Any game enthusiast who goes onto the internet is familiar with this
particular topic. Everyday, someone, somewhere in the world argues
that “games are not realistic enough.” Although this assertion is
made often, it is a somewhat disingenuous one. When game players say
that they want games to be more realistic, that is not exactly what
they mean. They are referring to a similar, yet together different
topic. This week, I am going to discuss realism in games: Why realism
is an unrealistic goal and what gamers are actually asking for.
First
off, I am going to start with a statement that will sound like common
sense when I say it: A
truly realistic game is never going to exist.
Furthermore, nobody
truly wants realism in games.
A truly realistic game would be a game where the protagonist would
die after taking a few bullets, health regeneration would take weeks,
the player would have to maintain some source of income and pay
bills/rent as they go through the story, etc. This would not be an
extremely compelling game. This would be real life. This would be a
chore. Also, programming and rendering this would be a complete
nightmare. It would take many years before we got close to completely
realistic and commercially available simulation programs. Players do
not want to play through real life, they want to play through
interesting and dramatic, yet believable
stories.
That
is the key. The audience does not want a realistic story. They want a
believable story. That is a subtle, yet distinct difference. A
believe story is one that might not be in line with the rules of the
real world (and indeed, often will not be depending on the genre),
but it does have its own
internal logic,
or continuity, that is rarely, if ever, broken. Even if it is broken,
it is only in small, minor ways that do not have a significant impact
on the world. This applies not only to the world itself, (as
in, how its technology/magic works, political alliences/treaties,
national pollicies, etc.)
but also to the characters how populate the world and take part in
the events of the story.
For
example, in Fallout:
New Vegas,
the NCR, who is equipped with guns and hi-tech combat armor, is in a
battle against Caesar's Legion, who is equipped with machetes,
chainsaws, and football equipment (as armor). In real life, the NCR
would dominate against Caesar's Legion. There would be no question: A
bunch of semi-trained marksman would destroy a group of the
best-trained melee specialists in football pads in a straight fight.
However, by the systems in the game, this makes sense. Using melee
weapons and/or unarmed are perfectly legitimate playstyles in New
Vegas
and many players use them (myself included). So when the Legion is
shown to be in a stalemate with the NCR, players will not question
it. While unrealistic in the real world, this still makes sense by
the game's internal logic. We might question the motives and
rationale behind the two factions, but we do not question that such a
stalemate is possible.
This
continuity extends to the factions for the most part. Going back to
New Vegas,
this is mostly done very well. The NCR has a believable motivation
because they wish to annex New Vegas to both spread their democratic
ideology and to gain the resources of the area, notably Hoover Dam
and the electricity generated by it. However, they have a streak of
over-expanding and spreading themselves too thin. Meanwhile, Mr.
House wants to keep control of New Vegas in order to keep making
profits from the NCR and use that profit to advance humanity
technologically and possibly space-ward. The trade-off is that he
will not tolerate any faction who openly opposes him and will
instruct the player to eliminate most of the minor factions in the
game. These are both interesting motivations, goals, and drawbacks
that the player can wrap their head around, understand and possibly
support.
However,
the Legion does not have a similar consistency. Caesar's Legion is a
faction that subjugates tribals and adds their men and women to the
army and the slave workforce respectively. They are also known for
rejecting advanced technology in favor of primitive weapons like
machetes and chainsaws and basic firearms like repeaters and SMGs.
The tradeoff being that while the concept of individual liberty and
freedom does not exist, the people are generally safe because bandits
wouldn't dare to cross the legion. With regards to behavior, members
of the legion are taught the ills of the society of the NCR and of
New Vegas. They shun anything to do with these things in favor of a
less advanced, and more demanding lifestyle, hoping
to destroy the NCR and Vegas.
With regards to their soldiers and general populace, this is fairly
consistent. However, when you get into the upper echelons of Legion
society, it begins to falter. Firstly, something that the player is
able to discover as the game goes on is that the Legion utilizes
systems of spies in both Vegas and the NCR. Far from shunning these
places and demonizing them, the higher ups place people in places
where they can influence the people there and possible steal some of
the intel/technology in the area for themselves. As if that was not
enough, with a high enough Medicine skill, the player and diagnose
Caesar with a brain tumor. His response to this would naturally be to
avoid modern medicine and try to heal himself through more primitive
means or even to prepare a successor. Nope! Instead, we asks you to
fix his Auto-Doc (Its a robot doctor.) so that he can use advanced
technology to heal himself, going against his core anti-technology
principals.
Going
on the anti-technology front again, this continues to be illogical
when the player asks why Caesar does what he does. He wants to use
the ancient Roman Empire as a model to form his own. Thus, we reverts
to using old technology. However, this does not make sense to those
who have even a surface level understanding of history. The
ancient Roman were not anti-technology.
In fact, they were about as pro-technology as you can get. The
shamelessly ripped off any good/useful technique/technology from
their neighbors if it meant that they could do better. So by
abandoning technology, Caesar is spitting in the face of the very
system he is trying to emulate. Everything he does seams to
contradict something else he is doing. The net result is that he
breaks his own internal logic and becomes a caricature that no sane
person would get behind. For a
world as beautifully crafted as the one in New Vegas,
this is tragic.
Realism as the dictionary describes it will never be a part of video
games and for good reason. However, this does not mean that gamers
are wrong to keep asking for games to be realistic. In fact, it is
important for the audience of game developers to keep them honest and
make them abide by their own internal logic. It is still very
important to maintain a level of consistency and believability with
the world and the characters. This is just another part of
storytelling. Game developers would be wise to remember this.
3 comments:
I think that Caesar is supposed to be portrayed as either a hypocrite or at least pragmatic enough in the whole Autodoc issue. He's certainly OK with using a Howitzer in the final battle. Personally, I'm thinking of the former.
That's a huge problem though. Theoretically, I'm fine with an implicit idealism vs. pragmatism debate. That would be incredibly interesting. But the Legion is just shown to be so stupid. The whole concept behind them makes no sense. They behave illogically and irrationally and it is just strange.
Not only is "Kai-Sar" supposed to be hypocritical, but I think part of the point is that much of the knowledge of human history is lost or misunderstood. (e.g., The Kings) So, it's Caesar who didn't do the research—not the developers.
At least that's my take.
Post a Comment