• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

[Game] Breach

Upvote 0
Lol that military dude doing the demonstration cracked me up. I love how he talked about how super realistic all the features of the game were, and yet never justified the 3rd person cover system with real world comparisons.

I mean the game might be fun -- I'm just criticizing the presenter's arguments. He was being inconsistently focused on realism. While he touted the realistic ballistics, suppression, tactics, and stuff like that, he failed to mention how someone should be able to see around corners without actually LOOKING around them ... and hence why the 3rd person cover system makes no sense.

Oh well lol, I just get a kick out of these guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: illinifan
Upvote 0
I thought I'm the troll here! :eek:


Uhh, they have real(istic) and complete destruction whereas in BC2 buildings are destroyed always on pre-set areas, so how is it better exactly?
That definitely isn't realistic destruction, I'll even go out on a branch and say that BC2's destruction system is more realistic, for the simply reason being that buildings are not made out of matches there and won't collaps when being hit by one single 40mm grenade.

The game is as far from reality in every aspect as BC2, it just has a slightly fancier destruction system and a 3rd person cover system. I mean, just watch the gameplay. Unfortunately they market this game as "realistic", which turns it from a might buy game into a "No way I'm gonna buy that" game.

Guys, at last be honest with yourselves and the game. It's NOT realistic in any way.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I thought I'm the troll here! :eek:



That definitely isn't realistic destruction, I'll even go out on a branch and say that BC2's destruction system is more realistic, for the simply reason being that buildings are not made out of matches there and won't collaps when being hit by one single 40mm grenade.

The game is as far from reality in every aspect as BC2, it just has a slightly fancier destruction system and a 3rd person cover system. I mean, just watch the gameplay. Unfortunately they market this game as "realistic", which turns it from a might buy game into a "No way I'm gonna buy that" game.

Guys, at last be honest with yourselves and the game. It's NOT realistic in any way.

For the average gamer ArmA2 isn't the standard of realism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: {Core}Craig
Upvote 0
LWhile he touted the realistic ballistics, suppression, tactics, and stuff like that, he failed to mention how someone should be able to see around corners without actually LOOKING around them ...

Tripwire spoils us with their first person cover system and blind fire that is actually blind, don't they? :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: {Core}Craig
Upvote 0
Realistic? Really? They've showed in multiple videos a guy shooting out a single wood log support for a building nestled on a hill resulting in the entire building falling apart.

I don't see this as being much more advanced than BC2's destruction either, at least not in the way it's used. You can just pinpoint in greater detail what you want to destroy but the end result in gameplay does not seem to make much of a difference from what I'm seeing. Granted, I haven't looked to far into this.

The graphics aren't too bad but I'm not digging the overly simplistic (cartoony) designs and the first person weapons look very budgety.

Still, it doesn't look awful, and I'd be more than willing to download a demo (is there one?). I still probably won't bite for even a $20 price tag considering HOS is right around the corner and it really doesn't look all that different than BC2 as was said.
 
Upvote 0