223, haven't tried that though.Īs flawed as it is, it still is a simulation, you can't whine that away, so stop trying.īut it does simulating hunting of various real-life animals by authentic means, so I am not sure why you claim it to be otherwise.Step 1: Download an Android emulator for PC and Mac
However, when you do not shoot the vitals, don't expect anything to die (soon). The only way for them to survive indefinitely is if the wound is a flesh wound with very low bleeding, which more or less makes sense. In fact: Everything with a flesh wound that is bleeding more than "very low" WILL die soon. I dropped ~200 animals by now and the system behind wounds and bleeding is actually very simple and absolutely not dynamic. Not sure what you're thinking, but you are aware that I do criticize this game heavily?Īnyways, what you said above is definitely not true though. "Bread lacks a lot of qualities that characterize rocks, but we can both agree that it's a rock, because the manufacturer clearly states so on the packaging!" We could do this all day and find a ton of issues with this game.
SCORE MY RACK APP FULL
Originally posted by Snake:Animals are hilariously oversensitive, you can keep calling the same herd in a meadow full of 5 other dead animals, animals have endless amounts of health and never bleed out even after serious wounds and sprinting for kilometers, all arteries pumping. You don't make the rules, do you? If you don't give a damn about SIMULATING an authentic hunting experience, so be it, good for you.īut that doesn't dictate how I will play or feel about this.
How you personally feel also has nothing to do with anyone else. "This war of mine" is a great example, where the player is constantly confronted with morality and making decisions that will lead to good or bad consequences, so your claim that ethics in video games are hilarious, is simply moot.
It is a fact.Ĭountless video games have proven this. If ethics play a role in video games or not, is no debate. No one said people will go out and shoot animals in the neck because of this game, so careful with your accusations here. When I hit an animal and just wound it and it runs away, I feel like blowing it up with a howitzer, I don't feel bad that I caused it a lot of pain. The question of ETHICS in a videogame is hilarious in the first place. There's regulations and exams and all that, which means that while the game could be tweaked better, it does not make that much of a difference. Nobody is going to go out hunting and shoot animals just after playing that game and try those shots. Originally posted by Snake:You ARE wrong, though. The developers did their utmost to appear all "ethical" and "eco" (kill the poor wounded animal mission for example) but they encourage the player to take the most risky shots that have the highest chance of failure and the greatest chance to cause a lot of misery for the animal.īut hey, let's lean back and wait until the controller-wielding "muh it'z jusT aGamEh!1" crowd comes along and tells us that we are wrong because reasons. Guys, I cannot agree more with you and I am very pleased to see more people speaking out against the current system we have ingame. The only thing i have to say is, if you can't get a PERFECT shot, you shouldn't take it at all. Last year I had a.lets say not so pleasant run in with a very unfortunate deer. In hunting this is very unethical but for some reason they reward higher for shots in the neck? Anyone that hunts know this is not an ethical shot at all. It should not reward quick kills of spine, neck and headshots. In my backround of hunting for over 10 years, I go out almost everyday in certain hunting seasons, so I know a lot about hunting.Īnyhow, any clean shot should consist of shot placed in lungs/heart. I feel strongly this is something that needs major change.
0 kommentar(er)
