L.Tankersley Posted December 15, 2000 Share Posted December 15, 2000 I came across this editorial on a gaming site today. While its primary focus is on the upcoming anime-influenced game Oni, the author makes several points I think have relevance here (particularly as we periodically get calls for more "realistic" blood and death within Combat Mission). http://www.macgamer.com/features/blood/blood.html ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted December 16, 2000 Share Posted December 16, 2000 Each is entitled to his own view. Mine is that this is a war game, and when you shoot people they bleed and die. If you don't want that in a wargame (which most don't have anyway) play Risk or Stratego. I mean nothing personal by this, Leland. I don't even know what your view is. I'm just stating mine. It has been looooooooooonng discussed here and I am sure that it will be again and again. Very interesting article. Thanks for pointing it out. Wild Bill ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted December 16, 2000 Share Posted December 16, 2000 Hell a lot of people threw a **** fit when the "dead body" casualty marker was added let alone about adding blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted December 16, 2000 Share Posted December 16, 2000 It has been discussed to death. BTS has reached a suitable compromise with the prone figure representing an "eliminated" unit. Just my 2 cents ------------------ "Moriarty, you suck." -- Dunno, but somebody must've said it somewhere along the line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Posted December 16, 2000 Share Posted December 16, 2000 hey, I am pleased with the BTS compromise, while I agree with Wild Bill. Someone asked another Wild Bill --Bill Mauldin -- once what the United States learned from the Second World War, and he said "We learned how much blood can come out of a human body." I'm happy the human element is taken into consideration, but I wouldn't want to see blood at the expense of other things - more units, additional ai programming, dynamic lighting, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MantaRay Posted December 16, 2000 Share Posted December 16, 2000 I have seen it happen, and don't need to see it in CM to have a good time. I think it would be a bit out of place anyway. But I am sure mod makers can add it to the dead body graphics if they really need the carnage. Ray ------------------ When asked, "How many moves do you see ahead?", CAPABLANCA replied: "One move - the best one." New CM Site. In process of switching. Brought to you by Hardcore Gamers Daily The Red Army of the Rugged Defense Group Ladder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted December 16, 2000 Share Posted December 16, 2000 Corey Tamás talks about realism, and how if people wanted blood in Oni because it would be realistic, they would be ignoring all the inherently unrealistic aspects of the game. This is in stark contrast with CM, where realism is the goal. However, CM does not simulate individual soldiers (and that is another debate). Unless individual soldiers are modelled – which they will not be anytime soon, if ever – then blood is irrelevant. David New map! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.Tankersley Posted December 16, 2000 Author Share Posted December 16, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wild Bill Wilder: I mean nothing personal by this, Leland. I don't even know what your view is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Heh, that's because I carefully avoided stating it. But just for the record... I come down squarely on the fence on this issue. (Ow, splinters.) Most of the time, I believe gameplay is head and shoulders more important than realism. If the game isn't fun, why bother playing it? Now, before the hamstertruppen come to take me away [OT: have I mentioned here my sister just got a chinchilla? Perhaps we need a Chinchilla Special Forces Brigade.] let me state there is one BROAD exception to this personal rule, in the area of "reality simulations," generally wargames. In this genre, the realism itself (broadly defined) is what provides most of the fun. And a good thing, too; otherwise nobody would bother playing a lot of the wargames out there. "Hey, want to read a couple hundred pages of rules and then use the rules to structure the way we move tiny bits of cardboard around on some marked-up pieces of paper?" "Sure, sign me up for Advanced Fnord Leader!" [My point being that you could take a wargame, say ASL, keep all of the MECHANICS (rules) the same but strip it of all context (don't let on you're simulating squads, gunfire, or even war at all), and you'd be left with IDENTICAL gameplay in a form that NOBODY would play.] Blood rarely (there are a few exceptions) adds ANYTHING to the gameplay. [Note that I DON'T consider graphic eye-candy to be a part of gameplay; the gameplay of Unreal Tournament and of, I don't know, the original Doom are essentially similar in my view despite wide differences in appearance. In a similar vein, I think that Warcraft and Starcraft and most RTS titles in general have pretty much the same gameplay.] You can make a reality argument for blood, but I don't find it particularly compelling. I'm personally not offended or particularly disturbed by blood. But I do have to echo the author's concerns that some people seem ... disturbingly obsessed by blood and depictions of graphic violence. These depictions are often egregiously UNrealistic despite the claims of their adherents. In my view, FPS games are at their core about besting other people at what is essentially a hand-eye coordination task; some people seem to feel that they're about making other people explode in ridiculously overstated showers of gore. I think there is something to the claims that this sort of thing can desensitize people (although I'm nowhere near the camp that says playing these sorts of games CAUSES people to actually go out and commit violent acts). On the other hand, I think that realistic depiction of CONSEQUENCES can be a good and important thing - it helps people internalize that actions have consequences. But most computer games are escapist fantasy at heart - when people start talking about how "realistic" the latest first-person shoot-em-up is, I just have to chuckle. [i'm not saying they're not fun, but c'mon, realistic?!] In these types of fantasies, realistic consequences are almost certainly BAD. Imagine if in a FPS game when you shot someone there was a truly realistic depiction of the consequences. Sounds like a huge downer to me. I think the same thing holds true in a wargame. What we're doing is engaging in a little escapist fantasy of our own -- if we had been in the position of, say, a battalion commander in WWII, how would we have performed? Well, I'm running out of steam here, and I need to go eat something. So I'll sign off now. Anyway, I'll echo Bill's sentiment that everyone is entitled to his or her own view. The above is mine. At least, until I think it over and realize I was wrong. ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Hough Posted December 16, 2000 Share Posted December 16, 2000 I fence-sit too. I have nothing really for or against blood... but what really disturbs me about this is that Bungie always used to defend the use of blood in their games, and that blood is definitely part of the anime aesthetic. I wouldn't care if they chose not to use blood if they weren't trying for anime styling, but they are, and it's something of a violation of the genre's conventions to not have blood. And certainly a violation to have a 'cartoonish flash of light and sound'. So in this case, I have to support the use of blood for the sake of artistic integrity. And am disapointed in Bungie. A no-blood option, like Myth has, would have been a satisfactory solution, but apparently that's out. -John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted December 16, 2000 Share Posted December 16, 2000 The flashes were in Oni long before they took the blood out. I gather it was a problem to make blows visually connect with your opponent, so they introduced flashes to tell you whether your blow caused damage or was blocked. The flashes are not a direct substitute for blood. As for Bungie's views and their integrity, I imagine blood would have stayed in if the game were not being passed on to Gathering Of Developers once it is finished. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.Tankersley Posted December 17, 2000 Author Share Posted December 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: The flashes were in Oni long before they took the blood out. I gather it was a problem to make blows visually connect with your opponent, so they introduced flashes to tell you whether your blow caused damage or was blocked. The flashes are not a direct substitute for blood.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Plus, they're using different color flashes to provide feedback as to the health of the target. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As for Bungie's views and their integrity, I imagine blood would have stayed in if the game were not being passed on to Gathering Of Developers once it is finished.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's my guess, too. As to the realism, well, I'm not sure how realistic it is to have gouts of blood spraying around when you kick someone. ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted December 17, 2000 Share Posted December 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wild Bill Wilder: Each is entitled to his own view. Mine is that this is a war game, and when you shoot people they bleed and die. If you don't want that in a wargame (which most don't have anyway) play Risk or Stratego.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why stop there, then? If you're going all the way, might as well throw in brains, viscera and every other sort of nastiness, none of which have anything to do with strategy or tactics, which I thought was the point of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted December 17, 2000 Share Posted December 17, 2000 Also, how exactly do you add blood to CM? When a soldier's hit, should a big gout of blood spurt out? Wow, you mean I can see that at 500m? Damn my eyesight's good. Or should there be a nondescript red splotch on eliminated unit figures? How is that any more realistic than the current lack of blood? Yes, blood is a part of war. And if I want to see flying viscera I can probably go sign on with Doctors Without Frontiers and see plenty within 24 hrs. But in a tactical simulation, what good does it do? Does it make my experience any more realistic? IMO, nope. ------------------ Grand Poobah of the fresh fire of Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarhead Posted December 17, 2000 Share Posted December 17, 2000 I am throwing in with the non-blood camp here. I get my fun with the fire and maneuver tactics. I don't think moving into that village after calling in 3 or 4 min of 81mm mortar fire and finding body parts laying around would increase the fun factor much. I would enjoy seeing a bit more damage to the buildings. I have to say while playing close combat I thought the gore lvl was a bit much. I'm not saying war is not bloody, I know it is. I'M playing for the chance to out maneuver, or slug it out head to head with another like minded person. Not to see arms and legs fly. ------------------ Semper Fi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted December 17, 2000 Share Posted December 17, 2000 I'll take pyrotechnics over blood any day. I've been around both blood and explosions (not in a real war) and I vastly prefer explosions. Of course, I prefer them both at a reasonable distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 17, 2000 Share Posted December 17, 2000 Blood I ll give blood...hehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Hough Posted December 17, 2000 Share Posted December 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by L.Tankersley: That's my guess, too. As to the realism, well, I'm not sure how realistic it is to have gouts of blood spraying around when you kick someone.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> When you kick someone? Probably not, except perhaps a bit when you kick 'em in the face. But the game does have guns, and I would hope swords, and those should have gouts of blood connected to hitting their targets. Realistic? Maybe not. But Oni shouldn't be that concerned with realism, but more with things looking and feeling right with their chosen aesthetic. Which includes vast amounts of blood, stylishly presented. -John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts