Reality vs. Myth, Fantasy & Legend.

[berghoff 11]

Yea Thief is a strange little game. o_. Almost scary.

[crashdome 1]

What about Sci-Fi stuff? Should all space movies use newtonian physics?

I'm a sim guy... I LOVE sims for their realism and accuracy. My entire collection of software is 70% sims. However, I enjoy a good fantasy and games like Rise of Legends which input different realms of fantasy into one mix is artisticly creative when done right.

Asking that something depict realism 100% just because depicts a small bit of realism is the argument of someones who's overly finicky. I am all for games/software that depict something realisticly but to squash software that isn't is just plain foolish.

Having said all that, I'll throw a curveball and say Theif series is the one instance that I don't like it, but I'm not into current steampunk or cyberpunk type styles. Cyberpunk was better back in the 80s when we had no clue what was going to happen... but now it's lost its luster for me and steampunk IMO should be more like what was shown in RoL (more Da Vinci, Jules Verne, etc..) throwing medieval style (swords/spears/etc) into steampunk is just the by-product that most people who enjoy steampunk are also avid medieval roleplayers who can't face the fact that gunpowder, electricity, and mechanics has made the sword-world obsolete. They've tainted it for me IMO

We need a new 'punk style....

ok... I went OT.

[xawery 0]

What about Sci-Fi stuff? Should all space movies use newtonian physics?

I'm a sim guy... I LOVE sims for their realism and accuracy. My entire collection of software is 70% sims. However, I enjoy a good fantasy and games like Rise of Legends which input different realms of fantasy into one mix is artisticly creative when done right.

I think you misunderstood me CrashDome (if indeed you were referring to my statements). You make it sound as if 'realistic' was completely incompatible with 'fantasy'. This is a common mistake.

Many people assume that if a world contains magic or other fantastic elements, every trace of realism immediately goes out the window. Indeed, this is often the case, but isn't necessary. For example, why shouldn't a world in which dragons and magic exist have realistic social strata or complex political structures? Why shouldn't the people inhabiting this fantastic world have to deal with issues which affected the inhabitants of the period this world is based upon (famine, plague etc. etc.)?

My point is this: more often than not, when a game/book/film claims to be "fantasy in a medieval setting", this medieval setting is limited to castles, swords, armour and gaunt peasants. Writers/developers/directors just don't take the time to create a believable world: "We'll just fill that void with lots of flashy magic and shining armour! Oh, and we'll let the main character join a thieves' guild, that will be cool". This is what I mean by realism: not creating a mirror image of our world, but creating a believable, complex world, with believable social structures, institutions, etc.

Perhaps I should replace 'realistic world' with 'a world consistent with its premise'. If magic did exist in a given world, and its users would really be able to shoot fireballs from their fingertips, how would the authorities react? Such people are an obvious threat to law & order. Practically no run-of-the-mill, AD&D based book/game/film addresses such issues. More often than not, 'fantasy' means some sort of escapism, a way to escape the complexities of real life. That's why most fantasy works (LOTR being the prime example...) are simplistic stories, built around the worn-out idea of yet another battle between good and evil. Some people may like, but I'm genuinly sick and tired of it.

That's why I enjoy the (old) Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay world, and books like the Song Of Ice And Fire series. There are no obvious good and bad guys (in WFRP, the average person is caught between Order and Chaos, which are basically two sides of the same coin and equally 'bad'. As George Martin said: "There is noone who will actually say, unless in a cartoon: "I am the Dark Lord and I'm going to do Dark Things". We are all Grey Lords."

Unfortunately, too many fantasy productions ARE this simplistic. And that's what annoys me.

Phew. Bit of a sore spot, this one.

[Journeyman 0]

Sure I do not know the full story of the Thief series, but even so it is still pretty apparent that the theme is that of a medieval setting.

No, it is not. Just go get a copy of the original Thief, or even Thief 2 (Check the

, or the

), and from the very beginning of those games it looks very little like a medieval setting (at least even a remotely realistic one).

I think I have to put this down to the generation gap between myself and you guys! I certainly had never heard of ‘steampunk’ and therefore am not familiar with this idea. Thanks Kegetys for explaining and offering the links!

