I really like the Division, as does Steven, but I agree that there's a sort of dissonance between the RPG elements and the "realistic" world they're putting out there. If it was just a little more Sci-Fi, somewhere between Division and Defiance, I don't think people would care.
I must say now that I've read this article from Mr. Steven Messner a fellow Canadian. I see what he mean's. but I have video interview that was done prior to his article from EPN.tv and some of the questions you asked were answered r by the devs . they stated the division agency its self , isn't a military organization and cause of that the agent's self reliant in this video to victor Lucas. i guess the vendors represent this part tat your not supplied by a military organization the detail are below in this link below
and no you aren't only remaining agent's from the division if you just play with your one buddy when your at those safe area hubs . the hub represent an option in case you no able t o play with your buddies . if you choose you play with some new via there but if you iffy on that just head back into the world solo and you won't have to deal with people you don't know since there are of people of late that have been demanding solo experience and don't like to p lay with people they don't know for many good reason's
I really like the Division, as does Steven, but I agree that there's a sort of dissonance between the RPG elements and the "realistic" world they're putting out there. If it was just a little more Sci-Fi, somewhere between Division and Defiance, I don't think people would care.
Yes, the dissonance is probably more apparent in a game that aims at a "realistic" setting, but it's abundant in most RPG's. When it's less apparent it usually results in a highly acclaimed GOTY, but that's a rare occasion.
Perhaps "The Last of Us" came close, if only they could have plausibly explained why there were so many newly infected everywhere in the world, when you almost never saw virus-free people anywhere...
1. 'RPG' intent back in the days of D&D was actually designed with realism in mind. The attributes and skills for the most part where applied to qualities we have in real life, strength, dexterity etc. Only areas such as 'magic' would be specific to a genre.
That might be the most ridiculous thing that I've ever read about D&D. Did you know that D&D stood for Dungeons and DRAGONS?
It feels weird to come to @SEANMCAD's defense but he was talking about the part you did not highlight. But I think you knew that.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
1. 'RPG' intent back in the days of D&D was actually designed with realism in mind. The attributes and skills for the most part where applied to qualities we have in real life, strength, dexterity etc. Only areas such as 'magic' would be specific to a genre.
That might be the most ridiculous thing that I've ever read about D&D. Did you know that D&D stood for Dungeons and DRAGONS?
It feels weird to come to @SEANMCAD's defense but he was talking about the part you did not highlight. But I think you knew that.
The part that is not highlighted is wrong too though.
For instance, intelligence affects spell resists (saving throws) and amount of spells you can learn. It's wrong on so many levels. That you roll dice to find out what your skills are doesn't represent realism at all. D&D is extremely game mechanic heavy. Maybe the MOST game mechanic heavy popular offering up till it was released ever. There is nothing about the stats in D&D that make them realistic. And D&D was certainly never designed with realism in mind.
1. 'RPG' intent back in the days of D&D was actually designed with realism in mind. The attributes and skills for the most part where applied to qualities we have in real life, strength, dexterity etc. Only areas such as 'magic' would be specific to a genre.
That might be the most ridiculous thing that I've ever read about D&D. Did you know that D&D stood for Dungeons and DRAGONS?
It feels weird to come to @SEANMCAD's defense but he was talking about the part you did not highlight. But I think you knew that.
The part that is not highlighted is wrong too though.
For instance, intelligence affects spell resists (saving throws) and amount of spells you can learn. It's wrong on so many levels. That you roll dice to find out what your skills are doesn't represent realism at all. D&D is extremely game mechanic heavy. Maybe the MOST game mechanic heavy popular offering up till it was released ever. There is nothing about the stats in D&D that make them realistic. And D&D was certainly never designed with realism in mind.
How else would you figure skills in a game? Mensa test? P.E. grades from high school? Arm wrestling? Cmon now. To say D&D and the mechanics thereof was not meant to be a realistic simulation of a fantasy world that does not exist is ludicrous.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
1. 'RPG' intent back in the days of D&D was actually designed with realism in mind. The attributes and skills for the most part where applied to qualities we have in real life, strength, dexterity etc. Only areas such as 'magic' would be specific to a genre.
That might be the most ridiculous thing that I've ever read about D&D. Did you know that D&D stood for Dungeons and DRAGONS?
It feels weird to come to @SEANMCAD's defense but he was talking about the part you did not highlight. But I think you knew that.
The part that is not highlighted is wrong too though.
For instance, intelligence affects spell resists (saving throws) and amount of spells you can learn. It's wrong on so many levels. That you roll dice to find out what your skills are doesn't represent realism at all. D&D is extremely game mechanic heavy. Maybe the MOST game mechanic heavy popular offering up till it was released ever. There is nothing about the stats in D&D that make them realistic. And D&D was certainly never designed with realism in mind.
How else would you figure skills in a game? Mensa test? P.E. grades from high school? Arm wrestling? Cmon now. To say D&D and the mechanics thereof was not meant to be a realistic simulation of a fantasy world that does not exist is ludicrous.
What you are talking about isn't realism. Stats themselves are not realistic. Within a game, like D&D and the Division, stats get in the way of realism often. For instance, lets say you are playing D&D and you have your knife to the throat of a goblin. Well, a knife does 1d4. That would not be enough to kill the goblin. However, realism would dictate that you would kill him instantly.
Dice rolls are an abstraction within the game. They are intended not to be realistic, but to be part of a game. And D&D specifically makes huge abstractions based on those stats. On top of that, D&D is FANTASY which means D&D isn't realism in the game sense or the setting sense. But really, these abstractions of reality are the very basis for the game and realism was never intended at all.
To answer your question directly, in order to figure out skills in a game, for the most direct realism, you state them directly. You say that your character can bench 200 lbs. Your character was a great tennis player which means they have quick reactions. Compare Counter Strike to the Division and you can see why one is considered more realistic than the other. While both have realistic settings, it is the game mechanics themselves that make the Division lack any serious realism.
And to reiterate, stats are an abstraction meant for a game. Dice rolling games are meant to be played and are not meant to be realistic.
1. 'RPG' intent back in the days of D&D was actually designed with realism in mind. The attributes and skills for the most part where applied to qualities we have in real life, strength, dexterity etc. Only areas such as 'magic' would be specific to a genre.
That might be the most ridiculous thing that I've ever read about D&D. Did you know that D&D stood for Dungeons and DRAGONS?
It feels weird to come to @SEANMCAD's defense but he was talking about the part you did not highlight. But I think you knew that.
The part that is not highlighted is wrong too though.
For instance, intelligence affects spell resists (saving throws) and amount of spells you can learn. It's wrong on so many levels. That you roll dice to find out what your skills are doesn't represent realism at all. D&D is extremely game mechanic heavy. Maybe the MOST game mechanic heavy popular offering up till it was released ever. There is nothing about the stats in D&D that make them realistic. And D&D was certainly never designed with realism in mind.
How else would you figure skills in a game? Mensa test? P.E. grades from high school? Arm wrestling? Cmon now. To say D&D and the mechanics thereof was not meant to be a realistic simulation of a fantasy world that does not exist is ludicrous.
What you are talking about isn't realism. Stats themselves are not realistic. Within a game, like D&D and the Division, stats get in the way of realism often. For instance, lets say you are playing D&D and you have your knife to the throat of a goblin. Well, a knife does 1d4. That would not be enough to kill the goblin. However, realism would dictate that you would kill him instantly.
Dice rolls are an abstraction within the game. They are intended not to be realistic, but to be part of a game. And D&D specifically makes huge abstractions based on those stats. On top of that, D&D is FANTASY which means D&D isn't realism in the game sense or the setting sense. But really, these abstractions of reality are the very basis for the game and realism was never intended at all.
To answer your question directly, in order to figure out skills in a game, for the most direct realism, you state them directly. You say that your character can bench 200 lbs. Your character was a great tennis player which means they have quick reactions. Compare Counter Strike to the Division and you can see why one is considered more realistic than the other. While both have realistic settings, it is the game mechanics themselves that make the Division lack any serious realism.
And to reiterate, stats are an abstraction meant for a game. Dice rolling games are meant to be played and are not meant to be realistic.
That was very well put.
I'm going to give you an "Insightful" for the effort instead of a "LOL" for totally missing the point.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
My problem with The Division can be summed up in two words. Bullet sponges. Tom Clancy titles were always more realistic than the other shooters and this is where TD falls down.
There's just no way I should have to shoot someone 200 times to kill them no matter how bad a boss they might be. RPG or not, they needed to get the shooter mechanics down first and foremost and they fucked it up royally.
