Top 10 Most Realistic First Person Shooters
Escape from Tarkov is the most realistic shooter available as of 2018. Every aspect of the gameplay has been tailored to be as realistic as possible. I'm a huge Squad/Insurgency/Red Orchestra fan, but EFT takes the cake. ARMA and Squad exist for military operations, of course, but if you want the FULL first-person experience, you need EFT.
One of many examples of the stellar design in EFT is sound. Sound is one example of what many realistic shooters seem to forget nowadays. Footsteps are loud, rubbing past a branch or the rustling of clothing as you move all makes noise. This is all taken into account in EFT, which means you are always risking being spotted if you move too fast and someone is nearby. Gunshots draw people from all around. You cannot search the bodies of people you killed silently. Zippers, searching through bags, it all makes noise. EFT does this near perfectly.
Hits from bullets are also something too many games do wrong. Being shot in real life in most cases will not kill you instantly. Even the most realistic shooters forget this (even though I think it's warranted for their gameplay styles). In EFT, you can sustain life-threatening injuries, but still remain standing. If you get shot in the bone, then you will need a splint or your limb will go dead and force you to limp/not be able to use a gun well. Your vision blurs, you see veins, and your character makes a great deal of noise as they cough, wheeze, and moan to death. You will need more than just a bandage to deal with injuries.
The gunplay in EFT is the most impressive part. Bullet physics, gun mechanics, it's all as good as it gets. Weapons that have not been serviced properly jam. A weapon that is missing pieces will function differently. Bullets ricochet off certain surfaces and penetrate thin materials to an extent. One of my favorite parts is that your character improves with time. Their speed at aiming, endurance when running, etc., is excellent. This game is the... more
Heavy squad-based multiplayer gameplay. If you join the right server, you can wait maybe an hour for your squad leader to finish briefing, then they have to brief you. Unless you're given just basic goals, this game can be super complex. And if you have some mods like ACE, medic systems are much more complicated than just picking up and using a first aid kit, or regenerating health like Call of Duty.
This must have the largest learning curve on this list. This is not my favorite game on this list. This is by far the most realistic game on this list.
I literally have no idea why it is ranked below Counter-Strike: Source and Call of Duty 4. I know both are great games, but in terms of graphics and reality, this game must have beaten both of them. Either ArmA 3 or Squad, I honestly couldn't choose, but based on my experience playing ArmA 3, it seems that ArmA 3 does not run as smoothly as this one, even though I was on a pretty decent gaming laptop.
I haven't bought this game, but by watching some of the gameplay videos on YouTube, I can assure you, this game deserves top 5 in the list, or even top 3 (either above or below ArmA 3).
The people who voted for Call of Duty either have never played a realistic FPS ever, or they think that Call of Duty is as close to a real war as they can get.
While I have never owned Arma myself, I have played it multiple times before, and it is much more realistic than Call of Duty or Battlefield. Battlefield does have bullet drop, big maps, and in hardcore mode, one shot to the vitals is a kill. But the Arma games have much more realism and tactics in them, which I find to be more fun than bouncing around a small map quickscoping, running up to someone while they shoot at you to knife them, and throwing grenades all the way across the map. The Arma games are definitely the most realistic, and as soon as I get a computer with a decent graphics card, I will be buying them.
For people with minimal experience with real firearms, Insurgency is very good. The gun physics, sounds, explosions, and especially the suppression caused during firefights are pretty good. Aiming with your zoom sight is a weird task to achieve and takes some time to get used to (like in real life, test the game and you will see).
Insurgency teaches you that suppressive fire is as important as hitting the target. No ammo counting. The only thing displayed is how many spare mags you have. If you think you can hit something with automatic fire, you'll be disappointed. Here, auto firing is only useful during suppression. If you want to blow up some heads, do this in semi-auto mode.
How is this game not on top?
You can't heal up without specific operators. You can't even live up to 5 shots. One-shot headshot, fully destructible environment, and a special elite force that does what Delta Force can't do. Of course, there are some glitches that are annoying, but what makes a good game without bugs and good content?
Don't even come at me with Call of Duty because honestly, if I can't one-shot headshot with a pistol, just delete that off of my screen, please.
Most realistic console game. Team killing is always active, one-shot headshots. The only complaints that I have about this game are how you can tell if a player is in a dark room because they are always lighter colored compared to their surroundings. Another complaint is that glitches are aplenty, but of course, this game has many updates to come.
The Newcomers
This game is very realistic. It's a 2 to 3 shot kill, or 1 shot wherever you shoot them.
Great game. I think it's very realistic as well. Don't let your frustration get in the way of enjoying this game - you will die a lot.
Call of Duty 4 was graphically amazing, but you also should think about the story and how it builds up. Call of Duty 4 has one of the better stories made in any FPS. I'm not saying the best, but one of the best.
Extremely realistic. I'm amazed by how close to reality this game is.
Multiplayer is exactly like a real war. It's almost scary.
