Battlefield: Vietnam
Posted: 2003-09-29 06:12am
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=31029
Sounds about right for modern gaming. I can't remember who, but there was one poster on SD.net a while back who saw a couple of kids criticizing the combat movements of some troops in Black Hawk Down or some movie, saying, "They weren't jumping as they ran to avoid fire", and were "carrying only one SMG" or in other words, assuming that Quake II deathmatch is the standard for real-life combat.Stark wrote:I heard that DICE are intentionally making BF:V even more unrealistic and cartoony that BF:1942. That isn't my sort of thing, and considering how FPSs seem to be headed in a more mature direction, I guess the 14yo's need something to play...
It was realistic enough in the general sense, but he wasn't talking about the historical accuracy of the story...evilcat4000 wrote:Was Black Hawk down realistic ? I thoght it was a standard hollywood movie instead of a documentary on what realy happened.
Oh my God, you can't be serious?!Lagmonster wrote:Sounds about right for modern gaming. I can't remember who, but there was one poster on SD.net a while back who saw a couple of kids criticizing the combat movements of some troops in Black Hawk Down or some movie, saying, "They weren't jumping as they ran to avoid fire", and were "carrying only one SMG" or in other words, assuming that Quake II deathmatch is the standard for real-life combat.
Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Oh my God, you can't be serious?!Lagmonster wrote:Sounds about right for modern gaming. I can't remember who, but there was one poster on SD.net a while back who saw a couple of kids criticizing the combat movements of some troops in Black Hawk Down or some movie, saying, "They weren't jumping as they ran to avoid fire", and were "carrying only one SMG" or in other words, assuming that Quake II deathmatch is the standard for real-life combat.
But it's CCR.3rd Impact wrote:I love the smell of...BF:1942. This also looks pretty good, but if Ride of the Valkyries isn't in the soundtrack then it's definately going to lose some review points.
If they had a Medal-of-Honor-esque single player mode to go with it, then Valkyries might be a cool gimmick once or twice... but I could see it being abused to no end in multiplayer games.3rd Impact wrote:I love the smell of...BF:1942. This also looks pretty good, but if Ride of the Valkyries isn't in the soundtrack then it's definately going to lose some review points.
Or maybe just people who are not so anal and realize the thing is just a game, and not is ment to be realistic but fast an fun.Stark wrote:I heard that DICE are intentionally making BF:V even more unrealistic and cartoony that BF:1942. That isn't my sort of thing, and considering how FPSs seem to be headed in a more mature direction, I guess the 14yo's need something to play...
Its one of the most realistic war movies ever, though the plot does not precisely follow that of the actual battle. But that is not the same as realism.evilcat4000 wrote:Was Black Hawk down realistic ? I thoght it was a standard hollywood movie instead of a documentary on what realy happened.
I was quite unhappy to see the Malaysians and Pakistanis portrayed as uninterested, and unwilling to help the Americans. That shit me, since the UN forces took casualties bailing the Americans out of a situation they put themselves in. Bad form.Sea Skimmer wrote:Its one of the most realistic war movies ever, though the plot does not precisely follow that of the actual battle. But that is not the same as realism.
They where, and it took hours to convince them to help, and the Pakistani's especially stalled for hours.Stark wrote:
I was quite unhappy to see the Malaysians and Pakistanis portrayed as uninterested, and unwilling to help the Americans.
I'm not aware of a single Malaysian or Pakistani causality in the action, and given that there personal numbered in the low dozens all buttoned up inside of armor vehicles, none of which was hit by more then machine gun fire I can't see how any would occur. Course there was one case when a one of the crews refused to bash though an improvised roadblock, and instead required that American infantrymen dismount and dismantle it under heavy fire.That shit me, since the UN forces took casualties bailing the Americans out of a situation they put themselves in. Bad form.
They must have been joking.......nobody is THAT stupid.Lagmonster wrote:Sounds about right for modern gaming. I can't remember who, but there was one poster on SD.net a while back who saw a couple of kids criticizing the combat movements of some troops in Black Hawk Down or some movie, saying, "They weren't jumping as they ran to avoid fire", and were "carrying only one SMG" or in other words, assuming that Quake II deathmatch is the standard for real-life combat.Stark wrote:I heard that DICE are intentionally making BF:V even more unrealistic and cartoony that BF:1942. That isn't my sort of thing, and considering how FPSs seem to be headed in a more mature direction, I guess the 14yo's need something to play...
Well, at least they didn't mention camping or respawning...Kamakazie Sith wrote: They must have been joking.......nobody is THAT stupid.
Or accuse the Americans of using an aimbot.3rd Impact wrote:Well, at least they didn't mention camping or respawning...Kamakazie Sith wrote: They must have been joking.......nobody is THAT stupid.
I think Saving Private Ryan would be the most realistic war movie. Black Hawk down was good though. BTW have you read the book with the same title as the movie ?Sea Skimmer wrote:Its one of the most realistic war movies ever, though the plot does not precisely follow that of the actual battle. But that is not the same as realism.evilcat4000 wrote:Was Black Hawk down realistic ? I thoght it was a standard hollywood movie instead of a documentary on what realy happened.
The Omaha beach landing in SPR is the only thing in that entire film that's even remotely realistic. The rest is utter shit.evilcat4000 wrote:
I think Saving Private Ryan would be the most realistic war movie.
Vympel wrote: The Omaha beach landing in SPR is the only thing in that entire film that's even remotely realistic. The rest is utter shit.
Generally M47's get used.MKSheppard wrote:
What about the closest, most realistic Tigers ever put to film, or would you
rather have M-60 Pattons with the Iron Cross on them
The Tigers sent into a city, unsupported by infantry, with not an MG42 LMG or 81mm in sight, with a ridiculous gap in the driver's vision block allowing some idiot to stick a Thompson in and shoot? Come on.MKSheppard wrote:
What about the closest, most realistic Tigers ever put to film, or would you
rather have M-60 Pattons with the Iron Cross on them
The last combat segment was atrocious. It was total bullshit- can anyone explain why the Wehrmacht would send that bunch of totally ill-equipped (and lacking the mainstays that every German force had) forces like that into an urban enivorment? Ugh. UGH!!!!I'd have to say that SPR did it's job best in the two 30 minute combat
segments in the beginning and the ending of the movie.