RMWeb Gamer's Lounge.

[Guest]

13 hours ago, scottystitch said:

And sometimes real life is grim enough, without immersing ourselves in artificial grimness as well.

 

Ages ago I bought 'This War Is Mine' where you play as a civilian not as a soldier.

It got very very good reviews but I've never been in the right mood to play it.

[scottystitch]

15 hours ago, Classsix T said:

Absolutely. I adore well presented art Scott, but I won't align myself with a particular genre of any of the arts willy nilly. I'll watch, view, play or listen to any of it once, form a personal opinion and either walk away or embrace it fully. There's no such thing as bad art because it is literally a subjective topic.

Subsequently, there isn't a great deal of Opera, Stage Musicals or Ballet I've got time for!

But of course a phenomenally well executed masterpiece will stand the test of time and let's face it, Once Upon A Time In The West is up there for many reasons. 

 

My personal favourite Fonda performance though is in Fail Safe, if you've not seen it do. It's a corker.

 

C6T. 

 

I have seen Fail Safe, hence my "arguably". Fail safe was a very good movie, but I lean towards Dr Strangelove. George C Scott's performance in that is also up there with the best.

 

Best

 

Scott

[scottystitch]

13 hours ago, Classsix T said:

I to some degree can see why Scott and Reorte might think this way, however I am of the belief gaming is a pressure release valve from real life and further, you've a choice in gaming that life does not offer. I often get consternated watching the TV news but games are fiction right? 

I absolutely know real life can be pretty crummy, so why not occasionally immerse yourself in virtual escapism with no culpability beyond the trophies or whatever? 

 

It shouldn't ever go beyond that however and the young especially need to be made aware that real life still goes on and has to be dealt with. Games can be a nice timeout but should never become a replacement, that way lies addiction.

C6T. 

To a point.

 

Gaming can be escapism, the problems occur when reality encroaches on the escapism. Or the gamers frame of mind is such that gaming becomes unhelpful to their situation.

 

SPOILER SPOILER    Take the latest COD Modern Warfare. There is a scene, when the embassy is under siege and a villian, trying to get the occupants to open the door for him, holds a woman up with a gun to her head. When the player doesn't unlock the door he executes her. He then grabs the woman's child and puts him in the same position. failure to unlock the door leads to the boys execution. All in front of you, the player. It's a game, it's pixels, it's not real. But that's not escapism, that's realism,  that's real life. People do that.   Open up a newspaper dealing in world events, this stuff is happening every day.  And so if you're already in a low frame of mind or your tired of reading, hearing, seeing such events, it can be a real downer to find it in your game.  It's just not the same as shooting a Tango from 200 yards. When you're in a good place, it's less of a problem.  SPOILER END

 

I take the point about the school game, but the issue we're really discussing, and what I think Reorte was discussing (i apologise if I'm way off the mark Reorte) is not what games make you or turn you into. Playing Fifa doesn't make me want to be a footballer. Playing Hitman doesn't make me want to go out and assassinate people. Playing "No Russian" in MW2 doesn't make me want to commit mass murder. It's not what it makes you do, it's how it makes you FEEL. 

 

How a game makes you feel also amplifies how you are feeling before you pick up the controller. In that respect we have a duty to ourselves to recognise what frame of mind we're in before we start. Do I have the emotional strength to play this game today? If not I'll bang on FIFA.

 

I don't know if any of this makes any sense to anyone. For anyone who goes through life and doesn't recognise any of what I've said above

 

I'm a big fan of a number of gangster films. Goodfellas, Casino, The Departed, etc.  But on at least one occasion I've had to switch off. A scene in Casino where Pesci has a cheater's head in a vice. I just couldn't watch it. The sheer barbarism and cruelty of it.   But it was because I approached the film on that occasion already feeling less than tickety boo. Throw it on today, and the black comedy of Pesci's dialogue will shine through once again. Gaming is the same. But it can be hard. I still haven't managed to see Joker because I'm aware of how much of a difficult watch it can be. For a lot of people that's no problem, go in, watch the film, emote, walk out and everything is right as rain. But for others, it's not so easy.

