| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (27)

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 8:21AM Irem said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
It depends on how it's implemented. It can be fun, and make the game world seem richer, or it can be annoying and clumsy. I tend to prefer mounts and transportation to instant travel in games, myself, at least at the start, and the implementation of food and drink to restore health or gain strength is usually a nice touch (even if you don't need to eat it to keep going). I like having to build or find a fire to cook, a loom to weave, a forge to work metal, and so forth. In WoW, I was a little upset when they removed the poison crafting system, because it felt realistic (why would my rogue trust someone else to do that for her?) and made my character seem like a real professional.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 8:41AM Bramen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Realism can be great! But at a certain point it can hurt the game. It is fun to have a rich world; it's not fun to have to eat every 6 hours or face death.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 9:03AM Lenn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Realism is good, but there's a fine line between fun and The Sims. Nobody wants to monitor their character's bladder contents.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 9:06AM nilsmmoblog said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Realism does not have any place in MMORPGs, fantasy stories or SciFi. No place at all!

What does have a place is Credibility and Consistency. Stop using semantics that make no sense, please. Fireballs are never 'realistic'; but they can and should be as credibile and consistent within the lore as possible.

Nowaday's popular MMORPGs do not suffer a lack of realism. They suffer a severe lack of credibility and consistency in their worlds.

Gameplay should be designed in a way that it supports the lore, not destroys it. And the simulation should be designed in a way that reasonable gameplay is possible.

Example:
Don't make that guy with the sword and the shield chain-swallow potions. Instead, give him healing stones that are part of the shield. Same gameplay, better simulation (that is more consistency and credibility).

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 9:07AM cowboyhugbees said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I think we need to better differentiate between "realism" and "immersion".

I enjoy immersive games, in which I feel drawn into the game world - a "suspension of disbelief" of sorts where essential game elements are still preserved in the interest of fun. Immersive games, however, aren't necessarily realistic, and that's ok.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 9:14AM Snappyguy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I like it when it isn't totally out of place. Having to goto the bathroom is an embarrassing thing so since we play game to feel better about ourselves so I prefer it if that is avoided :) . But hunger is something I like, as long as it doesn't give me a big downside for not having fruit for breakfast.

I like it because I've always enjoyed the idea of just hanging out in a game, maybe going out for lunch, but not feel like I'm wasting time or going full RP.

It's really something that needs to be well thought of first or not put in at all.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 9:52AM alzeer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
wouldnt mind if little added here and there
like character get fatter if kept eating meat..ect
or losing few teeth after eating sweets
but requires nothing major to return to normal

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 10:29AM dudes said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Lol you know it's art imitating life when the toilet looks like it's been hit by last nights curry and hangover.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 10:52AM Utakata said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@dudes

Though if that was Blizz, they would had animated flies buzzing around it. Um...trust me on that. :(
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 10:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Depends on the MMO honestly. In a sandbox MMO like Wurm you might find a place for 'the business', since it could attract creatures or possibly give you a sickness. In a game like Global Agenda it has no place, as the experience there is expected to be more of a shooter with action.

If it adds to the game I am all for it, but if it detracts or distracts from the expected experience then it isn't needed at all.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 11:06AM Twitchy5 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm currently playing an RPI MUD and Battleground Europe for my realism. I think devs should introduce it a lot more. Like Irem said, the way WoW did the food and potion system was a great system, and more devs should implement it. Also the mount system was also great, and then transportation between areas and the like. Maplestory also did a great job with the transportation; it was realistic, you could meet people, and on the ride you could fight things.
Realism doesn't have to be everything, but don't just take the easy way out. And if you do, make it in a funny, satirical way. Also not all games have to be like this, but currently, most games are the opposite.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 11:44AM MewmewGirl said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Realism in games is mostly annoying. I don't play games to experience real life - if I want to do that I don't log on a game.

I hate when you're playing a game that you can shoot fireballs and conjure magics and creatures, the most crazy unrealistic things are happening and some guy who wants it to be free for all PvP says "It's not realistic that people are protected and I can't attack them everywhere." Sure - he's fine that he can get away with mass murder on a daily basis, that you're killed and walking around a few minutes later, that he literally has a car in his pocket - but suddenly he says it's not "real" that he can't attack everybody? *rolls eyes*

For all we know - some of the fantasic elements are just "shortcuts" so we don't have to watch them. Maybe your person makes their way to get their horse that's somewhere else and returns to your area with it, and that part is just skipped (like skipping boring parts in a movie). There's always an excuse you can make anyway. Magic games obviously can have magic bags. Sci-fi games could use dimensional pockets or teleporters. It doesn't *have* to be un-real, most of it fits into THAT game world, it just doesn't fit ours.

