Project Reality Forums

Realism =/= Difficulty...

Wolfe wrote:Have any of you actually fired a live weapon? Tried to move, stop, and shoot? I have. It takes MUCH longer than the ridiculous 1-3 seconds that currently exists in-game. War-time veterans will tell you it takes 1-3 clips to kill just one man because by the time you've fired your first 1-3 shots and missed, he's already gone for cover. There are many factors involved in shooting than just stop, drop, and kill:

• Momentum
• Stance shifting time
• Muscle twitching, blood pulse
• Reacquisition, tracking time of moving targets

BF2 has NONE of these factors, making aiming and killing a simple twitch of the mouse. I think many of you are thankful for that because you'd rather run around and instantly kill whatever is on your cursor in a second or less without worrying about any degree of realism or simulated human reaction. Pure impatience, pure instant-gratification that has nothing to do with realism. So when things like deviation and cones of fire are introduced, all you people do is ***** and complain "wtf I put my cursor on him and he didn't die. This deviation sucks!"

If real life had anything close to PR's current deviation, wars would be over in seconds. You could spot an enemy, fire, and kill the target in 1-3 shots lasting less than 3 seconds. That scenario is completely absurd yet this is exactly what people want in the game.

The current physics make everyone a champion competition shooter. It's disgusting, and making PR no different than any other run'n gun shooter out there. It's getting annoying.

I've tried to tell you this before Wolfe, but, how you are describing PR is correct. That is what PR is like, and what it's been even more like over the last 2 years. So does it surprise you that lots of the people who have enjoyed this game and loved this game over the last 2 years, are people who like how PR is?

It's only logical that if PR has played a certain way in 0.3, 0.4. 0.5, 0.6 for like 18 months, that it built up a player base of people who love how the game is. Why would it attract tons of people who felt that the game was shitty and annoying (like you)? Like I don't like 3rd person MMO's and you don't see me joining one and then complaining that it's not in first person and that it's lame. No, I would simply never even play that mmo.

If PR has never been super realistic, and it's always been a fun fast paced FPS (lol, i mean it's still WAY slower than ALL fps games out there) then the people who play it must like it that way.

Wolfe wrote:BF2 has NONE of these factors, making aiming and killing a simple twitch of the mouse. I think many of you are thankful for that because you'd rather run around and instantly kill whatever is on your cursor in a second or less without worrying about any degree of realism or simulated human reaction. Pure impatience, pure instant-gratification that has nothing to do with realism. So when things like deviation and cones of fire are introduced, all you people do is ***** and complain "wtf I put my cursor on him and he didn't die. This deviation sucks!"

YES, that's exactly right! I have no interest in simulated human reaction. But it's hardly pure impatience, as an SL in PR you need patience for sure.

Wolfe wrote:The current physics make everyone a champion competition shooter.

You're not quite right. There's tons of noobs that can't aim that well. The only reason I'm getting killed by noobs with bad aim these days is because of the suppression.

Wolfe wrote:It's disgusting, and making PR no different than any other run'n gun shooter out there. It's getting annoying.

Perhaps PR just isn't for you Wolfe. There's other games out there like Arma, and the devs have said many times that they aren't making this game for the masses, and that if you don't like it then just stop playing it.

(I say that a bit tongue in cheek, but do you see how bloody annoying it is when someone says that **** to you? Now you know how annoying it is lol.) I think you are a good guy Wolfe, but you are on a mission to turn PR into a game I wouldn't like, and I've been playing PR for 2 years so, I'd be disappointed if that happened, already I think the suppression is a step in the wrong direction.

I don't think any of this matters untill the ballistics have been fixed.
Pointless discussion IMO.

Ya know, many people complained about the idea of removing SL spawning and increasing the deviation in .7 yet went on to become the most popular release to date, thus proving that sometimes people think they want something until you show them something better.

