Stop calling Call of duty serious or realistic

#1 Posted by Vermy81 (57 posts) -

There are serious and realistic first person shooters.  They are not mainstream, they aren't on consoles.   
 
I just read a bunch of people writing about bulletstorm and they all used leads saying that the market today is too crowded with serious and realistic shooters.    
 
No it's not.  You should play Arma II so you know what a realistic shooter looks like.   That's not even a knock against Bulletstorm or Call of Duty or support for what these games are.  It's just a fact that Arma II or the Original Operation Flashpoint for the PC are the kinds of things that a realistic shooter is like.  It's not fast paced, there's a lot involved more than just running around shooting dudes.   
 
I don't really like that style of game but they're a realistic game.  COD is just as arcadey as bulletstorm it's just a question of what kind of paint you put on it.  

#2 Posted by FiestaUnicorn (1576 posts) -

Those aren't realistic either.  No shooter is.
#3 Posted by Willin (1284 posts) -

I'll fight anyone who tells me Duke Nukem isn't serious or realistic.

#4 Posted by JoeyRavn (5007 posts) -
@Vermy81 said:
"COD is just as arcadey as bulletstorm it's just a question of what kind of paint you put on it.   "
It's either black or white? No grey? OK.
#5 Posted by Tennmuerti (8172 posts) -

All aboard the Hyperbole boat!

#6 Posted by Kaspar (159 posts) -

This looks a lot like something that belongs in a blog.

#7 Posted by vidiot (2737 posts) -

Who the hell proclaims that Call of Duty is either of these?! Perhaps they meant "modern shooters"?

#8 Posted by spartan0187 (36 posts) -

Until I can play a game where:
 A) a grenade can kill someone from 20 feet away because of shrapnel fragments flying in their eye cavities
 B) a bullet from a .50 caliber sniper rifle kills someone just by disturbing the air enough near their body to give them a concussion and/or internal bleeding
 C) a smoke grenade takes about 45 seconds to a whole minute to produce enough smoke to provide cover for multiple allied members
 
 Then sir I must object to your statement, and say that trying to vouch for a game being realistic is pointless, and it becomes simply about what is fun to play and what is not fun to play.

#9 Edited by BraveToaster (12588 posts) -
@FiestaUnicorn said:

" Those aren't realistic either.  No shooter is. "

This. Also OP, why do you have your panties in a knot over something so minute?
#10 Posted by Jadeskye (4368 posts) -
@Axxol said:
" @FiestaUnicorn said:

" Those aren't realistic either.  No shooter is. "

This. Also OP, why do you have your panties in a knot over something so minute? "


Panties... 
#11 Posted by TheGreatGuero (9130 posts) -
@spartan0187:  Bullet ripples can really do that? Whooaaaaa.
#12 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -
@JoeyRavn said:
" @Vermy81 said:
"COD is just as arcadey as bulletstorm it's just a question of what kind of paint you put on it.   "
It's either black or white? No grey? OK. "
Actually, it is about as arcadey. You heal up in a couple of seconds, you move fast as hell for pretty much as long as you want and SOMETIMES FASTER, emptying a 30 round mag on full auto takes like 10 seconds, which is about 3 rounds a second, you magically jump into helicopters and gun people down, and every soldier has a device that calls heavy ordinance down on their enemies, or highlights them on a heads up display map. 
 
 
Pretty fuckin Arcadey. 
 
I kinda agree, but CoD is very arcadey. And generally the grouping is pretty tight. There isn't a full spectrum. There are games like Duke Nukem, there are games like CoD and Bad Company, there are games like Rainbow six, and there are games like those ones with the AI voices. And then there are military simulations. There are small chunks of the spectrum that are heavily populated, and the rest kind of fills with the occasional game here and there. 
 
 
People will always say stupid shit, it's best to just let them be. It's like the idiots who constantly compared Call of Duty to Halo 3. Two awesome yet totally different games.
#13 Edited by spazmaster666 (1978 posts) -
@Vermy81 said:

" There are serious and realistic first person shooters.  They are not mainstream, they aren't on consoles.    I just read a bunch of people writing about bulletstorm and they all used leads saying that the market today is too crowded with serious and realistic shooters.     No it's not.  You should play Arma II so you know what a realistic shooter looks like.   That's not even a knock against Bulletstorm or Call of Duty or support for what these games are.  It's just a fact that Arma II or the Original Operation Flashpoint for the PC are the kinds of things that a realistic shooter is like.  It's not fast paced, there's a lot involved more than just running around shooting dudes.    I don't really like that style of game but they're a realistic game.  COD is just as arcadey as bulletstorm it's just a question of what kind of paint you put on it.   "

I think what people mean by "serious" or "realistic" are not referring to the mechanics or the gameplay but rather the style of the game and also the tone of the game. Games like COD are generally set in real world situations, using real-world weapons, hence they are going for a "realistic" style even if the gameplay itself is not realistic (i.e. in that sense, there is no such thing as a "realistic" shooter outside of an actual combat simulator). Also while a game like COD doesn't necessarily always take itself seriously, it's definitely much more serious in tone than Bulletstorm, which is intentionally designed to be silly from the start. Though you can certainly argue that COD-style games are usually silly in their own ways. Gameplay wise, Bulletstorm and Modern Warfare isn't that different if we break down the basic game play components (i.e. the main difference would be that Bulletstorm has  skill shots) but in terms of tone and setting, they are very different.
#14 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -

/agreed. Just about the only thing realistic about CoD is that bullets kill you. The settings and characters are way overdramatized and the gunplay is a joke. Same goes for the Battlefield Bad Company series. Arma II should be used as the benchmark for what a "realistic" shooter is. Too bad only something like 1% of the total gaming population has heard of it, let alone played it. 

#15 Posted by Pinworm45 (4088 posts) -

No one calls it either of those, stop giving a shit about games you don't give a shit about.

#16 Posted by Vermy81 (57 posts) -
@Axxol said:
" @FiestaUnicorn said:

" Those aren't realistic either.  No shooter is. "

This. Also OP, why do you have your panties in a knot over something so minute? "
Because words have meanings.   I actually love Call of Duty, I think it's a really fun single player game.  However, those games are like the absurd speed driven fantasies of someone who thinks Michael Bay movies are high drama.    
 
I was actually kind of convinced that Call of Duty games were satirical after playing MW2 and was shocked to see that the producers were presenting it as something they were serious about.   
#17 Posted by MooseyMcMan (11453 posts) -

CoD is definitely a lot more realistic than Bulletstorm. Pretty much all the weapons and stuff in there are real-ass guns, and for the most part, what happens in those games is stuff that could happen in real life.  
 
And if you bump the difficulty up, you die after one or two hits, just like in real life (pretty much). 

#18 Posted by Vermy81 (57 posts) -
@spazmaster666 said:
" @Vermy81 said:

" There are serious and realistic first person shooters.  They are not mainstream, they aren't on consoles.    I just read a bunch of people writing about bulletstorm and they all used leads saying that the market today is too crowded with serious and realistic shooters.     No it's not.  You should play Arma II so you know what a realistic shooter looks like.   That's not even a knock against Bulletstorm or Call of Duty or support for what these games are.  It's just a fact that Arma II or the Original Operation Flashpoint for the PC are the kinds of things that a realistic shooter is like.  It's not fast paced, there's a lot involved more than just running around shooting dudes.    I don't really like that style of game but they're a realistic game.  COD is just as arcadey as bulletstorm it's just a question of what kind of paint you put on it.   "

I think what people mean by "serious" or "realistic" are not referring to the mechanics or the gameplay but rather the style of the game and also the tone of the game. Games like COD are generally set in real world situations, using real-world weapons, hence they are going for a "realistic" style even if the gameplay itself is not realistic (i.e. in that sense, there is no such thing as a "realistic" shooter outside of an actual combat simulator). Also while a game like COD doesn't necessarily always take itself seriously, it's definitely much more serious in tone than Bulletstorm, which is intentionally designed to be silly from the start. Though you can certainly argue that COD-style games are usually silly in their own ways. Gameplay wise, Bulletstorm and Modern Warfare isn't that different if we break down the basic game play components (i.e. the main difference would be that Bulletstorm has  skill shots) but in terms of tone and setting, they are very different. "
I feel like the tone of the last two CoD games went way off the deep end out of serious land.   Like maybe the WWII games were serious but not realistic, but they've gone full speed into crazy-ville in  MW and Black Ops.  
#19 Posted by Hero_Swe (1188 posts) -
@spartan0187 said:
"

                   B) a bullet from a .50 caliber sniper rifle kills someone just by disturbing the air enough near their body to give them a concussion and/or internal bleeding.

                   

                "

 
A .50 caliber bullet will not shatter or even dent wineglasses or normal glass while passing close to it, a .50 caliber bullet will NOT, cause physical harm by missing.
#20 Posted by Turambar (6849 posts) -
@Tennmuerti said:
" All aboard the Hyperbole boat! "
You know, I use to pronounce hyperbole as hyper-bowl for the longest time.
#21 Edited by Toms115 (2316 posts) -
@Turambar said:

" @Tennmuerti said:

" All aboard the Hyperbole boat! "
You know, I use to pronounce hyperbole as hyper-bowl for the longest time. "
HYPURBULLE. nonsensical pronunciation all day every day.
#22 Posted by JoeyRavn (5007 posts) -
@MordeaniisChaos said: 

@JoeyRavn said: 

@Vermy81 said: 
"COD is just as arcadey as bulletstorm it's just a question of what kind of paint you put on it.   "
It's either black or white? No grey? OK. "
Actually, it is about as arcadey. You heal up in a couple of seconds, you move fast as hell for pretty much as long as you want and SOMETIMES FASTER, emptying a 30 round mag on full auto takes like 10 seconds, which is about 3 rounds a second, you magically jump into helicopters and gun people down, and every soldier has a device that calls heavy ordinance down on their enemies, or highlights them on a heads up display map.   Pretty fuckin Arcadey. "
AFAIK, there are no crazy combo kills or giant mechanical T-Rexes in CoD. What you mention are "creative licences". It should be pretty obvious by now that games call for a certain suspension of disbelief, which includes many, if not all, of the features you mentioned. Sure, CoD is far from being "realistic", but at least it tries to keep in touch with reality, with more or less success, but at least it tries. Bulletstorm, on the other hand, does not.  
 
