“When You Have Guns, Why Use a Sword?”


Western gamers have once again been the cause of consternation amongst Japanese JRPG fans as they dared to question why it is JRPG heroes insist on using swords despite the availability of perfectly good guns in the same world.

The discussion started amongst English speaking gamers:

When you have guns, why use a sword?

“This topic will relate somewhat to JRPGs, and I’ll be honest, I love me some Final Fantasy, but in a world filled with machine guns, rifles and rocket launchers why the hell would you use a sword?
In almost every JRPG involving guns, the main character will use a sword and still not die despite hundreds of bullets ripping through him (or her).

What is the logic behind this? And while some games aren’t like that, I’m just curious to here what you guys think the reason for this would be.”

“Because it’s a sword, and is therefore cooler than a gun?”

“I suppose the sword is still in there because it is symbolic of power, I think.
After all, you get crossed swords on walls, not so much crossed guns.

So I just think they are in there because they symbolise power, and perhaps bravery, as the person has to be willing to charge the enemy…”

“Because the Japs think swords are more cool than guns.”

“To compensate for lack of genital stature.”

“I’m going to give you the only logical answer. Games defy logic (especially JRPGs) just to put that super stupidly impractical awesome sword in your hands.”

“It takes more XP to level up bullets than guns because the points are distributed evenly amongst all the bullets in the clip.

There are two level 10 characters, one with a gun and one with a sword. The sword is level 10 which is highly effective against a level 10 character. The bullets are only level 3 which is not enough to get past the damage resistance of a level 10 character.

It’s simple maths really. I don’t know why the military don’t do proper research on this and train all soldiers with swords.”

“To be badass. Case Solved.”

“Would you prefer playing an RPG where you just picked up a rocket launcher and killed everybody in one hit with it?

It’s way more fun using a sword and casting a lightning bolt and riding a chocobo than just using some lame gun like in every other FPS clone out there.”

“Hardly unique to JRPGs though. Hell, Fallout 3 offers a wide variety of melee weapons, many of which are vastly more effective than most of the small arms in the game. […] Realistically, the guy that wins the bayonet fight is the guy with one bullet left.”

“In Star Ocean: The Last Hope they (kind of) justified why EDGE MAVERICK used a sword. You see, EDGE MAVERICK isn’t too good with a gun, he can’t get used to the slight delay between firing and hitting the target. […] Though it doesn’t explain why EDGE MAVERICK’s girlfriend Raimi Saionji uses a bow and arrow instead of a sword. It was explained that she studied it as a kid ‘because she’s kind of weird.'”

“It’s a samurai wet-dream to defeat guns with a sword. That is the JRPG ethos, also known as gayshido.”

“Are you seriously pondering the realism of a JRPG?”

Soon this discussion spread to the insular world of Japanese gamers.

The 2ch response is less than insightful, with most commentators evidently having trouble grasping that it is the presence of swords and guns in the same setting which is what seems so counter-intuitive, not the dominance of swords as a whole:

“Because Japan is not a gun society!”

“The story is based on swords and magic.”

“Because it’s boring with guns!”

“They’re not really looking for realism anyway.”

“It’s because looks get the highest priority. Look at Gattsu swinging his great big sword about.”

“Wait, don’t they have swords in Star Wars? The setting even explains that they can deflect projectiles.”

“Guns are just tools for killing but with swords you have bushido.”

“Foreigners have no dreams. Why do you have to think about everything in terms of realism?”

“These guys only know about FF anyway.”

“What I’d like to know is why you can be shot hundreds of times in an FPS and it automatically regenerates your health…”

“It’s a game so stop thinking about that stuff.”

“What’s fun about a gunfight? It’s just noisy and boring.”

“A gold sword is stronger than an iron sword. There’s no point in trying to explain this stuff in the first place.”

“Japan isn’t a gun society so guns are part of the fantasy to Japanese, hence both appearing together.”

“I felt it was a bit off having combat aircraft flying overhead whilst troops on the ground were all fighting with swords in FF12’s intro.”

“The combat in FF is really basic considering the tech they have, isn’t it?”

“The movements used in firing a gun are quite small.”

“Because it’s a JRPG. You want some beefcake firing a gun, you play western games.”

“JRPGs have a traditional level system. It’s no good just being able to one-shot someone. Eh? Fallout? What’s that?”

“This is what is called “samurai.” Foreigners will never understand this and that’s fine with me.”

“Foreigners just don’t understand Japanese artistic sensibilities.”

“It’s due to historical differences? American history started with the gun around, but Japan has mythical blades like Kusanagi from ancient history. It’s a historical difference. American history is just shabby.”

“It’s exciting to hear about Excalibur or similar. Not so exciting to hear about some guy’s AK47.”

“Foreigners have no imagination.”

“For Japan, guns always a villainous image, being used dishonourably in traps or to take hostages. It’s about the image. Like with Kenshiro and Jagi.”

“You wouldn’t want Harry Potter to be waving a gun around.”

“It’s because those huge swords just look so cool.”

    Post Comment »
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Avatar of grgpsunk
    Comment by grgpsunk
    06:51 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    When the sword was replaced by the gun, things like honor and style were not in any of the armies' minds when they made the transition. That includes the Japanese army itself.

    So how does a gun, a weapon that needs reloading and is susceptible to jamming, manage to replace a simple, lower-maintanence sword? The reason lies both in the training and tactics used with the gun.

    Take a look at the training regiments of modern-day armies and take a look at that of feudal/medieval armies: With feudal/medieval armies, the army has to hire a bunch of rich knights/samurai to train, and they have to start their training from childhood. Whereas with modern firearms-based armies, you can get people from any class and train them in 2 to 5 months (maybe a year for spec ops). If you compare a training regiment that requires a lifetime vs. a 2 to 5 month training, there's gonna be a HELL of a cost difference, one that completely dwarves the cost of things like ammunition and spare parts.

