>flaw one: jumping with a gun
This should be obvious to any game developer, but it’s quite alarming knowing how many games calling themselves realistic freely allow people to just jump around with a gun as if people just do that. You know how many people who can’t jump in general? The idea of seeing some random probably half emeciated dude jump around as if their fucking athlete in a milsim is ridiculous. Like fuck, even dark souls of all stupid games managed to understand how goofy jumping is in its settings.
>flaw two: forgetting that combat exists beyond the front lines
Believe it or not, there’s a special weapon called ‘artillery.’ The idea that any modern fight doesn’t involve a dude supporting at the back is horribly ignorant of real warfare. I actually find it fun to support friends with some machine gun or artillery fire while they’re assaulting a point.
>flaw three: forgetting to allow players to freely
Again, a little alarming knowing how many self proclaimed realistic shooters forget that people in real life normally give themselves a place to come back and resupply to if shit gets tough. I really do not understand why games like arma or insurgency manage to fuck something like that up. Like hell, even war thunder has refueling stations in the simulator modes.
>flaw four: vehicle combat being always goofy for some reason
There are days where I find fucking battlefield and halo APC fights to be more realistic than the shit you’d get in games like war thunder or hell let loose. It doesn’t take a lot to make mechanized combat realistic. A lot of milsims forget that vehicles normally have a lot of momentum and can accelerate to really fast speeds. Driving a tank really should not feel easy or as fast as it is in these games. I’d also add in that the unlimited fuel really adds to the goofiness. The same logic also applies for aircraft and drones.
>>39749Nope, innovations in optimization techniques don’t even justify the existence of games larger than a gigabyte. There are plenty of ways to keep game performance stable without doing much of anything. Game devs just won’t use them over funding costs or sheer laziness. Just compare a well optimized game like war frame or war thunder to the atrocity that was concord or that hogwarts game
A simple physics simulation like arma or squad will never have its goofiness justified. Also again, jumping in a milsim is objectively stupid.
>>39750>innovations in optimization techniques don’t even justify the existence of games larger than a gigabyte.Proof?
>There are plenty of ways to keep game performance stable without doing much of anything.Proof?
>Game devs just won’t use them over funding costs or sheer laziness.Proof?
>Just compare a well optimized game like war frame or war thunder to the atrocity that was concord or that hogwarts game<Just compare multiplayer game with servers vs single player CPU intense game>A simple physics simulation like arma or squad will never have its goofiness justified. Also again, jumping in a milsim is objectively stupid.That post never mentioned jumping.