In short, no matter how realistic the weapons, aiming mechanics, movement mechanics, and environment "set pieces" are in tactical shooters, they all have one huge gaping hole in realism; you play on the same confined "battle arenas" wave after wave, round after round, match after match, month after month, year after year.
This simple factor causes probably all of the absolute most unrealistic tactics and behavior in tactical shooters. It's not just about knowing the lay of the land, it's the fact that everyone starts in the same places at the same time every round. Thus, all combat in the game turns into a routine where people take the same paths and run through the same chokepoints and danger zones at the same time every time you play.
One thing which is just waiting to be done in tactical shooters, but hasn't yet is procedurally-generated maps. Procedurally-generated content has actually been around since the early days of gaming, when there wasn't enough memory to support large quantities of pre-made content. Based on certain algorithms and parameters, the game would essentially create graphics, or characters, or levels on the fly.
Skewed and Reviewed have written an Opinion Piece covering issues in the gaming industry, how current issues were issues years ago, and what can be done to help restore consumer trust.
Nothing. It's up to the gamers to stop consuming content from companies that they don't agree with.
How do you know if you agree with it or not unless you play it? Which without conventions forces gamers to rely on trailers. Perhaps Demos should be made more frequently. But companies need to do better as well.
But is that not what they have now? Tons of gameplay or are you talking about watching actual gamers play it versus the trailers and streams? The big issue is that some companies pay streamers and influencers and they create content but for me; that is hardly a fair, unbiased, and factual look at a game.
They usually are attached to the money sadly. It would be nice to have gamers in charge but you have so much money invested that business people are needed. Hence the issue; you need people who know business but are also gamers who know have an eye to the community. It sounds simple in theory that if you give gamers quality games that they want to play; money will be made. But that is not always so.
Marie Dealessandri speaks to Borislav Slavov and Gustavo Santaolalla about “the new golden age of games music”.
A famous actor from Starship Troopers has showered praise on Helldivers 2 and said he is open to the idea of playing General Brasch.
I vaguely remember Soldier of Fortune 2 featuring a very basic version of this idea.
yea I remember that too the levels were big and bland though. Man I liked the gore in that game.
Now, this is the future.. not extra space to drop models after model...
I expect next gen (PS4,Xbx3,Nin6) to have voice recognition and better gesture recognition first with smarter AI. Like giving commands to halt and move out and so on. Its partially in some games like one or two of the SOCOM games, but not at a level where the AI can understand and counter your statement. Not yet anyway. As well as new mind blowing physics.
I'd have to agree with the article. I can think of a couple of games I don't play anymore for that specific reason. After awhile it's just the same strategies. For example Rainbow 6 Vegas. The multiplayer levels are always played out the same way.