Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Collection of useful resources, including forum info and functionality, Dev AMAs and everything else you want to have a quick access to.
Locked
User avatar
Map1
Hunter
Posts: 688
Joined: May 16th, 2014, 1:03 pm
Location: Treestand
Contact:

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by Map1 »

It´s pointless in my opinion to debate about this topic!! I dont think it will change anything they lose players if they decide for
Realism or Fun because some people prefer fun and others realism so if they decide to appreciate the realsim the players who want to have fun will stop playing this game...

I prefer the realism because it´s simulation
Last edited by Map1 on June 11th, 2015, 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Insegt
Newbie
Posts: 25
Joined: June 16th, 2014, 12:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by Insegt »

Howdy ya'll,

to be honest, I was really confused about the title realism vs. fun. It feels like realism excludes fun and the other way around. Well, common sense tells me that can't be. I have fun in my life and trust me, that is very real.

So, what is this debate all about?

First, I guess, we all agree, that we are talking about a video game. A game that I personally always understood as a hunting simulation and not a real life mirror. In a game there are many shortcuts that can be taken, like not carrying the prey back to the lodge or taking two or more guns and ammo with you while on a hunt. Even using many different callers and hunt every species that crosses your path. This has not much to do with real life hunting. Has anyone ever tried to constantly crouch through the woods?
Well, this is gameplay. It does not have to be most "realistic" or a real life mirror, it has to provide consistent gaming experience. Well, the "fun" or better not so much serious part of the game.

The other side is the mechanics. Animals should behave like they really behave. Remember this mission where one schould shoot an airborne canada goose and an airborne moose (ok the airborne in the moose was optional)? I don't know about you, but I never saw a flying moose. Animals get spooked and flee when they are aware of you or hear a gun shot. Using different calibers and ammo for different game also belongs into this section. Different sounds for the gunfire (yes, it sounds different when you fire a .300 mag or a .22) and yes the spook radius of those guns should be different. Simply the common sense tells one that it is.

And that is the core what I feel this debate is all about: simple common sense. It has to be plausible, reasonable and understandable. It shall not interrupt the gameplay and shall also not question the action you just did. Imagine the following: You are out there and see a bear 220 m away. Well, you aim, shoot, hit and it drops dead on the spot. All done with a recurve bow. Sounds weird? Well, it would be, just because it's not reasonable and not plausible. Just like shooting rabbits with a .243, the same caliber used for big game.

theHunter refers to real life hunting weapons. Weapons that are actually used. We know the ballistics of these weapons, we know how loud they are, their weight and what they look like. All this data should be used, not to mirror real life into a game that cannot transport the adrenalin, the smell of the woods, the cold of the wind or the mood in heavy rain (Guys we really need to talk about this rain ;)), but to show that there is a difference in the weapons. Well, of cause all these figures could be phantasized, but why should they be created when they already exist?

This is where I personally draw the line. theHunter is about getting out there and getting some prey, take part in competitions and evolve (level up). Everything that can be taken from real life and is not interrupting or disturbing the game play or does not feel right according to common sense, should be used. Picking up the prey and carrying it back to the lodge would be disturbing gameplay, also doesn't it seem to be plausible to throw a moose over the shoulder and trotting joyfully whistling to the lodge.

Knut and TundraPuppy really put a bunch of effort in their threads and they both brought an example I'd like to pick up. TundraPuppy's Hänsel & Gretel and Knut's Romeo & Juliet. Both very old and successful tales. Even though they are for different audiences, have different topics and origins. Well, what both have in common (against all of TundraPuppy's assumptions) they are plausible. Which means there are logical chains in both stories that let's their audience believe this could have happened. E.g. Hänsel & Gretel used breadcrumbs, those got eaten by crows and they lost their tracks. It's a tale for children and those actually understand and can follow the story. It's not interrupting. It would be less plausible if you needed to explain how many bread they took and how they walked and how many crows were there and so on. Both stories never happened, but for each audience they could have happened. This is what realism means. It could be possible. (In the case of Hänsel & Gretel, please keep in mind it is a tale told to small children for centuries now.)

This leads me to the question, if there actually is a versus in realism and fun. I don't see such a large gap between these two opposing forces. Not like the Grand Canyon, more like a handshake away. In my experience and after having read those threads and having had the same discussion in many different ways with many people around the globe, I may constitute, Knut and TundraPuppy you have more in common than parts you. At least you have the same goal.

This one goes out to all those who like to go into extremes and get lost in details and mean to give proof to any assumption: Please, keep in mind, this a game for a broad audience, even though a very special group of this audience really gets attracted to it. This does not mean we are the chosen few. It simply shows there is more place on the video game market than just for CoD or WoW.

Good hunt

Me
User avatar
stancomputerhunter
Trophy Hunter
Posts: 5514
Joined: December 25th, 2013, 11:07 am
Location: 1 mile South of the Cheddar Curtain

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by stancomputerhunter »

Sqwee wrote:
Dillion1111 wrote: As for reality my biggest gripe is when people in these forums or the game itself uses the word realistic, IT IS NOT realistic in very many senses of the word.

1. The sounds in the game aren't realistic as far as volume goes

3. As for making the game harder, it is TOO EASY to sit in a spot and take out a whole herd of animals with the parker python, that is NOT reality in any stretch of the imagination. I don't care what species of animal you hunt with a bow, when the animal falls down it makes a noise and those around them get spooked.

4. It is nearly impossible to walk upon animals in the wild to within 20m to shoot with a bow, the tree stand concept is good but to lay down and call elk to within 20m of you is just an outright joke. On rare occasion it can be done, but not a whole herd and shoot one, so you're laying flat and you're going to sit up and pull back on a bow at 20 or less meters to shoot an elk deer or anything else in RL? Sorry, they will spook just from your movement alone.

I don't expect major changes that take away the fun factor but I would expect to not be able to drop whole herds of animals within a minute or two...
Yep. These things are some of the major immersion breakers for me.
".....but to lay down and call elk to within 20m of you is just an outright joke."

There is a YouTube video of a lady archer calling a bull elk in to 15 FEET and shooting it. My point is, it can be done, so its not really a joke.


Image Rares: 86 NTs: 29
User avatar
Sqwee
Outfitter
Posts: 1104
Joined: August 27th, 2012, 2:24 am
Location: Lutz, Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by Sqwee »

stancomputerhunter wrote:
Sqwee wrote:
Dillion1111 wrote: As for reality my biggest gripe is when people in these forums or the game itself uses the word realistic, IT IS NOT realistic in very many senses of the word.

1. The sounds in the game aren't realistic as far as volume goes

3. As for making the game harder, it is TOO EASY to sit in a spot and take out a whole herd of animals with the parker python, that is NOT reality in any stretch of the imagination. I don't care what species of animal you hunt with a bow, when the animal falls down it makes a noise and those around them get spooked.

4. It is nearly impossible to walk upon animals in the wild to within 20m to shoot with a bow, the tree stand concept is good but to lay down and call elk to within 20m of you is just an outright joke. On rare occasion it can be done, but not a whole herd and shoot one, so you're laying flat and you're going to sit up and pull back on a bow at 20 or less meters to shoot an elk deer or anything else in RL? Sorry, they will spook just from your movement alone.

I don't expect major changes that take away the fun factor but I would expect to not be able to drop whole herds of animals within a minute or two...
Yep. These things are some of the major immersion breakers for me.
".....but to lay down and call elk to within 20m of you is just an outright joke."

There is a YouTube video of a lady archer calling a bull elk in to 15 FEET and shooting it. My point is, it can be done, so its not really a joke.
Of course, it happens. Crazy things happen. The elk example isn't the one I would have used, because elk do respond well to calls IRL. What he's saying is if you're laying on the ground within 20m of an animal and you sit up and draw your bow, they will run away before you get the chance to shoot. Like I said, anything can happen in the woods...but you won't get away with it the vast majority of the time.

My dad also called in and took a bull elk at around 18yds with a bow. But he used his movement of drawing his bow to catch the trotting bull's attention and stop him. It worked perfectly.

