"Understanding Realism in Computer Games through Phenomenology" (DayZ discussion).

[scriptfactory 620]

This is a wall of text post. Maybe this is a shitty topic to discuss, I am not sure. If you have problems digesting written information just skip to the bottom for a TLDR.

So, while discussing realism in DayZ for the umpteenth time I made this statement:

"If you are saying the audio and visual cue system is more approximate to real life then I would disagree with you. I don't think there is an objective way to say who is right in this regard and it doesn't change the fact that an icon based system (like Mod) is less intrusive than having to go to your inventory to see your character status..."
 
Then I realized I was being a dumbass and someone has probably already taken it upon themselves to study realism in video games. I found the following term paper: Understanding Realism in Computer Games through Phenomenology by Gek Siong Low. The paper, in turn, lead me to this chapter from the book "On the Internet" titled "Disembodied Telepresence and the Remoteness of the Real" which contains this text:
 

[T]he body's ability to zero in on what is significant, and then preserve that understanding in our background awareness, enables us to perceive more and more refined situations and respond more and more skilfully; its sensitivity to mood opens up our shared social situation and makes people and things matter to us; and its tendency to respond positively to direct engagement with other bodies; underlies our sense of trust and so sustains our interpersonal world.

 
So realism, as defined in these papers, is simply the ability of a game to let a player lose himself in the fantasy world of the game. This is the essence of "immersion". Perception alone is not enough to convey a sense of realism. Perspective also has little to do with it. In fact, this paper says the following about first-person perspective:
 

At first glance, the first-person view appears to be more cognitively realistic and therefore logical. It might come as a surprise then to some people that the first-person view is in fact not realistic at all. Painters have known for centuries that "one should not draw or paint exactly as the eye sees." Perspective in computer games in based on plane projections. It is like tracing the outlines of objects on a windowpane. A sphere placed to one side of our vision would actually have an elliptical rather than a circular outline, if we followed the rules of true perspective. But then it would be “wrong”. This effect is called "marginal distortion", and the reason it occurs in real-life is once again a consequence of the human body. As discussed above, we do not maintain a fixed viewpoint for long periods of time, but rather keep shifting our eyes over the scene. To reduce the discomforting effects of marginal distortions, computer games keep the angle of vision artificially narrow, resulting in what we call “tunnel vision”. Peripheral vision is a big problem in first-person perspective. The player cannot detect something that is just off his field of vision. Still, people are quite comfortable with this way of seeing because people are familiar with paintings and films, which operate the same way. Merleau-Ponty would say that we have acquired the skill of how to interpret the world through a window or plane of projection. Our phenomenal field is shaped by our experiences with similar projection-based media. We have no problem interpreting the scene on the screen as something that we would see through our own eyes.

 
In DayZ SA the tunnel vision effect is severely amplified in 1PP mode. Many people discuss having the feeling that they are driving a human tank around. This could be explained by the unique Arma first-person camera view which is awkward and FoV calculations which seem to produce significant warping.

The paper goes on to say the following about the third-person perspective:
 

The third-person perspective appears to be less realistic because it is a disembodied point of view. However, it is more desirable in terms of playability in many situations because it allows the player to see everything and judge distances more accurately than using the first-person view. Tunnel vision is not a problem in third-person view. Similarly as for the first-person view, we are familiar with looking at the scene through the eyes of a camera floating in the air. The problem here is how it is that game players can be "inside" the game when they see "themselves" from a detached point of view.

So at the surface 3PP mode appears to be more unrealistic than 1PP due to its floating camera but in actuality it allows for a more realistic perception fo the game world without the "human tank" phenomena.
 

There are many ways in which the virtual reality can fail, but the illusion does not fail because it looks "unrealistic". Rather, if you carefully read how many computer game magazines and players discuss the issue of realism, you will find that their major complaints are more about how thing "don’t make sense" in the game. The virtual reality collapses when the game world is inconsistent with the players' expectations. Poole describes three kinds of such "incoherence": that of causality, function and space. He claims that it is this lack of incoherence rather than simply looking "unrealistic" that ruins the gaming experience. From a phenomenological perspective, "incoherence" is basically an extension of Heidegger’s tool use theory to the interaction in computer games.

