Gore for infantry

[Mohamengina]

Having some gore would add to the immersion a lot. Its a bit strange having infantry simply fall over after being hit by a 30mm cannon or explosives. Also an ability to turn this on or off would be a bonus as some players don't find gore that appealing.

[Jona33]

Personally I would hate that as it would probably mean the age rating would go up and I wouln't be able to get these games. Even turning it on or off would still make the rating go up so no thanks.

[Frostiken]

Personally I would hate that as it would probably mean the age rating would go up and I wouln't be able to get these games. Even turning it on or off would still make the rating go up so no thanks.

 

The UK may be a nanny state but nothing can stop you from getting it on Steam or digital download...

 

I'm all for gore, as well as just battle damage in general. For example, dropping a GBU-38 on a BMP is going to do more than just set it on fire - it'll punch through the roof and blow it to pieces. Bits of wreckage lying around... legs and arms get knocked off by explosions... direct hits with bombs turn people to little glowing bits all over the ground... :)

[Jona33]

The UK may be a nanny state but nothing can stop you from getting it on Steam or digital download...

 

I'm all for gore, as well as just battle damage in general. For example, dropping a GBU-38 on a BMP is going to do more than just set it on fire - it'll punch through the roof and blow it to pieces. Bits of wreckage lying around... legs and arms get knocked off by explosions... direct hits with bombs turn people to little glowing bits all over the ground... :)

 

Hey. Personally that's fine but I am twelve years old. Could be a little bit obvious that it isn't a 12 rated game with body parts everywhere. I don't want to have to play DCS in secret. :)

[98abaile]

-1 gore

Better battle damage? Sure, but gore is unnecessary. Grow up people, go back to COD if you want gore.

[AlphaOneSix]

You can't see gore from the cockpit. I'm all for adding gore as long as they also remove all external views. Besides, external views ruin immersion!

[Conure]

The UK may be a nanny state but nothing can stop you from getting it on Steam or digital download...

 

I'm all for gore, as well as just battle damage in general. For example, dropping a GBU-38 on a BMP is going to do more than just set it on fire - it'll punch through the roof and blow it to pieces. Bits of wreckage lying around... legs and arms get knocked off by explosions... direct hits with bombs turn people to little glowing bits all over the ground... :)

 

I'm all for a nanny state if it keeps us free of people that want to simulate oblitaration of body parts!:P

[sobek]

T

I'm all for gore, as well as just battle damage in general. For example, dropping a GBU-38 on a BMP is going to do more than just set it on fire - it'll punch through the roof and blow it to pieces. Bits of wreckage lying around... legs and arms get knocked off by explosions... direct hits with bombs turn people to little glowing bits all over the ground... :)

 

..., simulator engine coming to a crawl at 0.01 fps, ah, good times. :D

[shagrat]

Perhaps you people should join the armed forces, (I would propose the

French Foreign Legion) :doh:

There you can first hand deep dive into "gore" business... may be your own gore, but perhaps it is worth it.

 

One thing I do like about war simulations is, that it usually focus on tactical decisions, quick thinking and reactions etc. not on mega-bloody-gore orgies.

 

I guess here you may find what you are looking for:

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/videogames.php :D

[VincentLaw]

Having some gore would add to the immersion a lot. Its a bit strange having infantry simply fall over after being hit by a 30mm cannon or explosives. Also an ability to turn this on or off would be a bonus as some players don't find gore that appealing.

 

Maybe this game would be for you then: http://www.airconflicts.net/ (airplanes + bloody infantry deaths)

 

I find all of the fun of A-10C in the flying, and I enjoy FPS games like playing a sport, not to satisfy some primal desires. I remember back in the day when a good war game could be rated T. Now all of the developers think they have to make heads explode and have all of the characters cussing every 10 seconds for someone to buy them. They certainly sacrifice realism in enough other areas? I personally find it disturbing that any person can enjoy turning animated humans into a bloody pulp stain.

