Project Reality Forums

Customization would be amazing.

In my opinion, PR textures are just not sharp enough as ones in FH2 or Alpha.

Psykogundam wrote: I suppose he must mean visual quality. gameplay is really sound after all these years with emphasis on evolving the gameplay through the builds. But very little has been done to really push objects, textures and statics, apart from the vehiles and soldiers (which are great looking). The terrain never really got prettier, and things like trees and bushes have been left idle with crazy lines that hover in mid air and stuff, however the level layouts became far more advanced because it seems popular to build objects on google maps rather than try and structure the terrain according to how you might imagine it in your head. (imo)

The thing is we actually pushed that stuff too hard, not the other way round.

There are a few key things to consider here.

PR's View Distance for a start, much, much larger than vBF2 and FH2. This has a massive impact on pretty much everything. It affects the amount of objects you can have drawing, it affects the quality of the objects, the textures, the terrain detail etc etc.

The next is the sheer amount of assets we have. What some of you may not be aware of, a few releases ago we had to do a massive amount of scaling down on the quality of our vehicle and weapon textures from 2048x2048 pixels, to 1024x1024 pixels, that is 1/4 its original size and most things have never looked anything like as good since. This was done to stop players CTDing on load from running out of memory, when loading all these different vehicle and weapon textures, which use to happen a lot. Now its very rare but we had to sacrifice a lot to get a more stable game.

Then there is the matter of us using a lot of stuff, we didn't even make (with permission). vBF2 assets, assets from other mods etc which most of this stuff basically doesn't match up to the quality of the stuff we have made ourselves. I will agree some of the stuff we have made isn't very good, but most of it is top notch work, easily comparable to FH2's work (with its original textures etc).

For PR thou its mainly been more and more a matter of quantity rather than quality and that has shaped some of our work over the past few years dramatically as well which I would add allowing some assets into the mod which would have never passed our original quality standards but as time goes on I hope we move more back to quality, with quantity as much as possible, with optimizing in as many areas as we can and what I've been spending most of my time on over the past couple of years but its a very slow process and one most people are not that interested in either.

So to summarise, you really can't compare FH2 and PR, in the same way you can't really compare apples with oranges. They are two totally different mods, made in two very different ways, with very different ideas on gameplay etc but at the end of the day, both very, very good mods in there own right.

Now if this topic continues being a "FH2 vs PR vs AP" topic, it will be locked with perhaps a few infarctions given out too so stick to the facts people and leave the rest out.

the customization screen would be a useful tool for PR. For example, a class where more than two options for weaponry could apply. Choice of foregrip, or not, etc.

40mmrain wrote:Choice of foregrip, or not, etc.

Other than being a "cool" feature, it really offers nothing for gameplay and very little to immersion too, not to mention the massive amount of work involved to do this for all of PR's weapons.

While a choice of scopes, different weapons etc yes, could impact on gameplay, tbh what we can do there is pretty limited with keeping the same kind of gameplay PR has but yes, would be a useful feature.

The problem is finding someone with knowledge on how to do this and also getting it to work in line with our kit limiting system. I believe the kit limiting was the massive issue as to why this hasn't be done in the past, as adding customization would pretty much brake it but not 100% on that as it was a long time ago.

I, along with several others it would seem, am intrigued by the customization options. I could definitely see it serving a purpose in this mod.

Choosing between having a foregrip or not, and being able to choose your sights. Sure we can technically choose our sights now, the "primary" factions having scoped for the main version of a weapon and either iron, red dot, or eotech for the second choice. Some folks might want an eotech on their m4 as an AT, things like that.

My belief has always been non-combat or extremely specialized classes (such as Medic and HAT) should carry a slightly weaker weapon than their combat brethren, e.g. G3KA4 or M18A4 without the foregrip, etc, but that's neither here nor there.

How much work, by the way, would it take to add a sub-menu to the crate kit-request system (something like a sidebar) where players could select optics, etc? (... I know, I should find out myself...)

RealKail wrote:I, along with several others it would seem, am intrigued by the customization options. I could definitely see it serving a purpose in this mod.

Choosing between having a foregrip or not, and being able to choose your sights. Sure we can technically choose our sights now, the "primary" factions having scoped for the main version of a weapon and either iron, red dot, or eotech for the second choice. Some folks might want an eotech on their m4 as an AT, things like that.

Foregrip and other cosmetic changes aren't necessary, but otherwise this would be much better than the current system, which is clunky as all hell: Don't want a Mepro sight as an IDF medic/want to remove the scope from your MG? Better find a box then.

That adjustable EOTech is kinda cool as well.

[R-DEV]AfterDune wrote:My personal opinion is that it's cool, but it takes a lot of effort to get it working, without adding much to the game. Perhaps if someone from the community steps up and spends time on this, it'll be accepted. Otherwise, I don't see it coming to PR any time soon as there are far more important tasks that need to be done.

Agreed. All resources should be diverted to fixing the chopper sound bug =D

Seriously though, why are so many of you clowns obsessed with accessories for your guns? Would be a complete waste of devs' time IMO. Let's focus on gameplay features here.

