Just exactly HOW realistic do you want it to be?!! (Rant)

Gamer Bhoy 89

Ugh god, I was just going through some various forums for different games and I started to flip. Because I am getting pretty sick of the people who say a video game is horrible...because it isn't "realistic". . . .

As the title suggests, how f*cking realistic does a game need to be to fit you're definition of "realistic" ??? Honestly like??..

People who insult Battlefield and give the idle reason of it being "not realistic". (usually giving excuses like the snipers suck or you can't prone or lean or whatever) Okay, do you want the developers to fly you to the Middle-East, stick a heads up display around you're goggles and tell you to go capture some flags?? Is that realistic enough for you??? Hey, you get to do all the crawling and leaning you want at least!

Then there's the Forza vs. Gran Turismo crowd who say one is better than the other because the bad one isn't realistic enough. Go out and drive your car along the M9 then if it isn't realistic enough for you.

I can tolerate one who plays a game, then says it's not very realistic, but plays it anyway because he enjoys the game for what it is. But I can't grasp why some people actually refuse to even look at a game let alone play or buy it because it's "not realistic enough". Last time I checked, these were Video Games. They aren't real events happening within the game. I don't think any game is supposed to be realistic.

Rant over, i feel better now :cool:

ríomhaire

They're just all jealous because they know Team Fortress 2 is the best game ever.

Gamer Bhoy 89

lol LIKE

Samich

Hmmm play GTA on a ps2 then play a GTA on a 3rd gen console, which would you rather play? The latter as it's more realistic

Sarky

I found the first GTA more fun actually. Gouranga! Kill Frenzy!

Which would you rather play? Freespace 2 or MS Flight Simulator?

deathrider

This is something that really grinds my gears too. I can't imagine it was always this way. People in the 80's didn't avoid Mario games because he didn't get a headache from hitting blocks (I know he punchs them, but back then, we were unsure). Fantasy is what draws me to video games. Doing the extreme, the incredible, and the completely unrealistic is where most of the fun lies. Hell, even if I play racing games, I go for the Need For Speed/ Burnout types, instead of something that feels real. If I wanted realism, I'd probably play flight sim games because they are so close to the real thing. But that's not what I want. That's why I love games like God Of War, Mortal Kombat, Devil May Cry, Bayonetta, and why I'm looking forward to Lollipop Chainsaw so much.
Give me the ridiculous!

ríomhaire

Samich wrote: »

GTA on a 3rd gen console

I didn't know GTA was on the Sega Master System!

deathrider

Samich wrote: »

Hmmm play GTA on a ps2 then play a GTA on a 3rd gen console, which would you rather play? The latter as it's more realistic

I'd rather the PS2 GTA games, as they were more fun.

Samich

Sarky wrote: »

I found the first GTA more fun actually. Gouranga! Kill Frenzy!

Which would you rather play? Freespace 2 or MS Flight Simulator?

There's a difference between fun and realistic

dreamers75

Game is a game, dont really care what it looks like.

Sarky

Exactly my point. GTA got much more boring the more realism was pumped into it.

There's a certain satisfaction to be had from military or flight simulators. I understand people enjoy train simlators.

But I'd prefer the games where you play a man dressed up as a bat beating up 50 people at once, or where you wake up in a morgue and the first person to talk to you is a disembodied floating skull.

marco_polo

Simples

It matters when ...

The game you prefer is widely considered to be more realistic than its competitor.

It doesn't matter when ...

The game you prefer is widely considered to be less realistic than its competitor.

DarkJager

Sarky wrote: »

Exactly my point. GTA got much more boring the more realism was pumped into it.

There's a certain satisfaction to be had from military or flight simulators. I understand people enjoy train simlators.

But I'd prefer the games where you play a man dressed up as a bat beating up 50 people at once, or where you wake up in a morgue and the first person to talk to you is a disembodied floating skull.

.


