That's just me though. Going for "real" is very specific choice that depends on the reaction you want your audience/players to have. I think its slow and clunky and niche. I'm thinking of audiences for some military sims, etc.
Show this thread
My personal opinion is that "realism" is a false idol. No matter how much you wish to ground your game in the real world you'll want to exaggerate action to amp the drama. Especially for gameplay animation. Serve your player.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yeah, this is something I've been struggling with a lot. Obviously, exaggeration for drama is paramount. But it's also really cool to see something work in a game the way it does IRL, and if you can get both, why not get both?
-
The Witcher 3 had this special attack for Geralt, and it was 100% pulling directly from real-world montante fighting! I mean, this shit is (a) really dope and (b) loops very well!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6MZ-dCpM2E …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Realism in games expires very quickly. You can be bleeding edge one minute and an example of limited tech the next. I’m glad good art direction will be the major driving force going forward.
-
I think its very easy to get caught up in exciting new tech and lose sight of what were bringing to the player with it.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Shooting for 'believable' rather than 'realistic' makes far more sense
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think this is true for lots of arts. It needs to be inflected for effect, like a lens. If a face is as ‘real’ as a doorjamb, there’s an emotional flattening which serves no one.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.