Chasing Realism: How Important Is Authenticity in Games?

Tomorrow, the highly anticipated Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 will finally be released. This Czech game is intriguing not only as a comprehensive RPG offering over a hundred hours of gameplay but also as a medieval life simulator that prioritizes authenticity and realism above all else. The release of KCD2 is a perfect opportunity to discuss realism in games: its pros and cons, and whether it's possible to find a balance between engaging gameplay and hardcore simulation.

Attention to detail in realistic games significantly enhances immersion in what's happening on screen. You don't have to look far for an example: just consider the first Kingdom Come: Deliverance.

Warhorse Studios' previous game, like its new sequel, transports players to a historically accurate virtual Bohemia of the 15th century: castles, towns, and villages were recreated according to historical documents from that era. Moreover, the player assumes the role not of a high-born noble or valiant knight but of a simple blacksmith's son, and this factor directly impacts gameplay.

For instance, Henry, the protagonist of KCD, initially doesn't know how to read, so you'll need to learn this valuable skill as you progress. Additionally, the character's social status affects how NPCs treat him. Gradually, you can improve his standing by increasing his reputation, which makes it easier for Henry to persuade others. Subtle factors like the cleanliness of his clothes also influence his eloquence.

KCD's realism makes the game more challenging and pushes players to be more mindful of every decision they make, even in mundane matters. For example, if you wander into town at night without a torch, you might attract unwanted trouble: guards could interpret Henry's actions as suspicious since he isn't illuminating his face.

You believe in the world of Kingdom Come: Deliverance because it operates according to logical, understandable, and, most importantly, believable rules. The same can be said for only a handful of games, though arguably, Red Dead Redemption 2 achieves immersion through realism even more effectively than KCD.

When it comes to attention to detail, Rockstar, let's be honest, has no equal. In RDR2, every NPC has a unique daily routine: they go to work, take walks, and relax in bars. Animals live their own lives and hunt each other, with carcasses even decomposing over time. You can closely inspect any item in a store before purchasing, and food must be prepared before consumption. You need to care for your weapons, and yourself too—take baths regularly, shave, get haircuts, and dress appropriately for the weather. In other words, it's not just "another open-world action game," but a true, uncompromising Wild West simulator.

Of course, uncompromising realism also has its downsides, especially when it affects responsiveness or gameplay dynamics. Take Red Dead Redemption 2, for example. If you read negative reviews of the game, you'll notice that many of the game's strengths are seen as drawbacks by other players.

For instance, people complain that RDR2's protagonist feels too sluggish due to the realistic running and crouching animations. Moreover, not everyone enjoys having to watch Arthur Morgan take an extra two seconds to pull an item out of a container and put it in his pocket. Some players also gripe about the long animations for skinning animals, cleaning weapons, and cooking food. It's one thing to watch the hero realistically skin a carcass in detail for the first time, and quite another to do it for the 50th time.

Some animations can be slightly sped up or skipped by holding a button, but gamers still see this as an inconvenience. Perhaps this could have been avoided by adding a more arcade-like mode where unnecessary scenes are automatically skipped, making the game more dynamic.

There's a belief that if you try to make a game as realistic as possible, you'll inevitably have to sacrifice gameplay fun. But in reality, it's all about a delicate balance that lies entirely in the hands of the developers. And yes, there are examples where this balance has been successfully achieved.

Many might not remember, but right after the release of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, gamers complained about how unresponsive Geralt felt in terms of controls. Players noted that when sharply changing direction, the character reacted with a noticeable delay—just like a real person slowing down from a real run. CD Projekt RED listened to the community and released patch 1.07, which added an alternative control scheme to address this issue.

But without a doubt, the best examples of games where realism and gameplay do not conflict are The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild and The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom. On one hand, these titles feature extremely complex physics: wood burns upon contact with fire, metal attracts lightning during storms, surfaces become slippery when it rains, and ice melts near heat sources. On the other hand, both Zeldas never forget that they are games. And according to Nintendo's philosophy, games should be fun to play. That's why Link is highly responsive in terms of controls, crafting animations take mere seconds, and many restrictions imposed by the pursuit of realism can be circumvented: for example, you can acquire magic boots that let you run faster in deep snow or create a futuristic glider.

***

Realism is a powerful but potentially dangerous tool that needs to be used wisely. It can enhance immersion and provide a unique gaming experience, or it can become a burden. The release of Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 will be another test for Warhorse Studios: can the studio maintain authenticity without going overboard with hardcore elements and make the game both thrilling and comfortable? We'll find out tomorrow.

What do you think? Share in the comments your experiences with successful and unsuccessful examples of realism in games.