Over the years technology improves, meaning developers can achieve more, like the leap from 2D to 3D, graphical achievements such as lighting and particle effects, and applying realistic physics. We've got things like the Euphoria engine powering realistic AI reactions in The Force Unleashed, where storm troopers will attempt to grab onto something if they are pushed around with the Force.

Due to many of the graphical achievements and improving AI (more complicated scripted responses may be a more accurate description for some games), some games strive for realism. The problem is, once a game reaches for realism, what does not reflect reality, or at least plausibility, stands out all the more. Hands up, who has played Super Mario Bros? Did you ever question why a plumber can break blocks with his head, why he was jumping on turtles, or why flowers made him shoot fireballs? No, because you weren't expecting anything approaching realism.

I was playing Assassin's Creed the other night, where the guards do react somewhat realistically to your presence. I was on a rooftop, and a guard was 2 rooves over. I was not hiding, was clearly in plain sight, but he could not see me. It wasn't until I crossed over another roof that he drew back his bow and told me to leave. Realistically he should have seen me and shouted at me before I approached if I was not supposed to be on the rooftops. On another occasion, I assassinated a guard, and then returned to the scene of the crime. Another guard was standing several metres away, while citizens approached the body and said their piece; surely the guard nearby should have been standing over his dead comrade until the wheelbarrow came to pick him up? These might not be game changing, but because the game strives for such realism in the guards' behaviour, it sticks out when they don't react the way we think people should.

As well as expecting a more realistic response from characters in games, our expectations for environment interaction is rising. We want to be able to shoot stuff full of holes. We want walls to crumble when our grenades explode next to them. If we shoot a car tyre, we want it to affect how it handles as opposed to taking 5% off the cars 'health meter'. If a vehicle explodes, we want debris to spread realistically. We want water to ripple when we throw stuff in it. If we see a fence, we want our character to be able to climb over it.

While some things stand out in the games that strive for some sense of realism, we can only take our expectations of realism so far before it gets silly. If you stood in front of a stationary guard in Assassin's Creed and sidestepped left and right for a minute, surely he'd be getting annoyed that you were mocking him? Certain responses are just too obscure to program for. If I get non-fatally shot in Call of Duty 4, why don't I leave the hot zone, go get medical help, and get discharged because I can no longer perform my duty? That level of realism obviously wouldn't be fun to play.

So how much do the little things matter to you? Which side of the fence do you sit? If part of your arm clips through a wall, do you put down the controller or do you keep blasting dudes? Do you cry foul if you can't shoot out tyres in a modern sandbox game? Does a part of you die when you realise that your characters hair is made up of a few polygons instead of individually rendered strands? Realism is all well and good to strive for. In the end, I just want to play good games, realistic or otherwise.