Decrying the Excessive Emulation of Reality In Games

An editorial at GameSetWatch makes the case that game developers' relentless drive to make games more real has led to missed opportunities for creating unique fictional universes that are perhaps more interesting than our own. Quoting: "Remember when the norm for a video game was a blue hedgehog that ran fast and collected rings and emeralds? Or a plumber that took mushrooms to become large, and grabbed a flower to throw fireballs? In reality they do none of those things, but in the name of a game, they make sense, inspire wonder, and create a new universe. ... We’ve seen time and time again that the closer you try to emulate reality, the more the 'game' aspects begin to stick out. Invisible walls in Final Fantasy, or grenades spawning at your feet when you go the wrong way in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 are examples of kicking the player out of that illusion of reality, and letting them know that yes, this is a game, and yes, the rules are designed to keep you in the space of this world, not the real world. In reality, as a soldier I could disobey my orders and go exploring around the other side. I could be cowardly and turn back to base. Games shouldn’t have to plan for every eventuality, of course, but it’s not so hard to create universes that are compelling but where the unusual, or even simple backtracking, is not so unfeasible."

Comments

Re:yes, but

[pandrijeczko]

The issue with computer gaming today is that it needs a business model that sits halfway between commercial games companies and those who contribute to game-related projects freely.

The game companies are only interested in quick high-volumes sales within the first couple of weeks of a games launch...

Game programmers who write mods and levels often start off with great ideas but so few mods get fully finished, due mainly to under-estimation of the free time and resource that will ultimately be needed to complete the project...

The compromise would be for games companies to be more supportive of mod programmers and allow them to sell their mods at low cost whilst taking a cut themselves - maybe even sell third-party mods on their web sites. Hopefully, the remuneration that the games programmers would receive would be encouragement to complete more projects.

Of course, it will never happen in the real world because greedy games companies will see this as extending the shelf-life of games and won't want gamers buying mods instead of new games...

I HATE invisible walls

[SharpFang]

There are few more immersion-shattering elements.

So I plan: "This will be the right sniping spot. I will have them all right on the plate, and covered on their escape route too. The approach is covered, and the location provides decent cover behind these rocks. This should be easy then." Then - bump - invisible wall, border of the world. And I'm stuck with hopeless frontal attack which I barely survive.

Recently, I began playing Planeshift and learned how to find the perfect spots for mining. Unfortunately some of them are just past the invisible wall, leaving only crumbles for the poor in the open area.

Re:exception... (closest?)

[Tapewolf]

It's probably better than most, but if you've ever climbed out of the Catacombs Entrance area in Paris, you'll probably have discovered that the large tower you were airdropped onto has a trap at the bottom to make you explode, most likely to try and prevent the player surviving if they jumped off. Similarly, forget about exploring the ravine in the Vandenberg base (see also the "Vandenberg effect" on youtube).

Frankly I tend to play medieval fantasy type games more because you have more of an excuse ("It's magic!"), but having said that I do kind of wish that DE's "Realistic" setting had gone for something more like "If you're shot, it will kill you". As opposed to... well, if you know what you're doing, you can blow yourself up just before the mission ends and start the next one as just a head with no limbs or body.

Re:yes, but

[commodore64_love]

>>>Not every game HAS to have super high detailed 3D graphics, a physics system plucked from the altars

Yes you would think that, but it's not how the average buyer (read: kid, teen, or young adult) thinks. As example I didn't know what to buy my nephews for Christmas, so I just bought a pile of new Xbox and X360 games, and let them pick the 4 games they liked best. I was surprised when they picked the X360 game "Pinata" (or whatever it's called) instead of the Xbox Splinter Cell 2 game. So I asked why they chose the kiddie party game rather than the military game (which is their favorite genre).

"Because Xbox games have poor graphics."

Yep. Already judging games on looks, not fun, and this is why you can't create some 2D or 2.5D game - it will be automatically judged as crap. Personally I would have picked the Splinter Cell game (since I thought the Pinata game was dull), but then I've learned to judge things based upon the personality (fun, challenge, et cetera) not the T&A (polygon or pixel counts).

Aside -

This is why I like Nintendo games, and get a little annoyed when I hear people say "Nintendo consoles are crap". Okay so their consoles are not impressive hardware, but Nintendo still uses their imagination to create fun games. Ditto Sega. FOR ME the less real a game is, the more I enjoy it, because it feels like I've entered another world. Simulations of reality are nice, but how many times can I watch a body blowup and splatter blood all over the place? I think I'm sick of that genre. (Plus it really isn't realistic that you can get shot a dozen times and still be moving. I'd like to see a real FPS where one shot and you're done.)