"Good" Realism VS "Bad" Realism

[gta5freemode4eva]

I like GTA because it gives us a realistic'ish platform (map) to do kinda unrealistic things in, like shootouts, street races, flying jets into mountains, running people over, quad biking into bears etc etc... these are not the normal everyday activities for most people.

I like realistic graphics in some games, but I don't think that realistic graphics (photo-realistic) would suit GTA. I like the 'comic/cartoonish/animated' look to it and feel it adds that humorous value. Good realism is that they give us this nice world to muck about it but its not too realistic that if I get shot or am in a car crash that I die instantly.

[IDredMan]

You the guy who shot me a line on Youtube?

Wait ...Was that me? I think it WAS me.

Didn't read this tho, just went off Racecarlock's newer posts and phrased them differently in my brain, so I could relate to them.

[kesta195]

Recently, a lot of topics have popped up with the subject of "Fun Vs. Realism" as though the two are like oil and water, so I decided to reframe this debate. It's not a question of realism or fun, but good realism and bad realism. What follows are what I define as such.

 

Good realism is pretty simple. Have the environment feel like a real environment. Do things like (Copy paste) have peds use taxis and public transportation. Public transportation will have all forms open this time, this means a bus system. You can have peds checking out clothing in malls and even clothes going over metal bars in dressing rooms. You could have packed movie theaters with peds getting popcorn and you could also be able to get popcorn. Hell, have some movie parodies in there you could watch. Working amusement park, anyone? Peds getting food, buying their roller coaster photos, getting on roller coasters, complaining about long lines. Hell, have peds get on their laptops in the streets or playing a game/using an app on their smart phone. Be able to sit anywhere you want. Have celebrity red carpet appearances at various vinewood theaters with paparazzi and everything.

 

Then there's bad realism, which is a bit harder to pin, but I think I've got it down to things that limit what the player can do or how long he can free roam before doing a timed thing. These range from hunger, to injuries, to traffic laws, to fuel. I think if these are added, they should be optional. Because these are things that not everyone enjoys. I feel that fuel and hunger would just be mindless chores, traffic laws would have me being pulled over every minute, and injuries would just punish everyone who enjoys doing stupid stunts. I know these people might not matter to you, but forcing people to role play would remove that element of being able to choose your own play style that's been a core part of GTA since the top down games. This is why these features should be optional if implemented. Otherwise, they interfere with people who don't necessarily want to play hyper-realistically.

 

That's what I think anyways. What do you guys think?

Pretty much impossible to fault

[nimblelinn]

Spot on sir! I really hope one day R* learns to use OPTIONS! let the people choose what kind of realism they want!

[Nameless Foot Soldier]

Now I'm not one to argue for stuff like fuel and stuff but with this logic of bad realism. Isn't cops shooting you during a killing spree, the idea of a health bar and other things that limit you to do what ever you want just dumbing the game down. I don't know about you but I think rules give you a feel and puts you in the position to work around them as the player. Cops, assassinations and stealth, health and cover, ammo system, hell even gravity that keeps you from flying. All of that stuff hinders you from going overboard with your "freedom". And without that stuff, I'd think the game would be pretty boring, even if the world is very atmospheric which is one of the finer things I enjoy in GTA. But I need to be put in a world where I have my limits. You know what I mean?

Edited June 7, 2013 by Nameless Foot Soldier

[Macabro]

Recently, a lot of topics have popped up with the subject of "Fun Vs. Realism" as though the two are like oil and water, so I decided to reframe this debate. It's not a question of realism or fun, but good realism and bad realism. What follows are what I define as such.

 

Good realism is pretty simple. Have the environment feel like a real environment. Do things like (Copy paste) have peds use taxis and public transportation. Public transportation will have all forms open this time, this means a bus system. You can have peds checking out clothing in malls and even clothes going over metal bars in dressing rooms. You could have packed movie theaters with peds getting popcorn and you could also be able to get popcorn. Hell, have some movie parodies in there you could watch. Working amusement park, anyone? Peds getting food, buying their roller coaster photos, getting on roller coasters, complaining about long lines. Hell, have peds get on their laptops in the streets or playing a game/using an app on their smart phone. Be able to sit anywhere you want. Have celebrity red carpet appearances at various vinewood theaters with paparazzi and everything.

