Verisimilitude: Good or Bad?

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Do you like your RPGs to reflect reality?

• Provisions/supplies
• Item encumbrance
• Item degradation & maintenance
• Weather & exposure
• Travel time (no fast travel)
• Wounds, injuries, ailments
• Realistic lethality of weapons

Does attempting to simulate or reflect reality generally enhance games, or create tedium? Done well, they create opportunities for depth of character building where priorities can exceed the standard conventions of the typical murder-hobo. The mechanics can drive game play and quest structure, giving an engaging experience. Done poorly, they can bog the player with tedium, create work, and form an obstacle to the core game play.

Which do you prefer? Are the benefits of enjoyment theoretical and yet to be done right, or a detrimental fantasy that has hampered otherwise good games? What games are good examples of either scenario?

 

[overly excitable young man]

Verisimilitude

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

It's good if they're included as a part of the gameplay instead of being there just for simulation purposes. In board-game Agricola making sure that everyone has enough food and is not cold makes the game more enjoyable since the gameplay is focused on satisfying those needs. On the other hand in Ultima it was just added because "realistically people would get hungry from time to time" it's just pointless busywork and occasional annoyance.

 

[Old Hans]

things like travel time and supplies should play a factor when travelling somewhere. that tabletop rpg The One Ring had a cool logistical element when travelling long distances.

but stuff like Item maintenance is just never interesting.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

The only thing I hate more than anything is item encumbrance.

Maintenance/repairing can be an annoying fun sponge too. Oooh boy, can't wait to take a break from kicking heads in so I can fix my weapons and armor! That shit is pure "take a break you geek."

 

[Butter]

Every game feature needs to be in service of making the game more fun. If you're adding simulation elements just because you can, and they only make the game more tedious or annoying, you should cut them. Even immersive sims don't bother with garbage like forcing you to eat and sleep.

 

[V_K]

Depends on the pacing. Resource management is good - which is what most of these systems contribute to - but you don't want the gameplay to become too repetitive. So they probably should not become too realistic, or else the player would spend a hundred times more time doing chores than exciting things.

 

[octavius]

Depends on the type of game, and for what you intend to get out of them.
For a TES type of game where you control one character in an open world I'd like to see a physics engine that mimics reality to make it more immersive, and free of garbage like quest compasses and such.

But for party based CRPGs of the traditional or classic type I prefer more abstract game play, with emphasis on things like turn based combat (or RTwP or blobber combat), puzzles, mapping challenges and such.

In the end game play should trump realism IMO.

 

[MpuMngwana]

I guess theoretically it could work out well, but in practice almost never does. One of the major reason for this, I believe, is the lack of stimuli. In real life, if I'm overencumebred, I will know it because my shoulders hurt, not because there is a weigh icon next to my health bar. If I get pneumonia, I will cough all the time, instead of failing to notice it because I blinked when I got it, and now the information is buried on the third page of my character sheet.

It's even worse in a game when you control an entire party. I dropped Realms of Arkania because it felt more like taking a bunch of toddlers to a camping trip than controlling a party of semi-competent adult adventurers. Crap like that should be handled by character skill of not being completely fucking retarded, instead of player skill of "What the hell, Billy, when did you get sick? You were walking barefoot through snow again, you stupid little shit, weren't you!? Now put these boots one, and we're going home, the trip is over and you ruined it for everyone!"

Another issue is that of a timescale, requiring me to click on some bread in my inventory every twenty minutes is not very engaging, and making it rarer would kinda make it pointless unless the game is like a 100 hours long.

 

[Desolate Dancer]

I remember when SCS made Insect Plague be destroyed by Fire Shield and I said "well done, that makes a lot more sense that way". It was an example of verisimilitude done well. I was less excited when I saw that Beholders could now use Telekinesis to steal the Shield of Balduran. As such, we can all agree that it can be done well but not without potential drawbacks from another angle. This is also largely subjective, so it's possible that someone felt the exact opposite regarding my above examples. I'd say it's pretty difficult to even define verisimilitude, and perhaps it's even more difficult to define it's ideal limits.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Conceptually, I can't say that I like when games attempt to inject realism overmuch. Wounds make me want to cast reload, item maintenance makes me groan. Rations are an inventory and gold tax. Even still, consider in Betrayal at Krondor (1992):

• No fast travel
• Character had to eat & sleep
• Characters could become ill (outside of combat)
• Poison's effects took time to heal even after it was neutralized
• Weapons & armor needed regular repair
• Nearly all times were consumable (including repair tools)
• Inventory had no encumbrance, but inventory space was limited
• Necessary adventuring gear (consumable) like torches, ropes, shovels, and lock-picks
• Campsite choice could result in ambushes
• No quest markers
• Healing was slow or entirely absent outside of expensive treatment at scattered temples

I absolutely loved this game, and it is one of my all time favorites. By modern standards, the mechanics are a hardcore survival game--not a fantasy RPG. I don't remember any of it being a chore though--I remember the adventure. I remember the heartbreak when a lock-pick broke. The worry that I didn't have enough food to make it there and back, or have to prioritize survival over hauling back every piece of hard-fought loot. The sudden illness from resting in a dank dungeon, or slow recovery from poison. I remember going out of my way (almost to the point of being an emergent quest) to find manuals and teachers to improve my repair skills, or travel to a far flung city with the best smiths for my high quality gear. I can't say I've played many games with these features, but I enjoyed the hell out of it. Perhaps I merely had the time for it in the idleness of youth, but none of it really took my time so much as my consideration. I can't say I've seen it done since though. Perhaps its just an exception that proves the general rule?