 

Sorry for the long ramble.

 

Best

 

Scott

[Classsix T]

I think you're right on the money actually Scott, what's more, better put than my ramble. 

 

There's a particular scene in El Salvador (James Woods) that left an indelible imprint in my head and I'll have trouble watching again whatever mood I'm in. I'll certainly feel differently about films in particular when the line between fact and fiction (eg bio-pic's and documentary dramatisations) are blurred. 

 

The only time something similar has happened in gameplay for me is Trevor's torture "mission" in GTAV. Even I thought it possibly a step too far and asked my friends if they felt the same, "It's just a game." was the unanimous response.

I go to the cinema quite often these days with my elder sister who watches certain scenes through her fingers (whilst I'm chuckling away). 

 

I suppose all any of this proves is that we all have different mental thresholds of acceptability? For instance COD:MW isn't a game I ever intend to play, but I've heard enough about it that if I ever did all I'd be thinking is "anti-Russian propaganda" over and over. 

 

I'm not a person susceptible to moods in the first place though (detached some might say) so whilst I might not be affected by many games and movies I fully respect your point of view, there is no right or wrong and this discussion is I believe a helpful education, certainly to me.

 

C6T. 

[MJI]

In games I don't mind shooting enemies if they are shooting at you.

 

But I had trouble in Farcry2 where you had to kill one person. It just felt wrong.

[scottystitch]

C6T

 

I don't think I've seen El Salvador.

 

There is a scene in Syriana (George Clooney) where George's character is being tortured by having his fingernails removed. It's very graphic.  I switched off and never tried watching it again, so I haven't seen the film because of that.  I was in a pretty good frame of mind then as well.  I guess there are just some things that no matter what, one can't do.

 

The Torture scene in GTA V is another good example. For the record, I'm in your camp.  It went too far. Actually, ditto the scene where he kills his "friend" and his wife at the beach apartment. You don't see that happening, but the implication is probably more horrifying.  There was no hesitation in my mind at the end of GTA V to betray Trevor.

 

The latter reminded me of the the murder Tarantino's character commits at the Motel in From Dusk 'til Dawn.  Very, very, disturbing.

 

Best

 

Scott.

 

[Classsix T]

El Salvador is much like The Killing Fields in tone, worth a look but er, yeah, heavy going. 

 

C6T. 

[Classsix T]

4 hours ago, MJI said:

In games I don't mind shooting enemies if they are shooting at you.

 

But I had trouble in Farcry2 where you had to kill one person. It just felt wrong.

Similarly, in Deus Ex I'd knock out the civvies but had no qualms plugging security/police goons. Do unto others etc. dude!

On the one hand, hacking turrets and sentry 'bots and watching them dispatch the baddies for you brings a twisted pleasure. However, attaining the 'Pacifist' trophy also brings me an immense amount of satisfaction so I will happily play it twice using alternative combat styles.

 

Never played a Farcry title, but the premise of Just Cause (pick a number) just makes no sense to me whatsoever. I'm told this is an evil military junta so pop over there and kill and destroy as much as you can (for personal fiscal gain mind you) to create a power vacuum we can exploit. 

I'm sorry, that's just too close to actual US and CIA policy towards their neighbours to the south for me to stomach. Art imitating life, you betcha.

 

C6T. 

[SouthernRegionSteam]

I thought I'd like to add a little bit to this discussion, and I hope people understand where I'm coming from, even if they don't agree. Anyway!...

 

For me the whole purpose of gaming is definitely escapism. Whilst I can see how some people may be able to relate to some characters in games to some degree, and yes, the GTA5 torture mission was... somewhat difficult to watch at times, I cannot understand how people can take any game and equate it to real life. There is just no comparing the two. I'm not targeting anyone here, but it's similar to how some people blame gaming for awful crimes... there is absolutely no link found between the two, and it hurts me to see these comparisons.

