"Good" Realism VS "Bad" Realism

[ekhunter]

like anyone is gonna read this sh*thole wall of text thread,

 

LOCK

[StJimmy]

like anyone is gonna read this sh*thole wall of text thread,

 

LOCK

Why did you bump a good retired thread just to say the mods should lock it?

[Gigabomber]

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

1. Does it alter the pace of the game?
2. Does it interrupt the play by forcing a menial and/or unimportant task?
3. Is it entertaining?

 

 

I can't think of a better summary to decide if an element is bad. A Good game has good pacing, tasks feel important, and - if not - at least entertaining. If it is none of those, toss it like: filling a gas tank:, cappy mini puzzles that pad a games length, and a series of fetch quests.

Edited September 8, 2013 by Gigabomber

[HighOnGTA]

I think one can define good realism vs. bad realism, by stating this simple question:

 

Does it help your immersion in the game/your sense of being completely in the game-world in your mind - or does it not?

[dg101]

The only added realism I want in this game is more interaction with the environment. Being able to use chairs, or order different food or goods at any store. More open buildings to explore the interiors of, Stuff like that. It's a totally different type of game, but I loved that in Skyrim. You could do pretty much anything, interact with anything. Want to just sit and enjoy the scenery, watch this incredibly detailed world work? You could do it. There's a certain level of roleplay available there. And GTA V DOES have some of that...to a point. Michael can lounge on the couch and watch TV. You can STAND in your hot-tub. But not relax your character in it. Maybe go out and pick up a hooker, take her home or to a hot tub and get your f*ck on. Stuff like that adds a whole other level to the game. But I DO agree stuff like that should never be mandatory.

 

And that's probably just me. Hell, my idea of a perfect game is a blend of The Sims 2, GTA, and Skyrim.

[Racecarlock]

I think one can define good realism vs. bad realism, by stating this simple question:

 

Does it help your immersion in the game/your sense of being completely in the game-world in your mind - or does it not?

I think a more important question is does it make going to the world less desirable despite making it slightly more immersive.

 

I'm not the only one who thought about this. Rockstar clearly did, and it turns out fuel and hunger are not the directions that rockstar games is going in. Many people wrongly assumed they were, but they aren't.

 

I just don't find getting fuel or food fun. And rockstar agreed, which is why they are not in.

[DeafMetal]

I'm glad GTA V took GOOD realism (for the most part) this time around. Back to III era realism, baby. Now people will stop thinking GTA is gritty and realistic just because GTA IV has that reputation and they didn't bother to f*ckin' play GTA games to begin with.

 

Phew.

[Blennerville]

ill add to the "Bad realism" - a lot of the mechanics/animations/gameplay stuff added in GTA4 and 5 are just annoying and take from the experience.

 

 

The ragdoll physics where you fall down with the slightest tip from a car, or if jump into something/someone,

or the mechanic where if you crash a car you sometimes get thrown through the windshield, or if the cops are after you and one of you wheels get hit it locks up.

or if you jump off a hight that is one foot higher than the safe height then your character in GTA5 decides it would be best to to a flip in the air and land face first for no reason and loose a lot of health or die instead of just landing on his feet and loosing a small bit of health.

robbing a vehicle takes too long, getting out of a vehicle takes too long and there is no need to turn it off or close the door.

The VAST majority of the mechanics are nothing but annoying.

 

Then there is also stuff like over use of the phone and internet and banking - vice city was best here where all you did has answer the phone. internet is a waste of time and ever since it was first put into GTA in SA it has been nothing but annoying.

banking should be automatic or just like it was in the ps2 games.

The VAST majority of this stuff is annoying and a waste of time.

 

 

 

There is loads more which i cant think of but that are just as annoying.

 

All this (annoying) stuff just gives me the impression that they put all these (annoying) things in the games because they ran out of ideas and the didnt know what to do to fill the gap so they just put this stuff in as filler. Again they are just annoying and nothing else.

[Blennerville]

this is a good thread and needs lots more attention.

[Cyper]

What OP is speaking about is authenticity. In videogames this tend to refer to a beliveable environment, sound, light, and other effects, and in general a world that is visualy similar to the real world.

 

Realism, on the other hand, often boils down to non-visual components such as mechanics and functions. In GTA, that may be how your characters health work and how it is affeced by certain events in the world. Vehicle physics, vehicle handling, weapon damage, weapon handling, fall damage, and so forth, is related to realism.

 

I can't say I completely agree with OP. When videogame developers speaks about ‘’accessibility’’, ‘’aiming for a wider audience’’, or, ‘’more responsive and fluid’’, I fear what I despise the most: videogames that compress the skill gap by making the game scripted, obvious, and throwing in to many aids to the player. Worst off all, these games prevent the player from freedom of choice; you’re put into a corridor, with no other choice than do exacty, step by step, what’s already intended.

