Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

There's currently a forum problem with avatars not showing in reactions.
Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to make an order. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Realism in games

2»

Comments

  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,081

    CrevsDaak said:



    meagloth said:

    I hate first person shooters pretty much as a rule(though I have very limited experience with console games, well, any games at all, really.)

    Gotta tell you that the REAL First person shooters out there are for computer (and they are limited to Marathon, Doom, Dark Forces and Duke Nukem), where, if things sort of can be explained (Marathon uses the explanation 'your in outer space' for the 3-meters-long-jumps, which makes sense), they still fit (sometimes).

    Also, Marathon (all of the series) has a pretty solid story (which was nearly wasted in a FPS) with very good background (if you actually read everything while you are getting shot by 36 creatures armed with grenade launchers…). Also, they are more like a Dungeon-crawling-FPS, since 70% of the game happens insides (well, on spaceships and that stuff) and you'll get shocked hundreds of time by monsters coming out of a sliding wall-door ;)

    Halo 1 was a good successor of Marathon engine-wise, Halo 1 it's still my favorite MP FPS (while Marathon (as a series) is my all-times-favorite).
    Ha, never played Marathon or Dark Forces but I love Duke and I still play Doom (with the Brutal Doom mod). Still, I'd say shooters come in lots of fashions, the most popular one right now being the modern military setting. Like I said, even FPS can have a lot of realism (seriously, go look at ARMA, that's so realistic it should have a manual as big as a Paradox grand strategy game). There's one for each person and they can be very good games storywise (not a pure FPS, but look at Deus Ex or System/Bioshock).
    As for unrealistic shooters, I think a good approach on them is to just turn off your brain and fire away XD. Still, to each one his own and I don't want to look like a prick who thinks only he is right.
    @InvictusCobra‌ ah, yeah, I always forgot about those two (and Half-life too), even if I played Bioshock Infinite and said 'This game is inspired in PS:T' from start to end (actually I played both the start and the end but not the middle :P).
    Lateralus said:

    Anyways, I don't care about scantily clad men and women, if that's how they want to roll that's on them. Or not on them, pun, deal with it. What I DO care about is me. Or more specifically, my imagination. If you give me less reality I will activate more imagination. Nothing strengthens John Lennon's favorite tool more than (paper and pencil) PnP (role playing games) RPGs. Baldur's gate is a poorly dungeon mastered computer RPG. It's up to me to make it entertaining, I must fill in the voids with illumination from my mind.

    That. I prefer playing a game which uses ANSI characters and has ASCII graphics before playing one that has horrid 3D graphics, but I guess it's just me, since I also prefer 2D to 3D and red to blue...

    JuliusBorisovjackjack
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 5,764
    Entertainment is marginally more important than realism.
    I play a game or watch a movie to be entertained, however, if I can start nitpicking things that don't make sense my entertainment is diminished as I am broken from that reality.

    If I can suspend my belief for a moment, or give clarifying reasons to how something can suspend my beliefs in reality, then all the better.

    For example, the boob plate example. Yes it is fan service and I would prefer if it would look somewhat realistic, however these are magical settings where armor is enhanced as much as the breast sizes. I can imagine in my mind, that there is a magical shield (much like a spirit armor spell) helping block that vulnerable area.

    If my character can be reduced to 1 hp and still walk to the nearest temple without bleeding out that last HP, then I can believe that boob plate can sufficiently protect a female protagonist.

    ~

    The more realistic the game is suppose to be (such as Grand Theft Auto) the more it does irk me to a degree.

    I loathe the fact I can carry around a sniper rifle, a grenade launcher and a missile launcher unhindered both in mobility and law enforcement, that I can make magically appear and disappear whenever I like.

  • KidCarnivalKidCarnival Member Posts: 3,747
    Entertainment is marginally more important than realism.
    There is a difference between (lacking) realism in looks (breastplates, silly armor, useless spikes, illogical weapons,...) and realism in gameplay (need to eat/sleep/carry weight/...)

    The former is a matter of taste. I too dislike huge armor and weapons, skimpy outfits (more what it says about the player using it than that it's an option, because customization and options are a good thing) and so on. I block players I never exchanged a single word with for having shitty names - I find it immersion breaking if NPCs keep addressing a knight, for example, as "Sir gobbledygoo72". Can't be that hard to just name the guy John like any other unimaginative player, can it?
    However, what qualifies as "realistic" in this category is usually up to the individual player. And for me, it's not that important that everything is realistic like the world we live in. It just needs to be consistant with the universe. A medieval knight named Kevin-Pascal Miller would probably stand out as inconsistant in a world where Alustriel Deepforest is a common name, despite being realistic in our world.
    If the game's premise is about having superpowers, using superweapons or other fantasy elements - monsters, races like elves and dwarves, whatever - I expect there to be lore that explains these elements in the context to that world, not ours.