It's not a great game, it's not even a good game. It's a bad game with bad design, bad mechanics and dumbed down gameplay. Par for the course given the standard of most games in the last several years.
It's vey pretty though, credit where it's due, but I value challenge over eye candy.
My problem with The Division can be summed up in two words. Bullet sponges. Tom Clancy titles were always more realistic than the other shooters and this is where TD falls down.
There's just no way I should have to shoot someone 200 times to kill them no matter how bad a boss they might be. RPG or not, they needed to get the shooter mechanics down first and foremost and they fucked it up royally.
It's not a great game, it's not even a good game. It's a bad game with bad design, bad mechanics and dumbed down gameplay. Par for the course given the standard of most games in the last several years.
It's vey pretty though, credit where it's due, but I value challenge over eye candy.
And what "challenging" shooters are you playing right now? The "bullet sponge" thing has been addressed multiple times.
My problem with The Division can be summed up in two words. Bullet sponges. Tom Clancy titles were always more realistic than the other shooters and this is where TD falls down.
There's just no way I should have to shoot someone 200 times to kill them no matter how bad a boss they might be. RPG or not, they needed to get the shooter mechanics down first and foremost and they fucked it up royally.
It's not a great game, it's not even a good game. It's a bad game with bad design, bad mechanics and dumbed down gameplay. Par for the course given the standard of most games in the last several years.
It's vey pretty though, credit where it's due, but I value challenge over eye candy.
And what "challenging" shooters are you playing right now? The "bullet sponge" thing has been addressed multiple times.
Nothing released lately I can assure you. If you want to play something decent go and get Black Mesa.
Nothing released lately I can assure you. If you want to play something decent go and get Black Mesa.
I'm not interested in rehashing the old over and over again. The Division is actually very challenging, even if you play it on "normal" mode and not hard mode, that way you don't have to cry about bullet sponges, but chances are you'll still die well enough.
I have noticed the entire fps industry is trying to add rpg elements to increase sales.
However it turns me right off.I was quitting COD games for good anyhow because of cheating but the rpg elements also had me not wanting to play.
Black Mesa ...?Rings a bell is that like a Half Life mod?I really loved the Half life games,i would buy a new one in a heartbeat,really odd how Valve just seem to abandon the series,one of the greatest of all time.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Yeh when this game was first announced a while back I thought it would be my EVE. And with a Tom Clancy stamp on it I was mostly expecting lethal gunplay. I see UBISoft did not take either of those routes and I understand why. Oh well. There are still plenty of great mods for Arma 3 that I can dig into.
I have noticed the entire fps industry is trying to add rpg elements to increase sales.
However it turns me right off.I was quitting COD games for good anyhow because of cheating but the rpg elements also had me not wanting to play.
Black Mesa ...?Rings a bell is that like a Half Life mod?I really loved the Half life games,i would buy a new one in a heartbeat,really odd how Valve just seem to abandon the series,one of the greatest of all time.
I think its okay not to like The Division and other games for going the more RPG route. I think its important that they branch off and try new things. We've seen a lot of people trying to create the winning FPS RPG model, and I think they mostly fall short.
I'm a big fan of cover shooters. I think my first one was Winback on the N64.. aside from Time Crisis in the Arcade. I'm sure there are other ones out there, but they always seemed more tactical and calculating.
I like the additional RPG elements for classing in a genre that is pretty poor on classes. Shooters never really get classes right, everything boils down to the majority of damage being weapon focused, and no real classes are needed.
While that could also hold true, a cohesive team in TD excels when team members are focused on class objectives. Sure you can run a more balanced spec, but you can easily tell the difference between playing a DPS, Healer, Tank, or other support class in comparison to games like -- say -- destiny where everyone was mostly the same apart from grenades and special abilities.
But the OP does know that gaming today consists of finding out what is "fun" by metrics and then just bunging them into every type of genre? No matter if they have negative impact on other areas of gameplay?
If it works great in solo games it is going to work great in MMOs. If it works great in RPG's then it is going to work great in shooters. This is not trying to create an holistic gaming vision, its pick and mix at the candy store.
How else would you figure skills in a game? Mensa test? P.E. grades from high school? Arm wrestling? Cmon now. To say D&D and the mechanics thereof was not meant to be a realistic simulation of a fantasy world that does not exist is ludicrous.
