Realism Vs. Gameplay

I see a lot of proposals based on the argument that it's "realisitc".
Sure, Sandstorm wants to be kind of realisitc and authentic.
But keep in mind, that it is a video game after all. Enjoyable and balanced gameplay is very important too.
So you might want to check double, if a "realistic" suggestion might affect gameplay in a negative way.
That's all I'm asking to keep the discussion in a reasonable frame.

You are absolutely right Benny, but on the other hand we are thousands of players here on steam playing this awsome game and not all have the same likings.

The more realistic things are in a FPS game the more the players have the feeling to be right there as if in reality.

Having everything as realistic as possible ( Escape from Tarkov ) or just having a Military Simulation on a certain degree ( ARMA3 ) or having something like Insurgency:Sandstorm ( which adds more arcadish elements ) is a matter of personal likings.
What the one might like the other player might hate.
You never can satisfy all players and all fans of this game.

Therefore i say let the people post and propose whatever they like to see in the game and let the developers decide what to implement and what not.
The more people put feedback on that proposal in the forum the better the developers understand the wishes of the majority of the players.

Look at the titles like battlefield or Call of Duty, thousands of players love these games. I don´t !
That´s why i play Insurgency2 and now Sandstorm.

last edited by GSG_9_LIGHTNING

I see this thrown around a lot. Insurgency put gameplay first, but would include realistic elements if it would positively impact gameplay (e.g., free aim, scopes). Insurgency is not a milsim, and its successor shouldn't be that either.

@cyoce said in Realism Vs. Gameplay:

I see this thrown around a lot. Insurgency put gameplay first, but would include realistic elements if it would positively impact gameplay (e.g., free aim, scopes). Insurgency is not a milsim, and its successor shouldn't be that either.

Exactly!

I too see this argument thrown around a lot.

There's another game that those people ought to look at.

The ArmA series (previously Flashpoint), is meant to be realistic (as games go). It's also quite fun in a very different way from Insurgency.
However it's also highly moddable, so people who are into realism, added stuff to make it more realistic, so you can have your radios only work when there aren't too many hills between you and the other guy (it's a given that it's up to you to manage the frequencies), you can't run for long (anbd will actually have to stop), the place where you're wounded will have an impact for the duration of the game (in some cases you won't be able to aim, but you can still push the others on, so there's that at least).
And if you forget to brush your teeth, you can no longer eat and you die (ok, I made that one up).

Tl;Dr: realism is one thing, but you certainly want to think twice before putting it in your game. It's interesting in some cases, a possible challenge in others, sometimes a nuisance, sometimes it just turns people away.

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.