 

There are fundamental aspects of realism to every game.

 

The most fundamental aspect in GTA is by no doubt freedom. It’s freedom of choice within the sandbox environment. This freedom of choice is restricted in GTA V in certain ways. For example, you can only buy clothing that fits the characters pre-defined style. You can’t enter interiors because you are not supposed to. You can’t buy Safehouses because it is not allowed. You can’t be treated naturally by AI because they are designed to be over aggressive.

 

Two other fundamental aspects of GTA is driving and shooting

 

If driving and shooting isn’t solid, then the game falls short because so much of the game is focused on that. GTA could have offered a Hardcore Mode affecting weapon mechanics in a way to make shootouts more slow-paced, but instead less enemies, removal of checkpoints, and so forth. The driving part could offer ‘’Simulation Mode’’ and ‘’Arcade Mode’’. Simulation mode would manipulate car deformation to a rather realistic value, aswell as the vehicle handling, making vehicles behave in a more realistic manner similar to how they behaved in GTA IV.

 

Maybe Rockstar didn’t want that because it is similar to screaming ‘’Hey, we dumbed down GTA V, but you can still play as before....’’ Of course the mainstream audience wont bother with the game being dumbed down, because thats exactly what they want, but for me personally it does not make the game better. It makes it worse and its one of the reasons to why I got bored of GTA V singleplayer after about one month.

Edited March 16, 2014 by Cyper

[Blennerville]

What OP is speaking about is authenticity. In videogames this tend to refer to a beliveable environment, sound, light, and other effects, and in general a world that is visualy similar to the real world.

 

Realism, on the other hand, often boils down to non-visual components such as mechanics and functions. In GTA, that may be how your characters health work and how it is affeced by certain events in the world. Vehicle physics, vehicle handling, weapon damage, weapon handling, fall damage, and so forth, is related to realism.

 

I can't say I completely agree with OP. When videogame developers speaks about ‘’accessibility’’, ‘’aiming for a wider audience’’, or, ‘’more responsive and fluid’’, I fear what I despise the most: videogames that compress the skill gap by making the game scripted, obvious, and throwing in to many aids to the player. Worst off all, these games prevent the player from freedom of choice; you’re put into a corridor, with no other choice than do exacty, step by step, what’s already intended.

 

There are fundamental aspects of realism to every game.

 

The most fundamental aspect in GTA is by no doubt freedom. It’s freedom of choice within the sandbox environment. This freedom of choice is restricted in GTA V in certain ways. For example, you can only buy clothing that fits the characters pre-defined style. You can’t enter interiors because you are not supposed to. You can’t buy Safehouses because it is not allowed. You can’t be treated naturally by AI because they are designed to be over aggressive.

 

Two other fundamental aspects of GTA is driving and shooting

 

If driving and shooting isn’t solid, then the game falls short because so much of the game is focused on that. GTA could have offered a Hardcore Mode affecting weapon mechanics in a way to make shootouts more slow-paced, but instead less enemies, removal of checkpoints, and so forth. The driving part could offer ‘’Simulation Mode’’ and ‘’Arcade Mode’’. Simulation mode would manipulate car deformation to a rather realistic value, aswell as the vehicle handling, making vehicles behave in a more realistic manner similar to how they behaved in GTA IV.

 

Maybe Rockstar didn’t want that because it is similar to screaming ‘’Hey, we dumbed down GTA V, but you can still play as before....’’ Of course the mainstream audience wont bother with the game being dumbed down, because thats exactly what they want, but for me personally it does not make the game better. It makes it worse and its one of the reasons to why I got bored of GTA V singleplayer after about one month.

 

 

i think you missed the point.

[Blennerville]

I think the Housers are out of touch, they really dont know what to do anymore and this is why they have gone this way with GTA4 and GTA5 - bad realism, political/FIB heavy and shouting curse words all the time.

It like the Hangover part 3.

[VanillaIce]

the Bad Realism In V is....

 

when your cruising on a bike up hills and when you land right but still fall off and die almost all the time.

 

or flying out of your Windshield and dying almost every time you hit a car.

 

or when you land your car in a sideways Position from a fall or a stunt Jump and it blows up almost All the Time.

 

 

[poland stronk]

Good realism is where there is gameplay mechanic or feature that is showing something realistic but in enjoyable way. Bad realism is where annoyance, frustration and boredom strikes with it's realistic brutality. The reason we play games is because we want entertainment. We play GTA because we want to steal cars, shoot with cops and do stuff we wouldn't in real life. We of course want to see computer world as realistic as it can be - that is diversive, alive and surprising. It's the details we are after not limitations that makes the game less enjoyable.

 

For example: good realism is where you can regenerate 50% of your hp making rampages with police last longer. Bad realism is where even sports cars behave like there is always ice on the road.

