Have you seen the most common modern military shooters (Call of Duty)?
That is anything except realistic and imo a good example of the over the top games I mentioned.
Why is realism "lame"?
Have you seen the most common modern military shooters (Call of Duty)?
That is anything except realistic and imo a good example of the over the top games I mentioned.
Nytmare
David Jose
Ahnehnois
First Post
I don't think it's a generational issue.
I do think that there is a significant cohort of people who are overtly hostile to realism, verisimilitude, or things making any kind of sense. And no, I don't get why.
But the current generation of young people is exposed to a wide variety of high-verisimilitude fiction, including genre fiction. The care that went into crafting the Lord of the Rings movies is influential, as is the uncompromising style of the Song of Ice and Fire books and their derivatives. People go to theaters to watch superheroes fighting allegorical terrorists, and sit in their homes to watch dramas about the illegal drug trade. Shaky-cam is in. Unrated cable shows are in. Reality is in.
If anything, the rpg industry has made a mistake by not adapting to these broad cultural trends, and instead focusing on a subset of people that stand against them.
3catcircus
Adventurer
You just have to do one of two things:
1. Restrict the options in the games you play. For example - if you play Pathfinder, you could say that your players are only allowed to use the core Pathfinder book and that the spiked armor, spiked shield, and spiked chain are not allowed. Spells are limited to 3rd level or below, and there are no magic items available for sale.
2. Play games with built-in realism. In the fantasy realm, a likely choice would be Harn. In the modern realm, a likely choice would be the (sadly out of print) Twilight:2000 (in any incarnation, V1, V2, V2.2, or the Twilight:2013 version) or maybe GURPS with the right supplements. I know TW:2K fairly well, and the only danger is once you start getting into the nitty-gritty of it, you can find yourself tracking every bullet, when to do upkeep on the vehicle so it continues to run, when to forage and distill alcohol (to power said vehicle), and other "resource management" tasks, you can get so involved in it that you don't mind not advancing the campaign - the game can border on being like those RTS strategy games in that respect.
1. Restrict the options in the games you play. For example - if you play Pathfinder, you could say that your players are only allowed to use the core Pathfinder book and that the spiked armor, spiked shield, and spiked chain are not allowed. Spells are limited to 3rd level or below, and there are no magic items available for sale.
2. Play games with built-in realism. In the fantasy realm, a likely choice would be Harn. In the modern realm, a likely choice would be the (sadly out of print) Twilight:2000 (in any incarnation, V1, V2, V2.2, or the Twilight:2013 version) or maybe GURPS with the right supplements. I know TW:2K fairly well, and the only danger is once you start getting into the nitty-gritty of it, you can find yourself tracking every bullet, when to do upkeep on the vehicle so it continues to run, when to forage and distill alcohol (to power said vehicle), and other "resource management" tasks, you can get so involved in it that you don't mind not advancing the campaign - the game can border on being like those RTS strategy games in that respect.
Balesir
Adventurer
OK - as others have said, I see selection bias.
For computer games see almost any Paradox Studios title (Europa Universalis, EU: Rome, Crusader Kings, Victoria, Hearts of Iron, Sengoku).
For films/movies/TV see Lord of the Rings, A Game of Thrones, Deadwood, Anna Karenina, Lincoln, Warrior...
In short, I just don't see the issue, unless what you are saying is that you don't really want to see any gonzo stuff around at all - in which case, lighten up, dude!
Desh-Rae-Halra
Explorer
When I read this thread title I had an immediate response, and I think 3cat covered it to some degree.
Sometimes "realism" takes a heroic-story element out of the game. I remember playing a game of...I think it was Phoenix Command? A tactical roleplay game. I didnt want to be on the roof next to the person so I took the stairs down to go join with the rest of the party. By the time I made it down the stairs (really maybe 6 or 7 rounds), the whole combat was over. The firefight was over quickly (as I imagine one would be IRL, with bullets and grenades flying). It was "realistic", but not fun (particularly since the 6-7 rounds took almost 2 hours to play out, with all the "realistic" charts of bullet trajectory, wind, ad nauseum). Every round on my action I got to say "I make it down another couple stairs". How thrilling!