If accuracy were done correctly, I think people would appreciate the extra layers of dynamic play it would create then realize that "shoot-kill, shoot-kill" is as one-dimensional and boring as pong.

personaly i have found that since the release of .75, the enjoyment factor is back. i don't hit everything all the time, but i will tell you i certianly think twice before i stick my head out to see whats around.

on another not wolfe, i thought the sniper only map was a great idea, i will just take it once step further and hope if and when such a map is releaced we have some high classed 24 / 7 server to host it. it might free up spots in other severs.

Sgt.Smeg wrote:I don't think any of this matters untill the ballistics have been fixed.
Pointless discussion IMO.

If indeed they can be fixed. Then yeah, correct.

'[DVB wrote: Avalon.ca;635733']i thought the sniper only map was a great idea

I was being sarcastic.

From most of the responses here, I can see that the majority of people who play PR won't have their minds changed about this.
It seems that the largest chunk of PR gamers come from the lightning speed world of Counter Strike, Halo, and other fast paced FPSs. So adding in realistic aspects to weapon deviation and accuracy would naturally be unappealing to the majority of PR players.

Just look at what people have posted here.
One of the first posters says, "we don't need weapon deviation."
Another says, "I thought an all sniper map was a good idea!"

C'mon! This is Project Reality, not Project Boom Headshot. Not Project Counter Strike, or Project Quake.

For myself, PR is one of the closest mods to realistic infantry combat I've played. I actually enjoy firefights that last a while, and the deviation and accuracy from 0.75 takes away from that. If I wanted to play a game where I can run and fire full auto and get multiple headshots, I'd play Counter Strike...but I don't, I play this instead because for once I thought the developers wanted something different from what every other FPS game is like out there.
It was said in the beginning that PR wasn't being made for the public...something along the lines of "it's our mod if you don't like it then don't play it."
To my understanding that shifted to, "this mod is for the public, your influence counts" which really isn't that much better since it seems the public and the majority of the dev team LIKE the fact they can pop someone in less then 3 seconds.

I'll continue to hope for more realistic accuracy and deviation as long as I play this mod. I hope the developers won't let PR turn into just another FPS mod.

Halcyon wrote:If I wanted to play a game where I can run and fire full auto and get multiple headshots, I'd play Counter Strike...

Have you ever played CS..?

Wolfe wrote:I was being sarcastic.

so was i

People.

Dont forget the engine limits.

Yes, you cam make weapons more "inaccurate", but how does the shooter know if he's holding the gun wrong or right? He cant see it. It is confusing.

And what about CQB? Yes, it may not be as fast as Counter Strike, but i doubt you'll need 10 seconds to shoot someone who's two meters in front of you with a pistol. If you add more deviation, you have the situation again: A knife is more effective than a gun in CQB.

Thats BF2. Its difficult to change that. So the devs had to find a way to make it not too fast, but still enjoyable and realistic in other situations than the usual range. Of course, in other games it may be possible to have both, realistic CQB AND realistic ranged combat, but BF2 is a hard engine to mod on.

I'm not an expert, but i think a main factor for the unrealistic aspects of PR are simply the engine. Without visible weapon sway and without balistics, its just damn hard to simulate the feelings of a soldier in combat.
Look at the suppressing-effects. They had to be added, because BF2 isnt able to simulate it better.

Halcyon wrote: It seems that the largest chunk of PR gamers come from the lightning speed world of Counter Strike, Halo, and other fast paced FPSs. So adding in realistic aspects to weapon deviation and accuracy would naturally be unappealing to the majority of PR players.

That’s a rather broad generalization based on small sample grouping don’t you think? Especially considering the apparent reasoning behind it was:

Halcyon wrote: Just look at what people have posted here.
One of the first posters says, "we don't need weapon deviation."
Another says, "I thought an all sniper map was a good idea!"

Only Alex6714 made that statement and reading through the thread, the people that replied to his statement all disapprove or disagree about his views. And WOLFE (who seems to be part of TF21)/ [DVB] Avalon.ca made the comment regarding sniper maps in sarcasm.

Halcyon wrote:From most of the responses here, I can see that the majority of people who play PR won't have their minds changed about this.