Edited July 24, 2011 by VincentLaw

[Conure]

Maybe this game would be for you then: http://www.airconflicts.net/ (airplanes + bloody infantry deaths)

 

I find all of the fun of A-10C in the flying, and I enjoy FPS games like playing a sport, not to satisfy some primal desires. I remember back in the day when a good war game could be rated T. Now all of the developers think they have to make heads explode and have all of the characters cussing every 10 seconds for someone to buy them. They certainly sacrifice realism in enough other areas? I personally find it disturbing that any person can enjoy turning animated humans into a bloody pulp stain.

 

I agree entirely - I'm a complete pacifist though, I see war as something that should be a measure only used under direct threat, when prolonged and extensive negotiations have failed (e.g ww2). DCS-A10 is about an aircraft, it's systems, and mastery of both.

 

Start turning it into a system whereby people are getting blown up and suddenly it moves from being a celebration of aviation and technology, to a celebration of murder.

 

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to play COD!

[Zakatak]

Don't have them split in half or something, it's still a pretty content-neutral game.

 

Maybe a little spatter of blood on the ground?

[EtherealN]

You'll never see any of that in a real plane, so why would something like this offer any value whatsoever?

[GGTharos]

Yeah, it'll get added as soon as there's nothing more serious and actually immersion enhancing to add first ;)

 

Having some gore would add to the immersion a lot. Its a bit strange having infantry simply fall over after being hit by a 30mm cannon or explosives. Also an ability to turn this on or off would be a bonus as some players don't find gore that appealing.

[Irregular programming]

You'll never see any of that in a real plane, so why would something like this offer any value whatsoever?

 

Well, why have detailed ground troops at all when we are just going to see a low res model from the aircraft.

 

I don't see why a sensible amount of detailed gore shouldn't be added to the game for ground troops (there already is gore when you get a pilot kill), that said there might be performance reasons why it isn't, and I am sure there are more pressing matters to attend to.

 

But a suggestion about making the game more detailed is something that I can't understand how you can argue against..

[shagrat]

But a suggestion about making the game more detailed is something that I can't understand how you can argue against..

 

Because people who are sooo fond of blood and gore when making a bombing run are of no use in any army! Warfare is NOT a game :mad:

 

I "play" / fly sim to enjoy the tactical and technical challenges not to watch some simulated "war-porn".

 

ED has already implemented a lot of detail and realism in the ground forces engagements and yes there is enough "killing" going on to accurately simulate a strafing run on infantry.

 

Just for the "Boah, did you see the innards fly around!!! Cool man!" talk in the YouTube video comments these additional "realism" is not necessary, at least not for me. :huh:

 

If ED sees it necessary to add gore they probably will, but for the sake of making some sick minds happy in their lust for brutality there are enough sources out there on the web, including games, videos and photographs...

[Frostiken]

You can't see gore from the cockpit. I'm all for adding gore as long as they also remove all external views. Besides, external views ruin immersion!

 

No but you can see it on the TPod. People don't just fall over dead when you drop 200 pounds of tritonal on them. Pilots don't just have a clean job and simply fly around having fun, pushing a button that makes someone somewhere die. They actually watch these people get torn to bits:

 

 

Implementation of such could be accomplished by simply breaking parts of the model off. Don't have to have bloody-stump textures and shit like that, just break the model to pieces and ragdoll them around.

 

..., simulator engine coming to a crawl at 0.01 fps, ah, good times.

Actually it really shouldn't have much of an FPS hit. A few random-shaped chunks of debris that get thrown out of the model when it's destroyed.

 

Perhaps you people should join the armed forces... There you can first hand deep dive into "gore" business... may be your own gore... mega-bloody-gore orgies... "war-porn"... sick minds... lust for brutality...

 

Wow, glad to hear you hold people who serve in the military in such high regard. We're all just a bunch of baby-rapists to you, right?

