How far to take realism in games

[Astel]

I don't care about realism.

Recently i tried to play The Witcher 3 and while is technically not very realistic, the game is very... grounded? It's bleak, depressing, and sad... i just couldn't take it. It's more like the real dark ages, war, famine, plague, people eating rats, people abandoning children to die in the woods...
Also the towns are big for the sake of being big... no one says anything, i don't see the point. It has good cutscenes i think.... but i just had to drop it.
I guess i'll never know why it's called the best game ever... i still think skyrim is better, as the world is not a dark and gory hellhole.

 

[Benny Jackdaw]

I don't care about realism.

Recently i tried to play The Witcher 3 and while is technically not very realistic, the game is very... grounded? It's bleak, depressing, and sad... i just couldn't take it. It's more like the real dark ages, war, famine, plague, people eating rats, people abandoning children to die in the woods...
Also the towns are big for the sake of being big... no one says anything, i don't see the point. It has good cutscenes i think.... but i just had to drop it.
I guess i'll never know why it's called the best game ever... i still think skyrim is better, as the world is not a dark and gory hellhole.

Ironically, the graphics in Skyrim are arguably even darker and gloomier, but it doesn't have the more depressing tones of Witcher. It has war just like Witcher, but that's about it.

Also, I could never get into the Witcher franchise either.

 

[FleshToDust]

@Astel "Hello darkness my old friend..."

Yeah I'm not a fan of darkness, torture and brutality. I know there's a market for it but it's not for me. I only like dark souls because of the gameplay. I don't care for the "oh this game is evil and you're going to die all the time mua-ha-ha! Look how dark the lore is".

 

[CleanWater]

I don't like realistic games, I prefer fantasy games exactly because of that. It's a way to relieve the stress of real life and do things you can't in real life (like killing dragons, saving princesses and such).

I prefer colorful games like original FFVII than the ultra realistic FFVII REMAKE.

 

[FleshToDust]

@CleanWater Yeah I do enjoy colorful games. I like the look of a lot of nintendo games over greyish games like call of duty.

 

[Tai_MT]

Personally, I love realism. As much of it as possible. If we could manage to design a D&D game for the computer or console that worked extremely accurately to the mechanics of the tabletop itself... I'd be on board. All that would be required after that is a group to Roleplay with.

The problem with "hunger" and "thirst" meters is that they're arbitrary. You automatically gravitate to options that keep your meters full the longest and use nothing else. This is silly and stupid. If you're going to have these in a game, there need to be other tangible ways to affect them, as well as character preferences and other beneficial effects. In short, they need to be turned into a proper mechanic instead of just a numeric meter to fill. Imagine if you paired "Enjoyment" with foods and drinks in the game, based on the preferences of your character (which would be randomly rolled on each new character, so a player couldn't exploit the game mechanic). If you have higher "enjoyment" of a food or a drink, you perform better at skills or combat or negotiations for a while. Maybe binging (or only eating) high enjoyment foods eventually gives diminishing returns on the amount of enjoyment the character gets. They "get sick of eating that" after a while. Low enjoyment would make your character perform poorly. Etcetera. I mean, currently, we can't taste food or drink in a game, so there's no reason to eat one over another except convenience or stat gain. So, why not make such a system a little more realistic? In fact, make the drain on your meters realistic as well. It would make for a far more interesting mechanic that would encourage players to produce a variety of foods and drinks for various reasons. Heck, in an MMO setting, this could provide incentive to open up player owned restaurants and taverns, if they had good quality food to sell, or a type of food your character enjoyed.

I just like as much realism as possible. I grow tired of enemies taking an entire clip of Assault Rifle ammo to the face before dying (when in reality, a single bullet would do the job). I tire of "damage sponges" and like the idea of maybe losing an arm or a leg in combat if you aren't careful or properly trained.

While people always say, "Realism is boring in a video game", I think most of us would have to admit that if we could upload our consciousness into a fantasy realm where you live and breathe and eat and drink... Lots of people would do it without a second thought, because it improve immersion in the game, and if it were truly realistic, some of these video game settings would be far more interesting to live in than our current real lives.

 

[yajirobi]

my game is in first person and includes an EXTREMELY realistic hunger/sleep system.

 

[trouble time]

I just like as much realism as possible. I grow tired of enemies taking an entire clip of Assault Rifle ammo to the face before dying (when in reality, a single bullet would do the job). I tire of "damage sponges" and like the idea of maybe losing an arm or a leg in combat if you aren't careful or properly trained.

While people always say, "Realism is boring in a video game", I think most of us would have to admit that if we could upload our consciousness into a fantasy realm where you live and breathe and eat and drink... Lots of people would do it without a second thought, because it improve immersion in the game, and if it were truly realistic, some of these video game settings would be far more interesting to live in than our current real lives.

