Poll: Do you care about realism??
- Thread starter Drazeric
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Couldn't have said it better myself. Mind you Op Flash is the ONLY die hard realistic game I like, and I'm not sure why. I think it might be the no-nonsense believable campaigns, with zero patriotism, corridorism, contrived set pieces etc.Liberaliter said:
Usually I lean way more towards the Timesplitters end of the spectrum though. I just like my games with extra fun
The thing is, the more they claim it as "realistic", the more unrealistic it tends to be. (see: EVERY modern war-based game). So if you are going for realistic, try not to make "realistic" you big selling point, or the silly things will just keep standing out (REGENERATING HEALTH!!!).
OT: Realism has a niche appeal to me. I loved BC2. But I don't buy shooters because they're realistic. I buy them because I think they'll be FUN. It can add tension when they actually TRY to be realistic, but most of the time, they just put in real guns, put it in a modern setting and slap the word "realistic" on it.
I like realism when it's done right, but that's hard to do. Hence why I prefer stylized or fantasy setting x1000 more. It can make it's own world instead of trying to be this one. And that always tends to make for more interesting games.
OT: Realism has a niche appeal to me. I loved BC2. But I don't buy shooters because they're realistic. I buy them because I think they'll be FUN. It can add tension when they actually TRY to be realistic, but most of the time, they just put in real guns, put it in a modern setting and slap the word "realistic" on it.
I like realism when it's done right, but that's hard to do. Hence why I prefer stylized or fantasy setting x1000 more. It can make it's own world instead of trying to be this one. And that always tends to make for more interesting games.
In some games. And even then, so long as it doesn't get in the way of fun. For instance, I like CoD because it's an over-the-top war movie turned into a game, so I don't feel it needs to be super realistic . However, I'd rather, whilst playing a Rainbow Six game for it to be hyper realistic because that's what the game is.
As far as gameplay goes, realism isn't necessary. Hence the reason I hated GTA4 is because the physics were TOO real and took away from the game's hilarious nature (Saints Row 2 did it better).
Now, as far as world design goes. I can deal with uber-fantastic settings as long as they have a hint of realism to them. Read: It has to be semi-believable (not counting magic or the Force or things like that). But thats me.
Now, as far as world design goes. I can deal with uber-fantastic settings as long as they have a hint of realism to them. Read: It has to be semi-believable (not counting magic or the Force or things like that). But thats me.
Well now days reaslism tends to mean murky shades of brown textures that look overly depressing. Cant wait for the day we dump that crap and get a bit more colour in our games. Particularly shooters. One reason of many why I prefer Saints Row 2 over GTA IV. No im not trying to spark another SR2/GTA4 debate. I really do see a differance in the settings.
It really depends on the game. I love to play Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood at Realistic difficulty (no saves, no crosshair, no nametags hovering over squad members and you die from one well placed bullet, two if you're lucky!). REALISM IS BRILLIANT! =D
Then there's games like InFamous and Valkyria Chronicles. Realism? DO NOT WANT.
It really depends on the game.
Then there's games like InFamous and Valkyria Chronicles. Realism? DO NOT WANT.
It really depends on the game.
If it's labeled as a realistic shooter, then yes, it HAS to be realistic (I'm looking at YOU Modern Shitfare series)
I also love totally over the top games.
I also love totally over the top games.
Depends on the game. I generally only expect realism if I'm going to play a game like ArmA or a flight sim.
If they are going for realism, then it has to be done good, if not, meh. Games like Quake, Doom, Duke Nukem, Final Fantasy, Borderlands, and many more can do with completely unrealistic stuff. But Medal of Honor and Call of Duty need to at least try to be realistic. Crysis is a good example of bad realism. When coming out of cloaking the enemies around don't notice me right away, even if I'm right in front of them (good). Boats and helicopters, on the other hand, can seem to pick me out instantly, even when I'm in cloaking (bad).
Realism is an art form just as viable as abstraction or parody, so to say that you do or do not care is entirely a matter of choice, this thread might as well be "Post-Rococo Abstraction, what do you think?"
I hate it when games try to be realistic. However, I love games that feel visceral. Hence I stay away from JRPGs. Jumping into the air, flipping, and swinging a glowy sword a thousand times just to see your opponent move back an inch and grunt slightly is boring to me. For example, I liked Assassin's Creed combat where you really got the feeling of impaling an enemy on your sword. It made your blows, however small, feel significant.
But yeah, shit-brown games with "oh, look, bland cover-based combat without health bars! The joy" as their tagline really put me off.
But yeah, shit-brown games with "oh, look, bland cover-based combat without health bars! The joy" as their tagline really put me off.
