Is PR moving away from realism?
-
Psycho
- Posts: 114
- Joined: 2009-07-12 18:32
Is PR moving away from realism?
This isn't ment to start any flame wars but its just something I was thinking about.
I think PR is starting to move away from realism and more for balance. Anybody else think so?
I think PR is starting to move away from realism and more for balance. Anybody else think so?
-
Roborob
- Posts: 132
- Joined: 2009-01-06 15:18
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
Well it should. But I disagree with you that it is. look at the recent Medic changes, AR changes and the little direction thing on the Map. I mean Hell the AR is barely balanced right now.
I think it should be balanced so its not too frustrating/boring. But I don't think that its happening now more than ever.
EDIT: Gotcha
I think it should be balanced so its not too frustrating/boring. But I don't think that its happening now more than ever.
EDIT: Gotcha
Last edited by Roborob on 2009-08-20 20:27, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: To positivly respond to mod
Reason: To positivly respond to mod
Call me Rob ingame


-
Bob_Marley
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 7745
- Joined: 2006-05-22 21:39
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
Thread moved to appropriate forum section
The key to modernising any weapon is covering them in glue and tossing them in a barrel of M1913 rails until they look "Modern" enough.
Many thanks to [R-DEV]Adriaan for the sig!
Many thanks to [R-DEV]Adriaan for the sig!
-
Psycho
- Posts: 114
- Joined: 2009-07-12 18:32
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
Yes balance is a good thing but isn't realism the point of PR. Like how headshots aren't always an auto kill and I've gotten a headshot and he got revived. I mean in real life if you get shot in the head your dead not much of a chance of living
-
Roborob
- Posts: 132
- Joined: 2009-01-06 15:18
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
Debatable.Psycho wrote:Yes balance is a good thing but isn't realism the point of PR. Like how headshots aren't always an auto kill and I've gotten a headshot and he got revived. I mean in real life if you get shot in the head your dead not much of a chance of living
But I do agree with you that head shots should be fatal, and I want to know what else is becoming less realistic in your opinion. Do you have any other examples of what your talking about?
Call me Rob ingame


-
RememberTheAlamo
- Posts: 173
- Joined: 2009-02-12 00:58
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
Even if PR is becoming more unreal in one thing its trying to become more real in something else. And also its a game. Its almost impossible to make it absolutely real
-
hx.bjoffe
- Posts: 1062
- Joined: 2007-02-26 15:05
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
Back and forth, Forever
))<>((
))<>((
-
smart_boy00
- Posts: 153
- Joined: 2009-08-05 17:47
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
To me compared to BF2 its real enough as is. It could use some more details, but that’s just being picky.
-
Howitzer
- Posts: 648
- Joined: 2008-01-20 17:49
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
i you want more realism , go and see your nearest recruiting center
-
KingLorre
- Posts: 1893
- Joined: 2006-10-21 14:01
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
i tried that but i dint like the spawn times on those..Howitzer wrote:i you want more realism , go and see your nearest recruiting center
and next to that: the game needs balance in balance and realism, and i think that would mean that PR would never revert back to the ways of arcady bunnysnakedolphin bf2. howver i would like to see some more difference in the hardware both sides have. balancing it but with units that cancel eachotehr out, Tank>towhumvee and that load... toad.
-
Nox.
- Posts: 93
- Joined: 2009-08-02 14:40
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
If you want realism try ARMA or OFP. PR is still just a BF mod.
/prepares himself for geek flame barrage
/prepares himself for geek flame barrage
-
Twisted Helix
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 5145
- Joined: 2008-11-03 04:18
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
What do you want realism or gameplay ?
Realism --> You wander round on patrol holding your gun for 8 hours, nothing happens .. and on the way home in your vehicle you get hit by an IED, and spend the next 6 months in hospital .. . your leg gets amputated and you suffer from PTSS.
Gameplay --> You get to run around shooting folks in the thick of the action , experiencing an adrenaline rush, die , respawn and do it all over again. Then go for dinner and a pint down the pub.
Realism --> You wander round on patrol holding your gun for 8 hours, nothing happens .. and on the way home in your vehicle you get hit by an IED, and spend the next 6 months in hospital .. . your leg gets amputated and you suffer from PTSS.
Gameplay --> You get to run around shooting folks in the thick of the action , experiencing an adrenaline rush, die , respawn and do it all over again. Then go for dinner and a pint down the pub.
-
RememberTheAlamo
- Posts: 173
- Joined: 2009-02-12 00:58
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
wow nicely said and I totally agree with ya
-
DesmoLocke
- Posts: 1770
- Joined: 2008-11-28 19:47
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
Howitzer wrote:If you want more realism, go and see your nearest recruiting center.
Nothing else to say really.[R-DEV]Twisted Helix wrote:What do you want realism or gameplay ?
Realism --> You wander round on patrol holding your gun for 8 hours, nothing happens .. and on the way home in your vehicle you get hit by an IED, and spend the next 6 months in hospital .. . your leg gets amputated and you suffer from PTSS.
Gameplay --> You get to run around shooting folks in the thick of the action , experiencing an adrenaline rush, die , respawn and do it all over again. Then go for dinner and a pint down the pub.
Like I have said before, PR isn't about realism. It is about teamwork and coordination. Think of it as "Project Teamwork".
-
Chuc
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 7016
- Joined: 2007-02-11 03:14
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
Unfortunately 'Project Teamwork' doesn't have the same ring to it 
-
Rudd
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 21225
- Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
lets not pretend there is no room to wiggle.[R-DEV]Twisted Helix wrote:What do you want realism or gameplay ?
Realism --> You wander round on patrol holding your gun for 8 hours, nothing happens .. and on the way home in your vehicle you get hit by an IED, and spend the next 6 months in hospital .. . your leg gets amputated and you suffer from PTSS.
Gameplay --> You get to run around shooting folks in the thick of the action , experiencing an adrenaline rush, die , respawn and do it all over again. Then go for dinner and a pint down the pub.
Various PR mechanics can be changed to increase realism without destroying gameplay/
For example
Deviation (it will be a constant fight to get the appropriate levels I think, as arguements go both ways)
Vehicle Handling, choppers being too responsive or vehicles traveling too fast by default (not counting what you can do with a joystick)
effects (direct reference to Combined arms flares)
Weapon behaviour, deploy times for example. Is it realistic to take so long to bring ur weapon up? Deployed Vs Undeployed, which should have the long deploy time? (I would say undeployed should be fast and deloyed should be slow as the deloyed mode is you getting comfortable and steady, undeloyed is you standing ready for CQB)
Molotovs, coke can of death?
Kit geos - Medic has a hat?....
Thats off the top of my head,
All of the above can be tweaked to debatable levels possibly increasing realism without adversly damaging gameplay.
Unless there really is a stone tablet with the perfect settings for any PR mechanic.
-
Silverlance
- Posts: 38
- Joined: 2008-11-22 15:10
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
About gameplay, I would like the teams to not be so symetric, players need to adapt, and that brings a good challenge to gameplay, why do we need always to have a counter against all type of vehicles on that map?
Although Im not quite fan of insurgency, it's the best example how a "suposedly imbalanced assets" give no Sure Wins over insurgents, generally it's blufor who looses (by attrition true) but even conventional forces should need to adapt to the opposing force. An example of that taking place is on Monchegorsk, custom map made by Space, where one of it's layers, Russia gets 2 frogfoot and US gets apaches, you dont see a direct link between assets, you dont see the exact same type of assets on both teams, wich is the feeling I'm having while playing PR, everything as it's symmetrical.
A sugestion for this to be implemented, would be (pure exemple) US has to hold a city, imagine a city like Karbala spread with some flags, the city would have to be big enough to not feel like vBF2, US forces spawn inside the city, their assets may be a LB and a pair of .50cal hummers, while the opposing force would have APCs and maybe even 2 tanks! This sounds unbalanced... ^^ Well if US guys are smart enough, they will employ ambushes, guerrila tactics, they wont be running on open field waiting to get shelled by the tanks, actually inside the city, tanks won't be that usefull, one HAT on it's back and he is criticaly damaged, if not compeltely destroyed.
Maybe the oppfor on that map would be too vulnerable, open field they get the advantage, inside the city the roles exchange. And still you will not have TOW hummers running around hunting for tanks, like it happens on Ejod wich maybe is the most symmetrical map on PR, not only on assets but on it's design mainly.
After all this if your asking what is this on.topic, it is related to the Gameplay on PR, in "reality" you wont have a match for every type of force you may encounter, and when talking about fun, where is the fun if everything feels like the same with just another skin on it?
Although Im not quite fan of insurgency, it's the best example how a "suposedly imbalanced assets" give no Sure Wins over insurgents, generally it's blufor who looses (by attrition true) but even conventional forces should need to adapt to the opposing force. An example of that taking place is on Monchegorsk, custom map made by Space, where one of it's layers, Russia gets 2 frogfoot and US gets apaches, you dont see a direct link between assets, you dont see the exact same type of assets on both teams, wich is the feeling I'm having while playing PR, everything as it's symmetrical.
A sugestion for this to be implemented, would be (pure exemple) US has to hold a city, imagine a city like Karbala spread with some flags, the city would have to be big enough to not feel like vBF2, US forces spawn inside the city, their assets may be a LB and a pair of .50cal hummers, while the opposing force would have APCs and maybe even 2 tanks! This sounds unbalanced... ^^ Well if US guys are smart enough, they will employ ambushes, guerrila tactics, they wont be running on open field waiting to get shelled by the tanks, actually inside the city, tanks won't be that usefull, one HAT on it's back and he is criticaly damaged, if not compeltely destroyed.
Maybe the oppfor on that map would be too vulnerable, open field they get the advantage, inside the city the roles exchange. And still you will not have TOW hummers running around hunting for tanks, like it happens on Ejod wich maybe is the most symmetrical map on PR, not only on assets but on it's design mainly.
After all this if your asking what is this on.topic, it is related to the Gameplay on PR, in "reality" you wont have a match for every type of force you may encounter, and when talking about fun, where is the fun if everything feels like the same with just another skin on it?
*Rescue Rangers*
"You will never get lost if you follow us"
"You will never get lost if you follow us"
xfire: rdeagleeye
Visit us at:
[url]www.rr-clan.com[/url] No words to describe epicness.
http://www.realityteamwork.com/ Where Teamwork really exists.
-
Qaiex
- Posts: 7279
- Joined: 2009-02-28 21:05
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
PR was originally about realism, now it's about teamwork.. But even though realism is, teamwork doesn't mean realism has to be excluded in it's entirety.
Just parts of it.
Just parts of it.
Last edited by Qaiex on 2009-08-21 13:39, edited 1 time in total.
-
RHYS4190
- Posts: 959
- Joined: 2007-08-30 10:27
Re: Is PR moving away from realism?
This is basically what PR is about, game play teamwork and realism. all are equally important and are balance accordingly.
And like the others have said. there is ARMA 2 you could try, but there’s no promises you'd like that game ether, ARMA2 is one of those games you like or you absolutely hate. all i had to do was play the demo. and watch a 2 years old head shot a guy on the fly from 250m away whilst standing up with just a standard M-16, and i was firmly set in my loathing of the game.
People keep telling me that it more realistic the PR, it not, it just counter strike with a very big map.
absolutely horrible game
it one of those game's id chuck into a pit of hot coals.
And like the others have said. there is ARMA 2 you could try, but there’s no promises you'd like that game ether, ARMA2 is one of those games you like or you absolutely hate. all i had to do was play the demo. and watch a 2 years old head shot a guy on the fly from 250m away whilst standing up with just a standard M-16, and i was firmly set in my loathing of the game.
People keep telling me that it more realistic the PR, it not, it just counter strike with a very big map.
absolutely horrible game
it one of those game's id chuck into a pit of hot coals.
Last edited by RHYS4190 on 2009-08-21 15:15, edited 2 times in total.




