Why do some games think they need to be realistic?

[tippy2k2]

Because I like realistic games. Realism is EXACTLY where I want my FPS's to go. There are plenty of arcadey shooters out, you are just focusing on the realistic ones because a few big name realistic shooters have come out just recently.

NAME ONE~! Arcade style shooter being released this year?

OR an unrealistic shooter, (Space Marine doesn't count because they again made him move like a cow)

Just cause you like it, doesn't mean I have to endure it

Actually this whole topics a hot button of mine. I personally call it Lets be X.

Halo comes out. FPS's "LETS BE HALO!"
Cod:MW comes out. FPS's "Lets be like that!"

Yes their good games for what they tried to do, but after the 3rd clone, One get's sick of it. And any one that brings this up gets told to F*** off?

This shit does not fly with me,

Now excuse me I'm going to go play a Sequal done right (Doom 3)

Because I'm that guy, I went to Wikipedia and just looked at all 360 games released this year (sorry PS3/PC people)

Arcade Games:

Bulletstorm
Crysis 2 (I'll give this as half/half since you could argue it either way)
Brink
Red Faction: Armageddon
Duke Nukem Forever
FEAR 3 (Didn't play it but I've always considered FEAR series to be arcadey)
Shadows of the Damned
Rage
Deus Ex: Human Revolution (another you could go half/half with)
Dead Island
Gears of War 3 (half/half)
Goldeneye
Halo Anniversary (pending)


You could argue that some of these suck but let's look at "realistic" games

Homefront
Operation Flashpoint: Red River
Call of Juaraz: The Cartel
Battlefield 3
Modern Warfare 3

Even if you remove the half and half, more arcadey stuff has come out this year. Granted, I may have missed some things because I did not recognize it but there has been plenty of arcade stuff and realistic stuff to come out this year.

The only reason you think that "Realistic shooters" are the only things available is because two HUGE "realistic" shooters just came out.

 

[holy_secret]

Yeah, Yahtzee sort of said this in the Bad Company 2 review. Not that many people listened though. There were still a bazillion comments saying "No! Realism is so good!". It's because some people (falsely) associate realism with a game being compelling. It can sometimes help, but it's not always the answer.

Are you saying they're not really associating realism with a game being compelling?

I don't get why some forms of realism is considered awesome whilst others get complaints.

 

[Hellscourge]

edit:

I'm just waiting for a realistic Role playing game , before i start jumping on the " let's hate realism because it's cool" bandwagon. Because i don't care for any genre outside rpgs anymore. A GTA samurai edition would be pretty cool though.

I'd suggest you see if you can find and like the Way of the Samurai series. (Just don't touch Samurai western, its horrible)

 

[oktalist]

Because remember that game that was realistic, and it sold 100 million copies from being realistic? And remember when I made a game that was realistic, and it didn't sell 100 million copies from being realistic? That... is part of the reason.

 

[Stephen Wo]

There a quite a few, no, a lot of games (FPSes included), that aren't realistic.
Buddy, let's be honest. COD and Battlefield aren't realistic. Lemme' talk to you here. I'm assuming you're not a veteran of any armed conflict. Disregard my gaff if you are. Modern war games aren't realistic, they just use a more grounded setting.
I have no problem with COD or any of these shooters. There's just a lot of clones, that's all. What pisses me off is twats banging on about how "realism is ruining the industry". Hey, fuck off. These guys are spending 60 dollars on a piece of code that lets them do something they normally would not be able to.
Live and let live, that's my quote.

 

[Soviet Steve]

I like realistic games that allow me to be in the same environment I'm in in my everyday life, except without any consequences for my actions.

 

[dessertmonkeyjk]

If you're referring to the current trend of what is considered realistic then I think you need to take into account how the game actually PLAYS instead of LOOKS. They go hand-in-hand in case you haven't noticed.

Then again, I don't want to play games in which I die once and can't do so again...

 

[BurnedPizza429]

There's a reason why I love games like Infamous, because when do you get to play as a person with electric powers in realistic games blowing up stuff, flying around etc..? It's not that I hate them but they can be awfully boring at times.

 

[andreas3K]

Call of Duty is not realistic. It may look like it is, but the gameplay is no more realistic than Final Fantasy.

One of the best FPSs I've ever played is Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising, which is pretty realistic. The realism is the best part, not for its own sake, but because it makes the gameplay really good.

Also, I think Forza Motorsport and Gran Turismo, two of the most realistic driving games around, are doing quite well.

Realism is good, but not everyone likes it, nor should everything be it.

If you think that's realistic, try playing the real Flashpoint games made by Bohemia. OFP: Cold War Crisis/Resistance and Arma2. And yes the old Rainbow 6 games (Raven Shield and earlier) and Ghost Recon 1 were similar to those games, in that they all have MUCH more realism than these big selling mainstream shooters of today.

If I had a decent gaming PC, I would. I'm hoping Arma 3 comes out on consoles, though I know that's improbable. Right now Dragon Rising is the best I can get.

ARMA 3 won't be on consoles. What about the original OFP, Raven Shield and Ghost Recon 1 ? Those are not new games. Maybe you can run those ? If you liked OFPR compared to the mainstream stuff, i HIGHLY advise you to try these gems out, if you can.