 
So what the paper is basically postulating is that it is not the player viewpoint that is responsible for the sense of realism, rather the way the user is able to operate inside of the game world.

To me the biggest blockers for DayZ SA realism is the janky movement and controls. Pressing 'v' multiple times to jump. Having to press hotkeys multiple times for actions to occur and then the my action not even being performed. Getting stuck in animations leading to walking off buildings.

TL;DR: Regardless of your preferred game perspective, what brings you out of the DayZ experience? What are the biggest problems for you in regards to DayZ SA realism and how would you fix them?

 

I have added a poll with some of the things I could think of. If you vote on the poll please add a comment as to how you would change this aspect of the game. Please don't turn this into a 1PP vs 3PP debate.

Edited October 16, 2015 by scriptfactory

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

Ambient audio loops from the mod really ruin immersion for me.

 

I'm really hoping the new audio module features some great immersive qualities.

 

Hearing the same bird, fence sound, or bucket kick sound, over, and over, and over, is tedious and completely immersion breaking for me.

[Whyherro123 2283]

1) Lack of character customization.

 

We look all the same, even when we don't. I am pretty sure I see at least 75% of the available "characters" every time I play. This makes identifying my teammates a bit of a PITA, considering how we all basically wear the "same clothing" as well. Seeing 4 different Dean Halls, all in Gorka, makes a firefight rather .... onerous.

 

2) Character speed, movement, lack of inertia.

 

The fact that we can sprint for kilometers, across hilly terrain, with a full pack across the back is immersion-breaking, to say the least. The only time I have ever had to worry about hyperthermia (aka being too hot) is when the temperatures on servers were broken. Oh, and I also dislike how the go-to counter to gunfire isn't "taking/sticking to cover", but "zig-zagging like an asshole". We can change direction while running wayyy too fast. No intertia whatsoever. We don't pick up speed when going down a slope, either.

 

3) Stupid-as-hell medical system

 

Fuck me, this I hate the most of all (asides from "everything else" that I dislike : P). Dirty rags instantly stopping bleeding from major wounds, internal bleeding not being a thing. Medications (antibiotics, epinephrine, morphine) instantly working, as well as 1) not having side effects and 2) being 100% effective. "shock" being merely a "knockout" mechanic, as opposed to the interesting mechanics it could be (shaking, loss of vision, vomiting, etc). Painkillers (and morphine) not doing fuck-all to help with shock. Morphine magically repairing broken limbs, as opposed to merely being a powerful "end-game" painkiller (with appropriate "side effects").

 

If the game had actual "realistic", or hell, even a slightly-"authentic" medical system, the game would be so much better. Right now, it is "take a bullet to the chest, strap a dirty rag over it, and eat some beans. Get back into combat."

 

As with the overall lack of "survival" mechanics, this is nothing less than a disappointment, and a waste of potential. It seems the devs like to introduce mechanics, and as soon as they do so, stop working on them in favor of "other" mechanics.
 

Edited October 16, 2015 by Whyherro123

[Valdenburg 200]

"My Leg is painful"

 

"I´m completely drenched"  etc.

 

This imo completely phases me out of my character. The character is speaking to me so it does not represent myself.

 

"Your Leg is painful" would be slightly better since it would not be a person that talks about himselfe but a hint that actuallz YOUR leg is painful.

 

 

Afterall i much more prefer visual indication.

When its too difficult to add animations like to limp or to hold the stomache or making a stomache grumble sound - please add icons instead of the text messages.

[gannon46 788]

as a cat above me posted i think the medical system should be worked on and be more authentic. I would like to see it like project zomboid in that you can get minor cuts and scratches and you need to keep them bandaged till they heal and all the while keep the bandage clean and the wound clean if not it gets infected. same as bullet wounds they should be a bitch and should equal certain death without proper medical treatment.broken legs once you set it and but a splint on it you should have to wait for it to heal and move more slowly and with a limp. soft skill could be aimed alot at this so folks could actually be a nurse or a doctor. Though this will never happen folks would play 15 minutes and be on here raging the game is to hard this is bullshit i should be able to stack bandages and take 3 shots form an SVD and not die i had a hat on.

Edited October 16, 2015 by gannon46

[Valdenburg 200]

as a cat above me posted i think the medical system should be worked on and be more authentic. I would like to see it like project zomboid in that you can get minor cuts and scratches and you need to keep them bandaged till they heal and all the while keep the bandage clean and the wound clean if not it gets infected. same as bullet wounds they should be a bitch and should equal certain death without proper medical treatment.broken legs once you set it and but a splint on it you should have to wait for it to heal and move more slowly and with a limp. soft skill could be aimed alot at this so folks could actually be a nurse or a doctor. Though this will never happen folks would play 15 minutes and be on here raging the game is to hard this is bullshit i should be able to stack bandages and take 3 shots form an SVD and not die i had a hat on.

tbh most of these things are kinda implemented or being worked on and just not working because of the alpha nature of the game.

Its like saying "the item bug when you see things on the floor even when you already picked them up kill immersion"

 

But yeah ofc i agree that these things need to work to increase immersion.

[Maxgor 2314]

I can see the points being made about how technically third person can be considered more immersive since you have a way to kinda actual realize yourself within the games world better than just the usual first person camera view, but I still feel like first person adds to the realism better.  Interesting to think about.  Realism for me involves the first person view if it has a proper FOV and animations.  I don't think DayZ has changed too much with its movement in particular, somewhat if I remember, but I always felt that ARMA lacked realism due it's clunky canned animations.  You press button to prone, you go through the prone animation.  You climb over something, you press the button and active "fence hop animation" like a robot.  As not realistic or sim Battlefield is, I feel more realism from something like that just based on the ease of movement.  Overall movement is just way better.  It would be interesting to take that and then introduce more realistic weapon handling and other mechanics to such a smooth movement system.  That to me feels like the best of both worlds.

[scriptfactory 620]

As not realistic or sim Battlefield is, I feel more realism from something like that just based on the ease of movement.  Overall movement is just way better.  It would be interesting to take that and then introduce more realistic weapon handling and other mechanics to such a smooth movement system.  That to me feels like the best of both worlds.

 

I totally agree with this. The new player controller should help with this but, honestly, I feel that it will take a lot of effort and fine tuning to get the smooth and direct feeling of character control that Battlefield has.

[Maxgor 2314]

I totally agree with this. The new player controller should help with this but, honestly, I feel that it will take a lot of effort and fine tuning to get the smooth and direct feeling of character control that Battlefield has.

 

That's good to know they are trying to fix it somewhat, I haven't been keeping up with the standalone for a long time now, so I don't know what exactly they've done, just going off my previous ARMA/DayZ mod experience.  It's mostly the controls that have kept me from truly being invested in ARMA.  Hopefully by release the standalone will be much better to play.

[hleVqq 139]

I am pretty damn sure that IRL I can't peek over a wall without actually doing so. Not without a periscope, anyway. This makes it as unrealistic as it gets, and whatever "realistic aspects" 3PP throws at us cannot counter that.

 

Anyway, zig-zagging during combat is bullshit. Add inertia. Slow players down. Make them run to cover.

Edited October 17, 2015 by Powerhouse

[Noctoras 409]

none of the above. An apocalypse shouldn't feel like walking around in a supermarket. It needs to be a challenging environment - not only because of other players.

[scriptfactory 620]

I am pretty damn sure that IRL I can't peek over a wall without actually doing so. Not without a periscope, anyway. This makes it as unrealistic as it gets, and whatever "realistic aspects" 3PP throws at us cannot counter that.

 

Anyway, zig-zagging during combat is bullshit. Add inertia. Slow players down. Make them run to cover.