Side note, can you link the video? I'd like to check that out!
User avatar
Knut
Outfitter
Posts: 4847
Joined: May 25th, 2012, 12:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by Knut »

Mapinguari wrote:It´s pointless in my opinion to debate about this topic!!
Isn't it basically pointless to play a video game in the first place? :D

Debating this topic is for me all but pointless. It isn't likely to lead to any change of the game, true. But maybe it contains a take-home-message for someone, an aha-moment. Maybe it just entertains. It does entertain me, and quite frankly, I enjoy the intellectual challenge of discussion the issue and the theory behind it in-depth and at a high level, very much so, actually.
That are enough points to make it worthwile for me.
Insegt wrote:Howdy ya'll
Really excellent post and I agree with it entirely.
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" ― Isaac Asimov
User avatar
stancomputerhunter
Trophy Hunter
Posts: 5514
Joined: December 25th, 2013, 11:07 am
Location: 1 mile South of the Cheddar Curtain

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by stancomputerhunter »

Sqwee wrote:
stancomputerhunter wrote:
Sqwee wrote: As for reality my biggest gripe is when people in these forums or the game itself uses the word realistic, IT IS NOT realistic in very many senses of the word.

1. The sounds in the game aren't realistic as far as volume goes

3. As for making the game harder, it is TOO EASY to sit in a spot and take out a whole herd of animals with the parker python, that is NOT reality in any stretch of the imagination. I don't care what species of animal you hunt with a bow, when the animal falls down it makes a noise and those around them get spooked.

4. It is nearly impossible to walk upon animals in the wild to within 20m to shoot with a bow, the tree stand concept is good but to lay down and call elk to within 20m of you is just an outright joke. On rare occasion it can be done, but not a whole herd and shoot one, so you're laying flat and you're going to sit up and pull back on a bow at 20 or less meters to shoot an elk deer or anything else in RL? Sorry, they will spook just from your movement alone.

I don't expect major changes that take away the fun factor but I would expect to not be able to drop whole herds of animals within a minute or two...
Yep. These things are some of the major immersion breakers for me.
".....but to lay down and call elk to within 20m of you is just an outright joke."

There is a YouTube video of a lady archer calling a bull elk in to 15 FEET and shooting it. My point is, it can be done, so its not really a joke.
Of course, it happens. Crazy things happen. The elk example isn't the one I would have used, because elk do respond well to calls IRL. What he's saying is if you're laying on the ground within 20m of an animal and you sit up and draw your bow, they will run away before you get the chance to shoot. Like I said, anything can happen in the woods...but you won't get away with it the vast majority of the time.

My dad also called in and took a bull elk at around 18yds with a bow. But he used his movement of drawing his bow to catch the trotting bull's attention and stop him. It worked perfectly.

Side note, can you link the video? I'd like to check that out!
Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP38tYhyhW0


Image Rares: 86 NTs: 29
User avatar
Sqwee
Outfitter
Posts: 1104
Joined: August 27th, 2012, 2:24 am
Location: Lutz, Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by Sqwee »

stancomputerhunter wrote:
Sqwee wrote:
stancomputerhunter wrote:
There is a YouTube video of a lady archer calling a bull elk in to 15 FEET and shooting it. My point is, it can be done, so its not really a joke.
Of course, it happens. Crazy things happen. The elk example isn't the one I would have used, because elk do respond well to calls IRL. What he's saying is if you're laying on the ground within 20m of an animal and you sit up and draw your bow, they will run away before you get the chance to shoot. Like I said, anything can happen in the woods...but you won't get away with it the vast majority of the time.

My dad also called in and took a bull elk at around 18yds with a bow. But he used his movement of drawing his bow to catch the trotting bull's attention and stop him. It worked perfectly.

Side note, can you link the video? I'd like to check that out!
Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP38tYhyhW0
Okay. Yeah, I had a feeling that would be the video you would post. I like the video, don't get me wrong. To make this relevant to the discussion though...

Several things about this video:

-They had bad luck the day before and the work they put into the failure encouraged them to go harder.
-The guy calling the elk in is way behind the shooter, thus pulling the elk through the shooter (who is hidden behind the tree). The bull is looking way out in front of him (past her), trying to see the cow he thinks is calling. She didn't call him in.
-As soon as the bull breaks the plane of the tree, he knows she's there and there's something up. If she even remotely moves, it's game over. She can't just draw. He spooked and ran away before she even moved.
-Then, the camera man vocally stopped the bull at around 35yds to get a quick shot in (something we can't do in game, but real hunters have been begging for). She didn't shoot him at 15 feet.
-The bull flees and has to be shot a few more times to be put down.
-They are super excited about the kill and the story that went with it will stick with them for a long time.