Maybe I could. Where could I get them? I don't know if they still sell those at my local game store.

http://www.amazon.com/Operation-Flashpoint-Game-Year-Pc/dp/B00008K1YM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321130841&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Tom-Clancys-Rainbow-Six-Gold-Pc/dp/B00014WM6U/ref=sr_1_1?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1321130955&sr=1-1 It's also on steam too http://store.steampowered.com/app/19830/?snr=1_4_4__13

http://www.amazon.com/Tom-Clancys-Ghost-Recon-Gold-Pc/dp/B00007LVCH/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321131311&sr=8-1

There's also a ton of player crated content for these games (new maps,campaigns..), so your TRULY getting your moneys worth with them.

You can check here to see if you can run it. http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri/

I'll definitely check those out as soon as I make some more money. Thanks!

 

[Sparrow]

I like realism sometimes. Thing is, I've never seen a game that strives to be completely realistic. Complete realism might sound really sucky to some people, but to me the prospect of a proper injury system (opposed to something like Fallout 3, where you "cripple" a limb only to have your character hobble) and proper hitboxes (like a one-shot kill to the heart) sounds pretty darn intriguing to me.

 

[ChickenZombie]

The reason people like the "realism" factor is because it allows them to feel like they are doing something that they couldn't really do. I mean with a war game, most people wouldn't run down a corridor with a shotgun blasting away at anything that moves. A "realistic" video game gives the player the impression that they are doing these things.

 

[chadachada123]

...Or how about we want SOME games to be realistic, and OTHER games to be really far from it? Like with movies? Or books?

Some of us like hard sci-fi, some of us like modern drama, or over-the-top unrealistic stuff, blah blah blah. Some of us like a bit of everything.

And to call Battlefield or Modern Warfare "realistic" is...misinformed, to say the least.

No matter how "realistic" some games get, there is still a massive market for "artistic"/unrealistic games like Mario games, and there's also a big market for colorful games with no workable physics to speak of, making your concern quite unnecessary. There's no need to worry at all. You shouldn't, though, make the insinuation that realistic games are bad. They're a lot of fun for people that like them, and the problem I've found is that there aren't any games that are near-realistic ENOUGH.

I enjoy crazy/fun games as much as the next guy, but I want something that really pushes the envelope for realism in a game into something crazy. Not that all or even most games should be realistic, but SOME definitely should be just to add variety. Your suggestion is the exact OPPOSITE of providing variety to consumers and is suggesting we hinder artistic direction.

*Edit* On re-reading your first post, OP, I see that you're not talking about realism at all, you're only talking about games in a modern setting. My answer remains the same. Having plenty of modern shooters doesn't affect the creation of fantasy games at all, since Zelda games and the like still have a massive market. Of course I have a problem with EVERY FPS game being a carbon copy of Call of Duty, but that's because each of their stories is exactly the same as the one before it. Before the huge focus on modern settings, the market was stagnant with really crappy dungeon crawlers and adventure games because of the success of Zelda and Final Fantasy, and people like you were sick of THAT setting being re-used ad infinitum.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Because it's the direction some games want to take. Not everything has to cater to your tastes mister OP, and not every game has the same purpose or even should have the same purpose. Diversity on all levels is the best way for the entire medium to improve.

 

[ShatterPalm]

A GTA samurai edition would be pretty cool though.

It's called Yakuza.

 

[ShatterPalm]

How incredibly convenient that the Uncanny Valley [http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/the-uncanny-valley] episode of Extra Credits came up again this week.

Realism and photorealism are good things, the problem is they are extremely difficult and expensive to make work. Seriously, who hasn't watched a Holodeck episode of Star Trek and thought "that would be awesome for games!"?

I will grant you that, and I already saw the episode, but I'm talking in the mechanics and story, not strictly in the graphics. And frankly, I'll take Okami's painted art style over the best photorealistic image out there. Always.

 

[wildpeaks]

Realism is just a tool, it can be used well or not, but there is nothing wrong with it per se imho.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I don't see those games as "realistic" in much of any sense. Realism would be more akin to the Shenmue series whereas these war-shooter games aren't much real at all. You aren't scared out of your mind with huge bullets/mortars/rockets/grenades whizzing past your head all of which can end your existence in less than a heartbeat. And please before someone goes on about how they wouldn't be afraid in a real war situation, you've no idea what you're talking about. Get shot at, get shot, tell me you're not scared, I'll tell you you are not fucking human or just a liar who wants to look macho. Realistic would mean a lot of things that games cannot pull off.
CoD isn't realistic, but its got real world ideals, politics and weapons. If thats realism to you then fine.
Also the thing the OP said about wanting to live during a Blight rather than this boring world... I doubt the OP understands he/she/it would most likely be one of the civilians either running for his/her life or being eaten by darkspawn. I honestly believe most people who think it would be cool to live in a medieval setting take for granted how good we have it in the modern day. Go live in the deep woods, I'm talking miles from civilization, for about 3-4 weeks. No soap, no toilet paper, just a knife, some leather tooled clothes and a bedroll along with maybe a field pack. I guarantee after digging holes to shit in, learning which leaves not to wipe your ass with and bathing in cold as fuck streams you'll either come out stronger or at least appreciate the world you do live in more. Thats realism.