"Realism" in fps games? What it the point where it becomes annoying?

[Takayuki Yagami]

I've been playing Red Orchestra on steam recently. Its a ww2 game that tries to be more realistic than other fps games. If you take a rifle round to the chest you die more less immediatly. I very much enjoy the game. However, I hate ARMA, which is basically a simulation. My question for the people here is how realistic or harsh can a game get before it becomes infuriating or tedious?

 

[Watcher]

I've been playing Red Orchestra on steam recently. Its a ww2 game that tries to be more realistic than other fps games. If you take a rifle round to the chest you die more less immediatly. I very much enjoy the game. However, I hate ARMA, which is basically a simulation. My question for the people here is how realistic or harsh can a game get before it becomes infuriating or tedious?

Largely depends on if you're willing to deal with it or not.

One of my favorite games is S.T.A.L.K.E.R Shadow of Chernobyl which is likewise a very realistic game. You die very quickly, if you get shot you begin to bleed out, your guns decay overtime and jam if you don't repair them, etc. What I like about all of it was the dev team didn't implement all those features just because they wanted the game to be hard. They implemented those features because it all adds to the premise that the main character is not the core focus of the story. Indeed a big aspect of SoC is how the main character of the game is arguably the world you explore, and the player character is just the one who observes it.

With S.T.A.L.K.E.R it also has multiple difficulties, and I always found the easiest difficulty lacked this connection with the player. Which is why I play it on "Master" difficulty mostly because I want to die in a few shots and feel this tension throughout the game that hey "I might die soon". It means the story has more consequence and you are more involved as a result.

However that's a singleplayer game released back in '07. Red Orchestra is not the best series, and I don't think this particular framework works particularly well for a multiplayer game. Even Counter Strike, despite being fairly realistic in terms of damages itself, still has you potentially absorb dozens of bullets and multiple gunshots to the face depending on the weapon.

 

[Alec Benson Leary]

I hate the obsessive drive toward "realism" that is infecting all genres of games these days.

If I want realism, give me a game where I watch youtube videos while eating a sandwich. Video games are supposed to be at least a little ridiculous.

 

[EI 903]

Soldier of Fortune, baby.

 

[José Mourinho]

I hate the obsessive drive toward "realism" that is infecting all genres of games these days.

If I want realism, give me a game where I watch youtube videos while eating a sandwich. Video games are supposed to be at least a little ridiculous.

Or a game involving driving a bus from Tucson, Arizona to Las Vegas which takes 8 hours.

 

[exball]

Some people want to play a game with realism. I personally would rather shoot lightning out of my hands but no one is forcing me to buy a simulator type game.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

Largely depends on if you're willing to deal with it or not.

One of my favorite games is S.T.A.L.K.E.R Shadow of Chernobyl which is likewise a very realistic game. You die very quickly, if you get shot you begin to bleed out, your guns decay overtime and jam if you don't repair them, etc. What I like about all of it was the dev team didn't implement all those features just because they wanted the game to be hard. They implemented those features because it all adds to the premise that the main character is not the core focus of the story. Indeed a big aspect of SoC is how the main character of the game is arguably the world you explore, and the player character is just the one who observes it.

With S.T.A.L.K.E.R it also has multiple difficulties, and I always found the easiest difficulty lacked this connection with the player. Which is why I play it on "Master" difficulty mostly because I want to die in a few shots and feel this tension throughout the game that hey "I might die soon". It means the story has more consequence and you are more involved as a result.

However that's a singleplayer game released back in '07. Red Orchestra is not the best series, and I don't think this particular framework works particularly well for a multiplayer game. Even Counter Strike, despite being fairly realistic in terms of damages itself, still has you potentially absorb dozens of bullets and multiple gunshots to the face depending on the weapon.

Any tips for STALKER? I've tried to start Call of Pripyat several times and just failed horribly. Also, look into something called Survivarum. I think its by the same guys.

 

[Ivan Komarov]

Only game I ever had trouble with for being too realistic was Falcon 4.0 since I tried to play it without reading the manual. Otherwise, never had anything be "Too realistic" for me. I play ARMA 2 with ACE all the time.

