realism, whats the bloody point

[RadicalDreamer90]

Fantasy and the Abstract is based on realism, however when people delve to far from what actually exist, the story becomes unreletable and immersion is automatically broken. As important as suspension of disbelief is to most mediums like games and movies; how much they can actually get away with is limited. People like games that are more realistic because there closer to what they understand and it doesn't contradict what they know and what their use too. However, the more fantasy elements added, the more reletable the situation has to be in order to force the reader to overlook things that don't naturally exist within their understanding.

In short, the contrast of realism makes fantasy more wondrous.

Side Note: I've seen multiple comments stating that realism doesn't equate to immersion because it limits creativity, but the most creative minds were the ones that could create something wondrous without becoming to far fetched.

Example A: Flying. Flying itself is not possible for humans. We have proven scientifically and logically the flight is impossible, but yet and still creative minds wanted humans to be able to experience flight even if it wasn't possible. Thus, planes, and other inventions for flight were created. What made their invention creative, wasn't the fact that they did what they felt was impossible, but the fact that even with an impossibility, they found a way garner the same result. They went around what they found was implausible, and Humans experienced flight, without being to physically do it.

The same applies to games and movies. Yes, normal humans can't fly, but if a human weren't normal...maybe he'd be able to do it right? Thus ideas like superman and other heroes came to fruition. People took what they knew was impossible, and applied their creative thought process to make it possible. That's creativity.

You'll also notice that under the conditions of the impossibility, they didn't go against what they knew. We know that humans can't physically fly, so why go against truth. Why make a movie or a game, about someone who just starts flying one day randomly? That's not creativity dude, thats unrealistic. Under a certain circumstance that he grows wings or something else happens and he learns to fly is the creative approach people took to that problem. If under normal human circumstances, this feat is impossible, then we'll create a circumstance where it IS possible.

Creativity is what makes fantasy immersive, but fantasy and creativity are based on the laws that govern reality. It's only when you mess with those laws and truths that one is able create an experience around it.

 

[micky]

Fantasy and the Abstract is based on realism, however when people delve to far from what actually exist, the story becomes unreletable and immersion is automatically broken. As important as suspension of disbelief is to most mediums like games and movies; how much they can actually get away with is limited. People like games that are more realistic because there closer to what they understand and it doesn't contradict what they know and what their use too. However, the more fantasy elements added, the more reletable the situation has to be in order to force the reader to overlook things that don't naturally exist within their understanding.

In short, the contrast of realism makes fantasy more wondrous.

Side Note: I've seen multiple comments stating that realism doesn't equate to immersion because it limits creativity, but the most creative minds were the ones that could create something wondrous without becoming to far fetched.

Example A: Flying. Flying itself is not possible for humans. We have proven scientifically and logically the flight is impossible, but yet and still creative minds wanted humans to be able to experience flight even if it wasn't possible. Thus, planes, and other inventions for flight were created. What made their invention creative, wasn't the fact that they did what they felt was impossible, but the fact that even with an impossibility, they found a way garner the same result. They went around what they found was implausible, and Humans experienced flight, without being to physically do it.

The same applies to games and movies. Yes, normal humans can't fly, but if a human weren't normal...maybe he'd be able to do it right? Thus ideas like superman and other heroes came to fruition. People took what they knew was impossible, and applied their creative thought process to make it possible. That's creativity.

You'll also notice that under the conditions of the impossibility, they didn't go against what they knew. We know that humans can't physically fly, so why go against truth. Why make a movie or a game, about someone who just starts flying one day randomly? That's not creativity dude, thats unrealistic. Under a certain circumstance that he grows wings or something else happens and he learns to fly is the creative approach people took to that problem. If under normal human circumstances, this feat is impossible, then we'll create a circumstance where it IS possible.

Creativity is what makes fantasy immersive, but fantasy and creativity are based on the laws that govern reality. It's only when you mess with those laws and truths that one is able create an experience around it.

you make a REALLY excellent point there, and its very true

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I think alot of developers have the logic of realism = immersion.

Take STALKER ... Hey, most guns are pretty inaccurate so lets put that in ... and guns get damaged pretty easy with excessive use, so lets add that in too, oh and the more the are damaged and used = the growing likelihood of jamming. Oh, don't forget that you can't take a grenade without dying, so if you're close to a grenade it's pretty much death.

STALKER games are awesome ... don't gert me wrong ,.... but do you know how irritating it is to actually have a lull in a firefight, where you can actually lean out of cover to take a shot, and have it jam!?

It's one of those games that makes you scream curses at your computer ... especially given that you can only take a couple of bullets before dying.

But when all is said and done ... it's irritating ... but in a good way.

EVERY firefight I knew I was getting into (like a military patrol heading my way with no other choice but to hide somewhere and ambush them to survive) I approached with a million fears.

And the thought of "I have 30 bullets in my AN-94 ... It's yellow-bared ... and there's three of them ...." keeps you on your toes and the edge of your seat. Or the knowledge that there are bloodsuckers hiding in a crypt and all you have is a pathetic pistol? It's enough to have you chewing your nails in anticipation.

