Race Sim Central
Rec.Autos.Simulators Archive

OT: Modding other types of sims

26 posts by 11 people · 31 Jan 2005 18:47 UTC - 04 Feb 2005 06:03 UTC

Are other game genres modded as much as racing sims?

A poster asked whether genres other than racing sims had big mod communities. Others pointed out that FPS games had huge mod scenes, such as Counter-Strike for Half-Life. The thread then became a long exchange between Eric Tetz and alexti about whether immersion in FPS games is comparable to sim racing.

off-topicmods/tracks/cars

Automated summary.

mcewena 31 Jan 2005 18:47 UTC#25934
Releasing mods of racing sims has gone on since at least GP2 & ICR2, now it's almost a sign of respect (if it's not good enough for somebody to release a Mod it's probably not worth buying). Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing sims? It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to add more weapons, blood), nor the treasure hunting type games. Probably the flight sims. Please no philosophical/moral debates, just idle curiosity here.
BF '42 is modded to hell, & other 1st person shooters, but I dont know what they are actually changing, except I think "certain era" weapons and maps. so I guess this would equal "engines, grip & tracks" for certain series in racing? But then again, since the guy still can only run, jump, or crawl the same default speeds, I cant say they change the main "physics" that much (LOL), more like change the graffix of the "death" due to effects of different weapons? (kinda same as the CUP damage add on from papy?) I could see both sides of this arguement, I just took this one for brevity. LOL my opinion anywho... mcewena enlightened us with:
Quoted text (13 lines)> Releasing mods of racing sims has gone on since at least GP2 & ICR2, > now it's almost a sign of respect (if it's not good enough for > somebody to release a Mod it's probably not worth buying). > > Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing sims? > It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. > > I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to > add more weapons, blood), > nor the treasure hunting type games. > > Probably the flight sims. > Please no philosophical/moral debates, just idle curiosity here.
JP 31 Jan 2005 19:02 UTC↳ reply to mcewena#25936
"mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (14 lines)> Releasing mods of racing sims has gone on since at least GP2 & ICR2, > now it's almost a sign of respect (if it's not good enough for somebody > to release a Mod it's probably not worth buying). > > Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing sims? > It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. > > I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to add > more weapons, blood), > nor the treasure hunting type games. > > Probably the flight sims. > Please no philosophical/moral debates, just idle curiosity here. >
Every type of gaming software has mods. Most of them have a *lot*.
JP 31 Jan 2005 19:02 UTC#532377
Every type of *** software has mods. Most of them have a *lot*.
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > > I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering > Dude, seriously, expand your horizons. The above statement seems a *little* sheltered. MRSisson -- LOAD "GPL",8 SEARCHING FOR GPL LOADING READY. RUN
No way, any time I spend in another genre just hurts my gplrank score ;) I readily admit I'm speaking from near total ignorance of 1st person shooters, (I'm the wrong side of 40 to get hooked now), I imagine guys are changing guns and maybe cheating. In plowboy's analogy that's sort of like changing car skins and swapping engines. Are there people busy taking a WW2 shooter and moving it to WWI Vimy ridge complete with different AI, terrain and weapons? To stretch the analogy it would be like starting with NR2003 and producing the Ferrari 330 mod. If so, cool.
: I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd : bothering (un­less to add more weapons, blood) Um, FPS have had huge mod scenes since before GPL was a glimmer in Papy's eye. The most popular online action game for the past 5 years running is an FPS mod. If you don't like/understand the genre, fine, but don't be an ass about it. FPS and simulators are my two favorite genres, and this coincidence is not uncommon. They both create immersive 'virtual reality' experiences, typically in first person (FPS by definition, sims by choice). FPS are fundamentally 3D playgrounds, giving you virtual presence in a virtual environment, in first person, with the freedom to move and look around as you would in real life. The most popular ones are competitive, pitting human players against each other in an exercise of hand-eye coordination, tactical intelligence, resource management, and the ability to skillfully navigate a 3D environment -- many of the same reasons I like to race. It's not about guns and blood.
I did what? You said MODs, I took that to mean files you download like you do to run like we did BGN, or CTS as in MODS. You equated this to cheating? you bastard! <g> I tried BF 1942 and COD, played them less than 4 hours apiece, after at the time downloading for 5 hours to join the "map" my racing buddies were playing. mcewena enlightened us with:
Quoted text (14 lines)> No way, any time I spend in another genre just hurts my gplrank score > ;) > > I readily admit I'm speaking from near total ignorance of 1st person > shooters, (I'm the wrong side of 40 to get hooked now), I imagine guys > are changing guns and maybe cheating. In plowboy's analogy that's > sort of like changing car skins and swapping engines. > > Are there people busy taking a WW2 shooter and moving it to WWI Vimy > ridge complete with different AI, terrain and weapons? To stretch > the analogy it would be like starting with NR2003 and producing the > Ferrari 330 mod. > > If so, cool.