 

[Arkangel]

Any tips for STALKER? I've tried to start Call of Pripyat several times and just failed horribly. Also, look into something called Survivarum. I think its by the same guys.

Take things slow. This isn't a game where you can run and gun. Save often. Always keep your weapons in good condition; a weapon jam WILL get you killed in a tight spot.

 

[Watcher]

Any tips for STALKER? I've tried to start Call of Pripyat several times and just failed horribly. Also, look into something called Survivarum. I think its by the same guys.

Are you running it with a mod? Call of Pripyat Complete makes the game run just a little smoother

Other than that, try to play the game on a lower difficulty (which is found in the options menu). And remember to quicksave, the game does not autosave very often.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

Are you running it with a mod? Call of Pripyat Complete makes the game run just a little smoother

Other than that, try to play the game on a lower
difficulty (which is found in the options menu). And
remember to quicksave, the game does not autosave very
often.

Just reinstalled, for some weird reason the game won't ackowledge mouse input. Tried reinstalation and it did not work. Any idea what could do that?

 

[Watcher]

Just reinstalled, for some weird reason the game won't ackowledge mouse input. Tried reinstalation and it did not work. Any idea what could do that?

Have you patched the game? What operating system are you running it on? Since the game seems to have problems with Windows 8

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

Have you patched the game? What operating system are you running it on? Since the game seems to have problems with Windows 8

It's on 7. Steam is set to auto-update. I know about the mouse bug on 8.1. I can start a new game, but the mouse refuses to work.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

Have you patched the game? What operating system are you running it on? Since the game seems to have problems with Windows 8

Got the mouse to work. Now if only I could get Brutal Doom to run.

 

[Iä! Iä!]

Now if only I could get Brutal Doom to run.

What's the problem?

 

[StallChaser]

I'm of the belief that a game should be a game. If it can be realistic while still being good, that's fine, but realism shouldn't trump gameplay. It depends on the purpose of the game. If it's meant to be something like a simulator, or like a civilization-like strategy game that reproduces what it's like to live/be a leader in a certain era, then realism is super important. It would be in line with the goal of the game and therefore make it better. But if it was something like a futuristic racing game, an anime themed fighting game, or a high fantasy RPG, not so much. I'm more into the "less realistic" genres, so I'm not a huge fan of realism.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

What's the problem?

Just not very good with mods that don't hold your hand through instalation.

 

[Watcher]

Got the mouse to work. Now if only I could get Brutal Doom to run.

In terms of Call of Pripyat there's a mod called Misery that makes the game EVEN MORE realistic.

It makes money scarce, makes darkness darker, makes you die within the first two seconds of combat and adds a whole bunch of additional factors. Like to the point where if you get shot while wearing a gasmask, the lens of it can crack and you'll see fractures in your vision til you get it repaired. Your head mounted flashlight also drains battery, and while you have a handheld flashlight, you can't use a two handed weapon while using it. Or aim down your sights.

And yes you have to buy batteries, have to cook your food (with a stove that requires fuel) and there's hundreds of weapons all varying in terms of caliber.

Now if only I could get Brutal Doom to run.

I just copied a friend of mine's ZDoom folder and used it that way.

Zdoom is occasionally tricky though. Thankfully Brutal Doom can be run through a few other source ports. I recommend looking for a tutorial on how to install it, since it's not always self explanatory.

 

[Iä! Iä!]

 

[Rio]

I don't think that, in the video game industry, there's a such thing as 'too realistic' or 'not realistic enough.' I think there's plenty of room in the industry to have games that do pretty much any degree of realism or fantasy. When devs start feeling like there's only one way that's the right way, we start seeing a decrease in overall creativity because it limits the types of games that we'll be able to see. I enjoy experiences like painkiller, but that doesn't mean that I don't enjoy Red Orchestra. They're different approaches to a genre, and it's variety that makes trying different experiences worth your time imho. Whether realism or fantasy is fun or not depends on both the dev's competence and a player's subjective opinion. Not really on there being one 'right' way to make games.

It's a bit like the open ended vs linear 'debate.' Some games are fit for one, while others are fit for the other. There's nothing wrong with having games of both types on the market, because they appeal to different people.