Computer Game “Reality”

[WSUCougar]

I’m sure that Senator’s thread about the 6-10 Super Bowl winners (FOF4) elicited substantial groans from many of us, and it prompted me to put some related thoughts down.

As gamers, we attempt to simulate a variety of things. These vary greatly depending on interests, game types (RTS, text sim, FPS, RPG, etc.), and so on, but the bottom line is that the game represents an attempt to simulate something in some form or fashion. “Reality” is often an inappropriate term when it comes to games, but I think each gamer has a comfort level with how close (or “real”) the game representation comes. Is it a believable, acceptable representation?

I often hit a wall with games and my acceptable level of “reality.” Sometimes it either works for me or it doesn’t. As great as Star Empires IV is in many respects, I struggle to get past the fact that in combat the battle screen borders are “hard” – that is, a ship cannot move beyond the edge of the battle screen. Ia agonize over RPGs that devolve into click-fest battles. Another example is when a baseball sim simulates the actual gameplay poorly. Now I know that many (if not most) of you don’t get hung up on micro-details when you are simming multiple seasons, but when I see a game being played and in a key, obvious situation a pitcher doesn’t bunt or get pinch-hit for, it spoils the experience for me. The functional word there is “obvious” – I’m willing to suspend my need for reality to certain levels, but when (as a hypothetical example) a middle relief pitcher is allowed to hit with 2 outs in the 9th and a runner in scoring position, I can’t accept that. The representation is ruined…to me, what difference does it make to play out the “management” of the team when it is such a poor rendering of the game of baseball?

FOF/TCY has teased me over the years with various measures of this. The long FG, no punt problem with TCY strains it; the pass-with-a-lead-and-the-clock-running-out thing makes me want to scream. A 6-10 playoff team? Wow…we all look at that and say “No way!” because it would never happen in real life. Or would it? I’d like to see an analysis of that team and its players, game-by-game. Was it a fluke? 9-7 teams make the playoffs all the time. Would we accept 8-8? 7-9?

I’m rambling and will stop. Just some stray thoughts.

[Anrhydeddu]

[random thoughts]In my limited view, games should have a certain randomness to where a 6-10 team can win (rarely though). To me, predictability on gameplay is boring (which is where FOF4 fails, imo). From a micro-level, one can spend hours tweaking every single number in the various screens and get a 24-6 results. Or you can ignore everything (or at least, recommend) and still get a 24-6 results. We know that we will get that results because we will have a great QB as well as star players in other key positions while the AI will not unless they get lucky.

As far as the micro-details in a baseball sim, you're right, I don't get hung up. I see my MR2 going 0-2, 9.35 for the month and I will make a choice whether to 1) keep him there, 2) send him down, 3) trade him, 4) release him or 5) just get him out of the lineup. How he he lost those two games and gave up so many runs is irrelevant to me, only the fact that he performed very badly for the team. I just chalk it up to predictable randomness because I certainly don't what to have the predictability of my 9/8/8 MR performing excellent all of the time. So maybe in that sense, I want a little unrealism - if that will give me more fun in making decisions. I play any games primarily for the decision-makings without really spending much time finding out why (which would probably add considerable time to my already slow pace of play).

In summary, FOF is not fun for me to play because perhaps it is too realistic or predictable (6-10 winning the SB being an exception). With that, there are less critical decisions that I need to make, esp. in the absense of a competitive AI that makes most of your decisions meaningless. OOTP probably is less realistic but maybe because it is baseball and not football where you have more variables thus you can fake some stuff better. But to me, I accept this level of less realism or less predictability for the fun factor and numerous critical decisions I am forced to make (see my 1960s Cardinals dynasty for an example of this).[/random off]

[stkelly52]

While I think that a 6-10 team making the playoffs is unrealistic, it is certainly not impossible, and is much more likly now that the divisions have been realigned. with teams competing against just 3 other teams we will soon see several 7-9 teams make the playoffs. 6-10 is not much off of that, especially concidering how many games of FOF are played. I know that I have rattled off 100 seasons. In FOF2001 I played about 300 seasons. And I once saw the cowboys go 5-11 and then reach the superbowl, but in that many seasons there are bound to be statistical anomilies both in games and in real life.

[henry296]

I think like Kodos I am more concerned with the underlying engine making good decisions than I am with the results that it generates. With so many scenarios being run, the probability is high that odd ends occur. To put it another way the means are more important than the ends.

Todd

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by stkelly52
While I think that a 6-10 team making the playoffs is unrealistic, it is certainly not impossible, and is much more likly now that the divisions have been realigned. with teams competing against just 3 other teams we will soon see several 7-9 teams make the playoffs. 6-10 is not much off of that, especially concidering how many games of FOF are played. I know that I have rattled off 100 seasons. In FOF2001 I played about 300 seasons. And I once saw the cowboys go 5-11 and then reach the superbowl, but in that many seasons there are bound to be statistical anomilies both in games and in real life.