    Additionally, when armies fought with swords, you'd have a bunch of guys charging at each other in huge waves. There'd be massive casualties on both side, with dead bodies all over the place--It was a matter of how many men are needed to kill a single man. When they developed firearms and improved their tactics, they could actually make it so their armies can minimize casualties of their own and maximize enemy casualties. In modern-day times, the increased range and rates of fire of projectile based weapons made warfare a question of how many men can an individual kill. By introducing guns, bombs, and artillery, as well as camoflauge into the battlefield, the army doesn't need to have massive waves of people charging at the enemy to win a battle. Combined with good tactics and teamwork, a few soldiers wielding guns, artillery and air support could sneak into battle, and the only dead bodies left behind would be that of the enemy.

    The armies don't give a shit about honor or style, all it cares about is efficiency. The main reason why the gun isn't as revered in many cultures is because it's relatively new and hasn't developed the same sort of symbology in culture/literature that the sword has. It also has to do with the fact that the sword was also prevalent in a time where culture was dominated by religion and mysticism instead of science and logic. That's why swords seem more imaginative than guns.

    Comment by Kudeh
    07:26 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    This is 100% true.

    However, I doubt many people will read all of it.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:39 12/07/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    I read most of it.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:57 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I did! And you probably

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:42 17/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    The trouble is you are comparing a simple education in schools followed by a few month training to an education in writing, etiquette, logistic, small troop tactic, and weapon training. The plebes were trained for few weeks, yes it was too short, but they didn't expected they would be able to learn enough to be useful, or adaptive. Basically it's similar to comparing a shortened basics training with spec ops training. The later would be much more expensive.

    "when armies fought with swords, you'd have a bunch of guys charging at each other in huge waves. There'd be massive casualties on both side, with dead bodies all over the place"
    Hardly ever happened, both sides would need to be willing to fight to death.

    "Combined with good tactics and teamwork, a few soldiers wielding guns, artillery and air support could sneak into battle, and the only dead bodies left behind would be that of the enemy."
    When both armies are similarly equipped and competent, there are heavy loses on both sides. (as proven by Chinese in the last Korea war)

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:11 12/06/2011 # ! Neutral (0)

    even better

    Avatar of Holy One
    Comment by Holy One
    00:42 01/06/2011 # ! Neutral (0)

    Very nice post! I like. :D

    Not to mention when Nobunaga owned the Takeda cavalry with firearms in Nagashino. That was pure epic!

    Avatar of CS
    Comment by CS
    23:55 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)


    Avatar of Damian
    Comment by Damian
    Comment by Anonymous
    12:28 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Good points but you do still need some training, and for most "Normal" people in RPGs they don't get that training so they can squeeze the trigger but it won't mean that they'll hit something.

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:09 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I enjoyed reading this one post you wrote than all the things I've read in Sankau thus far. Thanks, you've broadened by perspective on this subject.

    Avatar of Schrobby
    Comment by Schrobby
    06:07 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    More fun at short distance. Only a chainsaw can beat it.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:28 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    A master of the sword would never get beat by a mere chainsaw :D

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:16 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    But can he beat the master of the chainsword?

    Avatar of loli in a box
    Comment by loli in a box
    06:07 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    You don't need to be a genius to get it...

    Swords have just more style.
    I'm with 2ch on this one.

    We wouldn't play games if we were seeking for realism now, would we?

    Avatar of Artefact
    Comment by Artefact

    Who says realism isn't fun? Have you played OPF or Kengo?

    Avatar of Sorrior
    Comment by Sorrior
    06:13 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Some do sadly. I play games for fun. Which for me often involves swords with a few exceptions such as more over the top ranged weapons. Hell in Fable 3 i beat the game without even getting 200 kills witha gun. I had over 1500 with swords and spells though.

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:23 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    arma, silent hunter, rainbow six raven shield, lockon and il2 would like to have a word with you.

    Avatar of Deibi_Manabu
    Comment by Deibi_Manabu
    10:08 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    But there is realism if said character had a choice of weapons - just like we choose what to wear or eat. ^^

    Avatar of Riiku
    Comment by Riiku
    07:35 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (-0.2)

    How about a fun game with mushroom as main hero, running on the walls of your appartment killing spiders by casting a spell that turn them into small cheesecakes? No matter how fun this is, I wont play extremely unrealistic (unbeliavable) and therefore not immersive bullshit.

    Avatar of Sorrior
    Comment by Sorrior
    08:05 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    In some part of the multiverse that would b more realistic than a man using a toothpick to clean his teeth. Fact is that idea sounds AWESOME to me and i'd play it in a heartbeat.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:40 12/07/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    That's actually a great idea.

    Avatar of DP
    Comment by DP
    09:01 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    That´s sounds so fun to play, where can i get it?
    If i want something realistic I just go outside.

    Avatar of Palmtop Tsundere
    Comment by Palmtop Tsundere
    06:05 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+0.9)

    It never needs reloading.

    Avatar of Azure Xuchilbara
    Comment by Azure Xuchilbara
    07:03 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    People always whine and b*tch, and not not westerners...

    Why can't East and West accept each other's raunchy fetishes, hot kinks and various turn-ons--er, I mean weapon preferences, game audience targets and appealing videogame protagonists..?

    It's always the constant comparing and b*tching about "Why do you have this?" or "Why is it like that?"...

    Personally, we should be strengthening and working together to make games that appeal to BOTH east and west and not just for the convenience of the other so we can end these petty conflicts that (eventually, if not already) spiral into hatred and loathing...

    I mean, we both make porn--er, games that appeal to our culture, so why not make games that appeals to both..?

    @Palmtop Tiger

    "It never needs reloading."


    Also, When I think of Guns and Swords, I instantly think of Dante from Capcom's "Devil May Cry"...

    Avatar of Tex_Arcana
    Comment by Tex_Arcana
    07:52 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.4)

    That was beautiful!

    Avatar of King Tiger
    Comment by King Tiger
    13:25 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    @ azure

    best idea i heard in EVER! T_T i pray for that faithful day to cum-er *come!

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:09 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Well the West isn't playing nice either and they're in the lead meaning they SHOULD be the one to get over it but no they decide to be gigantic showboats about and mock the other culture and milk first place for all it's worth, until the West can get over itself I'll be glad once the AAA causes the collapse of the Western gaming market.

    Avatar of Azure Xuchilbara
    Comment by Azure Xuchilbara
    14:53 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I meant to say "not only westerners" on that first sentence...Sorry for the confusion~

    Avatar of PikachuEXE
    Comment by PikachuEXE
    08:01 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+0.8)

    More importantly
    You cannot use unlimited ammo unless you cheat

    Avatar of DP
    Comment by DP
    07:42 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.4)

    Swords have the better gore factor.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:28 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Not really .