>It's not about guns and blood. No doubt, but what sort of things do they change from the published version? Era? that would be more or less cosmetic, not trivial be not the equivelant of a physics change. Add on scenarios/landscapes? Sort of like adding a track I guess.
"mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing sims? > It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. > > I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to add > more weapons, blood), Counter-strike was basically a fan mod for Half Life, right? Tim -- ---------------- Criticizing the current administration is a treasonable offence! The dept of "Homeland Security" has been informed of your activities and will arrive shortly to pick you up. Please wrap a towel around your head and stand out in front of your home with a burning US flag so they can find you. - smithdoer - Usenet out-take Currently listening to: 'Creep' - Radiohead
"Eric Tetz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... : I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd : bothering (un�less to add more weapons, blood) Um, FPS have had huge mod scenes since before GPL was a glimmer in Papy's eye. The most popular online action game for the past 5 years running is an FPS mod. If you don't like/understand the genre, fine, but don't be an ass about it. FPS and simulators are my two favorite genres, and this coincidence is not uncommon. They both create immersive 'virtual reality' experiences, typically in first person (FPS by definition, sims by choice). FPS are fundamentally 3D playgrounds, giving you virtual presence in a virtual environment, in first person, with the freedom to move and look around as you would in real life. The most popular ones are competitive, pitting human players against each other in an exercise of hand-eye coordination, tactical intelligence, resource management, and the ability to skillfully navigate a 3D environment -- many of the same reasons I like to race. It's not about guns and blood. Wasn't "Counterstrike", a fairly popular web FPS ;) , just a mod ? Elrikk
: No doubt, but what sort of things do they change : from the published version? Era? That would be more : or less cosmetic, not trivial but not the : equivalent of a physics change. Add on : scenarios/landscapes? Sort of like adding a track I : guess. The FPS world distinguishes between regular "mods", which may involve new maps, sounds, character, weapons, gameplay mechanics, etc. but will reuse existing elements -- and so-called "total conversions", where virtually everything is changed. The aforementioned "most popular online game" is Counterstrike, one of many total conversions for Half-Life. Half-Life is a cinematic, science-fiction action/adventure game about a scientist escaping from a lab facility where an experiment has gone horribly wrong (great game, BTW). Counterstrike is an online-only military combat game with goal oriented team play featuring realistic weapons and weapon damage. All new maps, characters, sounds, weapons (and other items), physics, and encompassing game structure. Another Half-Life mod called "team fortress" features entirely different character classes with unique abilities, such as snipers, engineers, medics, etc. There are tons of mods for Half-Life, and it's one of many FPS with large mod scenes.
"Helicon_One" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ctmf8s$9l4$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (22 lines)> "mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing sims? > > It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. > > > > I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to add > > more weapons, blood), > > Counter-strike was basically a fan mod for Half Life, right? > > Tim > -- > ---------------- > Criticizing the current administration is a treasonable offence! > The dept of "Homeland Security" has been informed of your > activities and will arrive shortly to pick you up. Please wrap > a towel around your head and stand out in front of your home > with a burning US flag so they can find you. > - smithdoer - Usenet out-take > > Currently listening to: 'Creep' - Radiohead
LOL. Some nitwit just said five minutes ago that they were reporting me to the secret service for something I posted about bush on a forum, and that they would be coming to take me away in handcuffs. This country has gone fu**ng nuts. :-) -- David G Fisher
"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (10 lines)> > "Helicon_One" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ctmf8s$9l4$[email hidden]... > > "mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing sims? > > > It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. > > > > > > I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to
add
Quoted text (13 lines)> > > more weapons, blood), > > > > Counter-strike was basically a fan mod for Half Life, right? > > > > Tim > > -- > > ---------------- > > Criticizing the current administration is a treasonable offence! > > The dept of "Homeland Security" has been informed of your > > activities and will arrive shortly to pick you up. Please wrap > > a towel around your head and stand out in front of your home > > with a burning US flag so they can find you. > > - smithdoer - Usenet
out-take
Quoted text (12 lines)> > > > Currently listening to: 'Creep' - Radiohead > > LOL. > > Some nitwit just said five minutes ago that they were reporting me to the > secret service for something I posted about bush on a forum, and that they > would be coming to take me away in handcuffs. > > This country has gone fu**ng nuts. :-) > -- > David G Fisher
Hehe, if so, answer me this; - under Clinton and Reno, we had the Idaho Incident, the Texas Barbecue, and the Florida Fiasco, to name a few. Under Bush et al, we've had what that is like the above ?