Just going to say, if you're asking for realistic firearm combat, then I you can actually simulated it by rolling a bunch of dice. Then a few minutes later someone tells you how many hit, but not what number needed to be rolled and you don't know if you or someone else actually hit them but at least you fired a few shots from a prone position behind cover/concealment.

 

[Tai_MT]

Oh, there are several tabletops that do realistic gunfighting quite well. Though, you have to be prepared to run through about 5 or 6 tables. Combat is "quick", but also "painfully slow". Never usually lasts more than two or three rounds either. Though, the realistic gunfighting tends to take place in settings with very low Medicine... so... even a non-lethal wound can kill you with Infection instead. Which, honestly, promotes not getting into gunfights... which is basically like how the real world was at the time. You didn't get into a gunfight unless you were both fast or accurate... Or you used lots of cover.

I'd gladly run such a Tabletop game, but good luck finding players who want to engage in it, ha ha. Especially when you can lose a character to infection.

 

[Niten Ichi Ryu]

I don't care about realism.

Recently i tried to play The Witcher 3 and while is technically not very realistic, the game is very... grounded? It's bleak, depressing, and sad... i just couldn't take it...
.

Witcher 3 takes inspiration from Fairy Tales more than fantasy. And Fairy tales are grim.

What makes Witcher 3 good is that characters have deep personalities and quests have meaning. No cardboard cutout followers, placeable props quest giver and FedEx quest.

Skyrim is epic but has barely any substance (except dawnguard maybe). In Witcher universe, the world doesn't revolve around you.

It's simply more focused (despite being huge) and more mature.

It's really European medieval made realistically I would say. Particularly the architecture and towns layout. It helps to get the feeling to actually know Europe and what a medieval city looks like. No game made it before as well. Try to visit eastern Europe one day. You'll see the inspiration. Or Tuscany/southern France for Toussaint.

 

[Benny Jackdaw]

Witcher 3 takes inspiration from Fairy Tales more than fantasy. And Fairy tales are grim.

What makes Witcher 3 good is that characters have deep personalities and quests have meaning. No cardboard cutout followers, placeable props quest giver and FedEx quest.

Skyrim is epic but has barely any substance (except dawnguard maybe). In Witcher universe, the world doesn't revolve around you.

It's simply more focused (despite being huge) and more mature.

It's really European medieval made realistically I would say. Particularly the architecture and towns layout. It helps to get the feeling to actually know Europe and what a medieval city looks like. No game made it before as well. Try to visit eastern Europe one day. You'll see the inspiration. Or Tuscany/southern France for Toussaint.

Frankly, I couldn't get attached to any character from either game. I love in Skyrim that you can play as a cat or lizard, which gives it that sense of unrealism that appeals to me, but it's just a hollow shell, and the other cats and lizards, well honestly, characters in general don't have much in the way of personality.

Witcher 3, on the other hand, I just felt the characters were way too serious, and that made them boring for me. Plus, it kind of falls under that trope of humans being the only race capable of goodness, plus the main character being mainly a monster hunter made him less likable for me. And even though it's based in a fantasy world, it's actually a rather generic one despite its polish, and IMO, its seriousness still has a sense of realism that takes me out of the game.

 

[Niten Ichi Ryu]

Well. The main thing about Geralt is that he isn't a simple monster, but a monster himself, in human eyes, being a mutant. He is a necessary evil. And what's that about human only being capable of goodness? Doesn't make sense. Humanity is seen as actually the worst species in term of cruelty and iniquity...

And once again, Witcher isn't your average fantasy world... It's a subversion of classical European fairy tale. The ones from Grimm brothers for example. Its not Disney fairy tales. It's more about folklore than fantasy.

There's also a lot of humour. Its not serious... Its grim. Its dark, its violent, often sad, even poetic at times.

Maybe it needs maturity and references to be properly enjoyed.

 

[Benny Jackdaw]

Well. The main thing about Geralt is that he isn't a simple monster, but a monster himself, in human eyes, being a mutant. He is a necessary evil. And what's that about human only being capable of goodness? Doesn't make sense. Humanity is seen as actually the worst species in term of cruelty and iniquity...

And once again, Witcher isn't your average fantasy world... It's a subversion of classical European fairy tale. The ones from Grimm brothers for example. Its not Disney fairy tales. It's more about folklore than fantasy.

There's also a lot of humour. Its not serious... Its grim. Its dark, its violent, often sad, even poetic at times.

Maybe it needs maturity and references to be properly enjoyed.

