Realism Thoughts - Do People Fear It? (Added Realism Lets Play)

[chibigoat 59]

I'm going to talk a little bit about realism in addition to adding a video of mine. Whatever works :cool:. THE VIDEO: It's a new lets play idea I came up with, it's simple and I haven't actually heard of somebody doing this before so yes, it is unique for me. I start off on the beach like I'm brand new and just immediately get rid of everything, including the backpack, I start with nothing, hardcore beta servers, it's realism maximized.

So recently I've seen a post or two on realism and what people think should be done to promote it. I'm not going to give my own personal specific ideas on what should happen because that will just get a bunch of negative feedback, I'll leave that to the people who are new to the forums. I think realism IS important, rather you kill-for-fun bandits think so or not.

It's important because this is a simulator, it's an attempt to simulate what things MIGHT be like if a zombie apocalypse were to happen. With that, it's also a simulator that it is in alpha. You can't correctly sit there and say they shouldn't do things to make the game more realistic. The game is MEANT to be realistic but it's alpha so obviously there's plenty of work to be done.

I really am not interested in taking a carebear side or a bandit side but regardless, I will be classified as one of those because plenty of people lack the maturity to really try to understand what I'm saying and add something useful such as: "I disagree because..." "I agree because...". I would however really appreciate, if you do reply, to leave it in the form of one of those two, or at least not in a negative way.

The fact is, this game will be altered to promote realism, whether that takes away from bandits being able to kill-for-fun so easily or whether that makes the game more difficult (which it very well should). Looking at the difficulty thing, I think that's what makes people fear added realism. We don't want it to become too difficult... With that I'll refer back to the all famous Rocket quote that says something along the lines of "you're mad? good" Put yourself in the shoes of your character, would you be able to survive in the forest with a bunch of zombies everywhere and people out to get you? Many of you will say "yes, it's easy" which is an ignorant answer depending on who you are.

If you're Bear Grylls, you'll probably be fine when it comes to the actual survival itself.. the zombies, however... nobody can know how that would truly go. Again, back to the, what MIGHT happen. We can only guess and that guess is typically based on movies or games we've seen.

Now, something else I've heard is simply "It's just a game". Alright,

. In all seriousness, it is a game.. obviously. You are accomplishing nothing by saying it's just a game. This I think is typically said by kill-for-fun bandits because they are simply here to kill people for fun and have no respect for the actual game itself. I don't want people getting confused with what I mean by bandit. I don't mind bandits at all, they are 50% of the game. The kind that kill people simply for fun though, technically they would indeed be "cod fags". That's what I mean by kill-for-fun, pretty obvious.

I know I'm jumping around all sorts of different topics here... oh well. What I think when it comes to people saying that these bandits that kill for fun are ruining the game for them is simply that you are letting them ruin the game for you. It's just as easy to get murdered by a bandit in Cherno as it is to run North and have zero bandit interaction.

Overall, my point here is that this mod is a simulator for a simulator. It's a zombie apocalypse simulator built into a military simulator which apparently works pretty well. What people don't understand is that it is a damn simulator. What can be done to get it to be as accurate a simulator as possible, should be done... maybe with a rare exception or two. That's something you should understand and accept getting into this game.

With that, I leave you with my new lets play idea. Just got this first video up today and hopefully it comes to be a somewhat entertaining series. Thanks for reading and thanks for watching guys. I kept this as mature as I could, I'd appreciate if you could do the same if you plan on replying.

Super Realistic Lets Play Series:

[Shakakahn 23]

can't we all just play the game?

[SLASH-7 27]

Pretty interested, I always enjoy your videos.

[Rakkasan 23]

China called, they want their wall back

[zak757 146]

ARMA II is one of those games that is "harder then life", something alot of sims suffer from. Armor isn't properly modelled, but bullets are, therefore causing more damage then they actually might in a real scenario. The movement is awkward, aiming is clunky (clunky =/= realistic, weighty = realistic) and the amount of stances one can take are limited in comparison to life. The FOV in the game is around 60, when in IRL you can pick up movement 100 degrees from your face. And of course, keyboards are not as fluid as being in control of a body.

People are under the assumption that to simulate something is to make it as difficult as possible. People want difficulty "for realism". But the game is already harder then it would be IRL in some areas (aiming/movement/stealth/communication/hunger), so there should be some compromises in other areas to balance things out, to make it as difficult as the real thing. This is why I'm oppose to spawning without protection, or tripling the size of zombie hordes.

TL;DR

Realism =/= Difficulty

Difficulty =/= Better Gameplay

[Kolchak (DayZ) 5]

Realism needs wisdom applied.

Eating beans-

Properly applied realism: right click on can, click on "eat food", you eat the food, blood goes up, hunger meter goes green.

Improperly applied realism: Unzip pack, reach in pack, grab can with left hand, grab can opener with right hand, pull out can and can opener, attach can opener to can, grasp handle, turn handle, turn handle, turn handle, turn handle, ect, ect...

The line between realism and tedium is razor thin, better to err against tedium than towards it.

[chibigoat 59]

Realism needs wisdom applied.

Eating beans-

Properly applied realism: right click on can' date=' click on "eat food", you eat the food, blood goes up, hunger meter goes green.

Improperly applied realism: Unzip pack, reach in pack, grab can with left hand, grab can opener with right hand, pull out can and can opener, attach can opener to can, grasp handle, turn handle, turn handle, turn handle, turn handle, ect, ect...

The line between realism and tedium is razor thin, better to err against tedium than towards it.

