Quote: Original post by VildNinja
I would say that a standard FPS game is a better resource than any other media.

Especially when that "standard FPS game" [sic] is about a special weapons and tactics group that doesn't exist in Real Life?

Or when that FPS is about killing hordes of Nazis as Rambo couldn't have done better? Or, when it is about killing aliens in alternate dimensions?

Of course you must not trust the internet blindly, which is equally ludicrous, but at least there are some official sources of information, like this or that.

Please don't get me wrong that I say that a game can't be a source of information per se, but for me personally, a game that I could refer to in a scientific paper has yet to be found (and itself should provide references and citations etc.). All candidates about military (those that I personally played) died for me when I absolved my basic training at the military. Or GSG-9? Hell, in germany, police asks for names of certain flora and fauna in interviews.

Also, please develop your own imagination of things, and don't trust your "leaders" (like your teacher, e.g.) blindly; they are often as dumb or even dumber than oneself.

[Edited by - phresnel on April 2, 2009 12:31:12 AM]

I am aware of how real life works, and who/what to trust.

But under the current circumstances (we're on a game development forum, discussing a very unrealistic setting. Also most people have watched Delta Force, and are aware that they got Chuck Norris!), I would say that games concerning the specific topic, are just as valid resources as rl.

If the two sides are relativity evenly matched then the attacking side needs at least 3 times as many people to have a good chance at winning. I base this on standard military training which includes training with the laser systems described above.
So in this senario the attacker doesn't really stand a chance.