 

Then there's bad realism, which is a bit harder to pin, but I think I've got it down to things that limit what the player can do or how long he can free roam before doing a timed thing. These range from hunger, to injuries, to traffic laws, to fuel. I think if these are added, they should be optional. Because these are things that not everyone enjoys. I feel that fuel and hunger would just be mindless chores, traffic laws would have me being pulled over every minute, and injuries would just punish everyone who enjoys doing stupid stunts. I know these people might not matter to you, but forcing people to role play would remove that element of being able to choose your own play style that's been a core part of GTA since the top down games. This is why these features should be optional if implemented. Otherwise, they interfere with people who don't necessarily want to play hyper-realistically.

 

That's what I think anyways. What do you guys think?

I would love to see all those things, the good and the bad in the game.

I agree that the hunger and fuel and traffic laws should be optional though.

I would use them but I get that most people wouldn't like it.

I was actually pretty disapointed that Skyrim didnt have a hardcore mode like Fallout NV did.

 

People would like injuries if you were shown a model of your skeleton breaking when you do stunts. At least an xray or something. I'm pretty sure in the next gen games will have "collision cameras" that will show even internal organ damage as your PC or NPC's get destroyed.

 

[_L1pE_]

 

Yes, player realism is generally a bad idea.  Places where such realism had gone awry in IV are:

 

 

Niko's animations, especially when climbing over things.  I don't want a mini cutscene showing me the character climbing a fence in real time.  The animation should be fast, yet maintain the illusion of being realistic in the fluidity of the movement.

 

 

Ammunition count.  Being stuck with a max 600 rounds for the assault rifles and 8 rockets for the rocket launcher was ridiculous.  All that did was make it more of a hassle to restock ammo frequently without making the game anymore challenging.  I'm not calling for infinite ammo, but the maxes should have been twice as much in IV.

 

 

Dying from a 3 or 4 story fall. I don't understand how this was supposed to make things more challenging instead of just annoying. For one, there were barely any missions which involved the risk of falling.  A lot of GTA is about screwing around and trying to get to all sorts of places, but that immersion is broken when I miss a jump and end up at the hospital.   In VC you could fall 15 stories and still survive so long as you had full health.  I could understand scaling it back some, but they went too far in IV.

 

 

However, there are plenty of ways in which player realism can be a good thing:

 

 

Learning skills - Things like fighting, weapon reloading times, picking locks, hacking security codes, etc. are all things that would realistically enhance the player's abilities.

 

 

Improving stamina - The more you run around the map, the more the character should develop improved stamina and be able to sprint and swim fast for longer.

 

 

Increasing strength - maybe having the character start off with slow poke animations when climbing fences would be a good thing so you will see improved speed as you gain strength the more you climb sh*t.  I'm not necessarily calling for a return of gyms from SA, but having the character's strength noticeably increase the more you do things without altering his physique would be a good thing.

 

 

Heh, funny, I found your list to be backwards, except for IV's animations which are really bad for how sluggish they were, you don't take 3 f*cking seconds to turn around IRL ffs, I find grinding for skills a really boring task, I don't see what's so fun about having to do something over and over again just so you start not sucking at it, it feels really artificial, the only skills that should matter are the player's, if someone can shoot well he should be able to, and not have his shots go all over the f*cking place because his skill stat was low, and if someone can drive well he should be able to, and not have his car skid everywhere because his skill stat isn't high enough.

 

On the other hand, I have no problems with the ammunation count, I don't really think the player should be a walking armory as that makes things too easy, by me there should be some limitation to the weapons the player can carry (not nearly as limited as MP3 though), while also allowing you to carry multiple weapons of the same type, because it makes no sense that you're only able to carry one weapon of each type, and I also have no problems with realistic fall damage, falling from over 10 stories and surviving is just stupid, not even SR2 did something like that (although they did when they went full-retard with SRTT), if you don't want to take fall damage be more careful around high places and don't f*ck up, or use a cheat.

