The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I should take a quick pause to say that by "unforseen", I meant unforseen by me. I am not speaking for you all.
You'll all no doubt be aware of the next generation consoles push for graphical and behavioural realism in forthcoming games and I must say that, up until this morning, I was all for it. Now before you get scared, this isn't another of those "bring quirkyness back to gaming" topics, instead I'm think what affect "realism" might actually have on games and the market they'd be suitable for.
We've all whooped at the graphical supremacy and realistic handling in GT3. More so at the graphical and interactive realism of the MGS2 demo. Well, this got the cogs in my brain a turning and I started thinking "what is the ultimate goal here?". It seems to me that both fans of gaming and games developers are wanting the same thing. Games that imitate life. This doesn't mean that we all want to play "Eastenders" or any of those other things on TV that "mimic life". What we want is for the characters and their movements, actions and reactions to convincingly portray human (or whatever) movements. But its not just this either. GT3 convincingly portrayed cars and their movements. Where we happy? Well not far off, but it didn't take long for complaints to come;
"When your car crashes, it doesn't suffer any damage. You call this realistic? Pah!"
And its a fair point. I know there were reasons beyond Polyphony's control for this, but even I was still left thinking; "Its a ashame".
Well, if this is the ultimate agenda, then surely a lot of games are going end up being for "older audiences" only.
What the devil am I talking about? I hear you inquire.
Ask your self this. You're hurtling along on a realistic race track in a shiny CG car and... oops, you lose control and wrap round a near-by (probably still badly drawn) CG tree. Well, in "the real world" when this happens, yes your car smashes. Easy enough to put into a game. Oh, but thats not all that happens, quite often drivers are minced inside, blood fills the windscreen, the car explodes, charred limbs fly out onto the race track, etc. BLING BLING your game now carries an 18 certificate.
Ok, thats an extreme case. But you get the idea. What got me thinking like this was asseeing a preview for "Kengo 2" in OPSM2. I thought "Hmm I quite like that whole Bushido blade type genre, realistic gameplay with its no energy bar formula"... then I started wondering about the "realism" of the game and thinking that as in Bushido blade your characters will probably carry injuries and fight on, I wondered if you'd be able to see these injuries.... suddenly my minds eye witnesses a horrendous CG image of one man in Kengo 2, slicing open the belly of another man and man 2's guts spilling out all over the screen.
Come now, is this really what we want from gaming? Ok, some of you probably do. But ultimately most games involve putting your characters (and many others characters) lives in danger, the more graphic this gets, the smaller the audience for the game gets. This could eventually result in the death of gaming (or at least a descent back into the realms of "geekyness" that its only just escaped, only this time with an added "snuff" quality. Yipes!)
Realism bad.
You'll all no doubt be aware of the next generation consoles push for graphical and behavioural realism in forthcoming games and I must say that, up until this morning, I was all for it. Now before you get scared, this isn't another of those "bring quirkyness back to gaming" topics, instead I'm think what affect "realism" might actually have on games and the market they'd be suitable for.
We've all whooped at the graphical supremacy and realistic handling in GT3. More so at the graphical and interactive realism of the MGS2 demo. Well, this got the cogs in my brain a turning and I started thinking "what is the ultimate goal here?". It seems to me that both fans of gaming and games developers are wanting the same thing. Games that imitate life. This doesn't mean that we all want to play "Eastenders" or any of those other things on TV that "mimic life". What we want is for the characters and their movements, actions and reactions to convincingly portray human (or whatever) movements. But its not just this either. GT3 convincingly portrayed cars and their movements. Where we happy? Well not far off, but it didn't take long for complaints to come;
"When your car crashes, it doesn't suffer any damage. You call this realistic? Pah!"
And its a fair point. I know there were reasons beyond Polyphony's control for this, but even I was still left thinking; "Its a ashame".
Well, if this is the ultimate agenda, then surely a lot of games are going end up being for "older audiences" only.
What the devil am I talking about? I hear you inquire.
Ask your self this. You're hurtling along on a realistic race track in a shiny CG car and... oops, you lose control and wrap round a near-by (probably still badly drawn) CG tree. Well, in "the real world" when this happens, yes your car smashes. Easy enough to put into a game. Oh, but thats not all that happens, quite often drivers are minced inside, blood fills the windscreen, the car explodes, charred limbs fly out onto the race track, etc. BLING BLING your game now carries an 18 certificate.
Ok, thats an extreme case. But you get the idea. What got me thinking like this was asseeing a preview for "Kengo 2" in OPSM2. I thought "Hmm I quite like that whole Bushido blade type genre, realistic gameplay with its no energy bar formula"... then I started wondering about the "realism" of the game and thinking that as in Bushido blade your characters will probably carry injuries and fight on, I wondered if you'd be able to see these injuries.... suddenly my minds eye witnesses a horrendous CG image of one man in Kengo 2, slicing open the belly of another man and man 2's guts spilling out all over the screen.
Come now, is this really what we want from gaming? Ok, some of you probably do. But ultimately most games involve putting your characters (and many others characters) lives in danger, the more graphic this gets, the smaller the audience for the game gets. This could eventually result in the death of gaming (or at least a descent back into the realms of "geekyness" that its only just escaped, only this time with an added "snuff" quality. Yipes!)
Realism bad.
Page:
I think I was talking graphics and physics/ biology originally. Gameplay should not be grounded in "reality" because then we kind of lose the escapism - by reality, I mean it shouldn't mimic our lives (unless you want to play a do naff all, then go to work then sit on internet sim? me neither).
Fair point about the statistics thing, would have been a fine point too, but then evil nit-pickers like myself come along and ruin the whole facade.
Fair point about the statistics thing, would have been a fine point too, but then evil nit-pickers like myself come along and ruin the whole facade.
I am the Tarrant wrote:
> I see what your saying, but you are looking at two extreme examples.
I think its like statistics, if you know how you can make them say what ever you want.
> I see what your saying, but you are looking at two extreme examples.
I think its like statistics, if you know how you can make them say what ever you want.
I stand corrected, slightly. Your right that it depends on the content of the individual film/game in question, in the game your in control.
I think what were talking about is less about graphics and more about gameplay, you can realistic graphics without realistic gameplay, but you could also have realistic gameplay in a text based adventure, like Zork could have been very graphic in it wording and things you could do, what if it allowed you complete freedom to do what ever you wanted, still text based, but it would be more realistic.
So is the downside to realism in games, realism of graphics or realism of what you are capable of doing, are we going to have games such as GT3 where its so realistic you can get out your car and run naked down the tack, dodging cars? (maybe not)
I think the developers have to consider and set out rules in there games which govern the boundries of game play, so you can't do certain things, but they can still make it look realistic.
I think what were talking about is less about graphics and more about gameplay, you can realistic graphics without realistic gameplay, but you could also have realistic gameplay in a text based adventure, like Zork could have been very graphic in it wording and things you could do, what if it allowed you complete freedom to do what ever you wanted, still text based, but it would be more realistic.
So is the downside to realism in games, realism of graphics or realism of what you are capable of doing, are we going to have games such as GT3 where its so realistic you can get out your car and run naked down the tack, dodging cars? (maybe not)
I think the developers have to consider and set out rules in there games which govern the boundries of game play, so you can't do certain things, but they can still make it look realistic.
I see what your saying, but you are looking at two extreme examples.
We're not talking just GTA3, thats probably the only game that promotes violence in such a one sided way. We could look at games like MGS2 were there is a lot to be learnt and the overall message is one of peace, yet it is littered with violence throughout.
American History X is an amazing film with strong violence but an even stronger message.
But not all films are like this though are they. Take Scarface; cracking film, lots of violence, but what message do we recieve from it? "Its maybe not the best idea to become a Mafia boss/ drug dealer king and shoot your sister"
Thats a fairly tame example, certain films in the industry portray far worse violence than GTA3 with even less justification.
We're not talking just GTA3, thats probably the only game that promotes violence in such a one sided way. We could look at games like MGS2 were there is a lot to be learnt and the overall message is one of peace, yet it is littered with violence throughout.
American History X is an amazing film with strong violence but an even stronger message.
But not all films are like this though are they. Take Scarface; cracking film, lots of violence, but what message do we recieve from it? "Its maybe not the best idea to become a Mafia boss/ drug dealer king and shoot your sister"
Thats a fairly tame example, certain films in the industry portray far worse violence than GTA3 with even less justification.
Pro Evo wrote:
> I think that it does have a lot to do with the interaction.
In films, there
> is nothing you can do, before you have seen it, its all set out for you, a
> start, beggining and an end. Nothing you can do will change that course of the
> film.
However in games, progression is entirly in you hands, you decide
> almost everything, whether to drive there, collect this, or, most importantly,
> kill them. Even though thats what the plot needs, you are the one in the end
> that has to 'kill' that person, and its this 'thinking' i feel that alerts
> parents in the know about how games work, to think twice about buying certain
> games for there perhaps, young children.
Saying that though, im only 16, but
> yet i still play GTA 3 and all the rest. My parents are, not concerned, but are
> aware of what i am playing. But because i myself feel i have had a good
> upbringing, they know im not likely to go out and run over many people. Also i
> like to think that i have the common sence not to go out and do this, and im
> sure i have and never will do such a thing.
It may just be a case of how you
> see what you are playing. If you play because of the fun of gaming, thats fine.
> But if you play for some other, strange reason, and take the games seriously,
> you should not be playing.
A good point, i'll expand on.
I think the differnece with films is that there is often something to be learnt from the violence or other features that make it an 18, in games its the objective to run people over or kill them.
If you have ever see Ameriacan History X, you know what I mean, its a very violent and film, based around a Guy who is obsesed by Naziism and white power and is extreamly racist, some of it is disturbing, but is an excellent film and makes you think about a lot of issues, it makes you think for yourself and lean from it.
How ever much I love Gta3, i cant see anyone learning anything good from it apart from from skid skills.