A great game to play. When I first saw it in 2007, I couldn't believe this was possible. The movement from PS2 to PlayStation 3 was absolutely amazing!
Barrel overheating, sight adjustment, when a tank crew member dies inside the tank, you move the body to the side to take his position. There are lots of realistic details.
Do you even scope, bro? When you scope in Red Orchestra 2, only the telescope zooms to the target. I think Insurgency has this feature too. Both are great games.
One-shot kills are very common in this game.
I think this game is #1 in realism because it has advanced physics. You can fly and drive vehicles, and the movements are realistic (i.e., the gun moves all around in recoil, not just up). You can see your shadow as well as others, and you can see your feet. And finally, it doesn't take 9 shots from a pistol to kill a person.
Look. It's way more realistic than Call of Duty in all aspects. Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong.
Why is Counter-Strike more realistic than Battlefield?
This game, besides Arma 2, should be higher. The game has a physics engine that allows the game to not only feel and look realistic but also act realistically. The accuracy of guns is comparable to the real world.
As close as you can get to a military simulator, at least until Squad is released.
This is the most realistic game I have ever played. Why, you ask? Health regeneration is for Call of Duty players who do not know how to heal themselves. And also, does Battlefield have multiple-choice objectives? Is Medal of Honor open-world? Enough said.
Call of Duty 4?! Are you insane? That is not realistic. This is. No regenerating health ever, more realistic guns and equipment. And who knows how real Red River will be when it's released.
While I know this game is very realistic, I voted for Arma because I played it instead of Operation Flashpoint.
Realistic if you're imagining future warfare, I suppose, and a good game. I think it's the players that make a game realistic. If Call of Duty players just slowed down and played more tactically and actually talked to each other without some little kid telling you to shut up or calling people "campers," then Call of Duty could be a very realistic shooter.
The Taliban don't pop up and shout "camper" at real soldiers holding a good position. That is a realistic tactic, not running around like idiots.
For me, graphic means the amount of reality. Crysis and Crysis 2 are definitely the best two video games with the best graphics, so I vote for that game.
The most tactical and realistic game there is. I played Battlefield 4 then this. If we compare graphics, Battlefield 4 wins. If we compare which is more tactical and realistic, of course, America's Army is more tactical and even realistic. We stay in cover. If we get out, 3-4 shots are enough to get us to the ground, and we start bleeding. Peace. Check the game out.
Since I own AAPG, and I play only realistic shooters and grand strategies, for me Proving Grounds is the most realistic CQB simulator. It is not like Arma because the latter stresses large-scale warfare. Proving Grounds, on the other hand, deals with intense CQB encounters, something the special forces have been doing ever since.
Everything from weapon control to ballistics is very true to life.
Why is Call of Duty ranked higher on this list than a tactical shooter? In this game, if you die, it's your fault. It can be due to poor planning or poor execution. In Call of Duty, it's often because someone is destroying you by using an unpatched exploit or an overpowered gun.
This game is essentially Call of Duty, but you die from fewer bullets. The older Rainbow Six games, like Raven Shield, I would vote for, but the Vegas series are capitalizing on the modern FPS's popularity.
Because you use cover, weapon selection is very important, and you can't survive 20 shots like in COD.
Multiple weapons, different ammo for different weapons, somewhat realistic ballistics and recoil. Weapons can deteriorate, and worse condition means a realistic inventory system that takes both weight and bulk into account and forces the player to make really tough priorities. Aggressive AI that is really trying to kill you - not just standing there waiting to get shot. Some elements of the game are highly unrealistic, such as artifacts that are "magical" items from high radiation which gives you bonuses. Geiger meters, wild mutant animals, etc., make every trip really exciting.
As the game progresses, it becomes more unrealistic story-wise, but it could also be seen as the protagonist going crazy from radiation and solitude.
Wonderful game all in all that didn't get the attention it deserved.
Developed by retired SWAT team members, how can it not be realistic? Gun goes to low ready (unlike many other games). Very tactical.
I like this game because of the strict ROE. You can't shoot a suspect unless they shoot first.
I like it because you need to think before you shoot at a person. It could be a civilian.
None of the other games are CLOSE to Battlefield 1.
Definitely realistic. Just not the realest.
Battlefield 1 is known for its destruction, sound and graphic quality, and realism in gameplay.
Seriously, Modern Warfare No. 1? You guys really need to rethink what makes a game realistic. It's not just having realistic environments and weapons, but you have to be able to do realistic things as well.
After I got fed up with how unrealistic the Call of Duty games are, I started playing this and was very satisfied with it. Not 100% realistic but a huge improvement in realism compared to Call of Duty.
Pretty realistic. I love destructive environments, way better graphics than Call of Duty and Halo.
The entire Operation Flashpoint franchise is based on almost-realistic combat. There is little HUD, the damage dealt is insane, there's no radar, no objective tags, no run and gun, and magazine bullets are lost when prematurely reloaded, etc.