 

I still completelly agree with OP in that hunger and fuel is boring and adds nothing to the game, but anything that makes it more challenging would be a plus for me, such as smarter cops and enemies, getting damaged on car crashes so you're encouraged to drive better, etc... They could include anything that improves the challenge in a hardcore mode, and leave the normal mode to be the always unchallenging but still fun GTA we have always had.

[Guest]

Those points you mentioned could easily be levelled out with convenience.

 

Firstly, traffic laws. Cops enforced traffic in MCLA, it wasn't a problem at all. You know when there's a cop nearby, if there is, either slow down while near him, or come up with a quick route around. It adds a small amount of thought when driving, and I welcome this. It makes the world feel more dynamic. GTA has always been about "randomness" of things that happen in missions. You can't do each mission the exact same every time like in scripted games, there are minor changes in how the mission plays out, adding an amount of freshness to every playthrough. Traffic law enforcement just enhances that.

 

 

Second, fuel.

The inconvenience of refuelling cars at the start of the game can give you something to work towards. It adds an extra thing to buy, the extra things being larger fuel tanks for your custom cars, and a valet who will refuel all your cars so they will have full tanks whenever you take them from a garage. This just means there is more to spend money on, and that's a good thing. Every playthrough is different. You don't just go "I'll buy x, x and x" every playthrough, you would think "Well, refuelling cars has been a problem, so I'll buy a larger fuel tank and a valet." Similarly, on another playthrough, you may decide to buy some attachments for your assault rifle. It's all part of making the game interesting and fresh. If you had no setbacks in a game, it wouldn't be fun.

 

 

Third, Hunger. SA had hunger, the only reason it was tedious was because food was only found at restaurants, and you could only eat it at the place itself.

 

If food was found in stolen cars, on tables, in buildings and such, it wouldn't be a problem. Stolen a car? You find a snack in the glovebox. Eat the snack, you gained a small health bonus and there's no need to eat anything for a while. As long as food is common, it would not be a problem. Keeping food in an inventory would also counter any problems. And instead of losing health, there would just be a slight loss in speed, agility and aiming which you would rarely ever experience anyway due to the fact food is everywhere and you can store it. I don't see a problem. If you hate it that much, there should just be a cheat to disable it.

 

 

Injuries though, I agree that's just pointless and tedious.

[Nameless Foot Soldier]

Third, Hunger. SA had hunger, the only reason it was tedious was because food was only found at restaurants, and you could only eat it at the place itself.

 

If food was found in stolen cars, on tables, in buildings and such, it wouldn't be a problem. Stolen a car? You find a snack in the glovebox. Eat the snack, you gained a small health bonus and there's no need to eat anything for a while. As long as food is common, it would not be a problem. Keeping food in an inventory would also counter any problems. And instead of losing health, there would just be a slight loss in speed, agility and aiming which you would rarely ever experience anyway due to the fact food is everywhere and you can store it. I don't see a problem. If you hate it that much, there should just be a cheat to disable it.

 

 

Injuries though, I agree that's just pointless and tedious.

Well, it puts more focus on the restaurants when you need to go there. It forces another use of the city or urban setting and it's resources for the player. What's the point of adding something if you really have no need to use it. Also, I believe the inventory system from RDR might be back so maybe you can buy snacks or so.

[Racecarlock]

Third, Hunger. SA had hunger, the only reason it was tedious was because food was only found at restaurants, and you could only eat it at the place itself.

 

If food was found in stolen cars, on tables, in buildings and such, it wouldn't be a problem. Stolen a car? You find a snack in the glovebox. Eat the snack, you gained a small health bonus and there's no need to eat anything for a while. As long as food is common, it would not be a problem. Keeping food in an inventory would also counter any problems. And instead of losing health, there would just be a slight loss in speed, agility and aiming which you would rarely ever experience anyway due to the fact food is everywhere and you can store it. I don't see a problem. If you hate it that much, there should just be a cheat to disable it.

