Fake realism in games

[Samuel]

Or make the world flat and wrap around at the ends. It isn't realistic, but it has much less arbitrary blockades thrown in.

[White Haven]

If you do that, though, make sure you put in the main character flipping his shit the first time it happens and a worthwhile in-game explanation for the fact that he's stuck in a bubble universe.

[Zixinus]

I wonder would it work just to say: "I can't go there./I don't want to go there." from the main character or mission control or whatever, given the first warning so they walk around the edges a little bit and after a certain point, slow down saying "I really shouldn't be going this way." and then "I'm not taking another step" and the character refuses to advance another step in a certain direction? A soft wall, in another words.

[Samuel]

I wonder would it work just to say: "I can't go there./I don't want to go there." from the main character or mission control or whatever, given the first warning so they walk around the edges a little bit and after a certain point, slow down saying "I really shouldn't be going this way." and then "I'm not taking another step" and the character refuses to advance another step in a certain direction? A soft wall, in another words.

Why would they do that? It is more random than "deserters will be shot" outside limits to games.

[Singular Intellect]

I think a weight system that determines what you carry would be a great idea for many games. I hate the category system that only allows you to carry so much ammunition or certain types of weapons at any one time. If you want an AK-47 or jut a pistol while the rest of your carrying capacity is dedicated to ammo for that, it should be allowed.

[Singular Intellect]

I wonder would it work just to say: "I can't go there./I don't want to go there." from the main character or mission control or whatever, given the first warning so they walk around the edges a little bit and after a certain point, slow down saying "I really shouldn't be going this way." and then "I'm not taking another step" and the character refuses to advance another step in a certain direction? A soft wall, in another words.

Why would they do that? It is more random than "deserters will be shot" outside limits to games.

Far cry 2 handled that well; going outside the main map area had you passing out in the desert heat and you ended up crawling back to the main map areas. I really liked that system implementation.

[Zixinus]

Why would they do that? It is more random than "deserters will be shot" outside limits to games.

Not that much if the character is (or at least, supposedly) motivated to do something in the playable zone. This way, the edge wouldn't be very random or arbitrary, the player given a warning and all. In some contextes (like in Far Cry 2, where you just have an instant and location specific malaria attack caused by... by.... heat at day and cold by night I guess?) it would work.

EDIT: Yeah, Far Cry 2 does spring to mind but I recall that there you just got a sudden and locatipn-specific malaria attack. I do think that Fallout 3 would work better with this system: at first, you got a massage that you should turn back, than you get hazy vision and massages that the outside zone is increasingly radioactive and then finally you collapse and find yourself rescued by a "distant trader, who took some bottle caps/items for his troubles for rescuing your life".

[Pablo Sanchez]

Not that much if the character is (or at least, supposedly) motivated to do something in the playable zone. This way, the edge wouldn't be very random or arbitrary, the player given a warning and all. In some contextes (like in Far Cry 2, where you just have an instant and location specific malaria attack caused by... by.... heat at day and cold by night I guess?) it would work.

Sandbox games could just do an "alternate ending" mechanic where you get a cutscene of your character just fucking off out of the game area and getting on with his life; like if you exited the zone in STALKER you'd get a dialogue box asking "do you really want to leave?", and if you chose "yes" there would be a video with a monologue of your guy saying "srsly fuck this I'm going to get a real job" and then some video of him as an auto mechanic in Kiev or whatever.

[Pulp Hero]

Or a soft border where, once you cross the first trigger line, you get "randomly" attacked by enemies that are much too strong to kill and who herd you back the right direction.

[Stark]

And then field constant questions about why the actual bosses in the game are easier than the unlimited spawning border guards.

The best way has already been mentioned - think about your location and have sensible movement restrictions, instead of trying to hedge in an area for which there is no real reason for you to want to stop (like F3, game is based on exploration but NOT OVER HERE LOL)

[Vympel]

I don't get why the 'moving off the map' restrictions / contrivances matter - I have never in my entire life ever gotten the urge to walk off the play area (which is always really visible, becasuse the map ends) - I know there's going to be sweet fuck all there, so why would I go there?

[Stark]

It's certainly not really a 'fake realism' thing, just a 'we suck at storytelling' thing. Is it fake realism that F3 handles radiation so badly that it's basically irrelevant for 99% of the game, since % resistance + most radiation is 1/s = you take 1/s anyway.

[Covenant]

Make buffer zones of a substantial size, duh.

Compared to Fallout 3, Oblivion's wall system was excellent--you simply had a few miles of dull, drab, useless terrain all around the map. If you were fleeing from monsters, or looking for mushrooms, or just exploring, you could, it just got to a point that you went "this is uninteresting." I had to work rather hard to actually reach the wall of the map, and I was only out that far anyway because I was playing downloaded content that gave me shit to do out where modders had open room.

Such a system is probably the best of any. Want to discourage people exploring certain areas? Make it really, really boring to do so. No monsters, no ruins, no notable flora or fauna or nice vistas or anything. It doesn't take much artist resources or anything else to put boring dead space around the areas you want people to go through. If you stick a stream in the way, people will be annoyed they can't cross it. If you put arbitrary snipers and border guards, people will try to kill them or evade them just to spite you. If you just make it pointless to go there, that's way less obtrusive, and it's simply the easiest solution. Fallout's wall hit like 10 feet after areas you might normally have explored. I swear you could take the 'dead space' around Oblivion's map and set all of Fallout 3 into it.

[Oskuro]

All the talking about how to set a limit to the game area kind of reminds me of Dark City. Darn, now I need to watch it, need my dose of Telekinetik Goa'uld.

[Stark]

Cov reminds me of something.

If you're using hard borders, don't fucking put 'interesting' shit out there.

Don't put a pirate ship in the Unswimmable Bay. Don't put a castle beyond the Impassable Forest. Don't have structurally-sound buildings in the Rad Death Zone. Don't have hookers outside the Chain-Link Fence. Shit like that just makes people want to go there, realise they can't, and annoy them. The best hard borders work, as Cov says, when you let the PLAYER decide they shouldn't go there.