The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Before I begin, it must be stressed that this post does not, in any way, encapsulate the bowling-alley suited machines that require a helmet to play. No way, in fact this post investigates the difference between the real and the virtual in the modern era of computer gaming. Some may say that the two are converging into one. Is this really what is happening in the gaming market? Is this also really what developers are intending to achieve?
In the past, in most cases, there has been a distinct barrier between realism and simulation. In fact many developers relish this difference as it allows them to make completely untrue to life games which are in fact great fun to play. A great example is Sonic The Hedgehog, I mean how often would you expect to become a blue hedgehog defeating a robot in real life?!? On the other side of the divide comes sports simulations, such as the FIFA series of games, which seems to make realism an utmost priority. As FIFA evolves, we get a more lifelike representation of what playing the game as a professional is really like. In the past this divide was strong, but is it beginning to weaken under the advent of technology that is making reality a more plausible concept?
Along came three-dimensional technology, technology that allowed us to visualise worlds in three dimensions on a two-dimensional screen. This technology has allowed the concept of realism to fluctuate exponentially in the modern world. We are now able to see things on a screen in the same way that we look at the world around us. Developers took this on board and created games which almost shockingly well manage to recreate reality. An example here could be Microsoft Flight Simulator. To my best knowledge flight simulator is actually used by budding pilots to reinforce their flying training. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a very real looking and feeling simulation, and it is, perhaps, the closest most of us will ever get to piloting a real plane. This technology works in this genre and will become increasingly pleasing to lovers of the flight simulator series of games.
The advent of three dimensional games and a need for realism spawned reality simulators, such as The Sims. There is surely a paradox here where we actually enjoy simulating human life more than we do living it in reality! However, this is not as stupid as it sounds, as the developers of the Sims have made a truly engrossing game, despite the fact the concept would have driven gamers away a few years back. This is perhaps a landmark game in the distinction between reality and gaming.
However, do we really want games to become more real? Of course we don't want this exclusively, imagine if we were literally faced with reality games solely. We would have to wave good bye to games such as Sonic and Mario, and welcome games that showed realism such as Flight Sim. The bottom line is that a game is meant to be fun, and this must be preserved if games are going to survive. However, it is unarguable that in ten years time, developers will have the technology to make games that look and feel 'real' to the gamer.
In the past, in most cases, there has been a distinct barrier between realism and simulation. In fact many developers relish this difference as it allows them to make completely untrue to life games which are in fact great fun to play. A great example is Sonic The Hedgehog, I mean how often would you expect to become a blue hedgehog defeating a robot in real life?!? On the other side of the divide comes sports simulations, such as the FIFA series of games, which seems to make realism an utmost priority. As FIFA evolves, we get a more lifelike representation of what playing the game as a professional is really like. In the past this divide was strong, but is it beginning to weaken under the advent of technology that is making reality a more plausible concept?
Along came three-dimensional technology, technology that allowed us to visualise worlds in three dimensions on a two-dimensional screen. This technology has allowed the concept of realism to fluctuate exponentially in the modern world. We are now able to see things on a screen in the same way that we look at the world around us. Developers took this on board and created games which almost shockingly well manage to recreate reality. An example here could be Microsoft Flight Simulator. To my best knowledge flight simulator is actually used by budding pilots to reinforce their flying training. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a very real looking and feeling simulation, and it is, perhaps, the closest most of us will ever get to piloting a real plane. This technology works in this genre and will become increasingly pleasing to lovers of the flight simulator series of games.
The advent of three dimensional games and a need for realism spawned reality simulators, such as The Sims. There is surely a paradox here where we actually enjoy simulating human life more than we do living it in reality! However, this is not as stupid as it sounds, as the developers of the Sims have made a truly engrossing game, despite the fact the concept would have driven gamers away a few years back. This is perhaps a landmark game in the distinction between reality and gaming.
However, do we really want games to become more real? Of course we don't want this exclusively, imagine if we were literally faced with reality games solely. We would have to wave good bye to games such as Sonic and Mario, and welcome games that showed realism such as Flight Sim. The bottom line is that a game is meant to be fun, and this must be preserved if games are going to survive. However, it is unarguable that in ten years time, developers will have the technology to make games that look and feel 'real' to the gamer.
