Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

The latest news and announcements about theHunter provided by the developers

Who won in the Great Debate: Realism vs. Fun?

Poll ended at July 1st, 2015, 8:16 am

Knut
107
72%
TundraPuppy
42
28%
 
Total votes: 149
User avatar
BodoWR
Newbie
Posts: 22
Joined: June 15th, 2015, 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by BodoWR »

What attracted me to the game is the Realism,I have hunted with a bow for over 50 years and find that the challange in the game is the most important aspect,getting the first of any of the species is in a lot ways just as hard as in real life,Shooting 500 well that's the Game,not the challange
User avatar
knott
Outfitter
Posts: 2547
Joined: June 26th, 2012, 9:53 am
Contact:

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by knott »

Strange options. Who want to play something that isn´t fun? And who say realism is booring? I would be forced to choose fun because there is no reason to play if I don´t get anything out of it.
User avatar
hunterPRO1
Outfitter
Posts: 1260
Joined: March 12th, 2015, 11:04 pm
Location: Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by hunterPRO1 »

the only reason I play this game today and the only reason I spend money on it period is because its realistic enough to keep me interested
but tbh there's so many improvements that need to be made as far as realism goes I wont go into all that as theres already topics out there (one I particularly like here :arrow: http://forum.thehunter.com/viewtopic.php?f=169&t=66606 )

a game like this wont survive long at all without realism because once you've done everything that's in the game that's all that there to keep you

the reason realism needs to be improved over fun imo is because all the animals are the same all the time and it keeps bugging me
is this the best hunting game ? yes
is it the most realistic ? close but idk if its the most realistic

but it can't be 100% realistic and survive if I have to play for hours everyday for two weeks just to kill one animal no of course im not gonna play for long
but if its too easy arcade like it wont be fun then because that imo is boring as waiting two weeks!

so overall I agree they have to find the perfect balance but as it is atm I think its just a bit tipped over to much on the fun side
most of the things I want in the game now are all in the animal behavior
"you win some, you lose some, you wreck some."
Spoiler:
User avatar
CybrSlydr
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: April 12th, 2009, 9:42 am
Location: Columbus, OH
Contact:

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by CybrSlydr »

Man, that was an awesome thread to read!

I kinda feel bad for Tundra as he made an outstanding case - but I, too, would have to vote for Knut.

Like Pratze said, because I vote for Knut doesn't mean I disagree with TundraPuppy. I want the hunting aspect to be as realistic as possible. Ballistics, scent, wind, animal behavior, etc. Because I derive most of the "fun" from the challenge of luring in the animal, picking my spot and making the kill shot.

That said, realistic bits that would make this game not fun for me would be if I really had to start out at 6:00am. or earlier game-time, each minute was equivalent to an IRL minute and literally sit in-front of the screen for 5 hours or more calling, and very likely, never seeing anything or getting a call in return.

Now, this doesn't mean I want to spawn at the lodge and there are 30 monster Bucks sitting outside the lodge grounds waiting to be slaughtered. I'm pretty sure the majority of us don't have the time to sit down and play the game as long as you actually hunt IRL. There's a reason people take vacations and do it on weekends - because they don't have the time otherwise!

Excellent thread - thanks to Knut and TundraPuppy for their thoughtful responses!
User avatar
P*Funk
Spotter
Posts: 84
Joined: April 17th, 2009, 7:56 pm
Contact:

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by P*Funk »

There are always realistic things that detract from the experience and realistic ones that add to it. Just because I want to play a realistic infantry combat game doesn't mean that it means you must include the 99% of boredom and repetitive drilling that soldiers go through.

In the end realistic adds granularity and adds complexity and that is what makes a game valuable in the long term. If its just about grinding and repetitive actions and having the knowledge of how to min max a series of non-skill based actions and the patience and or money to do it better than most people then you get yourself something like those idiotic cell phone games that depress me at even the thought.

I think realism makes for a better game because it naturally produces something that's exciting. Imagine how lame real life baseball would be if the ball didn't live by the laws of physics and were so predictable that you'd never see the kinds of dynamic things we see in any baseball game? That's what simming is about to me, recreating the dynamics and unpredictability of reality that make doing something 1000 times different than it is in most unsophisticated games.
User avatar
Tanngnjostr
Master Hunter
Posts: 8887
Joined: July 14th, 2015, 12:41 pm
Location: Moguntia

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by Tanngnjostr »

P*Funk wrote:Imagine how lame real life baseball would be if...
You lost me at "would be"... :lol: But then, I'm European, so I better not talk about baseball.
Otherwise, good points in your post of course!
Image Image Image
User avatar
Luziano
Hunter
Posts: 559
Joined: October 17th, 2012, 10:22 am
Contact:

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by Luziano »

There are plenty of video games... Hence... Realism.
Image
User avatar
FluorescentBlack
Spotter
Posts: 51
Joined: October 16th, 2014, 8:42 pm
Location: Redfeatherfa...I mean BC Canada.
Contact:

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by FluorescentBlack »

I'm here for the realism on the shooting physics and animal AI side. A few times I have found myself in a conversation telling someone my opinion on how I see the games shooting as realistic and I can always answer honestly that even though the baseline damage/energey to animals may be on the low side the difference between the chambers and ammunition types seems very accurate when referancing charts. What grain is that 7.92mm anyway?
User avatar
JohnDP
Tracker
Posts: 105
Joined: January 11th, 2014, 9:18 pm
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Contact:

In response to the debate

Post by JohnDP »

You are right about your own thoughts both sides but the main thing about this game both of you left out. The amount of time lost not being able to play because the game is not working takes a lot of fun out of the game itself. insteadof making more reserves which are great spend the time fixing the ones you already have. make the game more playable with less down time and have the animals act like real ones. hard to find at times but with trails that they use everyday like real life not just random travel. Also score the animals as real life and again not random scoreing by the computer as has been done,However the game is quite fun at times and i have played for 3 years and hope to keep playing. Remember that the game cannot be much fun when it is not working most of the time so then the realisim and fun is lost when it dose not work.
User avatar
Cutch
Master Competitor
Posts: 10263
Joined: November 28th, 2008, 6:45 pm
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Great Debate #1: Realism vs. Fun - Choosing the Winner

Post by Cutch »

Very good presentation by both. I was pleased that the debate did not
get heated up and out of control,...good job, folks.
I chose Knut.
A woman's mind is cleaner than a man's:
She changes it more often.
Post Reply

Return to “Latest News & Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest