Is Half-Life 2 realistic (research thread)?

[PlayingMantis]

Is Half-Life 2 realistic?


Soon, my brother (a psychology student at a certain European University) will be writing his thesis on violence and realism in video games.

We are going to discuss these aspects with several people (Half-Life 2 will be one of the objects of discussion). He has already been in discussion with gaming journalists about these matters...

But how would one go about defining 'realism'? Is 'realism' realistic? What makes a game realistic? Ultimately, is Half-Life 2 really 'realistic'?

And what makes a game 'violent'? Mario 'kills' baddies too, is this also violence? Are Doom 3 and Far Cry more violent than Half-life 2? If, so why?


I would appreciate any intelligent comments, for some opinions may be of influence to upcoming discussions.


Rude and immature posters and posts need not apply. (Garric and cueball, stay away)

Lastly, I would like ask all of you with knowlegde about existing and/or on-going research into the matter, to post the corresponding http address, the (scientific) journal's issue or newspaper's name, day and date.

Thank you.

 

[CriYam]

I don't think there is one single realistic thing in HL2. Or any game I've ever played.

 

[czrsink]

I'd say that Call Of Duty and Medal Of Honor were a tad more realistic (given their recreation of historic battles).

Grand Theft Auto is probably the most 'violent' game, but because the characters are cartoony, the violence is in fact comical. If you can overlook the rag doll physics and ropey AI in Max Payne 2, you could say that was 'gritty and realistic' - and far more of an 'adult' game than anything like Doom 3 or Half Life 2.

 

[kaf11]

i would define realistic, in terms of violence, as being able to fool the player into believing theyre actually in the game harming real people. Also, having real feeling about those who youre killing would be necessary. By this definition i believe half-life 2 is very realistic, though in a good way. the player is totally absorbed into the game, and fights against a true enemy to liberate oppressed citizens.

im also a psych student and i have access to my universities psych database. ill go do a search and see if i find any interesting studites or journal articles.

 

[corkscru74]

Ok, well here are just my opinions on the matter:

What makes HL2 Realistic
Graphics - The Source engine is quite possibly the most lifelike graphics engine today. Whereas Doom 3 pips it at the post in terms of shadows (Doom's lightsources create realtime shadows on pretty much everything) it simply can't create anything that resembles real-life. When it comes to representing water there have been huge advances in the past year or so and, without a doubt, Source creates the most believable and realistic water to date. Facial Animations have also been overhauled with Source, muscles and facial structure working together with rules on Human Expressions to bring about a new milestone in believable characters.

As you can see, on the graphics side, Source leaves it's current competitors standing in terms of realism even if in certain situations it's not 100% true to life (Shadows for example) Source gets around it.

The Characters also add a huge amount to the realism. You could have the most lifelike graphics in the world but if the NPCs weren't believable as Human the realism would suffer greatly. HL2 manages to flesh out the characters with their own personalities, agendas and voices. For Example - Eli's bantering with his daughter, Barney's joking around, Mossman and Alyx's feuding. Real life people aren't there to hand out missions - neither are the NPCs in HL2.

Another way the realism is ramped up is by the way the game is played. Always through Gordon's eyes - no cinematic cutscenes to destroy the suspension of disbelief that "You are Gordon". Also the game is played in Realtime, no missions or levels - meaning you never leave Gordon's point of view to select the next level (this is only broken when using the options screen but even then the sound doesn't stop playing - this helps to intergrate the menu into the game a bit).

Physics - finally the ability to alter and affect the world around us. This is one of the most important things in terms of creating a realistic world. We learn from a young age that we have the power to shape the world as we see fit - to stop us from doing this in the game world destroys this rule and destroys the suspension of disbelief.

So how does this realism affect us - does realistic violence desensitise us?
My answer would be no. I think the closer we get to realism the further we get from desensitising it. For Example - I was playing Operation Flashpoint a while back. I was battling an enemy tank with only a rocket launcher for protection. After blowing up the tank I felt a sense of elation, I'd had fun. As I was walking passed the tank I caught something out of the corner of my eye, glancing down I realised it was the charred remains of one of the Tank crew. Reality struck. It dawned on me that inside the Tank had been real people, possibly with families back home - then I remembered I was playing a game and they were just a few lines of code, nothing more.

