Page 1 of 1

Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 00:51
by Arnoldio
PR as we know it so far is a very basic or simple and straightforward game (mechanic wise ofcourse).

But is it too simple, making people think in the direction that game allows. But PR is more than that just by using some intuition and imagination.

Leaning is not possible with BF2 engine until Mosquill does something with it, but you can still do it to some point just by quickly peaking out of the corner. It isnt so effective but still...

Medevacs, sugessted 895865936459 times, but hey, its in the game from the day 1, what exactly is preventing you to call a chopper, revive the guy just before the chopper arrives and get yourself and the wounded (and possibly whole squad) and make the pilot fly you back to main or somewhere. See, possible without changing the gameplay.

Nukes. I think i saw a suggestion about adding nukes some time ago. Well, at the end of the round everybody dies and wouldnt that a nuke cause anyway? Its up to you or enemies or the clock timer to activate it, sadly you dont hear the effect but you wouldnt hear much of it anyway.

Cover system. Again same as leaning. Now with the deviation not resetting you can do all fun stuff as taking cover by or below the cover and peaking out and returning fire, at your risk ofcourse.

And i could put more stuff that i dont remember atm.

So yeah, PR is qute sandbox-ish so you dont really have to have all the fancy stuff ingame to make things work.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 00:58
by =Toasted=
At first I misunderstood what you were saying, But I understand now. I agree, PR is excellent as it is.
I would change the thread title though, because it sounds like at first that you are suggesting that these things be added to make PR "less boring" or something, not saying that they are un-needed.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 01:12
by Jigsaw
This post confuses me, have you been drinking Chiz? :lol:

If not can you elaborate further cos i'm really not sure what you're trying to say, although that might just be me :p

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 01:18
by yakuz
[R-MOD]Jigsaw wrote: although that might just be me :p
Nah i'm defninitely confused aswell. :-?

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 01:26
by Arnoldio
[R-MOD]Jigsaw wrote:This post confuses me, have you been drinking Chiz? :lol:

If not can you elaborate further cos i'm really not sure what you're trying to say, although that might just be me :p
I wish i could be drinking ffs... I will regret drivers license for years to come!

Im saying that many of the thigns suggested and mostly announced as hardcoded are actually ingame but you have to find the way to utilize them somehow. Either stuff not being accesible by key (leaning/cover) or forced by the game (medevac), blinds the players to only resort to what is actually a game function and not what they could do with the avaliable options.

You get it? :D

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 01:30
by Jigsaw
Ah yeah man I get it and it's a fair point. I shall copy/paste your thread when I have to lock suggestions like the ones mentioned ;) :D

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 01:38
by obZen
I would like the ability to mount pod weapons when crouching on ledges like on the top of a building.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 01:40
by Jigsaw
obZen wrote:I would like the ability to mount pod weapons when crouching on ledges like on the top of a building.
Not possible in the BF2 engine i'm afraid.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 01:54
by Spec
lol @ the two posts above.

I see what you're saying, Chiz. Though some of these things are not quite... effective.

When people suggest Medevacs, they want to be forced to use them, not waste important time on getting themselves back to base while the transport heli could be needed elsewhere.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 15:03
by BlackwaterSaxon
ChizNizzle wrote:I wish i could be drinking ffs... I will regret drivers license for years to come!

Im saying that many of the thigns suggested and mostly announced as hardcoded are actually ingame but you have to find the way to utilize them somehow. Either stuff not being accesible by key (leaning/cover) or forced by the game (medevac), blinds the players to only resort to what is actually a game function and not what they could do with the avaliable options.

You get it? :D
People probably would do the medevacs, if there was a special medevac button to press, shame people wait on prompts or dev notes to dictate what they can and cannot do in this game.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 17:08
by Looy
BlackwaterSaxon wrote:People probably would do the medevacs, if there was a special medevac button to press, shame people wait on prompts or dev notes to dictate what they can and cannot do in this game.
I'm pretty sure people would only use medivacs if it actually had some advantage.