That could certainly happen....but I'd think it would be near impossible for a 6-10 team to win 3 playoff games then the Super Bowl. Of course there are thousands of FOF seasons being played (someone is still playing, right ), so I suppose it is bound to happen now and again.

[primelord]

Originally posted by cuervo72
That could certainly happen....but I'd think it would be near impossible for a 6-10 team to win 3 playoff games then the Super Bowl. Of course there are thousands of FOF seasons being played (someone is still playing, right ), so I suppose it is bound to happen now and again.

I guess it dpeends on the circumstances as to why a team finished 6-10. Say a team has the best QB in the league and a very potent passing game, but they have an awful backup QB. If the starter gets hurt for most of the season and they finish 6-10, but he returns for the playoffs they are right then a much better team even though they only had a 6-10 record.

I agree with everyone that this should be the exception no the rule, but I can see situations where it could happen.

[cuervo72]

That had occurred to me primelord, as I was hitting the 'Send Reply' button That would still have to be one heck of a quarterback though!

One thing I had noticed about the original image Senator posted was that the point differential was only -6, which indicated to me that this might have been a particularly unlucky 6-10 team.

[mckerney]

People would also be pissed if when playing a college football game and a team that had lost to one of the worst teams in their conferences but still went to the bowl game that was hyped as the national championship game, lost the game, but were still named champions anyway.

In Minnesota, however, the 1960 season is considered a great national championship year.

[sterlingice]

While it may be unlikely, think about this: the only reason it's on the board is because it's a real anomaly that made everyone sit up and look at it. If there were posts for every time a 12-4 or 13-3 or 14-2 team won it, we'd have hundreds of thousands of posts, I'm guessing. Are you telling me that if the NFL had been around for longer than humans (let's just say 100K years), that there wouldn't be a 6-10 team in the playoffs and even winning the Super Bowl at least once? Oh the stories that would be told about that team...

("Remeber in Super Bowl MMMMMMCMLXXV when Blog and the 4972BC Rock Chuckers threw that great pass to Grog. That was a great call by John Madden's great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandfather and Pat Summerall.")

SI

[WSUCougar]

Originally posted by sterlingice
While it may be unlikely, think about this: the only reason it's on the board is because it's a real anomaly that made everyone sit up and look at it.

A valid point. However, I've seen plenty of 7-9 division/playoff winners in my FOF simming, and it always leaves a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. Not a gamebreaker, just a turn-off.

I'm curious about how other gamers feel about the "realism" factor in their games. Where is the threshold between what is an acceptable lack of realism and what is not? Any specific games to mention?

[Radii]

As someone else (stkelly I think) said, with the new divisional alignment, I think it will not be so rare to see an 8-8 team winning their division, and 7-9 will become much much more likely. I bet we see a 7-9 division winner within 10 years in the NFL assuming no changes to alignment. 6-10 seems a bit outrageous, but I agree with the idea that between all of us we've simmed tens of thousands of seasons of FOF, its bound to happen

The individual plays are the ones that bother me when I'm looking at a sports sim. Not kicking a field goal late in the half properly, not properly killing the clock in the last two minutes, things like that.

Baseball games are where it really kills me though. Bad decisions in baseball games drive me crazy. Outfielders that use an obvious throwing AI depending on where the runners are and ALWAYS allow the batter to take second when a man is going home. AI that allows you to induce a throw to second on an attempted steal and turn back if you realize you can't make it, lineup mistakes, not pinch hitting for the pitcher when you're losing in the bottom of the 9th. Not doing a double switch when you take out your starting pitcher and the 9 slot is the first up next inning.

I guess that's just a long winded way of saying I agree with Kodos. As long as the CPU teams play and manage themselves the "right" way consistantly, I can accept and even enjoy odd outcomes.

[JAG]

Originally posted by WSUCougar
A valid point. However, I've seen plenty of 7-9 division/playoff winners in my FOF simming, and it always leaves a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. Not a gamebreaker, just a turn-off.

I'm curious about how other gamers feel about the "realism" factor in their games. Where is the threshold between what is an acceptable lack of realism and what is not? Any specific games to mention?

Something like that does leave a bad taste in my mouth, but not because of the realism factor. Because it did happen in the game, it could indeed happen in the real NFL. There was a year in the mid-to-late 80's I believe where some team won the AFC Central with an 8-8 record while Denver got to sit at home with a 10-6 record. A 600 yard passing performance or a 300 yard rushing performance could happen.

To me, as long as these things don't happen on a continual basis, then the realism factor isn't ruined for me. If the top 7 QB's throw over 500 yards easily and often, then I wouldn't find it realistic or fun. If one guy throws for 500 yards every few years, I'd be ok with it. So again, if 6-10 division winners are happening every year, I'd have a problem. But doesn't it seem like every year improbable events happen in the NFL? Last year when Emmitt Smith broke Walter Payton's record that 15 years ago most expected to stay intact. How about David Patten's game from a couple of years back where he threw, caught, and returned a punt for TD's? Corey Dillon breaking Payton's single-game rushing record? Patriots winning the Super Bowl two years ago? The list could go on and on. Anyway, that's my take on it.