Unpopular opinion: not every shooter needs head shots

[Eggy the Merry]

Only a juggernaut like a Space Marine would shrug off shells to the face. I think your preference for arcade shooters is what matters. Rainbow Six sudden death styled games are very very appealing to people but it's not for everyone.

[fenrif]

I think if your game is in any way attempting to portray reality then yes, headshots should do instant kills if not massive damage. If you are shooting a regular old human a headshot should ruin his fun in the most immediate and catastrophic manner. If you're shooting a 10 foot tall space mutant then you have some wiggle room. But if you are shooting him with a railgun that you just used to take down a tank, then you'lve got some serious explaining to do as to why it isn't doing the same damage to his face as it did to an armoured vehicle.

That being said, the reason headshots are so annoying in modern games is because developers don't want to make any other aspect of gunplay that realistic. As you said, you can have a bullet in each elbow and use your gun perfectly. You can have someone unload a pistol into your foot and still sprint and climb ladders. Autoaim is just a crutch for people playing with controllers, and needs some very careful consideration before being just dumped into an online mode unceremoniously. For example, if you're using autoaim the weapons should not be hitscan, and the bullets trajectory should matter. Falloff at range for example, should stop people being headshotted with pistols from long range.

I think we should push games forward, not backwards. Removing headshots from games were it is appropriate is a step backwards. Instead we should ask devs to work on their gunplay a bit more and the graphics a bit less. Maybe hire less Hollywood voice actors and just get a student actor from the local university. Perhaps don't spend 20 million on advertising and instead put that 20 million into the weapon physics.