 

I really don't want to derail the conversation but there IS a tactical mirror. We used them in Iraq when I was sent over there in 2003. Pretty sure they are common.

 

 

none of the above. An apocalypse shouldn't feel like walking around in a supermarket. It needs to be a challenging environment - not only because of other players.

 

But does lack of a challenging environment really bring you out of the DayZ experience? Are you going around just thinking, "Man, this is so easy. Not at all realistic. None of this is believable." I would think that the environmental asthetic is more of a challenge to post-apocalypse realism (i.e. no dead bodies, no trash, everything looks fresh and clean.)

Edited October 17, 2015 by scriptfactory

[St. Jimmy 1631]

Unrealistic player movement speed. It doesn't only just feel bad that you will even jog everywhere but it makes 200km square feel like a 10km square. Walking ~15km in three sessions in the winter experimental was one of the best experience in DayZ I've had so far. Too bad is that jogging would've been better because it consumes less food and water and also keeps you more warm.

Blood loss causes desaturation. That kills the immersion and beauty of the game instantly for me. Blood loss should make you dizzy and tired.

So I'd say movement speed and character health and that kind of info given in the wrng way. I don't prefer HUD but I rather take HUD that shows numbers than screen effects that feel wrong.

[pilgrim* 3513]

What brings you out of the DayZ experience?

 

=>    STRESS

 

( they used to call it 'battle fatigue',  'survival stress' )

 

 

[edit:*note on research methodology:
Recall and description of events are always a mix of factual traces of sensory information overlaid with emotions, mingled with interpretation and "filled in" with imaginings.

Thus there should always be skepticism about the validity of a report from memory as evidence of factual detail. Eye-witness reports are notoriously unreliable.

eg: Perhaps the player who says "bad movement" breaks immersion, would say the same even if the movement was improved, or would find some other reason to dislike the game, or blames the fact that he got shot on "bad movement" rather than admit the cause is his own inexperience or his poor gameplay. He will believe that his excuse "happened" and describe it as causal. The "memory <-> excuse" paradigm is valid even in games such as chess with rigorous rules.]

edit edit: sorry scriptfactory I'm just being a smart dick, but it would be interesting to know how you could set up a control. I think you've got a rating in this area, so - if you made a statistical sweep of players and took out everything they said they didn't like, and put in everything they said they did like, wouldn't you end up with a crap game that nobody played?

Edited October 17, 2015 by pilgrim

[derLoko 30]

2 things that weren't mentionied so far.

Maybe not many players are bothered by this, but anyway:

 

 

- Inconsistent map design

Afaik, it's officially been a few months since the start of the zombie apocalpyse. But there are rusty car wrecks in the middle of the street and old shipwrecks at the coast. Some buildings look new, others look like they were taken straight from the chernobyl zone. 

Example: The ship wrecks from the last SR: http://i.imgur.com/MvE3Vwk.jpg

 

- Infos from "Inspect"

Inspect a weapon and you get half a wiki-article about it's history. Imo this is simply immersion-breaking handholding that doesn't even add anything to the game...

Edited October 17, 2015 by derLoko

[pilgrim* 3513]

..//..

- Infos from "Inspect"

Inspect a weapon and you get half a wiki-article about it's history. Imo this is simply immersion-breaking handholding that doesn't even add anything to the game...

 

Yes that's interesting - maybe survivors should not be told so much about guns (for instance) - why would they know what type of ammo this gun takes without trying and learning from experience ?

Edited October 17, 2015 by pilgrim

[scriptfactory 620]

edit edit: sorry scriptfactory I'm just being a smart dick, but it would be interesting to know how you could set up a control. I think you've got a rating in this area, so - if you made a statistical sweep of players and took out everything they said they didn't like, and put in everything they said they did like, wouldn't you end up with a crap game that nobody played?