    Comment by Anonymous
    02:34 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Ever seen someone hit in the ribcage by a hollow point bullet?

    Trust me, seeing that happen you make you cringe just as much, if not more, than seeing someone cut in half by a bladed weapon.

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:54 24/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    You think a bullet. Which has the capability of severing limbs(I understand). Is more gory than being right up in that person's face. And cutting a piece off?

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:07 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    to answer this "debate": its because westerners have NO imagination! end of discussion!

    Avatar of King Tiger
    Comment by King Tiger
    11:14 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    japan's imagination > western imagination

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:40 12/07/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    Then explain the decline of Final Fantasy.

    Avatar of Bigall
    Comment by Bigall
    06:09 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Bullets actually cost money and not all heroes have te money to them...

    06:18 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Swords only need sharping.

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:34 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Slowly and surely, I start to see a pattern in Sankaku Complex, it goes like this:

    1. Anime character birthday with lots of pics
    2. Flames against (Manga, Anime, Computergame)-Industry
    3. Cosplay or Anime Gallery with lots of ecchi pics
    4. Flames against China
    5. Flames from and against ignorant westerners
    6. Some top 10 list
    -> repeat

    Avatar of Schrobby
    Comment by Schrobby
    06:22 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Yeah, and most important, swords have style.

    06:25 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Style to kickass.

    Avatar of Schrobby
    Comment by Schrobby
    06:55 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    You forgot molestation news and figures.

    Avatar of Megidola
    Comment by Megidola
    06:39 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+0.8)

    7. ????
    8. PROFIT!!!

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:41 12/07/2013 # ! Neutral (0)

    And so the crow mocked the raven on the blackness of it's feathers.

    Avatar of TFish
    Comment by TFish
    06:52 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Jedi's use the force to harness the full potential of the Light saber though. If a storm trooper picked up a light saber he wouldn't be able to defend himself with it whatsoever.

    Avatar of TFish
    Comment by TFish
    11:15 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    There's also the quote "A more elegant weapon for a more civilized age." The light saber is more of a symbol than anything, like a galactic police badge.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:25 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    A Jedi COULD use a blaster fine. Better even than a non force sensitive user. HOWEVER, the point of a Jedi is to be sort of like a galactic police, a diplomat, and a monk all sort of rolled into one.

    They would kill when they NEEDED to but only if they needed to. The way they used the lightsaber was more defensive than anything with their ability to deflect blaster bolts.

    It's like. "I am impervious to all forms of attack you could possibly use against me. Are you CERTAIN you'd rather not try to come to a peaceful solution about this?"

    The sith? Well they have lightning and the ability to instant strangle people, why use plasma guns. Also they were a broken sect of Jedi so they sort of started out with the lightsaber idea and old habits are hard to break.

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:58 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Kind of like the katana in that respect. It was the symbol of nobility and the samuri caste. It wasn't really that good of a weapon.

    For warfare they used spears, polearms, and bows.

    Comment by Anonymous
    02:05 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yeah right, so a jedi wont be able to utilise a blaster rifle fully? If they can kill 10 enemies with a lightsaber, they should be able to kill a 100 with a blaster rifle right? So why do they still use lightsaber?

    Avatar of Ray
    Comment by Ray
    08:09 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Star Wars had Jedis wielding lightsabers even though there are perfectly good laser blasters around. And I find the Fett bounty hunters much cooler than the Jedi.

    You also have the presence of melee weapons along with guns and high tech weaponry in Fallout games. Although I have to admit there is something bloody cool about punching the living shit of your opponent with a pneumatic power fist.

    So much for westerners keeping melee out of gun based fantasy.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:58 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    the most epeic weapon ever. i want one.

    Avatar of Kwonnie
    Comment by Kwonnie
    07:04 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I think the real question is: Why is everybody not using blitzballs?

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:56 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)


    As sad it seems the man is right,if i see another aya hirano bullshit again...

    Comment by Anonymous
    02:27 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)


    good sword more expensive than gun,

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:41 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    yes but gun cost + all ammo from the beginning until the game end will always cost more than that

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:46 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Meanwhile in western"Here a pistol and a clip of bullets,now bomb an entire island and kill an army of mutants,GOGOGO" ಠ_ಠ

    Avatar of Shippoyasha
    Comment by Shippoyasha
    16:48 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Discussing 'logic' and 'videogames' is the stupidest thing ever, sorry.

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:48 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    there are several anime and RPGs that would argue against your claim of reloading swords

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:15 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Oh who the hell cares, China will kill them all within the next year anyways.. Can we stop the cultural exchange posts already?

    Comment by Anonymous
    02:33 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    What, if Japan is gone and we only have western cultures to depend on, the world will end! Cause the really have shitty cultures...

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:56 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Fallout 3 is a western RPG and has swords and guns, so whats there point?

    Swords are for fighting with honour.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:12 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Japanese blades are known to break after carving up a few bodies. They're practically a disposable weapon and only good as demonstration piece or as a collectors item.

    Who cares if it 'never needs reloading', when push comes to shove it'll let you down. It cannot stop bullets, nor can it hack through more than a dozen foes.

    The only swords that can do that and survive are massive broadswords and I doubt your needy ass could even lift one. Fag.

    Comment by Anonymous
    02:26 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    @Anonymous above

    Lol, its a game we are talking about... If you wanna talk about reality, then bring in bombs, cruise missiles and air strike =.="

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:22 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yeah, but swords get dull after a few chops. At least with a gun you can carry extra ammunition while the samurai tries to find a blacksmith.

    Avatar of Sorrior
    Comment by Sorrior
    10:58 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Not if it was well made. The swords they make today by an large are not made to be practical but display pieces and thus are FAR weaker than any sword you would have seen even as little as 200 years ago. If that long ago at that.

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:28 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    You forget that guns wear and tear also if you don't do maintainance on them making the accuracy pretty much make you look like a dead eye

    Avatar of OhYeah
    Comment by OhYeah
    12:36 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Depends on the metal used and the forging method. A well forged blade can maintain its sharpness much longer than any run of the mill weapon.

