Implied realism and expectations of such.

[Consultant01]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

As I hope it does for BF2.


My gripe with weapon accuracy goes like this... the bullets should go exactly where the rifle is pointing, period.

The Iron-sights should be 100% accurate and next-shot accuracy should decreased due to recoil. If I sit back and go in single-shot mode and tap out the rounds and let my rifle settle for aim between shots, the shots should be pretty darn accurate.

I just can't stand weapons like the SCAR-L being aimed at the head of an enemy 20 yards away, the red-dot is right on their nose, pulling the trigger and missing completly. It's just retarded.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

As I hope it does for BF2.


My gripe with weapon accuracy goes like this... the bullets should go exactly where the rifle is pointing, period.

The Iron-sights should be 100% accurate and next-shot accuracy should decreased due to recoil. If I sit back and go in single-shot mode and tap out the rounds and let my rifle settle for aim between shots, the shots should be pretty darn accurate.

I just can't stand weapons like the SCAR-L being aimed at the head of an enemy 20 yards away, the red-dot is right on their nose, pulling the trigger and missing completly. It's just retarded.

This is EXACTLY what you get in SWAT4. First show accuracy in non-moving stand or crouch position is almost always spot on (depending on the weaponry). After you let loose, theres IMMENSE recoil (compared to BF2) handlig of which is art on its own. It also comes with the random cone of fire.

This leads me to the question and ANSWER "why not in BF2?".

Reason is simple. SWAT4 offers oh so much cover and means to escape an engagement. The whole map is a maze of cover and tactical environment is offering a lot to the thinking player. Battlefield 2 on the other hand is extremely open, and with pinpoint accuracy involved, theres not much point in crossing fields or streets without getting killed. While accurate in real life, BF2 would be so much more frustrating.

BF2 is a fun-game first and foremost and DICE has been pretty clear on that. They also said that getting this game a step further is a job for the mods.

[L3adcannon]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

Whoever invented Cone Of Fire should be shot. But atm I don`t really care anymore as there is PoE2 and PRMM where there is recoil instead of cof.

But yeh, EA should have added a lable on the case saying : "Looks realistic, plays arcade" or something like that.

[Mylkinut]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

I don't think there's much complaint, you buy a game for fun. Designers put content into a game in order to make it fun (for the majority). Afterall, a game can never be realistic, people don't fly helicopters using a mouse now, do they?

[Big Poo]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

I dunno, I'm not too bothered about the cone of fire, I know in a real battle it would be very unlikely for me personally to land a shot with pinpoint accuracy. Maybe someone who has fired a real rifle can correct me on this, but I would say its unlilely to hit the bullseye with every (first) shot. They seem to have shooting as an Olympic sport, and I know we are not all athletes.

I get more pissed off at the flopping around to avoid being hit, or bouncing around while reloading. Maybe I will just buy a macro keyboard, heh, give them something to complain about because I can't exploit with leik leet skillorz...

[~WPN~Major Ursa]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

I dunno, I'm not too bothered about the cone of fire, I know in a real battle it would be very unlikely for me personally to land a shot with pinpoint accuracy. Maybe someone who has fired a real rifle can correct me on this, but I would say its unlilely to hit the bullseye with every (first) shot. They seem to have shooting as an Olympic sport, and I know we are not all athletes.

I get more pissed off at the flopping around to avoid being hit, or bouncing around while reloading. Maybe I will just buy a macro keyboard, heh, give them something to complain about because I can't exploit with leik leet skillorz...

Firing while under fire is a crapshoot. It all boils down to how well you were trained and how well you can concentrate under stress. Yes, shooting is an Olympic sport, but you can't compare the two just on the basis of both using firearms.

As stated before, you have to give up some elements of realism in order to have gameplay. If you were either killed or immobilized after one hit, then everyone would spend an eternity in the spawn wait. Sure, it wouldn't be hard to eliminate shock paddles or make head shots 100% death or any number of tweaks, but what is one man's perfect balance will be another's upset applecart.

Wait for the mods. There are enough of them to satisfy almost everyone's taste.

[sknight]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

Consultant01, thanks for keeping this forum interesting via real issues and things that are very interesting to think about!

Anyway, realism is implied, but then since it's a game, so is the non-realism. It's obvious that no one really wants either extreme, so there's a compromise. DICE chose a certain compromise and you chose a different one, so you are bit unhappy/frustrated, but really there's not much we can do. It's how they chose to make the game.

[Consultant01]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

right, I agree its a compromise.

They have to compromise on the things that make it a game, but they dont have to compromise on the aspects of the game that remove the required skill to achieve greatness.

I know when I played...UT2k3 for example, if a guy with superior hand-eye coordination was wielding a rail-gun... he would win the majority of encounters he came across. These games are, at their most basic level, tests of hand-eye coordination. Sniping is hard because you have to click the mouse the instant the crosshairs are on your target, running and gunning is hard because you are a moving weapon platform attempting to out-stalk your enemy who is also a moving target, dogfighting is hard for all the same reasons.

Why give us iron sights? Why give us red-dot scopes? Why give us crosshairs? If the bullets are going to land somewhere in some mysterious "Cone of fire" dispite your perfect aim... whats the point?

