ikill4aliving

realism all the way!

__________________
|TG-Irr|Ikill4aliving

Irregular Intelligence Officer



"My stripper name is Bandit LeGrande." - Axis of Eevil

Fallosophy

I voted realism because, if I understand Root, we are talking about mentallity. I do, however, understand the other points about limitations. There are thresholds that should not be crossed. A game can never be truly realistic in mechanics or mentallity so compromises need to be made.

Beatnik

My principal issue with "realism" (hence, my vote) is the vastly different interpretations of what level of it is appropriate at any given time. I've seen so much drama created over what I would call the "super-realism set" chiding "less-realistic" players for not playing to their particular idiosyncratic definition of acceptable realism that the word has almost become a pejorative term for me. Almost.

If someone's a super-realism fan, that's great, as long as they don't go out of their way to poo on others' (otherwise reasonable, team-focused, mature, etc) gameplay for not living up to their standard.

Playing these games (where some modicum of simulation/reality is present) is to me like Civil War re-enactors. Some of those people are super-realistic and wear the full wool uniforms in the middle of summer and don't shave or use anything modern, etc, and many will poo poo another guy that has a couple bottles of ice water (or beer...) tucked away in an otherwise unseen cooler, for not being "realistic". It's not a perfect metaphor but I think it communicates my point. People should play as realistically as they like, but shouldn't be asses about it when someone else unrelated to them isn't comfortable with that standard, and are otherwise great team players.

__________________

Gahlas

I was not aiming specifically at any mod, just trying to provide some examples of what I like and don’t like. I guess I should be more clear. I love realism but it is directly dependent on the game I am playing. There is that point where the realism is taken farther than it should be on the given game. The ideal game for me is one that finds that perfect balance between the game play and how realism fits into that. This sort of places me in the middle of the run-and-gunners and the complicated tacticioners. BF2 was aimed more for the run and gunners so it is limited as far as realism goes compared to say ARMA.

As to what I like about realism, I am more of the slow paced action guy. I like the very, very slow moving games that always have you on edge but rarely in the action. When we used to play Operation Frog every night on Tacmod night (This map is in a dark rainy foresty area) the games would move very slow but they were the greatest games I ever played and ever will play. Our squad leaders had the time to place us, give us kit load outs and tell us what are roles are comfortably. You had time to just sit for 5-10 minutes and really absorb the atmosphere. More than once I almost let the wood burner in my melt my house away I was so immersed in the game. I would be scanning the horizon listening to the background sounds and suddenly smell melting carpet. That is what I like.

Battlefield 2 is at its greatest for me with small teams, great coordination, players that know what they are doing, and slow paced action. This combination is far realer than any mod or game I have ever played. That is the realism I enjoy. I have fun just thinking about it.

Hope that helps.

jmaker

Great post Gahlas. I would agree with everything you said. I like the middle ground of run and gun and realism.

__________________

Braidedheadman

I'd like to point out that, since the stated objective here appears to sample the community's tastes beyond our expectations for PRM, the poll results might carry more meaning if they were introduced to a section of the forums where there isn't such a great concentration of PR players.

I feel it's fair to assume that most everybody who regularly participate in this threads like these, and indeed this section of the furmums, are probably looking for a more Hardcore game set than those who would visit, let's say, they General section of the forums or even the Sandbox. Given that assumption, I feel that the current data shown in the results might be somewhat skewed or at least representative of the views shared by a higher cross-section of Hardcore players than "Generalists", if you’ll permit me to coin the term.

__________________

fuzzhead

If its not played in a realistic way, its fine, but its not nearly as much fun for me....

When its played realistically, THATS when i have the fun out of the experience..

__________________

Plan6

Couldn't have said is better myself. I dislike this form is subtle elitism in games. People play PR and games for many different reasons. People sign on to the TG PR server to have fun, hang out with buddies and play a game with a slightly slower pace than normal BF, nothing more. They play for the teamwork and squad level play.

The idea that the players who are playing for "realism" and "tactical" reason, rather than the "run and gun/203 spammers" crowd, are somehow playing the game the right was is just elitism. Setting unwritten rules for how Light AT, medic packs and deathcam are to be or not to be used is all personal choice, not some way that makes the game better as a whole.

__________________
I kill terrorist.
I do good.
I have top score.
I a Dutch.

-AKA- Snow411

eGoatBoy

Agree!
Note the PR tester's use of the word FUN.
It is a potential problem...

All that siad and quoted:

I voted for realism. The entire feel of the games I play strive to create an environment where, if for just a minute, you can suspend disbelief and become absorbed into the game experience. That said it is fully within the context of being a GAME. Games have to be playable, and they have to be fun. However, if realism didn't count at all we'd all still just be playing Pong.

As asch pointed out, how you play is a big part of this equation. No game will ever be fully realistic (or at least I hope not because it will be way too painful). But for myself, I find it fun to try to bring real world-like tactics and methods into the game.