 

Anyway, my point is that whilst some games may try and strive for realism, none of them make it all the way. Whilst I haven't played RDR2, I have seen an entire playthrough. It's painful to see how some aspects are clearly intended to be realistic (skinning animals etc), yet they leave other aspects as gamey mechanics (dead-eye, anyone?!). This is to try and cater for as big as market as possible, I'm almost sure of it; especially when you consider how many times R*/Take-Two sell their games on multiple platforms, and also considering their vast sales figures. It doesn't take a genius to work out that some parts are definitely "dumbed-down" in order to cater for a larger audience. I also noticed this particularly in Ghost Recon: Wildlands; where the helicopter and car controls are so arcadey it really is a kick in the teeth to people like me who would've expected more from it.

 

Simply put, there's a very difficult balance between making a game realistic, and catering for as many people as possible. I don't really see NPCs as people (although oddly enough, I prefer not to steal cars with people in them in GTA; most strange, I know!), so it is very rare that I feel "bad" for "killing" them, no matter the context. That said, games affect people in different ways, including tolerance levels. So... as long as you're enjoying it, keep on playing! I don't take games too seriously, as that is bound to cause issues!

Edit: As for Just Cause; it's mindless mayhem, and whilst it can get very repetitive, it's cheesy and fun to goof around and create havoc! If you're reading into the premise and story too much, I can understand how you'd be put off!

Edited November 28, 2019 by SouthernRegionSteam

[Classsix T]

I'm glad you've joined in SRS because we've discussed similar issues earlier in the Lounge, particularly with regards to Just Cause. 

 

What I didn't understand at first about Scott (and Reorte's) point of view was that it seemed incomprehensible to myself. I do now Scott has explained it so well but I think with respect you've yet to appreciate is that not everyone shares the same perception of games as everyone else. 

 

Scott specifically pointed out that it wasn't a question of playing CoD and shooting up a school (that's a proven lax mental health/gun law issue, no evidence has linked such to video games) more he points out, in broad terms (correct me if I'm mistaken Scott) if he's feeling a bit glum, he don't want to be playing a game which might amplify his mood for the negative. 

Hard to argue with that even though you and I might be unaffected by such things.

 

C6T. 

[SouthernRegionSteam]

Oh, absolutely.  Trust me, I understand that completely! I run a friend's Discord server (who is an indie dev), and the sheer variety of opinions, expectations, and perceptions is something that took me initially by surprise. And that's just in a relatively niche gaming community.

Everyone is different, and what might affect others, won't necesarrily be the same for anyone else, nor will it be the same for every time that person played that game. If I'm feeling down, quite often I'll focus only on fun multiplayer games that I can play with friends, not delve into something more serious in singleplayer. I can see how some things may hit too close to home if you're not in the best moods, which is partly why I never took gaming seriously (as it was meant to be an escape), although for more serious matters in games, they are best avoided completely at such times. If you're not feeling 100%, and you play something with serious themes, I can absolutely get how people could be affected by that, or how it would worsen their mood. For me, it's all about picking the "right" game to begin with, although I can appreciate this may be difficult if you've not played a certain game before, and didn't know what to expect from it!

[Classsix T]

2 minutes ago, SouthernRegionSteam said:

Oh, absolutely.  Trust me, I understand that completely! I run a friend's Discord server (who is an indie dev), and the sheer variety of opinions, expectations, and perceptions is something that took me initially by surprise. And that's just in a relatively niche gaming community.

Everyone is different, and what might affect others, won't necesarrily be the same for anyone else, nor will it be the same for every time that person played that game. If I'm feeling down, quite often I'll focus only on fun multiplayer games that I can play with friends, not delve into something more serious in singleplayer. I can see how some things may hit too close to home if you're not in the best moods, which is partly why I never took gaming seriously (as it was meant to be an escape), although for more serious matters in games, they are best avoided completely at such times. If you're not feeling 100%, and you play something with serious themes, I can absolutely get how people could be affected by that, or how it would worsen their mood. For me, it's all about picking the "right" game to begin with, although I can appreciate this may be difficult if you've not played a certain game before, and didn't know what to expect from it!

Aha...that's more or less what Scott actually said. That's not a criticism BTW, because when I read his post involving COD:MW I initially disregarded it (sorry Scott) but came around to the brutal realisation, y'know, he's got a point. 

 

C6T. 

[SouthernRegionSteam]

Absolutely; it's all to easy to disregard something that you've never really experienced before (I've done it on numerous occasions!). That said, something that comes to mind when picking the CoD:MW example that Scotty mentioned, was that if there is a genuine "need/reason" for such a scene to exist, then that is not necesarrily a bad thing (although I can easily see how it would negatively effect some people!). If by having that (obviously rather brutal) scene in the game, you have proved a point, and set the tone for the rest of the game (and it's what people would expect based on trailers etc), I think it is potentially a worthy risk for the developers. However, I really can't see this being the case for CoD... at all!

 

As an aside (although still relevant), I can't stand the CoD series; just on morals and price point alone. I did however play the CoD: MW open beta, my first experience of CoD, which was surprisingly enjoyable solely because it was utter mayhem with friends. I would never buy it though, as it's not really a series I feel I *should* spend my hard-earned money on, nor would I get as much out of it as I did with the open beta because no one I know would ever buy it (not even kidding!). But I digress...

[Classsix T]

18 minutes ago, SouthernRegionSteam said:

As an aside (although still relevant), I can't stand the CoD series; just on morals and price point alone. I did however play the CoD: MW open beta, my first experience of CoD, which was surprisingly enjoyable solely because it was utter mayhem with friends. I would never buy it though, as it's not really a series I feel I *should* spend my hard-earned money on, nor would I get as much out of it as I did with the open beta because no one I know would ever buy it (not even kidding!). But I digress...

But maybe your youth betrays you young man. You point out that you will engage in the beta of CoD but not the released game? 

 

How does that figure sunshine? 

 

 

I'm pulling your chain, do whatever. 

 

C6T. 

[SouthernRegionSteam]

I often get ID'd, so apparently I'm a few years older than I look! I realise you're half-joking, but...

For what it's worth, I never intended to play the beta; it was only because a friend pointed out that we might as well try and enjoy a free game night that we hopped on (when it was actually working!).
CoD is one of those series that never seems to really try and push the boat out or try many new things. Aside from my general stingy nature, a game has to really offer something amazing or innovative if it is to part me of a lot of money... and considering they manage to pump out a new CoD every year...! I'm afraid that CoD is a series that just doesn't interest me enough, and at times I never know how seriously it is trying to be (remember the "F to pay respects" thing!). I'm also not really a fan of the gunplay (which, let's face it, is a HUGE part of the game!). I'm much more of an Arma/DayZ kinda guy where gunplay is concerned (aahh, lovely bullet drop, and at times clunky raw gameplay etc), and I'm definitely no close-combat nor twitchy shooter; both of which are characteristics of CoD. Perhaps I've been heavily influenced by my friends, but I genuinely don't consider CoD to be a gaming experience that I look for.

 

[Classsix T]

Right, I was being somewhat flippant for which I apologise, but I get where you're coming from. 

 

CoD has to some extent become an uncontrollable juggernaut. It never has appealed to me personally but makes a shed load of money through fans of the franchise, fair play and I can see why it ticks some people's boxes, but nah, not for me. 

 

C6T. 

[Classsix T]

Stepping aside from the topic du jour for a moment, one of December's PSN "freebies" is Titanfall 2 which looks interesting. Anyone care to opine? 

 

C6T. 

[big jim]

Regards the Lidl £129 Xbox one s, a lot of shops today have the same deal so it’s worth a look round depending on your brand loyalties and store cards 

 

i have bought one from Argos on eBay via the TopCashback website, by combining offers I’ve managed to get 6 x nectar points via eBay so 780 points (£3.90 worth) and TopCashback is offering 4.5 cash back which nets me £5.85 so it near as dammit takes £9.75 off the total price, it all adds up!

 

ill put the new one in the man cave and migrate the 2tb one to the living room to use with the 4K TV I bought a few months back (that’s still in its box until we decorate!! 

[scottystitch]

16 hours ago, SouthernRegionSteam said:

I thought I'd like to add a little bit to this discussion, and I hope people understand where I'm coming from, even if they don't agree. Anyway!...

 

For me the whole purpose of gaming is definitely escapism. Whilst I can see how some people may be able to relate to some characters in games to some degree, and yes, the GTA5 torture mission was... somewhat difficult to watch at times, I cannot understand how people can take any game and equate it to real life. There is just no comparing the two. I'm not targeting anyone here, but it's similar to how some people blame gaming for awful crimes... there is absolutely no link found between the two, and it hurts me to see these comparisons.

 

Anyway, my point is that whilst some games may try and strive for realism, none of them make it all the way. Whilst I haven't played RDR2, I have seen an entire playthrough. It's painful to see how some aspects are clearly intended to be realistic (skinning animals etc), yet they leave other aspects as gamey mechanics (dead-eye, anyone?!). This is to try and cater for as big as market as possible, I'm almost sure of it; especially when you consider how many times R*/Take-Two sell their games on multiple platforms, and also considering their vast sales figures. It doesn't take a genius to work out that some parts are definitely "dumbed-down" in order to cater for a larger audience. I also noticed this particularly in Ghost Recon: Wildlands; where the helicopter and car controls are so arcadey it really is a kick in the teeth to people like me who would've expected more from it.

 

Simply put, there's a very difficult balance between making a game realistic, and catering for as many people as possible. I don't really see NPCs as people (although oddly enough, I prefer not to steal cars with people in them in GTA; most strange, I know!), so it is very rare that I feel "bad" for "killing" them, no matter the context. That said, games affect people in different ways, including tolerance levels. So... as long as you're enjoying it, keep on playing! I don't take games too seriously, as that is bound to cause issues!

Edit: As for Just Cause; it's mindless mayhem, and whilst it can get very repetitive, it's cheesy and fun to goof around and create havoc! If you're reading into the premise and story too much, I can understand how you'd be put off!

 

When I play FIFA, being an Arsenal supporter, for my sins, I can recognise each and every player on the pitch, not just from their facial representation, but also, in some cases, they way the move.

 

So realism comes in different forms. The player I'm looking at clearly isn't Lacazette, but it's realistic enough that most football fans would be able to pick him out of a FIFA identity parade alongside Ronaldo, Messi, et al.

 

So, let's go back to the CoD execution example and instead of a random facial representation that you have never seen in real life (although presumably the faces in these games are based on real faces), instead of that stranger's face, it's the recognisable facial representation of your mother, your father, brother, sister, dog, cat................ I think you're feeling about such a scene would change. At the very least it would make you uncomfortable I think, even though it's not real and it's just a digital representation, and you're not taking the game too seriously. When confronted with that situation, would it still be escapism?

 

What if you were in a car crash that you were lucky to be alive from. And then you play a game, maybe a FPP game which involved you being in a particularly graphic car crash, with a first person perspective. It clearly wouldn't be real, but I'd bet my house, you'd feel something other than escapism.

 

My point is, everyone has their line in the sand. And that's before we throw in the complications of emotional and mental state of mind. It sounds like you probably haven't found yours yet (line in the sand, that is), and that's not a criticism, I actually envy you to a point.

 

I repeat, it's not what the game makes you do it's how it makes you feel.

 

Best

 

Scott

 

 

 

 

[scottystitch]

1 hour ago, big jim said:

Regards the Lidl £129 Xbox one s, a lot of shops today have the same deal so it’s worth a look round depending on your brand loyalties and store cards 

 

i have bought one from Argos on eBay via the TopCashback website, by combining offers I’ve managed to get 6 x nectar points via eBay so 780 points (£3.90 worth) and TopCashback is offering 4.5 cash back which nets me £5.85 so it near as dammit takes £9.75 off the total price, it all adds up!

 

ill put the new one in the man cave and migrate the 2tb one to the living room to use with the 4K TV I bought a few months back (that’s still in its box until we decorate!! 

I'd never really considered having two identical consoles in different parts of the house. Neat idea. I do have my PS3 set up in the mancave, however, and the PS4 in the den.

[scottystitch]

4 hours ago, Classsix T said:

Stepping aside from the topic du jour for a moment, one of December's PSN "freebies" is Titanfall 2 which looks interesting. Anyone care to opine? 

 

C6T. 

I saw that, but it was the motocross game I was considering. I haven't gone to look at any reviews yet.

 

Titanfall isn't my kind of thing at all, so I can't really comment.

 

Speaking of which, my renewal must be due soon..............

[Reorte]

17 hours ago, SouthernRegionSteam said:

Anyway, my point is that whilst some games may try and strive for realism, none of them make it all the way. Whilst I haven't played RDR2, I have seen an entire playthrough. It's painful to see how some aspects are clearly intended to be realistic (skinning animals etc), yet they leave other aspects as gamey mechanics (dead-eye, anyone?!). This is to try and cater for as big as market as possible, I'm almost sure of it; especially when you consider how many times R*/Take-Two sell their games on multiple platforms, and also considering their vast sales figures. It doesn't take a genius to work out that some parts are definitely "dumbed-down" in order to cater for a larger audience. I also noticed this particularly in Ghost Recon: Wildlands; where the helicopter and car controls are so arcadey it really is a kick in the teeth to people like me who would've expected more from it.

 

Realism vs. gameplay is a question of balance. The ideal game is 100% realistic and still great to play but there's a degree of being mutually exclusive there. Take any game with shooting - one hit and even if it doesn't kill you you'll be out of it for a while if it was completely realistic. And there's no realistic situation where you'll spend as high a proportion of your time shooting. So the question is just what sacrifices do you make of realism in exchange for good gameplay? My preference is usually "as few as possible", but which ones will still be subjective. If we stick to the RDR2 example a lot of people have complained about the controls being sluggish and unresponsive. There were similar complaints about The Witcher 3, which ended up being provided with an alternative control scheme. Personally speaking I'm fine with both, because they were the result of making the player character move more like a human being, and human beings can't stop and start or change direction in an instant. We have momentum. And it helps with the verisimilitude and willing suspension of disbelief. But then again in that type of game I'm trying to pretend it's real - the willing suspension of disbelief again, so anything that helps that is a plus. Although that has its limits - I doubt I find a game enhanced if I had to go to the toilet in it.

 

That's all if you're not deliberately creating a flat-out arcadey game from the start of course.

[MJI]

15 hours ago, SouthernRegionSteam said:

Absolutely; it's all to easy to disregard something that you've never really experienced before (I've done it on numerous occasions!). That said, something that comes to mind when picking the CoD:MW example that Scotty mentioned, was that if there is a genuine "need/reason" for such a scene to exist, then that is not necesarrily a bad thing (although I can easily see how it would negatively effect some people!). If by having that (obviously rather brutal) scene in the game, you have proved a point, and set the tone for the rest of the game (and it's what people would expect based on trailers etc), I think it is potentially a worthy risk for the developers. However, I really can't see this being the case for CoD... at all!