The game is scary, no matter what the opponent ... because you are a squishy human. Not War incarnate. Just a weak, insecure, pathetic human ... and you're about to have a very BAD day.

Sometimes realism is a blessing, like in the STALKER franchise, and sometimes all it does is irritate you for the sake of irritating you.

 

[mega48man]

yes, the realism in games like splinter cell conviction, heavy rain, and Modern warfare 2 .....and halo...one....can be troublesum, but look at it this way:
you're going on a vicarious adventure of action and exitement, drama and mystery, doing the impossible like daring a sprint across the realistic road trying avoid gun fire from enemy troops. it's a real experience doing the unreal. yeaaaaaaah, finding a gun in a militarized anywhere near your house is gonna be hard.

 

[AdamRBi]

When developing a game there are two things to consider when you want to draw you audience in and immerse them in to your world. The first way to do this is compelling storytelling and/or characters. The more believable your characters act, the more they seem like real people regardless of how they're portrayed (real or stylized). The second way is to have objects and visuals look and act realistically. Even if they're Sci-fi/Fantasy settings ether one of these options work great for bringing the player in to the world.

There are realistic games that pull off both incredibly and are fantastic because of it. On the flip side there are games that don't pull off the great characters/stories, so in order to immerse you in to the war they have to keep upping the realism.

That's why A. War games and games involving war are usually realistic. They focus more on conflict/gameplay then story or characters, so to bring the players in they use realism.

As for why a lot of people like it, you got to chock it up to personal preference. I have no trouble immersing myself in even the cartooniest of games so long as it has solid characters and likeable landscapes. For others they might be more in to realism, some might not even care so much for the characters and just focus on how the game plays. For that realism does a slightly better job bringing them in, especially if they don't care for stylized graphics.

 

[Sunstrike]

Escapism works best when you find yourself immersed in the world believe everything that is paraded infront of you instantly. Every time you see something in a game that makes you go "huh, that's impossible" you become less immersed in the experience, and thus have less fun.

Game developers use realism to fulfill the players expectations and increase immersion and atmosphere.

As with most things in life however, taken to extremes it can do more harm than good. If a game is almost perfectly realistic in every way than the one or two remaining impossible sequences/ideas stick out all the more and become exponentially more of a problem.

Also, as you said games are about having fun, and realism isn't always fun, and can annoy the player causing more damage than the good that comes from increased immersion.

 

[micky]

I think alot of developers have the logic of realism = immersion.

Take STALKER ... Hey, most guns are pretty inaccurate so lets put that in ... and guns get damaged pretty easy with excessive use, so lets add that in too, oh and the more the are damaged and used = the growing likelihood of jamming. Oh, don't forget that you can't take a grenade without dying, so if you're close to a grenade it's pretty much death.

STALKER games are awesome ... don't gert me wrong ,.... but do you know how irritating it is to actually have a lull in a firefight, where you can actually lean out of cover to take a shot, and have it jam!?

It's one of those games that makes you scream curses at your computer ... especially given that you can only take a couple of bullets before dying.

But when all is said and done ... it's irritating ... but in a good way.

EVERY firefight I knew I was getting into (like a military patrol heading my way with no other choice but to hide somewhere and ambush them to survive) I approached with a million fears.


And the thought of "I have 30 bullets in my AN-94 ... It's yellow-bared ... and there's three of them ...." keeps you on your toes and the edge of your seat. Or the knowledge that there are bloodsuckers hiding in a crypt and all you have is a pathetic pistol? It's enough to have you chewing your nails in anticipation.

The game is scary, no matter what the opponent ... because you are a squishy human. Not War incarnate. Just a weak, insecure, pathetic human ... and you're about to have a very BAD day.

Sometimes realism is a blessing, like in the STALKER franchise, and sometimes all it does is irritate you for the sake of irritating you.

i dont mind hard games and i love stalker you get to shoot mutants globs of once people that is very fun

 

[Kurokami]

i dont get why people love realistic games. i play games to escape real life not be reminded of it, for example jamming guns like in far cry 2 is a horrible and aggravating idea, and why does the color grey suddenly become a realistic color? am i just blind or missing the point, you tell me

Gaming is to displace you, its not to escape life, its to escape YOUR life, atleast that's how I feel. Realism is to make that escape seem all the more convincing I guess. sometimes they overshoot the idea and miss fun for realism, for example the jump between GTA:SA and GTA4. Some I'm sure might find it more fun because of some of the features, drink driving was fun. (IRL, no)

 

[micky]

i dont get why people love realistic games. i play games to escape real life not be reminded of it, for example jamming guns like in far cry 2 is a horrible and aggravating idea, and why does the color grey suddenly become a realistic color? am i just blind or missing the point, you tell me

Gaming is to displace you, its not to escape life, its to escape YOUR life, atleast that's how I feel. Realism is to make that escape seem all the more convincing I guess. sometimes they overshoot the idea and miss fun for realism, for example the jump between GTA:SA and GTA4. Some I'm sure might find it more fun because of some of the features, drink driving was fun. (IRL, no)

GTA4 is the biggest example of a series were realism ruined it, sometimes i dont mind realism if its in the right place i 3rd person sandbox game is not were it should be.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

i dont mind hard games and i love stalker you get to shoot mutants globs of once people that is very fun

Snorks freak me out.

Not so bad in the distance with sniper rifle. Butr I hate it when you're running along ... you hear that unmistakable 'grunt' and then BAM! Leap attack ... Change of underwear ensuing

Bloodsuckers too ... the whole 'Predator-like' invisibility thing is freaky ... especially in the dark.

Love the SPAS shotty with solid slugs when underground. The Shotgun is a Stalker's ultimate friend, lover and family ... cos it's the only gun that's half reliable.

 

[JWW]

Perhaps it's to create tension. It generally isn't too bad, so long as you inform the player that they are low on health in some way other than COVERING THE SCREEN IN BLOOD!

 

[micky]

i dont mind hard games and i love stalker you get to shoot mutants globs of once people that is very fun

Snorks freak me out.

Not so bad in the distance with sniper rifle. Butr I hate it when you're running along ... you hear that unmistakable 'grunt' and then BAM! Leap attack ... Change of underwear ensuing

Bloodsuckers too ... the whole 'Predator-like' invisibility thing is freaky ... especially in the dark.

Love the SPAS shotty with solid slugs when underground.

play it at night with all the lights of and sound high, now THERES some immersion i like

 

[micky]

Perhaps it's to create tension. It generally isn't too bad, so long as you inform the player that they are low on health in some way other than COVERING THE SCREEN IN BLOOD!

or jello if you mw2

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Perhaps it's to create tension. It generally isn't too bad, so long as you inform the player that they are low on health in some way other than COVERING THE SCREEN IN BLOOD!

I hate regenerating health too ... go back to health bars. They made the game scarier and less about "One dude ... who cares if I get hit? I'll kill him and just regen" ...

But The one thing I like about regenerating health is it tends to speed up gameplay ... rather than waiting for the perfect shot in singleplayer to save your medkits ... you're more likely to charge opponents, kill them, take cover, run and gun, take cover, add nauseum.

A game with medkits is like ... "I could charge .... but I'll just sit here for freaking DAYS because I don't know what's up ahead."

I guess it's more of a 'level design' thing. A game with medkits has to create purpose in making the player move whether they like it or not, whereas a game with regenerating health is like;

"It's cool if you don't want to move, but stop being a wimp ... action is over there, get to it! A sniper's bullet hurts but you can always hide like a wuss and get straight back into it!"

 

[8-Bit Grin]

I enjoyed GTAIV's car chase's much more with the added realism and physics.

Trying to turn a heavy car and flipping over and over until you finally bounce back onto your wheels is an extremely cool experience. I often felt like I was the stuntman in a movie since alot of the action revolved so heavily around the Euphoria engine. The sound effects were extremely intense and added to the experience as well, really bringing the whole scene together nicely.

When I tried playing San Andreas again, it just wasn't the same.

Sure, it was still fun. But I didn't feel that supreme awe that came with playing a high-end next-gen graphics fest that I did with the next-gen version. When I was chased, the physics felt...wrong. The crashes lacked that *oomph* that came with the smashes and dents and physics induced rolls. Bullets didn't crack my windshield, making me feel like my car was impervious to visceral damage. When I shot a man in the leg, he kept running until I shot him down. With his body riddled through with holes, he lay in the same position as every other poor schmuck that crossed my path. It didn't feel like I'd done anything interesting; Like crouching at the top of a flight of stairs already littered with bodies in different positions, waiting for the next person to push down to their death in a new sprawl.

I agree that sometimes realism isn't meant for a game.

I don't agree when it means I don't get the full experience I could *with* some realism.

 

[micky]

I don't mind realism in games as long as they don't add bullshit that is there for the sole purpose of being annoying.

For example, the tollbooths in GTA4. Why? Just what the heck were they thinking when they added that?

Also, the traffic in Midnight Club : LA. Really? You give me a nitrous system that makes me go at Mach 3, and then you block ALL the lanes on a highway with the goddamn traffic?

your avatar sums this up quite well

 

[TerranReaper]

Well, you still need some extent of realism. There is only so much that I'm willing suspend my disbelief for, such as lunging 10 feet forward while being shot to knife a guy.

 

[AWDMANOUT]

It's an attempt to match what cannot be matched. A goal that we keep striving in excellence towards, yet currently unable to achieve. It keeps us fresh, inspired, and invigorated.

that sounds like a description on a Gatorade bottle

lol at how he turned that *seriousness* into something comical.

 

[LethalGT]

If there was no goals to strive toward in gaming or progression in anything really, what's the point in doing anything at all?