xbox.Checkmate11B wrote:Sorry. Stupidity always has and always will drive me nuts.

your dog isn't stupid, how would he get to work? he can't drive, let alone get a license.

My God. You take games WAY TOO seriously. But using your sad reasoning, I personally would think it takes more "skill" to stay alive in a hardcore environment, as it's just as easy to get killed as it's as to kill. Anyway, games should never be built so that some kid can prove he's better then someone else. They should be built with fun in mind. Some of us like realism over being "l337 pwnz0rs". A direct port? Don't make me laugh. I defy you to offer up a suggestion for a hardcore/realism mode that doesn't use that formula. Go on. Try.

I personally hope that with time this "realism" fight over games just dies. The engine, maps, guns, ect. that do not change when you switch modes and break any realism the game is trying to make. The vanilla version of the game is what every piece of the game is crafted to work with.

To back this up I am going to bring in BF2:Project Reality Mod as a case study. If you have not heard of this and call yourself a fan of "realistic" or "hardcore" games then it is worth educating yourself over. This game's realism mode is just the game itself. The vision for this game was to imitate realism by changing more then just some interface options and damage.

Lets look at the mainstream hardcore model:
-More damage(or less health no big difference)
-Interface changes such as not showing ammo or mini maps, ect.

Lets look at project reality's realism model.
-Large maps(kilometers squared)
-Large view distances
-Guns with a very high deviation, requiring a few seconds between shots(not to mention lead as well)
-Required squads with limited kits(such as one Automatic riflemen, one medic, ect)
-Good use of tactical smoke
-Limited global kits such as 1-2 snipers per 32 man team.
-Logistics trucks and supply crates that must be transported across the map
-Multiple people required to operate armor

I could continue, but I think there is enough here to prove my point. There are other realistic"hardcore" models that are out there in games that are a heck of a lot better then the mainstream COD method. You can't take one thing from reality put it into a game and then call the game realistic.

cem_ea_id.Dex_Luther wrote:

battlefield.Isacc wrote:
People cry and cry about realism in games, but they don't understand that realistic games =/= competitive games. Hardcore mode has always been campy, and who sees who first JUST LIKE REAL LIFE. It's all spray and pray, because you don't need to aim for the head when a couple body shots kill just as quickly as a well placed headshot.

The only reason you can say that is because you've never played a game with proper realism. Play a Tom Clancy game (preferably one from before they were dumbed down). The first Rainbow Sixes or Ghost Recons, and then come and tell me realistic games =/= competitive games.

I competed a lot in Rainbow Six 3 (on PC and Xbox), Ghost Recon (on PC), and Ghost Recon 2 + Summit Strike (on Xbox). I can tell you the matches were much much more intense (especially on the Ghost Recons) than anything I've experienced recently. It only took 2-3 shots to bring someone down, so people were more careful and didn't go running around everywhere. You couldn't run and gun in the earlier GRs because your accuracy turned to crap. Unfortunately, morons complained about how hard and slow the game was, and the devs changed it in the newer games. It's all about the run and gun now. Especially in Halo Six: Vegas.

I played all the Tom Clancy games... way back from the very first Ghost Recon, with Island Thunder and Desert Siege. And with that game, a team with the better teamwork always won... that's just it. But nowadays, I just don't have the patience for it anymore.

I was speaking in terms of his statement regarding skill. He's WAY TOO tied to this game if he thinks it proves anything about him that he can "get three headshots on a guy".

It doesn't prove anything....except that I'm better at the game.

And whats wrong with wanting to be good at a particular game? Should sports players be ridiculed because they try to be the best? Should chess masters?

I'm not trying to grow a bigger *, I'm just playing a COMPETITIVE GAME. I don't see why that makes you so defensive.

And let's not even get started about the fact that the game will definitely have tournaments...

Dense much? Of course when discussing video games there has to be consideration made to what's fun. Games like ArmA and OpFlash prove you can have an amazing amount of realism in a game and still be fun. I love people like you that try and use extremes as solid logic. Classic forum debate tactic.