In article <[email hidden]> Helicon_One <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted text (11 lines)> >"mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... > >> Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing sims? >> It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. >> >> I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to add >> more weapons, blood), > >Counter-strike was basically a fan mod for Half Life, right?
About anything. >Tim It looks as though you're dead. Well, seeing as how it's so close to closing time anyway, I think we'll just call it a day. -- Lady Chatterly "You're not a bot" -- BuZzard
"Eric Tetz" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]: > FPS and simulators are my two favorite genres, and this coincidence is > not uncommon. They both create immersive 'virtual reality' experiences, > typically in first person (FPS by definition, sims by choice). FPS are > fundamentally 3D playgrounds, giving you virtual presence in a virtual > environment, in first person, with the freedom to move and look around > as you would in real life.That's something I find highly questionable. In real life you move using legs and feets (mostly), you look by turning your head or body or eyes. In FPS you emulate all that by complete artificial movements. It's a bit like sim-racing using a keyboard. If you master some FPS it will hardly help you to deal with similar activity with real life. Here I have no choice, but compare it to paintball as probably the only similar real life activity available to almost everybody. On the other hand in sim-racing, you do most everything like in real racing. You have the same controls, the main issue is the way you look, which is not a big issue in track racing, but is somewhat a bigger issue in rallying. Nevertheless, being good at sims, you can quite effortlessly sit in a real car/kart and do good laps (again, as something accessable I'm comparing it to karts, track days and auto slalom). Not that my point has anything to do with modding. Just that I question comparison of "immersiveness" in FPS and sim-racing. In FPS (like in text adventures, for example) "immersiveness" relies on your imagination. In sim-racing, what you do and what you see (but [fortunately] not what you feel) is very close to the real thing. Alex.
"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (10 lines)> > "Helicon_One" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ctmf8s$9l4$[email hidden]... > > "mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing sims? > > > It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. > > > > > > I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to
add
Quoted text (13 lines)> > > more weapons, blood), > > > > Counter-strike was basically a fan mod for Half Life, right? > > > > Tim > > -- > > ---------------- > > Criticizing the current administration is a treasonable offence! > > The dept of "Homeland Security" has been informed of your > > activities and will arrive shortly to pick you up. Please wrap > > a towel around your head and stand out in front of your home > > with a burning US flag so they can find you. > > - smithdoer - Usenet
out-take
Quoted text (12 lines)> > > > Currently listening to: 'Creep' - Radiohead > > LOL. > > Some nitwit just said five minutes ago that they were reporting me to the > secret service for something I posted about bush on a forum, and that they > would be coming to take me away in handcuffs. > > This country has gone fu**ng nuts. :-) > -- > David G Fisher
Ah ha!! So you confess! It will go better for your family now. Elrikk ;o)
"elrikk" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wlELd.38380$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (10 lines)> > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > "Helicon_One" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:ctmf8s$9l4$[email hidden]... > > > "mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > > Just curious, are other genres as frequently modified as racing
sims?
Quoted text (24 lines)> > > > It's been to long since I've had any other type of title installed. > > > > > > > > I can't imagine the first person shooter crowd bothering (unless to > add > > > > more weapons, blood), > > > > > > Counter-strike was basically a fan mod for Half Life, right? > > > > > > Tim > > > -- > > > ---------------- > > > Criticizing the current administration is a treasonable offence! > > > The dept of "Homeland Security" has been informed of your > > > activities and will arrive shortly to pick you up. Please wrap > > > a towel around your head and stand out in front of your home > > > with a burning US flag so they can find you. > > > - smithdoer - Usenet > out-take > > > > > > Currently listening to: 'Creep' - Radiohead > > > > LOL. > > > > Some nitwit just said five minutes ago that they were reporting me to
the > > secret service for something I posted about bush on a forum, and thatthey
Quoted text (10 lines)> > would be coming to take me away in handcuffs. > > > > This country has gone fu**ng nuts. :-) > > -- > > David G Fisher > > > Ah ha!! So you confess! It will go better for your family now. > > Elrikk ;o)
I could use a vacation. :-) -- David G Fisher