Anyway, I agree with (the translated version of) the OP's post.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 18:46
by zenarion
Seeing as this is a "let's go crazy and suggest stuff" thread, I will like to suggest some kind of tank rescue vehicle. Them blown up tanks won't pull themselves back to base, right?

Also, why is there no dedicated medic group? Why are there no dudes setting up comm towers and antennae?
How come nobody cooks food? God damnit I was a cook in the army, and I want my job to be respected!

Seriously now. Nukes. What? Is this drunken posting?

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 19:05
by Nagard
I think I got your point Chiz (not sure though :P )

Apparently most of the players play this game straight focused on "winning" and not playing it to play it. Medevacs for example (as mentioned before) would be a really, really awesome thing, but you can't force players to do such a thing if there is no need to, to win the round.

Maybe if it would be possible to make server-sided changes (for example you will lie down wounded for 10 minutes without being able to give up or maybe a tank needs at least 30 rounds of Sabot to blow up, but will be immobilized after one or two, so you have to get there and repair it), there would be a few players who could like it (I definately would) and play there. That would be some kind of RPG gameplay though and most of the guys want some straight action. Give them a rifle and a guy patching them up: They're fine. They will go forward and if they die: So what? Respawn! Ask them how they would act in real life, how to use proper tactics to advance along a road or clear a building? They won't be able to tell you.

As I said: If server-sided possible, you could find a bunch of guys, but if you change the client it will stop plenty of players from playing.

But you're not alone mate. This mod is great and it's sad so few recognize what could be done.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 19:06
by TheValkyre
Everybody loves a good drunk text ! :15_cheers But nukes.....I would cry,

how about fastro...I mean uh uh foxholes that protect you from artillery barrages! :roll:

But seriously people just need to have some creativity when dealing with an older engine like this, just put some thought into it people! :confused:

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-08 20:12
by Quikli
I really want a medevac to be in the game. It would make the game's medical system much more realistic and fun in my opinion.

But nukes? Cover system? Leaning? PR does not need that.

Nukes? Bad idea. It's freaking Project REALITY.

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-09 00:46
by Nagard
Delfer wrote:I'm pretty sure most of page 2 doesn't understand what his point was..
Well as many guys here already said: It may be a little hard to understand what he meant.

But maybe you could tell us, if we are all wrong...

(Don't want to insult, but I always like constructive advice ^^)

Re: Is Project Reality too basic?

Posted: 2010-07-10 19:25
by Arnoldio
Nagard wrote:I think I got your point Chiz (not sure though :P )

Apparently most of the players play this game straight focused on "winning" and not playing it to play it. Medevacs for example (as mentioned before) would be a really, really awesome thing, but you can't force players to do such a thing if there is no need to, to win the round.

But you're not alone mate. This mod is great and it's sad so few recognize what could be done.
You semi-got me. First point yeah, they would use it if it was forced ingame ofcourse, but its ingame now too.

Second, not what could be done, but what can be done now.
TheValkyre wrote:Everybody loves a good drunk text ! :15_cheers But nukes.....I would cry,
What are you talking about?
Quikli wrote:But nukes? Cover system? Leaning? PR does not need that.

Nukes? Bad idea. It's freaking Project REALITY.
Oh really? My point was that PR actually has some primitives of cover, leaning and nuke. And seeing that i have more posts than all of you in this thread together, you might predict that i was on the forums long enough that i know whats a stupid suggestion and what isnt. And this is discussion forum not suggestion.
Delfer wrote:I'm pretty sure most of page 2 doesn't understand what his point was..
This
Nagard wrote:Well as many guys here already said: It may be a little hard to understand what he meant.
Just read my second post where i explain. Dont just read first post then skip 8975295872 posts and then OMG YOU ARE DUNK.

Your dad is drunk! :D

EDIT

And this
BlackwaterSaxon wrote:People probably would do the medevacs, if there was a special medevac button to press, shame people wait on prompts or dev notes to dictate what they can and cannot do in this game.
+1