    Taking that into account, a lot of weapons are subject to the inverse law of sharpness and durability. Often times the most durable weapons can't really maintain an edge while the sharper weapons are much easier to chip.

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:16 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Swords are more useful in some type of close combat settings. Guns (esp. riffles) more in areal combat. Much of it depends on the skill of the wielder of course, no matter if you have a machine gun or a spoon.

    As for Japanes, think it's more a tradition thing.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:45 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Maybe a knife, but a sword, no. If you have space to swing a armslength of steel around, you have space to aim a handgun.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:21 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Or just call for airstrike

    Avatar of DP
    Comment by DP
    08:57 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Or just throw an hand grenade.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:25 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    swords= less evidence left for authorities to find on the body.

    guns= shell casings, bullet grooves, residue... so much work to get rid of stuff.

    Avatar of Schrobby
    Comment by Schrobby
    11:25 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Or a killsat

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:55 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I can hardly see a sword wielder defeat someone with a gun, not counting stealth kills.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:31 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    @Anon 7:53 Truth

    Bayonet's were also used quite often in WW1. Great for if your gun jams or to stop a rush on a trench.

    As a matter of fact they were used in WW2 for trench fighting, but were often made out of the combat knives of the fallen. Mostly because the Allied troops were under supplied and had to make due with what was on hand.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:11 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Today bayonets are only used as a last resort when you're out of ammo our your weapon is damaged, bayonets stem from a time where it took minutes to reload your weapon and it was practical to be able to convert your weapon into a spear to prepare for close combat.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:53 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Bayonet use is very rare in modern ware fare. If your at that range, a knife tends to be the weapon of choice.

    I know quite a few people in Iraq who had to open some necks, but none have had to use their bayonet, except as a crowd control device.

    Avatar of DP
    Comment by DP
    07:33 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    And why is there bayonets? If they are so useless.

    Avatar of Sorrior
    Comment by Sorrior
    07:11 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I can if they're fast enough. Subconciously a man usinga gun will have a WTF moment(read logical disconnect) lasting at minimum 2 nanoseconds. If you're close enough and fast enough that's enough time. It is highly improbable however but it is certainly possible. Also in martial arts classes they do still teach moves that are designed to disarm a gunman. My old instructor showed one of em to us once.

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:13 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    "The British Army performed bayonet charges during the Falklands War, the Second Gulf War, and the war in Afghanistan.[6] Recently in Iraq at the Battle of Danny Boy, the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders bayonet charged mortar positions filled with over 100 Mahdi Army members. The ensuing hand to hand fighting resulted in an estimate of over 40 insurgents killed and 35 bodies collected (many floated down the river) and 9 prisoners. Sergeant Brian Wood, of the Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment, was awarded the Military Cross for his part in the battle.[7] This engagement brought to notice the tactical use of the weapon for close combat and the sheer psychological effect it can have. Similarly, in 2009, Lieutenant James Adamson, aged 24, of the Royal Regiment of Scotland was awarded the Military Cross for a bayonet charge whilst on a tour of duty in Afghanistan: after shooting one Taliban fighter dead Adamson had run out of ammunition when another enemy appeared. Adamson immediately charged the second Taliban fighter and bayoneted him.[8]"

    The last time the US had a bayonet charge was in the Korean War. (I've been to the hill where it happened.)

    Avatar of Bazzyrick
    Comment by Bazzyrick
    06:09 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    In a world with proper guns then swords have no place like they do in todays world. Short blades like knives can be useful in close quarter combat, some sort of super pro assassins could even use swords in those circumstances, but in open combat and in big open areas guns would always win. Swords are 'cooler' yea. But guns can kill you from further away :P

    Avatar of Schrobby
    Comment by Schrobby
    06:34 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Coolness is important in games. Hacking away is badass.

    Avatar of Maderlulz
    Comment by Maderlulz
    06:39 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    I agree, that is why the Assassin's Creed franchise has a lot appeal to me. A breath of fresh air from all the shooters being made.

    Avatar of Schrobby
    Comment by Schrobby
    06:56 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+0.8)

    Stabbing with a sword is the new poking with a stick.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:23 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Rush'n attack stabby action is much cooler.

    Avatar of Maderlulz
    Comment by Maderlulz
    07:47 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    AC is mostly stabing with your "stick" but you can per se be agressively hack and slash with your stick. In fact Assassin's Creed Brotherhood made the fighting system more sophisticated and you will have to be aggressive and not wait to counter.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:08 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    In "Fantasy" you can block bullets with a sword. You can run forward taking the bullets on the way and then slice your target in half. It doesn't show that in the game because it would take a huge amount of money and time to do it and then you won't have a game.

    06:48 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Got to love the stabbing action. stabby stabby.

    Avatar of DP
    Comment by DP
    07:35 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    You really have to ask?

    07:10 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Which stick do you have in mind.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:39 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Light-speed Iai Slash <3

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:52 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.6)

    Well, I suppose that's true, but in real life, nobody is lv 9999 with 3 million HP, a stack of 99 Super Giga Healing Potions. Not to mention healing type magical girls.

    Avatar of Schrobby
    Comment by Schrobby
    06:58 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Aren't cute healing type magical girls 100 times better than a mere med pack? See?

    Avatar of Duolis
    Comment by Duolis
    12:56 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Med pack prevent you from falling down, so you can keep on getting those shit that are coming at you.

    Magical girls help you standing up and make you think "I must not go down, especially when I have a magical girl behind my back".

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:07 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    I'll try to tackle this question a bit better.

    1) You're not always going up against something humanoid in size or shape, Trying to drop a behemoth for example would probably require you to have a gun with a very high calibur... where as cuts inflicted by a sword can always cause the thing to bleed out.

    2) Unless you carry around a mobile bullet factory, it can be very hard to resupply on the field... Running out of bullets is a huge issue for modern day soldiers as you can only pack around *so* many magazines before it starts to cut into space needed for your *useful* supplies, like food.

    3) Well made swords/axes don't need as much upkeep as a Gun... Swords need sharpening and they need to be repaired if they chip. Guns need constant cleaning and oiling or they jam/misfire... and god forbid you do something like drop a gun in sand, that'll require you to strip the whole thing.