There have been no replies to this thread yet.
Before I begin, it must be stressed that this post does not, in any way, encapsulate the bowling-alley suited machines that require a helmet to play. No way, in fact this post investigates the difference between the real and the virtual in the modern era of computer gaming. Some may say that the two are converging into one. Is this really what is happening in the gaming market? Is this also really what developers are intending to achieve?
In the past, in most cases, there has been a distinct barrier between realism and simulation. In fact many developers relish this difference as it allows them to make completely untrue to life games which are in fact great fun to play. A great example is Sonic The Hedgehog, I mean how often would you expect to become a blue hedgehog defeating a robot in real life?!? On the other side of the divide comes sports simulations, such as the FIFA series of games, which seems to make realism an utmost priority. As FIFA evolves, we get a more lifelike representation of what playing the game as a professional is really like. In the past this divide was strong, but is it beginning to weaken under the advent of technology that is making reality a more plausible concept?
Along came three-dimensional technology, technology that allowed us to visualise worlds in three dimensions on a two-dimensional screen. This technology has allowed the concept of realism to fluctuate exponentially in the modern world. We are now able to see things on a screen in the same way that we look at the world around us. Developers took this on board and created games which almost shockingly well manage to recreate reality. An example here could be Microsoft Flight Simulator. To my best knowledge flight simulator is actually used by budding pilots to reinforce their flying training. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a very real looking and feeling simulation, and it is, perhaps, the closest most of us will ever get to piloting a real plane. This technology works in this genre and will become increasingly pleasing to lovers of the flight simulator series of games.
The advent of three dimensional games and a need for realism spawned reality simulators, such as The Sims. There is surely a paradox here where we actually enjoy simulating human life more than we do living it in reality! However, this is not as stupid as it sounds, as the developers of the Sims have made a truly engrossing game, despite the fact the concept would have driven gamers away a few years back. This is perhaps a landmark game in the distinction between reality and gaming.
However, do we really want games to become more real? Of course we don't want this exclusively, imagine if we were literally faced with reality games solely. We would have to wave good bye to games such as Sonic and Mario, and welcome games that showed realism such as Flight Sim. The bottom line is that a game is meant to be fun, and this must be preserved if games are going to survive. However, it is unarguable that in ten years time, developers will have the technology to make games that look and feel 'real' to the gamer.
In the past, in most cases, there has been a distinct barrier between realism and simulation. In fact many developers relish this difference as it allows them to make completely untrue to life games which are in fact great fun to play. A great example is Sonic The Hedgehog, I mean how often would you expect to become a blue hedgehog defeating a robot in real life?!? On the other side of the divide comes sports simulations, such as the FIFA series of games, which seems to make realism an utmost priority. As FIFA evolves, we get a more lifelike representation of what playing the game as a professional is really like. In the past this divide was strong, but is it beginning to weaken under the advent of technology that is making reality a more plausible concept?
Along came three-dimensional technology, technology that allowed us to visualise worlds in three dimensions on a two-dimensional screen. This technology has allowed the concept of realism to fluctuate exponentially in the modern world. We are now able to see things on a screen in the same way that we look at the world around us. Developers took this on board and created games which almost shockingly well manage to recreate reality. An example here could be Microsoft Flight Simulator. To my best knowledge flight simulator is actually used by budding pilots to reinforce their flying training. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a very real looking and feeling simulation, and it is, perhaps, the closest most of us will ever get to piloting a real plane. This technology works in this genre and will become increasingly pleasing to lovers of the flight simulator series of games.
The advent of three dimensional games and a need for realism spawned reality simulators, such as The Sims. There is surely a paradox here where we actually enjoy simulating human life more than we do living it in reality! However, this is not as stupid as it sounds, as the developers of the Sims have made a truly engrossing game, despite the fact the concept would have driven gamers away a few years back. This is perhaps a landmark game in the distinction between reality and gaming.
However, do we really want games to become more real? Of course we don't want this exclusively, imagine if we were literally faced with reality games solely. We would have to wave good bye to games such as Sonic and Mario, and welcome games that showed realism such as Flight Sim. The bottom line is that a game is meant to be fun, and this must be preserved if games are going to survive. However, it is unarguable that in ten years time, developers will have the technology to make games that look and feel 'real' to the gamer.