LMAO. Arma and Opflash are both wretched excuses for games. They were both GINORMOUS flops that couldn't even function as a second rate FPS. OpFlash was just a carbon copy of BF2's Project Reality mod, except with the fun taken out.

And speaking of "solid logic," your OPINIONS on arma and Opflash don't "PROVE" anything. Failed at your own game there.

A direct port? Don't make me laugh. I defy you to offer up a suggestion for a hardcore/realism mode that doesn't use that formula. Go on. Try.

Project Reality. OWNED.

Oh, btw...in order to go all REALISM on you...

Shock paddles don't revive people from bullet wounds. Guns can't shoot more than 1 or two shots without becoming inaccurate, and the kick on them is damned heavy. It takes trained professionals to drive tanks and fly helicopters. And little boxes with decals don't automatically give real people health or ammo.

Nice try though.

battlefield.Sorrow wrote:

xbox.Checkmate11B wrote:Sorry. Stupidity always has and always will drive me nuts.

your dog isn't stupid, how would he get to work? he can't drive, let alone get a license.

There are many dogs who have meaningful jobs, his dog is a freeloader.

I love the "Hardcore takes less skill argument".

So it's MORE skillful to get shot 5 times in the back and turn around and headshot the person?

Sure, you turned around and got a headshot, but you got SHOT 5 F*CKING TIMES. YOU FAIL.


Yeah, sorry. If you actually think having to be 10x more careful, accurate, and cunning - requires less skill...than you're delusional.

battlefield.Deckard wrote:I love the "Hardcore takes less skill argument".

So it's MORE skillful to get shot 5 times in the back and turn around and headshot the person?

Sure, you turned around and got a headshot, but you got SHOT 5 F*CKING TIMES. YOU FAIL.


Yeah, sorry. If you actually think having to be 10x more careful, accurate, and cunning - requires less skill...than you're delusional.

This PROVES MY POINT. Your post says people have to be "10x more...accurate"...and yet you managed to shoot 5 shots into someone without headshotting them? FFS LEARN TO AIM.

That's the ENTIRE POINT. Yes it IS more skillfull for a person to headshot you after you FAILED TO AIM CAREFULLY.

Not to mention, I don't see the argument for hardcore mode taking more accurate shots. Spray and pray = kills when 1 or 2 shots kill. That's simple common sense.

battlefield.Deckard wrote:I love the "Hardcore takes less skill argument".

So it's MORE skillful to get shot 5 times in the back and turn around and headshot the person?

Sure, you turned around and got a headshot, but you got SHOT 5 F*CKING TIMES. YOU FAIL.


Yeah, sorry. If you actually think having to be 10x more careful, accurate, and cunning - requires less skill...than you're delusional.

This.

@Isaac: Stop trying, you just keep failing. I'll copy/paste just for you my dense little forum monkey.

xbox.Checkmate11B wrote:Of course when discussing video games there has to be consideration made to what's fun.

Oh, and ArmA and OpFlash flopped? Really? That's why I can find full servers every day? Riiight. Keep telling yourself that. I'm also referring to the ORIGINAL ArmA/OpFlash as well.

And finally, the PR mod wasn't gold. It was good, but it was far from perfect. The fact is that the hardcore model used in this game is the easiest and most streamlined why of doing things. You can't use PR as an example because it's an ADD-ON. It had to be BUILT FROM SCRATCH. We're talking about things that are packaged on disc. PR is it's own separate game, and required a whole separate set of tools/resources.

Checkmate, I love how you just claim you are correct without even making an argument. Arrogant much? All your high and mighty talk about logic, and yet your arguments contain hardly any.

I dare you to explain how the hell accuracy is more important in hardcore mode than in normal. There is NO WAY. When it doesn't matter where on a body your shot hits, THEN IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW WELL YOU AIM. END OF STORY.

battlefield.Isacc wrote:

battlefield.Deckard wrote:I love the "Hardcore takes less skill argument".

So it's MORE skillful to get shot 5 times in the back and turn around and headshot the person?