 

 

Injuries though, I agree that's just pointless and tedious.

Well, it puts more focus on the restaurants when you need to go there. It forces another use of the city or urban setting and it's resources for the player. What's the point of adding something if you really have no need to use it. Also, I believe the inventory system from RDR might be back so maybe you can buy snacks or so.

Well that's the problem. It FORCES another use. Instead of just letting the player go there if he wants to, now he has to go there or the player character dies of starvation.

 

I don't think I should have to worry about this sh*t in a game. Video Games aren't reality. I want to be on a vacation where I don't have to eat, don't have to pay bills, don't have to avoid buying the big tacky expensive jet because I need to save money for fuel, don't have to follow traffic laws or get chased by the police.

 

Yes, I could carry extra fuel and food with me, but all I would be thinking would be "Why do I have to worry about this sh*t now?". I would not be marveling at the realism. I just wouldn't.

 

Traffic Laws and food and fuel are for simulators. That's fine. I don't want GTA to start doing this stuff. I just don't.

[Macabro]

It may be possible to identify good and bad elements depending on the following criteria:

 

Does it alter the pace of the game?

 

Does it interrupt the play by forcing a menial and/or unimportant task?

 

Is it entertaining?

 

This. I also completely agree with TC. The people who want fuel can especially go f*ck themselves.

2 and 3 are pretty subjective though.

 

Some people might find those menial and/or unimportant task to be entertaining.

 

The same kind of people who loved hardcore mode in FONV and where dissapointed it wasnt in Skyrim.

[Guest]

Recently, a lot of topics have popped up with the subject of "Fun Vs. Realism" as though the two are like oil and water, so I decided to reframe this debate. It's not a question of realism or fun, but good realism and bad realism. What follows are what I define as such.

 

Good realism is pretty simple. Have the environment feel like a real environment. Do things like (Copy paste) have peds use taxis and public transportation. Public transportation will have all forms open this time, this means a bus system. You can have peds checking out clothing in malls and even clothes going over metal bars in dressing rooms. You could have packed movie theaters with peds getting popcorn and you could also be able to get popcorn. Hell, have some movie parodies in there you could watch. Working amusement park, anyone? Peds getting food, buying their roller coaster photos, getting on roller coasters, complaining about long lines. Hell, have peds get on their laptops in the streets or playing a game/using an app on their smart phone. Be able to sit anywhere you want. Have celebrity red carpet appearances at various vinewood theaters with paparazzi and everything.

 

Then there's bad realism, which is a bit harder to pin, but I think I've got it down to things that limit what the player can do or how long he can free roam before doing a timed thing. These range from hunger, to injuries, to traffic laws, to fuel. I think if these are added, they should be optional. Because these are things that not everyone enjoys. I feel that fuel and hunger would just be mindless chores, traffic laws would have me being pulled over every minute, and injuries would just punish everyone who enjoys doing stupid stunts. I know these people might not matter to you, but forcing people to role play would remove that element of being able to choose your own play style that's been a core part of GTA since the top down games. This is why these features should be optional if implemented. Otherwise, they interfere with people who don't necessarily want to play hyper-realistically.

 

That's what I think anyways. What do you guys think?

Adding an option to turn off features that may be annoying is the solution bcuz then everyone is happy. Saying they shouldn't add certain features bcuz they would be "bad realism" or annoying to you personally is just plain selfish. How about you stfu and use your cheats and stop tryin gto lead charges to prohibit features from roleplayers.

[Racecarlock]

Recently, a lot of topics have popped up with the subject of "Fun Vs. Realism" as though the two are like oil and water, so I decided to reframe this debate. It's not a question of realism or fun, but good realism and bad realism. What follows are what I define as such.

