Warface

Crytek... 'nuff said:



Discuss

Why is that right handed shooter using a left handed bolt action rifle?

Once I noticed that, I couldn't enjoy the rest of the trailer.

FAP FAP FAP FAP FAP FAP FAP FAP
http://kotaku.com/5699302/crysis-creators-latest-game-is-an-online-shooter
Now if only I still had a computer that could run that just fine =/ When does it hit NA?

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:Why is that right handed shooter using a left handed bolt action rifle?

Once I noticed that, I couldn't enjoy the rest of the trailer.

I assume you didn't really enjoy Counter-Strike.

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:Why is that right handed shooter using a left handed bolt action rifle?

Once I noticed that, I couldn't enjoy the rest of the trailer.

I assume you didn't really enjoy Counter-Strike.

Nope.

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:Why is that right handed shooter using a left handed bolt action rifle?

Once I noticed that, I couldn't enjoy the rest of the trailer.

I don't think that's a game breaking issue, but that's just my opinion.

Hmm.... Dosnt look very good at all to me.

Bodom wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:Why is that right handed shooter using a left handed bolt action rifle?

Once I noticed that, I couldn't enjoy the rest of the trailer.

I don't think that's a game breaking issue, but that's just my opinion.

Of course it isn't. Literally every model for Counter-Strike was backwards, and that game is a complete cult classic. Still has millions of players a day.

It looks good. But pretty much every shooter for the past two years has been a huge disappointment.

So I'm going to get hyped over it until it is actually released.

Bodom wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:Why is that right handed shooter using a left handed bolt action rifle?

Once I noticed that, I couldn't enjoy the rest of the trailer.

I don't think that's a game breaking issue, but that's just my opinion.

Of course it isn't game breaking. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Why not have it on his left shoulder instead if they wanna make it a left handed bolt action rifle?

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Bodom wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:Why is that right handed shooter using a left handed bolt action rifle?

Once I noticed that, I couldn't enjoy the rest of the trailer.

I don't think that's a game breaking issue, but that's just my opinion.

Of course it isn't game breaking. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Why not have it on his left shoulder instead if they wanna make it a left handed bolt action rifle?

They originally made the model for left handed shooters, and left the left side of the gun (The part that isn't visible) as one huge poly to save resources. Since the majority of games nowadays have right-handed shooters, many people need the gun on the right, or they will not play the game. So they just flip the model instead of spending several thousand dollars paying someone to make a new model.

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Bodom wrote:

I don't think that's a game breaking issue, but that's just my opinion.

Of course it isn't game breaking. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Why not have it on his left shoulder instead if they wanna make it a left handed bolt action rifle?

They originally made the model for left handed shooters, and left the left side of the gun (The part that isn't visible) as one huge poly to save resources. Since the majority of games nowadays have right-handed shooters, many people need the gun on the right, or they will not play the game. So they just flip the model instead of spending several thousand dollars paying someone to make a new model.

Wait, flipping the model would still have it as the wrong way. The bolt should be on the side that isn't visible. I'm confused now.

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Of course it isn't game breaking. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Why not have it on his left shoulder instead if they wanna make it a left handed bolt action rifle?

They originally made the model for left handed shooters, and left the left side of the gun (The part that isn't visible) as one huge poly to save resources. Since the majority of games nowadays have right-handed shooters, many people need the gun on the right, or they will not play the game. So they just flip the model instead of spending several thousand dollars paying someone to make a new model.

Wait, flipping the model would still have it as the wrong way. The bolt should be on the side that isn't visible. I'm confused now.

No, it shouldn't.

They originally modeled it for left handed shooters, so the bolt is on the right side, as normal, but they never model the backside of a gun to save resources, so they can't merely move the gun over, either they make a new model or they flip the current one. And to flip saves a great deal of money, and most people won't care. So it saves them money.

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wheen Your Strange wrote:
They originally made the model for left handed shooters, and left the left side of the gun (The part that isn't visible) as one huge poly to save resources. Since the majority of games nowadays have right-handed shooters, many people need the gun on the right, or they will not play the game. So they just flip the model instead of spending several thousand dollars paying someone to make a new model.

Wait, flipping the model would still have it as the wrong way. The bolt should be on the side that isn't visible. I'm confused now.

No, it shouldn't.

They originally modeled it for left handed shooters, so the bolt is on the right side, as normal, but they never model the backside of a gun to save resources, so they can't merely move the gun over, either they make a new model or they flip the current one. And to flip saves a great deal of money, and most people won't care. So it saves them money.

The bolt should be on the left side for left handed shooter. That's how left handed bolt action rifles work.