: I question comparison of "immersiveness" in FPS and : sim-racing. In FPS (like in text adventures, for : example) "immersiveness" relies on your imagination. "Immersive". adj. Pertaining to immersing or plunging into something. Being mentally drawn into a virtual environment has little to do with what your fingers or toes happening to be doing. The important factors for me (obviously it's somewhat subjective) are the first person perspective and the ability to look around freely as I would in real life. In fact, I find most FPS more immersive than racing games. Using 3D glasses and/or head tracking technology can make racing games even more immersive, for the same reason. By *your* definition, car and airplane sims are the only immersive games. They just happen to have a similarity between real-world and game-playing motions. : Nevertheless, being good at sims, you can quite : effortlessly sit in a real car/kart and do good laps I bet you could do nearly as well having practiced with only a mouse or a joystick, and not a wheel. The skills you are learning -- how to approach turns, when to brake and accelerate, etc. -- are somewhat independent of the input device. : In sim-racing, what you do and what you see (but : [fortunately] not what you feel) is very close to : the real thing. Not sim racing, *car* racing (unless you happen to have a full sized, motorcycle motion-simulator at home). ;)
>There are tons of mods for Half-Life­, and it's >one of many FPS with large mod scenes.ya learn something every day, thanks.
"Eric Tetz" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]:
Quoted text (12 lines)>: I question comparison of "immersiveness" in FPS and >: sim-racing. In FPS (like in text adventures, for >: example) "immersiveness" relies on your imagination. > > "Immersive". adj. Pertaining to immersing or plunging into something. > Being mentally drawn into a virtual environment has little to do with > what your fingers or toes happening to be doing. The important factors > for me (obviously it's somewhat subjective) are the first person > perspective and the ability to look around freely as I would in real > life. In fact, I find most FPS more immersive than racing games. Using > 3D glasses and/or head tracking technology can make racing games even > more immersive, for the same reason.
Sorry, english is not my native language, I thought that immersiveness can be measured and apply in different degrees... In any case you've brought "immersiveness" to show correlation between sim-racing and fps and I was questioning the logic of it, not your use of term immersive. Consider the following scheme: car racing sim: --------------- Computer implemented physics engine -> visuals and sound -> your "driving" brain paths -> movements of your arms and feet -> computer implemented physics engine real car racing --------------- Real physics -> visuals and sound and G-forces -> your "driving" brain paths -> movements of your arms and feet -> Real physics FPS --------------- Computer implemented physics engine -> visuals and sound -> you choose one of the action from offered by the game (I'd rather move that lamp to blind the enemy when he enters, but it's not implemented, so I will hide behind that crate instead) -> you translate desired action into the keyboard/mouse command that implements it -> computer reinterpretes your commands into the action -> Computer implemented physics engine Adventure --------------- Computer implemented physics engine -> visuals and sound -> you choose one of the action from offered by the game (I'd rather move that lamp to blind the enemy when he enters, but it's not implemented, so I will hide behind that crate instead) -> you translate desired action into the keyboard/mouse command that implements it -> computer reinterpretes your commands into the action -> Computer implemented physics engine So the flow paths in car-sim matches the flow path in a real driving, while the flow paths in FPS and adventure are the same and different from the one in car-sim. Both FPS and adventure (same for RPG) rely on person's imagination to achieve immersiveness, while car-sim don't. Actually, car-sims are enjoyable without immersiveness (because you can just enjoy the process of driving itself) You think that sim-racing and FPS [positively] correlate. That may be coming because there's a lot of people playing FPS, which means that you'll see many people who like sim-racing and FPS, unless there's a strong negative correlation (like if there was good reason for sim-racing fans to dislike FPS). > By *your* definition, car and airplane sims are the only immersive > games.Well, not sure what is the right term then, but they achieve somewhat different effects using significantly different methods than the other genres of the games. Actually, in this sense, computer board games (chess, go etc) are much closer to car/plane-sims in the way they operate. All of them provide very similar ways of interaction to real life and don't rely on imagination to create believable experience. > They just happen to have a similarity between real-world and > game-playing motions.I think that was done intentionally by the game developers ;)
Quoted text (7 lines)>: Nevertheless, being good at sims, you can quite >: effortlessly sit in a real car/kart and do good laps > > I bet you could do nearly as well having practiced with only a mouse or > a joystick, and not a wheel. The skills you are learning -- how to > approach turns, when to brake and accelerate, etc. -- are somewhat > independent of the input device.
Well, you can probably expand this logic so that the person who have watched plenty of tennis and played it well on the computer should have little problem to do well on a real courts. With all those athletic activities making your body do what you want is usually the main problem (unlike chess for example). Just think about how many people have difficulties when switching from a regular car to a sportcar that have much shorter pedal travel and tighter gears shifter. Or about people who have hard time to learn left foot braking. >: In sim-racing, what you do and what you see (but >: [fortunately] not what you feel) is very close to the real thing. > > Not sim racing, *car* racing (unless you happen to have a full sized, > motorcycle motion-simulator at home). ;)Right, that was car/kart racing that I meant. Come to think, I can do pretty well in motoracing games, but I can't ride a real bike ;) Alex.
