Shoot to Thrill: Weapon Realism
Video game guns have come a long way since the days of Doom’s double-barreled shotgun or even Goldeneye’s iconic Walther PPK. With greater processing power available to spend on physics engines, designers are now able to take factors like recoil and bullet drop into account when crafting their guns. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re plugging every real-world factor into their ballistic models. A recent article featured in Popular Mechanics explains why.
With many modern FPSs hitting the best-seller charts, it’s inevitable that gamers would wonder just how true to life these games are. Sure not many actual people (except maybe Curtis Jackson) could absorb the hundreds of rounds that most players soak up in the course of a single session – but are the guns gamers get to use in these games as accurate as possible? The answer is jointly yes and no.
Philippe Therien, a designer who worked on Rainbow Six Vegas 2, explains: “These consoles are so powerful, when you fire a bullet we could factor all of it in: windfall, range, everything about the history of that specific weapon, friction values for the barrel, how many times it’s been fired since it was last cleaned.” But the problem then becomes less compelling gameplay. Therien continues, “We could make it as anally realistic as possible. But we’re not trying to make a live simulator.”
So what about games that do aspire toward absolute simulation? America’s Army, an unapologetic recruiting game distributed for free by the U.S. Army, offers potential enlistees the chance to get a feel for real-world action. But it seems even here accuracy has taken a back seat, as developers admit that frame rate and the almighty fun-factor had to be considered first.
Gamers that would like a touch more realism in their shooters can certainly find it in several places. The popular Half-Life 2 mod Insurgency, available through Steam, features much more accurate representations of real-world weapons, as does Project Reality for Battlefield 2.
Tags: America's Army, Doom, FPS, Rainbow Six
That’s saying something when they’ve actually run out of things to improve upon and are turning attention towards weapon physics o_O
Games are still games, I think Call of Duty 4 keeps the realism to the sounds and graphics, the game play is awesome, but I don’t think you rejuvenate in real life that fast.
I agree that games should be games, meaning that games should be fun first. Realism shouldn’t be the be all end all USP of a game. Gun physics are cool to think about but would anyone want to play a game where you have to take into account loft, wind, distance, and elevation every time you shot they’re gun? In this case, I’d say close enough to make it fun is just enough.
This article makes me think about the first time I walked into an arcade and saw Silent Scope. It was at that very moment that I was hesitant about video games. I totally agree with the primary purpose of games to be fun. But, the extent of realism that games are moving towards is astonishing. Not only can games physically simulate the recoil and have you hold a weapon in your hand like Time Crisis or Silent Scope in the arcades, but now console games really make you take into effect every part of the outside environment that effects your shot. I would have never thought I would have to take wind speed and the Coriolis effect into account when using a sniper rifle to the extent Call of Duty 4 made me. Not saying all this is a bad thing, just that for anyone who has fired a rifle or pistol before, the line is starting to blur from games and reality. Good or bad, you decide. I personally think a game is the same as a gun, but not in the terms you would assume as pure danger. If a wacko is going to use it in the wrong way, there going to use it the wrong way no matter what.
Thats impressive, games that take all that into account. Good for the army and prospective snipers,but games wouldn’t be as fun if it were exactly like real life.