Crytek Dev On Fun vs. Realism In Game Guns 324
An anonymous reader tips a post from Pascal Eggert, a gun enthusiast and Crytek developer, who sheds some light on how weaponry in modern shooters is designed. Quoting:
"Guns in games are like guns in movies: it is all about looks, sounds and clichés. Just like in the movies, games have established a certain perception of weapons in the mind of the public and just like in movies games get almost everything wrong. ... The fact is that we are not trying to simulate reality but are creating products to provide entertainment. ... if you want to replicate the looks of something you need to at least see it, but using it is even better. You should hold a gun in your hands, fire it and reload it to understand what does what — and at that point you will realize, there is nothing on it that does not have a function — because guns are tools for professionals. Lot of weapon designers in the game industry get that wrong. They think of guns like products for consumers or magic devices that kill people at a distance when really it's just a simple and elegant mechanism that propels little pieces of metal. Unfortunately 3D artists often only get access to the photos that Google Image Search comes up with if you enter 'future assault rifle' or, even worse, pictures from other games and movies that also got it wrong. This may explain a lot of common visual mistakes in games, especially since guns are mostly photographed from the side and egoshooters show weapons from the first person view."
This article is drawn from his personal experience in the game industry. The images shown are Pascal's personal work and are not related to his work at Crytek.
Actually... (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, as someone who's had at least the basic infantry training (our main role was to shoot down aircraft) it seems to me like it is indeed very very easy to handle. Ever since some guy tied a bow to a plank, weapons have been point and click basically.
And I imagine we'll probably find some parchments where the old guard argues that command line weapons were better, and how you should give lusers an IQ test before letting them anywhere near a weapon. ;) Actually, that is only half joke. A pope actually treated the crossbow as some kind of WMD and prohibited its use against fellow Christians. But I digress.
Anyway, a non-guided anti-tank rocket launcher like the one in most games is the epitome of easy to use. You don't even have to compensate for distance as much as with an assault rifle. The only thing that's unlike the game is basically that you should be sure there's nothing behind you, and shooting most rocket launchers in a room is an awfully bad idea. When the rocket comes out the front end, a jet of flame comes out the back end, see? You don't even have much recoil to deal with, since the hot gas just goes out the back end instead of pushing against something. Truly point and click, really.
Now guided ones that can take down a low flying helicopter may need a tad more training, but the basic principle is the same.
As for the other point, while I'll concede the general point that too much realism kills the fun, there is a difference between lack of realism because you understand exactly why it would be less fun, and lack of realism because you have no clue how a weapon works. The latter can be unrealistic without gaining any fun, or even being less fun.
Heck, probably the most baffling weapon-related example comes from the post-NGE SWG, where one quest gives you a sniper scope for a sword. No, literally. I can't even imagine what they were thinking, what were they smoking, and what's the phone number of their dealer so I can get some of that good shit too ;) And I can't even start to imagine why that would be more fun than a more believable (i.e., realistic) attachment like a mastercrafted grip or pommel.
Or take the meme that assault rifles kick so hard that you spray bullets in a 30 degree cone, or make that 45 degrees if it's an AK-47 or SAW. Such a weapon would be fracking useless. I once calculated that if a real SAW had the spread from counter-strike it would be useless even for suppression at its rated effective range, because you'd need to fire many many full belts and more ammo than a squad carries, to even put one bullet in the same square metre as the guy you're shooting at. Sorry, that won't make me keep my head down. I'll take that kind of chances.
And anyway trained soldier (most games pretend you're one) wouldn't spray lead like that. Except maybe if he's shooting from the hip while dancing the Macarena ;)
And the AK-47 is actually a very manageable weapon, although the larger calibre tells the average clueless gamer nerd who never shot one "OMG, higher calibre must kick like a mule." The key there is that it really was designed as a mid-range weapon, in the same line of thinking as the German MP-43/STG-44 (the first assault rifle) it was trying to imitate. It has a shorter cartridge case and shoots a larger but slower bullet, which means you're not really putting more impulse in the bullet. It's also why its effectiveness takes a nose dive beyond 300 metres: the slow bullet needs a too curved trajectory to hit the target and increases the chance to estimate wrong and shoot over or too short. But even then (A) it's 300m, not the distances on the average game map, and (B) it's the ballistic problem described before, not some kind of spraying lead in all directions.