Then you have to say - how far do we want the realism to go? I don't want to have to eat or pass out, I don't want to have to go to the bathroom (we teleport in most of the games, I say that function is filtered out of us as we port :D). These are annoyances rather than something that adds to the experience.

How about we come up with a complicated series of key presses that make our legs move - that is each muscle in a leg is represented by a key press. The speed at which we press these keys translates to the speed we move in game. If we don't press the keys in exactly the right way than we don't move our legs in exactly the right way we trip and fall (realistic no?). How about we also have key presses to breathe in and out and if we forget to press them or don't press them in relation to the right speed of what we are doing at the time - we pass out. And biggest of all - how about we die and never get up again.

The point is that realism is not fun in games and as real as one tries to make is there is always another step you can take it (breathing, muscle movements, etc).

If it helps - you can think that your avatar takes care of things like eating and the bathroom when you're not there.

People who want it too real seem to want another world to live in rather than a game to play - and that in itself is a problem they should be seeing a shrink for rather than looking for a game world to pretend is real...

Despite these facts - I do agree that skimpy bikini's are just goofy. If it's the world's lore that skimpy clothes are magically defensive - we should see guys all over wearing the same type of skimpy clothes, then I'd be happy.

Posted: Apr 18th 2011 12:23PM Space Cobra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@MewmewGirl

Pretty much what I was gonna say.

You even got the irony of those wanting "PvP realism" and comparing it to the nature of MMO gaming.

+1
Reply

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 12:02PM Germaximus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I dont play video games for realism.
I dont mind some realistic effects but i hate when people say "thats not realistic enough" i honestly just think its stupid as hell.

Its like going to see The Lion King and saying "that would never happen."

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 12:22PM aillas said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Realism has a place, but it should never dominate the gameplay.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 12:31PM madcartoonist said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If a game wants to go the realism route they are going to have to be OK with a niche audience. If they can survive with a niche audience then I am all for it but most games seem to want to compete with WOW's numbers and that will require your game being at least aimed at slightly casual players.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 1:42PM Borick said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm with Nils on this one. Consistency and integrity of mechanics is what defines realism in an online world. MMOs have too many contrived mechanics, and the perpetual ballet of shifting mechanics kills investment.

I would dare to say there is no market for a massively multiplayer online bathroom simulator, but I do think that the MMO scene is hungry for an immersion-without-rails experience and greater ownership (not just impact) of their world.

I think that it's time for developers to stop trying to lead the market for a while. AAA studios in particular should embrace a willingness to re-engineer and revisit old ways of doing things with new technology. There are countless ways to add a reality of value to the gameworld, without locking the players into a grind.

I look at Minecraft, and while it isn't an MMO it does look like a toolkit for 3D world play that could help re-define the MMO genre. We're starting to see control systems that can open up the market to everything from consoles and PCs to smartphones, and when that happens I think MMOs will become quite 'real'.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 2:01PM Unverfied B said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I play games because reality is not fun, so please GTFO with this realism fad, kthxby.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 4:57PM Revrent said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I do not mind when games have some elements of realism, however often times the term realism is used to push a certain point of view.

People tend to forget that their idea of what the lore should be, and what the lore are not always the same. An example would be a contingent of fans saying that guns are not realistic to have in a fantasy settings and as proof they post a bunch of semi relevant wiki articles showing armor form the sixteenth century. I remember when EQ2 put in it's appearance gear slot, and people said that it would not be realist for a mage to wear plate armor, but evidently they had no problem with a warrior swimming in their full plate.

I believe it helps a game when the game mechanics are supported by the lore, but hey some of the most interesting games i have played have absolutely no basis in reality.

Welcome Home
Rev.

Posted: Apr 17th 2011 5:10PM mysecretid said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
An interesting question because computer games, by definition, are completely unreal. They're wholly created, and do not exist naturally.

So "reality" becomes something reflected in the game: there's a sort of scale, of course, and somebody chooses where to set the dial.

I agree with previous posters who point of that, whether realism is a good thing or not depends largely on the type of game, and whether more realism makes the game in question more fun.

I'm also one of those people who plays MMOs and other such games to get a break from reality. In my case, there's definitely a point where a game can become "too real".

Featured Stories

Make My MMO: December 14 - 20, 2014

Posted on Dec 20th 2014 7:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW