Your thoughts on PR and other games focused on Realism.

[STORM-Mama]

Mind if I only answer you second questions?

Yes, I prefer realism in games. The reason to why I play games in the first place is that I want to "get involved" in another world than the real one of my everyday-life. In order to really feel that I am part of the game world it has to be believable and feel like it's "real". In a game that features, for example, weapons that exist in the Real World, realistic handling of these weapons is important. If they don't appear, sound or handles the same way as in real life, the whole image of a real and believable game-world can be destroyed.

This, for me, includes "boring" tasks like transporting supplies and repairs to the frontlines, defending a position far away from the actual frontline, etc. All of this contributes to that "image" of being somewhere else, in another world. I don't play games for the adrenaline-kick of the action-moments, but because I want to get sucked into this whole different world. Realism (even the boring parts) is a very good way of accomplishing that, the illusion of actually being on a distant battlefield.

[Beefster]

1. Why do you prefer playing PR instead of vanilla BF?

As someone has pointed out Vanilla is quite a boring game of Rock Paper Scissors. If I'm not getting TK'd for a Plane/Chopper, I'm simply playing the "How quick can I get to where I died with the appropriate kit" game. The team work is absolutely amazing, I have only once gotten on a squad with people that I found distasteful, over all the community seems to be great!



2. Do you prefer more realism in a game?

Absolutely, don't get me wrong I still enjoy arcady games, I get great enjoyment out of Counter-Strike and TF2, however I remember feeling almost offended when BF2 came out and it was so cheesy. I used to play Rainbow 6 (The original, not this new console stuff they've come up with) 1-3 online and it was some of the best gaming I've ever had. I have always wanted a large scale non-urban combat focused game that held true to reality (close enough) that I'd get into it.

I love the fact that I can choose to be a transport driver, I love the fact that sometimes I just sit around in an APC waiting for a pick up call. I love the fact that just because my cross hairs are on someone's head , doesn't mean I get a head shot! I love the sitting and waiting on defense because honestly? Sitting around and waiting is quite a bit of what the military does.

3. Can a game have to much realism? If so: at what point does a game have to much realism?(Like when vehicles needs petrol, avatars need to eat, go to the toilet or other stuff like when shot in a leg you can't use that limb etc.)

I think that this question is hard to answer while staying on the topic of PR when you push it to the extent of eating/toilet. I'd point out that if you want a game with eating and toilets, The Sims is the game for you! I believe that when you get shot in the leg you should limp, I believe when you get shot in the arm you should suffer an accuracy penalty.

4. When does a realistic game become a simulation instead?

I am of a firm belief that there is no such thing, nor can there ever be a proper simulation of war. Anyone who has served in any military and seen combat will agree with me on this. At no point will there be a video game that simulates the anxiety of watching someone bleed out, or hearing the *tink tink tink* of 7.62 hitting the side of your humvee. If you make a game where I can literally feel the air pressure change when I hear "That buzzing sound" as a round passes my head, I'll happily eat my words, but until then I stand by it, there is no such thing as combat simulation, it is simply not possible.


5. Would you consider PR a simulation?

Absolutely not, I think it's a very fun game and I really do enjoy how tacticle it gets but I can promise you that many of the tactics that we as gamers use on a daily basis playing PR, we would not even consider in the slightest if there were real bullets being fired at us.

Also, last time I checked an Epi Pen and a medic kit don't bring me back to full working order after taking a round in the chest.



Please don't misconstrue my statements, I really , really really love PR, I only found out about it about three weeks ago, but I really... really enjoy it!

[*]Why do you prefer playing PR instead of vanilla BF?

The immersion.

[killonsight95]

# Why do you prefer playing PR instead of vanilla BF?
more teamword basicly, the guys are nice and poeple play with tactics and its slower a game lasts upto 2-3 hours instead or 15 mins
# Do you prefer more realism in a game?
yes i do it gives me a thrill
# Can a game have to much realism?
yes it can
# When does a realistic game become a simulation instead?
when it takes more than 10 hours per game
# Would you consider PR a simulation?

no it doesn't take 10 hours per game

[Indian_Clay]

Why do you prefer playing PR instead of vanilla BF?

Teamwork. I used to play games like James Bond and Halo, but gave it all up for vBF2 because of mass player co-op. PR is just the next step deeper.

I find games boring to play by myself. I like a strong teamwork element that you can't find in typical FPSs or even MMORPGs.

Do you prefer more realism in a game?

I prefer realism in a game oppsed to 733tness in a game.

Can a game have to much realism? If so: at what point does a game have to much realism?

Mose-keyboard input cannot match what the human body can do (or can't do) in a real environment. Therefore, the most realistic game really isn't. Just the limitations of the system.

There will always be a group of players that will play a game no matter how realistic.

But you can't be ridiculous. Even in simulations you don't have to stop to take a crap.

When does a realistic game become a simulation instead?

Games are designed to be fun and enjoyable. Simulations are designed to train and teach.

Would you consider PR a simulation?

No. PR is designed to be enjoyable, therefore, is not a simulation.

[ryan d ale]

Why do you prefer playing PR instead of vanilla BF?

Because it is more realistic. This realism has gone to the level of making the gameplay very slow which allows for tactical maneuvres which would otherwise be worthless and/or not very time efficient. This requires teamwork and it's good to be part of a team (even if it's 5 people you've never seen or spoken to before in your life).

Do you prefer more realism in a game?

In every game I play I prefer Realism.

Can a game have to much realism? If so: at what point does a game have to much realism?

Yes. Where the genre of the game is missed. The genre of PR is war and it does it well. When you have to do nothing for hours. Vehicles needing petrol is fine. Getting shot in a limb and not being able to use it is fine. Polishing and cleaning your rifle and vehicle might be fun but that isn't a game.

When does a realistic game become a simulation instead?

Realistic. Realistic means that it's kind of close to Reality and in many ways PR is. To become a simulation the 'gamey' elements need to be removed and that produces a steep learning curve (similar to those that you will find in simulators). Think of a first person shooter removing crosshairs (crosshairs are even present in simulations) but in PR and WWII online...

Would you consider PR a simulation?

Absolutely.

[Cobhris]

Why do you prefer playing PR instead of vanilla BF?
I play PR when I get tired of the spammy, epileptic gameplay of BF2. Firefights in BF2 are decided by 70% reflexes, 20%tactics, and 10% hitreg. PR firefights are 25% reflexes, 55% tactics, and 10% hitreg (bad hitreg can screw you up here just as much as in BF2. PR also has better maps, better sounds, and better graphics, making for an overall better atmosphere.

Do you prefer more realism in a game?
To a certain extent, yes.
Can a game have to much realism? If so: at what point does a game have to much realism?(Like when vehicles needs petrol, avatars need to eat, go to the toilet or other stuff like when shot in a leg you can't use that limb etc.)
I'd say it gets too realistic when you are forced to perform tedious real-life tasks that have no effect on the gameplay. Things such as eating, cleaning things, all-day patrols, being court martialed if you mess up, becoming permanently disabled if you get wounded badly, etc.

When does a realistic game become a simulation instead?
When all relevant aspects of the situation represented within the game are replicated as close as possible to their real life counterparts as technology permits.

Would you consider PR a simulation?
Not at all. PR is balanced between realism and gameplay, and that's the way it ought to be.

[Nick_Gunar]

Can a game have to much realism? If so: at what point does a game have to much realism?

I will only answer this question as realism is a notion of relativity or perspective (point of view). Something can be "realist" for someone and can't be for another one. Just read the long list of posts where they agree or disagree about a suggestion for instance.
A game is a simulation of reality but again it is the point of view of the person who makes this simulation that matters here.
There are no answers to this question in a philosophical way of speaking

[CaptainKilla]

[2]Do you prefer more realism in a game?
I prefer lots of realism in a game. Games like Modern Warfare mulitplayer is too much of an arcade style game. It is a run and gun type game and I can't stand the fact that the objective is to rush in shoot as many people as you can before you die. Then do it all over again. PR has a lot to offer. First off, you actually have to know how to learn how to fly helicopters and jets. You can't just jump into an aircraft and just go. I like the variety of roles the game offers as well. Infantry, Base defense, FOB troops, Armor, etc. I also like the down time that is there every once in a while for example, building a firebase and waiting for Intel on a cache on Insurgency mode.
[3]Can a game have to much realism? If so: at what point does a game have to much realism?(Like when vehicles needs petrol, avatars need to eat, go to the toilet or other stuff like when shot in a leg you can't use that limb etc.)
I don't think that there is too much realism in any game. If a game has achieved that then I haven't played it. Vehicle needing gas is a great idea. PR should impliment this. Needing to eat and go take a crap would be amusing but I am not sure how a game could impliment this correctly. Getting shot in the leg and not being able to use that in the game would be interesting too but once again, it has to be done just right. The player doesn't want to be out of the game the whole time. So I guess there is a such thing as too much realism.

I feel that the Team work is an essential ingredient to PR and it does the job well. Getting rid of Rally points I think a good idea. Initially, I thought that it would be a bad idea, but in giving more thought, it is more realistic. The Forward Outpost is a great idea but is under utilized. Making the FOB more utilized will be a good thing. Too many times there are abandoned FOBs. I have been a BF2 fan since it has come out and since PR, I don't even enjoy the arcade style gameplay anymore. I just wish we had more maps, game modes, and players. PR does a great job overall in providing a realistic type game that creates teamwork on both sides. And yes I think it is the best simulation game out there.

[Cassius]

I really like realism in a game. It makes a game feel like a big adventure and experience in multiplayer.
My ideal would be a bug free ARMA II that softens the realism of 1 live dead game over wait for this game to end with limited rally points or the like (maybe making them dissapear after so many spawns).

The foreplay of being deployed over an 15 min flight taking out a tank by coordinating air support or equalizing a ground fight situation by having my CAS operator call in an airstrike adds a lot of atmosphere fun and in the end more things to do.
Spawning and spamming tanks with 5 realods out of your rocket launcher while you parachute out of a blackhawk is imo the road to this http://www.theonion.com/content/vide..._game_consists . VBF 2 isnt very far off.