Sure, you turned around and got a headshot, but you got SHOT 5 F*CKING TIMES. YOU FAIL.


Yeah, sorry. If you actually think having to be 10x more careful, accurate, and cunning - requires less skill...than you're delusional.

This PROVES MY POINT. Your post says people have to be "10x more...accurate"...and yet you managed to shoot 5 shots into someone without headshotting them? FFS LEARN TO AIM.

That's the ENTIRE POINT. Yes it IS more skillfull for a person to headshot you after you FAILED TO AIM CAREFULLY.

Not to mention, I don't see the argument for hardcore mode taking more accurate shots. Spray and pray = kills when 1 or 2 shots kill. That's simple common sense.

Just don't bother, it doesn't matter. Our BC2 isn't ruined by becoming MW2 with big maps and vehicles... and they get to have what they want with hardcore mode. In the end, everyone's happy. Doesn't matter what one person thinks is skillful or not.

BTW, to Deckard, being shot in the back doesn't mean you're not skillful or that the other person is skillful. It happens at random times where you're running and you'll end up running behind someone. That has nothing to do with skill.

Just drop it. This argument is pointless, both sides are too stubborn.

battlefield.Isacc wrote:Checkmate, I love how you just claim you are correct without even making an argument. Arrogant much? All your high and mighty talk about logic, and yet your arguments contain hardly any.

What? Can you not read? And you're hardly making logical arguments. Pot, meet kettle.

battlefield.Isacc wrote:I dare you to explain how the hell accuracy is more important in hardcore mode than in normal. There is NO WAY. When it doesn't matter where on a body your shot hits, THEN IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW WELL YOU AIM. END OF STORY.

Prime example of illogical/irrational statements. It does matter. Headshots are OHK, body takes 2-4 shots. Also, if you miss your target you're likely to get killed by his squadmate/the target himself.

battlefield.Isacc wrote:Pot, meet kettle.

rofl I will remember this one

This'll be my last post here because iClutch has a point, and as long as there's still normal mode, I don't give a damn if people want to play hardcore.

However, my one last response to Checkmate. 2-4 shots to body kills...2-4 shots is a fraction of a second in this game...so how does that matter? By the time the hit registers on a headshot, you've already put 2-4 more shots into them. It really doesn't matter where you shoot.

xbox.xMG CRYSiiS wrote:
rofl I will remember this one

At least credit it to the right person

battlefield.Isacc wrote:This'll be my last post here because iClutch has a point, and as long as there's still normal mode, I don't give a damn if people want to play hardcore.

However, my one last response to Checkmate. 2-4 shots to body kills...2-4 shots is a fraction of a second in this game...so how does that matter? By the time the hit registers on a headshot, you've already put 2-4 more shots into them. It really doesn't matter where you shoot.

Using that logic it doesn't matter in core, either. As it only takes 4-6 rounds.

battlefield.Isacc wrote:Checkmate, I love how you just claim you are correct without even making an argument. Arrogant much? All your high and mighty talk about logic, and yet your arguments contain hardly any.

I dare you to explain how the hell accuracy is more important in hardcore mode than in normal. There is NO WAY. When it doesn't matter where on a body your shot hits, THEN IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW WELL YOU AIM. END OF STORY.

Accuracy isn't just limited to where you hit, it also includes just hitting the person, period.

And when it comes down to whoever gets a shot or two off first. Even missing 1 shot can cause you to die. For example, two snipers see each other at the exact same time. If you miss, you're most likely dead. Much less of a chance in non-hardcore.

It's not like non-hardcore where you can run and gun like Rambo, takes dozens of bullets, and still manage to live each time. If you get caught once unprepared, you're dead. Simple as that. There's a lot more risk, in every circumstance.

You think people who spray and prey are effective in hardcore? Really? You can't run around firing at the hip, and take down the entire enemy team. I'm unsure why you guys think that is the case.


I have nothing against non-hardcore. In fact I think I may actually prefer it in BC2 for various reasons, but you can't really argue that playing hardcore EFFECTIVELY requires more skill than playing normal.