realism

[flykiller]

elsewhere we read:

Add enough realism and 'Traveller' becomes a two year trip to Mars to plant a flag for Mankind.

... but it occurs to me that most of us certainly don't want an unrealistic version of traveller. so, perhaps we prefer certain kinds of realism but not others.

 

[Supplement Four]

What we want is suspension of disbelief.

In other words, we want to accept that the Jump Drive works the way it does. We don't want the alternative, where we roll our eyes at it.

Gamers talk about realism in combat, but, most really don't want that. Combat is fun in most games, and players want their characters to survive combat. So, we accept some aspects of the game as reality, when, in real reality, the aspect in question is not at all real.

 

[Redcap]

"What we want is willing suspension of disbelief" would IMHO be better

 

[Barsanuphius]

What we want is suspension of disbelief.

In other words, we want to accept that the Jump Drive works the way it does. We don't want the alternative, where we roll our eyes at it.

Gamers talk about realism in combat, but, most really don't want that. Combat is fun in most games, and players want their characters to survive combat. So, we accept some aspects of the game as reality, when, in real reality, the aspect in question is not at all real.

Not to mention the fact that I spent 45 minutes creating a CT character and in his last term he dies and accordingly I would have to begin the process over again. pooh! :nonono:

 

[Redcap]

Hence the tee-shirt "I died in character creation"

I use a piece of software for my characters, tbh; while characters might cop it in the creation process, at least I don't waste a brick outhouse-worth of time generating a character that eventually survives creation.

It just takes a fairly creative referee to waste the poor sucker inside ten seconds of game play instead :devil:

 

[Vargas]

Not to mention the fact that I spent 45 minutes creating a CT character and in his last term he dies and accordingly I would have to begin the process over again. pooh! :nonono:

Forty-five minutes?

 

[creativehum]

I think any concern about "we" is a flaw in the premise.

I'm reading tales by Poul,Piper, Bester, and Tubbs right now.

Given the minutia I see people digging into on these forums to make things make sense, I think they'd make people's heads spin.

They're exactly the feel I'd want: A sense of pulpy adventure which extrapolate core SF premisses and environments for puzzle solving potential. But "realistic"? No.

 

[robject]

People who feel personally invested in Traveller want to see internal consistency plus some degree of external consistency.

For people who are into sciences, that external consistency is with one or more pieces of science (kinetics, astronomy, energy, thrust, sensors). For people who are into military history, it's with how combat "works", in the strategic theater, or operationally, or in small-group tactics.

 

[whartung]

I want systems upon which mechanics are based, rather than just mechanics.

Describe the systems, then present some mechanics for some popular use cases. For edge cases, referees can fall back on the system description to enhance, extend, or create new mechanics.

Arbitrary mechanics, with little to back them up, is what I don't particularly care for.

I don't mind M-Drives, Jump Drives, Heplar, Black Globes, or most any other "sci fi" suspension of belief. I don't mind when they "make up science", but just make the game mechanics consistent with said science.

That leaves a solid foundation for everyone.

 

[nobby-w]

What we want is suspension of disbelief.
...

I think a good word to describe this is verisimilitude - the appearance of reality. In other words, things in the game should make sense.

If the game is too nonsensical then it's hard to get absorbed into it.

 

[Redcap]

I think a good word to describe this is verisimilitude - the appearance of reality. In other words, things in the game should make sense.

If the game is too nonsensical then it's hard to get absorbed into it.

Thread winner Perfect definition if ever I heard (read) it.

 

[atpollard]

elsewhere we read:

... but it occurs to me that most of us certainly don't want an unrealistic version of traveller. so, perhaps we prefer certain kinds of realism but not others.

Of course we want an unrealistic game.

REALISM: Trained police officers miss hitting a man-sized target with 90% of their shots in actual 'gun combat situations', and the statistics for less trained shooters is far worse.

Is that how you WANT gun combat in your game to operate? Realistically, throwing piles of ammo at the enemy hoping to get lucky? When someone does get lucky, the combat is typically over in one shot with a high probability of a fatality. ... Then comes the manhunt, arrest, trial, conviction, prison sentence ... 3-5 TERMS later, the character is ready to adventure again.


Let's move beyond combat.
REALISM: 80% of all new businesses go bankrupt within the first year.

Is that how you want to model trade in your game?

 

[flykiller]

Of course we want an unrealistic game.

it would be far more accurate to say players want successful 1%-level player characters, NOT an unrealistic game. they want to be good shots, NOT shoot one bullet and five indians go down like in the old cowboy movies.

REALISM: Trained police officers miss hitting a man-sized target with 90% of their shots in actual 'gun combat situations', and the statistics for less trained shooters is far worse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noIgDD7Dbko

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaJVaYyHopA

pretty good shooting if you ask me ....

 

[savage]

it would be far more accurate to say players want successful 1%-level player characters, NOT an unrealistic game. they want to be good shots, NOT shoot one bullet and five indians go down like in the old cowboy movies.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noIgDD7Dbko

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaJVaYyHopA

pretty good shooting if you ask me ....

Well if the player has a fusion gun man-portable weapon system, 5 could fall.

I'd say its "entertainment" and reality people get every day. Players want to succeed at tasks but also want the excitement of a good gamble. A ref that kills a player character in 5 min of gameplay needs to go back to being a player and a player that kills a character in 5 min of gameplay needs a new attitude. But hey, it's my 2 cents.

Realism comes from the explanation of a crossover to things we see everyday, air rafts/speeders in Traveller may be automobile/planes in the real world, etc.

 

[Enoki]

What we want, I think, is a reasonable mostly science based even if on very theoretical science, game. No PFM (Pure F...ing Magic) or Handwavium sort of stuff to make things work. That is, the propulsion systems are reasonable and largely based on science. The weapons and such are within the realm of possible science.

This is in the end a game. It should be something you enjoy participating in. A good storyline goes ten times further than good science.

Realism comes mostly from not letting players be "super soldiers" or some equivalent thereof.

 

[salochin999]

My take is in an RPG verisimilitude is when the game plays out like the kind of movies / stories the players associate with that RPG.

edit:

so there's "Star Wars" realism and "Outland" realism

 

[CosmicGamer]

Of course we want an unrealistic game.

REALISM: Trained police officers miss hitting a man-sized target...[clip]

There is a difference between the realism of the game being a simulation with similar odds of occurrences as in real life vs the realism of that's possible vs that never would happen.

 

[atpollard]

There is a difference between the realism of the game being a simulation with similar odds of occurrences as in real life vs the realism of that's possible vs that never would happen.

Like traveling Faster than light?
Or motion without a corresponding reaction?

I have to admit that it was my post that was originally quoted in the OP.
The point that I was taking mild issue with was the willingness to swallow camels but strain at gnats. One frequently encountered example is the ship arriving in a system via 'magic' FTL Jump Drives, then accelerating with an almost infinite Delta-V using 'magic' Maneuver Drives, then 46 pages of debate on how Piracy is impossible because you can see EVERYTHING in space glowing like a beacon and nobody could hide or run or intercept.

All of the 'gnats' are true, and very good arguments for 'realism' ... but we have already swallowed the camels. True 'realism' doesn't allow for FTL, or near infinite Delta-V. The application of realism is already a selective process.

So, accept that. Embrace it.
"Choose ye this day what sort of space adventure ye will play."
I just wanted to point out that REALISM is not a holy grail of fun. Dysentery is realistic, but not something I generally want to worry about in a game.

What I object to is the misuse of the word 'realistic' as a debate strategy to dismiss anything else as 'unrealistic'. I hate to break the news to anyone, but most of the Traveller core tropes (FTL, Gravity drives, Star Empires, Marine cutlass) are already 'unrealistic'. It is part of a concept called 'fun'.

I am not anti-realism, I am just pro-fun.
So what's the harm in swallowing one more gnat?

 

[creativehum]

Like traveling Faster than light?
Or motion without a corresponding reaction?

I have to admit that it was my post that was originally quoted in the OP.
The point that I was taking mild issue with was the willingness to swallow camels but strain at gnats. One frequently encountered example is the ship arriving in a system via 'magic' FTL Jump Drives, then accelerating with an almost infinite Delta-V using 'magic' Maneuver Drives, then 46 pages of debate on how Piracy is impossible because you can see EVERYTHING in space glowing like a beacon and nobody could hide or run or intercept.

All of the 'gnats' are true, and very good arguments for 'realism' ... but we have already swallowed the camels. True 'realism' doesn't allow for FTL, or near infinite Delta-V. The application of realism is already a selective process.

So, accept that. Embrace it.
"Choose ye this day what sort of space adventure ye will play."
I just wanted to point out that REALISM is not a holy grail of fun. Dysentery is realistic, but not something I generally want to worry about in a game.

What I object to is the misuse of the word 'realistic' as a debate strategy to dismiss anything else as 'unrealistic'. I hate to break the news to anyone, but most of the Traveller core tropes (FTL, Gravity drives, Star Empires, Marine cutlass) are already 'unrealistic'. It is part of a concept called 'fun'.

I am not anti-realism, I am just pro-fun.
So what's the harm in swallowing one more gnat?

If there was a way of doing a +1 on this, I would.

I'd add as well that the notion of a star spanning civilization is, of itself, suspect to lots of people who think this stuff through.

 

[atpollard]

it would be far more accurate to say players want successful 1%-level player characters, NOT an unrealistic game. they want to be good shots, NOT shoot one bullet and five indians go down like in the old cowboy movies.

I can agree with that.
Verisimilitude is probably a good word, although I might be inclined to describe that as more 'Cinematic' than 'Realistic' ... hence the "1%".

pretty good shooting if you ask me ....

I have only statistical data to go by, but I think shooting the dog becomes harder when the dog is shooting back and you are focused on both shooting and not getting shot.

Just to spread the love around, the police just have good data because they account for every bullet, but the principle applies more generally ... in a battle, the majority of soldiers make no measurable contribution to battle (like actually shoot someone), and a study of office workers indicate an average of 30% of their work day was spent in something that actually benefited the company.

My take away was that most of Real Life is far less 'heroic' than I like in a RPG. So 'realism' takes a back seat to higher gaming priorities.

Marines fight on starships with cutlasses. ... Is that realistic? No, but I can live with it, because it sounds like fun.