In game, it wouldn't have happened like that. In game:

-She would have gotten him herself on the first day (Because the game is too easy).
-She would have called the bull in herself. And to simulate the caller being behind her, she would have called and quickly found an ambush point as far ahead as possible without spooking him, so the bull walks broadside. (I'm okay with this. This is a real-life tactic but it has to be done very carefully and early. Hard to pull off in most instances).
-She goes prone because players are virtually undetectable that way. Whether she's behind a tree or not, it doesn't matter (Immersion killer).
-When the bull gets close, she goes up on her knees and draws. Bull may or may not stop. She fires an easy shot at the heart and drops him (The intense stare-down and adrenaline rush not there).
-Furthermore, she could have just shot him through the front chest as he approached because that's easily done in game (again, too easy and, robbing you of true hunting experience).
-She claims it with her Huntermate, may or may not take a picture, and moves on and does it over and over during the hunt. The next day, she completely forgets she ever killed that bull (Not the essence of hunting).
User avatar
DHRifleman
Team Hunter
Posts: 11094
Joined: December 3rd, 2008, 11:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by DHRifleman »

Knut wrote:And at this point I would like to chime into the general discussion about introducing difficulty levels.
In my opinion that would be a severe stab, if not a mortal blow to the game. This game lives also to a distinctive proportion from the "community feeling" - in lack of a better word. Splitting the player base into different levels will ruin this severely.
But the game already has this based on the score of the animals you go after because of the higher AI. Also it has this in the comps based on amount of kills for that species, which really separates people competing with each other on quantity not quality of animals harvested. Why should someone who only targets higher scoring animals be relegated to hunt in the novice or intermediate comps, while a mass kill anything that moves while running all over is in the elite comps. I think the player should decide a what level they want to compete, not an inflated easy kill record. Without changing the core of the game, just by changing what max score loads based on the level picked would do this.

I would think a good portion would go for the elite comps, and the hardest gameplay because of the higher reward, But the newbies would have a much easier time starting out at the lower level and still get reward for their effort keeping them around. The middle of the road level will be for those with limited time, but still want a chance to win.

Face it, just as the amount of acceptable realism in the game is completely a personal opinion, so is at what level a person feels they can compete at, and adding levels only widens the appeal to a broader audience. Which then brings together even more people playing the game, not dividing them as you suggest.

I think what can really be taken away from this debate is, everyone has their own opinions, and there is no problem voicing them. When the title contains the word debate it is assumed there will be opposing opinions, so it for the most part stays civil. Without that in the title, it is no longer a controlled argument. ;)
The above statements are strictly my opinion, and should not be taken as fact, even if I believe them to be true.
Antlercreeklodge.com Tournaments
Permitted Weapons per Reserve By ClemD
User avatar
insub
Hunter
Posts: 677
Joined: March 19th, 2015, 12:25 pm
Location: the swamp
Contact:

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by insub »

stancomputerhunter wrote:
Fletchette wrote:
insub wrote:I check this forum before i open facebook now.
Admitting that you use FaceBook is quite brave. It's sort of the Internet equivalent of "coming out of the closet."
The voice of reason checks in. :lol: :lol:

try hunting with him when he forgets the bear food at the lodge, see how reasonable he sounds then lol :shock: :shock: :lol: :lol: :mrgreen:

all kidding aside, facebook sucks
User avatar
stancomputerhunter
Trophy Hunter
Posts: 5514
Joined: December 25th, 2013, 11:07 am
Location: 1 mile South of the Cheddar Curtain

Re: Great Debate: Realism vs. fun

Post by stancomputerhunter »

@ Squee..

I can tell you, I'm not a hunter IRL, but I will never forget the sight of that Albino Red Deer Stag crossing the river towards me. Or the Melanistic one, or the 194 Blacktail, or the 1109 Feral Hog, or the 228 Moose with 18 points, or the 266 Ibex, or the 391 Elk that kept me out of the 400 club, or the 86 Red Kangaroo, which was the very first Roo I ever shot. Or the huge NT WT that I happened upon just a couple of days ago. I vividly remember every one...because I'm not a real life hunter, and this is my only opportunity to get close. Its fun..but for me it will never get any more real.


Image Rares: 86 NTs: 29
Locked

Return to “Official Game and Forum Information”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest