<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MF_DOOM:
i think its just the harsh halflife engine that ur not accustomed to. These games can be compared because there both set in ww2 are both fps and are both going for realism. One more so than the other. And dod2.0 is very close to hitting it on the money, and transfering those ideas and mechanics to moh would just blow everything that is gaming out of the water. And because dod is on a dated engine , seeing that kind of realsim and gameplay on a stylish engine like moh would be very enjoyable. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>these ultra realistic shooter are imo anything but.
in real life a single bullet will not INSTANTLY kill you unless it hits your head.
yet a shot in the upper chesy(shoulder lets say) instantly kills in these games. why? its not realistic.
neither is not dying and sitting on the ground writhing in pain from a shoulder wound.
i think the best solution is the counter-strike model. head shots = dead. body shots slow you.
see it can never be realistic.
realistically i can contort my body to take cover almost anywhere. that cant be done in a video game.
i dont have lag or frame rate problems in real life.
in real life i have perfect 3dsound.
all of these make realism impossible in a game.
that why IMO the most fun game are counter strike like....or the normal moh.
the only thing moh needs is more balance in regards to the different weapons.
maybe throw in some medics,a flame thrower, and real machine guns heh
