I've been thinking about paintball recently, one of my favorite activities, and I've come to the realization that in paintball you kinda have to be facing the cover you're behind. If you put your back to it, you really can't see what's around the corner without poking your entire head out slowly, and firing from that position is basically impossible.

So I've been thinking, why do characters in games always put their backs up against cover? It doesn't seem like a smart thing to do. Facing the cover allows you to pop up quickly to see what you're facing.

I'm perplexed.

I suppose just so you wont be staring at their backside for a whole game.

Just another example of the great mysteries in life!

Anyway I think it's to make things clear, if your character turns around and sits against the wall it's "obvious" they're taking cover. If they were to do like you say you do in paintball then maybe the player could get confused and think that the character is just crouching and not fully protected.

I suppose just so you wont be staring at their backside for a whole game.

This might just be my memory tricking me but doesn't Nathan Drake have his side to the cover in Uncharted?

This might just be my memory tricking me but doesn't Nathan Drake have his side to the cover in Uncharted?

Because in the real world if you are facing cover you can't see behind you.

@isles said:

Because in the real world if you are facing cover you can't see behind you.

In theory, you shouldn't be getting into cover if there are people behind you.

@Stephen_Von_Cloud: If I recall I think Army Of Two had people facing cover, yes. I do think that having backs to cover looks a lot better but technically doesn't make much sense.

@Voxel: They lean their back to avoid getting flanked,since staying in cover for too long will get someone to flank you,but only the player character looking behind doesn't help

Guns of the Patriots and Metal Gear Online both have you facing the cover. I always thought that was much more awesome than backing into cover.

It "feels" better that way, if you get what I mean.

When Marcus and Friends (TM) slam their oversized backs into concrete walls, there is a slight sound and rumble in the controller and the screen shakes just a tiny bit. This isn't exactly easy to notice but it does add to the feeling that your character is really big, really powerful, and kicks a lot of ass. If he just crouches behind something, you don't get that same feedback.

Well, supposedly anyway. Gordon Freeman won't get caught behind cover and he kicks tons of ass.

EDITED: Also, I didn't notice the date on this thread.

You just blew my mind!

Shit looks Hollywood.

@Vexxan said:

Anyway I think it's to make things clear, if your character turns around and sits against the wall it's "obvious" they're taking cover. If they were to do like you say you do in paintball then maybe the player could get confused and think that the character is just crouching and not fully protected.

Basically this.

I started asking myself this question after the Last of Us E3 demo. I simply love how the dude in that game puts his hands on the cover while facing it, looking around it to see the enemy.

It looks cool, what else do you need?

Besides the functional feedback, it definitely "looks cooler" than humping up against the wall.

Old thread but still, Red Orchestra and Men of War have good cover systems that don't face it backwards.

@Voxel: My thoughts would pretty much be for vanity's sake. The same reason we have girls with DDDD^4 boobs that can still stand up straight. Games allow us to do things we would do in real life, but un-realistically.

Just my thoughts, though.

@MarkWahlberg said:

@Vexxan said:

Anyway I think it's to make things clear, if your character turns around and sits against the wall it's "obvious" they're taking cover. If they were to do like you say you do in paintball then maybe the player could get confused and think that the character is just crouching and not fully protected.

Basically this.

yup, it's all about visual cues and communicating stuff to the player.

many a thing gets thrown out when it comes to realism vs. fun-mechanics (magic ammo, for example - as addressed in a recent Rock Paper Shotgun interview about Metro: Last Light where the interviewee brought it up, it basically frustrates him that if you reload while there's still bullets in a mag, those magically stay with you after you throw out that magazine but not doing that wouldn't be fun unless you're making a simulation-game (search for "magic pocket of bullets")