For example, the Savage Model 11 FLNS which is a left handed version of their Model 11 FCNS:
http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/11FLNS

Notice the bolt on the left side of the gun. If they did what you're saying (and they most probably do), they'd have to somehow remove the bolt. I can see why they'd use a left handed model for a left handed shooter (it looks "cooler" seeing the bolt move) but is in fact less realistic. Its more work for the shooter to have to use his opposite hand to cycle the bolt when he could use his strong hand for a faster/efficient bolt cycling.

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wait, flipping the model would still have it as the wrong way. The bolt should be on the side that isn't visible. I'm confused now.

No, it shouldn't.

They originally modeled it for left handed shooters, so the bolt is on the right side, as normal, but they never model the backside of a gun to save resources, so they can't merely move the gun over, either they make a new model or they flip the current one. And to flip saves a great deal of money, and most people won't care. So it saves them money.

The bolt should be on the left side for left handed shooter. That's how left handed bolt action rifles work.

For example, the Savage Model 11 FLNS which is a left handed version of their Model 11 FCNS:
http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/11FLNS

Notice the bolt on the left side of the gun. If they did what you're saying (and they most probably do), they'd have to somehow remove the bolt. I can see why they'd use a left handed model for a left handed shooter (it looks "cooler" seeing the bolt move) but is in fact less realistic. Its more work for the shooter to have to use his opposite hand to cycle the bolt when he could use his strong hand for a faster/efficient bolt cycling.

I understand, I'm just using CS:S as an example.

You cannot easily find left handed blueprints for weapons. Since the majority of the weapons made are for right-handers, and therefore the majority of blueprints made are right-handed weapons. Instead of making it incredibly difficult, and pricey, for the devs, they just let the models be backwards. Since most people aren't nitpicks, they won't care, and the money they saved will result in a net profit. Since there are only one or two nitpicks who won't play games because the charging handle is too skinny or the selector switch is upsidedown.

In short, they made right-handed models, for the left side.

So they used right handed models to be used as left handed rifles instead of right handed rifles and then they just flip them around making them both inaccurate?

Is that what going on...

EvanErgo wrote:So they used right handed models to be used as left handed rifles instead of right handed rifles and then they just flip them around making them both inaccurate?

Is that what going on...

As I said repeatedly, I'm using CS as an example.

If you can find blueprints to a left-handed weapon, I will openly admit you have won this argument, and shut my mouth up right there.

In Valve's case, they weren't Valve, it was some modding group who made the original CS, that modding group was majority leftys, so they wanted their guns to be left handed, but they could not find left-handed blueprints. So they just made right-handed blueprints and put them on the left side.

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

No, it shouldn't.

They originally modeled it for left handed shooters, so the bolt is on the right side, as normal, but they never model the backside of a gun to save resources, so they can't merely move the gun over, either they make a new model or they flip the current one. And to flip saves a great deal of money, and most people won't care. So it saves them money.

The bolt should be on the left side for left handed shooter. That's how left handed bolt action rifles work.

For example, the Savage Model 11 FLNS which is a left handed version of their Model 11 FCNS:
http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/11FLNS

Notice the bolt on the left side of the gun. If they did what you're saying (and they most probably do), they'd have to somehow remove the bolt. I can see why they'd use a left handed model for a left handed shooter (it looks "cooler" seeing the bolt move) but is in fact less realistic. Its more work for the shooter to have to use his opposite hand to cycle the bolt when he could use his strong hand for a faster/efficient bolt cycling.

I understand, I'm just using CS:S as an example.

You cannot easily find left handed blueprints for weapons. Since the majority of the weapons made are for right-handers, and therefore the majority of blueprints made are right-handed weapons. Instead of making it incredibly difficult, and pricey, for the devs, they just let the models be backwards. Since most people aren't nitpicks, they won't care, and the money they saved will result in a net profit. Since there are only one or two nitpicks who won't play games because the charging handle is too skinny or the selector switch is upsidedown.

In short, they made right-handed models, for the left side.

I understand why they do it, but I don't understand why we allow them to be "lazy", for lack of a better word, and let them do this. I could wait a couple more months and even years it might take them to make the guns more realistic. I understand time is money and they're working on deadlines, but if the consumer stands up and says "You know, I am dissatisfied with this product I have seen. I will not spend my money on it" then they'll have to change. Sadly, most people have lower standards and developers are able to get away with this stuff.

I dunno, maybe I'm just old fashioned and believe things should be done of higher quality. Even games like Medal of Honor (the 2010 one) have faults. Apparently, a Russian pistol from 2003 was what the Tariq pistol was based on according to the developers. In fact, it was the Beretta 1951 which the Tariq is a licensed copy of (they later stoped paying for the license and just continued making them). I know they might not have had the money to model a Beretta 1951, but they could have at least given them another pistol. They took the easy road and just gave them a pistol model they already had and slapped "Tariq" on it.

In short, I'm trying to say that we should ask for better and not be afraid.

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

The bolt should be on the left side for left handed shooter. That's how left handed bolt action rifles work.

For example, the Savage Model 11 FLNS which is a left handed version of their Model 11 FCNS:
http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/11FLNS

Notice the bolt on the left side of the gun. If they did what you're saying (and they most probably do), they'd have to somehow remove the bolt. I can see why they'd use a left handed model for a left handed shooter (it looks "cooler" seeing the bolt move) but is in fact less realistic. Its more work for the shooter to have to use his opposite hand to cycle the bolt when he could use his strong hand for a faster/efficient bolt cycling.

I understand, I'm just using CS:S as an example.

You cannot easily find left handed blueprints for weapons. Since the majority of the weapons made are for right-handers, and therefore the majority of blueprints made are right-handed weapons. Instead of making it incredibly difficult, and pricey, for the devs, they just let the models be backwards. Since most people aren't nitpicks, they won't care, and the money they saved will result in a net profit. Since there are only one or two nitpicks who won't play games because the charging handle is too skinny or the selector switch is upsidedown.

In short, they made right-handed models, for the left side.

I understand why they do it, but I don't understand why we allow them to be "lazy", for lack of a better word, and let them do this. I could wait a couple more months and even years it might take them to make the guns more realistic. I understand time is money and they're working on deadlines, but if the consumer stands up and says "You know, I am dissatisfied with this product I have seen. I will not spend my money on it" then they'll have to change.

Except you're the only one saying that they are dissatisfied with the product. As I've said before, CS:S is one of the most played games of all times, and still gets millions of people playing a day. Granted, many of these people have textures packs, but these aren't used to remedy the backwards model. They're used to make the game overall more awesome. Instead of an AWP, an M82, instead of an M4, a SCAR, etc.

The majority of the people couldn't wait an extra couple of months for accurate models, so that would end up costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars, which I'm sure we all know isn't worth it for some accurate models.

If you want an accurate game, make it yourself. Or if you're not good enough, just make some texture packs.

Wheen won that argument

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

I understand, I'm just using CS:S as an example.

You cannot easily find left handed blueprints for weapons. Since the majority of the weapons made are for right-handers, and therefore the majority of blueprints made are right-handed weapons. Instead of making it incredibly difficult, and pricey, for the devs, they just let the models be backwards. Since most people aren't nitpicks, they won't care, and the money they saved will result in a net profit. Since there are only one or two nitpicks who won't play games because the charging handle is too skinny or the selector switch is upsidedown.

In short, they made right-handed models, for the left side.

I understand why they do it, but I don't understand why we allow them to be "lazy", for lack of a better word, and let them do this. I could wait a couple more months and even years it might take them to make the guns more realistic. I understand time is money and they're working on deadlines, but if the consumer stands up and says "You know, I am dissatisfied with this product I have seen. I will not spend my money on it" then they'll have to change.

Except you're the only one saying that they are dissatisfied with the product. As I've said before, CS:S is one of the most played games of all times, and still gets millions of people playing a day. Granted, many of these people have textures packs, but these aren't used to remedy the backwards model. They're used to make the game overall more awesome. Instead of an AWP, an M82, instead of an M4, a SCAR, etc.

The majority of the people couldn't wait an extra couple of months for accurate models, so that would end up costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars, which I'm sure we all know isn't worth it for some accurate models.

If you want an accurate game, make it yourself. Or if you're not good enough, just make some texture packs.

I agree many people will play Counter Strike with or without those texture packs because that is what they're looking for in a game. Maybe its because they've never fired real guns or because they just have lower standards. Maybe they just want a game that meets their criteria in their minds for "fun". Who knows, but they play it.

I, on the other hand, would want a game with tons of immersion when it came to the firearms. I wouldn't care if it took 20 years to produce and the final products cost 1000$, I would buy it. It would let you choose your bullets, your powders, your primers and your cases, and that's just the ammunition. I would go so deep, you'd think you're actually doing this for a real firearm. Not just some generic "Put this = +10 damage" but actual difference in the way the bullet travels, the FPS at which it travels, the kind of group patterns they can pull off etc.

But maybe that's because I know too much about firearms. Maybe that has led my standards to go higher than others who couldn't care less about the guns they're using. Its all a matter of what you like and not many people care for firearms.

