What is a sim, what is not...

[icarus]

By definition a computer simulation attempts to simulate a process or situation. Anything that attempts this is a sim.

Most people think a sim is a serious entity (I used to), but that is incorrect. What those people are (I was) actually arguing is how successful the sim is in its realism and accuracy or even immersion, not whether it is a sim or not.

The correct definition of a computer simulation makes it harder to differentiate sims like CoD and A-10 vs WoP and other game-like sims (even The Sims is a sim) that are less serious in their modelling etc., but it is the correct definition.

As long as they attempt to simulate they are sims. But we all know that there is a vast differences within that definition.

[Madfish]

I believe anything can be a sim if you allow the bending of real world laws of physics etc.

However, the way I define a sim is this: A simulation follows real world mechanics as closely as possible.

This means that for example Flight Unlimited isn't a sim anymore to me as the flight model is now arcade. The same goes for many older games and even IL-2 1946 will lose it's "sim" status at some point. This is simply because these games cannot simulate flight in the highest achievable fidelity anymore.


Many other games are following a different approach though. For example simplifying the flight models on purpose. Those are clearly arcade.

So my definition for arcade is clear. My definition for a sim changes over time.



Battlefield 3 is clearly arcade to me though. Too many shortcuts were taken that prevent the game from actually simulating - it's more of a fantasy demonstration if you will.
ArmA3 is a simulation in the genre of military shooters - for the flying part I don't know (yet) but ArmA2 is clearly not a flying sim.

[gonk]

Originally Posted by Madfish

- for the flying part I don't know (yet) but ArmA2 is clearly not a flying sim.

Agree....Arma2 is not a aircraft/vehicle sim... but it is the best Military tactical sim out there..Unless you want to buy the military versio.

ARMA2 ground troops with DCS -A10 CAS ... that would be a sim...

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Madfish

I believe anything can be a sim if you allow the bending of real world laws of physics etc.

However, the way I define a sim is this: A simulation follows real world mechanics as closely as possible.

This means that for example Flight Unlimited isn't a sim anymore to me as the flight model is now arcade. The same goes for many older games and even IL-2 1946 will lose it's "sim" status at some point. This is simply because these games cannot simulate flight in the highest achievable fidelity anymore.


Many other games are following a different approach though. For example simplifying the flight models on purpose. Those are clearly arcade.

So my definition for arcade is clear. My definition for a sim changes over time.



Battlefield 3 is clearly arcade to me though. Too many shortcuts were taken that prevent the game from actually simulating - it's more of a fantasy demonstration if you will.
ArmA3 is a simulation in the genre of military shooters - for the flying part I don't know (yet) but ArmA2 is clearly not a flying sim.

You hit the nail on the head. Everyones def has changed which is why there is so much argument on the subject.

The dictionary def has not. If we all follow the accepted dictionary def, we won't be arguing over the definition, only discussing which sim is more realistic, accurate, etc.. Which is really the essence of what we are talking about here.

[Jaws2002]

Originally Posted by gonk

ARMA2 ground troops with DCS -A10 CAS ... that would be a sim...

Yeah. Is funy in some games how easy is to bring down planes and choppers. I just shake my head.
Let's face it. Not many shooter players would want to play a game where 95% of the ground forces can't do a damn thing against air power.

[Stefem]

Originally Posted by Ailantd

Arma2 infantry could be considered a sim, more when you compare it with others fps, but Arma2 vehicles otherwise can not. I really would like Arma vehicles being full or realistically simulated even if no everybody could handle it.

Yea, it seems that Arma 3 will resolve this lacuna with vehicles and objects handled by a real physics engine

[whoarmongar]

The problem with Arma2 isnt the physics engine its the fact that the vehicles in particular the choppers and fixed wing are far to easy to kill. This was done in the interests of "balance" and "gameplay" but this game would be so much better if the damage model was more realistic in my opinion.
Even with its faults its still a superb game and I love it.
Very soon I expect in the game world we will be able to fly in a CloD type flightsim game and when we bail out bail into a Arma2 type world, all with hundreds of people online.

[ElAurens]

Another problem with ArmA2 is that the maps are far too small for any real simulated modern air warfare. Any jet fighter would be across the entire map in seconds.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by Madfish

I believe anything can be a sim if you allow the bending of real world laws of physics etc.

However, the way I define a sim is this: A simulation follows real world mechanics as closely as possible.

This means that for example Flight Unlimited isn't a sim anymore to me as the flight model is now arcade. The same goes for many older games and even IL-2 1946 will lose it's "sim" status at some point. This is simply because these games cannot simulate flight in the highest achievable fidelity anymore.


Many other games are following a different approach though. For example simplifying the flight models on purpose. Those are clearly arcade.

So my definition for arcade is clear. My definition for a sim changes over time.

I don't think you should start calling an old flight sim an arcade game just because something has since surpassed it. An old flight sim will always be a flight sim, it may seem to be less realistic than it once did obviously because of technology advances, but more "arcade" is the wrong word.

The original IL-2 will never become an arcde game.

[Rattlehead]

If we're talking about a game ie software used for entertainment purposes, then I would say a sim is a game that tries, as near as is possible, to accurately replicate the subject content.

To me, it is more about the idea than the actual execution. Like the old Il-2 for example, is most definitely a simulator for me because the idea behind it was to make a sim that was as close to real life as was possible at the time.
Sure, with many more years of coding and advancement in computing power it could have been more realistic, but at it's heart it tried to be as close to 'the real thing' as was possible without spending an obscene amount of money and time on it.
They still had to make it work within the context of a video game.

By contrast, a game is not particularly bothered with being as close to the real thing as is possible as long as people have fun with it. The entertainment value far outweighs the need to accurately replicate the subject content.
Some aspects may be fairly accurate to the real thing, like for example the 3D models, but the fun factor is king.