Some of my funnest moments in TG BFx. Practicing room clearing techniques in PoE (yet to fully implement in game), and coordinating air traffic control on a helo practice for budding pilots in PR. Effectively "role-playing" moments more than anything else. Don't get me wrong though, the excitement of competing in an external TG vs The World scrim is also a pinnacle, but in a different way.

Anyway, it's mostly all about the game experience for me. That means a healthy dash of realism, while fully knowing that it's just a game meant to be played for fun. I would certainly hope to never become a realism snob though.

Cheers,

__________________

ChernobylKinsman

Hang on, I thought we were playing on "Tactical" Gamer? They are playing the game the "right" way for the Tacical Gamer server, hence all the SOPs, rules and whatnot that are set out and are required reading, no? I thought that was kinda the point?

__________________
"It's nothing to do with Stalker, really"

Braidedheadman

I do not mean to pick on anyone in saying what I have to say here but with this statement, I think we see the general mindset of today's reality player. Realistic infantry combat is the name of the game for most people, I believe, while realistic vehicle interaction does not scale well in the "realism" market with the same group of people.

The latest changes being discussed for Al Basrah, for instance, frequently insist on removing heavy-hitting vehicles like the A10. People get upset with A10 pilots because of their (supposedly) outrageous scores at the end of each round, and their KDR in particular, while with the same breath assert that they want "realism" in the game they are playing. Realistically, the A10 is an extremely effective close air to ground support weapon and it shouldn’t surprise anyone when BF2 pilots walk away with sizable scores while (potentially) assisting their team to the win. I can see why people would be upset with vBF2 airpower dominance, but in games like Project Reality? Why all the outrage?

I recall a similar argument in the past with respect to attacking rear flags using tactics that were consistent with real-world combat doctrine (disruption of supply lines). This was, apparently, too realistic as well and new rules were imposed to prohibit rear flag raids, treating them as though they were all UCBs.

It's these sorts of logical inconsistencies that make deploying a "realistic" game, particularly a mod, impractical. As I stated earlier, I enjoy realism in the games I play if, and only if, the whole package is realistic, not just parts of it. If the name of the game is "reality" let all aspects of it be played realistically or not at all is my "hardcore" philosophy. If realism across the full spectrum isn’t fun, then why make the attempt to model it in the least degree?

As things are, and given all the drama that the word "reality" in PR has generated, IMHO, I believe that PR is a game better suited to a different name. At least then the developers could get away with adapting the mod to suite their vision without people stumbling over semantics.

__________________

Hambergler

I have been sitting silently in a bunker with my paintball gun pointed at the door. Listening to enemies crush twigs 3 feet away, with cockroaches crawling up my ass, all in the name of realism. Does anyone really want that?

I respect the 1st, and squads that play like them. Anyone playing and training like them is going to get a hell of a lot more out of PR. When I tried to join the server. I usually get into a half asses squad that does the old stick together and bum rush the flag approach (at best). In my experience it doesn't really work, I go nuts repeating the same maneuver for the umpteenth time, with no progress and just hit the disconnect button in frustration. POE on the other hand doesn't require advanced tactics and I can get on and have a relatively fun time with people I haven't done extensive training with. I just wish it was a little more populated though. I used to think the 1st was crazy with the tactics and everything on POE. But I can see how that hard work would work very nicely with PR. I'm glad they have a place they can shine. Now excuse me while I go whore myself on the 2142 server.

__________________

msdz

Realism is ok but if it takes away the FUN factor then what would be the point? I do not want some person yelling or dictating to the point the game has no fun, if I wanted that then I would go and try to get back in the military AGAIN. I have seen few SL and CO that are that way and I just do not follow along to good when they are that demanding, as I said, been there did that for real. After all it is a game, no matter how real a people should try to make it. The game play and how the game feels and looks is another story, I would like for the game to be as close to real as possible with sights, sounds, weapons, vehicles as close to being right there in real life. Another thing is, the game must be somewhat easy to play, I do not want to take an entire week to learn a game. I want to start having fun as quickly as possible.

__________________

General Hospital

I'm a big fan of realism, but I think PR has struck a great balance in terms of realism vs. gameplay. Realistic gameplay is rewarded over vanilla tactics (on some maps).

Still, there are some game mechanics that I take advantage off even though they're not very realistic. For example, if I am taking shots from a sniper off in the distance but I don't have a visual on him, I can just point in his general direction, spot him, and a red blip will mark him on the map for all to see.

Sabre_Tooth_Tigger

Visual distance cut off will be altered in 0.6 I think


The ucb rule is realistic imo, the game shouldnt play out like kellys heroes and shooting spawning players is both unrealistic and skilless

People complain about the A10 because USMC usually lose the map anyway.
The score system is biased towards kills when it should be towards flag capture and defence imo

__________________

WWII German infantry weapons in detail