[/quote']

Yeah, this is a great point.

[Budiak 1]

First off, I'm pretty sure I know what your point is, but stating that the game is a simuator inside a simulator is not an argument. It needs to be defended. It is merely the state of things. If you have an opinion, air it. That is what the forum is for. That is what communication is all about. If you are attacked, defend yourself. That's part of the debate process. Remember that you did already state a starkly negative view of those who disagree with you, while attempting to appear aggreable. Faux pas. You discounted your opposition before making your own statement.

Second, you deride those who post their ideas for improving the game while avoiding giving your own ideas, because you feel they will be attacked. If they are attacked, so what? You might have some ideas that get implemented. That's why this particular forum is so active. Good ideas are noticed. Also, you should avoid telling people how to respond to your post. It comes across as elitest and pompous.

Third, I agree that it is a simulator. I do not agree that it needs to be 100% realistic because the more realistic it is, the more it becomes work and not a game. This is explained perfectly in Kolchak's post, two before my own. The purpose of the game, irrespective of Rocket's dystopic vision of a vicious play experience, is and always will be to entertain those who participate. When the game ceases to be entertaining people will stop playing. It's as simple as that, and Rocket knows that. That's why simulators created for entertainment purposes always feature bits and pieces of distinct unreality.

The problem here is that, given what my argument was, your post would suggest that I'm most likely a kill-for-fun bandit who has no respect for the game. Do you think I appreciate that presumption?

Finally, I appreciate your venture with the video series, and I DO think that the game could still be viable if everybody were to start as you did. In fact, I think I may do this on my next life.

[chibigoat 59]

First off' date=' I'm pretty sure I know what your point is, but stating that the game is a simuator inside a simulator is not an argument. It needs to be defended. It is merely the state of things. If you have an opinion, air it. That is what the forum is for. That is what communication is all about. If you are attacked, defend yourself. That's part of the debate process. Remember that you did already state a starkly negative view of those who disagree with you, while attempting to appear aggreable. Faux pas. You discounted your opposition before making your own statement.

Second, you deride those who post their ideas for improving the game while avoiding giving your own ideas, because you feel they will be attacked. If they are attacked, so what? You might have some ideas that get implemented. That's why this particular forum is so active. Good ideas are noticed. Also, you should avoid telling people how to respond to your post. It comes across as elitest and pompous.

Third, I agree that it is a simulator. I do not agree that it needs to be 100% realistic because the more realistic it is, the more it becomes work and not a game. This is explained perfectly in Kolchak's post, two before my own. The purpose of the game, irrespective of Rocket's dystopic vision of a vicious play experience, is and always will be to entertain those who participate. When the game ceases to be entertaining people will stop playing. It's as simple as that, and Rocket knows that. That's why simulators created for entertainment purposes always feature bits and pieces of distinct unreality.

The problem here is that, given what my argument was, your post would suggest that I'm most likely a kill-for-fun bandit who has no respect for the game. Do you think I appreciate that presumption?

Finally, I appreciate your venture with the video series, and I DO think that the game could still be viable if everybody were to start as you did. In fact, I think I may do this on my next life.

[/quote']

I guess I worded it wrong, the simulator inside the simulator thing was not meant to be my main point and definitely not meant to be somebody's primary point of reply. I appreciate that your reply was actually mature though, sometimes it's tough to find those. I'm completely anti-elitist and I've had a pretty strong hate for elitist since I had played WoW for 6 years.

I'm just not interested in negative replies because while it sounds weird it's stressful to be on here for hours trying to defend myself. I don't want to have to deal with that and I want to try to keep my threads positive. That's why I asked for mature replies which is completely reasonable. I've made threads before that have been filled with extremely ignorant replies and I just don't want to deal with that.

I agree that it shouldn't be too overdone, it should be kept fun but there are plenty of things that can be added to improve the realism while still keeping the game fun.

[Budiak 1]

I find your readiness to accept constructive criticism quite refreshing.

[psycho84 0]

Rocket posted this a short time ago. It highlights that realism is not the goal of the mod but fostering authentic emotions is. It's a very important distinction I think.

This mod is not about realism. Realistic combat?

I was a soldier' date=' it's fucking boring 99% of the time.

This mod is designed to have the authenticity required to model and produce some authentic emotional responses.

Reality has many concessions made against it in order to achieve this authenticity in the brief time a player is present in the world.

[/quote']

@OP

I think what your getting at is actually authenticity which is great. Thats a more tangible realism for games anyway.

[Budiak 1]

As an Infantry Sergeant, I understand exactly what he is saying. This is exactly why I like the game- authentic emotional responses. It already has that in spades and anything that damages that sentiment should be tossed. Invoking these responses is the goal and purpose of a simulator, regardless of the actual realism of the game.

Another post recently proposed a lengthy process for applying field aid to a fallen player. What most efficiently creates the response of urgency and fear: having to remember the lengthy process and posess a number of special yet realistic equipment, or merely having to patch up your comrade in a hurry with the threat of his death? Gotta use Occam's razor on that one.

[haviv[3rdid] 57]

It shouldn't be realistically complex but it should be realistically hard. It should be hard to survive as a lone wolf. It should be hard to completely trust members of a team you made up of total strangers.

If people are building huge military arsenals based on stuff they found in the middle of the woods then something is wrong. If anyone can just walk up to a broken helicopter and repair it or perform major surgery on himself then something is wrong. The results in the game have to make sense even if all the details aren't there.

[DryGulch 32]

RATE COMMENT AND SUBSCRIBE AMIRITE?