What this all means is that by pursuing very specific experiences that are not overly complex from a technical level, it becomes easier to
Which elements then, belong in the realm of fantasy, and which elements should we be striving to replicate more realistically?
These games represent a hyper-reality that shows us where we must focus our energies and the difficulties we could face. So for instance, to learn the value of money
In this primal, chaotic space kids can learn the value of fear, and discipline, getting beyond their sheltered lives for perhaps the first time. Kids crave this, even many adults crave it. For those kids that have experienced this in the real world though, maybe they can learn to enjoy peace though, and how to empathize with the people they have internal hatred towards. These games are hardly the realm of science fiction, in fact psychologists use these very techniques to help their patients.
I think some of us do, especially if we've had negative experiences. I think games can help us deal with these deep simulations though, even though few of them attempt it.
Or lets say you wanted to write a 1000 page autobiography without being able to use names of people, places, colors or activities and having to use 16th century English. Sure its possible, but how accurate would it be as an autobiography? Most of your life is made up of activities involving people and places in a contemporary setting, and color is often used as an adjective you use in writing to give readers a sense of place. So how would you make it work?
Someone who meant a lot to you could suddenly be taken away. Maybe you cut ties with everyone you know, and are now being evicted from your place with no income and family to fall back on. Maybe you're in debt with no clear way out because you didn't anticipate a retrenchment package when you signed that loan. completely random accidents that occur, sports injuries, theft of personal property, wild acts of nature, and unexpected health issues.
There are two major limitations to achieving the above scenarios within reasonable accuracy to how it happens in real life.
and lateral thinking, these skills can also be learnt by other mental activities, such as conventional studying.
What about serious physical activities though, could they be done in games? So for instance, a mugging simulation where you are the victim. I believe this too is going to be hard to recreate in a game, given the difference between adrenaline levels when your life is actually under potential threat versus a game with little physical feedback and real threat. I expect that this is why instead of going by the book and making a cover based shooter IO interactive instead worked on their crowd and riot response A.I for Hitman: Absolution. Unfortunately though, the problem comes in again with the limited number of interactions and possible outcomes in the game when compared to all the possibilities this kind of situation could actually involve. Because these games have such linear outcomes, its hard to see them as any worthwhile simulations. This is possibly one of the reasons developers like Capcom and From Software have chosen very much to stay in the realm of fantasy, even though their engines are capable of rendering both realistic combat and large crowd dynamics. I think there's also something about fantasy though that when used properly in a video game can be greater than a simulation. This is what I guess could be called 'Fantasy Simulation'.
In another post I spoke about the difficulties in developing simulations for events based around human relationships and physical 1-1 activity. Now I want to write about games with are just a bit more fantasy than they are sim, what I'd call 'Fantasy Sims'.
A good example is Volition Inc Red Faction: Guerrilla. When this game was released it was the best use of destructible environments ever seen in a third-person game, and amazingly enough was even able to utilize these destructibility features in multiplayer modes. Volition inc. had built up experience in creating destructible environments and understood how important these game mechanics could be for creating engaging action scenarios. While there is a realism in the destructibility and gravity, many other aspects of the game are fantasy themed, containing structures, weapons, mechs, jetpacks, and vehicles that fit with the theme. Another more down to earth fantasy simulation is Shenmue. This game modeled realistic areas in Japan, incorporated day/night cycles, a currency system, and allowed the player to explore them through first and third-person views, all things which had never been done in a third-person action adventure game.
Neither of these games model their action physics as well as they could have though, and this sometimes creates logical disconnects where we feel short sold as players, such as when standing under collapsing buildings in Red Faction and jumping out unscathed, or with the flippant nature of some of the battles in Shenmue and how tedious they quickly become after you've struck someone in the head with a fierce kick for the third time.
The question then is, given the sheer effort it takes to just simulate a few small aspects of our interactive world, completely avoiding the fact that we've simulated only a small subset of likely outcomes and choices, should we instead try and guide the player through emotional situations rather than these painfully detailed, physics based simulations that are heavily based around graphics? Does a blind man need vision to feel emotions?
and what this results in is the failure of games to be used as a tool for measuring and improving ones ability to cope with unfamiliar situations.