 

As an aside (although still relevant), I can't stand the CoD series; just on morals and price point alone. I did however play the CoD: MW open beta, my first experience of CoD, which was surprisingly enjoyable solely because it was utter mayhem with friends. I would never buy it though, as it's not really a series I feel I *should* spend my hard-earned money on, nor would I get as much out of it as I did with the open beta because no one I know would ever buy it (not even kidding!). But I digress...

 

CoD

 

Well I have had "discussions" with fans of the series, they claim to be the elite of FPS players.

 

I have heard them cry with sadness, was a long time ago in PS3 era. My favourite PS3 MP game was Killzone 3, I was actually good at it, good like top 0.5% good.

 

It is a slow game, cannot win by charging around, need to use tactics. Many players were older gamers as slow movement = time to plan. (High gravity world)

 

One weekend PSN offered the MP only as a freebie.  MP only version played with the full version, and of course we knew it all because we had beaten the campaign on hardest difficulty, then played MP for about a year. All that bravado disappears when the CoD masters get totally wiped, I remember going 36:0 and 31:1 or 2.

 

And I was using motion controls! Lots of us did, aiming was so accurate and fast, point and shoot. The 31:1 or 2 was only a death because I ran out of ammo (playing Marksman with VC32 & STA52). I still had a 30 streak. The 36 was because fully upleveled Tactician in an LS209 Exoskeleton against unleveled.

 

FPS skills do not carry across games with different controls and movements. But I enjoyed upsetting the CoD "masterrace"

[MJI]

18 hours ago, Classsix T said:

Similarly, in Deus Ex I'd knock out the civvies but had no qualms plugging security/police goons. Do unto others etc. dude!

On the one hand, hacking turrets and sentry 'bots and watching them dispatch the baddies for you brings a twisted pleasure. However, attaining the 'Pacifist' trophy also brings me an immense amount of satisfaction so I will happily play it twice using alternative combat styles.

 

Never played a Farcry title, but the premise of Just Cause (pick a number) just makes no sense to me whatsoever. I'm told this is an evil military junta so pop over there and kill and destroy as much as you can (for personal fiscal gain mind you) to create a power vacuum we can exploit. 

I'm sorry, that's just too close to actual US and CIA policy towards their neighbours to the south for me to stomach. Art imitating life, you betcha.

 

C6T. 

 

I liked 2 and 4, 3 was OK but played as a Yank brat, 2 was a choice of characters.

 

Farcry 2 had some interestig Do-Bos and carriages with incompatible couplings.

https://farcry.fandom.com/wiki/North_Railyard

 

 

https://gamebanana.com/maps/182611

 

I really wanted to model these!

 

 

[SouthernRegionSteam]

Great points, everyone!
On the subject of railways being represented in games... oh my...
My (non railway enthusiast) friends find it hilarious that I get annoyed at, what is to me, glaring faults of railway portrayals in games.
I know, I know, it's only a game, but there are numerous things I always notice that I can't unsee:

From the usual lack of bothering to model any gaps in pointwork (i.e. just overlaying two tracks to represent a point), to missing chairs, square section rail... I could list a million things here!
I suppose I'm being unreasonable, but when the rest of the game can look fantastic, it really ruins it for me. A case in point is, again, Ghost Recon: Wildlands. (Ignoring the fact that trains/wagons disappear before they have left the edges of your screen, and bogies that turn 90 degrees when reasonably far away due to LoD), one thing that boggled my mind was a particular rail yard:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1193996484

I've heard of hump shunting before, but surely this is taking it to extremes!
I'll be interested to see/hear if any of you also can't help but notice these things.

Edit: Oh, and whilst I'm sharing my screenshots, here's a physics test of the indestructible railway physics in games (again, happens to be Wildlands, but could easily be GTA5!):
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=911079359

Edited November 29, 2019 by SouthernRegionSteam