 

Good realism is pretty simple. Have the environment feel like a real environment. Do things like (Copy paste) have peds use taxis and public transportation. Public transportation will have all forms open this time, this means a bus system. You can have peds checking out clothing in malls and even clothes going over metal bars in dressing rooms. You could have packed movie theaters with peds getting popcorn and you could also be able to get popcorn. Hell, have some movie parodies in there you could watch. Working amusement park, anyone? Peds getting food, buying their roller coaster photos, getting on roller coasters, complaining about long lines. Hell, have peds get on their laptops in the streets or playing a game/using an app on their smart phone. Be able to sit anywhere you want. Have celebrity red carpet appearances at various vinewood theaters with paparazzi and everything.

 

Then there's bad realism, which is a bit harder to pin, but I think I've got it down to things that limit what the player can do or how long he can free roam before doing a timed thing. These range from hunger, to injuries, to traffic laws, to fuel. I think if these are added, they should be optional. Because these are things that not everyone enjoys. I feel that fuel and hunger would just be mindless chores, traffic laws would have me being pulled over every minute, and injuries would just punish everyone who enjoys doing stupid stunts. I know these people might not matter to you, but forcing people to role play would remove that element of being able to choose your own play style that's been a core part of GTA since the top down games. This is why these features should be optional if implemented. Otherwise, they interfere with people who don't necessarily want to play hyper-realistically.

 

That's what I think anyways. What do you guys think?

Adding an option to turn off features that may be annoying is the solution bcuz then everyone is happy. Saying they shouldn't add certain features bcuz they would be "bad realism" or annoying to you personally is just plain selfish. How about you stfu and use your cheats and stop tryin gto lead charges to prohibit features from roleplayers.

Ahem.

 

"This is why these features should be optional if implemented."

 

Bottom of the bad realism paragraph.

[GTAVTheHeat]

Recently, a lot of topics have popped up with the subject of "Fun Vs. Realism" as though the two are like oil and water, so I decided to reframe this debate. It's not a question of realism or fun, but good realism and bad realism. What follows are what I define as such.

 

Good realism is pretty simple. Have the environment feel like a real environment. Do things like (Copy paste) have peds use taxis and public transportation. Public transportation will have all forms open this time, this means a bus system. You can have peds checking out clothing in malls and even clothes going over metal bars in dressing rooms. You could have packed movie theaters with peds getting popcorn and you could also be able to get popcorn. Hell, have some movie parodies in there you could watch. Working amusement park, anyone? Peds getting food, buying their roller coaster photos, getting on roller coasters, complaining about long lines. Hell, have peds get on their laptops in the streets or playing a game/using an app on their smart phone. Be able to sit anywhere you want. Have celebrity red carpet appearances at various vinewood theaters with paparazzi and everything.

 

Then there's bad realism, which is a bit harder to pin, but I think I've got it down to things that limit what the player can do or how long he can free roam before doing a timed thing. These range from hunger, to injuries, to traffic laws, to fuel. I think if these are added, they should be optional. Because these are things that not everyone enjoys. I feel that fuel and hunger would just be mindless chores, traffic laws would have me being pulled over every minute, and injuries would just punish everyone who enjoys doing stupid stunts. I know these people might not matter to you, but forcing people to role play would remove that element of being able to choose your own play style that's been a core part of GTA since the top down games. This is why these features should be optional if implemented. Otherwise, they interfere with people who don't necessarily want to play hyper-realistically.

 

That's what I think anyways. What do you guys think?

Adding an option to turn off features that may be annoying is the solution bcuz then everyone is happy. Saying they shouldn't add certain features bcuz they would be "bad realism" or annoying to you personally is just plain selfish. How about you stfu and use your cheats and stop tryin gto lead charges to prohibit features from roleplayers.

You know, after reading the whole post I found yours a little.. Premature.

[Hotband]

Recently, a lot of topics have popped up with the subject of "Fun Vs. Realism" as though the two are like oil and water, so I decided to reframe this debate. It's not a question of realism or fun, but good realism and bad realism. What follows are what I define as such.