> Sorry, english is not my native language, I thought > that immersiveness can be measured and apply in > different degrees... Immersiveness is subjective. My arguments are more observational, based on personal experience from a lifetime of gaming (since the Fairchild Channel F days) and hanging around gamers (including several years in the industry). Immersion, as the name implies, is the feeling of being *draw in* to something. It's a *mental* state -- the more your mind inhabits the game world, the more real that world seems, the more *immersed* you are in it. What your body is doing has less to do with it than you think. When you're walking, you don't actively "control" your limbs, you don't tell individual muscles to contract and relax, you just choose where you want to walk. When you look around, you aren't actively controlling your neck muscles or eye muscles, they are a *means to an end*. In a game, your fingers are the means. You quickly adapt and it becomes second nature. > So the flow paths in car sim matches the flow path > in a real driving We already establish that (it's pretty obvious, right?). That may make it more effective training for the real activity, but it doesn't necessarily make the experience itself more immersive. There are other, more important factors. Imagine attaching a computer screen to a treadmill. It shows a character walking through a virtual forest. As you walk faster or slower on the treadmill, the character walks faster or slower. You can't look around and can only walk in a straight line, but there is a 100% match between what the character in the game is doing and what your body is doing. Does that make it immersive? Not really. Now imagine putting on a VR helmet. You see the forest in first person, in true 3D, and you can look around freely. Using a controller sitting in your lap, you can walk anywhere in the forest, climb trees, push aside plants, explore. That's going to be a *far* more immersive experience, regardless of the fact that you're sitting on your ass. Another example: what's more immersive, racing in 3rd person or from the cockpit? Most people find the cockpit view more immersive, totally irrespective of what your hands and feet are doing. You can make a racing game even immersive making the cockpit fully 3D and give people the ability to look around it freely (just like an FPS). > Both FPS and adventure (same for RPG) rely on > person's imagination to achieve immersiveness, > while car sim don't. Racing games still totally rely on your imagination, unless you normally perceive the world as a small, 2D rectangle floating in front of your face. ;) > You think that sim-racing and FPS [positively] > correlate. There are a *lot* of different game genres. FPS and sims are closer than most. They are action games, typically first-person, with heavy emphasis on hand-eye coordination and spatial reckoning. Fighting games, platformers, and sports games are more distant relatives, typically played in 3rd person and more dependent on button-sequences. Adventure games are even more distant, with less reliance on hand-eye coordination. Strategy games and RPGs are even more distant, while puzzle games, relationship games, rhythm games, board games, etc., are way out on the horizon. > Actually, in this sense, computer board­ games (chess, > go etc) are much closer to car/plane-sims in the > way they operate. All of them provide very similar > ways of interaction to real life a­nd don't rely on > imagination to create believable experience. Thank you. I couldn't have said it better myself. I challenge you to show me someone who finds Yahoo! Checkers more immersive immersive than Half-Life 2 or Doom III. ;)
Quoted text (8 lines)> By *your* definition, car and airplane sims are the > only i­mmersive games. > > > They just happen to have a similarity between > > real world and game-playing motions. > > I think that was done intentionally by the game > developers ;­)
No, it's a lucky accident that they were able to do so. It just so happens that the controls used to operate a car are fairly easily reproduced at home. Can you say the same thing about a motorcycle racing sim? How about a sailboat racing sim or a horse racing sim? Makers of car sims are lucky in that regard. > Well, you can probably expand this logic so that > the person who have watched plenty of tennis and > played it well on the computer should have little > problem to do well on a real courts. That was not my logic at all. I was just thinking that going from a mouse to a wheel is a minor learning curve compared to all the non-physical things you learn about racing from a simulator. If you were going to throw two gamers into real cars and have them race, I would put my money on the kid who spent a year playing Live For Speed with a mouse over the kid who spent a year playing Need For Speed with a wheel. : Just think about how many people have difficulties when : switching from a regular car to a sportcar that have : much shorter pedal travel and tighter gears shifter. Or : about people who have hard time to learn left foot : braking. True.
I still think you awe me an apology, so even inferring the cheating, for gods sake, you can not even infer this with what I posted. mcewena enlightened us with:
Quoted text (14 lines)> No way, any time I spend in another genre just hurts my gplrank score > ;) > > I readily admit I'm speaking from near total ignorance of 1st person > shooters, (I'm the wrong side of 40 to get hooked now), I imagine guys > are changing guns and maybe cheating. In plowboy's analogy that's > sort of like changing car skins and swapping engines. > > Are there people busy taking a WW2 shooter and moving it to WWI Vimy > ridge complete with different AI, terrain and weapons? To stretch > the analogy it would be like starting with NR2003 and producing the > Ferrari 330 mod. > > If so, cool.
"Eric Tetz" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]:
