google wrote:This is why your argument is flawed and kind of pathetic. The reason is that you are going too far into reality that has nothing to do with the game anymore. Do we have after round courtmartial trials or paperwork to account for warcrimes displayed after each round? No, that would be silly. This topic of finishing off wounded soldiers does, however, have everything to do with gameplay. The revive system heavily effects the way the game is played due to the ticket system.
I'm really tired of people complaining about the war trial/crimes factor, it's simply not a factor that has anything to do with this game. Tan, while you go buy Sim Genocide, don't forget to pick up a copy of Sim War Crime Prosecutor.
I'll buy that too
Then explain to me why there are consquences to killing civilians in the current PR release? Oh wait, it does have
something to do with the silly paperwork of Sim War Crime Prosecutor.
Yes, because if we followed YOUR argument, we could kill civilians freely without having score resets and minus intelpoints. (And many here want consequences to shooting them to be even worse, get it?)
Why is that? Cause IRL they have to follow an ROE and the conventions whatsoever the case might be. They don't always do, and that's what is currently simulated.
Now, executing wounded prisoners? Follows the same pattern as with the civilians : it's either you can't at all, or you can (by some magical mean engine-wise) and you get score resets, intel point losses or even worse, like death after 3 executions (as for removal from the BF for court martial).
Is that REALLY necessary? Is that kind of dimension REALLY needed in comparison of civilians that are much more inherent to insurgency scenarios than execution of prisoners, wich is only a moral effect and has no logistic impact else than court martials and war crimes?
Also, how needed is this? Really? If the headshots come back, do you really think this will be worth the hassle, the coding, the messing-around, etc? So what?
You will be happily running around, freely shooting at corpses that are probably already dead, feeling all good that you ARE SURE that THIS guy and this other guy, won't be revived by a sneaky civilian/medic. Will this look realistic, to see players run roam over dead bodies all the time, shooting them just to be sure?
That doesn't look realistic, it will just encourage a rather stupid and gamey interpretation of war. If they do that IRL,
i'm sure they don't all just run around and shoot dead bodies, have a good laugh, teabag them then bolster at how they are sure those guys are DED-DED, like it would look like in PR. And that for many reality reasons, including conventions, court martial, and the very mind of those soldiers that are not playing a game at all.
It's the same reason why you don't have an apache on a taliban map yet ; IRL they don't just roam around and bombard everything not NATO. They have to request permission to fire and have visual proof of hostile presence. If you put Apaches vs Taliban, the Apache will just fly around the map and wtfpwnzorz everything that does and doesn't move, unlike IRL.
On an endnote, something about games is that when they thrive for realism, you must be careful what you implement as you are NEVER sure it will be used realistically. That's why PR restricts many things from BF2. A good example is the vehicle drop. I'm sure EA/DICE never thought that players would use the infamous Cartillery as a WMD! lol, but they do, and that's why it's not in PR.
You can implementent stuff all you want, but if you're thriving for realism, the more you implement, the more risk there is of players using ''it'' in an unrealistic fashion.
I mean, if this was a WWII mod, then following your argument I could ask so on the japanese side, we'd get tons of tickets+intelpoints for torturing prisoners, yeah, that's realistic... And then this would get exploited as usual, for more /facepalm failness.
Get real, it's not worth it, and it doesn't have its place in PR.