Can Reality kill a game ?

[Pyode]

For me, it's really simple. Balance.

I played the demo for one of the Battlestations Pacific and I noticed a really bad contradiction. I was flying a dive bomber and, unlike a lot of games, you had to actually "dive" to use the bomb properly. "OK" I thought, "this will take some getting used to but I can dig it." On the next part of the mission I had to use some missiles to blow up a little wooden shack. And guess what, it took 6 fucking rockets to blow up one dinky wooden shack. It made no sense. One minute I'm realistically dive bombing an island, the next minute I'm trying to blow up a structure made of magical, indestructible wood.

I don't mind realism as long as it's consistent and makes sense, and the same goes for a lack of realism.

 

[Beartrucci]

I've had more fun with ArmA II than I have with almost any other game this year, and that games almost real life it's so realistic.

This, except with Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising because I don't have a gaming PC. My favourite FPS of 2009.

OPFLASH 2 isn't quite as realistic.

Good, but not as realistic.

The US and UK armies use a version of ArmA called VBS2 to train their soldiers, because apparently it's the closest you can get to an actual firefight in video games.

Yeah ArmA II is more realistic, I would definitely try it out if I had a gaming PC. I should be seeing my friend in the next couple days though and I think he has the demo of it on his PC.

 

[e2density]

Nah, it's just a bad game IMO...the AI is glitchy, your teammates are like small children that need to be reminded of their goals every five minutes...

And checkpoints are nowhere to be found.

It's better on PC, because the editor actually gets rid of most of the problems in the game.

I've made user missions 10 times better than the best of the campaign ones.

I have the PC version. I'm playing on v1.0 though, that might be the cause of all my problems...then again, why did they release the game when it was so glitchy?

 

[SantoUno]

Sure it can, just look at Killzone 2.

It wasn't terrible, but the movement and handling of you gun...ugh.

 

[BENZOOKA]

Yes. I hated the (execution of) cell phones in GTA IV. Generally speaking reality is a good thing

 

[BlumiereBleck]

then you should try BORING OLD LIFE! The worlds video game where everything is real! except for the vampires D:

 

[Kollega]

I've had more fun with ArmA II than I have with almost any other game this year, and that games almost real life it's so realistic.

What we are talking about here is not "true" realism (simulation games), but quasi-realism (game decides it wants to be lifelike despite the ridiculousness of a setting).

So-called "realism" has no place in gaming outside of hardcore simulators designed to imitate real scenarios as perfectly as they can. Taking an existing cartoonishly-exagerrated franchise in "realistic direction" will surely ruin it. Same goes with applying "realism" not in full package, but in small doses (brown graphics, shitty weapons), or bringing it to inappropriate genre (for example, a sandbox crime game or a classic online shooter with rocket-jumping and flags to be captured).

 

[nativebelle]

Yeah, I suppose it is quite annoying. I mean I can certainly understand why they do it and why it is bloody good when it's done properly sometimes, but it seems like there's less chance for true escapism.
Sometimes you need something completely alien, not an almost lifelike version of an almost lifelike city all grey and brown and boring. I want some multicoloured flying shit. Now.