But it all depends on how the game portrays the violence, if the player is rewarded and not shown the consequences of their actions then it will affect the person as it would in real-life i.e. If there were no penalty for indiscriminate killing then everyone would be out murdering those they had a beef with. Obviously this then means that the game is not realistic, killing without consequence is unrealistic.

Therefore, theoretically anyway, the more realistic we make games (in terms of cause and effect, action/reaction) the more they will reinforce rules in the realworld.

 

[PlayingMantis]

im also a psych student and i have access to my universities psych database. ill go do a search and see if i find any interesting studites or journal articles.

Thanks for that.

 

[PlayingMantis]

Thanks for the replies so far. corkscru I am still reading yours...

 

[Ragingsamster]

Realism is a misnomer. what your friend is attempting to quantify is immersiveness. Where the line between the gamer and the game metaphoricly blurs. I've noticed over time that games are becoming more immersive, but the gamer's expectations with each new generation of game are raised.
When Wolfenstien3D came out it was the most realistic game available, as the genre advanced other titles would break new grounds providing the gamer with more and more pixels to help them identify with the game and less with mouse and keyboard they are using to control the virtual world spread out before them.
Realism in an unrealistic game would be limited to the way the environment reactes to your various manipulations of it. If your world reactes the same way as the real world we can deem that realistic. Any other scenarios would not apply, i.e. the gravity gun is not realistic, but given that, do the things unrealisticly affected by it act realisticly? The physics engine takes care of that interaction, and in half life 2 the physics engine does a fairly reasonable job of depicting the various forces in the virtual world.
As to the violence, it is a game, people who act violently in society will act that way regardless of whether they play GTA or not.

/edit Dang! corkscru, you type fast!

 

[kaf11]

playingmantis, suprisingly there arent as many studies on videogame violence as i would have expected. but, there are enough that would fit with your brothers research. for instance, i found one which studied whether violent video games would desensitize participants against what is perceived to be a real-life escalating physical conflict between 2 younger boys. most of the other studies report the physiological changes (eg: heartrate) while playing violent games.

 

[Mountain Man]

Threads like this always strike me as someone wanting other people to do their homework.

Anyway, I'd say the problem with video game violence is not that it's realistic, it's that it's unrealistic. Video game violence--much like movie violence--does not impart to the player the full emotional and psychological brunt of violent behavior. It turns violence into emotionless entertainment or it inpsires the wrong emotions because it presents violence in an entertaining way. It's this violence without proper consequence that causes some people to object to video game violence in general.

 

[xiphrex]

As computer hardware and technology become more advanced, games are looking more and more like reality e.g. solid snake was transformed from the MG1 2d sprite on the NES, to a supremely more realistic 3 dimensional human being. With that jump came a jump in AI but also in game immersion - some may disagree and say that games of the old are of a different class than games of the present, which in some aspects is true, but there is a vital factor that is not constant in this viewpoint, and that factor is time.

As the generation of game players who were content with playing Super Metroid on the Snes get older, their lifestyle changes and with that their gaming experience also changes. They might not acknowledge a change in their gaming tastes, but there definately is one (the evidence is todays games, blue hedgehogs and jumping plumbers are not all the rage like they used to be, even with their improved graphics etc).

What happens though, is that the new generation that have not played super metroid on the Snes or MG1 on the NES, have only played Vice City on their PS2's for example. So for them, GTA3 is how gaming is, and ever was. When they get older, they will then have a higher threshold to violence, like their fathers did when they were playing MG1 on the Nes. Sure that game had killing, but all that happened was the dead would flash and they would disappear. So when they come to see todays GTA3, they will be outraged, because that game depicts violence and infact most missions involve some form of violence. But for our new generation who have lived with GTA3, they will need a game of incredible depiction of violence to become outraged.

Remember Street fighter2, and how parents were very worried at the time over Dhalsim and his fireball antics, and the few cases of people setting each other on fire when they were roll playing SF2 (believe me, it happened, I remember the news like it was yesterday), well, the same people who were playing that game are now probably adults and are being outraged at the violence in GTA3/vice city/etc.