Quoted text (12 lines)>> Sorry, english is not my native language, I thought >> that immersiveness can be measured and apply in different degrees... > > Immersiveness is subjective. My arguments are more observational, based > on personal experience from a lifetime of gaming (since the Fairchild > Channel F days) and hanging around gamers (including several years in > the industry). > > Immersion, as the name implies, is the feeling of being *draw in* to > something. It's a *mental* state -- the more your mind inhabits the > game world, the more real that world seems, the more *immersed* you are > in it.
<snip> The big problem is that FPS severely limits your movements. In the real life your body is able of a rich spectre of movements, and large part of enjoyment from the active sports somes from the pleasure of mastering quick, smooth and efficient movements to achieve the game goals. Computer games don't come anywhere close to simulate an experience of a nicely done shot in tennis, or a tricky header in soccer. At best computer games only emulate the tactic part of the game. FPS, which to large extend are supposed emulate a lot of physical activity, suffer from the same problem. These days they're getting pretty good at tactic aspect though. Sim-car-racing can emulate both aspects quite well. > Now imagine putting on a VR helmet. You see the forest in first person, > in true 3D, and you can look around freely. Using a controller sitting > in your lap, you can walk anywhere in the forest, climb trees, push > aside plants, explore. That's going to be a *far* more immersive > experience, regardless of the fact that you're sitting on your ass.As you have mentioned immersiveness is subjective. > Another example: what's more immersive, racing in 3rd person or from > the cockpit? Most people find the cockpit view more immersive, totally > irrespective of what your hands and feet are doing. You can make a > racing game even immersive making the cockpit fully 3D and give people > the ability to look around it freely (just like an FPS).It's hard to comment, because I can't race in 3rd person. I know that some people can do it, but I have no idea how to do it. To me personally, making fully 3D cockpit would make no difference. Asides of the gauges I don't even know how the cockit looks. Somehow, there're always more important places to look at. Being able to use peripheral vision (and turn eyes/head) would be nice though for practical purposes. Using button to look left/right feels like a cludge, and it always disorient me for a moment. >> Both FPS and adventure (same for RPG) rely on >> person's imagination to achieve immersiveness, while car sim don't. > > Racing games still totally rely on your imagination, unless you > normally perceive the world as a small, 2D rectangle floating in front > of your face. ;)Well, that's about how our vision works. There're some focus/out-of-focus issues and stereo-vision which monitors don't emulate very well, but otherwise there's little difference. And imagination is not required component in sim-racing. You don't need to imagine yourself sitting in a real F1 car to have fun. Driving computer- simulated car is fun by itself (that's if you like this kind of games). Games in many other genres (FPS, adventure, RPG) pretty much lose sense if you don't use your imagination.
Quoted text (12 lines)>> You think that sim-racing and FPS [positively] >> correlate. > > There are a *lot* of different game genres. FPS and sims are closer > than most. They are action games, typically first-person, with heavy > emphasis on hand-eye coordination and spatial reckoning. Fighting > games, platformers, and sports games are more distant relatives, > typically played in 3rd person and more dependent on button-sequences. > Adventure games are even more distant, with less reliance on hand-eye > coordination. Strategy games and RPGs are even more distant, while > puzzle games, relationship games, rhythm games, board games, etc., are > way out on the horizon.
So what you saying is that sim-racing and FPS are similar because of hand- eye coordination and spatial reckoning. If that's the reason for correlation you should also observe high correlation between people who like FPS and people who like active [real] sports.
Quoted text (9 lines)>> Actually, in this sense, computer board� games (chess, >> go etc) are much closer to car/plane-sims in the >> way they operate. All of them provide very similar >> ways of interaction to real life a�nd don't rely on >> imagination to create believable experience. > > Thank you. I couldn't have said it better myself. I > challenge you to show me someone who finds Yahoo! > Checkers more immersive immersive than Half-Life 2 or Doom III. ;)
Checkers is just not very exciting game by itself, so you should be comparing it some very bad FPS :) But if you make choice between HL2/Doom III and chess/go/bridge I don't know anybody who would go for HL2/Doom III (here I mean immersion as the feeling of being *draw in* to something). And obviously, I only considerng those who like and know both kind of games.
Quoted text (10 lines)> >> By *your* definition, car and airplane sims are the >> only i�mmersive games. >> >> > They just happen to have a similarity between >> > real world and game-playing motions. >> >> I think that was done intentionally by the game developers ;�) > > No, it's a lucky accident that they were able to do so.
So let's agree that they've done it intentionally, and by lucky accident have succeeded ;) > If you were going to throw two gamers into real cars and have them > race, I would put my money on the kid who spent a year playing Live For > Speed with a mouse over the kid who spent a year playing Need For Speed > with a wheel.If they're getting into real cars with summer tyres on the snow, I'd bet for the one who drove with wheel/pedals. Same for any driving in low grip conditions. If it's racing slick on dry oval, then I don't know. Alex.