    4) Sometimes guns just aren't the right tool for the job, either they make too much noise or they lack stopping power or they'd inflict too much collateral damage or their ammunition is just plain dangerous to carry.

    Avatar of Damian
    Comment by Damian
    09:06 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    the bear example can also be apply to swords, since you must be close to hack at it, powerfull enough so actually hurt him, and demands much more fitness and resistance

    Avatar of Mike
    Comment by Mike
    20:13 23/02/2012 # ! Neutral (0)

    problem, even though a war axe or warhammer would work better against a bear, thats just fucking stupid. how we killed bears is we'd get a nice posse and some spears, circle around it, constantly piercing its skin, slowly letting it bleed out without getting to close.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:29 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Also, IRL things like *bears* are hard to kill with most guns, due to thick hide + bones. Trying to get a bullet inside the cranium is incredibly hard due to their thick skull and their general body posture isn't exactly conducive to putting a bullet in a major organ like the heart.

    Most people are jaded in how easy they think guns are to kill with due to a humans upright body posture which leaves a lot of our organs open to being damaged. We also have pretty thin skulls with huge brains all things considered, an animal with a smaller brain will tend to have an even thicker / more heavily muscled head which makes it harder to kill in a single shot.

    Avatar of Sorrior
    Comment by Sorrior
    10:55 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Which is why when fighting bears a War axe,War hamer or mace not to mention any of their variants are better. They have thye ability to crus and/or shatter the bears bones.

    BTW i have indeed put ALOT of thought into this seeing as i want to someday have a special suit of armor made and go melee fight abear.

    Comment by Anonymous

    Someone actually answered the fucking question. Thank god.

    And shooting a gun is not easy AT ALL. There's a way to aim, a way to hold a gun, a way to position your body depending on the type of gun you're holding. People take for granted that just because a gun is fast and effective that it doesn't take skill to shoot properly. If that were the case there would be no legendary gunslingers of the old west.

    And if winning a battle was just a matter of armament and not skill US troops wouldn't have gotten their asses handed to them by rag tag insurgents in Iraq.

    Avatar of Blackbird
    Comment by Blackbird
    06:31 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (-0.2)

    Agreed with you!

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:35 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Never needs reloading, AND assuming superhuman strength, a sword has more potential than a gun. A sword can sever a person in two. A gun can only ever hope to put a little hole in them.

    But honestly, this topic is stupid. Games have unrealistic elements, either to make the gameplay more fun, programming limitations, or because it's a fantasy setting. A critical analysis is hardly required to see something so ridiculously obvious.

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:32 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    There are guns that have the same potential as swords. Just find the right one and it can pretty much tear up a body just as or better look up AA12 which the ammunition can be interchanged with grenades too....

    Avatar of TheBeast
    Comment by TheBeast
    12:54 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    in the world of jrpg's you can get machine gunned a hundred times in the chest and still walk away, but if you get shot in the chest once during a cutscene, you're a dead man.

    the same is true about swords. -sephiroth&aeris.

    and beachballs wakka ffx

    and ball in a cup genis tos.

    Avatar of Shizu's Waki Obsessor: MaidNiac
    10:29 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Damn true, one big reason why I hate to be an Archer in an MMORPG.

    Avatar of OhYeah
    Comment by OhYeah
    12:32 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    But archers are so fun to play as. -3-

    By the way, Archery is also just as if not as hard to master as it is with swords. Not only does it require physical aptitude rivaling those of the heavy weapons persuasion (most warbows back in the days were produced with draws in the excess of 80 lbs, some even over) and you had to be able to hold it too (because you were expected to aim with it and fire continuously). Now add that to the skill required to both fire them and redraw for another shot as quickly as possible (you were expected when the enemy is charging you with Knights) you needed to have serious training to be able to shoot with the best.

    Now combine that with the Cavalry archers from mongolia who were not only taught to shoot from Horseback (firing while STANDING on a horse and moving) but also to fire freaking BACKWARDS, you now have one of the most difficult to master weapons in the world.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:30 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I said both have advantages and disadvantages. But having both just makes you awesome. Look at "Devil May Cry" The main character Dante has both and is one of the most badass people in gaming. He uses his guns for long range, then gets in close to finish them off. They work together PB&J. For short, who wouldn't want a cool gun fight that with bullets flying everywhere and final shot that finish the opponent off flying. Or the joy of duking out with someone with every swing of the sword just to end it with a final blow that has cool poses. I say both or nothing.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:13 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    And now the west has made Dante into the visage of Ninja Theorys lead developer, an ugly mo-fo hilarious.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:02 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    "but the edge can get dull" (argument in black lagoon, i let you guess between who and who ;) )

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:52 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    That's from Second Barrage iirc.

    Revy and Ginji Matsuzaki. The latter preferring to use a katana, and who did get close to defeating Revy. But as they say, close only counts with horseshoes and high explosives.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:30 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Bzzzzt. No it was revy saying that to Shenuna(sp?) when sheuna said "Guns run out of bullets, blades are much better."

    and revy said "Well, blades chip and get dull."

    Avatar of Deibi_Manabu
    Comment by Deibi_Manabu
    10:07 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yes, that and it's the character's preference. I can't understand why people couldn't see that the character has an opinion in as much as the storylines would go...

    Avatar of Abel Liegod
    Comment by Abel Liegod
    11:15 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Its a fact that you can have more fun slashin than shootin!
    I myself love both weapons but at least in games i always used a sword instead of any range weapon!

    Avatar of Renzo
    Comment by Renzo
    10:50 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Why not make combination sword and gun ? Since Sword doesn't need targetting, just hack and slash @ ur victim, while gun u need to target and reload ( except Machine Gun which is heavy but u can shoot at random )

    and One side notes

    GUNS ( and its ammo ) ARE EXPENSIVE !
    SWORDS doesn't need one.

    Avatar of Bazzyrick
    Comment by Bazzyrick
    06:07 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (-0.2)

    Never needing to reload wont do much good when you were sniped so far from the enemy you couldnt throw the sword to hit him. :P

    Daggers are understandable in close quarters but in long range open field battle, swords have no place.