Are you seriously telling me that you see Bulletstorm as "arcadey" as CoD? You really believe that there is absolutely no shade of grey between the two games?    I must have been playing CoD wrong all these years.
#23 Posted by PrivateIronTFU (3874 posts) -

It's 'realistic' for game standards. If shooters played like real life, only serial killers would play it, because it would be gross to look at.

#24 Posted by Lukeweizer (2749 posts) -
@FiestaUnicorn said:
" Those aren't realistic either.  No shooter is. "
This.
 
BLOODY SCREEN. SO REALISTIC.
#25 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5855 posts) -

I want to play Arma II and Operation Flashpoint

#26 Posted by Agent47 (1901 posts) -
@Vermy81: I think you missed the point there pal, when they said that they mean serious as in the sense that it involves the real war in Afghan or past real wars. Uses real weapons, and terrorism as it means of a setting.
#27 Posted by JasonR86 (9763 posts) -

I think when people use the words 'realistic' and 'serious' for games they mean in terms of setting and tone.  COD has a Hollywood take on realistic settings and a serious-action movie tone.  Yeah, comparing what actually happens in real life and what takes place in these games the comparison is ridiculous.  But, for entertainment mediums, COD is fairly realistic and serious.  I can't really comment on games like ARMA II as I stay away from them like the plague.  But, I doubt even those games adequately mimic what is actually experienced by soldiers how experience those situations every day.  Therefore, I think saying they are more 'realistic' or 'serious' is a bit of a stretch. 

#28 Posted by ThatFrood (3377 posts) -

no one calls them that

#29 Posted by triple07 (1198 posts) -
@MooseyMcMan said:
" CoD is definitely a lot more realistic than Bulletstorm. Pretty much all the weapons and stuff in there are real-ass guns, and for the most part, what happens in those games is stuff that could happen in real life.   And if you bump the difficulty up, you die after one or two hits, just like in real life (pretty much).  "
This. Also its all relative. Compared to Bulletstorm which is set on some crazy planet where the laws of physics are different , Call of Duty looks a lot more realistic to me. Not that it is some simulation or anything but then again its not supposed to be.
#30 Posted by Bones8677 (3271 posts) -
@Turambar said:
" @Tennmuerti said:
" All aboard the Hyperbole boat! "
You know, I use to pronounce hyperbole as hyper-bowl for the longest time. "
Shhh that's the secret football game that is above the Super Bowl. We aren't allowed to talk about it.
Online
#31 Posted by Mikemcn (7009 posts) -

Who ever said it was realistic. and the single player is plenty serious. Theres just some off tone moments. 

#32 Posted by Undeadpool (4989 posts) -
@Tennmuerti said:
" All aboard the Hyperbole boat! "
Hyperboat?
#33 Posted by CptChiken (1987 posts) -

If you dont go down, scream in pain, and need a medic to carry you off the battle field everytime you're shot its not realistic... i mean seriously, no one can get shot like 5 times and keep fighting.

#34 Posted by Azteck (7449 posts) -
@Tennmuerti said:
" All aboard the Hyperbole boat! "
The shrimp are great!
#35 Posted by Brendan (8025 posts) -

Seriously.  Let's be real people.

#36 Posted by FritzDude (2279 posts) -

If i want to see realistic shooting i go and watch the news.

#37 Posted by natetodamax (19217 posts) -
@spartan0187 said:
B) a bullet from a .50 caliber sniper rifle kills someone just by disturbing the air enough near their body to give them a concussion and/or internal bleeding
  I refuse to believe that.  
#38 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18954 posts) -

whats with all the obsession with realism in games, games have good stories, etc.. ? 
 why should a game be so realistic to impress? why should a game have a great story to be a masterpiece video game ? 
 
 
fuck realism and fuck stories WHEN a certain game does fine without them. i dont want realistic shooters, thats boring, we're playing video games here

#39 Posted by HisDudeness (254 posts) -

The only shooter that ever seemed realistic to me was Six Days In Fallujah, such a shame it won't get a release.

#40 Posted by Hero_Swe (1188 posts) -
@natetodamax said:
"

                    @spartan0187 said:
B) a bullet from a .50 caliber sniper rifle kills someone just by disturbing the air enough near their body to give them a concussion and/or internal bleeding
  I refuse to believe that.  

                   

                "

You shouldn't, cause it's not true.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.