At what point does realism in gaming get boring?

[pulse2]

I love games, but theres a thin line between realism I find makes the game more immersive and realism that makes the game boring.

Take GTA4 as a popular example, it was fun, don't get me wrong, but at times, I couldn't help but feel it was treading along that 'too realistic' line at times and forgetting what made the game popular to begin with, sheer chaos and humour.

For other games, it seems that sticking in a zombie mode is there way of taking away the realism issue.

So, at what point is realistic 'too realistic' for you?

Eg: I can't stand simulators, they bore me to tears, I don't want to think about how to get the plane flying, I just want to press one button and it flies.

 

[Physics Engine]

Realism in games will never get boring as long as developers also keep making games that are unrealistic.

I love simulators specifically for the reason you gave to dislike them. But I can also pop in a game like Final Fantasy or Mario if I want something more whimsical. It's all about the mood I'm in at the time.

In the case of GTA the game has gone from a whimsical sandbox to a gritty, more realistic one. It's not worse, it's simply different. If I want a realistic sandbox I'll play GTAIV, if I want one that doesn't take itself seriously I'll play Saints Row. Same goes with any game really; Forza/GT vs. NfS/Burnout or Halo/Killzone vs. CoD/BF:BC2. As long as developers keep catering to both playstyles and moods it works for everyone.

So, uh, never.

 

[radioactive lemur]

If you get shot in COD and the screen goes dark and you can't turn it back on ever, that's too realistic. Or even better, if you get shot in the leg or something and get dicked around by veteran affairs filling out paperwork and shit for months before they give you the treatment you need and you can return to duty. Or having to do 5000 push ups in basic training before they let you touch a gun. There are a ton of ways games can be too realistic.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

I love games, but theres a thin line between realism I find makes the game more immersive and realism that makes the game boring.

Take GTA4 as a popular example, it was fun, don't get me wrong, but at times, I couldn't help but feel it was treading along that 'too realistic' line at times and forgetting what made the game popular to begin with, sheer chaos and humour.

For other games, it seems that sticking in a zombie mode is there way of taking away the realism issue.

So, at what point is realistic 'too realistic' for you?

Eg: I can't stand simulators, they bore me to tears, I don't want to think about how to get the plane flying, I just want to press one button and it flies.

Well sims are not bad it really comes down to mechanics and what I call the gameplay narrative.

Lets take 4 examples DOOM 1-2 and DOOM 3, Quake 2 and Quake 4.

DOOM 1-2 the mechanics are see it shoot it and hope you don't run out of ammo, you get to carry all your weapons and ammo. Damages and what not are balanced somewhat but what makes the game is you are tested against each level each maze before you not only do you have to find a way out but you are given the extra benefit of hind sight to see if you collected everything and explored everywhere. Now one could claim it filler because they had little else they could do mechanics but I say its polish adding to the over all qaulity of the title.

Now we move to DOOM 3 were its foundation is not the labyrinth to test you but small and fast paced encounters in cramped settings, one can call this a modern way of doing a shooter its realistic(yet unimaginative) and keeps you moving(speeding you closer and closer to premature erectile dysfunction IE game over is that it WHAT!!WHAT!!!? wheres multiplayer... WTF is this sht?!?! Q3 demo is better than this!!!!). Now we have a realistic setting with a more modern "upbeat" or demanding(and lacking) pace. This plus Carmack's attempts at "cinergy" leave you shooting in the dark in annoyingly small ad unimaginative places with overtly realistic themed weapons(but for the lights and night vision and such which would have ruined babies cenimatic masterpiece.....*PUKE*).

ahem...

Moving on to the next set of examples Quake 2 had a hub'd labyrinth system, similar to Wolfenstein (08) but once you can not cross hubs most of the time. Anyway semi open levels, an item belt you can use with tiems you found laying around, cartoonish but dark weapons leaning to realistic but having their own artistic merit as functional art (ok prob leaning a bit more to quake 1 with that statement). The AI was ok for the time perhaps Unreal was a bit better but both were good solid fun games that did not conform to the norms of the corridor shooter.

And then Raven made Quake 4 and I lost all faith in them, a typical corridor shooter, using modern realistic themes to drive home the hopelessness in trying to jump over blossoming knee high walls.. as cover systems have not been in heavy use by that time, and whats even more sad is they hint at the fabo0lous level designs they could have done and hinted at what they could have done with his Strogg form...but it never leaves the safe well worn and soiled in 4 colors blanket of mendacity, sure you get upgrades to the weapons every few levels and that was nice but it didn't help, it could not have a strong alt fire for each weapon type of mechanic because that is to fantastical for today placid and boring shooters.... wait...wait I am raging......... let me stop and move on

.. God I fail at grammar what I am trying to get across is that when you use the er... real world realism that films often use it more often than not just fails when it is applied to gaming, that with a snobish level of this is what I think is a great balancing mechanic(not allowing you to pick up more ammo than X/Y or Z or not allowing you to carry more than 1 type of the same weaopn when you are cluster fcked with silly weaopn/ammo,ect restrictions).

We need more options we need more features being adopted and standardized.

Something as simple as a slider that re balances what you can carry ammo wise, or just turn the balance option off(and thus achievements gained while in "imbalanced" mode) not to mention basic sliders for AI sensitivity, how much damage you do to AI head, normal damage done to AI, damage done to you. AI/player speed/jump height.

These things would help make dreary SP or CO OP games alot better and can be used as a measuring stick as to what modes will be adopted into MP as well(IE they see it dose well its blaanced enough and people like it thus they make it a MP).


