How far can suspension of disbelief go before players start going "this is just (beep)ing ridiculous

[XJ-0461]

Personally, until one of the established in-universe rules is broken repeatedly, or multiple rules broken.

Say, for example, that in the game people have an innitiate magic ability of flight. Groovy, I can dig that.

But then, to be faced with a loss or though choice that could have been resolved/sidestepped for the better by flying, but for an unexplained reason being unable to, I can't take. Because it has already been established that people can fly. Likewise, if you establish that dead people can be resurrected, there ought to be no dead party member that you can't resurrect without adequate reason.

My suspension of disbelief is pretty great when it comes down to the rules beneath a realm. Flying people, disregarding Einstein and Newton while in space, dimension hopping aliens, gods who respond to prayers etc. Doesn't matter, as long as it is consistent.

This. As long as the game (or any work of entertainment) sets up the rules/limitatons of whatever's going on and either ssticks to them or gradually expands them, then I'm pretty much cool with whatever happens.

 

[Danzaivar]

Basically once people start harping on about the power of friendship it kills any enthusiasm or suspension of disbelief I was affording it.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

I think there is a certain threshold to any suspension of disbelief.

I read the epic of Beowulf for a class, and I did stop my class to question why there was dragon that had a concept of monetary value (it guarded gold seemingly because it choose to and claimed ownership over it). Why would it want gold? What would it do with the gold?

I can buy Grendel and his mom being demons on faith, they're evil and powerful but they flesh out their backstory and explain why they do what they do. Some dumb broad in the class called me out on it saying "It's a dragon, they don't exist so what does it matter?" and I hate people that say that because that's just lazy! If you don't eventually have a line for disbelief all literature might as well be like the Transformer's franchise, mindless entertainment.

Sorry for being a nerd, but thats because Dragons are the personification of Greed and Avarice. In old folklore leading up to all modern forms of fiction, dragons are depicted as guarding fantastic hoardes of treasure just because it's THEIRS and if anyone fucks with it they DIE.

 

[Spacewolf]

Honestly, suspension of disbelief isn't all that important if whatever you're doing is fun. Sure, Just Cause 2 has you surfing on fighter jets going at five hundred miles an hour and a limitless parachute that can be used to shoot yourself into the air, but no one cares because you're having a blast doing it. Don't worry about believability as much as enjoyability.

Suspension of disbelief is the most important thing for any form of media.
Just Cause 2 wouldn't be fun if you couldn't suspend your disbelief and accept that any of those things was possible in that game world.

On-Topic: The fastest any game broke my suspension of disbelief was in the first few minutes of Bioshock. I could accept the giant underwater town, the flying turrets but NOT the giant dirty needle that the character you're playing as jammed in his arm without thinking about it.

Would you kindly

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

I can suspend it easily.

I'm not really one for "immersion", as I'm too busy thinking about stats for my character build in games, generally pulling myself out of it all the time. I'm a min/max'er at heart.

 

[theamazingbean]

It doesn't have to be plausible, just awesome.

 

[Outright Villainy]

Honestly, suspension of disbelief isn't all that important if whatever you're doing is fun. Sure, Just Cause 2 has you surfing on fighter jets going at five hundred miles an hour and a limitless parachute that can be used to shoot yourself into the air, but no one cares because you're having a blast doing it. Don't worry about believability as much as enjoyability.

Suspension of disbelief is the most important thing for any form of media.
Just Cause 2 wouldn't be fun if you couldn't suspend your disbelief and accept that any of those things was possible in that game world.

On-Topic: The fastest any game broke my suspension of disbelief was in the first few minutes of Bioshock. I could accept the giant underwater town, the flying turrets but NOT the giant dirty needle that the character you're playing as jammed in his arm without thinking about it.

Would you kindly

Actually, I love when people say stuff like that, which pretty much shows they didn't even bother finishing the game before judging the story.

'tis awesome.

 

[AyreonMaiden]

Pretty much if I'm playing a serious anime-style JRPG and I encounter one of the many RPG cliches, I lose it.

 

[Merkavar]

i think the line is some where around the earth dudes in the last airbender movie. tey control earth and are in a prison on the land. and the only reason they dont escape is cause they havent had they morale boosted by the airbender. that is just redonkulous.

apparently in the cartoon/anime series these earth benders were imprisoned in a prison out in the ocean or something. that makes sense.

you just got to make the game to fit your own level of ridiculousness and if other people dont like it just look down your nose at them and say 'you just dont understand real art' and walk away.

 

[Netrigan]

Honestly, suspension of disbelief isn't all that important if whatever you're doing is fun. Sure, Just Cause 2 has you surfing on fighter jets going at five hundred miles an hour and a limitless parachute that can be used to shoot yourself into the air, but no one cares because you're having a blast doing it. Don't worry about believability as much as enjoyability.

Suspension of disbelief is the most important thing for any form of media.
Just Cause 2 wouldn't be fun if you couldn't suspend your disbelief and accept that any of those things was possible in that game world.

On-Topic: The fastest any game broke my suspension of disbelief was in the first few minutes of Bioshock. I could accept the giant underwater town, the flying turrets but NOT the giant dirty needle that the character you're playing as jammed in his arm without thinking about it.

Would you kindly

Actually, I love when people say stuff like that, which pretty much shows they didn't even bother finishing the game before judging the story.

'tis awesome.

If it's explained afterwards, it can easily knock you out of the moment.

There was a scene in Sky Captain that did it for me. First time the plane goes underwater simply doesn't work for me. A minute or two later he says he made alterations but the damage was done. The scene made me disbelieve.

 

[drbarno]

So long as the game dosen't break any of the rules it presents itself about the how the world runs, it should be fine. It's generally those times when a character could have done something else entirely, which would be simpler than the in-game/movie/literature action, that's when I get annoyed.

 

[DustyDrB]

This thread is about Indigo Prophecy, right?

 

[TPiddy]

Here's a couple of movie examples that really got to me:

1. Freddy vs. Jason - Basic story is that as children forget about Freddy he loses his power so he sends Jason to scare them again. Major flaw? Jason is a renowned serial killer at a camp that is driving distance away from the town, and yet no one knows who he is or recognizes him when he shows up at a party.

2. Signs - Aliens, whose weakness is water, invade a planet that's 70% water?

 

[Brikson]

If its established that this is how stuff works in the world then I can go with it. It's only when something goes beyond what was established do I stop and say WTF just happened. This tends to happen to me more in sequels and prequels then originals. Such as R2D2 having rockets in his legs in the new trilogy, but never using them in the old, or like the character 180s in Mass Effect 2. I'm looking at you Tali and Shepard.

 

[Lord Legion]

Here's a couple of movie examples that really got to me:

2. Signs - Aliens, whose weakness is water, invade a planet that's 70% water?

Yeah, or the fact that they are engagine IN HAND TO HAND COMBAT humans whose blood has even more water in it.

Punching some guy would've been like splashing acid on the alien's hand.

 

[sms_117b]

Aries dying in FF7 was broken until I realised in battle you get knocked out not killed, somehow all that only knocks you out...oh well.

The end of Fallout 3 with the purifyer, just didn't make sense, and if you didn't want to turn it off yourself, boy were you given a hard time by Lyons!

So it's consistency for me that can break a game, howver stating something and not really giving ANY reason, even a lame one does it too, like Unobtainum in Avatar, what the hell makes it more than 200 times more valuble than the newest pharmasutical product that's being tested!

 

[TPiddy]

Here's a couple of movie examples that really got to me:

2. Signs - Aliens, whose weakness is water, invade a planet that's 70% water?

Yeah, or the fact that they are engagine IN HAND TO HAND COMBAT humans whose blood has even more water in it.

Punching some guy would've been like splashing acid on the alien's hand.

Yep, I'm sure there are many more examples, but that was the first and most blatant I could think of

 

[sageoftruth]

I think one very important factor is how seriously the form of media seems to take itself. In a goofy comedy, things like breaking the fourth wall are more acceptable. As a result, even if the plot suggests that the creator ran out of ideas, we'll just accept it as humor.

Another important thing is how relevant the improbable/impossible event is to the plot.
If the conflict is started through this event, the viewer may have to sit through the whole experience knowing that it could have easily been avoided (Example: In Neverending Story 2, the main character has a device that can grant wishes, and he never thinks to use it to resolve the whole plot).

If the conflict is resolved through this event, the audience will feel robbed of any reason to be impressed by the hero's accomplishment (Example: Guy gets out of financial trouble by winning the lottery). Something like this simply suggests that the creator had not idea how to solve the conflict without bending the rules of reality.

Bottom Line: As far as I know, the two important factors are how serious the media takes itself and how important the events are to the plot. Feel free to add any other variables.

 

[caselj01]

Here's a couple of movie examples that really got to me:

2. Signs - Aliens, whose weakness is water, invade a planet that's 70% water?

Yeah, or the fact that they are engagine IN HAND TO HAND COMBAT humans whose blood has even more water in it.

Punching some guy would've been like splashing acid on the alien's hand.

Yep, I'm sure there are many more examples, but that was the first and most blatant I could think of

That still leaves 30% of the planet that isnt water.

Maybe that 1 alien who actually does engage in hand to hand combat just lost his assault rifle or something? Maybe he is the squad dumbass and thats why he got left behind.

The real question for me is why dont they have any clothes? Thats like the first thing that human beings invented.