To me and I’m sure to any others picking this game up on its third incarnation and not having awareness of this ‘steampunk’ idea would assume only one thing – medieval, albeit medieval in a fictitious world hence the magic and mythical creatures. However, Thief 3 is but an example here for what I am trying to imply about how IMO too many games based in a ‘pseudo’ medieval world (as Xewery put it) rely too heavily on this theme of myth and magic to create interesting and entertaining game content!

I also agree entirely with Xewery’s point about how this magic is usually implemented into games (and films etc.) without considering its broader social impact and acceptance into society in a believable way and instead just using it as a sort of escapism from reality and its potential implications. This is one of the reasons I don’t bother watching many films these days as most of this sort of fancy mythology is lost on me! And yes every battle is between good and evil and the good always win! It might sound fair but it is both unrealistic and boring!

Yes I am a realism freak but I will happily accept unknown powers and mysterious happenings in games and films if only they were to be implemented in a realistic and believable manner and properly constructed into the story with all the various RL implications that would potentially go along with them. However, this is rarely the case so I usually get bored with it very quickly!

This is why I personally prefer reality based games (and films) especially if they are historically based as there is just so much history to tell. Would it not be cool to live the life of a knight in medieval England? The trials and tribulations of that person’s life. The gruesomeness of those times, the primitive public punishments, the plagues, the battles, the theatres, basic city life of the times .. So much to tell! A game like this would be both entertaining and historically educational. No amount of book reading could substitute for this if it was done as accurately as possible. What a great way to educate us all about our ancestry whilst having great fun at the same time!  

[crashdome 1]

@xawery:

I wasn't replying to you.

However, after reading your recent post I understand your concerns but I still think you are making fantasy overly-complex.

I realize you can have elements of realism in fantasy like your suggestion of how magic would induce a dramatic change in society, etc etc... Those are nice, but to be honest... I personally (and probably many others) really don't care enough about that to WANT that level of detail in a fantasy world. It's those type of thoughts that I've heard come from the dwellers (a.k.a D&D Mongers) when I would frequent the study area in the union of my university. I heard arguments of why "Ice Dragons couldn't possibly defeat Pheonix Golems because the barometric properties of firedust ..blah blah blah blah"  (I made this up obviously but you get the point).

The problem with that is that the mixture of science and fiction to the point that reality rules are being applied to a fictional rules to provide a standard of what can and cannot be done "realistically". The point of which is moot.... the minute you implement fantasy you can no longer have reality... ever. It's all make-believe at that point and why not just create something you enjoy rather than argue about scientific fact when referring to zombies and dragons??  I'm sorry but I have to laugh uncontrollably at that thought.

[Myst9999 0]

I think CrashDome hit the nail on the head there.

The days of 500 page manuals and 6 installation disks is over.

Why?

Money.

The vast majority does not wish to buy these kind of games today. They want something slick, with a "pick up and play" orientation. Notice how BIS have developed ArmA with a more user friendly edge? Switching between soldiers during play comes to mind for a start.

For the purist this would be unthinkable, but most people don't have such a drive for realism and want to kick some arse, win, feel good about themselves, then go and eat something.

I suppose we can blame EA to an extent, the masters of dumbing down. The only innotive games I can think of in their collection are The Sims and perhaps whats left of the C&C franchise.

I like engrossing games, but there's a fine line between engrossing and downright daft. Games with a mythos that spans eons and yet aren't attached to any existing franchise/series don't usually do well commercially unless they do something interesting that would please any gamer.

The whole zombies/monsters fad is just a fall back position. Games use it because its a successful money spinner.

I wouldnt say all fantasy/sci-fi games are unrealistic though. The Half Life series has created a convincing reality whilst retaining its sci-fi premise.

[EiZei 0]

Switching between soldiers during play comes to mind for a start.

Uhh.. I think switching between units is a feature more often seen in flight sims than in mass games which tend to be very linear and plot oriented.

[Myst9999 0]

Really?

Well I wouldn't know, dont own any.

But the point I was making is that if you really want to be able fanatically embed yourself in a reality, you shouldn't have the ability to change character/perspective whenever you like. Then it becomes less sim and more whim.

