Realism vs fun - where do you stand?

9 I guess for me, I like the cars/bikes to be modelled after a real thing but I don't want to be doing circuits
 
[TW]Fox;17648021 said:
Anyone saying 1 is a liar.

Unless you want your combat simulator to involve 5 hours sat in a plane before you even get to fight. Or you your first person shooter that doesnt allow you to play it ever again if you get shot, etc
Click to expand...

+1, unless I'm taking the question too seriously. As far as FPS go I suppose the people who reply 1 would want the realistic smell of warfare too, and no I'm not talking about napalm either, more so the smell of death, sweat, etc.
 
3 ish I think, the main racing game I've played over the last 2 years is iRacing, which is pretty much the best sim out there,

I rarely play arcade games as, oddly, I don't get much enjoyment out of them anymore, I find the lack of a 'realistic' physics engine just gets irritating...

The main exception to the above though is F1 2010, whilst it's obviously nowhere near iRacing (and FW31 in a few days \o/, ahem) and it's seriously lacking any steering feel, it is however 'fun', in the sense of 'ooh, I can pretend I'm actually an F1 driver' kinda fun :p

Well, until the stupid, buggy pos game goes and corrupts the savegame at least...
 
Im deinitely an 8 or 9

I really miss the ridge racer franchise - I have never spent so long on any of the newer realistic racers as i did even on RR6 on the 360 - whic it self was comparatively rubbish coompared to RR type 4 and Rage racer.

wipeout was another favourite.

edit: and mario kart

edit 2 : and Trakmania
 
Last edited:
I've played a fair share of racing games from the arcade (Mario Kart, Trackmania), to sim (F1 games) and ones in between like DIRT/GRID and Gran Turismo.

Maybe I have a broad taste of games, but I enjoy them all, but it depends on my patience level at time of playing. There's no way for me to play a F1 game for example if I want a quick blast and need to relax, for that I'd play an arcade orientated game.

That said, my absolute favourite racing game is Flatout 2. Whilst it's probably closer to arcade than simulation, the game itself is very technical and fun. The driving model the developer, BugBear, employed is in my opinion perfect, as you get a real sense of driving without it turning into a chore. Different cars actually behave and very feel different, something other racing games don't really achieve. Also coupled with the wide range of tracks in the game and amazing multiplayer, it's the reason why I still play the game to this day.

I hate the Codemaster's driving model that they've used and still use since way back when, where the car turns from it's centre and basically doesn't handle like a car. This is a shame as GRID would, for me, be a much better game if it wasn't for the appalling driving model.
 
It depends what mood I'm in, like everything else. Sometimes an arcadey racer is more appealing but generally I like it a lot more 'sim'.

But to give an overall number I'd say 2, on that scale

EDIT: And that's just racing, as for other games, it varies wildly. Probably a 5 overall.
 
Last edited:
I'm somewhere between 3 & 10, it just depends on what I want from a game.

I love Red Orchestra, Arma, Project Reality but at the same time love TF2, Borderlands, Mario Kart etc. It just depends to how a game is portrayed, an abstract/sci fi/silly/fun game, I have no problems with super handling cars, people taking 30 bullets before dying but portray it like a 'serious game' and that happens then something is wrong.

I am probably in general more towards the lower end of the scale (a 4?), for instance after playing stuff like Men of War, I get annoyed playing another strategy game where for instance a tank will to little damage to a infantry man just because the game is set up like that to not be its counter. And games like Fallout 3 and Stalker after playing through once I'll look for mods to adjust the 'realism' of the game.

With realism based games though, there has to be a balance between realism features and gameplay fun. The Tripwire/RO forums are a good place to see it, you'll get people demanding super realistic features like weapon maintenance/jamming or even more obscure stuff like "historically the Russians should have only rifles, little ammo and no AT in this map due to the real life supply situations in the battle" but in game it would be no fun to run round a corner for your weapon to randomly jam as you come face to face enemy or be completely steam rolled by the other steam with vehicles you can't counter.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;17648021 said:
Anyone saying 1 is a liar.

Unless you want your combat simulator to involve 5 hours sat in a plane before you even get to fight. Or you your first person shooter that doesnt allow you to play it ever again if you get shot, etc
Click to expand...

Me thinks you're taking the question tad too seriously, my answer didn't mean that I want to be sitting there demanding nothing short of reality down to sitting hours beforehand mentally preparing myself for the race. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with arcade racers and they have their lion's share of the market but they simply don't appeal to me.
 
[TW]Fox;17648021 said:
Anyone saying 1 is a liar.

Unless you want your combat simulator to involve 5 hours sat in a plane before you even get to fight. Or you your first person shooter that doesnt allow you to play it ever again if you get shot, etc
Click to expand...

Take it that far and why not have it so if you get shot you have to die irl to?

Theres realism and theres gaming realism.
 
back in the 'doom' days i thought that realism in future games would be all positive, but with some games that are out now their a little too realistic and now seek a careful balance between the 2 worlds :)
 
I absolutely despise realistic shooters. I cannot play them. My eyes won't let me - I can't tell the difference between the terrain and the enemies. Everything blends in too well. I don't know if it's my colourblindness or what but I have never played a realistic shooter for more than 3-4 hours, they are horrible to me. The only multiplayer shooters I've ever played a considerable amount of hours on is TF2 and Halo 2, both very cartoony. For single player I don't mind so much, but I still cannot stand anything like Call of Duty, Battlefield or Medal of Honour, single player or multiplayer.

Realism means nothing to me, the more realism the more I hate the game.
 
Heh, having seen the effort those fight sim guys put in to building those cockpits, it's not hard to imagine that they do indeed fligh for 5 hours to get from A to B. And better still, there's probaly another guy sitting there for 5 hours calling the air tracfic control:)
 
Seems an odd question to me, obviously i'd take fun over realism, but i enjoy realistic racing games.

F1 2010 for example is ruined for me by all the obvious flaws, cars built like tanks, pit bug, fuel bug, elastic banding, the fact you can win in a Lotus & of course wet weather that presents no additional challenge to drive.
 
Probably 8 out of 10 for me in pretty much every genre I play, nearer to 9 out of 10 for driving games. Minecraft and Team Fortress 2 are probably the the most unrealistic games I have installed at the moment which I only play to have a laugh with some friends. I dislike games which are based in the future and I can't stand fake weapons. It kind of narrows down the games I'm willing to give a try but never mind :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom