nazi zombiez

[Mina Synd 0]

wow that was so lame. you know WHY it was "dull and repetitive"? because they were trying to make it with as much fun and action but without crossing the limits of what actually happened in the conflicts. they don't have that boundary with CoD4 because it's set in the near future. they could do anything they wanted. it's one reason i don't like it... because it's not FAR future, it's near future trying to create an amazing plot.

 

real life doesn't HAVE amazing action movie plots like that. there is only so much stuff one soldier can do before his/her luck runs out (working by the theory that when you have completed the game it's all technically one life, even though you've done multiple attempts per level to beat it...)

 

one thing i will give CoD4 credit for. the nuke. that was original... the radiation thing... that's never been done before and the visuals were stunning... it was a very good game... but there were no set limits which basically just turns it into a generic action shooter which can become more and more intense as the game progresses, even if it would be simply impossible for the real character to survive that situation o-O

[Luk3us 63]

What are you talking about? There are soldiers who fought in world war one and world war two, and survived. That spans a time of years. The odds might be against you, but people survive. Its just how it is.

 

I mean what about the Russian conscripts who made it all the way through the war? I mean lol the odds against them must be ****ing staggering, considering the massive loses they faced...

[Mina Synd 0]

yaaaah. you have to take into account the number of casualties to the number of people actually involved. do you -really- think that EVERYONE in the war was constantly under attack like in the games? XD the average soldier would have experienced maybe one or two battles tops... front line soldiers leading the way would have experienced more...

 

but even so, the soldiers aren't in constant near-death situations all the time. in the games you are almost constantly in situations where you are near-singlehandedly fighting off 10+ enemy soldiers at a time... pretty much the soldiers in situations such as stalingrad that survived from day 1 til the end of the war in constant battle scenarios were either not at the front (such as staff, high ranking officers) or very rarely, EXTREMELY lucky soldiers.

 

you have to take into account that a "heavy military defeat" ISN'T what we say it is in games. a heavy military defeat in the real world means that out of your whole army up to 7 out of 10 men are dead and the rest have had to retreat or be captured. there have been very, VERY few examples of a TOTAL victory/defeat in modern history. an example of a defeat would be losing 3 out of 10 men average and having to retreat...

 

for example, the charge of the light brigade (british against the russians, battle of balaclava, 1854 in the crimean war)

"with 118 men killed, 127 wounded. After regrouping, only 195 men were still with horses." - a short quote of the british casualties. it was remembered as a massacre and a heavy defeat, admitedly the brigade had more then half it's men wounded, dead or captured, the action was actually a victory though be it a violent one. cavalry against cannon had NEVER been tried before - until then.

 

if you have watched the movies (such as the most famous one with errol flynn in '36) you'll notice that the charge goes on forever with mass death everywhere. not true. the cavalry spent most of the distance just going along at a slow trot - then charging when they got in range of the cannons. the cannon fire lasted less then 30 seconds, and a large amount of the casualties were taken when the russian cavalry engaged them.

 

anyway my point is that no single soldier could POSSIBLY be THAT lucky to survive THAT much constant, heavy battle. in the games, they cut out the rest of the time such as the waiting or guard duty... and they cut out the combat where nothing happens, and when there is combat they make sure your character is constantly at the front of it... generally the average frontline soldier would have 5 or 10 minutes of intense combat then some rest, or at least a breather until the enemy regrouped. whereas in games your character constantly engages in combat at the front for a whole level's worth at a time...

 

and WW1 is a really bad example xD they spent 90% of the time just sitting about in trenches or underground rooms being bored and going insane... the other 10% either on leave or going over the top and being shot, taking ground or killing some people and retreating back XD

[Luk3us 63]

Perhaps.

 

Don't ya hate it when you build up a huge retort, just to be faced with a half line response?

[Mina Synd 0]

it's more then i was expecting from you ^-^