[EiZei 0]

But the point I was making is that if you really want to be able fanatically embed yourself in a reality, you shouldn't have the ability to change character/perspective whenever you like. Then it becomes less sim and more whim.

It also means the mission maker does not need to compromise the mission in order to make it less frustrating for the player itself.

[xawery 0]

@xawery:

I wasn't replying to you.

However, after reading your recent post I understand your concerns but I still think you are making fantasy overly-complex.

I realize you can have elements of realism in fantasy like your suggestion of how magic would induce a dramatic change in society, etc etc... Those are nice, but to be honest... I personally (and probably many others) really don't care enough about that to WANT that level of detail in a fantasy world. It's those type of thoughts that I've heard come from the dwellers (a.k.a D&D Mongers) when I would frequent the study area in the union of my university. I heard arguments of why "Ice Dragons couldn't possibly defeat Pheonix Golems because the barometric properties of firedust ..blah blah blah blah" (I made this up obviously but you get the point).

The problem with that is that the mixture of science and fiction to the point that reality rules are being applied to a fictional rules to provide a standard of what can and cannot be done "realistically". The point of which is moot.... the minute you implement fantasy you can no longer have reality... ever. It's all make-believe at that point and why not just create something you enjoy rather than argue about scientific fact when referring to zombies and dragons?? I'm sorry but I have to laugh uncontrollably at that thought.

The key term to your argument is "enjoy". "Enjoy", just like "fun" are subjective terms, although as of late they are being applied as if they were absolute ("school needs to be fun" etc. etc.). I'm sure there are tons of people who enjoy simplistic concepts just to have quick 'n' dirty "fun" (Torment, Diablo, Dungeon Siege etc.). As I said before in my initial post, that is all good and well, everyone to it's own etc., but the fact remains that there are people who enjoy realism in books/games/films, even if the aforementioned media contain fantastic elements. The problem is, this crowd (to which I belong) remains underserved.

Quote[/b] ]he minute you implement fantasy you can no longer have reality

That is true, but that doesn't mean you cannot have realism, or a believable world. Call me old-fashioned, but I expect more from the material I consume. I have a limited amount of free time on my hands, and thus I expect the games which I play in my spare time to be truly interesting and engrossing, not some trite waste of time. I like detail and I pay attention to it. I am a firm believer in suspense of disbelief (no fiction can exist without it), but there are boundaries.

Oh, and don't throw that AD&D example at me, because you know full well that's not what I mean... There is nothing 'engrossing' (haha) about overweight 28-year olds debating the intricacies of arbitarily set rules. I'm not talking about the details of ice golems vs. phoenix whatever, but the logical implications of introducing magic or other fantasy elements into a world similar to our own. There's quite a difference.

Again, the crux of my argument is the following. The vast majority of today's games is directed at players who prefer simplistic, instant-gratification fun, irrespective on the genre (Battlefield series, all the dungeon-hack games etc.). Truly interesting games (Fahrenheit, Bioshock etc.) are a minority. This is a shame. That is all I'm trying to say. I am not trying to be elitist or whatever (what a derogatory term this has become...). Don't feel attacked... I'm only saying that there are people out there who expect more from a game than flashy graphics and leet sorcerors. Boy, what I wouldn't give for a remake of Darklands...

Red Kite is right, maybe this is a generation thing.

Um, no wait, I'm 23.

[Pathy 0]

I profess to being the #1 thief fan here, i am truely obsessive about it. Sometimes i even cross the road to avoid streetlights just incase some taffer sees me.  

Anyway....as has already been pointed out, the Thief series is set in a very well developed and deliberately steampunk universe, they did not say "this is set in England, 1587", or anything like that. It is not intended to be a historical recreation. You're not meant to sit there and imagine you're in medieval Europe, you're meant to sit there and imagine you're in "the city" in Garrets world. And it quite simply would not be thief if it was not set in that universe. Just imagine, no hammers, no pagans, none of the trickster/mechanist/keeper elements to the games that really make them what they are. I mean, keepers wouldnt be possible for a start if you made it strictly medieval, and Garrets skill at concealing himself, you have to understand, isnt just a good skill at hiding, its almost a magical ability to blend into shadows, thanks to the glyphs. And that is only one example for starters. I do realise however i could rant all day on this line, so i'll trust you have the intellect to realise what i'm saying.

