What would a game be like with annoying levels of realism and would you still play them?

[andreas3K]

After saving the galaxy, Ratchet has to pay a million bolts for destroying all the street lamps in the galaxy.

James Sunderland just shits his pants and runs away.

In Just Cause 2, you only have one parachute and you have to throw the grappling hook yourself and climb the rope.

Some fantasy RPGs become unplayable, because there's no such thing as magic.

 

[leady129]

This type of realism would have it's venue. I can't see it incorporated into a massive action title like COD, although, I believe there was an FPS which incorporated a similar type of realism. The names on the tip of my tongue. It'll probably come to me as soon as I hit post.

Operation: Flashpoint; that's the one.

I can see it being incorporated well into survival horror, where a single hit could debilitate your character for the rest of the game. Tell me those monsters wont seem a hell of a lot scarier when your limping and have a useless arm.

 

[pumuckl]

Oh, and no one would play ANY multiplayer FPS because once they die - its over.

oh really? so you dont think super competitive one life multiplay would have an appeal to some? it would be good if you were good and very very bad if you were bad


OT: all MMOs you have to take off your armour before swimming and cant carry it with you cause you will just sink to the bottom. is that hat this thread is about? adding realism to games that break gamplay and enjoyment?

try America's army, it is a super competitive one life multiplayer shooter with extreme levels of realism, but it seems to have a good fan base, i personally was never good enough at shooters to enjoy it, but realism has it's place in games, like hardcore mode in fallout new vegas.

 

[Lilitu]

Why would I want to play an ultra-realistic game? If I want realism, I go out into the real world. Eventough there are no dragons and if I shoot someone, I'm gonna get arrested...but hey, in an ultra-realistic game it would be the same.

I am even annoyed when I can't carry more than 10 potions and have a limit to items in my inventory.
In a realistiv RPG most charakters couldn't even hold their weapons because they would be way to big and you would be sent to a nuthouse for slashing jello and poor little critters.

 

[varulfic]

I'd kill for a realistic horror game. Instead of vampires, you're hunted by rapists. Instead of zombies, you get gangmembers on pcp. I don't find supernatural threats the least bit scary, because I know they don't exist, but people, man... when walking down dark streets at night, I do get a bit apprehensive.


I find this aversion to realism just infuriating, because you guys are always picking the worst examples possible. Of course a realistic Mario game would suck, who would ever question that? No, no one wants to play Boring Desk Job Simulator, and no one would ever attempt to make one so why even bother bringing it up? It lends no credence to your arguments, it just means you guys lack imagination. The realistic horror game, as mentioned, would be totally awesome. A realistic adventure game would be sweet too, then we might get some puzzles that actually makes sense.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

GTA4 already annoys the fuck out of me with it's realism, and I don't play it. Any more of that and I will go back a generation.

Also MW3 is going to have that level of realism. Just look at this report from Americas Finest News Source!

 

[Wargamer]

I think a realistic FPS would be pretty awesome. Sniping would be damn hard because you need to account for wind and gravity and stuff, suppressing fire would matter and the mere THREAT of an LMG would be enough to halt an entire squad.

Plus, think how epic Grenades would become; their blast radius would be huge (larger than the distance you can throw them, in fact) meaning that one good grenade can end a whole squad. On the other hand, it also means you have to throw them from behind cover or you die too. Plus there would be a mechanic for diving on top of a grenade, thus taking the brunt of the blast and saving your team - very heroic!

Now combine that with no radar and you've got one hell of a brutal fight.

 

[kickassfrog]

Are we talking total realism here? Every single Science Fiction game I can think of would be extremely boring without FTL drives.

Theoretically you could go really fast and let relativity take over the travel time

 

[Arctarus'sCookie]

In Brink when you're free-running and your character gets tired and you have to wait for him to get back up so he can fight.

 

[Tax_Document]

Why would I want to play an ultra-realistic game? If I want realism, I go out into the real world. Eventough there are no dragons and if I shoot someone, I'm gonna get arrested...but hey, in an ultra-realistic game it would be the same.

I am even annoyed when I can't carry more than 10 potions and have a limit to items in my inventory.
In a realistiv RPG most charakters couldn't even hold their weapons because they would be way to big and you would be sent to a nuthouse for slashing jello and poor little critters.

Read the thread, mate.

 

[Doom-Slayer]

Multiplayer? No. KInd of ridiculous to be honest. But in singleplayer? Hell yes. Theres a mode like that in a space sim I play X3 Terran Conflict called Dead is Dead.

You make a game as normal, but you cant save manually, and it autosaves when you quit and ties it to your steam profile. You die, it deletes it. ITS REALLY HARD.

But FPSs would be great, but in multiplayer everyone would go sniper since screw being in the front lines.

 

[Doom-Slayer]

doublepost

 

[ResonanceSD]

I hear ARMA 2 is pretty good (bad) with realism? A big war smulator more than a game.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

With our current tech? Rubbish. With full on virtual reality? A beautiful thing. Assuming we are allowed in game logic (eg zombies exist and are capable of surviving and multiplying, elves and dwarves and orcs can exist and each have their own blahblahblah) then hells yeah.

The problem for me is responsiveness is of, thinking of zombies you want to quickly boot them back, vault a low railing, pick up that 2x4 and club it round the head. Dead Rising comes to mind where it would be much easier in full control than as a character, even if you couldn't even get bitten once without dying (or perma requiring zombrex) the added flexibility, speed and co ordination of being a person as opposed to a limited avatar of one would easily overcome that.

So right now, for most games it would suck, it can kinda work with some (as long as we allow for things like respawning (or the equivalent of taking over another soldiers body) and so on) but only if we tweak things. The real world is fascinating and cool but not as fun as games for obvious reasons...

 

[electric_warrior]

Oblivion- you can only carry like five things at any one time, when you get hit you get weaker, you have to eat and drink regularly or you die, you have to sleep every night or you go slowly crazy, you have to walk everywhere, unless you buy a horse for £5000 or so, there's no such thing as magic and one hit with a sword kills you, but the same goes for everyone else, you can kill them with one hit, and you don't have to sit through a loading screen every time you go through a door.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

They'd be like Far Cry 2 - and I'd probably not play them.

i was thinking along the lines of Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising, but from what i hear Far Cry 2 can be very annoying too.

and no i wouldnt play them either.

 

[polymer]

Games are essentially escapism, but I wouldn't mind more attention to detail in certain games.

I'm a stickler for weapon/firearm realism in games; most contemporary FPS titles are delivering in this regard. It's great to see. However, being able to carry a sidearm, five grenades, C4, two assault rifles, a sniper rifle and an RPG is ridiculous - especially when you're still required to find switches and/or keys to open gates and wooden doors.

 

[Vault101]

Fallout involves tumours....lots and lots of tumours and death