    The latter, realism in gameplay, can also mean different things. It can mean real time, it can mean a lot micromanagement, it can mean inconveniences. I'm fine with a certain amount of realism here. If it's a game about living beings (and not robots or ghosts or something), I expect there to be consumable food/drinks, but I'd find it annoying if I had to eat every 8 hours sharp or my character starves. Having food means I can roleplay the rest to "realism" without frustration (i.e. interrupting a mission to get food, carry around food despite limited inventory space - "realistic carry weight"). The same goes for similar things, i.e. sleep or healing. It's enough if it exists, but I don't want to be forced.

    booinyoureyeskaguanaJuliusBorisovjackjack
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    Realism is somewhat more important than entertainment.
    Ooh! I have a friend! @Rarayn‌, care to comment?

    JuliusBorisov
  • ElectricMonkElectricMonk Member Posts: 599
    It's all about the internal consistency. If armor in a game is required for defense, then it should be consistently practical. If magic suffices for defense, then clothing (skimpy or otherwise) should be adequate and armor not required. These two points contribute to the completely nonsensical nature of the chainmail bikini and its ilk. Men running around in massive armor and women wearing a steel thong and iron pasties... wtf? It just makes absolutely no sense.

    If a fictional world has everyone running around in loincloths and scraps of fabric then I suppose that's perfectly fine. I prefer an explanation for why warriors don't wear armor but at the very least I can accept that there's some cause which is contributing to nobody wearing armor. However, if you show me a world where the male warriors are strapping on full plate and packing steel and the female warriors are willingly donning some matching iron panties and bra and leaving themselves ridiculously exposed, well, I'll pass on that insane level of inconsistency.

    JuliusBorisovmeaglothRavenslight
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    Realism is somewhat more important than entertainment.

    okay, first of all, most interesting and well thought out poll on this forum I've seen so far. Love the detailed explanations. Really good job. Way to go Meatloaf!

    Well, didn't see that coming. Thanks! also, don,t call me meatloaf. ;)
    Good post to.

    booinyoureyesjackjackkaguana
  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 4,732
    Entertainment is marginally more important than realism.
    Interesting poll about willing suspension of disbelief. I notice and mentally remark on every unrealistic thing I see in a movie or game, but I put it aside as soon as I notice it as long as the story and characterization are good. I tend to be pretty forgiving with my willing suspension of disbelief, more so than a lot of people of I've met and most critics.

    By "unrealistic", I mean the world of the story according to its own rules, not according to the rules of our own real world. A lot of fantasy and sci-fi can't keep its own rule system coherent and free of contradictions.

    For example, if most of your story world follows real life physics and science, then so should the superheroes' powers. Like @Meagloth, I think that the Superman franchise is the most egregious offender here. Most of what Superman can do violates the laws of physics according to his world's own story premises.

    It doesn't matter how strong he is; it is not physically possible for a being of his size to lift, say, a building or a huge ship, because the object would crumble and break apart around him due to having inadequate structural support against gravity in its now upended position. It gets more ludicrous if he is hovering in midair and holding up such an object. All that weight has to be supported somewhere, or it is going down.

    It would be better to explain this kind of feat by saying that Superman has mental control over the force of gravity itself, than to say he can do it because he has infinite physical strength and can fly. And don't get me started on the flight - where is the thrust coming from? How is he navigating?

    Yet, despite all this, I still enjoy Superman movies, including the last one. I thought it was just plain fun to watch Superman and Zod destroy Metropolis, and I liked the character examination also, when Superman decides to kill Zod rather than allow Zod to burn and kill an innocent family with children. I felt irritated with friends who wanted to criticize the movie to death. "Come on, I went to the movie for a couple of hours of mindless fun, and that's what I got. Let me enjoy it."

    So I guess I am of two minds, with a lot of mixed and contradictory feelings and opinions about this issue.

    ElectricMonkmeaglothbooinyoureyesJuliusBorisov
  • SouthpawSouthpaw Member Posts: 2,026
    Entertainment is marginally more important than realism.
    I'm somewhere between 3 and 4. I get annoyed by too over-the-top action heroes, movies by that psycho Michael Bay are lowest of low and warrior females in a stripper-outfit are met with an annoyed grin. (Maybe influenced by the fact that I know how to fight in real life and know quite a lot about human anatomy and weapons, so spotting unrealistic things is far too easy)

    However, I am willing to cut the work of fiction some slack, if they don't overdo it and it's a good or funny piece.

    jackjack
  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    Realism is somewhat more important than entertainment.
    Squire said:

    Another point regarding this: I think it's important to draw a distinction between "realism" and "believability".