Now i understand what you're saying, why cant you have an accurate historical thingy, but you have to realise that doing that would kill half of what is so great about the thief games. And likewise with other games. If you take away that artistic license, you're screwing over the premise that a particular game is based on.

At the end of the day you have to appreciate that from Thief 1, it's been set in a fantasy universe, a very well thought out and constructed one, and if you're going to complain about historical accuracy, then you're playing the wrong game. Enjoy the game for what it is, everything in that universe is as it is for a good reason, and not just because the developers felt "lets chuck some zombies in". Me personally i love the Thief universe, it would be dull and boring if they took away all those fantasy elements. Maybe it's because you never played T1:TDP and T2:TMA, if you had then you'd probably realise how it all comes together, and wouldnt be having ridiculous expectations of it that it is a medieval sim, when it aspires to be nothing of the sort.

Edit: I am tempted to do a dissection of red kites initial post, but i'll see what the response is first :P

[crashdome 1]

Quote[/b] ]I'm only saying that there are people out there who expect more from a game than flashy graphics and leet sorcerors. Boy, what I wouldn't give for a remake of Darklands...

Red Kite is right, maybe this is a generation thing.

Um, no wait, I'm 23.

And I'm 30... I don't feel attacked nor do I disagree with those statements above. I was under the impression by your previous posts you were more concerned with complexity:

Quote[/b] ]This is what I mean by realism: not creating a mirror image of our world, but creating a believable, complex world, with believable social structures, institutions, etc.

However, if one finds more realism beneficial that is fine by me... as I stated before I am a sim nut and we like getting as close to real as possible with the things that strive for realism. If fantasy is introduced though, we need to understand we are now at the mercy of the artist and must suspend any belief that certain rules must apply anymore.

We can easily "vote" away with bad ideas by letting them die horrible deaths (like Karnov). Problem is, like I said... not many people care to much about this level of detail and continue to buy the regular stuff.

[xawery 0]

At this point I'd like to add that I enjoyed Thief very much, exactly for the reason Pathy stated. I found the world of Thief to be a well-thought, consistent one. A rare occurance.

Quote[/b] ]We can easily "vote" away with bad ideas by letting them die horrible deaths (like Karnov). Problem is, like I said... not many people care to much about this level of detail and continue to buy the regular stuff.

True. And that's what worries me. The tyranny of the majority. If enough people are dumb, stupidness will triumph. As is the case right now. At this moment, it takes a lot of guts to create a game with a learning curve steeper than a donut. Luckily, some people still do it (BattleFront, Paradox Games, Quantic Dream etc.).

I think we have strayed from the subject somewhat. However, it's good to see that so many people have such lively thoughts about this issue. At first, I thought this thread would die on the second page. I'm glad it's death won't come before page 5

[earl 0]

Accurate historical fiction would be quite a niche market in the video games industry, not to mention needing a niche developer that isn't under pressure to pump stuff out and tune the content to appeal to the typical gamer.  Imagine the research needed to build all the details realistically.  I think it would actually be fun, but it's unlikely to happen without a really tenacious developer that can stave off the publishers who will inevitably try to add some "zing".

hahah, on the first page of google image search for zing to prove my point: http://s116760103.onlinehome.us/Zing.jpg

[Myst9999 0]

But the point I was making is that if you really want to be able fanatically embed yourself in a reality, you shouldn't have the ability to change character/perspective whenever you like. Then it becomes less sim and more whim.

It also means the mission maker does not need to compromise the mission in order to make it less frustrating for the player itself.

A mission that frustrates someone usually means it wasnt made very well or is far too complex.

Take Flashpoint for instance. The missions made so far have always had to have been from one persons perspective. It's not difficult to make a non frustrating mission. Maybe it can't be as varied as people would like, but you would realise that from the start.

Besides, I don't have a problem with the character switching thing myself.

Anyway, we digress.

