Realism at the core of fun
I grew up playing Civilization, all the way from Civ I with my dad to Civ IV, now. It was the first game where I ever got to wonder about converting reality into games, about taking elements from the real world and turning them into game mechanics. Of course I did not think of it in those terms back then, but I was always extremely aware of that strong bond between Civ and reality. When things that I did not know were real that I knew from Civ started appearing in the real world, that bond strengthened immensely, to the point that I learned I could trust Civ and assume that whatever it taught me was right.
So the other day I watched a Sid Meier’s video about his Dinosaur project and the reasons why it failed, which excited me very much, and I clung to every word of his as if it was imparted by God Himself. But one of the things he said caught my attention the most. It wasn’t even one of the most important things of the talk, as he just said it in passing, but coming from the designer of Civilization I just knew it to be true – very much like I knew everything Civ taught me to be true back then.
What Sid said was that when reality and fun collide, fun must always win. Now, I think I knew that. Of course I knew that. Because deep down we all know that, don’t we? It’s so simple! Why make a realistic boring game if you can give in just a little and make it a blast? But don’t we all fall into that trap sometimes? Aren’t we sure nobody is going to fall for that unrealistic thing just because it feels better? I know I still doubt about making that kind of decision, and probably always will – which will surely merit that I take that quote from Sid with me wherever I go.
So I look at that quote and go back to my Civ days. Of course, he did not sacrifice realism in any of the more critical and recognizable elements, like Wonders of the World, city names or country leaders, but looking closer at some elements I start finding that they do not really make much sense. So why hadn’t I noticed? Well, now I think about it, because they were… fun. Huh.
Still, it is important to recognize the spots where realism should not be sacrificed, or at least should be tried very hard to maintain. And this applies to every game, because all games have elements of realism to them, not just the ones that aim to emulate reality. Super Mario Bros is not a game that evokes reality, but still we demand realism from the character’s movement, we expect him to jump and run in a certain way in the same fashion that we expect our X-wing fighter to steer in a certain way. Prince of Persia, to this side of Sands of Time, is a game about impossible character movements – but still we need them to look real, to be convincing. We need them to feel right (just by italicizing “feel” I already feel like I’m ripping off Steve Swink, which I would like to believe I am not).
What I mean is that when we move away from games like Civ and into other games where realism is on a different layer, we need to start wondering about that Sid Meier’s quote and how to adapt it. This is not about whether a courthouse should actually account for a decrease in corruption for our virtual city – not anymore; this is more about whether it is actually possible to grind on a skateboard for one full minute on a rooftop – even if you are Tony Hawk.
And of course it is not possible, no one ever dreams that it is possible. But it is possible to grind on a rail, which is what I did in that first level… and it felt so right. Then I did it in that escalator, I guess that’s possible… felt awesome, too. And now this rooftop, which is clearly into the realm of the supernatural, but who cares anymore? Just give me some moving vehicles I can grind on next! So reality is definitely there: there is a grinding mechanic which is based on facts, and it is being stretched wildly to make the game fun. If the skater were to grind using the helmet on his head instead of his skateboard it would not be fun, because it would feel silly.
Back to the Prince of Persia example: this game takes place in a world where there is room for the supernatural, so theoretically we could be more forgiving of lack of realism. But still the Prince’s moves are based on real physical abilities, and the supernatural part of it does not interfere with these abilities, but just lets us rewind time to attempt again a failed move. I know I have seen dancers and acrobats walk on walls and backflip off them and thought “well that looks cool”, as I am sure a lot of people have. What the Prince does is based on fact, grounded on something we can grasp, and then stretched to suit the game’s needs and to please the player by making it “cooler”.
Whether the game seeks to be a loyal World War II adaptation or a Space Exploration Mutant Adventure, realism is always the best place to start building from, because it provides a common ground for everybody to identify with. Once a realistic foundation is set, it should be tested to see if it fits well. It very well may be perfect for a simulator, but will surely be found lacking for a fantasy game. The process of making the elements steer away from realism and into the land of fun should be gradual and, as every other process, iterative.
It is just a matter of knowing when realism is needed and when it can be stretched. We all need to identify with something in our games, because we like to play characters that we can at least remotely dream of embodying, and never forgetting about realism can make our characters and environments much more appealing. But never forget: when realism means boring, go for the fun.
Tags: Civilization, Fun, Realism, Sid Meier