    Great post, and good point. I totally agree. I think a good way to put the poll question would be to say "how much realism is Necessary to make a game believable?".

    Interesting poll about willing suspension of disbelief. I notice and mentally remark on every unrealistic thing I see in a movie or game, but I put it aside as soon as I notice it as long as the story and characterization are good.

    Same here, except I don't have the self control to keep it in. I am going to the special hell.

    BelgarathMTH
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 2,476
    Entertainment is marginally more important than realism.
    If I am playing a game or watching a movie then I accept a certain amount of bending or breaking the rules of physics in order to enjoy the entertainment value. Last weekend the kids were gone so I watched Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace again. Some of the falls should have dislocated or broken Bond's shoulders, knees, or ribs but he gets up and stays in the action anyway. That is fine for him but if I were to do some of those things it would be a week before I could get out of the hospital and then I would spend the next year or so in physical therapy.

    @Tuth the armor in that picture has massive shoulder pads in order to accentuate the wearer's masculinity. In reality, he wouldn't be able to walk in that much armor, presuming he could have it put on him in the first place.

    On the topic of boobplate....women have breasts, a fact no one may ignore. Either the wearer needs to tape them down as much as possible, the breastplate needs to have a little extra room, or both (I recommend both). If someone is approaching you in armor and their weapon in drawn their gender doesn't matter--combat is imminent and you had best not be distracted by trying to figure out of those hips are swinging or not.

  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    edited August 2014
    Realism is somewhat more important than entertainment.


    On the topic of boobplate....women have breasts, a fact no one may ignore. Either the wearer needs to tape them down as much as possible, the breastplate needs to have a little extra room, or both (I recommend both)..

    Eh, sort of. With plate armor it's not like it's just over your clothes. You have clothes, LOTS of padding, maybe some leather, chain, and then plate. There's enough padding and such that breasts are almost irrelevant, especially on the athletic figure of an adventurer/fighter. Women's armor, *is* a different shape, however, especially when it's custom made. Despite the exaggeration of the fact, Women really are not men, and armor is not exactly one size fits all. You may have heard The us army is is implementing women's armor just now so it fits better. They had had to wear clothes for men before and the sizing issue actually cause difficulty and discomfort.

  • meaglothmeagloth Member Posts: 3,806
    Realism is somewhat more important than entertainment.
    @Rarayn‌ huh. Really, those first to aren't so bad. The ras sword is even a littler *less* busy than a lot of the rapiers you see. The drow sword..... I dunno. It's just a sketch. Could it be done? Probably. Would it be done? Well, they're drow. So maybe. Carsomyr is a bit over the top.

  • RaraynRarayn Member Posts: 12
    Realism is somewhat more important than entertainment.
    The downward spikes of the Daystar would make it nigh impossible to hold in a way that it could be used as an actual weapon. It's a pointless detail that can only harm the wielder. No smith would ever make such a sword for actual use in combat.

    Ras Sword isn't *that* bad, but unlike on a rapier the "details" on the hilt serve no purpose and only get in the way. It's bad sword design. It's not like on a rapier where the hilt is often designed to protect the hand in one way or another.

    As you can see, they do look a bit busy, but unlike on Ras Sword, the details serve a purpose and don't get in the way of holding the sword effectively. The point is to protect the hand, not to add pointless decorative details.
    image




    As for the Drow Sword...I can certainly see the Drow deciding to make such a sword, but how they'd be a feared force in the Underdark with such wildly impractical blades is a mystery to me. Tetanus is probably the greatest threat to Drow society.

    jackjackTuth
  • SquireSquire Member Posts: 512
    Entertainment is marginally more important than realism.
    Rarayn said:

    ..(BG2 sword art)...

    This is exactly the kind of thing I was thinking of when I mentioned weapons that look impractical. What's most annoying, though, is that these weapons are typically better than the ordinary looking ones (the ones that actually look like weapons) - those ones are "mundane", hence inferior, to the crazy spiked hilt ones. There are plenty of historical sources from which to draw inspiration if you want unique looking weapons...like those Italian rapiers and the broadsword, shown above, which were clearly an inspiration for some of the BG2 weapons, only they got it a bit wrong. :D

    For those who don't know, on the Italian rapiers, the blunted section of the blade by the hilt is called a ricasso, and is designed so that you can wrap your forefinger around the guard for more point control - the extra quillions are designed to protect your finger when using it like this. The Ras sword is clearly not designed with that function in mind.