 

[mondblut]

"Deep & detailed mechanics" and "realism" has little to nothing to do with each other.

You can have deep & detailed mechanics without lolrandomly dying to a single blow because that's what sharp metal objects realistically do to soft human flesh.

 

[Murk]

The execution is far more important. Thing is that 'realism' is hardly ever a limiting factor for many of the QOL features games offer.

Fast travel can be done properly in setting with mechanical consequences, it doesn't have to just be "open map and click here to teleport there" nor does a game that tries to emulate/simulate a sense of reality and cohesiveness require specifically that fast travel be excluded.

Etc.

One thing I dislike is really bad inventory limits that serve no purpose. If limiting inventory is relevant to the game and offers a proper consequence of what to bring, then so be it, but if it's just "make 2 trips to loot instead of 1" then fuck it.

 

[Viata]

Realistic lethality of weapons

Tbh, I really want to see a crpg that tries it. There is the friday firenight fight(FFNF) system in cyberpunk 2020 that is cool, yet I don't believe C2077 is going to have it, they are already complaining about the melee fights.

 

[Lady_Error]

I dropped Realms of Arkania because it felt more like taking a bunch of toddlers to a camping trip than controlling a party of semi-competent adult adventurers. Crap like that should be handled by character skill of not being completely fucking retarded, instead of player skill of "What the hell, Billy, when did you get sick?

I actually think that Realms of Arkania travel is one of the best examples of how more detailed realism can add to the immersion and fun of a game.

It may be that it is not everyone's cup of tea, but I liked it. Though in general I find that hunger bars are more annoying than fun. A good middle ground is to need supplies for resting, but not bother with food otherwise.

And I think no RPG has simulated toilet functions. Some things are better left out.

 

[MpuMngwana]

Yes, I like resting supplies. They are for the most part automated, you only need to think of them when you're planning your journey and don't need to dick around with inventory. In fact, I probably would've enjoyed Realms of Arkania much more if travel supplies thing was streamlined a bit - say, you know you'll have to cross a mountain and you pack six warm cloaks, so when you reach the cold area the game assumes your party is wearing them instead of having to manually equip them on everyone (because that's what you do when it's getting cold - you put on something warm, and anyone with enough mental capacity to go adventuring would do such a thing). So you still have to prepare for your journey, but don't need to micromanage every obvious little detail.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Exploration is the fundamental core of RPGs, and it is always enhanced by a certain amount of logistics derived from the realistic needs and limitations of a party of adventurers, even in a fantasy setting. Such resource management can include encumbrance, inventory limits, stamina/fatigue, hunger, thirst, sleepiness, interior lighting, a day/night cycle, Vancian magic spell memorization, deterioration of weapons/armor, and probably several more. However, such logistics should be implemented in a manner that integrates with and improves the gameplay rather than as a means to create verisimilitude for the sake of verisimilitude.

 

[Erikkolai]

As always, I look to ELEX for wisdom. Breast physics should be mandatory, but it doesn't necessarily have to be realistic.

 

[Funposter]

IMO the verisimilitude of a world is reflected more in its characters, their motivations and its history. This is why Morrowind will always feel more "real" than Skyrim does, even if you load down Skyrim with mods like Frostfall, Realistic Needs & Diseases, AI improvements, etc. These things can be nice, but ultimately they are ancillary.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

one of the games which fascinated me the most as a kid has been "robinson's requiem". i want that gorram clockpower to work dammit!
most of that game was completely unnecessary, but it was awesome it was there. last time i've been awed by technology applied to videogames? elite 2. how long as it been? 26 years? more than a thousand times that power and games are going back to vic20's degree of complexity.

 

[Jrpgfan]

most of that game was completely unnecessary, but it was awesome it was there. last time i've been awed by technology applied to videogames? elite 2. how long as it been? 26 years? more than a thousand times that power and games are going back to vic20's degree of complexity.

Time to upgrade from windows 98, grandpa. You've got 20 years of gaming to catch up on.

 

[PapaPetro]

Yes and no.
I like the familiarity with reality concepts, but if the games are too verisilimitudinal to reality then it hits an uncanny valley and doesn't provide a suitable escape from the realness of our own reality.

If that makese sense.