I've got no real problem with realism, but only as it doesn't get in the way of fun in a game. For me Fun will always be a higher priority then realism or graphics.
realism, whats the bloody point
- Thread starter micky
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I've actually had this discussion several times, and the main argument that people come up with is "Immersion", but to be fair, many games that attempt to be "realistic" don't actually have much of an aspect with relation to immersion for me. Alan Wake has to be, up until now, my personal preference when it comes to immersion because it's just so well made. It's not horribly realistic either, as I'm sure anyone who has played will agree.
In any case, I don't really count realism as one of my preferences in games. I neither like nor dislike games that are realistic. There are various other aspects that I prefer to look at such as:
- Gameplay
- Fun
- The prequels(Frankly, if a sequel is worse than its predecessor, it's failed, horribly, in my opinion)
In any case, I don't really count realism as one of my preferences in games. I neither like nor dislike games that are realistic. There are various other aspects that I prefer to look at such as:
- Gameplay
- Fun
- The prequels(Frankly, if a sequel is worse than its predecessor, it's failed, horribly, in my opinion)
Hey look, another one of these threads.
In an unrealistic game you usually win by being able to exploit something the best (ie in Halo the winner is usually whoever whores the power weapons or in MW2 its whoever gets the killstreaks first.)
In a realistic game you usually win (or SHOULD win, seeing as how no realistic game can ever be 100% exploit free) by being able to outthink and outmaneuver the opponent. Thus you get the satisfaction of not only killing the enemy, but doing it faster and more effeciently.
That said, I'm impartial towards the degree of realism. I'm more concerned with the game actually requiring skill than it having perfect bullet drop, barrel heat and humidity mechanics.
In an unrealistic game you usually win by being able to exploit something the best (ie in Halo the winner is usually whoever whores the power weapons or in MW2 its whoever gets the killstreaks first.)
In a realistic game you usually win (or SHOULD win, seeing as how no realistic game can ever be 100% exploit free) by being able to outthink and outmaneuver the opponent. Thus you get the satisfaction of not only killing the enemy, but doing it faster and more effeciently.
That said, I'm impartial towards the degree of realism. I'm more concerned with the game actually requiring skill than it having perfect bullet drop, barrel heat and humidity mechanics.
I like realism, like you say gaming is often about escapism, and playing a game that's (relatively) realistic for me makes it easier to suspend my disbelief and thus become more immersed.
First of all, welcome to the Escapist!Joe Casson said:
And second of all, I'm not saying Mario games are any worse than the more realistic games, it's just a different approach to fun. Realistic games aim to please in a different way.
But I have to agree with you that I'm getting pretty tired of seeing the same sort of 'gritty', realistic games over and over again.
I agree, I don't think realism equates immersion by a long-shot.micky said:
Making games realistic puts less stress on the developers to be creative
... why think up some new and interesting premise when you can just make another WW2 game?
such lazybonesDeadlyFred said:I agree, I don't think realism equates immersion by a long-shot.micky said:
Making games realistic puts less stress on the developers to be creative
I believe that "Realistic" games are just a fad right now. People are still testing the boundaries of the still-some-what-new hardware we have. We want to see just how real we can make something look and feel.
Its just technology. It allows things to look and act like it would in the real world. You've got to remember that we didn't have that kind of thing until recently. Even up to the PS2/Xbox, we could only go so far.
Eventually, it'll pass, and we can get back to wacky games that are more fun than a test to what we can do.
Then new technology will arise, prompting us to push the reality test even further.
Its just technology. It allows things to look and act like it would in the real world. You've got to remember that we didn't have that kind of thing until recently. Even up to the PS2/Xbox, we could only go so far.
Eventually, it'll pass, and we can get back to wacky games that are more fun than a test to what we can do.
Then new technology will arise, prompting us to push the reality test even further.
I buy, play and enjoy both, so I'm not too bothered. Playing something intense as SWAT 4 is just as fun as messing around on Halo 3 with some friends.
You know, realism is a term that gets tossed around a lot and most people who use it mean "realistic" as in the real world but the term realism as applied by a literary definition (and has been used to define the rules of fantasy and sci-fi for more than fifty years now) is simply this: that the world you have created continues to play out by the laws of reality that you the creator have set out for it. So long as you do not break the rules (that the writers themselves have established)the game, novel, movie, whatever remains "realistic". This is what allows for the suspension of disbelief. It's a contract that the creator makes with their reader, player, viewer, etc.
That said, why does there seem to be a push for games to be more like the real world? One could say the advancement of technology. That has been the forward push of gaming for the last decade, better graphics engines that realistically simulate real world environments. Another could deconstruct the backlash since the 90s against 50s style optimism and the lighter story-telling style of 60s, 70s, and 80s in favor of more "adult" themes. You know, trading in the hero for the anti-hero, etc. It's probably a compilation of things.
That said, why does there seem to be a push for games to be more like the real world? One could say the advancement of technology. That has been the forward push of gaming for the last decade, better graphics engines that realistically simulate real world environments. Another could deconstruct the backlash since the 90s against 50s style optimism and the lighter story-telling style of 60s, 70s, and 80s in favor of more "adult" themes. You know, trading in the hero for the anti-hero, etc. It's probably a compilation of things.