That's very realistic, happens every weekend in the Limerick Regional Hospital!!

marko93

gamercfc wrote: »

lol LIKE

You're as bad as those cúnts who complain over "realism"
Or even worse than the people who just write "this" under a rant

>_>

tonydude

Samich wrote: »

Hmmm play GTA on a ps2 then play a GTA on a 3rd gen console, which would you rather play? The latter as it's more realistic

Vice city any day

Robby91

tonydude wrote: »

Vice city any day

Driving over people with a moped causes them to fly 20ft into the air? That's my kinda realism tbh :pac:

Wolfe Tone

Its not realistic enough until mirrors and water in game reflect real life, and not just stuff in game dammit!

AdamD

Realistic does not equal good.

Operation flashpoint is by far the most realistic shooter on ps3, still ****. Cod is extremely unrealistic yet popular.

K.O.Kiki

Okami is an extremely unrealistic game from the previous generation.

Its visual style also knocks the pants off pretty much anything on the PS3/360, to this day.

Doctor DooM

Over in the fighting game world I (as a Street fighter fan) am continually amazed when people say they prefer SF to tekken because it's "more realistic" and doesn't have fightin bears and aliens et al.

Yes, Getting grabbed by a huge russian, thrown about 30 feet into the air and then slammed head first into the (usually) metal or rock ground and then getting up and throwing fire from your hands is perfectly reasonable.

I think the actual issue here is suspension of disbelief. People don't understand it's a personal thing and different things take people out of the narrative of a game or film for different reasons (for example my suspension of disbelief was ruined watching the directors cut of aliens because of the rudimentary tech they use to look at the map of the base. Other people wouldn't notice it at all. Whereas the slavering aliens with poison for blood was perfectly acceptable to my brain).

Gamer Bhoy 89

marko93 wrote: »

You're as bad as those cúnts who complain over "realism"
Or even worse than the people who just write "this" under a rant

>_>

I like the way you managed to figure out my personality with one little reply on Boards. Now you know what I'm like 100% , we should be friends :rolleyes:

Gamer Bhoy 89

I don't get it though lads, like... Why do people want pure realism from a video game? Especially from games like GTA. I'd actually be more concerned to people who wish GTA was more realistic, it sounds like they actually want the authentic feeling of actually killing someone or breaking the law :eek: I don't even expect Fifa to be realistic despite loving football so much I've never complained about Fifa and although being one of the most popular, if not, THE most popular sports game this day n age, it sure is one of the most complained about.

People saying things like the linesmen having "super-sight" or something like that, because they were a foot-long offside that a linesman wouldnt be able to see that in real life so easily. You'd be surprised! I actually have friends who play Fifa and shout abuse at players as if they were actually there! WTF?? One friend of mine was playing against me on Fifa, I scored with Gerrard and he shouted "F*** you Gerrard you should've gone to f**king prison" The last time I checked this was a VIDEO GAME I was playing.

My point is there are people who don't think games are realistic (for all the wrong reasons) and people who think a game like Fifa and NBA simulates the real thing to the extent of actually shouting abuse at the player you truely hate in real life, towards the video game equivelant! Pointless.

Sorry about the double post

Shiminay

gamercfc wrote: »

I don't get it though lads, like... Why do people want pure realism from a video game?

Probably because they have really poor imaginations and can't fill in the blanks when they see a representation of something on a screen rather than a fully rendered 361235billion polygon count with 16.7m colours.

<WARNING>
I'm speaking in general terms and so any cries of "THIS GAME ISN'T / I AM NOT LIKE THAT!" will be ignored

Think about it - gaming has become more popular not strictly because of games getting "better" (there have been huge advances, but by large, the basic idea of what a computer game is has remained the same for the last 30 years - do things, earn points, try to get the highest score. For story driven games, the highest score is "learn all of the story"). For many, the idea of looking at Space Invaders and seeing it as space ships rather than stupid looking angular things on a screen did not translate. So when you make games look more like the real thing (or certainly more like how people might imagine it looking), you draw those with the lack of imagination and willingness to suspend their disbelief in. So this is why graphics and accuracy is so important to so many gamers. If you're a soccer fan for example, you're going to enjoy FIFA a whole lot more because it's got the actual teams you see playing week in week out in their own kit, in their own stadium (a lot of the time). You're also hearing familiar voices in the commentary team and the reverse of all that was you saw the EA Sports logo start appearing on Sky Sports' feeds to again draw the reality of the thing closer together. So when gamerfc's buddy starts shouting things at a computer representation of Stevie G, then you know they've succeeded. He's not the only one btw, I often play big sessions of FIFA with 6+ people in Lounge mode and we all get great fun out of shouting abuse at one another and at the players as though we were really there. None of us thinks its reality, but it *is* a lot of fun.

I don't btw, consider these folks any less of a gamer than me, I guess as a kid I preferred to let my imagination run riot and it's stuck with me in a lot of ways This area of "suspension of disbelief" was a huge barrier for a lot of people in the same way that the gaming companies considered the controller a barrier to entry for a lot of people, so they introduced Kinect and Move and all the rest (and tbh, it's going pretty well for them).

marko93

gamercfc wrote: »

I like the way you managed to figure out my personality with one little reply on Boards. Now you know what I'm like 100% , we should be friends :rolleyes:

Really? WE CAN BE FRIENDS?
FREIIIIIIIINEDS!
I simply said those comments were as annoying as people wanting realism. While I flamed you slightly, i meant nothing by it my good sir!
No attack on your personality and I hope we become good chums, hating on saps who want "REALISM".
Much love,
MARKO93

Vegeta

gamercfc wrote: »

Then there's the Forza vs. Gran Turismo crowd who say one is better than the other because the bad one isn't realistic enough.

This is a terrible example to pick OP. Both these games strive to simulate all features of real world cars as closely as allowable on a console. Spending millions in the process.

If a game tries to simulate real life and is noticeably wide of the mark, then imho it deserves criticism for it.

penev10

There seems to be two debates intertwined here:

Graphics:
Realistic Vs Stylized

Gameplay:
Realistic Vs "Fun"(for want of a better word)


If the graphics strive to be as true-to-life as possible should the gameplay follow suit? If confronted with a perfectly rendered, photo-realistic Iraqi insurgent should he really take 15 bullets to down?

If something breaks the immersion of a gaming experience due to it not being in keeping with the world / ruleset than it tarnishes the experience. This principle I would hold to.

"My guy is able to take 40 bullets which is ok by me but when I come accross an enemy who's a similar damage sponge than it's blatanty unfair!" This argument holds no water for me and is just whinging

Dcully

I dont buy into this realism V fun, some games/simulations are designed to be both not one or the other.
There seems to be a misconception that you can only have one or the other.
Id argue that something like iracing is both the ultimate in realism and is a hell of a lot of fun to those into hardcore sim racing.
Likewise i get more fun from red orchestra than your usual run of the mill fps title.
Its a pretty silly even debating this to be honest, some people enjoy realism others dont,end of debate right there.
Some genres suit realism others dont,some people enjoy it others dont.
To throw a blanket over gaming or indeed a genre and label it either too realistic or not realistic enough or whatever is pointless, there are too many permutations and possibilities to just generalise.
I play and enjoy games from both ends of the spectrum and games that fit somewhere in between.

ríomhaire

penev10 wrote: »

Gameplay:
Realistic Vs "Fun"(for want of a better word)

For some reason non-realistic gameplay is often referred to as "arcade" (arcade being an adjective here).

Call of Duty Modern Warfare is classified as a arcade military shooter.
ARMA II is classified as a realistic military shooter (or a military sim).

o1s1n

I want a realistic platformer. One where you try to jump over a big gap, fall into said gap and then have to spend two weeks in hospital with a broken leg.

Realistic hospital based mini games could include -

A text based game in which you have to argue your way out of a conversation about the existence of god with the communion delivering nuns.

A throwing/physics type game where you try to get the attention of chattering nurses outside the ward while not waking up the grumpy old man beside you.

'Cast doodle'

Realism is where it's at.

Skerries

I just hope the Dragons and Orcs in Skyrim are going to be more realistic than Oblivion

Gamer Bhoy 89

Vegeta wrote: »

This is a terrible example to pick OP. Both these games strive to simulate all features of real world cars as closely as allowable on a console. Spending millions in the process.

If a game tries to simulate real life and is noticeably wide of the mark, then imho it deserves criticism for it.

Don't have a go at me. It's not me who is comparing both games.