 

The way I see it, being opposed to the real violence that accompanies real warfare with the very aircraft you're killing virtual Russians with is hypocritical and immature. I'm sorry those of us in the military don't adhere to the lofty moral standards of Conure and Shagrat, but war is hell and this is a simulation of it. Requesting ragdoll physics for infantry and limb separation from high-explosive impacts isn't unreasonable, and if you can't stomach virtual violence in your virtual A-10 on your computer, safe and comfortable in your home while casually badmouthing people who put their life on the line so you can enjoy the freedoms you have (a hilariously hypocritical stance for a German to take...), well, maybe you should just stop playing war games altogether.

 

I think the real people who are immature and are sick and twisted are those who would be unable to draw a line between reality and a game with the inclusion of gore.

Edited July 24, 2011 by Frostiken

[Zakatak]

(there already is gore when you get a pilot kill)

 

There is...?

[shagrat]

Wow, glad to hear you hold people who serve in the military in such high regard. We're all just a bunch of baby-rapists to you, right?

 

The way I see it, being opposed to the real violence that accompanies real warfare with the very aircraft you're killing virtual Russians with is hypocritical and immature. I'm sorry those of us in the military don't adhere to the lofty moral standards of Conure and Shagrat, but war is hell and this is a simulation of it. Requesting ragdoll physics for infantry and limb separation from high-explosive impacts isn't unreasonable, and if you can't stomach virtual violence in your virtual A-10 on your computer, safe and comfortable in your home while casually badmouthing people who put their life on the line so you can enjoy the freedoms you have (a hilariously hypocritical stance for a German to take...), well, maybe you should just stop playing war games altogether.

 

I think the real people who are immature and are sick and twisted are those who would be unable to draw a line between reality and a game with the inclusion of gore.

 

After serving for 8 years and still good contacts and first hand feedback from buddies in the german and UK forces I don't argue about what warfare is about or want to neglect the fact that it is brutal.

 

I DO strongly agree with the point that lots of civilians (especially in Germany) are so way apart from what "peace-keeping" and "order enforcing" missions in Afghanistan or the Balkans are really about.

 

I DO hate the common view that our guys who keep their ass in the line of fire for our phoney politicians reputation are accused of being bloodthirsty maniacs and whenever there is the chance media and politics want them chastised for things that everybody who knows a little bit about armed conflicts will see as "normal".

 

When it comes to sending soldiers into war I have the strong belief it should be the absolute last option, but after the decision is made let them do their job without harassing every action or the stupid ROE enforced during the Kosovo conflicts.

 

What I meant was: People who "enjoy" gore that much may want to experience what real war is about. Get a little bit shot at (...a really cool experience *sarcastic*). If people join the armed forces because they "like" killing people, shooting around and feast on brutality they are at the wrong place!

A soldier is a well trained specialist, not a trigger happy killer, besides his mates will not likely go on patrol with some stupid jerk risking everyones live for his personal thrill).

 

The problem is the "job" itself. Sometimes I feel the average civilian is seeing soldiers like some vegetarians see butchers. Both have a job you may not find to your personal liking, both jobs include bloodshed. Only that soldiers find themselves accused of murder on a regulary bases (at least in germany).

 

...but on the point of lofty moral standards: It is not about neglecting the fact that there is violence in war, but for me as well as other (ex-)soldiers I do not need extreme gore to be immersed into a simulation.

 

I would not enjoy / thrive on virtual bloodshed nor on real live bloodshed.

 

When we look at the YouTube war-porn and especially the comments what do you guess this is good for? Some people say "Oh my god! This is what war is like..." or do we see lots of "I grew up during the cold war and didn't join the military sure wished I did love that shit :)" (Original comment from YouTube!)...

 

I had some guys in our unit that had a similar attitude. I guarantee this is not funny and luckily they didn't get themselves injured or killed in live firing exercises.

 

...and don't tell me DCS: A-10C is not enjoyable or realistic, because bodies don't get blown to pieces ;)

Edited July 24, 2011 by shagrat

[VincentLaw]

The way I see it, being opposed to the real violence that accompanies real warfare with the very aircraft you're killing virtual Russians with is hypocritical and immature.