[crashdome 1]

Niche markets are good. However, I wouldn't be too worried about losing ground to "dumb,stupidness." Subcultures are like rollercoasters, the ones who go against the grain will always revive a genre and make it better (or in rare cases worse). Those usually hold a decent share of market and live long rather than large share for short time. (*cough* *cough* OFP vs BF2 *cough*)

I've seen a sudden resurgence in appeal towards paper and pen games again. Something I thought for sure would never happen....  now if we can just hold on for some good wargaming enthusiasm to rebuild.

[Journeyman 0]

Accurate historical fiction would be quite a niche market in the video games industry, not to mention needing a niche developer that isn't under pressure to pump stuff out and tune the content to appeal to the typical gamer.  Imagine the research needed to build all the details realistically.  I think it would actually be fun, but it's unlikely to happen without a really tenacious developer that can stave off the publishers who will inevitably try to add some "zing".

hahah, on the first page of google image search for zing to prove my point: http://s116760103.onlinehome.us/Zing.jpg

I assume you meant accurate historical fact! I am not a developer, so know little about publishing trends, but I can make general observations of market forces. … You say a niche developer would be required to develop such a game thus applying that this would be a niche market. Well I guess you are right, but do we not already have such ‘niche’ games already demonstrating how successful historically realistic content can be? What about realistic WW2 games, and how many of these have there been in recent years already earning their place in gaming history? COD and COD2 were classics and demonstrate just how successful historical realism can be when told in a video game! OK WW2 was a major and historically fairly recent event, but I don’t see why this idea cannot be used for more distant history and especially medieval times of which there are many great battles to be told! Sure research will be harder but who’s going to know if some detail is incorrect? Like COD2 it would be the overall atmosphere and immersion into the period that will make the kill!

Then there is the potential for greater things! If kids started to get high grades in history through playing such historically accurate FPS/RPG video games. How long before the educational institutions around the world jumped to attention? Schools and colleges around the world may well start ordering such software by the truckload! Just a scenario, but nevertheless I can almost see it happening!

Older generations too will soon start playing more video games. Why? Because lifetime habits die hard and the youth of today will replace the current generation of PC techno freaks most of who would rather run in front of a bus than learn about computers or game consoles!

… Though I do believe the market is already there if only people were offered it. I even think trends will change and there will be less and less witches and elves and more and more swords and spears rather than fingertips with fire! Kids will probably be the first to turn the tide as fans of the new realistic games start scoffing at their piers for still playing with zombies and dragons!

OK! Back to reality! … I guess we will all just have to wait and see!  

[Pathy 0]

Nah, cmon, for hundereds, thousands of years kids have been entertained by stories of elves, dragons, ect. Just look back to greek myth, or the folk stories told by many other cultures. All packed with fantasy elements.

Fantasy storytelling is essentially the same as it always has been, only as technology has evolved the medium for telling these stories has changed. We now can tell stories through computer games, a truely interactive way of making a story unfold (if done well).

So i very much doubt the popularity of stories involving dragons, goblins or other magical creatures will diminish over time. It is engrained in human nature to need fantasy elements to stories.

I agree it would be great to have games that are historically accurate, if that is what they are purporiting to be - btw for me, i found CoD 1&2 to be pretty fake feeling, i did not get immersed at all. Maybe it was something to do with the total lack of realism, or maybe it was the nagging feeling i had constantly throughout both games that they werent trying to make you feel as if you were a soldier in ww2, but instead make you feel you were taking part in a scene Saving Private Ryan or Band of Brothers instead.

But

You cannot attack fantasy games that are clearly based in a fantasy universe, for not being historically accurate. Feel free to have a bash at any game which aspires to be historically accurate and fails, but do not bash games like my beloved theif for not being historically accurate when they arent even set in the same universe that we occupy.

[Ares1978 0]

You cannot attack fantasy games that are clearly based in a fantasy universe, for not being historically accurate. Feel free to have a bash at any game which aspires to be historically accurate and fails, but do not bash games like my beloved theif for not being historically accurate   when they arent even set in the same universe that we occupy.

You can always bash them for not aspiring to be historically accurate.

[Journeyman 0]

You can always bash them for not aspiring to be historically accurate.

Yes exactly! And BTW I am not bashing your beloved Thief Pathy for anything else! Sure originally I felt disappointed in the way they ruined a setting, but I was not aware at that time that this setting was actually 'cloud cookoo land' rather than an attempt at medieval! With regards to Thief I am now more enlightened and have accepted the situation!  