    Avatar of Schrobby
    Comment by Schrobby
    06:31 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+0.9)

    Yup, but JRPGs tend to have melee fights. Oh, and bullet deflection with a sword is a badass move.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:08 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Guns have a set amount of damage- an AK round will be just as powerful when shot by a SPEZNAS as it is when shot by a Somali Islamist.

    This is not the case with swords or meleé weapons in general, for instance a hardened soldier will do much more damage with a blade than a 11-year-old girl. Except if she happens to be a killerloli.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:09 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    it's actually to do with mentality and the fact that swords are generally regarded as more honorable than guns

    yes, you could just pull out a gun and shoot the guy in the face, but when you kill someone, you have to make a point and essentially prove that you are better with them

    anyone can pull a trigger, not everyone can swing a sword well

    Avatar of OhYeah
    Comment by OhYeah
    08:38 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Well it generally is in the interest of the fun factor, but if you compare a gun to say sword in terms of damage, often times, the sword actually wins out because of the mass and force behind it. The only reason why humans are so susceptible is because we are made of explodium.

    Of course missiles are a completely different story. I guess it is all in the fun factor.

    Avatar of Lonesnipa
    Comment by Lonesnipa
    07:08 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Gunblade. Problem solved. Oh wait no thats a bad idea.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:16 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Why RPG chars use sword or melee weps?
    Simply - coz, they have supernatural strenght, durability etc etc. When u use sword, injures u cause are COMBINATION of melee weapon cuttin/hacking/slashing/whatever ABILITY and CHARACTERS PHYSICAL ABILITY (well, sometimes mental/magical). When using guns, the only thing it depends on is amount of gunpowder (yeah yeah, shape and calliber of bullet too, but to less extent).
    So now, aswer me, why use gun, that can only shoot through wooden deck, when character is strong enough to break through concrete block with bare fists?

    And whats more, why the hell make realistic games? If u want realism - go outside and find life -.-


    Avatar of Crim
    Comment by Crim
    15:55 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+0.8)

    I just fired a fireball with my hands, summoned a demon god and brought down a meteor upon the earth

    Why the fuck would I use a gun

    Avatar of RETake09
    Comment by RETake09
    10:46 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.6)

    @Anon 9:20

    Obviously you need to compensate with your small penis too. =]

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:42 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.6)

    W T F ?

    Don't group 'Western gamers' like this. I myself is one of them, but I never questioned such. If a swordfight seems right, then go for it, don't reach for your guns. I'm pretty sure some Japanese would question this as well. It's a matter of being able to leave games and reality apart. Has nothing to do with where you come from.

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:50 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.6)

    They actually exist. Sword that converts into assault rifle like in FFXIII would actually be as badass as impractical, but so would FFVIII's sword that uses powder charges for extra damage.

    A lot of games kind of explain the dominance of the sword one way or another. For example, in FFVII guns are generally low damage weapons, so being able to snipe people doesn't do much. In lots of other games guns and swords are counterbalanced in a way that somehow makes swords practical in a world with guns.

    Avatar of onitake
    Comment by onitake
    16:28 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.4)

    both have their advantages and disadvantages:
    with a blade, you need to score a precise hit to do a lot of initial damage, unless you go for bleeding your victim to death or breaking his/her bones. and that is not easy if they wear strong armour, or are very nimble.
    also, you need to get very close.
    light weapons with a far reach (halberd, flail, pike, etc.) are more practical, but useless in close combat. a mace or a hatchet might be the best bet against someone wearing armour.
    blunt weapons are good too, they don't need sharpening to be effective. but it's difficult to kill someone quickly with them.
    guns have to be loaded with ammo - and the ammo must be effective against the target. hv ammo causes wounds but doesn't incapacitate quickly. hp is very effective against unprotected tissue, but doesn't do much damage against armour. u238 coated bullets are mostly useful to kill the crew inside heavily reinforced vehicles.
    automatic weapons need a lot of ammo - do you want your delicate hero to carry around 100s of assault rifle clips?
    the same goes for heavy weaponry. rocket launchers can be very light, but who's going to carry around 100 rockets for you?

    if you wan't a realistic setting, you should go for an assault rifle or a repeating rifle with a bayonet and a few clips of various ammo types. then be conservative with using them up. or hope the enemy uses the same type of ammo.

    jrpgs are not meant to be realistic. if you want realism, play a realistic game. if you want fantasy, play a fantasy game. it's as simple as that.

    Avatar of Pertamax
    Comment by Pertamax
    10:44 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.4)

    When it comes to zombie apocalypse, yo'll need a decent sword so you can conserve ammo

    when it comes to sci-fi you can easily deflect laser pistol with a little swing ( assuming you're a jedi )

    when it comes to world war you can yell tenno heiko banzai !!! and charge up to front line

    when it comes to absurdness you can cut up even an airplane with your sword

    bottom line ... its cool

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:39 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Did they forget about the lightsabers in Star Wars?

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:25 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    'Guns have a set amount of damage- an AK round will be just as powerful when shot by a SPEZNAS as it is when shot by a Somali Islamist.

    This is not the case with swords or meleé weapons in general,'

    Also note that a bullet to the leg is not a bullet between the eyes, and a sword to the leg is not the same as a sword through the eye socket.

    In other words, hit locations matter.

    A Spetznatz with an AK47 would probably hit between the eyes nine times out of ten, whereas a jihadi would probably miss the target five times out of ten.

    Comment by Anonymous
    16:39 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    this is what i think... what would you do without ammo? not everyone can afford ammo in times of desperation... also dont you look like a bad ass with a sword?

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:11 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    its because swords are a symbol of bravery, honor and power, any fool can point a gun at you an just pull the trigger, besides you guys are forgeting that the characters in JRPGS are not NORMAL, they have super human strenght and speed, they can dodge bullets or deflect them with the sword, thats why if you put a sword in a super human arms it will work better than having stupid ass gun, just think about it, would a gun work with someone like sepiroth? or kefka?, nop it wouldnt, thats why swords are better in this tipes of games

    Avatar of Raul Rayven
    Comment by Raul Rayven
    23:16 18/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Because 'melee combat' looks you more cool, and MORE COOLER if you beat out the enemy's crap using a sword.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:17 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    The last comment was so perfect...

