Originally Posted by Sordak

Ive already given my reasons why i hold that opinion and ive done so before.
Games will never be realistic, not just from a technical standpoitn but from a standpoint of perspective.

Anyone that has ever helped with construction or soemthign like that can probably understand what im getting at here: smash something with a Sledgehammer and compare how it feels.
Does it feel like Kingdom come deliverence? which by all means is a pretty realistic game. Or does it feel different?

Watching someone break something isnt the same as breaking something yourself. You canot express the tactile expirience of force beeing acted upon an object by showing how it realisitcally looks like from the outside.

Eh? I don’t expect a game to give me the real life feeling of smashing something. Unless it’s so frustrating I put my keyboard through the monitor, I guess. What’s your point here?

Im not dismissing stuff outhand, im pointing out that mybe before you parrot "Looks like in reality = GOOD" you might THINK about how that actually works out in gameplay.

Parrot? Haha! Now you’re using language most commonly found in debates on issues like political propaganda, religious teachings or pseudo science.

The easiest way to do this is to point at video games that do it.
When you ask someone what video games have combat that feels right, theyll probably point towards the souls series, towards fighting games and towards dragons dogma.
They dont point towards Skyrim, and for a more top down appraoch: they dont point towards games like Eisenwald or Age of Empires.

Alright, but your examples don’t seem to work in relation to the topic. Let’s THINK this through, shall we?

Dark Souls combat generally doesn’t have a bunch of flashy effects, which is what you seem to be arguing for. Swinging swords, blocking, dodging, parrying, etc all look normal and are relatively slow and deliberate. Everything feels weighty and impactful. Having to pay careful attention to your enemy, time your moves well, etc is probably the core of why so many rate it. Many would call it all quite “realistic”. It doesn’t have the effects that people are arguing should be toned down, so how is it even an example to support that they should stay?

Skyrim is not noted for “realistic” combat. It’s not very flashy for a melee character either. It’s just not particularly good for combat. Now you’re trying to use a game that’s generally not noted for realism to bolster your argument that aiming for realism is bad.

Are you really saying Dark Souls combat is good because it’s not “realistic” compared to Skyrim which is bad because it is? Really? If you’d brought up something the Devil May Cry series, I’d at least understand what you meant. Combat in those games is supposed to be very good and it’s highly stylized.

Diablo like games have for a long time figured out that making things explode, having your screen shake and your animations be exagrated just produce a response that feels more like force is beeing applied.
Look at recent XCOM games if you want a turn based example.
Take XCOM and compare it to Age of Wonders Planetfall and tell me what feels more believeable.

Never played Diablo, but XCom doesn’t seem like a great example either. Shooting things or launching explosives seems to do pretty much what you’d expect them to. Other actions are not highly stylized. Activate run ‘n gun for instance and the soldier will say something like “going in for the kill” and that’s it. Overwatch is just marked by an icon next to your health bar. Compare that to the spectator light show of Reactive Shot in DOS2-


We’re not only talking about actions that should feel weighty and impactful. Seems what most people are saying could be turned down a bit are things like the jump with super hero landing. Does my stealthy rouge really need to look like Iron Man every time I jump a small gap? Besides, if things are too overdone, I often think they can get old fast.