At any rate, exactly what fun does that inaccuracy bring? Games have been balanced just fine and had interesting weapons even in the "stone age" when guns were hitscan weapons. And games like WoW still are such a bad offshoot of hitscan that you can even see the projectile curving and even zig-zaging to its target, and sold more copies than a lot of the "but it's realistic!!" (if you don't know how guns work, that is) idiocies. _Someone_ must like that.
Re:On guns in games (Score:3, Informative)
Re:almost everything wrong (Score:5, Informative)
well, racing game designers often go and remeasure the various test tracks, and run the stats of their modelled cars through the manufacturer, why not the same with FPS's? doesn't have to be in a warzone, but these weapons are available to be photographed, measured, tested and modelled.
dave
Re:Maybe... (Score:5, Informative)
I love Crysis because it is at least three different FPS games rolled into one. You play in the standard armour mode, you head in, kill some bad guys, win the day. You play in stealth and pick off opponents from far away, then slip away into the shadows to attack from another position. You mix it up with speed and strength to charge in and beat the living hell out of something. I've never played a game with such dynamic alterations to gameplay without having to stop, quit, and change class. You're a HW Guy, a Sniper, and a Scout all at once.
If you've completed it and fancy some awesome God-like carnage, edit the ini file to make suit recharging almost instant, clips hold 999 ammo, and run speed twice as fast. Super sweet.
Re:More of this kind of complaint please. (Score:3, Informative)
Oh come on, the FN FAL (SLR) is the only one in the game that DOESNT reload like that. He (you) take a new magazine and use it to knock the eject mechanism to remove the spent magazine. The FN FAL is the only rifle in the game that does this (despite the AK having a similar eject mechanism, making it possible.
I don't think we're talking about the same thing. There are two controls by the magazine port, the magazine eject and the bolt hold-open device. Hitting the magazine eject is irrelevant to what I am talking about, it is the hold-open device that you release after you change magazine. The breach-block has been held to the rear and the ejection port is now open to view the open magazine; release the HOD when you affix the new mag and it will charge the breach from the new magazine. Essentially to the onlooker this can be one fluid motion where the magazine is affixed and the rifle appears to automatically ready itself. The AK47 famously does not have a hold-open device, it is famous for the old "Dead Man's Click".
Re:Maybe... (Score:3, Informative)
Agreed. I like Crysis because of its overall polish and the flexibility allowed in terms of how problems can be solved. It doesn't hurt that the eye candy is ALSO rather stunning if your rig has the hardware to handle it. So I'm willing to accept less "realistic" gunplay for better overall realism and more engaging environment.
If you want 100% realistic gunplay, get off your ass, give the sofa a rest, and visit a rifle range.
Re:Actually... (Score:3, Informative)
Sort of. While a crossbow did allow one to use any untrained peasant, a longbow could do the same thing at the time. Far more important IMHO was the advent of the bodkin tip, essentially a pencil-like narrow metal spike, as opposed to the more traditional triangular or broadhead arrow tips.
In tests, a bodkin tip has been show to go right through both sides of a chain hauberk (hoodie;)) mounted on a wooden pole, as well as quite a way into the pole. And in historical accounts a point blank shot was described as piercing even the early plate breastplates. (Bearing in mind that even as late as the 1400's a suit of plate would be only 45 pounds and relatively soft iron, as opposed to the 60 pounds of steel of later gothic armour.) Though even that wouldn't really be an issue when Pope Innocent II banned crossbow use against Christians in 1139, as the vast majority of nobles still wore chain in battle at the time.
And yes, being caught with bodkin arrows if you weren't a soldier was an instant hanging offense, precisely because any peasant could kill a noble with them.
Re:Maybe... (Score:5, Informative)
I loved playing through most of the game using the stealth mode... It's a bit slower but takes more finesse.
However, the multiplayer design of Crysis was absolute shit. Anyone should've picked up from the DX9-clients-can't-mix-with-DX10-clients that Crytek violated one of the first rules of multiplayer game architecture - DO NOT TRUST THE CLIENT. In Crysis' case, apparently they offloaded world physics calculations to the client, and also trusted the client WAY too much.
For example, if a client said, "my 9mm pistol does 9999 damage", the server would say, "OK, 9999 damage to your target. Oh look, it's instadead."
Similarly, if a game client said, "My vehicle is immune to all forms of fire.", the server would happily say, "You got hit with a missile. Oh, you're immune to explosive damage - no damage at all!"
I played multiplayer for two weeks, the second of which was playing with the INI files figuring out what degree of cheating would not get noticed. (Thanks to the blatant instakillpistol cheaters, there was a LOT of potential for nonobvious cheating, such as the 400HP Toyota truck with a tweaked suspension.) After that I uninstalled the game and haven't played since. Cheating was, of course, unexciting other than the technical challenges of modding the game. Playing legit was pointless because of the ease of cheating.
Re:I stopped reading TFS here: (Score:3, Informative)
hunting rabbits with my .20 guage shotgun
I'm not sure what a guage is, but a .20 gauge shotgun, if such a thing existed, would probably tear your shoulder off with recoil. A 20 gauge shotgun is quite controllable and suitable for rabbit-hunting.
and squirrels with my .22 caliber rifle
On the other hand, a .22 caliber rifle (again, if such a thing existed) would pose little threat to even the smallest squirrel -- the critter might feel a bit of a sting when you hit it, but that's about all. A 22 caliber rifle, of course, will do for a squirrel quite nicely.
Maybe if Crytek hired people with three digit IQs they could make some fun games; this guy's obviously one of the 50% of humanity with a two digit quotient.
Beam. Eye. Pot. Kettle.
Re:I stopped reading TFS here: (Score:3, Informative)
Dan I'm a little confused.
You're picking on someone for mis-spelling gauge as guage. Okay, I got that one no problem. You progress to sarcastically point out that a .20 gauge shotgun would "tear your shoulder off with recoil". I'd ask you where you're getting this idea? The smaller the gauge of a shotgun the LESS powerful it is. Commonly available progression in order of most to least powerful is 10, 12, 18, and 20. You're already wickedly confused so I'm going to leave out the .410.
Once you're done displaying your ignorance in the scatter-gun category you move on to displaying it in the rifle category. The correct expression is .22, not 22 as you state. A 22 Caliber rifle very possibly COULD "tear your arm off" with recoil.
It's incredibly obvious that you don't understand the first thing about how to calculate a Gauge OR how to calculate a Caliber. In fact I'm calling into question whether you know anything about firearms at all.
Here is your own comment turned back on you - "Beam. Eye. Pot. Kettle."
The next time you're going to pick on someone for their ignorance perhaps you should check to make sure that your own knowledge is up to par.
Gauge - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_(bore_diameter) [wikipedia.org]
Caliber - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliber [wikipedia.org]
Mods - Mr. Dvorkin's post is not informative, it's WRONG.
Re:I stopped reading TFS here: (Score:3, Informative)
22 caliber, when written, is informal usage. When spoken, the decimal is always assumed to be there unless specified otherwise.
Re:It's probably a non-trivial reason.... (Score:3, Informative)
Any parent letting a politician or political organisation control their child's perception of the world should be sterilised at gunpoint.
I say that one as a person who likes Australia's gun control methods (Read: gun license required, dear gun nuts).
In many parts of the world people are bough up to not treat guns as toys in the same way they are taught not to treat carving knives as toys. Many Australian's have shot a gun, it's not hard to go down the range and fork over $30 (half of that is just paying the staff) but only 5% of Australians feel the desire to have a firearms license and as part of that 5% I can tell you it's not hard. Some places in Europe require young men to learn how to operate and care for a firearm. Greece and Sweden have national service and I've yet to meet a Swede that couldn't shoot (yes, one day that chef on the Muppets will crack and the frog will get it). Israel makes sure all it's citizens can shoot, male and female.
Please dont display US propaganda as being real. Most anti-gun ban activists do not actually know the gun laws of other nations they protest against such as the only thing preventing an Australian from getting a gun license is a violent criminal record or psychiatric episode (institutionalisation) which leaves oh, 99% of the Australian population eligible, the damn things are easier to get then a drivers license these days. More often then not they drag up laws that were repealed years ago, for example how many times have you heard that the Nazi's instituted gun control when in fact the Nazi's relaxed it (by 1938, any Nazi party member could buy, use and carry firearms without question, most German citizens received no grief about guns, the only real ban was against Jews having guns (shock horror)). The referenced gun control laws were implemented by the Weirmar republic as a requirement of the Treaty of Versailles (the on the US and French made them sign and Winston Churchill was against) before Hitler even joined the Nazi party and relaxed in 1933 then virtually eliminated in 1938.