IMO, there is clearly a conclusion from all of this, that violence is only what your perceive to be violent. You and the present society of adults in the community. And actually everything these days is dependent on this, for example, homosexuality springs to mind (few decades ago it was prosecuted, now its fully accepted).

So mario jumping on animals in Super mario bros for the Nes may have been violent to the older generation at that time, but for the present generation and the upcoming new generation of people, super mario bros' violence is childs play.

As for HL2, it is indeed violent to some extent although there are many games already out that are far more violent. See violence does not neccesarily mean realistic, and I'll use the information Ive discussed before to reason this:

It will be clear that realism does not change, seeing as we currently are all of the same species (homo sapiens) and our brains function alike, perceiving reality the same. So for us, the nth degree of reality is real life itself. As of yet that nth degree cannot be synthetically achieved with current hardware, but we have come a long way closer to that since the days of the Nes. However notice how for shooting games back in those days, people and animals still died, there was still violence, but it was not realistic. There is something that prevented and continues to prevent, although slightly these days, the belief that the game is real. That something is the compound of immersion but also the outcome of the comparison between the game and what we think reality is.

So in other words, the combine are alien enslavers who are taking over the world or something the likes, in any case, they are aliens. At present, that screams to us UNREALISTIC, because we have not seen aliens, and we dont know if they exist. But perhaps in a few years or few decades we will come to meet one and then immediately the combine become REALISTIC because our attributes of real have changed.

In conclusion really, realism is based considerably on what the present world considers to be real, and that violence is just a side effect of our perceivance of reality. If in 10 years time someone develops a gun that makes people flash then disappear, MG1's death animations would be more accepted as realistic.

 

[MajorPayne]

I would say that Half Life 2 goes a long way towards realistic gaming by making you care so much about the NPC's, and what happens to them (especially the asides from your squadmates, such as "When this is all over, I'm gonna breed", and "I just want some cheese".). It also steps back from realism in that you cannot (accidentally or on purpose) shoot friendlies -- ask any soldier in Iraq if friendly fire is a valid problem. Almost any game makes tradeoffs in creating/limiting realism. Some (such as GTA pointed out above) give realistic freedom of action/violence, but make the characters "cartoony" in order to limit the impact of the violence. Others such as Half Life 2 create very realistic characters (good and bad), but limit the gore/violence level. For realistic violence/characters, the closest I have seen would be the soldier of fortune series -- you CAN accidentally shoot squadmates in this series, and it accurately models ALL damage done (to the gory extreme -- much like the movie 3 Kings did to expose the real damage done by weapons). I would say Half Life 2 if 50/50 between realistic and non-realistic in my opinion.

 

[PlayingMantis]

playingmantis, suprisingly there arent as many studies on videogame violence as i would have expected. but, there are enough that would fit with your brothers research. for instance, i found one which studied whether violent video games would desensitize participants against what is perceived to be a real-life escalating physical conflict between 2 younger boys. most of the other studies report the physiological changes (eg: heartrate) while playing violent games.

Could you provide a reference / bibliography?

 

[PlayingMantis]

Keeping the soul alive.

 

[Qonfused]

I saw a quote by a Nintendo Rep. and she said something like:

"If people were influenced by video games, we'd all be fat, painted up in yellow chasing little white pills around."

Older people say that the reason violence in teens is strong is because of music and video games while they're actually just looking for something to blame it on. I don't know about you but I don't feel like 'cappin' a foo' after I listen to some Snoop Dogg or feel like screwin' a hooker then shootin' her to get my money after playing GTA. All video games are is an escape. If you want realistic violence...

...Turn on the news.

 

[Keyser.Soze]

I think a lot of people are forgetting that games are made to have fun.

 

[corkscru74]

One thing I hadn't considered before is that if a game is unrealistic it's probably going to be easier to distinguish between it and the real world. Therefore shooting people in a 2D side scrolling shoot-em-up, no matter how gory, is not going to affect us as much as if it were graphically closer to real life.