What you are talking about isn't realism. Stats themselves are not realistic. Within a game, like D&D and the Division, stats get in the way of realism often. For instance, lets say you are playing D&D and you have your knife to the throat of a goblin. Well, a knife does 1d4. That would not be enough to kill the goblin. However, realism would dictate that you would kill him instantly.
Dice rolls are an abstraction within the game. They are intended not to be realistic, but to be part of a game. And D&D specifically makes huge abstractions based on those stats. On top of that, D&D is FANTASY which means D&D isn't realism in the game sense or the setting sense. But really, these abstractions of reality are the very basis for the game and realism was never intended at all.
To answer your question directly, in order to figure out skills in a game, for the most direct realism, you state them directly. You say that your character can bench 200 lbs. Your character was a great tennis player which means they have quick reactions. Compare Counter Strike to the Division and you can see why one is considered more realistic than the other. While both have realistic settings, it is the game mechanics themselves that make the Division lack any serious realism.
And to reiterate, stats are an abstraction meant for a game. Dice rolling games are meant to be played and are not meant to be realistic.
That was very well put.
I'm going to give you an "Insightful" for the effort instead of a "LOL" for totally missing the point.
GUYS!
The attribute of STR is not linked to fantasy, not is INT, nor is WIS, nor is CHAR.
do you evern know what those statnd for?
STR is strength which might affect your ability to hold a large sword..or...use a large pipe found on the ground of new york
INT is for intelligence which will affect your ability to learn a spell....or...understand a technical manual on how to hack a computer found in new york
WIS is for wisdom which I forget what this was good for I think clerics, anyway could it not translate to a modern settting or is this your one way out of it...lets try...;)
CHAR is charasma you chance to get what you need in a conversation. really? conversations only happen i fantasty settings?
sometimes i think there are people will literally study the attributes of thier character in Fallout and then 10 mins later say RPG cant work outside of a fantasy setting or would not work in a game based on real life
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
1. 'RPG' intent back in the days of D&D was actually designed with realism in mind. The attributes and skills for the most part where applied to qualities we have in real life, strength, dexterity etc. Only areas such as 'magic' would be specific to a genre.
That might be the most ridiculous thing that I've ever read about D&D. Did you know that D&D stood for Dungeons and DRAGONS?
You know, it’s kind of a given in a fantasy setting that something will be fantastic. Not in the “great” meaning, but “imaginative or fanciful; remote from reality”.
Even then inside that genre any given piece can be more realistic than others. In D&D arrows don’t do much damage to skeletons, blunt weapons do the most. While skeletons moving without muscle or tendon is fantastic, the effects realistic weapons have on them is realistic. You can even have a realistic dragon. A dragon is just a creature that has a mix of physical attributes that other real creatures do. A realistic dragon may only have 4 limbs, and will have a wingspan that would appear capable of supporting it’s mass. An unrealistic dragon would have small wings that shouldn’t be able to allow flight. In realistic fiction they will explain how the reality works logically, anything else works as we are familiar with it. So in short, yes, a fantasy game can be realistic. It refers to the bulk of the details.
That aside, that response is a pet peeve of mine, I agree with the article. While it’s no surprise that it has a lot of RPG elements are in The Division, it was supposed to be more on an MMORPG after all, it seems they have taken the easy route adding them in. Giving someone food could get you information on where weapons or supplies are, in effect giving you a mini mission. The multiple agents thing could have been easily explained too. Working as part of a larger group doesn’t mean you can’t be a hero.
1. 'RPG' intent back in the days of D&D was actually designed with realism in mind. The attributes and skills for the most part where applied to qualities we have in real life, strength, dexterity etc. Only areas such as 'magic' would be specific to a genre.
That might be the most ridiculous thing that I've ever read about D&D. Did you know that D&D stood for Dungeons and DRAGONS?
You know, it’s kind of a given in a fantasy setting that something will be fantastic. Not in the “great” meaning, but “imaginative or fanciful; remote from reality”.