alexti wrote: > The big problem is that FPS severely limits your movements. They don't limit where you can focus your *attention*. You can navigate and look around freely. That's goes a long ways toward providing immersion all by itself. > As you have mentioned immersiveness is subjective. And? Do you disagree with my assessment, or are you just throwing that out there to be contrary? > > unless you normally perceive the world as a small, 2D > > rectangle floating in front of your face. ;) > Well, that's about how our vision works. There're some > focus/out-of-focus issues and stereo-vision which monitors don't > emulate very well, but otherwise there's little difference. There is little visual difference between a computer screen and *reality*?! This conversation is quickly growing silly. You seem to be arguing for the sake of it. > And imagination is not required component in sim-racing. You > don't need to imagine yourself sitting in a real F1 car to have > fun. Driving computer- simulated car is fun by itself (that's if > you like this kind of games). Games in many other genres > (FPS, adventure, RPG) pretty much lose sense if > you don't use your imagination. I feel the need to quote Michael Sisson here: "Dude, seriously, expand your horizons. The above statement seems a *little* sheltered." There are plenty of people in the sim community for whom simulation of real cars, tracks and/or historical eras is important. And there are plenty of people (like myself) who just want good physics, fun to drive cars and tracks (needn't be real), and good netcode. There are people who play FPS to lose themselves in fantasy worlds (the games that provide this type of experience are a minority). Many more FPS players are concerned primarily with physics, controls, balanced weapons, well designed maps, good network code, etc. Many of the most popular FPS (Counterstrike, Quake Arena, Unreal Tournament, etc.) don't *have* single-player missions, they don't have a story to speak of, they are simply made designed frameworks for competition. Do you realize that there are professional gamers? FPS tournaments with $200,000 cash prizes? International competitions attended by 50,000+ gamers? It's not about imagining you're a space marine. It's about competition. It's about seeing who is best at the physical/mental skill -- a contest of speed and precision and tactics. It doesn't need to correspond to anything *real*, and the scenary is totally incidental. > If that's the reason for correlation you should also observe > high correlation between people who like FPS and people who like > active [real] sports. Why? That's a terrible argument. People with good spatial reckoning skills also make good physicist -- does that mean nuclear physicist are naturally gifted athletes? > Checkers is just not very exciting game by itself, so you should > be comparing it some very bad FPS :) We weren't talking about excitement, we were talking about *immersion*. You hypothesis is that immersion requires a high correlation between what is happening in the game and what your body is doing. As you point out, that correlation is very low in FPS, and very high in checkers games. If your hypothesis was true, checkers games would be more immersive than FPS games. Your hypothesis is bogus. > But if you make choice between HL2/Doom III and chess/go/bridge > I don't know anybody who would go for HL2/Doom III (here I mean > immersion as the feeling of being *draw in* to something). Concentration/focus and immersion are not the same thing. A game of Go can capture 100% of your attention whether the board is real or virtual. But you don't feel *draw in* to the board, as if it has become a real place that you inhabit. Many Chess and Go programs don't even bother to render 3D Chess/Go pieces, they display 2D symbolic representations. > If they're getting into real cars with summer tyres on the snow, > I'd bet for the one who drove with wheel/pedals. So you would get in the car with the kid who has learned that you can take a turn at 180MPH simply by yanking the wheel as hard as you can? I'd pay to see that. ;)
"Eric Tetz" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]:
Quoted text (11 lines)> alexti wrote: >> The big problem is that FPS severely limits your movements. > > They don't limit where you can focus your *attention*. You can > navigate and look around freely. That's goes a long ways toward > providing immersion all by itself. > >> As you have mentioned immersiveness is subjective. > > And? Do you disagree with my assessment, or are you just throwing > that out there to be contrary?
Because ability to look freely and navigate freely doesn't make the game immersive for me. It doesn't make it immersive for many other. For many others that makes the game immersive. So it's subjective, exactly like you said.
Quoted text (8 lines)>> > unless you normally perceive the world as a small, 2D >> > rectangle floating in front of your face. ;) >> Well, that's about how our vision works. There're some >> focus/out-of-focus issues and stereo-vision which monitors don't >> emulate very well, but otherwise there's little difference. > > There is little visual difference between a computer screen and > *reality*?!
There is little visual difference between how you see the image on the computer screen and how you see in the real world. > There are plenty of people in the sim community for whom > simulation of real cars, tracks and/or historical eras is > important. And there are plenty of people (like myself) who just > want good physics, fun to drive cars and tracks (needn't be real), > and good netcode.Right, and many people appreciate both. In the first case you have to use your imagination in the second you don't need to. > There are people who play FPS to lose themselves in fantasy worlds > (the games that provide this type of experience are a minority). > Many more FPS players are concerned primarily with physics, > controls, balanced weapons, well designed maps, good network code, > etc.This one I actually doubt. Do you know what is percentage of people playing FPS online relatively to the number of units sold? NPD Group was used to provide information on the PC games sales, but it seems they've stopped (or they don't make it available publicly anymore). Is there some other source?