    RaraynTuth
  • kaguanakaguana Member Posts: 1,328
    edited August 2014
    Entertainment is somewhat more important realism.
    Rarayn said:

    Tetanus is probably the greatest threat to Drow society


    I don't think the drow know what is a tetanus even if they wanted to and I bet they wouldn't wanna know lol

    As for what I think about all this, I think that fantasy is important and that each world should have his own logic and I wouldn't want realism in everything in that world but it should be consistent with his logic.

    Games, movies, books, and you name what should be entertain it a way to leave our world with all the rules we got for ourselves and just relax, enjoy, leave worries behind, run away to a different better world (for people that this world is hard on them and find themselves wanting to be elsewhere, or feeling more at home and belong to that other world then in their own world), any one of us have his own reason to be entertain, and I think realism mostly get in the way of thing like that, but like I said there should be logic in the world and consistency of it but it not like I have to understand it completely, that all the beauty in fantasy that it have super power, it have thing unnatural that one can't explain it (like the talk here about superman that can lift heavy stuff and fly and it all against the gravity of his world).

    As for cloth and breast armor well as a woman I surely will like a comfortable armor that I can breath in it and it won't suffocate me if I would ever had to wear one in one of this worlds, yeah sure it should be practical and fit for the purpose I'm waring the cloth and wearing a bikini or a tight cloth like wonder woman isn't fit for fighting or protection, but that how it is in some worlds so ok I get it but sometimes it because the one who wear it is a woman and I think some women in the fantasy got their cloths basically from an unbalance way of thinking about women not equally to the men who got their full armor and not running around half naked (maybe except Tarzan but that his character), it like some women are there just for the show of thing and not really for fighting.

    And as for weapons that looks ridiculously big (like Dragon age 2) or not fit for holding like @Rarayn here mention well in some cases yeah ok it ridiculous and not logically in our eyes but hey it works in the games and being used maybe it a bit different in the game who knows it is a fantasy after all I don't have to fully understand it to enjoy it ;)

    JuliusBorisovlolien
  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,570
    Realism is marginally more important than entertainment.
    I don't have enough time in the day to read all the great threads and comments on this forum, but I'd just like to toss my own opinion in.

    Like a few of the other people here, it depends for me. I think Archaos summed up my opinion the best. It depends on the setting. I LOVE realism. But if it's a fantasy game with magic and non-realistic flora and fauna, then I don't mind at all. For that setting, it IS realistic. But I do appreciate realistic weapons/armor/combat styles. I can't stand dual wielding and almost never use it in BG. On the other hand, I can appreciate it if it's approached in a more realistic way. For instance, I have a ranger character in BG. Obviously rangers naturally get two pips in dual wield. So how do I role-play it? He uses a dagger in his off hand for parrying. Now in game terms, he fights with it. But in my terms? It's a parrying knife, used for blocking blows and occasionally getting a quick stab in. Nothing more.

    Some days I want nothing more than pure realism. I've done a (relatively speaking) "lot" of work on conceptualizing and equipment/world/character writing for a (mostly) realistic medieval RPG. Not a fantasy RPG. A medieval one. An example of how it's realistic:

    Armor:

    Armor is defined by three things to define it's armor rating.

    1. Material:
    The materials are your standard bronze/iron/steel type of deal. However, just as ore from one mine is different in quality to ore from another mine, so does it work in this game. You may have two iron helmets, but one of them is called a (random name I just came up with) Jist'il iron helmet and a For'thuun iron helmet. The Jist'il iron helmet is higher quality because the Jist'il mine provides superior ore.

    2. Quality:
    There are five qualities of craftsmanship in the world. Rusted, Poor, Average, Fine, and Mastercraft. Different smiths have different skill, and therefore produce different quality pieces.

    3. Type:
    This one is pretty self explanatory. Chainmail v.s. splintmail. etc. etc. Certain classes (the characters in the game are pre-made and there are only eight of them) have different types of armor they can wear, so not everyone can wear the best plate, but the type still matters when deciding between two pieces of armor for a character.

    Conclusion:
    A standard piece of armor would be called... "Fine Jist'il Iron Helmet" So you have three adjectives (for a standard item. Some things, like different types of swords, might have one more) that define the quality of the piece. Now you have a way to increase what at first seems like a very basic armor system with only 25 or so different types of armor into a large traditional RPG system that allows for many many different items. It might seem a little complicated or convoluted to some people, but I feel like this allows for a standard RPG item upgrade system to be placed into an incredibly realistic medieval RPG.

    Anyway. Random tangent over. Sorry. =p


    Also, props to @Tuth‌ for the Skallagrim vid. I love that guy.

    meaglothRaraynTuth
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.