Even then inside that genre any given piece can be more realistic than others. In D&D arrows don’t do much damage to skeletons, blunt weapons do the most. While skeletons moving without muscle or tendon is fantastic, the effects realistic weapons have on them is realistic. You can even have a realistic dragon. A dragon is just a creature that has a mix of physical attributes that other real creatures do. A realistic dragon may only have 4 limbs, and will have a wingspan that would appear capable of supporting it’s mass. An unrealistic dragon would have small wings that shouldn’t be able to allow flight. In realistic fiction they will explain how the reality works logically, anything else works as we are familiar with it. So in short, yes, a fantasy game can be realistic. It refers to the bulk of the details.
That aside, that response is a pet peeve of mine, I agree with the article. While it’s no surprise that it has a lot of RPG elements are in The Division, it was supposed to be more on an MMORPG after all, it seems they have taken the easy route adding them in. Giving someone food could get you information on where weapons or supplies are, in effect giving you a mini mission. The multiple agents thing could have been easily explained too. Working as part of a larger group doesn’t mean you can’t be a hero.
I'm not arguing that some fantasy settings can't be more or less realistic than other fantasy settings (although I would never call any fantasy setting realism - like you said, it's a given). But certainly D&D was not one of the more realistic ones. Floating masses of eyeballs that control your mind unless you roll a dice to see if your saving throw was effective is not only not realism, but it also an enormous abstraction based on statistics. D&D is a game. The guy literally said, "'RPG' intent back in the days of D&D was actually designed with realism in mind." That's just false and his interpretation on how statistics are a way of bringing realism to a game is also false. He invented his position out of thin air. And while I agree that statistics work pretty well to help get people to be able to relate to their character, they don't promote realism in any way.
Anyway, in no way am I saying RPGs can't work in a realistic setting. I will say that to some people it is off putting though (as shown in the article).
Strength: Determine types of guns/ammo you can carry and how much
Speed: Determine how fast you sprint and aim
Endurance: How much health you have and how long you can sprint
Intelligence: What types of gadgets/devices you can use in the battlefield and how good they work.
Luck: How fast you find new weapons in game
Just that alone would make the RPG part better and give more variety to character types.
stats are called different since the 2nd RPG, the division is nothing unusual in that sense.
they have 3 main stats, one for each "classing" choice, and ALOT of substats.
you think they should use other stats? well, that's why people make their own PnP RPGs after some time. if you wanna do that on PC; i suggest you start studying game devlopment :P
but seriously, those statistics are fantasy stats, actually hardly used in modern day or sci fi RPGs.
aaaalso, if you wanna go for the basics, speed would be called agillity or dexterity *G*
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Comments
I must say now that I've read this article from Mr. Steven Messner a fellow Canadian. I see what he mean's. but I have video interview that was done prior to his article from EPN.tv and some of the questions you asked were answered r by the devs . they stated the division agency its self , isn't a military organization and cause of that the agent's self reliant in this video to victor Lucas. i guess the vendors represent this part tat your not supplied by a military organization the detail are below in this link below
Yes, the dissonance is probably more apparent in a game that aims at a "realistic" setting, but it's abundant in most RPG's. When it's less apparent it usually results in a highly acclaimed GOTY, but that's a rare occasion.
Perhaps "The Last of Us" came close, if only they could have plausibly explained why there were so many newly infected everywhere in the world, when you almost never saw virus-free people anywhere...
It feels weird to come to @SEANMCAD's defense but he was talking about the part you did not highlight. But I think you knew that.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
For instance, intelligence affects spell resists (saving throws) and amount of spells you can learn. It's wrong on so many levels. That you roll dice to find out what your skills are doesn't represent realism at all. D&D is extremely game mechanic heavy. Maybe the MOST game mechanic heavy popular offering up till it was released ever. There is nothing about the stats in D&D that make them realistic. And D&D was certainly never designed with realism in mind.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
Dice rolls are an abstraction within the game. They are intended not to be realistic, but to be part of a game. And D&D specifically makes huge abstractions based on those stats. On top of that, D&D is FANTASY which means D&D isn't realism in the game sense or the setting sense. But really, these abstractions of reality are the very basis for the game and realism was never intended at all.
To answer your question directly, in order to figure out skills in a game, for the most direct realism, you state them directly. You say that your character can bench 200 lbs. Your character was a great tennis player which means they have quick reactions. Compare Counter Strike to the Division and you can see why one is considered more realistic than the other. While both have realistic settings, it is the game mechanics themselves that make the Division lack any serious realism.
And to reiterate, stats are an abstraction meant for a game. Dice rolling games are meant to be played and are not meant to be realistic.