Quoted text (7 lines)> Do you realize that there are professional gamers? FPS tournaments > with $200,000 cash prizes? International competitions attended by > 50,000+ gamers? It's not about imagining you're a space marine. > It's about competition. It's about seeing who is best at the > physical/mental skill -- a contest of speed and precision and > tactics. It doesn't need to correspond to anything *real*, and the > scenary is totally incidental.
How is it related to FPS/sim-racing similarity? If anything, it's rather a dissimilarity to sim-racing. And contest to determine the best presents in any competitive sport.
Quoted text (7 lines)>> If that's the reason for correlation you should also observe >> high correlation between people who like FPS and people who like >> active [real] sports. > > Why? That's a terrible argument. People with good spatial > reckoning skills also make good physicist -- does that mean > nuclear physicist are naturally gifted athletes?
Did you actually read what I wrote? like something doesn't mean being very good at it (or gifted). >> Checkers is just not very exciting game by itself, so you should >> be comparing it some very bad FPS :) > > We weren't talking about excitement, we were talking about > *immersion*.You can hardly get immersed into a boring game. > You hypothesis is that immersion requires a high correlation > between what is happening in the game and what your body is > doing. That's not my hypothesis.
Quoted text (11 lines)> As you point out, that correlation is very low in FPS, and > very high in checkers games. If your hypothesis was true, checkers > games would be more immersive than FPS games. > > Your hypothesis is bogus. > >> But if you make choice between HL2/Doom III and chess/go/bridge >> I don't know anybody who would go for HL2/Doom III (here I mean >> immersion as the feeling of being *draw in* to something). > > Concentration/focus and immersion are not the same thing.
That perfectly fits to your own definition (quote from your earlier post):
Quoted text (10 lines)> Immersion, as the name implies, is the feeling of being *draw in* to > something. It's a *mental* state -- the more your mind inhabits the > game world, the more real that world seems, the more *immersed* you are > in it. > A game of Go can capture 100% of your attention whether the board > is real or virtual. But you don't feel *draw in* to the board, as > if it has become a real place that you inhabit. Many Chess and Go > programs don't even bother to render 3D Chess/Go pieces, they > display 2D symbolic representations.
Well, you keep moving your definition of "immersion". If you mean it as being drawn-in as into the real place you may find a lot of similarity with books and movies... >> If they're getting into real cars with summer tyres on the snow, >> I'd bet for the one who drove with wheel/pedals. > > So you would get in the car with the kid who has learned that you > can take a turn at 180MPH simply by yanking the wheel as hard as > you can? I'd pay to see that. ;)You didn't mention about that kid being a madman ;) You can look at it as on the person who turns the wheel/press pedals until he starts losing traction. This person can explore what kind of input you can feed to get results. Person who can't control his extremities has no this option. Anyway, this discussion is branching out like crazy. I suggest to get back to the initial point, where you were trying to demonstrate the correlation between liking sim-racing and liking FPS. You've mentioned spatial reckoning and eye/hand coordination, which are the common requirements. But these requirements are shared by even much larger group that includes a lot of real sports, arcade games, platformers etc... Being immersed as being concentrated/focused puts sim-racing much closer to the logical and strategy games. Being immersed as being draw-in into real (maybe it should fictious too? - how about FPS in fantasy/futuristic settings) world. This is not really a strong point of racing sims, they are usually somewhat limited in this area (you can't usually look at anything which you don't need for driving, most of activities, like preparation to the race, pre-start activities are ommitted). By this characteristics FPS is much more similar to adventure and RPG (there's no strict border between FPS and RPG anyway, it's just degree of mental vs physical action) Alex.

Sponsors

Affiliate Links

Sim Gaming Expo MOZA Racing Sim-Lab Fanatec TrakRacer Asetek Internet Privacy From NordVPN Dreamhost Capital One Credit Card Application Fanatical CDKeys Amazon Amazon UK Project Motor Racing iRacing Get your racing gloves, boots and more from Demon Tweeks. Enlist at Roberts Space Industries, developers of Star Citizen and Squadron 42


Back from the ashes since July, 2019. First created in 2001 with the merger of Legends Central (founded 1999) and simracing.dk.

A site by a sort of sim racer, for sim racers, about racing sims. News and information on both modern and historic sim racing software titles.

All products and licenses property of their respective owners.


Facebook Threads Bluesky Twitter Mastodon Instagram YouTube Tiktok Twitch Reddit Google News Apple News Subscribe via WordPress Flipboard eBay

Race Sim Central © 1999-2026 | Some links pay RSC a commission. Advertising does not equal endorsement.Cookie Policy