As for fantasy story telling for kids of course there will always be myth and magic for them to enjoy! I was referring more to older kids, the sort of kids that put their teddy bears down and start playing with action man!  

And I'm sure also there will ALWLAYS be an element of the adult population who will favour zombies and dragons over knights and archers! Such is the diversity of the population!  

But please give us the choice so that at least folk like myself who prefer realistic stories over myth and magic can have our fun too!  

[ebns72 0]

It seems that the argument of this thread is do games have an obligation to be as accurate as possible, and the flat out answer is no.

The real issue with medieval games, IMO, is how fantasy games are so oversaturated and we have yet to see one true and good depiction of medieval reality.

[Pathy 0]

Probably because a true depiction of medieval life would be boring.

"Backbreaking Labour Simulator: The Medieval Age" anyone?

[Ares1978 0]

It seems that the argument of this thread is do games have an obligation to be as accurate as possible, and the flat out answer is no.

It's about wasted potential from certain players' point of view, not about some neglected obligation.

[Journeyman 0]

Probably because a true depiction of medieval life would be boring.

"Backbreaking Labour Simulator: The Medieval Age" anyone?

Even the simplest of searches will bring up an exhaustive list…..

Significant medieval battles...

· The Battle of Chalons (451)

· The Second Arab siege of Constantinople (718)

· The Battle of Tours (732)

· The Battle of Anchialus(917)

· The Battle of Brunanburh (937)

· The Battle of Maldon (c. 991)

· The Battle of Kleidion (1014)

· The Battle of Stamford Bridge (1066)

· The Battle of Hastings (1066)

· The Battle of Manzikert (1071)

· The Battle of Levounion (1091)

· The Battle of Crug Mawr (1136)

· The Siege of Lisbon (1147)

· The Battle of Sirmium (1167)

· The Battle of Myriokephalon (1176)

· The Battle of Hattin (1187)

· The Battle of Adrianople (1205)

· The Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa (1212)

· The Battle of Bouvines (1214)

· The Battle of the Golden Spurs (1302)

· The Battle of Bannockburn (1314)

· The Battle of Crécy (1346)

· The Battle of Poitiers (1356)

· The Battle of Nicopolis (1396)

· The Battle of Grunwald/Tannenberg (1410)

· The Battle of Agincourt (1415)

· The Battle of Patay (1429)

· The Battle of Towton (1461)

· The Battle of Vaslui (1475)

· The Battle of Bosworth Field (1485)

Medieval wars...

Major wars of the Middle Ages, arranged chronologically by year begun.

· The Spanish Reconquista (718-1492): In which the Moors were driven from the Iberian Peninsula; begun under Pelayo in Asturias, concluded under the Catholic Monarchs (Isabella of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragon), of Columbus fame.

· The Crusades (1096-1291): A generic, catch-all term for Church-sanctioned wars against non-Christians or heretics.

o 1096–1099—First Crusade: The only "successful" crusade against the Islamic Near East; Christian states were established throughout the Levant.

o 1101—Crusade of 1101

o 1147–1149—Second Crusade

o 1187–1191—Third Crusade

o 1202–1204—Fourth Crusade: In which the Western forces sacked Constantinople

o 1209–1229—Albigensian Crusade: In which the Albigensians in southern France were crushed.

o 1212—Children's Crusade: Sometimes believed to be a fictional event

o 1217–1221—Fifth Crusade

o 1228—Sixth Crusade

o 1248–1254—Seventh Crusade

o 1270—Eighth Crusade

o 1271–1291—Ninth Crusade

· The Hundred Years' War (1337-1453): In which the English were eventually driven out of France; many famous events occurred during this war, including the Battle of Agincourt and the campaign under Joan of Arc.

· The Wars of the Roses (1455-1487): War for the English throne between the Houses of Lancaster and York

…. And these are just the battles and wars. Every soldier, knight, infantryman or civilian of the times would have had a social life too. The way criminals were dealt with in the stocks and public hangings, thugs of the times etc is all interesting historically, and is huge fodder in itself for interesting game content.  

[EiZei 0]

You didnt notice that total war: medieval 2 is about to come out in a month?