I'm going to give you an "Insightful" for the effort instead of a "LOL" for totally missing the point.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
There's just no way I should have to shoot someone 200 times to kill them no matter how bad a boss they might be. RPG or not, they needed to get the shooter mechanics down first and foremost and they fucked it up royally.
It's not a great game, it's not even a good game. It's a bad game with bad design, bad mechanics and dumbed down gameplay. Par for the course given the standard of most games in the last several years.
It's vey pretty though, credit where it's due, but I value challenge over eye candy.
Nothing released lately I can assure you. If you want to play something decent go and get Black Mesa.
However it turns me right off.I was quitting COD games for good anyhow because of cheating but the rpg elements also had me not wanting to play.
Black Mesa ...?Rings a bell is that like a Half Life mod?I really loved the Half life games,i would buy a new one in a heartbeat,really odd how Valve just seem to abandon the series,one of the greatest of all time.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
I'm a big fan of cover shooters. I think my first one was Winback on the N64.. aside from Time Crisis in the Arcade. I'm sure there are other ones out there, but they always seemed more tactical and calculating.
I like the additional RPG elements for classing in a genre that is pretty poor on classes. Shooters never really get classes right, everything boils down to the majority of damage being weapon focused, and no real classes are needed.
While that could also hold true, a cohesive team in TD excels when team members are focused on class objectives. Sure you can run a more balanced spec, but you can easily tell the difference between playing a DPS, Healer, Tank, or other support class in comparison to games like -- say -- destiny where everyone was mostly the same apart from grenades and special abilities.
If it works great in solo games it is going to work great in MMOs. If it works great in RPG's then it is going to work great in shooters. This is not trying to create an holistic gaming vision, its pick and mix at the candy store.
The attribute of STR is not linked to fantasy, not is INT, nor is WIS, nor is CHAR.
do you evern know what those statnd for?
STR is strength which might affect your ability to hold a large sword..or...use a large pipe found on the ground of new york
INT is for intelligence which will affect your ability to learn a spell....or...understand a technical manual on how to hack a computer found in new york
WIS is for wisdom which I forget what this was good for I think clerics, anyway could it not translate to a modern settting or is this your one way out of it...lets try...;)
CHAR is charasma you chance to get what you need in a conversation. really? conversations only happen i fantasty settings?
sometimes i think there are people will literally study the attributes of thier character in Fallout and then 10 mins later say RPG cant work outside of a fantasy setting or would not work in a game based on real life
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
You know, it’s kind of a given in a fantasy setting that something will be fantastic. Not in the “great” meaning, but “imaginative or fanciful; remote from reality”.
Even then inside that genre any given piece can be more realistic than others. In D&D arrows don’t do much damage to skeletons, blunt weapons do the most. While skeletons moving without muscle or tendon is fantastic, the effects realistic weapons have on them is realistic. You can even have a realistic dragon. A dragon is just a creature that has a mix of physical attributes that other real creatures do. A realistic dragon may only have 4 limbs, and will have a wingspan that would appear capable of supporting it’s mass. An unrealistic dragon would have small wings that shouldn’t be able to allow flight. In realistic fiction they will explain how the reality works logically, anything else works as we are familiar with it. So in short, yes, a fantasy game can be realistic. It refers to the bulk of the details.
That aside, that response is a pet peeve of mine, I agree with the article. While it’s no surprise that it has a lot of RPG elements are in The Division, it was supposed to be more on an MMORPG after all, it seems they have taken the easy route adding them in. Giving someone food could get you information on where weapons or supplies are, in effect giving you a mini mission. The multiple agents thing could have been easily explained too. Working as part of a larger group doesn’t mean you can’t be a hero.
Anyway, in no way am I saying RPGs can't work in a realistic setting. I will say that to some people it is off putting though (as shown in the article).
stats are called different since the 2nd RPG, the division is nothing unusual in that sense.
they have 3 main stats, one for each "classing" choice, and ALOT of substats.
you think they should use other stats? well, that's why people make their own PnP RPGs after some time. if you wanna do that on PC; i suggest you start studying game devlopment :P
but seriously, those statistics are fantasy stats, actually hardly used in modern day or sci fi RPGs.
aaaalso, if you wanna go for the basics, speed would be called agillity or dexterity *G*
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"