> I think that it does have a lot to do with the interaction.
In films, there
> is nothing you can do, before you have seen it, its all set out for you, a
> start, beggining and an end. Nothing you can do will change that course of the
> film.
However in games, progression is entirly in you hands, you decide
> almost everything, whether to drive there, collect this, or, most importantly,
> kill them. Even though thats what the plot needs, you are the one in the end
> that has to 'kill' that person, and its this 'thinking' i feel that alerts
> parents in the know about how games work, to think twice about buying certain
> games for there perhaps, young children.
Saying that though, im only 16, but
> yet i still play GTA 3 and all the rest. My parents are, not concerned, but are
> aware of what i am playing. But because i myself feel i have had a good
> upbringing, they know im not likely to go out and run over many people. Also i
> like to think that i have the common sence not to go out and do this, and im
> sure i have and never will do such a thing.
It may just be a case of how you
> see what you are playing. If you play because of the fun of gaming, thats fine.
> But if you play for some other, strange reason, and take the games seriously,
> you should not be playing.
A good point, i'll expand on.
I think the differnece with films is that there is often something to be learnt from the violence or other features that make it an 18, in games its the objective to run people over or kill them.
If you have ever see Ameriacan History X, you know what I mean, its a very violent and film, based around a Guy who is obsesed by Naziism and white power and is extreamly racist, some of it is disturbing, but is an excellent film and makes you think about a lot of issues, it makes you think for yourself and lean from it.
How ever much I love Gta3, i cant see anyone learning anything good from it apart from from skid skills.
I think that it does have a lot to do with the interaction.
In films, there is nothing you can do, before you have seen it, its all set out for you, a start, beggining and an end. Nothing you can do will change that course of the film.
However in games, progression is entirly in you hands, you decide almost everything, whether to drive there, collect this, or, most importantly, kill them. Even though thats what the plot needs, you are the one in the end that has to 'kill' that person, and its this 'thinking' i feel that alerts parents in the know about how games work, to think twice about buying certain games for there perhaps, young children.
Saying that though, im only 16, but yet i still play GTA 3 and all the rest. My parents are, not concerned, but are aware of what i am playing. But because i myself feel i have had a good upbringing, they know im not likely to go out and run over many people. Also i like to think that i have the common sence not to go out and do this, and im sure i have and never will do such a thing.
It may just be a case of how you see what you are playing. If you play because of the fun of gaming, thats fine. But if you play for some other, strange reason, and take the games seriously, you should not be playing.
In films, there is nothing you can do, before you have seen it, its all set out for you, a start, beggining and an end. Nothing you can do will change that course of the film.
However in games, progression is entirly in you hands, you decide almost everything, whether to drive there, collect this, or, most importantly, kill them. Even though thats what the plot needs, you are the one in the end that has to 'kill' that person, and its this 'thinking' i feel that alerts parents in the know about how games work, to think twice about buying certain games for there perhaps, young children.
Saying that though, im only 16, but yet i still play GTA 3 and all the rest. My parents are, not concerned, but are aware of what i am playing. But because i myself feel i have had a good upbringing, they know im not likely to go out and run over many people. Also i like to think that i have the common sence not to go out and do this, and im sure i have and never will do such a thing.
It may just be a case of how you see what you are playing. If you play because of the fun of gaming, thats fine. But if you play for some other, strange reason, and take the games seriously, you should not be playing.
Probably not. Though I've noticed that in general, parents will quite willingly purchase a film thats certified 18 for their 14 year old son. However they think twice and question store managers about a game that holds a 15 certificate.
Funny that. I wonder if its anything to do with the interactivity?
Funny that. I wonder if its anything to do with the interactivity?
Thats a great idea, having a Censored game and a game for the lesser ages to play, that way everyone gets to play the game in question.
But like the age limits that are out today, would anyone keep to them?
But like the age limits that are out today, would anyone keep to them?
I see what you're saying and I think you are right. Especially with sports sims, the audiences will grow.
However, risking ones life and limb plays a big part in todays gaming. My thoughts flick to things like this;
GT3, superb but people "want" to damage their cars. This idea develops to horrendous crashes, an ultimately very popular series loses/ could stand to lose the pre 15 market for these games. Thus, though "realism" is in demand, to take it to the extreme and consider all angles, which a lot of people would like to see, may not be able to happen as it would cut sales.
One possibility is in the future there could be "censored" versions of games being released. Much like in the music industry today. The likelyhood is that "realism" will only go so far.
However, risking ones life and limb plays a big part in todays gaming. My thoughts flick to things like this;
GT3, superb but people "want" to damage their cars. This idea develops to horrendous crashes, an ultimately very popular series loses/ could stand to lose the pre 15 market for these games. Thus, though "realism" is in demand, to take it to the extreme and consider all angles, which a lot of people would like to see, may not be able to happen as it would cut sales.
One possibility is in the future there could be "censored" versions of games being released. Much like in the music industry today. The likelyhood is that "realism" will only go so far.
Page: