Why i'd hate to be a sniper

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 09 2003,06:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ April 09 2003,07:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">and enemies that die in ways that would make Saddam blush.<span id='postcolor'>

I don't think so. <span id='postcolor'>

Maybe your aim isn't up to par, Avon

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ April 09 2003,08:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 09 2003,06:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ April 09 2003,07:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">and enemies that die in ways that would make Saddam blush.<span id='postcolor'>

I don't think so. <span id='postcolor'>

Maybe your aim isn't up to par, Avon  <span id='postcolor'>

I don't think so.

[-76-Chavez 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Leone @ April 09 2003,04:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am trying to make amends to them, but now I realise that nothing can make it up when you have lost your pixels.<span id='postcolor'>

Hmmm, restart maybe!?

[der bastler 0]

We are talking about games, right?

If you can't see the difference between a game and real life, I'd advise you to contact a psychiatrist. At least you should stop playing.

Or play Deus Ex. You can solve all quests without killing anyone (except for two cyborgs and one bad guy). It's my game of the 90s...

Other games without deaths of pixel-people: Monkey Island series, Maniac Mansion, DotT, Larry 1-7 or simply KSokoban...

[cam0flage 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Other games without deaths of pixel-people: Monkey Island series, Maniac Mansion, DotT, Larry 1-7 or simply KSokoban...<span id='postcolor'>

Larry contains another taboo for our society, and it isn't killing

[Longinius 1]

"If you can't see the difference between a game and real life, I'd advise you to contact a psychiatrist. At least you should stop playing."

I think everyone can see the difference. The question is does moral and ethics apply to computer games or should they be checked at the door? Do they apply only to one type of game mode, or to all? Are they relevant in singleplayer, multiplayer or massively multiplayer games?

To me, some degree of morals always apply when I am playing a game. There are a couple of occasions when I have felt kind of bad for killing a person, mostly in roleplaying games. But then again, sometimes I dont even care about mowing down a sidwalk packed with people in GTA. I think the difference to me is how alive the NPC feels, how they respond and react to what is happening around them.

I also tend to try and avoid killing other players in RPG's, while I have no second thought about blowing them apart in OFP or Blackhawk Down. This all depends on the type of game and what options I have to deal with the threats I encounter...

[Shack 0]

Monkey Island 1:

Bob and Lechuck and the other one

Monkey Island 2:

Lechuck again

Monkey Island 3:

Lots of Skeletons, LeChuck yet again

Monkey Island 4:

The Aussie Bloke

They're all pixel people that die, having said that though, all bar the aussie are already dead, but still

If you're feeling bad running people down in GTA3, if you wait by tyhe casualties then an ambulance arrives and revives them, so you're safe in the knowledge that you only injured them.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A 15 year old teenager firing a rifle at you is still a combatant. I'd shoot as i'd consider my ageing azz to be worth more as well as any fellow comrades. Their "innocents" flees them the moment they engage to kill YOU!!<span id='postcolor'>

Happens in the real world, I have a mate in the IDF and hes told me that this happens all the time, you don't see them as a kid, they just become a target because they'd try and kill you given the chance.

[dayglow 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (der bastler @ April 09 2003,03:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We are talking about games, right?

If you can't see the difference between a game and real life, I'd advise you to contact a psychiatrist. At least you should stop playing.

Or play Deus Ex. You can solve all quests without killing anyone (except for two cyborgs and one bad guy). It's my game of the 90s...

Other games without deaths of pixel-people: Monkey Island series, Maniac Mansion, DotT, Larry 1-7 or simply KSokoban...<span id='postcolor'>

It's not that I feel 'bad' killing in a game, I just don't get entertained by mindless violence. I play games to be entertained period. GTA didn't do it for me. It is an amazing game with a huge open evironment, but in the end I got bored. As for SOF, take my challange and turn off the gore and play through the game. It sucks. My response is if someone needs over the top gore to be entertained they need to see a psychiatrist

BTW some of the most scenes of violence have come to me from OFP. It doesn't need flying limbs and disembowlment to really make a point. I remember a time in a mission where I had my head down as a enemy squad was cutting my side to pieces. In game the Calvary as a AH1 came overhead and started to let rip with the cannon. 30sec later it was eerie silent and I got up to check out the scene. The enemy was just slaughtered in a open field and there truck was destroyed with 2 guys crumpled over in the drivers seat sticking out the windows. Pretty gruesome scene even without pools of blood.

COLINMAN

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (the_unknown_one @ April 06 2003,19:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">bin meesing around wiht the deltas and the african militia pack, and found it kinda disturbing. Call me sad if you like, but its kinda disturbing sniping the teenagers as they run away   , and kinda weiard it like they sprinting and tyhen u lineup ur sights and then BANG!, you see the blood fly and they fall and really sad music comes on and its all slow motion... ok mebbe not but if u try it ull c my point.<span id='postcolor'>

Snipers normally don't go an a mission to snipe some teenage soldiers. So your the name of your thread is ,actually, wrong.

