I did, you’re just in denial of what this game is.
Looks like you are heavily backtracking.
You can see me and the OP discussing the death of any realism in this game.
That is all there is to say.
The game is what Gaijin make it not what you say it is and what it is now is not what it was when I started, or the OP and it is getting worse.
Why do you need to come in and defend the parts of the game that everyone agrees are poor? You like the new red line maps?
You mean my Panzer 4 killing Concept 3s.
Not hard…
1 Like
Wow ,I pray for Knights in Armour on the next update.
No i am not at all. i am explaining. If you care to read it would be easy to understand. This is why you are frustrating. I didn’t change any of my positions or arguments.
Yes and all there is to answer is:
“WRONG!!!, that’s not what realism is” (this at least is true for your posts, the OP does indeed have subjects that are relevant to realism, like sounds and graphics)
If you want i will explain again why it isn’t. But it is weird that you phrase it this way since a few Minutes ago you said you don’t care for what realism is.
this was your response when i told you:
But now you do care again? and you again confuse realism with historical accuracy.
I mean, how can one be not frustrated by that. You lie and change your mind constantly. Do you care about realism or not?
Do you understand that realism isn’t the same as historical accuracy?
Do you understand that all your post were about historical accuracy (technically historical authenticity, i know that) and not about realism?
Do you understand these things. Because this is why you are wrong- If you could get over yourself and use the rigt words your arguments could at least be coherent
Like I said a long time ago, you need to get a better translator because you are not reading me or anybody else on here. You are in good company of some very baffling people so you may get some likes.
I have been playing video games since 1976, the good ones made sense the bad ones did not. WT did make sense but not anymore and it’s getting worse.
I don’t see how even a simpleton can’t grasp that very simple point that the OP makes, and I agree with.
1 Like
this has nothing to do with my post. Or with whether the game is realistic… this is just a strawman.
Making sense and being realistic are still two different things.
I never commented on OPs points though. I commented on your arguments. They were wrong. You are deflecting.
i asked you simple yes and no questions.
1 Like
Which were what?
Just nothing more to say here, there never was anything to say because I never understood a word you said. Your comments have no relation to mine and never have.
You have dragged everybody off topic and the OP made a very good point and deserved a better response.
in recent events this one.
You claimed that a Concept 3 fighting a WW2 Panzer IV wasn’t realistic.
I told you (correctly) that it was.
Since what you are complaining about is called historical accuracy, realism means something different.
And then i was trying to hammer the difference betweent historical accuracy and realism into your skull.
That’s why i asked if you now understand the difference.
because your recent statement:
Since you were not discussing the death of realism but the death of historical accuracy.
So shall we repeat everything or can you at least try to remember what has been written. It is in written form you can reread it.
edit: and here is on why the difference is important. Gaijin advertises WT as realistic, it doesn’t advertise it as historically accurate.
2 Likes
Oh the great Concept 3 battles of 1943 ,I remember it well lol, WTF ?
Are you ill bro seriously ? are you trolling for a laugh here?
See this is why i asked you if you understand the difference between historical accuracy and realism.
The answer seems to be that you don’t.
I don’t see how you not understand what i am trying to tell you. read the entire post again maybe?
1 Like
Historical accuracy is realism in my language which is English.
I have a 2:1 Degree in history so I know what I mean thank you.
Realism is about art though…
so you seem to have no idea about that.
Realism is a measure of fiction (how much it complies to the natural laws of our real world), while history isn’t about fiction at all.
And if you really think this you can’t be helped.
Again, realistic art is full of stuff that never happened.
2 Likes
Facepalm. I was right about you. We will leave it there. Goodbye.
you have proven nothing.
Realism is a measure of fiction (how much it complies to the natural laws of our real world), while history isn’t about fiction at all.
Again, realistic art is full of stuff that never happened. I even showed you a realistic painting as an example. It was historical nonsense but is a defining piece of realism. How would that be possible if historical accuracy and realism are the same thing?
1 Like
Realism does not equal Historical accuracy. Even Gaijin acknowledged this when they renamed HB to RB back in the day.
1 Like
You can’t have one without the other its either Realistic/Historical or Fantasy.
The whole idea of a detailed recreated tank facing an 80s APC on an unrelated map is just bad game making nothing more.
Nobody ever put a post war tank in with a WW2 tank in what is meant to be a WW2 game or movie without facing criticism.
I would never have even started War Thunder I f I had seen films of 80S tanks vs WW2.I would have run a mile. As it was the lunacy didn’t really start until 4BR by which time I was well into it.
You sound like DerGraf VonZahls alternative account to be honest. Same baffling sense of logic.
You have only had 4000 games remember ;)
Yeah you can, War Thunder is a vehicle combat game. Not a historical sim game. Also, I’ve been here since the beginning of the game. So unlike you I know what I’m talking about. Furthermore, I don’t know what your obsession with the number matches played is. That doesn’t matter what matters is how long you play the game for.
2 Likes
That’s BS.
The Shawshank redemption is regarded as a realistic movie. It is not historically accurate. It never happened.
Realism does not need a historicalprecedent
Yeah. It’s also nit a hard destinction.
Realism is what could possibly happen. And historical accuracy is what did happen.
So historical accuracy always implies realism. But realism does not imply historical accuracy.
Also why just movies and games? It does apply to paintings as well. And there are art pieces that define realism that are exactly the kind of historical lunacy you are criticizing. I already have shown you one.
I came up with an even better example:
The tv series battlestar Galactica is more realistic than star wars because it depicts space more correct.
Even though both cannot be judged by their historical accuracy.
It’s not realism or fiction. Fiction can be realistic, which would be impossible if it was the same as historical accuracy.
Sure, but the criticism is that the game or movie is inaccurate nit that it’s unrealistic.
There are tons of movies that are regarded as realistic, about stuff that has never happened.
No such thing.
- Sims aren’t necessarily games
- Games give the players agency true historical accuracy can only be a reenactment… Which is useless in a game. Being told when to fire and where. You might as well watch a movie.
Btw:
Even though i disagreed with him several times now…
Riiiiiiiight.
1 Like