Okay, what are you proposing exactly? Revert the deviation system back to 0.7? From all the posts in this thread, you have yet to clearly propose or suggest a solution to the problem you are stating, and if you did, you did not elaborate on it to make it convincing.

If you are suggesting the deviation system be switched back to 0.7 then I’d have to disagree, not because I’m an impatient FPS gamer who does not appreciate realism but rather because that would be counter-productive.

There are problems with 0.7 deviation that 0.75 deviation solved, for example the huge deviation increase when making minor adjustments to the aim without moving and like you’ve stated the G3 problems. And as you’ve stated there are also problems with 0.75 that needs to be fixed. If we just revert 0.75 back to 0.7 deviation then the problems we’ve fixed would come back to haunt us and we would have to keep on compromising between the 0.75/0.7 deviation, resulting in no steps forward whatsoever.

I apologize if I’m misinterpreting your exact intentions but you have not made them clear and that is the reason why I’m not supporting your ambiguous proposal. I’ve made a proposal/ suggestion that could solve the problem you’ve state:

PRC_Heavy_Z wrote: In my opinion, the modification that the deviation needs in order to solve the problems you've stated would be to make the deviation remain constant when shooting.

Here is what I mean:

A rifleman runs then stop and immediately starts shooting (at highest deviation), while he is shooting the deviation SHOULD NOT decrease but remain constant. When he stops shooting and he does not walk/ run (stationary), the deviation would then resume decrease till he is at max accuracy.

This would significantly hinder the accuracy of the trigger happy runners and prone-divers from hitting much of anything. Therefore solving the problem.

Now propose yours and elaborate on it, if your idea for solving this problem you’ve stated is logical then I myself would full heartedly support it and I’m sure a vast majority would also.

Waaah_Wah wrote:Have you ever played CS..?

Yes.

To PRC_Heavy Z:

I already proposed a solution in my original post, which is going back to 0.7 weapon deviation.

PRC_Heavy_Z wrote: If you are suggesting the deviation system be switched back to 0.7 then I’d have to disagree, not because I’m an impatient FPS gamer who does not appreciate realism but rather because that would be counter-productive.

It is already counter-productive as it is, the accuracy seems to be closely related to the v.6, rather than v.7.

PRC_Heavy_Z wrote:There are problems with 0.7 deviation that 0.75 deviation solved, for example the huge deviation increase when making minor adjustments to the aim without moving and like you’ve stated the G3 problems. And as you’ve stated there are also problems with 0.75 that needs to be fixed. If we just revert 0.75 back to 0.7 deviation then the problems we’ve fixed would come back to haunt us and we would have to keep on compromising between the 0.75/0.7 deviation, resulting in no steps forward whatsoever.

Like Rico11b stated, v.7 is WAY more realistic than v.75. Reverting back to v.7 is not a problem, but rather the more realistic approach.

It IS a problem, because of the other unrealistic aspects of high deviation, like unrealistic CQB, and the still not existing weapon sway animation.

Halcyon wrote:...which is going back to 0.7 weapon deviation.

Well, like I said in my previous post, the problem with that is 0.7 had problems that were fixed in 0.75. Therefore it'd be counter-productive and it'd also be like killing a fly with a cannon. Of course I agree that 0.75's deviation still needs some tweaking but reverting it back isn't the best answer.

If there are any DEV's still looking at this thread, it'd be helpful to know what changes were made to the deviation system since 0.7 and this discussion could then actually go somewhere.

Halcyon wrote:Yes.

Somehow i find it hard to believe when your claiming that you can get multiple headshots on full auto...

Anyways, whats so unrealistic with guns that hit where you aim?

Waaah_Wah wrote: Anyways, whats so unrealistic with guns that hit where you aim?

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:Most ridiculous statement I've read on the forums of a game aimed towards realism.

Waaah_Wah wrote:Anyways, whats so unrealistic with guns that hit where you aim?

To ask this question is to not understand the answer.