[stgn 39]

If you have moral problems shotting other then play SWAT3 there it is bedst not to shot at all(you have to do it when they shot at you). I cant say I have problems whit killing people in games a frew houses in SWAT3 looked like swiss chees after me and my squad hat pass by(even whit civis in just hope i miss them).

STGN

[mr. Duck 0]

I have no problems at all, killing people in flashpoint, even when they're the last man standing and fleeing for me and me squad. Heck, I even shoot at unarmed civilians (out of boredom). I sometimes even got the tendency to shoot at my squadleader for his "incompetence" (only happens in my missions when we're assaulting an enemy position and one squad is charging while mine is still waiting behind).

My general ROE is shoot to kill, if I can see it, I will shoot at it. Darn, I'm quite trigger happy in ofp.

[LaPoieto 0]

You should only feel bad for civilans caught in the crossfire. It was his choice to pick up a gun. The minute he does that and aims it at you, you have the green light. Also, I ive tried this several times but i never seen people retreat. Does it have to do with the comparison of the two sides?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (LaPoieto @ April 10 2003,04:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, I ive tried this several times but i never seen people retreat. Does it have to do with the comparison of the two sides? <span id='postcolor'>

Set up a little mission on desert island where you are a sniper with a squad of infantry running towards you. Pick 3 or 4 off, including the leader, and you will watch them retreat.

[19kilo2/10Cav 0]

Everyone should pay close attention to the quotes at the end of the game...(when you are KIA)

If the game bothers you don't play. There are so many mods and addons you can find a way to do peaceful missions.

I really like the versatility of the game and what makes it great is that the users can change it to suit them.

Im sure there is a script that would make you a rogue if you kill innocents.......

The bottom line is that war is disturbing, it causes fear and panic, but it is not necessarily evil in the grand scheme. The grand scheme is what war is about, its not about young boys from Arkansas and young girls from Nasyriah, its about political and ecomomic power.

There are rules for war but in the heat of a firefight sometimes the rulebook is thrown out the window. Example: your M113 is ambushed by two platoons of heavy infantry, you are out of M-16 ammo but the MaDeuce is locked and loaded, the Geneva Convention forbids the use of .50 cal ammo on personnel....solution .....

Gunner target backpack, canteen, etc.....

It is very dynamic and there are ethical standards that govern combat, as a fomer soldier I respected the rules of engagement and did not have any ethical dilemmas.

That my 2 cents.....

[Guest]

Target backpack Rules of engagement can be exploited though...just look at Somalia or Iraq. The enemy knew the rules and used them to their advantage....

[the_unknown_one 0]

finally someone (namely icefire) sees what i mean (for once ). and i didnt realise everyone was going to mke a big deal. n e way, bye.

[mr. Duck 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the Geneva Convention forbids the use of .50 cal ammo on personnel....<span id='postcolor'>

I still can't understand why they do this, outlawing it.

[Jinef 2]

Well actually i would prefer to be shot by a smaller bullet than a 50. but some other people might prefer it.

Would you like to be identified with a small hole or half your torso missing, it's all about appearances and presentation. How would my hair look if a 50. hit my head eh? You have to think aboot these things.

[ArchangelSKT 0]

Well if my ass was on the line in a real war situation I`d fire rounds agains armed women / children and I`d also use 50cal ammo , of course only if they where armed .

Wouldn`t compromize for my own safety there .

[mr. Duck 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ April 11 2003,13:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well actually i would prefer to be shot by a smaller bullet than a 50. but some other people might prefer it.  

Would you like to be identified with a small hole or half your torso missing, it's all about appearances and presentation. How would my hair look if a 50. hit my head eh? You have to think aboot these things.<span id='postcolor'>

Well you're dead anyway, so I don't really care, small holes, big holes, you don't look pretty with them.

Why didn't they outlawd bombs too? If I dropped some on enemy troops they wouldn't look that swell either.

[Jinef 2]

see if we had death by shagging or other methods which didn't involve people getting plastered on to nearby objects then life would be better!

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ April 11 2003,19:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">see if we had death by shagging or other methods which didn't involve people getting plastered on to nearby objects then life would be better!

<span id='postcolor'>

Haha wtf... death by shagging. I think if you had big army women trying to kill you by shagging it would be much worse than being shot in the back.

[Renagade 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ April 11 2003,13:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well actually i would prefer to be shot by a smaller bullet than a 50. but some other people might prefer it.  

Would you like to be identified with a small hole or half your torso missing, it's all about appearances and presentation. How would my hair look if a 50. hit my head eh? You have to think aboot these things.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes but u may get hit from a 5.56 bullet the creates a festering wound but doesn`t kill u so u eventually die from half ur leg being rotted and disease

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 12 2003,02:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ April 11 2003,19:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">see if we had death by shagging or other methods which didn't involve people getting plastered on to nearby objects then life would be better!

<span id='postcolor'>

Haha wtf... death by shagging.     I think if you had big army women trying to kill you by shagging it would be much worse than being shot in the back.  <span id='postcolor'>

Me sings a classic song: "Sit on my face and tell me that you love me..... "

[IceFire 0]

This is not on topic.

Stay on topic.