Most of the counters to the “realism>game” argument are rooted in “if I wanted to live life I’d do it IRL”, which doesn’t really work when I want my game to be “life”[/quote]
That’s very sad.[/quote]
You’re misunderstanding him. Big times.
What he is trying to say is the following: I want to have a Game (in this case CDDA) to be realistic, like life, because I find it intruiging to see how different, impossible or at least nearly impossible situations would impact life, and how I would fare in those situations.
This seems to be, at least somewhat, what he is trying to say. He wants to have a game, which is basically similar to real life, but with 1 or 2 big differences, like cdda’s zombie outbreak, or fallout great war, which basically destroyed the life as we know it.
This falls into the same category as shows like ‘the living dead’ where it shows the life of survivors of a zombie apocalypse, or games like the Living dead, where you play the role of a survivor, not unlike in CDDA. Just with way better graphics.
There is nothing wrong with his statement, if we consider this. In fact, I have a similar opinion, I like more realism in games. Especially when it just…fits. One example from the ‘last few’ CDDA updates: The Vitamin/nutrition system that was added. It makes sense in my mind to actually add something like this to a Zombie game. Why? Because it would be actually ‘hard’ to find everything for a good diet. You won’t be able to just buy meat, fruits, vegetables, bread and other stuff to stay healthy, you have to scavenge or hunt for it, stuff that will put your character in danger. It connecty amazingly well to the Zombie-survival, if done well.
