how important is realism to you?

[Lance]

.
does it take a high level of realism in a game to get you fully involved?
can you forgive unconvincing graphics if the physics engine of the controls feels real?
do you need for the control to feel like ''real life''?
have you ever had just as much, or even more fun playing a completely unrealistic game as you have playing a good simulation?
.

[FoxZero]

im more of the arcade gamer, gran turismo is about the only simulator ill do and even in that the crashes arent proper. ive played some other simulations like mechwarrior2 and janes f15 but ive always been terrible in them. i can get away with racing smiulators with practice but the lap numbers tend to bore me. id much rather shoot somebody if they cut me off, too :wink:

i used to be terribly addicted to descent multiplayer, that was pretty unconvincing graphically. i think worms is a great game too. for that matter, i like tempest too :)

[Task]

I'd say that realism is critically important... in games where it's necessary.
Something like Tank Wars or Quake isn't about "realism", but most other games absolutely require it. Racing games, or any simulation game, if they haven't got seriously good realism, they're garbage to me. Sega GT I've seen mentioned here, and I threw that game out the window because the realism was so craptacular. Steel Batallion OTOH is such an amazingly realistic simulator that I bought the game when I don't even own an XBox.

To me, it's all about the realism... If what you're talking about is in any way a simulator. 8 )

[Wamdue]

I think realism is overrated. Games with good instant-gameplay tend to be very good at not using realism in their gamedesign. They select an element from the real word and constrain the game to that element alone and polishes the gameplay. Take any airplane arcade game, they focused on the element flying and shooting alone, they left out the stalls, the advanced controls of an airplane and fuelgage etc etc. Still the game is surely mighty fun. My point is, in good gamedesign id choose an element or two from the real world and ignore the others. Games like Mario work like this too.

[infoxicated]

It's not necessarily realism that hooks me - I prefer honesty in a game.

Games like Ace Combat 4, for instance, come along once in a blue moon, where not only is the gameplay sim-like but extremely playable, but the AI plays by the same rules as the human player.

[Mano]

I think that a very big part of the art and skill about making games, is about making the gamers immerse in the world they have created, regardless of being real or not, as far as the world you create is convincing


Sometimes its about making the gamers believe it COULD be real

Sometimes its about making the gamers WANTING it to be real (those times things are so much fun you wish you could do those things in real life)

because if only games based on realism were immersive, we would have missed a lot of very creative and original games, sometimes just a little drop of realism is required.... depends on the soup your brewing

[Asche XL]

I'd say that realism is critically important... in games where it's necessary.
Something like Tank Wars or Quake isn't about "realism", but most other games absolutely require it. Racing games, or any simulation game, if they haven't got seriously good realism, they're garbage to me. Sega GT I've seen mentioned here, and I threw that game out the window because the realism was so craptacular. Steel Batallion OTOH is such an amazingly realistic simulator that I bought the game when I don't even own an XBox.

To me, it's all about the realism... If what you're talking about is in any way a simulator. 8 )


Same here. All depends on the game. Most of the time, yes Realisim is important.

[rodwipE]

Rather than get into a philosophical debate over what is real and what isn't I'll just sayTetris.

[Lumecanopy]

Realism in games is subjective, so as a result it largely depends on the subject matter involved, and our perceptions of the subject being explored. Before I lose all of you with long winded sentences, consider the following. Wipeout as a game series has intrigued many of us with its arcade style of play that is, honestly, not realistic at all. Yet many of us are addicted to the simulated speed, weapons arsenal, and cutting edge music that plants us solidly within the realty the game designers have developed for our enjoyment. Would any of us enjoy this series less if it were more realistic? Personally, I don't think so. This series as a whole could benefit greatly from a more realistic approach. Really, think about it. Just because a ship is weightless, being freed from the limitation of gravity , this condition does not create a craft with limitless capabilities. There is still the very important dynamic of wind resistance and the crafts overall aerodynamic design. The craft may be weightless hovering in air, but as it moves through the air its design and weight distribution become critical factors in speed response, manuverability, braking etc. I would love it if these factors were encorporated into the game. And who of us would be offended if the game became as visually stunning as its use of accurate physics, craft agility, and improved playability. An approach towards greater realism in games, and in particular this series, can only help in the developement of games worth investing our already diminishing time. LC :roll:

[FoxZero]

yeah lume, and then what if you could tweak the ships to the extent of gran turismo simulation mode.. then you could be part mechanic part pilot! although honestly gran turismo tweaking never excited me that much, if i can create a track or fiddle with the game, and if these tools are easy to use, then i spend much more time playing than if the game is without those tools.