Also, have you ever played in a campaign that was "realistic" to the point that your GM keeps track of when your character has to go to the bathroom? Realistic, but not fun.
I probably make the weirdest characters in our group, but its on the premise that this will be fun, and yet wont spoil it for anyone else. I'd frankly rather play a humanoid alien with a rapid fire shotgun that has a telescopic/spring loaded Halberd underneath, with my glowing illuminati runic tachyon-sizzling adamantium-spandex armor with katana-sized blades sticking out of it than play another 2 hours of "I'm taking the stairs for the length of the adventure/roll to see what percent your bladder is full while you sit in traffic".
Sometimes "realism" takes a heroic-story element out of the game. I remember playing a game of...I think it was Phoenix Command? A tactical roleplay game. I didnt want to be on the roof next to the person so I took the stairs down to go join with the rest of the party. By the time I made it down the stairs (really maybe 6 or 7 rounds), the whole combat was over. The firefight was over quickly (as I imagine one would be IRL, with bullets and grenades flying). It was "realistic", but not fun (particularly since the 6-7 rounds took almost 2 hours to play out, with all the "realistic" charts of bullet trajectory, wind, ad nauseum). Every round on my action I got to say "I make it down another couple stairs". How thrilling!
Also, have you ever played in a campaign that was "realistic" to the point that your GM keeps track of when your character has to go to the bathroom? Realistic, but not fun.
I probably make the weirdest characters in our group, but its on the premise that this will be fun, and yet wont spoil it for anyone else. I'd frankly rather play a humanoid alien with a rapid fire shotgun that has a telescopic/spring loaded Halberd underneath, with my glowing illuminati runic tachyon-sizzling adamantium-spandex armor with katana-sized blades sticking out of it than play another 2 hours of "I'm taking the stairs for the length of the adventure/roll to see what percent your bladder is full while you sit in traffic".
Last edited:
Argyle King
Legend
No, but it's still not realistic; in some aspects, it's not even close. One of the reasons I prefer Battlefield is because the way that bullets travel in Battlefield is a lot closer to my real life experience with guns than CoD is. It's a small detail, but it is one which can have a big impact on things which matter to me when playing such a game. The bullet travel and drop models aren't perfect, but they are (imo) far better than what CoD uses when it comes to that aspect of the game. I find it strange in CoD 2 that some pistols are better at long range shooting than some of the sniper rifles are. ...and as far as swords and armor... well, I can toss a throwing knife several hundred yards and kill somebody with it.
For me, the small details are often more important to me than the big ones. It in no way bothers me to have elves, dragons, and magic. Fantasy is one of my favorite genres. However, sometimes it does bother me when I try to justify how grappling someone has zero impact on their ability to use a longbow. Likewise, I like small touches such as magical fire behaving like fire once it comes into play. I'm not asking for a perfect model, but one which gives at least a nod toward what seems like it would make sense or at least be consistent with the game world fiction as presented.
On more of an overall scale, I personally prefer a little more realism because some of the stories I want to tell work better if I have some. If I want political intrigue; feuding kingdoms, and noble PCs leading armies against a rival army, I feel it works out a little better when one PC cannot defeat entire legions by himself. I also like for the PCs to engage the world and interact with it rather than standing so far apart from it as some games put them.
None of this is meant to suggest I cannot enjoy unrealistic things. I simply find that -for me- I can use reality to enhance my fantasy. The two need not be mutually exclusive.
MichaelSomething
Legend
Another reason is that I prefer unrealistic to realism done badly. If you're gonna be realistic, it requires a good deal of knowledge and/or research to be accurate. If you're just pulling ideas out of your head or a movie you just saw, be honest about it.
Mishihari Lord
First Post
Agreed. You can find both realistic and over-the-top if you look for them.
It's common even to find them in the same series or even the same movie/book. For example I loved "Pirates of the Caribbean" because it started off very realistic then moved to some fantastic elements once a "real" feeling had been established. On the other hand I hated the second Pirates movie because there was no realistic period - it moved straight into "WAHOOO!" territory.
