Realism in Games - What does it mean?

Realism in games is, in my opinion, first dictated by how it fits into the games world, if it makes sense in its setting. Secondly its up to personal preference, the individual perception. The realism does not have to resemble our own, but only make sense within it its world. Though I would also argue that the game would benefit from basing aspects of its realism on our world to make it more relatable. Morrowind for instance is very alien, but all its workings, realism, and logic are partly based on aspects from the real world.

This topic somewhat blends into that of immersion (the suspense of disbelief, to be "sucked" in). One does not necessarily need to eat, sleep or feel the cold to be immersed, but in a game like Skyrim some would prefer it this way (myself included). To achieve this we will install mods that make the game more realistic in the sense that it more closely resembles the rules of our world. To what degree this is needed is, as said, entirely up to the individual, how they perceive it fitting within their perception of the game.

I was inspired by a video by Gopher, "Should Fantasy Games be Realistic?". He talks mostly about fantasy games, but I feel the question can be put to any game genre. Certain elements of any game have to be "gamy" in the sense that they have to contain certain mechanics that are established across game genres. By this I mean things like an inventory menu, control schemes, quest structure, world design and so on. Some games try to work around this, like the Metro games by displaying ammo on the weapon (among other things), but it is in general an accepted fact that normally does not retract from the experience.

But beyond this, to what degree should a game try to achieve realism? And how should they define realism? Should it be based purely on our world, entirely within its own, or a hybrid?

Also in Metal Gear Solid 2 how you could shoot the ice cubes in the ice cube bucket. That should be in every game.

Who cares? Completely unrealistic games like Bayonetta 2 or Pac Man DX should be just as viable as ARMA 3 or DCS.

I don't worry too too much about realism in games, because for me, they're an escape from reality. But, I do really want to see a game that takes murdering enemies very seriously. Like having to kill someone is the absolute last resort to make progress, and you only kill a handful of people over the entire game.

I want to feel bad for having to take someone's life in a game, instead of being desensitized to laying waste to scores of nameless bad guys. It could be interesting. Is there a game already that's at least tried something like this and I don't know about it?

I recommend you check out I Am Alive. It's not great but it does do that well.

@corevi: I completely agree, I just wanted to see what the user opinion was on this topic. In Bayonetta everything is crazy and large, but it works because you feel it fits. My argument isn't that realism makes a game better, but rather what it means to create a realism in games. Some of my favorite games are Mark of the Ninja and Super Mario Galaxy, two very different games that deals with realism in very different ways. It doesn't have to look or feel like the real world, but only make sense within itself, in my opinion.

@nickhead I agree with it being an escape, but when I consider reality in games isn't that I want it to look like my own, quite the opposite. I'm more interested in how the game constructs realism and if it follows it's own set of rules and how to govern this. In Dark Souls you die easily, similar to the real world, while other games recover your health by simply hiding and staying out of harms way. One is not better than the other, they are both legitimate interpretations of how death works in the real world. But some prefer the more "realistic" death, the quick one, where you feel more human and vulnerable. I'm just interested in your opinions.