Hmmmmmm - good topic btw, much better than the usual "Daily Mail says Violence in games is bad - I hate the Daily Mail" threads that crop up once a week. What is there beef???

 

[justmatt]

It's incredibly realistic. I have an HEV suit in my closet at home and I can easily hide 6-8 weapons in various pockets without it slowing me down at all.

 

[Mr.Wotsit]

I think people take the idea of realism a bit too simply.

I mean, how we interpret reality is all about how connected we are to the experience. Some people have cattaracts and so the world looks all weird but it doesn't mean it's any less of a reality in terms of their experience of it. In a similar manner, Half Life 2 doesn't depict the world in perfect detail either but you still take part in events in which you may become absorbed, just as you would in a book.

However, significantly there is the advent of interaction. With this interaction, your influence into the reality isn't limited to a passive role as with books or films but is much much greater in many ways. I mean, people create custom levels for each other. However, ultimately, something like Half Life 2 is deeply linear. You may fire that buzzsaw through the zombie's chest but it has been placed there specifically for that purpose and I for one knew immediately as I picked it up that this is what I must do next with it. Of course, it's absolutely important to remember that people experience these games in hugely different ways and therefore, it's very hard to make a judgement that is applicable to an large range of people that can stand up. Of course, you also have to remember that most games players are in the minority of society.

Sorry if I blabbered a bit there, just let my fingers go typing really but I hope there's some stuff to give you something to perhaps think about a bit. Stuff like that old and slightly disputable gem that perception is reality.

I love thinking about all this kind of thing!

 

[Mechagodzilla]

There is no fully realistic game. It's borderline impossible for there to ever be one.
And, even if there were, it's the unrealistic aspects of a game that provide the amusement, the game's raison-d'etre.

 

[PlayingMantis]

There is no fully realistic game. It's borderline impossible for there to ever be one.
And, even if there were, it's the unrealistic aspects of a game that provide the amusement, the game's raison-d'etre.

I.M.O. Gran Turismo 4 comes pretty damn close to the real thing if one has the right equipment to run it...

 

[MajorPayne]

As has been said on these forums before, if you want to experience an ATTEMPT at "realism" in gaming, take a look at Trespasser. Play it, hate it, put it back on the shelf.

I think we are about as close as you can get to realistic gaming as we will be until DECENT Virtual Reality gear is affordable for the home user. TO be able to interact in-game with your HANDS, not just buttons, should be the next leap in gaming. That, coupled with a visor-style screen system would give a great level of immersion, and make games feel much more lifelike. (Of course, the pr0n potential of these is not to be ignored either! ).

 

[freakybun99]

Realism

So realism eh?. instersting topic, cause all games like to evoke a sense of realism from the player. Be it the freedom that is Far Cry (although it gets more restrictive the further you play) or the open ended San Andreas. The latter being a huge sheep skin being pulled over your eyes.

The last two games mentioned above have really tried to push the envelope of realism, like the Medal of Honour games, they put you in a situation, and the realism part comes from how you manage to get youself out of it.

There's no way that videogame designers can predict and program every possilble combination of choices the player takes, especially with games getting bigger and bigger these days.

I think even with the larger power of future consoles, its going to be a long time before we see a video game thats truely realistic. I mean, 99% of games, especially those that drive a decent narritive, require you to perform actions in a larger series of events.

I think what i am now (having thought about it) wondering is, what is realism? Is it, like Half Life 2 that when you smack a cardboard box into the corner of a wall that it shatters? Is it the fact that Shooting a rocket into a wall in Red Faction causes it to blow apart and create real damage? Is it just that when you shine a torch against railings in Doom 3 that you see the shadows cast onto the surrrounding areas?

Its all about realism these days, some do it better than others.

In truth, the games I've enjoyed the most in the past 10 years or so have had some element of realism about them, but mainly, they were fun to play.

Sure, the Half Life 2 physics make you wow at what you can do, but they are still contrained by the laws, not of physics, but of the valve designers wanting you to enjoy the experience.

Also, a case in point on realism, look at Beyond Good and Evil from last year. One of the best games I've played for years on my PS2, and its pure fantasy - hey you can't even jump!! (zelda style!). Now thats realism for ya!!

 

[ShadowFox]

HL2 is far from real, thank god.

I find games whose aim is to be real, end up getting bogged down in the fact and aren't fun.

 

[f|uke]

It wont be realistic untill theres anatomically accurate gore and the characters portray genuine emotional terror when wounded/near death/etc. Characters in games never even act hurt.. they're fine right up to the point where they're totally dead.

If that stuff was added to a game, I'd be so impressed..

 

[Cole]

You know realistic can be put into so many areas. Just like here in the USA, like obcene things etc.. Who decides they are obscene? Realism is only as far as the player lets it be.
If the player is willing to open up his mind, and let every feature in his mind and unerstand it all then the world becomes very real to him.

Now there is also realism in the sense, Life vs Games.

When it comes to that, Half-Life 2 has a very real image based on what happened to us. It's not all this super super science world after it got taken by the combine. But rather, a mix of the old and the new. You see new technology by the combine all about, from there weapons to whatever. Then you see the architecture, and everything and that shows the old. It does a magnificant job showing it.

Physics? Well fluid physics, obviously no game to date can possibly do that yet. But when it comes to regular physics(as we think of them), Half-Life 2 does one great job at showing them. How objects break are not realistic, but MORE realistic than other games. Yes they seem realistic, with the breakpoints but not fully realistic vs life in general. Also when it comes to physics, the ragdolls are fantastic. Physics play an enormous part in HL2. HL2 uses all objects affected by physics to magnificance. But still, not 100% every single object in HL2 is affected by physics. There lies the problem keeping the physics seem totally real. Yet, for what objects are affected by physics then yes they do seem.... real.
Water in HL2, is not perfect. But define perfect? Define good? Define bad? HL2 does show water much better than any other game. Then again any time I say something like that, it is a personal prefrence.
Graphics in HL2. The modeling is not realistic, as life is not modeling. Now how good the modelings looks to the eye vs what how good life looks to the eye, well it looks decent. Textures, look "Photo-Realistic" for the current generation of technology. They look realistic vs anything to date. Once again, thats a personal prefrence.

The emotions in HL2, are based on a study of rather real emotions. They are great, they are better than great. They obey the physics in which the human face can do. Thus making them seem as if they are real.

Now when it comes to the game itself, it is far from realistic in all senses. From the physics to whatever it is far from realistic. When we can create technology that, I can make a planet via a game, place a single microscopic orgranism and watch the life grow without any exta coding, or modeling then we will still be far from realistic. We will be closer in one sense. Not any closer in the other sense.

There is no real reason to make games realistic. Games are just for enjoyment. No reason to compare them to life.

When you get right down to it, does it really matter when we compare something to another?

 

[4est]

I was recently shooting and reshooting pics of the battle at the lighthouse. I got some great action shots ... but damn. I had to finally stop. The rebels getting killed over and over really started to bother me. They are so real its freaky.

A HUGE part of realism is what you perceive. Books are only paper and ink but they can totally enthrall a reader.

 

[CriYam]

The rebels getting killed over and over really started to bother me. They are so real its freaky.

Yikes, comments like these are really freaky.

There isn't a single realistic thing in any game man!

 

[PlayingMantis]

Again, thanks for the replies so far. Keep 'em coming.

Interesting comments, people.


Now, see if you can address the the following questions directly:

-What makes a game realistic? How would you define realistic?

-What makes a game violent? How would you define violent?
Are Doom 3 and Far Cry more violent than Half-life 2? If, so why?

Again, if you possess knowlegde about existing and/or on-going research into the matter, would you be so kind as to post the corresponding http address, the scientific journal's issue or newspaper's name, day and date.

Thanks again.

 

[PlayingMantis]

Addendum

Comments from MODS and Valve employees would be greatly appreciated...

...if humanly possible feel free to post your opnions..

 

[Teddy]

well, for one thing.. the gravity in half-life 2 is only 6m/s/s. They do this to make the phyiscs a bit more sweeter, we've done it in dystopia too

 

[STieRKe]

Nice thread! Excuse me for the bad English, im from Belgium so...


What makes a game realistic? How would you define realistic?

i think realism is what we experience trough our senses, Our sight, sound, smell, touch and taste. A game only give us 2 of our 5 senses (and these two are not even complete). therefore, how can a game be realistic? It simply cannot.

When u run arround in HL2 and combine troop shoot u, you dont feel any pain. When u swim, u dont get whet. You dont feel the heat of the fire in ravenholm.

When we play a game, read a book or watch a movie, our fantasy sometimes fills in those missing sensations. We can shiver when reading a book on the northpole, or feel pain when we watch a program on surgery. When our fantasy fills in the blanc spots, this is the part where reality becomes fantasy. Games, books, movies all rellie on our ability to fantasise and therefore they cannot and probably never will resemble reality, or in a very small way.

Offcourse who am i to say what is real and whats not, what i see, feel or smell can be very different of what another person feels, sees or smells in the same situation. Reality, education, expirience all effect our perception of the world.


-What makes a game violent? How would you define violent?
Are Doom 3 and Far Cry more violent than Half-life 2? If, so why?

This allready has been said in this thread but violence differs from person to person, from generation to generation.

Its impossible to say what is violent. Hell, the nazi's didnt think killing all those people in the concentration camps was violent. I dont think its violent to kill a fly and others think its ok to blow up frogs or shoot bunny's for sport.

Hell lets all get drunk and play ping pong :cheers:

Im gonna think about this a bit more but if my boss sees me doin this im gonna get fired so... :bounce: have fun

CheerZ

 

[Mr.Wotsit]

People who say realism is about how much like real life a game looks have very small brains.

How much like real life do words in a book look? Surely the words just give you the guidelines from which to draw the image in your brain? Games give you many more guidelines in much more vivid detail.

I'm totally of the opinion that games don't make you go out and kill people but I'm not keen on all the people dismissing games as realistic because they think it's the kind of link that can lead to other bad judgements.

 

[Muhwi]

IIRC someone at VALVe said that the next big advance in terms of realism in dependent on the development of input devices. I totally agree here, because the current control devices cannot possibly produce a feeling of realism. I mean come on, a board with small buttons on it and a small lump of plastic under your hand is the best we can do? One and probably the only way to achieve prefect realism and integration would be to plug the computer directly into the brain; make the world of the game as real for the player as the real world can possibly be. This of course produces loads of ethical questions and also quite a few dangers should this technology become as widespread as the present-day mice and keyboards are. Matrix, anyone?

 

[Kyorisu]

IIRC someone at VALVe said that the next big advance in terms of realism in dependent on the development of input devices. I totally agree here, because the current control devices cannot possibly produce a feeling of realism. I mean come on, a board with small buttons on it and a small lump of plastic under your hand is the best we can do? One and probably the only way to achieve prefect realism and integration would be to plug the computer directly into the brain; make the world of the game as real for the player as the real world can possibly be. This of course produces loads of ethical questions and also quite a few dangers should this technology become as widespread as the present-day mice and keyboards are. Matrix, anyone?

Ofcourse this will never happen. Our current understanding of the human brain is, general at best.

 

[Muhwi]

Ofcourse this will never happen. Our current understanding of the human brain is, general at best.

In the eighties someone said that 640k is all the memory a personal computer will ever need Given the recent speed of computer evolution and advance of science I don't see this as impossible. Very very unlikely is closer, and in any event such things won't be around anytime soon.

 

[mi6o]

Is it realistic?Yes It Is, you have no idea how realistic it is... realy.That's probably bacause you don't live in City 17, you are located too west .

I am from Bulgaria.And I thing that Sofia(the capitol) is te very prototype of City 17, Cconsidering the fact that one of the main designers is Bulgarian - Viktor Antonov.And don't know if actually there is another east-europian designer in Valve... not sure.

Seriously, when I am playing HL2 I have the feeling I am walking in my town.Here in a local forum someone said that when he is heading to school early in the morning, while not wake up completely, he has the feeling that is still playing HL.The blocks, the graffits on the walls in cyrilic, the funny small cars(trabant - russian mark I think), the trucks, the signs wich say "техника" or "порта " (which means "technique" and "gate")... it's all like here.Also a friend of mine told me that somewhere in the game he saw a washing machine named "перла", wich is bulgarian mark.