    Comment by Anonymous
    16:00 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    if it's about logical then when yo got shot first you must get the bullet out and stitch your wound,but what they use is just some med kit and my health bar back to 100%
    medkit is not a fantasy jrpg style potion no

    so which one is close to logic,gun wound with med kits or sword/melee wound with magical potion ?

    Comment by Anonymous
    05:54 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    You don't get the:

    1. May the bigger Gun Win
    2. Snipers can Kill All.
    3. I have better skill than you. (I shoot faster and got you).
    4. Spray and Pray and kill the enemy VS Wave Sword And Succeed.
    5. Who cares. Just Nuke them.

    OR we can go with...

    Disarming Criminals with Kendo Sticks (Sankaku did cover that.)

    and miss out on an Oakland Transit Officer accidentally drawing his Pistol instead of his Taser.

    At least the Kendo Stick has less Drama than a Gun (oops Taser). Note, you can use a Club with less social anger than a gun. Everyone Buy hoses and spray the zombies off the Bridge. I meant Kids.

    Comment by Anonymous
    02:18 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    @Anonymous at 13:34

    I have been military trained and so I can tell you for sure that firearms are uch easier to learn than swords or those melee stuff...

    It takes a few hours for a soldier to be taught about the technical informations required, a couple of days for them to get use to reloading, carrying the firearms around and probably a couple of weeks for him to fire decently, IN A RANGE...

    But try picking up fencing, kendo, etc... It is going to take you weeks just to get the stances carved into you mind, and even months to be able to swing a sword well... Let alone use it!

    Thats because you need to train you body to utilise the weapon of choice... On the other hand, even a fat-kid can fire decently with around 2weeks of firearms training...

    Avatar of Lilith
    Comment by Lilith
    09:07 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Because martial-arts combat was still "fair" in the eyes of the beholder whereas the new firearms warfare is really "unfair" since the best armed army will usually win the fight regardless of training.

    Training with a sword or fists are usually linked with honor and dedication which leads to heroes whereas in rpgs people that use guns are taken as cowards.

    I'd go deeper and say that war was never beautiful and guns just made it more evident but that's going too deep in a superficial argument so I'll leave it as is.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:51 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    If you learned Kenbunshoku Haki, the guns are obsolete...

    Avatar of DP
    Comment by DP
    07:37 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    It´s all about hack´n´slay.

    Avatar of Yama-jii
    Comment by Yama-jii
    14:31 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Simple. It just looks cool as hell. Dodging and deflecting bullets. Now that is cool. Besides in the game, they usually explain how the guns(in their universe) are either weak or under developed or that the sword has some kind of power which makes it better than guns.

    If you ask in real life, I would say that carrying bullets and the limit of it a factor why one might use a sword. In real life there has always been a debate that is still going on today : the 5.56 rounds vs the 7.62 rounds. Although 5.56 rounds are lighter(therefore you could carry more) they have lesser damage compared to the 7.62 but the 7.62 is heavy and the weight is stressful to the soldier. Nevertheless, the weight and the limited amount of bullets is a problem a gun user faces. That is also why they still carry knives around.

    I don't think that it is not possible for swords to be used today, but not as a primary weapon of course. Well there are tons and tons of reason why swords are still used in games and even in anime besides the fact that it looks cool.

    Katana vs gun(.45 caliber, not the weaker 9mm) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNiX_l-HEGM And that is without their super ass ninja skills!

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:34 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Srsly guys, it also takes skill to shoot guns. Its _NOT_ like playing Counterstrike or Call of Duty. Headshotting with a mouse or a joystick does not translate to real life.

    Go on, go to a range. Pick up a gun. A real gun, NERF gun, paintball gun, airsoft gun, a rubber-band gun, a crossbow, a longbow, a javelin, a slingshot. Try to hit something. Not so fucking easy now innit?

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:13 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    If you have Ultima why would anything else matter?

    Avatar of shiroki
    Comment by shiroki
    13:29 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Guns can only shoot while swords of the same size will detach appendage and also do long range shockwave attacks which will also detach appendage! Realism? What is that?

    Avatar of djchayan
    Comment by djchayan
    11:25 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    "anyone can pull a trigger, not everyone can swing a sword well"

    Loved that right there, also just get Gutts sword use it as shield too heck he even has a noobtube on his left hand xD.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:20 13/11/2010 # ! Drivel (-1.0)

    I guess japanese guys see the sword as a substitute for their short dicks...


    Avatar of Chen-04
    Comment by Chen-04
    06:36 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.5)

    That's called cowardice and the opposite of the image the hero has in these kind of games.

    Also, there is one more simple reason. Guns don't intimidate people like swords, because even if you know, you can't really imagine how bad a gun can hurt you, but with a sword it's a different story, or so I heard.

    Avatar of Kwonnie
    Comment by Kwonnie
    06:57 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.6)

    This is the first time I've agreed with 100% of 2ch's comments. Bravo, all commenters above. Could NOT agree more.

    Avatar of TFish
    Comment by TFish
    13:08 13/11/2010 # ! Good (+0.6)


    You do realize that 2ch's answers weren't answers for the question at all, right? They just based westerners for using guns in games, they totally ignored the fact that the question was why use a sword in a game when guns are readily available.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:10 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.4)

    when you kill someone, you have to look good whilst doing it, otherwise it's just rude

    Avatar of konakona
    Comment by konakona
    00:08 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I thought it was obvious. In those magical worlds everyone can dodge/deflect/resist bullets. Or at least have skin hard enough to feel nearly nothing form a bullet. It explains why you have to shoot at a monster so many times to kill it.


    “What I’d like to know is why you can be shot hundreds of times in an FPS and it automatically regenerates your health…”

    I loled.

    Avatar of TFish
    Comment by TFish
    06:45 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    The human body does heal itself when it's damaged. I assume in those worlds you're a super soldier with healing abilities.

    Most games it's your armor that takes damage and recharges, not you.

    Avatar of ImBZppl
    Comment by ImBZppl
    08:22 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    It may be more satisfying to cut up your enemy with a sword rather then 1hko them with a bullet to the head I guess?
    plus guns are wimpy unless they are fighting close range with them like when Panty vs Scanty

    Avatar of MasterX25
    Comment by MasterX25
    09:46 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Its like in COD games, why shoot them if you could humiliate them by knifing them?

    Avatar of NeverSleep
    Comment by NeverSleep
    10:13 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    And the fact that the characters in J-RPG can dodge, deflect, parry, use force fields, etc against bullets. Like in Star Wars, where the Jedi also uses "swords" in a galaxy full of blaster rifles, heavy repeaters, etc...

    Comment by Anonymous
    04:53 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    easy when from a far use a gun, when in close use a sword or dagger; saves on ammo and funds.

    No brainer question. C'mon PEOPLE MONEY DOESN'T FALL FROM THE SKY Y'KNOW

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:45 18/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    There's more than one enemy on the battlefield.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:36 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Then everyone might as well claim the chainsaws on those Lancer guns in Gears of War as useless, since realistically it requires time to start up, and it relies heavily on some form of power to rotate it. But guess what? People still enjoyed using them in games, so why make it sound like nobody wants it in the game?

    I really hate it when a minority of whiners always end up louder than the supporters.

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:11 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    those guys need to play DMC,gun isnt as effective as sword well i dont know if DMC can be called JRPG :p

    Avatar of Worthless
    Comment by Worthless
    06:32 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Especially with the range and stopping power of today's rifles. You can reload in a second and then continue firing. It's the equivalent of trying to slash and then having to reverse your own motion with the sword to slash again. Then again, JRPGs don't have inertia either.

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:19 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    When your physical strength is powerful enough to to tolerate gunshots or evade flying bullets, you are not going to use guns anymore.

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:28 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    you guys are right, when you move faster than a bullet, guns are useless

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:55 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    That was the best comment I've read so far. People seem to forget that the inhabitants of the world are powerful enough to be consider godlike by our standards.

    Guns are only effective if they can kill quickly and easily, if bullets are much less powerful, speed, power, and the ability to rip someone in half in a few seconds is easily superior. That makes for a hell of alot more potent a weapon.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:11 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Why using a gun when you have your own penis?

    Avatar of TyRANT
    Comment by TyRANT
    12:48 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    What's more intimidating? Killing a guy with a sword using your gun? Or killing a guy with a gun using your sword? The latter of course.

    Avatar of TFish
    Comment by TFish
    06:49 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I heard the story of a British soldier in WW2 that had his arm cut off by a Japanese officer during the storming of a hill. In his blood lust he grabbed the sword from the officer with his other arm, killed the man and then kept charging the hill. 1 armed, with only a katana, and what I can assume to be the biggest balls any one man ever possessed. He killed and wounded several men before being shot down, but his act of pure insanity encouraged the other british soldiers to follow suit and charge the hill in what I assume to be a sort of blood orgy, needless to say the Japanese surrendered.

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:47 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    well take a sword and get rdy to kill a guy pointing a gun in your face and then let us know

    Avatar of EXkurogane
    Comment by EXkurogane
    14:28 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Thats true. When we watch a mech series like Gundam, close combat/swords are always preferred and "superior". This is not true in real life, tell me if there's any human who can hold a katana and dash forwards, evading every single bullet, or a pilot that evades every single laser beam shot, when lasers travel at the speed of light.

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:21 15/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    But Gundam are more like a super robot series, than a realistic series so...
    ...a mecha slicing a humongous space station with a sword... sure is an epic sword with +525 strenght, +1.000.000 dodge rating.

    Avatar of yaku
    Comment by yaku
    10:08 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    This reminds me of those stupid arguments like "why don't you learn to play an actual guitar instead of playing Guitar Hero".

    It's a game, it doesn't need to be 100% realistic; it just needs to blow your mind.

    Avatar of Member548
    Comment by Member548
    11:01 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    What if you, or your target is physically faster then a bullet? This is often portrayed in anime and even some western films.

    Your only option is to use a melee weapon, then if you are bad ass enough, like DBZ ridiculous, only your own personal power and fist will even work since no material or weapon can even harm you or your foe.

    Avatar of Chen-04
    Comment by Chen-04
    15:43 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)


    How does it feel? I mean the being 13 years old thing. Reading your text sure brings back memories from a forgotten time.

    Comment by Anonymous

    Who cares if it doesn't, I can shoot you 30 times before you get in range to use that sword.

    There is a reason swords haven't been a main infranty weapon for a long, long time. They were inferior to the spear for main army use, and completely outclassed by the gun following that.

    Avatar of Sorrior
    Comment by Sorrior
    08:03 13/11/2010 # ! Quality (+0.8)

    That's if you can. Since my earlier post hasn't shown up i'll say it again. There will be a logical disconnect for people usinga gun when someone comes at them witha sword. Giving the swordsman about 2 nanosecond at least maybe more. Depending on the range and speed of the melee user they can win. It is improbable that they will but they can. Don't go all macho this is what i would do. I have been in fights barroom brawl style and thensome so i KNOW how i would react. But as for most people they just blow it out their ass. Besides while guns are easy to USE aiming is another matter.

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:47 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Just FYI: two nanoseconds is two billionth of a second. Considering how our universe works, a window of 2 nanoseconds is not enough for any human to do anything (light in empty space would only travel 0.6 meters in such interval). Srsly, if you want to make a point, at least don't make such a obvious mistake. Though reaction time argument in close quarters is still valid I guess (reaction delay is just not 2 fucking nanoseconds).

    Avatar of Sorrior
    Comment by Sorrior
    09:14 14/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Well i was gonna say .2 seconds but meh i'm bad with such things. Damn local school district kicked me outa normal classes at 6th grade cause i got into a fair number of fights.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:13 13/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    In the past, they don't bother with aiming and just fire volleys, since those guns have pathetic accuracy. And the riflemen have about a 25% chance of hitting anything. Massed fire increases the chances.

    Personally, why not a gun AND a sword? Shoot enemies that come at you until they get within melee range, then proceed to hack and slash, using the gun as a means to counterattack with a nice bullet in the belly after a block.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:19 13/11/2010 # ! Drivel (-1.0)

    Japanese need to compensate for their short dicks with a sword...

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:55 24/11/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    As if guns aren't used for the same thing. @Anon 9:19

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:29 13/11/2010 # ! Drivel (-1.0)

    and chinese with big egos.

    Post Comment »


Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments