Touch Too Much

The other day, I was surfing the internet aboard the good ship Ultrafail and I came across an article that really made my day. Not because it was well written or funny, but because it told me that items in Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim will not degrade with use. A few toilet rolls later, I decided to see what other gamers were saying about this change. Naturally, the “hardcore fans” of previous Elder Scrolls games took to the change about as well as the Catholic Church probably took to the idea of gay ministers.

The main reason for their angst? Because being gay apparently goes agai- sorry, wrong argument. It’s because taking item degradation out somehow makes Skyrim less realistic. Suddenly, all the pieces fell into place and I understood. I knew exactly what these gamers meant.

I mean, when I finally get to lay my hands on a copy of Skyrim and I get into my first fight with a dragon, I want my weapons to feel like they can break at any moment, thus sending me into a state more commonly known as “dinner”, because it’s more realistic! Who says you can’t have fun spending hours lavishly mending your sword and shield that may or may not have been made from a composite substance comprised of steel and jelly? To be honest, if Bethesda just spent the rest of Skyrim‘s development cycle perfecting the in-game item degradation I would be perfectly content. Who needs such trivialities like huge, immersive open-worlds and epic battles with dragons and lightning and all sorts of other cool shit?

Immediately after this startling revelation, I started to look at other games and how they could be more realistic, in a bid to be better games. Take these for example:

1. Burnout is nowhere near as realistic as it could be. All those crashes, and not a single piece of paperwork filled in? Come on! I propose a new game mechanic, whereby every time the player crashes they’re given an adequately realistic amount of paperwork to fill in. I’m not a driver and have thus never crashed a car, so I don’t know how these things work. 20 pages of forms to fill out per crash is a realistic amount, right?
2. Portal was adequately lacking in the realism department too. A gun that makes portals? And that’s realistic, how, exactly? Here’s an idea instead that’s guaranteed to be a sure-fire winner: a gun that doesn’t make portals. Now those testing chambers pose a realistic challenge! Don’t even get me started on those frictionless gels either; if it was really frictionless, they wouldn’t stick to any surface, would they?
3. My final example will be Mass Effect. It’s a well known fact that faster than light travel isn’t possible, yet Mass Effect and it’s sequel have it in spades. Did it not occur to Bioware that maybe I want to have realistic space travel that takes hundreds or even thousands of years to fully transpire? Did they not think that maybe I want to subject entire generations of my offspring to continue on with my game save, long after I’m dead? How dare they assume those things! It’s clear that Mass Effect is just a shining beacon of nonsense in a world where realism is in high demand. How did this tripe ever see the light of day?

I digress. My point is, I am completely bewildered that people will think less of a game because of the ways in which it doesn’t limit you. It’s just utterly bonkers, especially when it ultimately doesn’t matter in the slightest.