And we also have a discussion, of how much the small kids will manage to make difference between HL2 and real world.We are not sure about that.

I absolutely agree with corkscru74, when he said :

So how does this realism affect us - does realistic violence desensitise us?
My answer would be no. I think the closer we get to realism the further we get from desensitising it. For Example - I was playing Operation Flashpoint a while back. I was battling an enemy tank with only a rocket launcher for protection. After blowing up the tank I felt a sense of elation, I'd had fun. As I was walking passed the tank I caught something out of the corner of my eye, glancing down I realised it was the charred remains of one of the Tank crew. Reality struck. It dawned on me that inside the Tank had been real people, possibly with families back home - then I remembered I was playing a game and they were just a few lines of code, nothing more.

I have allways having , killing NPCs in the games.Allways I try to kill my allies to see what will happen and if they are not invulnerable, till the end of the game I kill them a several times for fun.But In HL2 something strange for me happened.I was at the moment when Barny gives me the crowbar.And then I realize that I still haven't tried to kill the friendly charracters!You may think thats normal, but I was very shoked from this discovery.Of course then I tried to kill Barny and saw that he is ghost...

Why I havent still shoot at Alex or her father ?Or another shoot at Barny ? Because they act really realistic,like a real humans and I like them... I don't shoot people I like(although you may think we are all terrorists here , or at least american movie directors think that )

 

[STieRKe]

People who say realism is about how much like real life a game looks have very small brains.QUOTE]

excuse me? What do you compare the realisme in a game with, surely it is the fysics, emotions, history... of real life?

If u can jump 20 meters in a game it is not realistic
if u can jump half a meter it is

If u get shot 6 times and still be able to move normally, it is not realistic
If u get shot 6 times and are cripled or die, it is

Doesnt this resemble real life? :upstare:
Tell me what is ur reference for "real" or "realistic"?

Plz explain your definition of realism in games if u will!

 

[STieRKe]

People who say realism is about how much like real life a game looks have very small brains.

I know this isnt grown up and all, but i gotta say, i've been reviewing ur posts and it looks like u really think u are so wonderfull and all, u seem to have little or no people skills at all, offcours u probably have 5 degrees in idontknowwhatkindofshit but people dont like u man, or i dont anyways, and i think im not alone here. I dont like to be called dumb, or having a small brain! insulting people isnt a good form of communication.

Hell u probably get a kick out of pissing people off, so im not gonna bother any more, enjoy ur puny life little man!

Admins and playingmantis sorry for this out of topic stuff!

 

[mi6o]

What makes a game realistic? How would you define realistic?

There are no more no less 3 things that can make the game perfect realistic:
1)The Graphic
2)Interaction with the world
3)Real interrior

The first is slear - to have perfect realism you must have a perfect graphic, with the resolution (the_number_of_smallest_particles_a_common_human_can_see_in_horizontal_line_without_moving_his_eyes) : (the_number_of_smallest_particles_a_common_human_can_see_in_vertical_line_without_moving_his_eyes).And you must have virtual glasses.

The second - the interaction means that
- you must have the perfect physics and the models must not be made of 2D polygons, but of 3D objects
- you must have real AI - simulated real human brain(Neural Network)
- you must have microfon(sound input)
- and you must have sensors all over your body and you must play in outerspace, where there isnt gravity
- of course some speakers

The third means that if the game has the first two elementst, if you play in a world with flying pink elephants, it still won't be realistic

So It is obvious that perfect realism is far away(or may be not so far).But some elements are at a very good level.And the things are getting better.

-What makes a game violent? How would you define violent?

Killing living things makes the game violent.Violence is when you are making some living thing suffer, for fun.Human are violent.We kill animals, even we can eat vegetables, that is viloence(yes I eat meat too :| ).Rich people are showing off their toys expensive cars, clotches, stuff ect. saying to poor people "Look I am better than you, you don't have this".Most people prefer to buy a game, or a music album or a film, instead of giving those money to the girl from charity organisation, showing to you a picture of a child who don't have enough money to make life-saving operation... you got it I think.