F4LL0UT: Oddly enough I can't think of that many shooters that have explosive barrels and most ones I can think of have them in the context of military camps or army bases or include them rather humorously (like Painkiller or Bulletstorm). Don't remember a single shooter that had explosive barrels in an office complex, to be honest.

F4LL0UT: How can something implode inside out? Or is that a joke that's meant to further illustrate the absurdity of the game? :D

FoxySage: It is to prevent you from sacrificing them. :P

Wishbone: Also thigh-high walls and fences that you can only go around, not over. I'm looking at you, cover-based shooters.

Jonesy89: Silencers: THEY DO NOT EXIST. So-called silencers cannot make guns completely silent; all they do is make the gun slightly less loud when fired.

F4LL0UT: You're not implying that guns with an integral silencer can't be extremely quiet, though, right? Just check out the De Lisle Carbine. The actual shot is roughly as loud as loading that thing. I'm sure it's true for a variety of other guns with an integral silencer, don't know how much an attached silencer can do. I'm quite sure that a silenced firearm can become inaudible in a comparably loud environment.

Darvond: Someone apparently forgot about Liches, Grimmy, and the occasionally lively skeleton.

Jonesy89: Actually, the clip I watched made it sound fairly loud (and definitely louder than loading it), albeit less loud than an unsilenced handgun firing the same .45 ACP ammo. Less loud? Sure. Helpful in an otherwise noisy environment? Probably. Anywhere near close to mirroring the way that silencers in games make muted *thumps* or *pews* when the guns they are attached to are fired? Hell no.

ixbt25i: It's pretty banal, but it'll never stop to irritate me that in modern RPGs (player) characters have no need to eat, drink or sleep.

adaliabooks: I'm always torn on things like this. I like the realism, and I think it works in things like roguelikes, but mostly it's just an annoyance to have to manage a hunger level, or to have to stop and sleep all the time.

Jonesy89: Well I never... how could you both forget dear old Mummy?

AFnord: The main issue I have with the weight and naming problems is that I don't really see a reason for it to begin with. Renaming swords just causes confusion, and considering how many seem to get their information about these things from pen & paper RPGs, a shockingly large portion of the self proclaimed "history geeks" that I've met think a longsword is a 1-handed weapon. As far as weight goes, they could simply have renamed it, call it "encumbrance" or something, and then they can give it a value that reflects both its weight, and how awkward it is to carry around (and it could also be used as a balancing factor).

Blackdrazon: Well, since you brought up pen & paper RPGs, I feel the need to point out that "weight" is a rename, and the original term was encumbrance. I'm not sure when the term that makes sense (encumbrance) was turned into the term that doesn't make sense (weight), but it probably has to do with the way certain pen and paper RPG rules were applied. Early games started trying to do one thing, came to be seen as representing another, simpler thing, and forty years of later here we are trying to jam a square peg into a round hole.

Wishbone: Well, the inverse is also true. It is not uncommon for an RPG character to be lugging around four sets of plate mail, three staffs, five swords of various kinds, two flails, two maces, twenty-five healing potions and around twenty thousand gold coins. And all without impeding his or her movement noticeably.