[Lance]

.
to a certain degree, in WO3 at least, the feel of the ships indicates that aerodynamics is somewhat taken into account, particularly noticeable when the ship is steeply pitched during jumps. the mass of a racecraft is also evident. while the simulation of aerodynamic and momentum effects is not total, it is sufficient to give the impression of reality. i find that to help very much in creating an immersive experience.

that being said, there are games that are quite unrealistic that are extremely absorbing without creating the feeling of being in a real alternate circumstance

since i like both sorts of games, i would say that realism is important to me only in those games which attempt to imitate the real world in which we live, for example, a motor racing game. even there i feel no need for total simulation; i can do without car damage. a game like F355 Challenge on the Dreamcast is very satisying because it so well imitates the visual and sonic and vehicle dynamics effects of the cars, within reasonably convincing scenery. if it had realistic car damage, however, the fun would be cut short too soon and too often for me, since i am a less than perfect 'driver'. realistic damage would create a learning curve so steep that gaining sufficient length of practice to play the game well would frustrate me to the point of trading the game for something a bit more forgiving
.

[FoxZero]

its so much fun to smash cars up in grand theft auto, and narrowly missing a wall in need for speed high stakes is much more anxious with car damage, but at the same time, the full-throttle-wall-slam technique of motorhead wouldnt be possible with car damage. i think its okay sometimes to penalize the player for being reckless (like blowing up in wipeout or performance decrease from rolling upside down a lot in rallysport challenge) but i really hate being crippled and limping around the track or stopped entirely because of one bad wall collision. i dont continue to play games where i cant get back up and start again. same with some 'realistic' first person shooters if im dead in one shot.

[jmoid]

Lance, you just pretty much summed up my feelings on this. Wipeout Fusion lost me because they did away with any semblance of creating a realistic feel within the confines of an unreal situation, but, F-Zero GX doesn't attempt that at all, yet I've been playing it all the time since I bought it, and I was like a kid at Christams yesterday when I unlocked (what I think are) the last four tracks yesterday.

Generally I'm not a big fan of absolute realism in games. Videogames aren't about simulation for me, they're about exploring possibilities that couldn't happen in real life.

[yuusen]

_
personally i prefer tactility in a game as opposed to realism..
playing a game that has an impact of my senses outside the visual and audible field is more important to me than being able to spot check the technical elements of a game in comparison to either its realife or conceptual real life counterpart. to expand on the word, i would like to hark back to my first ever time playing wipEout. it was a time when i had little experience in controlling a games console and i found myself leaning and physically reacting to the onscreen happings. i was feeling what was going on, the game was tactile. i tried other games to see if they had the same impact and i can name none that did. nearly 10 years later i can pick up and play almost any game successfully (which i guess is a partial merit to games designers) and stay totally motionless. however, wipEout still has me spinning in my seat when things get really fast.
when i play a game i play it in order to mentally escape from my physical boundings, or to draw on the experience of being in the physical world. i have no doubt this is the case for many others. whtehr or ntot this effect is isolated within the wipEout game series universally or whether it is simply because individuals responde to different ranges of stimulae differently (a more valid theory) i am not sure.
in conclusion, tactility creates a more emersive experince for me because of my leaning towards a certain archetype of stimulation. realism tends to leave me cold as it feels like a downgrade of reality, rather than an extension, as in tactile gaming.
_
¥

[G'Kyl]

Hm, the reality issue. Personally, I like it a lot if games, or racing games for that matter, are realistic, but I think I like it even more if all they care about is to give you that fast, intense racing experience without taking any somewhat real physics model into account. The only thing I DON'T like is when those two aspects get mixed up. I want no F1 game that's part sim part arcade. I want either Grand Prix Legends from Papy or Formula One 9x from Psygnosis. That's simply because I find it useless spending time adjusting my car and learning tracks inside out only to find myself racing in a car that behaves somewhat realistically but also self-recovers after spins, has a simplified damage model or any similar player-helping features that you can't uncheck. For me it's like this: They either go all the way and give me the feeling of actually driving a real car, or they give me something that throws me right into the action without heaving to deal with anything apart from racing the track (and maybe shooting some opponents ;) ). The bottom line is: Physics should not distract from the easyness with which vehicles should be possible to be controlled.

[Lance]

.
hi G'Kyl, welcome to the WipeoutZone
.

[G'Kyl]

Hi,

thanks for the welcome. Hope I didn't offend anyone by not introducing myself officially. I was just trying to avoid the "Hey, it's ME, look here'-thing.
And I'm not that new, it's just that you never heard from me before. ;) I've come to the woz somewhat regularly for the last 3 years or so but never said a word.
So anyway, thanks again. Oh and: Keep up the great work you've been here!

Ben

[Lance]

.
we have quite a few people who just watch. many of them are actually members! :o
i seem to be the least quiet of us all. to put it charitably. ;)

i'd say that you are probably our only member from Dresden, though i can't be sure of this, since there are several members from Deutchland. i hope you continue to speak up :)
.

[G'Kyl]

.
we have quite a few people who just watch. many of them are actually members! :o
i seem to be the least quiet of us all. to put it charitably. ;).


Strange thing is that I never lurk around on any boards. For some reason, woz has been the only one (nothing personal, though. :-) ). That way at least I know there's actually people talking here. There's nothing worse than browsing through abondoned forums.



.
i'd say that you are probably our only member from Dresden, though i can't be sure of this, since there are several members from Deutchland.
.

Yep, already recognized that, but I rarely read profiles, so if there is anyone from Dresden or someplace near raise your hand!



.
i hope you continue to speak up :)
.

Better won't promise anything. *g*


Ben