 

Two of the departments I help out with at my company are sourcing and monetization/game design. We evaluate potential licenses for playability, marketability, and potential for monetization. The key to making a game that appeals to a large audience seems to be making "subsets" of the game. Game modes, special characters or different motivators. You balance these and modify them, add new game mechanics, different win conditions to reach the widest audience possible.

 

In other words, you don't just take out everything people hate and you don't just add in everything people like. You start with a basic, fun, game design pattern and modify it based on the wishes of the players. DayZ SA is a resource management game at it's core. Spawn, acquire and protect resources. There are no win conditions. There is only one "lose condition", health resource dropping below zero. That is all. Every suggestion made by a player needs to be evaluated on that basis.

 

This is why a great lead game designer is so important. It means the difference between making a game that is derivative but playable and one that is truly entertaining.

 

This is, of course, just my nerd opinion.

 

 

Yes that's interesting - maybe survivors should not be told so much about guns (for instance) - why would they know what type of ammo this gun takes without trying and learning from experience ?

 

Confusing players is a good way to reduce the chance that a player will return to your game. I believe his is why the industry has steadily become more "casual" over the years. In a multiplayer game CCUs matter and the best way to get more players playing is to make sure the game is accessible for the most people possible.

Edited October 17, 2015 by scriptfactory

[pilgrim* 3513]

 

..//..

This is why a great lead game designer is so important. It means the difference between making a game that is derivative but playable and one that is truly entertaining.

.//..

 

I understand your argument. It's an interesting reply. The problem you are trying to work around, as I view it - (fairly nerd also)

Put it terms of the film industry, the problem is easier to see - because it's an older branch of "entertainment / creativity / monetization" - and the end-product and delivery structure is more easily understood

You can have either a film that is Blockbuster or a film that is Cult

- but not both

Good luck with this.

I'm interested that people are thinking it through. As you know, in the media world - the current generation of distributors, being tech based with no content-production experience - are looking for max monetization for minimum investment in creativity. To feed them, the standard production-end investment solution/deal at present is spend 70-80% on advertizing and 30-20% on creation,

ie Blockbuster.

= derivative but playable ? .. & short product life

[scriptfactory 620]

There are a few big budget games that have been done exceptionally well and have had amazingly long lifespans with high replayability values. Eve Online. World of Warcraft. Halo. Minecraft. Almost every Street Fighter (not SFxT which was broken by the stupid as fuck gems system). Every Fallout. Every Elder Scrolls game. It can be done.

 

I believe that DayZ can be that game but it needs to go back to its roots. Why did Rocket remove humanity in SA, for example? Because he believed gameplay mechanics (e.g. survival elements, weapon raising/lowering mechanics, etc.) would drive player interaction. He even admitted his own failure in this regard and is trying a new approach for his new game (player-driven rewards/punishments). So I believe the game designers need to address every single Mod gameplay element and find what role it played in making Mod good... then use this information to make SA fucking amazing.

 

It can be done.

[Yuval 221]

Yeah but what you suggest is totally against realism. I do understand and agree humanity was a good thing in the mod, but most of the people loved it due to the skins you get. Realism will most likely fit the current DayZ where people can do whatever they want with no external affect to stats.

Stats are bad in vanilla gameplay in my opinion. KoS will keep happening in similiar rates simply because thats what freedom means. Heck, if I am fully geared I won't interact but kill.

Perhaps a mod for DayZ SA like ArmA 3 Breaking Point or DayZ Origins where you progress towards a goal and killing people affects progression either way will bring different results.

But realism means that you will decide your playstyle and nothing should affect your character by killing a player. Heck, adding humanity or stats of some sort will make players want to kill others more.

The devs can't limit KoS directly because that's gonna be very BS towards most of the players.

[scriptfactory 620]

Yeah but what you suggest is totally against realism.

 

...

The devs can't limit KoS directly because that's gonna be very BS towards most of the players.

 

Is it against realism? Realism, in the context of video games, is the ability of a player to immerse himself into a game. It does not mean that because something can be done in real life it should be able to be done in a game. It means that a player's should be able to lose himself in the fantasy of the game.

