Main > Gameplay

Authenticity vs. Realism in our Weapons

(1/4) > >>

awkm:
I want to make sure we're all on the same page with the direction of the game's weapons are going.  A lot of different people play the game and will therefore have several expectations, balance included.  However, right off the bat I'll say that this game was never meant to be a realistic shooter simulation.  We're not the old school Tom Clancy games.  At the same time, though, we're not completely imaginary like in Quake.  We're inspired by what happens in real life.  We're authentic, a verisimilitude.  Not 100% realistic.

This also means we cannot turn the game to become realistic.  It's too late for that.  Under the hood, nothing was designed with realism in mind.  Again, it's a verisimilitude.  We only appear to be realistic, to have only a semblance of realism.  We'll add in things like accurate sights (the Lumberjack, thanks to those who mailed us a real weapons sight) or how a bullet should drop after long distances (e.g. Field Gun, but all our projectile physics), but it's not our aim to completely dive into realism at the sake of what I and the others on the team believe is 'fun' in this game.  Again, it's also just too late for that :P

So the guns don't look realistic, that's for sure.  They also don't behave realistically either.  It's my job to first and foremost make the game 'fun', balanced, and easily approachable for quick and snappy matches.  Tuning guns to operate realistically does not scream 'fun' or easily approachable in my mind.  It's not the direction we're trying to head to.  This is not the weapons simulation.  The closest thing that comes to simulation is airship driving and movement... and airships don't exactly exist.  So that's how real this game is lol.

A good way to imagine this is the feel of TF2.  That's definitely not realistic and neither are we.  However, we still draw a lot of inspiration from reality since the world that the game exists in is loosely based off of reality.  That's the line that we draw.  Somewhere in the middle.

Helmic:
I believe Resistance and Liberation used the term "Hollywood realism" to describe their goal.  They wanted believability, not realism.  This has been on my mind ever since that silly turning bug discussion, thanks for making this clear.

Lord Dick Tim:
Your qoute about batman in space with no helmet is the perfect, simplistic argument helmic for believability vs reality.  At least I think you said it...  Hmm.

NoWuffo:
In terms of "Hollywood Realism" (to borrow the phrase from Helmic), I think you guys have pretty much got it. No one's going to actually believe that if you use Moonshine on engines that you'll get a tremendous speed boost. Yet at the same time, I can totally believe that adding hydrogen to a balloon will introduce a chance of the balloon catching fire. It's fun intricacies like that make the experience believable. I feel like I'm flying a steampunk war airship, even though I know it couldn't possibly exist. I'd almost argue that TF2 isn't a good comparison, because the universe that you've thrown players into is far more unique than the cartoony FPS that TF2 does, and yet you guys still nail it in terms of feeling authentic. In summary, good job, keep it up.

Chango:
Why does the Flamethrower sound like a Marvin the Martian raygun now?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page