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

I understand why they do it, but I don't understand why we allow them to be "lazy", for lack of a better word, and let them do this. I could wait a couple more months and even years it might take them to make the guns more realistic. I understand time is money and they're working on deadlines, but if the consumer stands up and says "You know, I am dissatisfied with this product I have seen. I will not spend my money on it" then they'll have to change.

Except you're the only one saying that they are dissatisfied with the product. As I've said before, CS:S is one of the most played games of all times, and still gets millions of people playing a day. Granted, many of these people have textures packs, but these aren't used to remedy the backwards model. They're used to make the game overall more awesome. Instead of an AWP, an M82, instead of an M4, a SCAR, etc.

The majority of the people couldn't wait an extra couple of months for accurate models, so that would end up costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars, which I'm sure we all know isn't worth it for some accurate models.

If you want an accurate game, make it yourself. Or if you're not good enough, just make some texture packs.

I agree many people will play Counter Strike with or without those texture packs because that is what they're looking for in a game. Maybe its because they've never fired real guns or because they just have lower standards. Maybe they just want a game that meets their criteria in their minds for "fun". Who knows, but they play it.

I, on the other hand, would want a game with tons of immersion when it came to the firearms. I wouldn't care if it took 20 years to produce and the final products cost 1000$, I would buy it. It would let you choose your bullets, your powders, your primers and your cases, and that's just the ammunition. I would go so deep, you'd think you're actually doing this for a real firearm. Not just some generic "Put this = +10 damage" but actual difference in the way the bullet travels, the FPS at which it travels, the kind of group patterns they can pull off etc.

But maybe that's because I know too much about firearms. Maybe that has led my standards to go higher than others who couldn't care less about the guns they're using. Its all a matter of what you like and not many people care for firearms.

This has been said millions of times before, but a game can be too realistic. I honestly doubt you'd enjoy that game, plus, you'd be one of the only people to buy it. Another thing is that if it took 20 years to produce, it would be behind the times, the graphics would suck, they'd have to change platforms several times, and all this would discourage you from purchasing it. Creating YOUR perfect game just isn't cost effective, unless, like I said, you want to do it yourself.

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

MegaMonkeyChunk wrote:

Wheen Your Strange wrote:

Except you're the only one saying that they are dissatisfied with the product. As I've said before, CS:S is one of the most played games of all times, and still gets millions of people playing a day. Granted, many of these people have textures packs, but these aren't used to remedy the backwards model. They're used to make the game overall more awesome. Instead of an AWP, an M82, instead of an M4, a SCAR, etc.

The majority of the people couldn't wait an extra couple of months for accurate models, so that would end up costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars, which I'm sure we all know isn't worth it for some accurate models.

If you want an accurate game, make it yourself. Or if you're not good enough, just make some texture packs.

I agree many people will play Counter Strike with or without those texture packs because that is what they're looking for in a game. Maybe its because they've never fired real guns or because they just have lower standards. Maybe they just want a game that meets their criteria in their minds for "fun". Who knows, but they play it.

I, on the other hand, would want a game with tons of immersion when it came to the firearms. I wouldn't care if it took 20 years to produce and the final products cost 1000$, I would buy it. It would let you choose your bullets, your powders, your primers and your cases, and that's just the ammunition. I would go so deep, you'd think you're actually doing this for a real firearm. Not just some generic "Put this = +10 damage" but actual difference in the way the bullet travels, the FPS at which it travels, the kind of group patterns they can pull off etc.

But maybe that's because I know too much about firearms. Maybe that has led my standards to go higher than others who couldn't care less about the guns they're using. Its all a matter of what you like and not many people care for firearms.

This has been said millions of times before, but a game can be too realistic. I honestly doubt you'd enjoy that game, plus, you'd be one of the only people to buy it. Another thing is that if it took 20 years to produce, it would be behind the times, the graphics would suck, they'd have to change platforms several times, and all this would discourage you from purchasing it. Creating YOUR perfect game just isn't cost effective, unless, like I said, you want to do it yourself.

All I can do is dream when it comes to something like that. But then again, it won't be a problem to actually to all that stuff IRL when the laws change here in Canada. Until then, I'll have settle for the best of what actually exists.

As for something being too realistic, like I said, I just want the guns to be realistic. Sure it would seem weird that guys might be able to take 4-5 175 grain .308 bullets to the face and keep walking, but at least the way the gun functions and the gun itself is realistic. Of course, they'd obviously have to balance some guns like its ROF and "damage" for balancing purposes since some guns are clearly superior to others.

Right now, I'll settle for Dead Space 2 since I can't really complain about the weapons because all of them don't exist.