The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
"Some tasks are pure genius: a harvesting wave attacks an elementary school in America 1966. Your goal is to lead the children to the nearby church, but they're not getting on the school bus you hop into. Hop into an ice cream truck named Mr. Lolly, and watch the children follow. Mr. Lolly's "weapon" is a hilarious ice cream jingle. Imagine slowly driving an ice cream truck down the street, jingling a happy tune, aliens are beaming down and attacking all around you, and you have about 20 children following after you that you need to lead to the church. It's moments like this that make you realize the brilliance of Body Harvest's gameplay."
> But to be fair if you analyse the combat in any turn based RPG type
> game it is completely unrealistic... How many sword slashes does it
> usually take to kill someone in reality...?
Depends how well armoured they are and how good they can dodge, if they get in close with a dagger then you my sword-wielding friend are stuffed.
> Depends how well armoured they are and how good they can dodge, if
> they get in close with a dagger then you my sword-wielding friend are
> stuffed.
Ah, but in RPGs pretty much every attack connects, just does little damage. In reality if a hit connects an armoured person it will either bounce off the armour and do no damage (apart from maybe knocking the person back a little) or it will break the armour / go through a gap in the armour and pierce the flesh, likely causing a pretty severe wound. But in most RPGs enemies can take quite a few hits, as can your characters...
Anyway, this is rather a ridiculous debate... Videogames aren't generally meant to be realistic... In all the alien invasion, cloning, etc. world of Hybrid Heaven the one unrealistic thing picked up on was a bloke beating up a machine with his fists... :-|