I can see why some people call this a noob game. Aim really isnt that greatly rewarded. I love it, dont get me wrong... I really enjoy the game most of the time I play it but I think that the game has gotten progressivly "dumber" and more prone to fits of lucky spray-n-pray since the first expansion of BF1942.



I wish FPS games in general, would reward skill more than luck. I know im not alone in that. Hell, if the weapons were twice as accurate as they are now, I'm sure I'd get utterly destroyed! But you know what? I'd be challenged and I know that my kills would be a result of my own improvement...

[imported_HorrorBusiness]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

You have to take breathing, movement, sight picture, alignment, wind speed, elevation distances, etc. etc. into consideration. Just right clicking into iron sights shouldn't be instant 100% accuracy. Perhaps being in the prone or kneeling for X amounts of seconds should add to accuracy. Of course auto or 3 round bursts will pull up and right for righties and up and left on lefties and increase deviation at distance. The quickest you can really fire every shot accurately is between the inhale and exhale.

But what would 4 time expert know about that, I'm just a forum drama queen

[BryanG]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

You respawn when you die
You can change kit/loadout everytime you die
Every injury is magically healed with defibrillators
No one has blood
When you die a little bag comes out of your body for other people to pick up
Anyone can jump in a boat/tank/helicopter/APC/jet and instantly know how to operate it safely
You apply to command the troops
You get points everytime you kill someone
Friendly soldiers have their name floating above their head
A helicopter and be shot heavily in the rotor and have no failure

I could go on

This equals arcade game.

Would you play a game where you die once and have to uninstall?

All of this is done for the sake of gameplay, it still attempts to be as realistic as possible.

[DesertFalcon]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

I agree but it think there is a line between realisim and fun. main thing I hate is bunny hoppers and dolphin divers.

[pyrpieman]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

well this wil all be better in 2142

[BryanG]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

How can you say that? Its the same game with new skins and some models (mod!).

Or is it because it sooo futuristic anything goes?

[Jungles]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

I think what detracts BF2 from being realistic or immersive is not that it is completely unrealistic, but that some things are unintuitive.

When a player is dropped into an environment that looks and feels similar to the real world, the player has expectations that things will behave like they do in the real world.

If I press a button in the game to hop into a vehicle, that is the result I expect. BF2 delivers well, without introducing the complications of fitting into an armoured vehicle. There is a small bit of unrealism in controlling of vehicles, but it is at least intuitive when we follow the controls assigned in the game options.

But what is NOT intuitive in this game, is things like bunny-hopping and dolphin-diving. It would be absurd to see someone in real life bunny-hopping like they are on super-powered pogo sticks. It defies our understanding of how the real world works, and it is therefore not only unrealistic, but ruins the immersion factor by being unintuitive to our a priori knowledge of the world.

Same with rockets. If I shoot a rocket at a buggy, I expect from my a priori knowledge of the real world, that it will blow up. If I shoot at a tank, I also know that in the real world, it might NOT blow up, but it may take multiple hits. BF2 delivers in the latter, but not the former example (rockets seem to go through buggies when fired at certain angles). It is an inconsistency that should be rectified.

Another example is snipers and the lethality of shots in general. If I fire a rifle at a target, and my shot finds its mark, then I expect from my knowledge of the real world, that it will cause significant damage to the person. Perhaps not one-shot-kill, but maybe up to two or three shots would take them down. I would expect a head-shot to be instantly fatal.

Ammo and healing bags are another. I can expect from my knowledge of the real world that a medic may take some time to treat by wounds, or another soldier take time to re-arm me. But instant healing and rearming defies our intuitive expectations. Same for defibs - no one gets back into battle instantly after being revived by a defib. Another thing that defies intuition.

Basically, while some compromises need to be made to make a game playable and fun, the game environment should comply with what an ordinary person would expect as being within reasonable bounds of reality. Not complete realism, but at least enough compliance for the game environment not be utterly unintuitive with our a priori knowledge of the real world, which is what the game is based on.

[troll_hammer2020]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

it looks and feels nice but thats where it ends .
plus as far as team play i have one thing to say .
not in a clan or Sq with m8s there is none .
join a sever try to join a Sq hey yay theres only 2.
and even they only have 2 or 3 lads in them .
try to form a Sq and get other ppl to join it .
hell no im out for myself what you think im dumb.
plus a lack of game types is letting this game down badly.
i play call of duty,uo and it has lots of game types .
some i think would work gr8 with BF2 and its Sq play.
like S&D and lots of others .
gr8 game realistic no way lack of game types shamefull .
hey pong was a long time ago ppl .
but hey the new one has all of 2 game types .
to lil to late i now place my trust with the moders out there.
they have been gaming for a long time and know what ppl want.
plus their free what free is this some kind of madness .
no its true ppl work hard to bring you gr8 mods .
and better bf2 and we are still talking about how gr8 bf2 is .
as a platform its for moders its gr8 as a game its good.
sorry ppl thats the way i see it iv playd a lot of FPS.
and its 2006 not the 80s or 90s any more .
i just want more from a game than eye candy and stats .
like all you i paid so il play but bf 2142 ota be doing something new .
the mods are and they have less than no backing nevermind EA and DICE.