PS: Ah gaming the more you move forward the more I see you falling back....
/rant

 

[hermes]

At the point where game conventions don't work because everything has been replaced by how it works in real life.

For example: one hit kills being likely, character getting tired from physical activity, damage for running into a wall, no HUD or indication of status at all, or a character not being able to jump over 3 feet.

 

[MR T3D]

Depends on the player.
Some prefer a more realistic game, as the simulator genre shows, however most people playing games don't want depth/realism.
So long as you can reset without massive penalty, respawn, and/or rounds aren't that long.
Fucking love complexity to operating the game, Playing some Space sim: dogfighting while swapping recharge rates for guns and engine, shunting power around from sheilds to engines, dodging missiles, esentially one hand on the filghtstick, the other dancing on the keyboard, THEN dealing with having several thrusters knocked out and trying to TRB, fucking awesome.

Also, GTA4 was by far the best game rockstar's made, finally a 'mature' GTA which appealed to a mature gamer such as myself.

 

[Sronpop]

Gta is the notable game where realism ruined the game a bit. Thank the gods of metal they got it right for Red Dead Redemption. That was Rockstars redemption along with John Marstons.

 

[Private Custard]

I love simulators specifically for the reason you gave to dislike them.

I'm the same, I love to tinker. Getting FSX to run right and look amazing has been a real trial.......and it's still going!

I got bored of the lack of realism on consoles, so my unrepaired RROD 360 is still sat under my telly a year later!

EDIT: And due to more complaints of realism ruining GTA IV, I have to say this.

It wasn't realism that killed GTA IV, it was the removal of all the fun bits of GTA combined with cars that handled like bags of shit that killed GTA IV. It wasn't realistic, just crap.

 

[pulse2]

When I say simulators, I'm specifically talking about Ship Simulator, Flight Simulator, etc.

I'm a fanboy of cars, so I enjoy GT and Forza tinkering. Thats not to say I find sims bad, I don't mind them at all, but I get frustrated easily, and anything that isn't something I can get into, laugh about and enjoy playing for ages, I get bored with.

Strange that, because I happen to love a variety of RTS games.


There is some degree of realism I would like, for example, bodily damage, if I shot someone's leg, I'd expect them to limp, as if I shot the arm they were using to shoot, they would have to revert to using the other arm. That would be a satisfying shooter for me, it would make me want to take time and torture other gamers online as they drag themselves across the floor or even the AI as opposed to going for insta-kill in the form of head shots.

I also like a degree of realism in racers, I tend to prefer racing games where I can see physical damage to the car. I don't know why that's become a purchase factor for me now, but for some reason it has.

I also expect the likes of Tekken to start using more WWE-like realism, with fatigue and such.

While I say all this, I'd also prefer that none of these necessarily hinder the gaming aspect and make them so realistic that the games are no longer fun.

 

[Xabekrn]

I feel that the point that realism gets boring is when you have to do things you are forced to do everyday. For example, using the toilet. This should never be in a game for more than maybe a toilet humor opportunity, because I dispose of waste every few hours or so I don't want to quit murdering crack heads and prostitutes with a .9mm to take a leak. Eating food/water is alright in some aspects like Fallout, were eating would become a difficult task because there isn't a lot of it. Doing laundry would be god awful lol as well as mowing the lawn, pretty much everything you can do in the Sims. Rather than playing the Sims why don't go just go to school, graduate, get a job, get a house, buy a dog, get married, and live out a normal human life?? Your paying money to virtually do things that suck to do in real life lol. I want to drive my car in a police cruiser and flamethrower a bum in his sleep( lol jk I'm not that messed up), so I pay for a game that I can do that in.

 

[Auron225]

For me, Monster Hunter was too realistic to be fun. And I know that may be an odd choice but I dont mean the concept - obviously that is highly unrealistic! But the mechanics... You cant run for very long at all without getting really tired, killing things can be frigging awkward and jumping is almost not an option at all. Climbing up ledges isnt unrealistically graceful either - its realistically awkward and tedious to watch - I felt more sorry for my character making him climb a huge wall filled with ledges than I did making him fight Wyverns! o.o

Never finished the thing, I think I only got about 15-20% through it. I KNOW I wouldve gotten further if the character was more nimble!

 

[Duffeknol]

Mafia II was pushing it. Everyone knows mobsters do more than barge into warehouses and empty tommyguns all day, but making us drive around the city and selling contraband cigarettes because we're out of money? Argh.

 

[shadyh8er]

When it reflects the slow pace of real life.

 

[wammnebu]

realism will be boring
when you encounter what you were escaping in the real world

 

[TheHecatomb]

As soon as the game makes you do stuff that you were initially trying to get away from.

 

[subject_87]

Realism in games will never get boring as long as developers also keep making games that are unrealistic.

I love simulators specifically for the reason you gave to dislike them. But I can also pop in a game like Final Fantasy or Mario if I want something more whimsical. It's all about the mood I'm in at the time.

In the case of GTA the game has gone from a whimsical sandbox to a gritty, more realistic one. It's not worse, it's simply different. If I want a realistic sandbox I'll play GTAIV, if I want one that doesn't take itself seriously I'll play Saints Row. Same goes with any game really; Forza/GT vs. NfS/Burnout or Halo/Killzone vs. CoD/BF:BC2. As long as developers keep catering to both playstyles and moods it works for everyone.

So, uh, never.

Good answer: sometimes I'll be in the mood for a strategy game that's fairly detached, like Age of Mythology (Really good game, btw); other times, I'll want the depth of Civilization.