Exactly, which is why I cannot accept them as being the absolute only creature capable of good in a fantasy universe. It always urks me when I see that in games. As for him being a mutant, that brings me to another point: only humans AND creatures who look just like humans can be good. I, personally, lump all human-looking creatures into the same category, as if it looks just like a human, it's more or less just used as a way to make them more appealing to people, but at the same time it's cowardly and uncreative, not to mention slightly narcissistic. Like, do they really believe people can only see evil in completely non-human designs, that they can only grow attachement to humans, so only human-likes can be good? Frankly, non-human companions are what help me like a fantasy world, and at the same time it's not entirely unrealistic either. There may not be talking lizards in the real world, but there are definitely friendly interactions between humans and non-humans.

Not a fan of Disney, but again Witcher's too dark and serious for my tastes, and even though you say there's humor, I really haven't seen anything in the game even remotely funny or whimsical.

I frankly couldn't care less about those things. Heck, I'd argue "maturity" ruins experiences for me. I am no fan of ultra-childishness, but color and whimsy go a long way for me. I guess we're different in that regard, though. You seem to have the opposite or a much different opinion, and that's not wrong.

 

[Niten Ichi Ryu]

I totally respect also your views. I loved the Witcher, I consider it the best ambiance I have played, but to be honest I couldn't play only games like this. Would be too depressing

That's what make it rather "realistic". Life sucked in middle age.'

 

[Builds_a_lot]

@bgillisp Yeah I hate the hunger system roguelikes have. I also think walking around a wasteland for an hour trying to find where you're suppose to go is bad(fallout new vegas). I was trying to make realistic stuff and then it dawned on me that even the elder scrolls games which are supposed to be designed in a realistic manner aren't realistic and that traveling 20 minutes to get to another shop would be really boring not to mention that's a lot of extra wasted space and how many npc's you'd have to make for that.

I had the most fun with need for speed on the ps one. after that I wasn't as into it, not sure why. Rubber banding is annoying though.
I long for a racing game without it!

@Niten Ichi Ryu man perma death is the worst thing to happen to rpg's. Imagine getting to level 30 and then dying and having to start from level one again on a new character. that sucks.

when I say the elder scrolls is realistic i mean the environment and peoples day to day behaviours. it's definitely fantasy with the dragons and trolls etcetera.

Welcome to table-top D&D. If you die, you have to create a new character from scratch. The original source of perma-death before perma-death was a thing. And yes it does suck! No matter what game it exists in.

As to the OP, I agree with....(scrolls to the top to find name) bgillisp, when realism gets in the way of fun, it has went too far. Tedium is not a game mechanic, and anything that feels like tedium needs put out of its misery.

I think realism is awesome, to an extent. It gives us a sense of the familiar and makes impossible things relatable in some context. So it is a comfort, rather than being pitched into what would feel foreign and alien to a player. (This is why horror games are set in space so often. Just my opinion. Nothing is familiar or comfortable unless you're an astronaut.)

Back to my point, people play games to have fun, relax, or even as escapism (Sims anyone, build the perfect life/home/self you wish you had?) So use realism like a hearty seasoning, use sparingly, sprinkle gently and enjoy the little bits that are familiar.

Aside from that, I'm having a similar debate with myself.
I want to add crafting to my project but do I base it in reality: Real World herbs, fabrics, metals, materials. Or go the fictional/facsimile route? Where it is like fictional or one off from real world/know materials?

 

[Builds_a_lot]

Good points. My point is though we can make our own world which follows their own rules if we wish. For example, in my world, the rich live in houses that look small on the outside, because they can afford an Air Mage to create a time-space distortion which makes the inside bigger than the outside. However, the poor cannot, so they have to have houses that are similar in size both outside and inside. I also use this to explain why you can shove 99 swords in a backpack and not run out of space.

BTW, fallout came out in 1997, if you were curious, and it is based on Wasteland, which came out in the 80's (don't know exact year, but I want to say 1988 or 1989 for some reason).

1988. You were right with your first guess.

 

[yoda]

The original Morrowind was a good example of hard core RPG mechanics. It felt like a real world and gave you real life situations in a fantasy environment. Realism I think needs to be better defined. Does it feel real based upon our world and how we perceive it, or does it make you believe in the world itself thus creating a new perspective of reality? Some define realism in games as containing blood, guts and gore, but that isn't what we encounter on a daily basis (at least most of us that are sane). Some define realism based upon graphics but the content itself might be far from what is considered "real" to us. While art is in the eye of he/she whom beholds it, reality is in the mind of the one in whom believes in it.

 

[Dodokajet]

i think it can't have too much realism more you have the better you can always imagine later in gta or in simulation game you can have a realistic discussion with an ia. You don't need that to appreciate a game of course but if you want to play a immersive game it's a plus so it depend of what kind of experience you search when you play a game