• jas0n@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Didn’t expect so much hate for this game… In terms of simulations, in 2002, the original game was light years ahead of its time. They did a lot of things right that it took the more popular mil sims years to get correct. I’d go as far as to argue it is one of the most realistic squad-based tactical shooters of all time.

    • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      It being that realistic made it a terrible choice for me.

      So I did all of the medical training that had on there, which I did learn stuff from but also found out that I should never actually work in the medical field.

      But because it didn’t easily identify friend from foe, I kept killing my own team. Not on purpose I was just really bad at identifying friend from foe and if I saw it moved I killed it.

      Otherwise it was a solid game. All the issues I had with it were with me.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ll suggest that there hasn’t been anything like it. I’ve tried a couple that were supposed to be more realistic mil-sim and not just FPS run-‘n-gun, but they don’t hold a candle to AA.

    • psmgx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Painfully realistic. To the point of not really being fun. Which I think was kind of the goal – they Army was trying to show the kiddies a little bit of what reality was like, while also trying to rope them in.

      Closest comparison is probably ARMA 3, IMO