So Elmagoo, if someone does get hit by a mortar will there be blood and gore, or it's up to EA again? What audiences are they targetting anyway, I seriously think you guys should talk to EA, it seems like (IMO) they're trying for a Teen rating? Or "For Everyone"? That's B.S. I think it's killing interest in their real potiential customers, kids won't buy this game, they're too busy with Pokemon.

------------------
"Unplug all electrical devices and come out with your servo-mitts in the air!"

Amen candy =) hehe, blood would be cool, not to much, but just enough to really know ya got that nazi

Well, this game was looking incredible until I heard that there will be NO blood. I quite frankly can't believe that a company would decide to make a realistic game about WAR, based on quite a gory movie, and decide NOT to include any blood or gore. That is just ridiculous! That's what war IS, blood and gore. Now I'm not saying that it has to be like Soldier of Fortune(although if wouldn't hurt), but at least some blood spray and an entrance wound if you shoot somebody in the head or on exposed skin, and blood stained uniforms and a entrance wound when somebody gets hit anywhere else. Is this game made being made for children or something? IMO, anyone who would purchase what is advertised to be a realistic WWII game, would be looking for atleast a small amount of blood and gore. Think about it, a WAR game w/NO blood. It doesn't even make sense!

[This message has been edited by -DJK- (edited May 24, 2001).]

Candy you go man, as always http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/smile.gif

"But remember... it is a game. Game's are supposed to be fun. If you think that blood is an integral part of the fun gameplay..."

I do actually. Blood would be fun AND realistic. Isn't that what this game is supposed to be? Anyone who thinks blood is NOT considered fun, shouldn't be playing a WAR fps game in the first place, and certianly wouldn't have enjoyed a movie like Saving Private Ryan.

"I've mentioned this before in another post, but the only time you would really see blood is when you shoot someone in a bare, exposed flesh area, or the head. If you shot someone in the mid-section, you'd actually see a puff of dust because the blood would get caught in the clothing."

Well then only have blood if you shoot someone's exposed skin. I'm not saying that there should be blood where there WOULDN'T be in real life, and I think seeing a puff of dust if you hit somebody in the midsection would look realistic, but seeing just a puff of dust when you hit somebody in exposed skin, like the head, would just look silly. So how ARE you going to handle headshots? Also, if you hit somebody in the midsection, will you at least see a hole in the uniform after, or just a puff of dust and then nothing?

"...and it also makes the game available to a greater audience seeing the violent content wouldnt be there."

It's WAR. It's SUPPOSED TO be violent. Just the idea of killing people is violent. Little kids shouldn't even be playing war games IMO. They should at least have an option in some .cfg file to turn on blood if you really wanted it.

The question of whether or not to include blood is up to EA. But remember... it is a game. Game's are supposed to be fun. If you think that blood is an integral part of the fun gameplay, I would have to disagree with you.

Don't get me wrong, I'd just as soon have blood in it myself for realism. On the other hand, I think blood is more an eye-candy feature than a gameplay feature. The *only* gameplay aspect of blood is knowing that your shot hit someone; that can be indicated more effectively with a good animation, and some dust coming off the uniform only adds to the effect.

Well, the decision on this issue isn't up to us actually.

I've mentioned this before in another post, but the only time you would really see blood is when you shoot someone in a bare, exposed flesh area, or the head. If you shot someone in the mid-section, you'd actually see a puff of dust because the blood would get caught in the clothing. If someone got shot in the arm or the leg, you'd see a red mist appear, but not tons of blood. The only time you'd ever really see gore (as in limbs flying off) is if someone got hit by a mortar or artillery/AA round. A grenade wouldn't really severe a limb unless a person jumped on it practically (grenades kill by fragmentation, not concussion).

------------------
-----------------------
Latuh fuh U,
Benson
benson@2015.com

"We don't introduce or cause bugs in the game, we merely find and bring to light the inadequacies within the code."
-regarding level designers

I would be more happy too see that dust effect than a great gush of blood spewing out
. It looks more realistic (if Saving Private Ryan is anything to go by) and it also makes the game available to a greater audience seeing the violent content wouldnt be there. Blood or no blood, it's still going to be an awesome game. And when the game comes out some person may even edit it and make it so there is blood not just dust ?? you never know. http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/smile.gif

Thats true DJK, a war game shouldnt be played by younger people, I've changed my mind about that. A little blood would good, I didnt say it would be a bad thing, maybe if you shoot them in the head their eyes roll back into their head, and a spray of blood comes out the back of the head ?? And if you shoot them in the Torso you see no immediate blood, but after a while a small pool will appear under the dead ?? I'm swinging both ways on this subject, blood or no blood, it doesnt really worry me. But really, when you think about it, where would you be putting most shots when your in a combat zone ?? In the Torso because thats the greatest area of the body and the biggest target, nobody would have the time or patience to line up a shot to the head, waste of time, if you want to drop someone, you shoot them in the upper chest region, heart or lungs.

When the game DOES come out, it will be a very simple operation :

change the dust colour...

By default, it should be greyish... just make it reddish and you have yourself all the blood you could wish for http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/smile.gif


Of course, if this type of dust effect is the same throughout the game( for every effect ), then things get complicated hehe

No Bloooood http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/frown.gif http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/frown.gif.... i hope there will be a Blood patch.........

------------------
http://redrival.com/leibstandarte/totenkopfi.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by General_Hienburg:

in that case why in hitlers name
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
*ROFL*



------------------
http://redrival.com/leibstandarte/totenkopfi.gif

why cant the blood thing be an option in the options menu ?? things would be so much easier .

if theres no blood honestly i think it wouldnt make the game as good, it ll still be awsome though, also why not just put on a parental lock or soemthing, like in soldier of fortune.

godsake your already killing people
let me get this right EA doesn't want blood becuase they are trying to turn away from that area?
in that case why in hitlers name did they take on such a violent game

you are making a realistic WAR game and your publishers turns around and says NO gore and No blood?

alittle bit of blood aint going to effect a rating your already blowing the shit out of AI Germans (God help us)

thats like saying i want a Juicy red apple but i don't want it to taste like an Apple.