I was just thinking about film/literature and how liberal they are with their use or understanding of science and 'known' truths in order to make a more cinematic and enjoyable experience. My favourite example of this is the UV bombs that have light travelling round corners though there was a list published a month or so ago listing the top ten scientifically impossible/believable things in films.
Now, with games' push towards realism increasing rapidly this generation (IMO) with Farcry 2, crysis and all the other physically realistic games coming and already out along with the hugely improved visuals, do you prefer the 'correct' attributes of the universe to be used in play or are you more looking forward to liberal interpretations?
Myself? I'm looking forward to the physically accurate games that don't have objects bouncing and sliding down frictionless surfaces.... the bullets dipping over range (hopefully in Farcry 2 where there's 850 metres of visibility), ricocheting and perhaps dud rounds.
On the other hand, i also want unfeasibly large explosions and over-the-top acrobatics that are in the upcoming razor's edge and another game that i've conveniently forgotten the title to.
So which is it? Do you prefer one or the other, or a bit of both.