[Recycled Spooge]

If there will be no blood, I wonder if we can light people on fire.

[Hans]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Recycled Spooge:
If there will be no blood, I wonder if we can light people on fire.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe I heard about a flame-thrower some where (think it was PC-Gamer Mag.).

[-DJK-]

sorry, double post

[This message has been edited by -DJK- (edited June 12, 2001).]

[-DJK-]

"The feature isn't suddenly left out, it was never there"

Uh, what first person shooters have YOU been playing??

"and if it was excluded to make room for new and inovating features then that's a good thing"

Not really. You act as if blood was just some stupid fad that is out of style or something. Just because blood has been in other games, doesn't mean it's not STILL a vital part of games that portray combat. Adding new things is great, but removing some of the things that continue to add to realism, such as blood, gore and bullet holes is just plain stupid.

"games aren't going to get any better if they all stick to the same plan."

As I said, people still bleed when shot, and so games should keep including blood, ESPECIALLY games that claim to be realistic.



[This message has been edited by -DJK- (edited June 12, 2001).]

[Hans]

"Uh, what first person shooters have YOU been playing??"

What FPSs are YOU talking about, MOH never had blood.

"Not really. You act as if blood was just some stupid fad that is out of style or something. Just because blood has been in other games, doesn't mean it's not a vital part of games that portray combat. Adding new things is great, but they shouldn't remove the old stand bys like blood, gore and bullet holes."

And you act as if your about to have a heart attack if you don't get blood in you games. Just because blood is in other games does not mean it has to be in them all. In case you haven't noticed no one else here is really concerened with the blood, just you, so maybe it's not as important and you think.
Sure it looks cool, but red mist is not more important the gameplay features like the ones I've mentioned. I'm not here to say that blood is bad, just that I don't want to play through another SOF -- "Wow, I shot him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, and him, oh my god I shot him too. Sure there is blood, but they put so much effort into the blood (even built an engine around it) that other things sufferd, (ex. AI) the enemy just stood there in the middle of the hall and shot at you intill you blew his face into a fine red mist and looked at the inner-workings of his throat. It was boody & gorey, but damn was it repetive.

"As I said, people still bleed when shot, and so games should keep including blood, ESPECIALLY games that claim to be realistic."

So every realisic feature should be in this one game, if need to have this one you need them all.

Well, we need photo realistic terrain, fully destructable terrain (red faction style) every weapon ever featured in a WW2 game, we need to include a flight simulater section, we need to be able to play as every different nation in WW2, and loads of other great features.

I mean all of these have been included before, we must do it again.



[This message has been edited by Hans (edited June 12, 2001).]

[-DJK-]

"What FPSs are YOU talking about, MOH never had blood."

I'm talking about realistic FPS's in general, all of which seem to have blood.

"Just because blood is in other games does not mean it has to be in them all."

Well, it should be in anything that is called "realistic" by the developers. I simply can't take a game seriously that has people getting shot w/out blood.

"In case you haven't noticed no one else here is really concerened with the blood, just you, so maybe it's not as important and you think."

Or maybe I'm just not as willing to except less than most here are.

[Hans]

"Or maybe I'm just not as willing to except less than most here are."

Or maybe you just Bitch alot more then anyone here.

"I'm talking about realistic FPS's in general, all of which seem to have blood."

And what FPSs would they be, Quake?

"Well, it should be in anything that is called "realistic" by the developers. I simply can't take a game seriously that has people getting shot w/out blood."

And I can't take anyone who gets so upset over the lack of red pixels seriously.

[-DJK-]

"So every realisic feature should be in this one game, if need to have this one you need them all."

Well it couldn't hurt, but if something HAS to be left out, it certianly shouldn't be blood. I think most people would just expect it in something that claims to be a realistic WWII game inspired my Saving Private Ryan. I can just imagine how many posts there are gonna be on here when this game is released, saying, "Wheres the blood!? Every other FPS has it!".

[Hans]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
"So every realisic feature should be in this one game, if need to have this one you need them all."

Well it couldn't hurt, but if something HAS to be left out, it certianly shouldn't be blood. I think most people would just expect it in something that claims to be a realistic WWII game inspired my Saving Private Ryan. I can just imagine how many posts there are gonna be on here when this game is released, saying, "Wheres the blood!? Every other FPS has it!".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I don't recall that happening with PSX MOH. Why shouldn't it be blood that is excluded? You seem quite ready to dump other features (the leaves), you expecting 2015 to go "Oh no, -DJK- wants blood, we better add it real quick!" Just because you like blood doesn't make it the MOST important think in an FPS.

[-DJK-]

"Or maybe you just Bitch alot more then anyone here."

Well, that too

"And what FPSs would they be"

Rogue Spear, SOF, Operation Flashpoint, Swat3, Project IGI... need any more?

"And I can't take anyone who gets so upset over the lack of red pixels seriously."

The whole game is just pixels.

[Hans]

"Rogue Spear, SOF, Operation Flashpoint, Swat3, Project IGI... need any more?"

You call SOF realistic? you can take of someones head with a Desert Eagle from agross a court-yard. If that's the kind of blood and realism you want then you don't want realistic blood, you want "Evil Dead" style blood.

"The whole game is just pixels."

So why are you all upset over the exclusion of a few red ones?

[SoLiDUS]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -DJK-:
I can just imagine how many posts there are gonna be on here when this game is released, saying, "Wheres the blood!? Every other FPS has it!".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Damn right...

[Recycled Spooge]

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

Damn right...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yep, I can already see it. No offence to 2015, but they have to wake up and smell the pc gamers. We are not 3rd graders that play Playstation, we are pc gamers! We are human beings! I am not an elephant!!

[SoLiDUS]

They should call it a "pseudo-realistic" war game instead. Maybe we'll have less ticked off weenies this way.. ?

Furthermore, as I've so clearly been pointing out since the beginning of this useless debate, there will be patch after patch adding this and that to the game.. You'll have your blood and guts..

Hell, can you say MODS ?

[Recycled Spooge]

BTW, no offence to Playstation players. There are old people that play it also, but I've seen kids as young as 7 years old playing it.