Realism doesn't always mean better.

[nimblelinn]

Some people say adding realism would take away "the fun" because it would be to hard.

 

I think its the opposite, the harder something is the longer it takes to master it. Ya sure, running out of gas or getting pulled over for speeding would be irritating at first. But that just means you would get better at looking out for cops or stealing cars that have full tanks.

 

I went back and played San Andreas, I beat it in a matter of days, it took me at least a month maybe two the first time. now i realize it could have been harder.

Realism has nothing to do with difficulty.

Then why not make it as real as possible?

[IDredMan]

Some people say adding realism would take away "the fun" because it would be to hard.

 

I think its the opposite, the harder something is the longer it takes to master it. Ya sure, running out of gas or getting pulled over for speeding would be irritating at first. But that just means you would get better at looking out for cops or stealing cars that have full tanks.

 

I went back and played San Andreas, I beat it in a matter of days, it took me at least a month maybe two the first time. now i realize it could have been harder.

Realism has nothing to do with difficulty.

Then why not make it as real as possible?

Cause that's what outside is for.

(I was gonna say that it would be no fun, but judging by your first post, you don't care about that.)

[GarrowsKai]

Realism where it improves the game or adds a fun challenge (carry less ammo/weapons). Not ott realism like getting chased for running red lights or speeding though.

[IDredMan]

This time we can carry 12 things in our 'back pocket'.

All I have to say is, GTA protagonists must have roomy rectums.

Edited May 12, 2013 by IDredMan

[nimblelinn]

Some people say adding realism would take away "the fun" because it would be to hard.

 

I think its the opposite, the harder something is the longer it takes to master it. Ya sure, running out of gas or getting pulled over for speeding would be irritating at first. But that just means you would get better at looking out for cops or stealing cars that have full tanks.

 

I went back and played San Andreas, I beat it in a matter of days, it took me at least a month maybe two the first time. now i realize it could have been harder.

Realism has nothing to do with difficulty.

Then why not make it as real as possible?

Cause that's what outside is for.

(I was gonna say that it would be no fun, but judging by your first post, you don't care about that.)

haha touche!

 

but if i get in a high speed pursuit in real life (something i really want to do) REAL people die or i go to prison for a long time

[reform]

Some people say adding realism would take away "the fun" because it would be to hard.

 

I think its the opposite, the harder something is the longer it takes to master it. Ya sure, running out of gas or getting pulled over for speeding would be irritating at first. But that just means you would get better at looking out for cops or stealing cars that have full tanks.

 

I went back and played San Andreas, I beat it in a matter of days, it took me at least a month maybe two the first time. now i realize it could have been harder.

Realism has nothing to do with difficulty.

Then why not make it as real as possible?

Cause that's what outside is for.

(I was gonna say that it would be no fun, but judging by your first post, you don't care about that.)

haha touche!

 

but if i get in a high speed pursuit in real life (something i really want to do) REAL people die or i go to prison for a long time

So applied to a game you'd want that character to perminently die too, so you'd have to buy the game again if you wanted to continue playing? Or have the game become a prison sim for 18 years or whatever your character was sentenced for.

[nimblelinn]

no that's silly, that's the point of a video game. I just want the environment and the peds to be as real as possible. with out the consequences of death and prison

 

EDIT: I don't understand why they don't just make things like that options. level of traffic, how the police react to traffic laws, eating.

Edited May 12, 2013 by nimblelinn

[VIPΣR]

Rockstar should definitely fix the static steering wheels, because even Saints Row has movable steering wheels by now. It looks rediculous when Niko moves his hands, but the steering wheel doesn't move.

[Cyper]

People have to wake up and realize that ''fun'' is completely subjective.

 

One of my favorite games is ARMA. It's the most realistic FPS game on the market (and probably the only simulator) and its by far one of the most fun games I have.

The more realism I see in the game, the more fun it gets. For ME. Then there is of course the objective that ''If you want realism, go outside, or join the army etc.'' That is of course an objection that has no weight to it at all, and its an objection that simple-minded people make. There is no need for stating the obvious (real-life is more real than reality in a game) and to say that if you want to kill someone in a videogame, then you should do it in real-life, is as stupid as it gets and totally misses the point.

 

But GTA is a mainstream game. ARMA is not. Therefore, GTA has to balance Realism and Arcade. Because games that focus a lot on realism (ARMA) will never appeal to a wider audience.

 

Adding RPG elements, or other aspects that makes the game more realistic, is not a problem if it's optional and not forced down peoples throat. Then it is obvious that if something is more difficult that doesn't mean it is more realis In GTA 1 one bullet killed you - no matter what. No matter if it was from a submachinegun, a pistol, or where you were hit: it killed you anyway.

 

If Fallout New Vegas you could activate ''Hardcore Mode'' and that forced you to eat, drink, and sleep in order to survive. It also made ammo and other items have weight. But then of course, if a similar system is made into GTA, it most be possible to change the timescale in the game or else you would have to eat every 20 minutes since 2 minutes in GTA = 1 hour in real-life.

 

Personally, I think some form of Hardcore Mode would be good for GTA.

 

 

Regarding the thread, it is highly biased.

 

''Do you want a realistic GTA''

 

Well, that does that even mean? To what degree? To even make GTA a simulator of some sort?

Edited May 13, 2013 by Cyper

[IDredMan]

Rockstar should definitely fix the static steering wheels, because even Saints Row has movable steering wheels by now. It looks rediculous when Niko moves his hands, but the steering wheel doesn't move.

But to be honest, in GTA IV, the handling was so bad, I doubt the wheels were moving either.

[IDredMan]

Regarding the thread, it is highly biased.

 

''Do you want a realistic GTA''

 

Well, that does that even mean?

What, I can't have my own opinion cause I'm the OP? I'm a user and a citizen, everyone here is equal, it's not like I'm the overlord of this thread and will lock you all up for life if you disagree with me.

[Dope_0110]

Regarding the thread, it is highly biased.

 

''Do you want a realistic GTA''

 

Well, that does that even mean?

What, I can't have my own opinion cause I'm the OP? I'm a user and a citizen, everyone here is equal, it's not like I'm the overlord of this thread and will lock you all up for life if you disagree with me.

What's your problem. He's asking you do define ''realistic''. To some people it may be full on realism, to others it may only mean small additions like having to refuel.

[IDredMan]

Regarding the thread, it is highly biased.

 

''Do you want a realistic GTA''

 

Well, that does that even mean?

What, I can't have my own opinion cause I'm the OP? I'm a user and a citizen, everyone here is equal, it's not like I'm the overlord of this thread and will lock you all up for life if you disagree with me.

What's your problem. He's asking you do define ''realistic''. To some people it may be full on realism, to others it may only mean small additions like having to refuel.

He said it was biased...