My main gripe is how every game is now a global war, mass destruction, levels tearing through evacuated towns. For a few years now these games have been nothing but map packs.

Instead of focusing on including the newest military gun, how about focus on some compelling dynamic AI that focuses on team work. How about close quarter levels? NOthing has come close to the atmosphere and suspense of All Ghillied Up. That was 5 years ago.

I still maintain that the first MOH would have been great online if it weren't for the ridiculous sniper situation. Take them away and i would possibly still be having the odd game on it now.

to be fair for all the disrespect you folks say it makes, and esp @ the medic post, my mates an army medic and he loves a game of bf3, so bam

Yeah I know two soldiers warfighters and they absolutely love any stuff like this but COD especially.

Have you tried NORTH?

Mod74 wrote:

The people moaning, do you actually like military shooters and want something new within the genre and don't feel this is it, or are you just moaning because it's a military shooter?

Moaning. No.
Moral standpoint. Yes.

They are based on past events.

New games based on present events. Mockery of guys my age going to war.

Still not buying mod

Also, my mate is in the TA and the first thing he did when he got back from Afghanistan was fire up Battlefield 3.

Another element of the real world efforts for me is that they're not very good at it. I've said it before, but a few years ago developers were boasting about the credentials of their military consultants, now they just lift bits from Generation Kill. It's not as if the game play is realistic, the mechanics are more firmly rooted in walking through hails of bullets than ever. Realism would involve better AI, developers would rather stick with shooting galleries.

I am really getting sick and of the sheer enormity and spectacle of the levels in actions games now. Every level is trying to top the last in terms of excitement.
I was playing Ghost Recon FS today and it is all THE ULTIMATE THREAT etc... Over and over again. I feel like playing a game with levels set in a tower block where you have to take out a drug dealer or simple but challenging levels based on proper room clearing and tactics.
Something a bit more real world and believable, where every kill is earned and waves of faceless morons don't run into your stream of bullets.
Dare I say 'gritty' and not bombastic.

I know what you mean but no not really.
Even in ARMA/Op Flashpoint you start a mission and before you know it your 4 man fire team is defending a village against a tank division, to then yomp over a hill and take out a AA site, then you assault a infantry division at an airfield. All of it is implausible.
I'd like to see devs carve a rewarding experience out of realistic goals and achievements. The shit you get up to in ARMA/Op Flashpoint, the general in charge can send the rest of his troops home and just let your fire team do everything.

I am not articulating myself well enough here. 
I am not after realism as such I.e. 1 shot you are dead etc...
I am after compelling gameplay and a sense of achievement from believable level design and goals. 
The game that springs immediately to mind as some kind of reference is the original SWAT on PC. 
The first level had you assaulting a ordinary suburban house to capture some dude. Nowadays you would drop from choppers into the garden take the guy out, then a tank would crash thru the wall and you would escape in a chopper (that will obviously get shot down by a RPG) while you minigun the fuck out of the neighbourhood. All this would end up with you eventually calling in a massive airstrike on a bunch of hind helicopters and a cutscene with some gravelly voiced commander telling you that 'the nukes' have been stolen by some arms dealer in inranstanbanastad who is goin to do something baaaad. 

The problem with upping the threat 'game' is that eventually there is no where left for you to go.

Run!

pantyfire wrote:

I am not articulating myself well enough here.  I am not after realism as such I.e. 1 shot you are dead etc... I am after compelling gameplay and a sense of achievement from believable level design and goals.  The game that springs immediately to mind as some kind of reference is the original SWAT on PC.  The first level had you assaulting a ordinary suburban house to capture some dude. Nowadays you would drop from choppers into the garden take the guy out, then a tank would crash thru the wall and you would escape in a chopper (that will obviously get shot down by a RPG) while you minigun the fuck out of the neighbourhood. All this would end up with you eventually calling in a massive airstrike on a bunch of hind helicopters and a cutscene with some gravelly voiced commander telling you that 'the nukes' have been stolen by some arms dealer in inranstanbanastad who is goin to do something baaaad.  The problem with upping the threat 'game' is that eventually there is no where left for you to go.

haha i liked that.. to be honest i enjoy some spectacle but its often ringing hollow for me lately, bf3's campaign fell completely flat and the last few of these games ive played i seem to be completely in the wrong mood for some climactic moment, like i hadnt been guided properly in excitement. something 'special' would happen, and i'd be 'oh'when it finished, and not really that excited at all

maybe something like you describe, tenser more realistic close firefights with lots of tenseness between explosions of conflict instead of bombast would drag me in a bit more

It wasn't the genre that became saturated, just the style. I guess that happens when something becomes insanely popular.

TBH, I'm not really sure that particular style of shooter has become saturated, it probably just feels like it because Activision do one a year and now EA are as well.

God, I'd give anything for Bad Company 3. That, for the most part, was fairly realistic.