 

Good realism is pretty simple. Have the environment feel like a real environment. Do things like (Copy paste) have peds use taxis and public transportation. Public transportation will have all forms open this time, this means a bus system. You can have peds checking out clothing in malls and even clothes going over metal bars in dressing rooms. You could have packed movie theaters with peds getting popcorn and you could also be able to get popcorn. Hell, have some movie parodies in there you could watch. Working amusement park, anyone? Peds getting food, buying their roller coaster photos, getting on roller coasters, complaining about long lines. Hell, have peds get on their laptops in the streets or playing a game/using an app on their smart phone. Be able to sit anywhere you want. Have celebrity red carpet appearances at various vinewood theaters with paparazzi and everything.

 

Then there's bad realism, which is a bit harder to pin, but I think I've got it down to things that limit what the player can do or how long he can free roam before doing a timed thing. These range from hunger, to injuries, to traffic laws, to fuel. I think if these are added, they should be optional. Because these are things that not everyone enjoys. I feel that fuel and hunger would just be mindless chores, traffic laws would have me being pulled over every minute, and injuries would just punish everyone who enjoys doing stupid stunts. I know these people might not matter to you, but forcing people to role play would remove that element of being able to choose your own play style that's been a core part of GTA since the top down games. This is why these features should be optional if implemented. Otherwise, they interfere with people who don't necessarily want to play hyper-realistically.

 

That's what I think anyways. What do you guys think?

[badass nyuka]

Here We Go Again....

[Shadowfox_]

Recently, a lot of topics have popped up with the subject of "Fun Vs. Realism" as though the two are like oil and water, so I decided to reframe this debate. It's not a question of realism or fun, but good realism and bad realism. What follows are what I define as such.

 

Good realism is pretty simple. Have the environment feel like a real environment. Do things like (Copy paste) have peds use taxis and public transportation. Public transportation will have all forms open this time, this means a bus system. You can have peds checking out clothing in malls and even clothes going over metal bars in dressing rooms. You could have packed movie theaters with peds getting popcorn and you could also be able to get popcorn. Hell, have some movie parodies in there you could watch. Working amusement park, anyone? Peds getting food, buying their roller coaster photos, getting on roller coasters, complaining about long lines. Hell, have peds get on their laptops in the streets or playing a game/using an app on their smart phone. Be able to sit anywhere you want. Have celebrity red carpet appearances at various vinewood theaters with paparazzi and everything.

 

Then there's bad realism, which is a bit harder to pin, but I think I've got it down to things that limit what the player can do or how long he can free roam before doing a timed thing. These range from hunger, to injuries, to traffic laws, to fuel. I think if these are added, they should be optional. Because these are things that not everyone enjoys. I feel that fuel and hunger would just be mindless chores, traffic laws would have me being pulled over every minute, and injuries would just punish everyone who enjoys doing stupid stunts. I know these people might not matter to you, but forcing people to role play would remove that element of being able to choose your own play style that's been a core part of GTA since the top down games. This is why these features should be optional if implemented. Otherwise, they interfere with people who don't necessarily want to play hyper-realistically.

 

That's what I think anyways. What do you guys think?

Adding an option to turn off features that may be annoying is the solution bcuz then everyone is happy. Saying they shouldn't add certain features bcuz they would be "bad realism" or annoying to you personally is just plain selfish. How about you stfu and use your cheats and stop tryin gto lead charges to prohibit features from roleplayers.

Ahem.

 

"This is why these features should be optional if implemented."

 

Bottom of the bad realism paragraph.

Illiteracy at its finest -.-

[badass nyuka]

Imo I wlould Love To See RandOm Events Like Muggings And Gas Station Robbrries.

[Six Paths of Pain]

Yeah as long as the realism doesn't negatively effect the gameplay by slowing it down or making it overly difficult then I see now problem with adding as much as possible

 

Example:

 

this is what happens in real life when a car hits a telephone/light pole....

 

 

essentially.... your 250k Ferrari is about as valuable as my dishwasher and your skull has fragmented over your steering wheel. Now if GTA V kept to this level or realism, I don't think a single one of us would make it 5 minutes without wrapping the new Cheetah around a pole and sending Franklin to his untimely death... 20 times

 

 

 

GTA V like it's predecessor will 99.9999% have light poles that you can drive over/through without so much of a dent... and why?

 

 

.......Because you wrapping your car around a light pole at 100+ mph every 1-2 minutes and instantly dying isn't fun

 

 

 

Edited July 7, 2013 by Six Paths of Pain

[badass nyuka]

Yeah as long as the realism doesn't negatively effect the gameplay by slowing it down or making it overly difficult then I see now problem with adding as much as possible

 

Example:

 

this is what happens in real life when a car hits a telephone/light pole....

 

 

essentially.... your 250k Ferrari is about as valuable as my dishwasher and your skull has fragmented over your steering wheel. Now if GTA V kept to this level or realism, I don't think a single one of us would make it 5 minutes without wrapping the new Cheetah around a pole and sending Franklin to his untimely death... 20 times

 

 

 

GTA V like it's predecessor will 99.9999% have light poles that you can drive over/through without so much of a dent... and why?

 

 

.......Because you wrapping your car around a light pole at 100+ mph every 1-2 minutes and instantly dying isn't fun

Thats Messed Up...

[aaronimpact]

 

Yeah as long as the realism doesn't negatively effect the gameplay by slowing it down or making it overly difficult then I see now problem with adding as much as possible

 

Example:

 

this is what happens in real life when a car hits a telephone/light pole....

 

 

essentially.... your 250k Ferrari is about as valuable as my dishwasher and your skull has fragmented over your steering wheel. Now if GTA V kept to this level or realism, I don't think a single one of us would make it 5 minutes without wrapping the new Cheetah around a pole and sending Franklin to his untimely death... 20 times

 

 

 

GTA V like it's predecessor will 99.9999% have light poles that you can drive over/through without so much of a dent... and why?

 

 

.......Because you wrapping your car around a light pole at 100+ mph every 1-2 minutes and instantly dying isn't fun 

Thats Messed Up...

The worst part about that picture is, the area looks to be residential. The driver must have been going pretty fast.

 

 

On the subject of bad realism, I thought GTA:San Andreas had bad realism. You had to eat when you got hungry and exercise or you would loose muscle.

Edited July 7, 2013 by aaronimpact

[Six Paths of Pain]

@Thats Messed Up...

 

@The worst part about that picture is, the area looks to be residential. The driver must have been going pretty fast.

 

 

I think I read the driver in this pictures survived with insane injuries, but as you can tell by the damage..... the VAST majority well..... don't. It's bloody amazing how durable those light & telephone poles are though

 

I mean the amount of inertia 3000lb car doing 60mph has is insane, and they wrap around them like tin foil, hell i've seen Semi's barely up route the metal anchors to them -_-

[badass nyuka]

FFS The fuel system wouldn't be a "chore" You are just ignorant and unwilling to listen to reason.

Shut up

[jpalmer2004]

I'm not a huge fan of sleeping dogs but it was funny to be able to pee. You didn't have to pee but it was an option.

 

I've heard from people saying he starts to wobble and act weird if you don't pee at all though. I haven't seen it.

[Racecarlock]

 

@Thats Messed Up...

 

@The worst part about that picture is, the area looks to be residential. The driver must have been going pretty fast.

 

 

I think I read the driver in this pictures survived with insane injuries, but as you can tell by the damage..... the VAST majority well..... don't. It's bloody amazing how durable those light & telephone poles are though

 

I mean the amount of inertia 3000lb car doing 60mph has is insane, and they wrap around them like tin foil, hell i've seen Semi's barely up route the metal anchors to them -_-

You know what the hell of it is? I actually like soft body physics. I really do. If the game was being made just for me, I would actually try to get them in there.

 

But the thing is, I know the game is not being made just for me. I know there are people that would find these physics frustrating. That's why I still came out against them.

