Videogame Logic

[Glorb]

I've noticed something. Logic in videogames, even in supposedly "realistic" games, is completely bizarre.

For example, in most games, a 9mm handgun is the weakest weapon, regardless of size, weight, speed, manufacturer or caliber; also, a shot to the chest or stomach would cause negligable damage. In real life, geting shot in the stomach or chest would be lethal, especially as a stomach hit would cause internal bleeding.

In game logic, all shotguns are 12-gauge, although their power could be fairly low. Also, the beginning shotgun is always a SPAS-12. In real life, a 12-gauge shotgun is extremely loud and often lethal, and requires extensive training to use. Getting hit with a 12-gauge shell would be lethal even with a bulletproof vest on, as the force applied would be equal to getting hit by a train. And of all 12-gauge shotguns, the SPAS-12 is among the most lethal.

In most GTA-style games, driving ito a light post would cause it to simply fly behind the car; hitting one in real life would caus extensive frontal damage and barely move the post.

Now, I realize that this sort of bizarro-world anti-logic is what makes games fun, but it seems like developers of realistic simulations are following the cliches because they're an established videogame norm. It's kind of annoying sometimes, especially when wielding a SPAS-12 in any FPS would make you the object of mockery for the other players.

[Luigison]

... Getting hit with a 12-gauge shell would be lethal...

???  Shotguns usually shoot multiple shot in a single shell.  The shell itself is the casing that holds the shot.  Or, did you mean slug?

Also, small calibar bullets can be more dangerous than larger calibar ones.  The small bullets are usually fired with less velocity and can bounce around in side of someone while the larger calibar bullets usually have a higher velocity and go straight through the person.  Thus, people are often killed with shots to the chest/stomach with small low calibar handguns.  A judge was recently shot multiple times in the chest with a high powered rifle.  None of the bullets hit major organs like his heart and he was on the news doing interview a few days later.

[MaxVance]

Now, I realize that this sort of bizarro-world anti-logic is what makes games fun,

You just answered your question there. Sadly, that's why games are made that way.
Something I have to wonder about, though: Why do barrels have to explode when shot at? It's not like every single barrel in the world is loaded with gunpowder. Besides, most bullets would either bounce off the barrel or go in and make a small hole.

Sorry, but I couldn't resist. This is the only game where barrels should explode.

[The Chef]

Of course video game logic is messed up. How else can you drive off a cliff and reappear a moment later without a scratch in most racing games?

[Koopaslaya]

In Jazz Jackrabbit, if you shoot a barrel, the bullets just bounce off.

[Luigison]

In Jazz Jackrabbit, if you shoot a barrel, the bullets just bounce off.

Yeah.  I loved that game.  I got it from my dad and spent hours playing it on my PC.  Was there a console version?  I also played Pajama Sam's sock sorting game, but forgot what it's called.

I'd like to be able to play an Ocarina and travel through time or space, cast a spell to bring my fallen comrads back to life, or pick up a leaf and fly.

[SushieBoy]

this I am about to say comes from many games. Like in the SSB series. If all the characters are together,body parts will stick out of the players. You know what I mean.

[BP]

What would a video game be if everything in it were logically possible? A pretty crappy game.

[Insane Steve]

Play any point-and-click adventure game. Some of the logic in adventure games can get rather absurd (oftentimes intentionally so to be funny, but still).

[DeadAwake]

Consider the alternative:  If virtual environments obeyed Universal Law completely, the environment would cease being virtual and become indistinguishable from reality itself.  This paints Bird Person's response in an interesting light:  Is life itself a crappy game?

[Hirocon]

But some things in real life are illogical too.  What's up with the wave/particle dual nature of light and matter?  It makes no sense.

[DeadAwake]

Just because we can't see the logic, doesn't mean it isn't there.

[Glorb]

Argh! My brain! Me hurting to think!

[PaperLuigi]

In Metal Gear Solid 3, a head shot kills with any gun, yet a chest or gut shot does almost nothing unless you're holding something with extreme power, such as the sniper SVD. However, the shotgun kills an enemy in one shot, no matter the body part. That is if you're up close, of course.

(Also, a butt shot and a...........ummmm, private area shot make a one hit kill, but in real life, it's not lethal. )

It's most likely the chest shots do not kill enemies in one blast because it'd be way to simple and easy to do it that way. It's be more challenging for players to use multiple bullets for one enemy, unless you're a good shot and hit the head. (The butt shots and groin area's are just ment to be funny)

[G-Dawg]

What would a video game be if everything in it were logically possible? A pretty crappy game.

Yeah I mean look at Mario...you think that jumping on someone can possibly kill someone? Or in any game that involves jumping on enemies. Games have to be illogical to be fun.

[SolidShroom]

Games aren't supposed to be realistic you silly people. THAT'S wHY WE PLAY THEM. To escape reality.

[G-Dawg]

*sings* An escape from reality *sings* Sorry, you reminded me of that song.

[Glorb]

I'm so tired of that response. So, what you're saying is, the military employs training simulators to "escape from reality"? Or that games like Full Spectrum Warrior or Operation Flashpoint are supposed to be escapist? What I'm getting at is that too often, crazy, nonsensical stuff seeps into realism-centered games because the developers are so used to them. I mean, it's sad when, in Brothers in Arms, a game based on a true story, you have a magical compass/radar built into your vision.

[DeadAwake]

So, what you're saying is, the military employs training simulators to "escape from reality"?

Absolutely.  It's quite obvious when you consider the alternative is TAKING BULLETS TO THE HEAD.

[Glorb]

Excuse me, what? The military employs training simulators so that you don't get shot in the head! That's why they're called training simulators and not, say, Super Mario Kart.

So, operating on the same logic, when I grow up and have kids (possibly), I could just lock them in a room and force them to play Paperboy all day in leu of actual bike riding, because you could get scraped real bad riding a bike?

[DeadAwake]

Excuse me, what? The military employs training simulators so that you don't get shot in the head!

Exactly!  That's the reality of war:  bullets to the head!  So in this case the military employs a simulation to escape reality--which is what you somehow contorted into an argument in the opposite direction.

[SolidShroom]

(I didn't know this argument was over what I said)
Anyway, of course games are escaping from reality! Reality is fun sometimes, but come on! Look at SMB! Can you run around outside, bash bricks on your head and eat mushrooms that make you bigger?! Or the GTA series. It seems fun to steal cars and shoot people without anything worse than a game over.
Also, training simulators in the army are supposed to be realistic, but do you really want to play them for fun. That's what the difference between "Video Games" and "Training Simulators".



 

So, operating on the same logic, when I grow up and have kids (possibly), I could just lock them in a room and force them to play Paperboy all day in leu of actual bike riding, because you could get scraped real bad riding a bike?

Ask yourself, would a scrape kill you? The army doesn't want to sacrifice soldiers to train them. I doubt you want America's army either a) going out with no experience to become fodder, or b) Training on eachother, which would kill innocent men that could be invaluable to the fight.

[Glorb]

Yes, but the way DeadAwake (whom I don't have any beef with) was putting it earlier, he said that training simulators were to escape from reality and be played as a game, which is not true. It's meant to prepare them for reality. Not once did I say they should train with live weapons on each other (but the military is training with paintball-style programs, by the way); in fact, I completely condone the use of training simulators, because they can be a more efficient method of traing. of course, you'd still need live experience in most siuations, but it would help with remembering squad tactics.