Hmm, it would be good to see customization options, but one other way it could be done by randomizing the alternative kits.

Rifleman
Std - M16 ACOG
Alt - M16 EOTech/Aimpoint/IS

And so on. You could randomly get one of those alt kits while requesting the alt version of rifleman.

This is one way to do it without adding any buttons so to speak.

The next is the sheer amount of assets we have. What some of you may not be aware of, a few releases ago we had to do a massive amount of scaling down on the quality of our vehicle and weapon textures from 2048x2048 pixels, to 1024x1024 pixels, that is 1/4 its original size and most things have never looked anything like as good since. This was done to stop players CTDing on load from running out of memory, when loading all these different vehicle and weapon textures, which use to happen a lot. Now its very rare but we had to sacrifice a lot to get a more stable game.

Yeah this always saddened me, though perhaps if we can optimise the maps enough we can put a few at least back up. The lightmap atlas numbers were always a underestimated RAM drain.

Screw customization, I want that UH-1Y Venom

(are the Cobra and the Huey being replaced anytime soon or is that way down the to-do list?)

Checks out video in link.

Nice! That's neat-o


But yeah I can totally understand if PR cannot take the weapons customization system along with the current PR kit request system.

And given the amount of assets PR already handles in game, it's perfectly fine why the graphics cannot be pushed too far.

Thank you for your detailed post Rhino.

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote: The next is the sheer amount of assets we have. What some of you may not be aware of, a few releases ago we had to do a massive amount of scaling down on the quality of our vehicle and weapon textures from 2048x2048 pixels, to 1024x1024 pixels, that is 1/4 its original size and most things have never looked anything like as good since. This was done to stop players CTDing on load from running out of memory, when loading all these different vehicle and weapon textures, which use to happen a lot. Now its very rare but we had to sacrifice a lot to get a more stable game.

I never really noticed this, do you have any pictures to compare?

What is with the already existing switching of weapons like in BF2 vanilla?
Why its not possible to set 4 Kits all the same but only different sight. (Models that already exists)

So with kitrequest on crate only 2 versions are avalable (like now), but in spawn menue are more.

Example Squad Leader: Iron Sight, Red Dot, Eotech, Scope ...
Medic: Iron Sight, Red Dot, Eotech ...

A nother good thing is that the spawn menue don?t has so mutch kits and you could add i dont know more spawn menue kits. Like mobile UAV_Kit for example.

Alpha Project and FH2 dont even have the gameplay, tactic and feeling to 1% right.

Navo wrote:I never really noticed this, do you have any pictures to compare?

Sure,

1024x1024 (what it is ingame currently): http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/2609 ... 003453.jpg
2048x2048: http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/6687 ... 004930.jpg

Best way to view the difference is to put the links in the same tab, fully load each pic, then switch back and forth between them.

Apart from the massive difference in detail on the textures, you can also see the huge amount of dds compression that's on the 1024x1024 version which also makes it look worse than it already is, which is a lot less visible on a higher rez texture, even thou both textures are saved in excatly the same formats (DXT5, all mips, other than the normal maps which are DXT1, no alpha, all mips, which is the same as they where before too).

cant we haz HD texture pack of some sorts?

ChallengerCC wrote: Alpha Project and FH2 dont even have the gameplay, tactic and feeling to 1% right.

Eeeh, I think what you mean is that FH2 and AP don't have the same gameplay as PR

karambaitos wrote:cant we haz HD texture pack of some sorts?

No, because even if you have a 64bit OS and a sh*t load of ram, BF2 is still a 32bit application and as such, can only use a maximum of 3 or 4gbs (can't remember which one and if the PC has less than that, w/e the PC has).

Not to mention all the md5 problems you would have and if we removed that, cheaters would change the colours of vehicles to bright colours so they could easily see, identify and shoot the enemy, even players just installing "custom skin packs" without intending to have an advantage, may have an advantage, or even a disadvantage as a result (although most likely an advantage).

Pvt.LHeureux wrote:Eeeh, I think what you mean is that FH2 and AP don't have the same gameplay as PR

Indeed, ChallengerCC don't turn this into a Vs. topic...

Mariospeedwagen wrote:Seriously though, why are so many of you clowns obsessed with accessories for your guns? Would be a complete waste of devs' time IMO. Let's focus on gameplay features here.

Exactly. I'm sure that even if the DEVS decided to add any of these features, that you wouldn't see them for a year or more. They just aren't important at all.

I'm not telling you to GTFO and go play COD or BF3, but if you want these accessories, go play BF3 or COD, they have spent a lot of time on these things and seem to be just fine.

All they are are accessories, they can't bring anything valuable to the game.

LOL if the devs emphasized "cool" features/visuals and not realism, playability, and balance I dont think I would still be playing PR. Some people miss the point of PR. Graphics are nice, so are static objects but at what cost? Server stability and more CTD. We have enough features and CTDs/server crash as is.