 

In that case fencing, paintball, and college wrestling are hypocritical and immature too. All three of these sports are based on real war. There is a difference between enjoying play combat and enjoying a very graphic depiction of death. DCS is not real war, no real people die in a simulation, and I certainly hope AI technology never reaches the point where it can truly feel pain or some people would argue for that feature too.

[Frostiken]

In that case fencing, paintball, and college wrestling are hypocritical and immature too.

Do I even have to point out the ridiculous flaw in *that* parallel?

 

Virtual Russians.

 

Real people.

 

no real people die in a simulation

 

Uh, yeah, so why bother getting upset about it?

 

Let's put it this way - why don't you just fly around dropping BDUs, firing TP rounds and training rockets then, if the violence aspect shouldn't appeal to anyone? Why did they even bother letting you fire the gun on 'real' targets? I'm sure I can find some people that would find the idea of even glorifying a war machine to be unreasonable.

 

Also tone down your sensationalism. Nobody's asking for "very real depictions of death". Nobody's asking for virtual pixel-men to crawl around screaming their little .wav screams, leaving a trail of digital pixel intestines behind them, clutching their make-believe little leg stumps and moaning about their pretend little textures painted on them. Even if it were just ragdolls that would be fine.

 

Do you have these arguments with every game that features any sort of blood?

Edited July 25, 2011 by Frostiken

[VincentLaw]

...being opposed to the real violence that accompanies real warfare...is hypocritical and immature.

DCS is not real war, no real people die in a simulation

 

The point is not that we are opposed to the real violence of real war. We are opposed to "real violence" being put into the fake war.

Edited July 25, 2011 by VincentLaw

[Frostiken]

The point is not that we are opposed to the real violence of real war. We are opposed to "real violence" being put into the fake war.

 

You could say that about every game. But nobody does, your logic and rationalle is a completely absurd double-standard, and that arguing about violence in games was old hat when it was regarding Mortal Kombat in the 90s.

 

Can you even draw a line between 'too real' violence? Right now, they're virtual human fascimilies that fall over with a death animation. Is that too real for you? Should they just blink and disappear like in an old arcade game? Should they be obvious non-humans, maybe zombies or even angry dinosaurs? Keep in mind even the comical deaths of TF2 was 'too real' for Germany and they replaced them with robots that explode with gears.

 

Me, I want war in my wargame. On that note, this might be one of the most absurd arguments I've ever heard.

Edited July 25, 2011 by Frostiken

[VincentLaw]

You are right, it is a poorly constructed argument on my end that I should apologize for wasting your time with. That last post does not even properly address your quote of me as it was supposed to.

 

I'm sure everyone here has their own reasons for their opinions. For me, it is mostly a matter of taste. I simply enjoy games more when they do not exceed a certain (ambiguous) threshold of violence.

 

This does not mean that all games that depict human death should be outlawed. It also doesn't mean that every game with a little violence should be fully graphic. These would both be extreme viewpoints. The truth is that there are some people who enjoy nonviolent games, some that enjoy nongraphic violence, some that enjoy it mildly graphic, and some that enjoy it fully graphic. With that in mind, there is a place for every type of game in the range.

 

If a-10c was made more graphic of a game, it wouldn't really make it a worse game, it would just make it worse for me. I have no objective reason for DCS to not have more graphic infantry deaths, I simply hope it doesn't.

 

Do you have these arguments with every game that features any sort of blood?

 

 

and to answer that question, no I don't. I only argue against the inclusion of the feature, not for the removal of it, since people like you deserve somewhere to get their fun too. That said, you have every right to argue for blood and gore here. I will stop being hostile.

 

We can simply agree to disagree while respecting both the pacifist FSX pilots and the Mortal Kombat fighters.

[Frostiken]

It also doesn't mean that every game with a little violence should be fully graphic. These would both be extreme viewpoints

Fair enough. I just got the impression that your argument hinged on this belief that including enhanced damage on ground targets, to include infantry, you automatically equated it to this:

 

Edited July 25, 2011 by Frostiken