Jump to content

Realism and games


Telric

Recommended Posts

@warmer All that is true, but my question would be what system would replace zombies breaking into concrete? It's a game mechanic to give the player a threat. It's not to combat realism. It's just a part of the game. If they couldnt do the concrete, then you'd be 100% safe. Is that the end of the game? Once realism is reached, you win? That's a big part i'm having trouble understanding from the point of view from a non realismer (yes that's a word... now.) Once that line is crossed, its over, in this game... And i'm not calling you out for your post. Just using it as a reference. Maybe you do or maybe you dont know why this type of system would be wanted or not. Just getting view points. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Game play is the line.

 

You make the game as fun as possible for the most people you can.

Then you accept that you're gonna get flamed by those who don't fit into that group.

 

Nothing else you can do.

 

No matter what you do in this world, there's someone who won't like it.

There's people who don't like this post I'm writing right now.

 

I'm going to stipulate for the record, that I don't like your post, but only to provide further proof to the point you were making that someone, somewhere, was always going to not like your post. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People dont want "realistic" mechanics, they want "plausible" mechanics.

Some rules (even if they are hypernatural) that get applied over the whole gameworld.

Example: the way magic is cast in the Harry Potter saga. It not realistic but has a very defined ruleset. Characters in the books use magic then in a plausible way.

 

When certain parts of the world break those rules, just for a specific "fun" effect, thats whats putting off people.

 

And there are no "fun" mechanics. The game can only be fun as a whole. A mechanic that works perfect in a jump and run game will not be fun in a WWII shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the thought of plausibility being applied to realistic. I play a bunch of different genres, (aRPG) Last Epoch, PoE, D3 (I lost my D2 discs or I'd play them instead), (MMORPG) P99, Tera (Survival Crafting) 7D2d, The Forest, Dead Frontier 2 (I know it doesn't have crafting, bite me), (MOBA) LoL, Dota 2, SMITE, (Single Player) Skyrim, more Skyrim, did I mention Skyrim?

 

Playability for me personally is does the game feel like what it's supposed to be. Is there mechanics in it that I can enjoy exploring either solo or with friends. Will I have fun breaking stuff (GMod) or pulling off insane head shots (CS:S / GO). (Can I build my empire more efficiently and increase my output while defending it (Factorio).

 

7D2D is portrayed as a survival horde crafting game. Supplies should be scarce, hordes should exist and be teeming to gnaw your face off. Anything after that is a mixed results bonus which players can opt in or out of via modders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'll walk right into Morloc's trap and comment....

 

It's not my trap, it's Admiral Ackbar's...err...wait, no...I mean.....

 

Now look what you've done!....I've posted here! Possible, escape is not! Doomed am I.

 

Wars do not make one great (except sometimes), but if you want to see fun realism in a game....play Rimworld, yes!

 

Read the tragic story of Min will you.

 

No, wait, there is another.......sale! Morloc's Rimwold stock climbs!

 

 

 

Oh, and p.s. ....go spam-crafting!!...Woot!

 

 

-Morloc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People dont want "realistic" mechanics, they want "plausible" mechanics.

Some rules (even if they are hypernatural) that get applied over the whole gameworld.

Example: the way magic is cast in the Harry Potter saga. It not realistic but has a very defined ruleset. Characters in the books use magic then in a plausible way.

 

When certain parts of the world break those rules, just for a specific "fun" effect, thats whats putting off people.

 

And there are no "fun" mechanics. The game can only be fun as a whole. A mechanic that works perfect in a jump and run game will not be fun in a WWII shooter.

 

First let me say that you make a very valid argument.

Plausible vs Realistic.

Yup I can understand where you're coming from.

 

The problem I have with your statement, at least for now, is that 7DTD is in Alpha.

 

We still don't have:

 

- Reason for Virus

- Plot or any storyline

- Defined parameters

- Beta version of the game where TFP says "Yeah this is the game."

 

Right now everything is up in the air.

 

I'd say your post isn't wrong in any way, it's just early.

 

I'm going to stipulate for the record, that I don't like your post, but only to provide further proof to the point you were making that someone, somewhere, was always going to not like your post. ;-)

 

Hahaha yeah.

 

1SLMOi5.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@warmer All that is true, but my question would be what system would replace zombies breaking into concrete? It's a game mechanic to give the player a threat. It's not to combat realism. It's just a part of the game. If they couldnt do the concrete, then you'd be 100% safe. Is that the end of the game? Once realism is reached, you win? That's a big part i'm having trouble understanding from the point of view from a non realismer (yes that's a word... now.) Once that line is crossed, its over, in this game... And i'm not calling you out for your post. Just using it as a reference. Maybe you do or maybe you dont know why this type of system would be wanted or not. Just getting view points. :)

Why has nobody mentioned.. CRAFTING TIMES!?

 

*Insert Smug Sentence Here

 

The escalation of durability in materials is an attempt at better gameplay (progression etc) through realism. As mentioned earlier, realism can either harm or complement gameplay and as many have said if realism harms gameplay it is obviously not an option. AFAIK none ever said or wanted that in these forums. So zombies destroying blocks is a necessary compromisation because as you said, a large part of gameplay will become meaningless.

 

It's really simple, just use common sense. Some examples:

 

-Loot timers: the game didn't use to have loot timers. Loot timers are a realistic element that also complements gameplay. If loot timers were more like 3-5 minutes, like they would be in real life, they would harm gameplay instead.

-Crafting times: It's in the name. Crafting actually takes time (and requires many realistic parts). Again a realistic element that complements gameplay. If crafting times were equivalent to real life crafting times, they would harm gameplay instead.

-Inventory "weight" system in A17: It is an attempt at better gameplay using realism. They didn't pull the concept of "weight" out of their head. Gravity/mass/physics is a party of the game's universe. If weight was identical to real life weight a whole part of the game (building for example), would be gone.

 

That's why I keep saying - when people talk about realism in video games, they are not talking about making things identical with real life. They are talking about plausibility/believability within the game, which is a good thing when it complements gameplay as demonstrated above and by the game itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...