 

KoS is not a part of that fantasy. It is an end to it. The KoS thread is hundreds of pages long for a reason. People that tend to KoS and grief are not doing so because the game's narrative has drawn them to murder someone else. They do it because they are used to shooting other people in games or want to ruin someone else's day.

 

In my opinion KoS is one of the largest hurdles to overcome in allowing players to completely let themselves dive into DayZ. There is a reason the Mod has humanity and it isn't because people thought a humanity indicator was realistic. Humanity was an attempt to regulate the behavior of griefers so that emergent gameplay could present itself more often.

 

Edit: I really don't want to derail the conversation towards KoS since I feel that many players have strong opinions about this and this isn't a complaint thread, rather a discussion of how game mechanics can be tweaked towards more immersive gameplay. But I feel that the terms "realism" and "authenticity" are major stumbling blocks for players that want DayZ to be a PvP experience without repercussion nor distraction. But if we take an objectively viewpoint of the situation, a deathmatch situation is completely unrealistic on the scale that it occurs in DayZ or any shooter game out there. The most violent places on earth don't have murder rates even close to approaching what we have currently on DayZ. So I feel the word "realism" is completely misused in this situation.

Edited October 17, 2015 by scriptfactory

[Yuval 221]

If I wish to shoot someone its not because I want to ruin his day and if people do it they need to see a doctor. Most people do it for their own reason such as better gear, lack of food / drink and they just like combat.

You can avoid KoS, you can be careful and go to places that are less popular by players where people actually want to not be bothered by others and therefore won't shoot you.

Combat makes your heartbeat go from 60 to 120 in 3 seconds and some people like it. The andrenaline I get just by being in a 50 players server with full gear on me is something I have never experienced in a video game. But then again it might be because I'm a pussy..

Realism directly involves with the game punishing players for killing others. Be it humanity reduction or anythimg else.

Then again, we are talking about vanilla gameplay. Mods will probably feature humanity-like systems.

[scriptfactory 620]

Please don't take my generalizations about killing in DayZ personally. I kill everybody when I play. There is, literally, nothing else to do besides play dress-up and kill.

 

I am an old-school gamer. I'm 34yo and can still, clearly, remember the thrill of PvP in Ultima Online. The karma and fame system was fairly strict but it made each person think before taking action. Remember, Mod added a humanity system for a specific reason and Rocket TEMPORARILY removed it because he thought it could be controlled in another way; through game mechanic changes (e.g. gestures, survival elements, raising/lowering weapons). He admitted defeat in a recent interview and said that in his new game players would be given the power to control negative player behavior themselves (via an in-game version of the RIOT player tribune).

 

You make some good points and I could talk about this all day long but I will drop the murder topic so we don't derail the conversation.

[derLoko 30]

 

Confusing players is a good way to reduce the chance that a player will return to your game. I believe his is why the industry has steadily become more "casual" over the years. In a multiplayer game CCUs matter and the best way to get more players playing is to make sure the game is accessible for the most people possible.

 

 

Well, imo that depends a lot on the game you're making and its target audience. For the average gamer, EVE is way too complex, slow, and generally hard to get into. It's a niche game with a niche audience, but that niche audience loves it.

 

Of course, a game should never be confusing for no reason, but in this case, it serves a purpose. You have no idea what rifle and what kind of ammo you just picked up? Well, too bad - now your only option is to try and figure out which ammo fits that rifle, just like IRL. Some players are going to hate that, but others are going to love it. 

 

In the end, the question is this: Does something "fit" the overall game experience and add to it, or does it feel out of place and unneccessary? And imo, inspect information like this simply feels completely out of place:

 

[WilliamTheConqueror 81]

For me the biggest thing is the HUD. I want the text prompts gone. I want the quick bar only visible from the inventory screen. I do not want anything on the screen. The current crosshair is horrible in the way it shows where the gun is aiming, the old was was tolerable, but I still wanted it gone. The proposed new hud showing your hunger thirst and temperature would be game breaking for me.