent and balanced, I mean most guns in most games you reload a hell lot faster in the game that you would in real life. Only guns like ak-47 are easy to reload when you have a magazine clip read to put in.

Now you can say that the cocking you do is to prevent jamming, whether or not you already have a bullet in the chamber, you wana make sure the spring in the magazine clip is working and that the first bullet of the clip is fed, even if you waste a bullet. So I suppose you could use that as your excuse, but the truth is, there is a clear line when realism stops being fun and too real. I mean do you really think you can pull bullets out of your body and go back to fighting? Especially with guns where the bullet head explodes inside of you or where it hits a bone and cracks where if you leave even a little bit of the bullet inside of you, it will be infected and you'd most likely die.

IIIR37RO
08-28-2008, 03:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by keithsprout:
The Call of Duty series and Crysis got this accurately. I think Left 4 Dead might, I'm not sure. It's probably something developers don't really think of often because most people have never fired an automatic weapon. It's not really something that matters much in games. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hell the original Halo got it right. The action is unnecessary unless the weapon is empty.

Fedaykin552
08-28-2008, 07:08 PM
That only applies to closed bolt weapons though right?
thats all right on a closed bolt weapon but, it's just a tiny thing, like RSV2 had it and it was cool but unnecessary. If that is going to stop you from buying this game well...

needfarcry
08-29-2008, 07:47 AM
who the **** cares !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
its a great game you lesbian transexual lover.
P.S-sorry for being so rude http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

cre8nhavoc
08-29-2008, 11:34 AM
Rainbow Six 3 and Rainbow Six Black Arrow had the "30+1" option that worked quite well. They skipped it in the Lockdown series but brought it back in the Vegas series.

I like the feature myself, not just for the realism, but for the decisive outcome of gunbattles as well. If you knew you were close to a reload, you could do it quickly and get an advantage over your opponent.