 

What irks me is that, aside from bumpyjohnson (maybe), no other role players seem to consider that. Whenever someone suggests fuel or jail or traffic laws, they never think to add in a caveat that the feature is optional. Never. Not once (except for bumpyjohnson). I actually saw some guy named NudasPriest recommend that fuel not be optional. Because it could be used as a weapon and a business thing. But getting gas for your car is not required to make gas stations buyable businesses or make gas a weapon.

 

The worst of it is that some people think I'm delusional or something for whining about stuff like this. Is this it? Is chores just the future of GTA or something? Do people actively look forward to getting gas in real life that they just have to do it in a game? Am I just crazy? Am I in bizarro world?

 

Also, the reason these chores piss me the hell off is because whenever I'm doing them, I think about every other game I have and every demo on Xbox Live. I think about them, and I wonder why I'm doing this crap instead. That's why mafia II pissed me off so much. I have just cause 2. Could be surfing on airplanes. This goddamn game made me clean toilets. I have hulk ultimate destruction. Could have been being the hulk. This god damn game made me clean toilets. I could be running an amusement park in RCT3 or thrillville, tearing sh*t up in a giant robot with a lightsaber in the gundam dynasty warriors demo, wrecking cars in burnout paradise, doing fun stuff in general in SR2, rolling a katamari, racing in one of my many racing games, and mafia II decided a better use of my digital free time was cleaning toilets.

 

That's what pisses me off. I could have been doing so much cooler sh*t and instead that f*cking game made me do a chore that I could easily do in real life. But I don't want to clean a toilet in real life. That's why I'm playing the game. But no, mafia II made me do it anyways. Because why the hell should video games be an escape from your normal boring life? f*ck that game, and f*ck the idea for chores in this game.

 

 

Edit: It's kind of like having a dream where you take out the trash, in that when you wake up you get pissed and wonder why the hell you weren't dreaming about being superman or getting laid or going to six flags.

Edited July 7, 2013 by Racecarlock

[Lospuertafreeway]

I want the game to be realistic as possible, if you shoot a ped they leak blood and try and walk to the hospital or call the ambulance themselves. I want the protag to have a hunger and thirst meter. Feeling up gas Is a must. I think the gta series somewhere in the future can build the first realistic virtual open-world video simulation which would shock everyone maybe they would have to change the name because it won't just be about stealing cars anymore.

[voltaire]

Yeah, this is pretty much spot on. But I don't know why this is even an issue. Most people who enjoy this kind of stuff ("bad" realism) are probably the kind of people who play games like The Elder Scrolls (which I do). So they already know how to role play.

 

A big part of role playing is using your imagination. Want to get pulled over if your driving is bad? Then just try driving like a normal person, and use the raise wanted cheat. Want to make Niko eat to survive? Then periodically go to a diner or cluckin' bell.

 

It's not hard. And i've done all of these things. We don't need to force everyone to play a certain way. The tools are already there to play as you please. So no more of this "x feature should have an on/off switch."

Yeah, I did this, I know it sounds stupid but when playing GTAIV and Sleeping dogs, I'd make the main character periodically stop to have something to eat, take a piss and pull up to a gas station and "pretend" that someone is filling up the gas tank.

[Kalerney]

Bad realism is when police chase you for almost nothing (and in GTA IV, one star can quickly become 2, wich can mean big loss of health or even death when on foot).

It's also a tiny health, it's not fun at all when you die every 10 minutes because you want to make funny stuff like jumping out of the running car etc etc ...

 

[duy9161]

The fuel system could be fun if it was a cheat though. This is one of the things that would be fun, for like 5 minutes, and then get you pull your own ass hair out, so if it was a cheat then I don't see why they shouldn't try something with it.

[bobo081093]

Fuel to some extent would be a good thing but only if it was scripted for peds as to give petrol stations a purpose rather than just being static explosive areas..

As for hunger, it doesn't really add anything to the game as a whole and the resources would be best used elsewhere.