Comments on: There’s Not a Single Realistic War Game Made Yet

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:20:29 +0000

Armed assault II is realistic…

By: Sala bingo enorme chiusa.

Sala bingo enorme chiusa. — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 03:13:08 +0000

[...] win4ever calls $0.50. Carlo3004 folds. Hollywood111 raises $3.50. Scarface033 folds. Beh brunson ti direbbe che sa le carte di alcuni che non causa danni a nessuno….. Con un termine di paragone per capire se l’ho [...]

By: allan Tyson

allan Tyson — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:34:51 +0000

I have written just the kind of war game that addresses all of the issues that you wrote about. Its called INVASION. I am looking for a manufacturer. Any idears?
Best wishes,
Allan Tyson

By: Queight

Queight — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:11:04 +0000

I almost forgot, there is one more realistic war game. I can tell it’s the most realistic war game out there – Defcon. It certainly not suck ;D

By: Sargon

Sargon — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:02:10 +0000

Well there is a game that contains some of the elements you mentioned.
Its a humeristic addactive little game called nuclear war.
It has propaganda, the attacks cause casualties in civillions and everyone are bad guys in this game.

By: Tuomas Karmakallio

Tuomas Karmakallio — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:31:24 +0000

no, actually id like to see some which really put the mud and grime back in. Start your team of noobs shitting their pants at a car backfiring, unto the time a year later when half of them are dead, half of the last half are shellshocked headcases and so forth… fun? who needs it, this is war.
No Saving allowed. No replaying when your favorite grunt gets whacked.
Civilians are soldiers Pay. Murder, Rape and Looting minigames. mmm, what else is missing…

By: tosa

tosa — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:29:57 +0000

Don’t we already have too many war related games?

By: Sarper

Sarper — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:14:45 +0000

Yes they are not 100% realistic and they don’t have to be. They are “games” so they meant to entertain us.They don’t have the responsibility to show us how bad is a war. Realistic games suck, only EA works on realism on their games and EA sucks too.

Cheers.

By: Koen

Koen — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:28:53 +0000

Of all games that involve war, I think Civilization was the most accurate. In that game, war involves a lot more than bombing your enemy and then occupying his cities. After cities are conquered, there will always be major unrest, and if you are unable to contain it, you will lose control of the city. Also, if a war drags on for too long, protests and riots will break out in your own cities, sometimes even leading to the collapse of your government and anarchy! Depending on the type of governement you have, it may even be almost impossible to start a war without being attacked yourself first.

By: Ghost

Ghost — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:10:16 +0000

Actually there’s a good idea for a multi-level MMORPG. You can play at Civ level (controlling the country), at city level (like SimCity) or at individual level (like most MMORPG’s right now). You could even implement government types by restricting what choices are available at the individual and city level (and who chooses who controls the city and nation level).

The tech probably isn’t up to it just yet, and if you could implement it why would it be any different from ‘real life’ (expect you could run it faster – a revolution every week or so would be possible).