[Kevinnicholls62]

GTA IV realism > GTA V realism

[Blennerville]

GTA IV realism > GTA V realism

 

 

[Racecarlock]

GTA IV realism > GTA V realism

Care to explain why? That's what forums are about, after all.

[matajuegos01]

 

GTA IV realism > GTA V realism

Care to explain why? That's what forums are about, after all.

 

Because if you crash and you go through the windshield you rarely die, you can withstand a lot more damage and the driving is better.

[Blennerville]

bump

[Algonquin Assassin]

bump

If you're going to bump a thread at least make a worthwhile post other than "bump". I'll let it slide this time, but please remember in future.

[Blennerville]

[universetwisters]

One thing I'll say about this, though, having to stop for gas/constantly eat/abide by traffic laws is one of the sh*ttiest bad realism things I can think of.

[Lioshenka]

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 actually disagree on most, if not all, of these points.

 

For instance, clothes going over metal bars and people counting cash at the checkout would be time-consuming and annoying as hell. I am all for reasonable simplicity - yes, let people buy things, but don't re-create a complete shopping experience where they can't remember their PINs, or when the shop doesn't have shoes in their size or whatever. A simple animation, where they take something from the counter will suffice.

 

Parodies in cinemas are good, but I was left with the impression that R* spends too much effort on this, when it could have been spent elsewhere. For instance, comedy shows in 4 weren't even that fun. The cabaret thing was a complete weird thing to have, it was not fun, it was not entertaining - time and resource consuming. I had more fun with low-poly strippers in Vice City. Then there's a whole animation, where you enter a building, and wait for the interior to load, and probably buy a ticket, and find a seat... Back in the olden days you step into a yellow triangle and then a second later into a red cylinder. No need to wait for anything, there is freedom, but it is kept to a reasonable minimum.

 

Now, fuelling up your car is amazing. It adds an element of challenge, gives you an element of rôleplaying and allows the player to explore the map looking and pulling into petrol stations. How often do you fill up your car in real life? I do it 3 times a month, and it uses A LOT of petrol. I can hardly think you can drive the same car in GTA for 4 hours until your tank is empty. Eating is SA was crucial... did you do it often?

 

I hate the way GTA takes with the realism since GTA 4, therefore if given a choice between "fun" and "realism" I'd choose fun. At least this way there is more chance I'll actually enjoy the game and not end up running from a car park, where I have just finished changing my tyre to the cinema, where I'd have to explain to the usher why I am late and beg to sell me a ticket and let me in.

 

Ragdoll physics? Annoying.

Flying from the windscreen every time you hit something? Annoying.

Being able to roll the car over? Annoying.

 

And the list goes on: cars blowing up when you land at an angle, but not blowing up when you are upside down; not being able to climb steep hills on foot; falling down from bumping into small fences and vehicles.

 

Yet, 18 years later and we still haven't got a speedometer, cruise control or the ability to pick up objects and sit on benches or ground. Now, that would be a good realism.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Lioshenka

[Jack Lupino]

^^ you just quoted a 6 year old post O_o

 

I will add:

Good Realism-

-Ability to change body growth and feature by exercise and eating

 

-ability to destroy buildings or objects or use surrounding things as weapon

for example, in sleeping dog's you can smash someone's head in between doors and lock him in the boot of the car

 

-more interiors(hospitals, police precinct,burger/pizza outlet,structures,nightclub,casinos,apartments,banks etc)

 

-tvs,radios,phones,tablets,Internet websites,videogame box,vending machine for snacks,drinks etc,working showers,toilets,electric lights switch (like max payne)

 

Now,bad realism

-Death by jumping out of speeding vehicles

-too much fragile aircrafts

-not able to survive a fall from tall building

-fuel meter

-linear gameplay (what I mean is not having the ability to complete a mission in multiple ways and have to follow radar)

Edited April 5, 2018 by Jack Lupino

[Timcatgt5]

Good realism would be for the next installation;

 

A balance of stamina, fat, lung capacity and strength determines how physically capable the player is.

 

Having max strength, medium fat and low stamina/lung capacity will result in the player finding it difficult to run or swim well, but they can attack harder and absorb damage. This would be considered for a brawler.

 

Having high stamina/lung capacity, low fat and low strength means the player can move around easier and maintain running speed, but they are vulnerable to damage. This would be considered for a ninja.

 

Having medium strength, medium fat and medium stamina would be the perfect balance of physicality, as the player can run or swim fairly well without their body mass slowing them down, they can absorb damage fairly well and can attack well. This would be considered for a boxer.

 

Also, you can learn different attack styles, such as boxing, brawling, martial arts or kickboxing depending on the players attributes.

 

Brawling for heavier characters, martial arts and kickboxing for lighter characters, and boxing for leaner characters.