Video games and “F*ck You” Realism

I’d like to look back at the brief discussion that was had about realism in games, though not just limited to the FPS genre. In many games, adding “realistic” elements is an attempt to push for more immersion, but as you may have surmised, there are some games that have an additional element in their attainment of realism: F*ck You.  

A good starting point to describing this phenomenon is the game that puts realism in its title: Realistic Female First Person Shooter. At first blush, it seems clear that the word “Realistic” is just a part of the game’s satire; the game takes a warped, unrealistic view of women and bends the entire world around it, leading to a comical reflection on how misogynistic gamers view women. Though, as I’ve discussed previously in a blog comment, I do believe some elements of RFFPS are realistic, but not about women in general, but gamers. There are those who play FPS games, like Call of Duty or Battlefield, where because of some perceived skill in the game, think they would be able to do the “real thing.” (I always see posts like this whenever “World War III” is trending.) However, I think many, if not most of these capital G “Gamers” would struggle to run wearing military gear, and to lift a gun up and aim properly at a moving target. In this way, RFFPS takes the aspects taken for granted in modern FPS games and strips them away, breaking the “magic circle” and emphasizing the boundary between the world of games and real life by giving the player a punishing experience. To me, this is F*ck You Realism. Although, it would be a reductionist to say that messing with the player is “the point,” even in my interpretation. The true end goal, I think, is to get people to reconsider how they see games and the stigma against women in gaming culture; telling the player F*ck You is just a means to an end. 

I don’t want to give the impression that any difficult game is F*ck You Realism. While games like Problem Attic and Dark Souls may tell the player “F*ck You,” (literally or metaphorically,) is there really any realism in the fact that a woman turned spider demon by the Flames of Chaos would be difficult to beat? (I don’t know dark souls, I had to look that up.) Aspects that lie entirely within the realm of fantasy are up to the determination of the developer of any particular game and thus aren’t realism. 

On the other end, something that is realistic in a game, even if the player does not like it, isn’t necessarily F*ck You Realism; to some extent, an aspect of realism needs to be included specifically to make the life of the player harder. Personally, I don’t sense ill intent in the inclusion of a full animation of skinning animals in Red Dead Redemption 2. However, there is an example from the same game: the fact that guns have a chance to jam if they are not properly maintained, (though there is always a possibility for even a perfectly handled gun to jam at times). In a similar way to RFFPS, RDR2 takes what is usually a given in most shooters, the fact that guns will always work, and f*cks with it. I would argue that the gun-jamming mechanic isn’t pushing for immersion the same way that the real-time animations are. Seeing Arthur Morgan rip the skin off of a dead animal is indeed more realistic than a text-box appearing in the air, saying “+1 Animal Skin,” but in addition to that, it’s adding to the setting, showing how messy and hands-on life in the olden days could be. Rather than giving you a few more seconds to relax and reflect, I think that your gun jamming, especially when in a high-stakes shootout, reads more as a punishment. The aspect of realism is that things will fail if you don’t take care of them, as many car owners will understand. A gun jam is an inherently negative occurrence that likely pushes a player to clean their gun more often to avoid it, while also enforcing the grittiness of the time period, like the skinning. Again, like RFFPS, RDR2 uses F*ck You Realism not out of malice towards the player, (though that remains to be confirmed,) but as a means to a greater goal; I believe, to push the player towards using the game’s systems, and to become immersed in that time period. 

I’m sure you can already see an issue with this framework. There is nothing definitive that determines if a mechanic is F*ck You Realism, or just regular realism; it’s very vibe dependent and relies heavily on assumption of intent of the developer. Someone may see RDR2’s animal skinning animation as a punishment as well, teaching a lesson to not be cruel to animals and to truly consider the violence you are enacting. I would not be able to argue with that person. There are also cases where punishing realism is the point, within the genre of “rage-bait” games. I know we’ll play QWOP later on, so I won’t go into detail, but the entire game is an exercise in frustration, all to do what can be done in most games by holding the analog stick forward. If someone plays a game specifically because it is hard, and that it will make them angry, is it even a f*ck you at that point? 

One last point that I’ve thought about is that if there is F*ck You Realism, there too must be Fuck You Absurdism. I interpret this as when a game takes something that exists in the real world, and makes the game character less capable of doing that thing than the average, though still with the implicitly negative connotation. The first thing that comes to mind are invisible walls, a staple in video games that don’t make much sense; there are many games that give no explanation as to why you can’t walk down this particular hallway, or step over a 2-foot tall traffic cone. However, it is difficult to find an example in this category that is intentionally f*cking with the player. The closest thing I can think of are the barriers in Mother 3, that always have another absurd excuse for the player not being able to go a certain way. Though it seems to be a more playful, tongue-in-cheek version of “F*ck You,” the developers are playing with what is a common theme in games and forcing you to accept their strange logic. 

I’d love to hear what others think of the concept, and if it even deserves a sub-category within Realism in games.