Implied realism and expectations of such.

[Roger Smith]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

well that's another point but do you realy think that DICE would have implemented a standard AR that has a Deviation of 1 inch at 100 yards with an entire Clip emptied in Semi Auto mode?

no, but i would think that a mid-long range target wouldnt be out of the question for an assault rifle. its not complicated thing, the ak and m16 simply do not have enough range for thier weapon type, gameplay wise, not real life wise.

I don't think so, that would have made the unlocks useless

this is besides the point, unlocks are supposed to be no better or worse than the other guns, just different, and they do that quite well. that bieng said, i know what you are saying, and you are right. unlocks have double the range of normal ars, and thats lame, but its dwarfed by there terrible medium range performance.

And yes, a Humvee can withstand a 137mm Anti Armor missile, check the spec's for the HMMWV XM119 /A1 and the Eryx, when you hit the engine bay with that you can stop the Humvee but you can't destroy it totaly.

what about the cab? ok, well you seem to know more about it than i. i suppose its fine as is, aside from the attack heli, which should go down instantly.

[cox325]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

This may be sitting on fence but what the hell. Computer games are what you make it and what you want it to be. I play alot of military oriented games, I was in the British Army I have the mentality to keep the real and virtual worlds seperate. Its all personal, make it what ever you want it to be.

Just realise that in the real world you can hurt people.

[Kedra22]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

one thing i'd really like changed though would be vechicle, entering and exiting and changing positions. This is crazy, I hit an apc with an eryx a few times and it doesn't blow up and i go to switch weapons cause I know the guy is about to exit and he's already out and killed me before I can switch to my shot gun or reload my eryx.

[Roger Smith]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

one thing i'd really like changed though would be vechicle, entering and exiting and changing positions. This is crazy, I hit an apc with an eryx a few times and it doesn't blow up and i go to switch weapons cause I know the guy is about to exit and he's already out and killed me before I can switch to my shot gun or reload my eryx.

while i agree with you on this in general, i dont think anyone else in this community would.

[Kayback]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

And yes, a Humvee can withstand a 137mm Anti Armor missile, check the spec's for the HMMWV XM119 /A1 and the Eryx, when you hit the engine bay with that you can stop the Humvee but you can't destroy it totaly.
If you try the same with a MILAN or a TOW you would blow the Humvee to heaven and a Tank to bits...

Actually an Eryx would blow the **** out of an Humvee. It'd splatter a Stryker all over the landscape

Seriously,the Eryx can defeat TANKS with frikken reactive armour on it. A Humvee would go SPLAT bigtime.

Since when does a Humvee has 900mm+ of tank and reactive armour on it?

And even if this magically fantastic XM119 of yours can withstand that, since when can the Vodnik, or the Toyota truck they use in SF ?

Personally I'd love to see the stats on this XM119/A1, can you link us to them? The Humvee's in BF2 aren't even up to M1116 standards. They don't have protected gunners turrets. They are probably M1114's which come with 7.62mm Assault Rifle Armor Piercing protection, Perimeter 155mm Artillery Airburst Overhead protection and 12 lbs Front and 4 lbs Rear Anti-Tank Mine Protection.

No where does it say protected against a direct hit from a dual warhead 137mm HEAT round.

KBK

[LahLahSr]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

No such thing as "realism" in a computer game. Never has been and never will be.

You're all talking about "believability" and "immersion" - not realism. Games are illusions, designed to provide us with some sort of approximation of what we
imagine reality to be.

When we praise or berate a game for being more or less "realistic" all we are really doing is communicating our expectations, based on the imaginations that we have.

BF2 is a game that has almost zero believability, if you have actually experienced the reality that is simulates. Picking out specific parts that are less "realistic" than others really just displays our ignorance. Nothing whatsoever in BF2 is "realistic" but some of it appears to be more believable to us, because we have certain imaginations that are close.

Having absolutely no inertia in body-movement is not more or less "realistic" than massive weaposn that somehow doesn't kill the enemy it hits.

This doesn't make the discussion invalid and it's no less interesting for it - it's just important to keep in mind that we are talking about how close the gaming experience is to how we imagine a reality that we have never experienced.

The reality of warfare is not constant - enemies with over 20 bullet hits sometime run off, high on adrenaline. Soldiers fall facedown into a rainpuddle and drown. Distant explosions break eardrums, weapons backfire and kill the operator. Snipers sometime kill enemies more than 2km downrange, sometimes soldiers puke and **** their pants when they are being fired at. They freeze when they see an enemy. They get so flustered that they can't hit an enemy 10 feet away at full auto. They break ankles and can't move. They wait for hours on end with nothing to do. Weapons need to be cleaned, equipment break down without ever being fired on or used. Etc. etc. Nothing in BF2 is "realistic"....

Cheers :-)

[Kayback]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

Well said.

Except some of us have experienced it.

KBK

[LahLahSr]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

Hey Kayback,

I can appreciate that there are a very very few people here in these forums who have actual battlefield experience - perhaps even in settings that are not too dissimilar to the ones the game portray.

However, I am pretty sure that they are not the ones talking about "realism" as a whole in BF2. They have a lot of very valid and experience-based observations about aspects of the game, but I do not think that a single one of them have the expectation that a PC game can ever come close to any kind of reality they have actually experienced. They know that there is no comparison.

BF2 is without any emotional content whatsoever. Nobody is ever injured - no protracted and panicked screams of agony ring out over the battlefield. No rivers of arterial blood pools at anyone's feet and the coppery stench of fresh-spilled blood mixed in the with odors of cordite, sweat, feces and fear is ever experienced. Nobody is a friend - thre is no connection with anyone.

For a person who has really been in the ****, BF2....is....just....a.....game.

Cheers :-)

PS: Call of Duty 2 (single-player) is infinitely more "rich" when it comes to simulating the experience...it's a lot more believable..and the things that makes it so, has nothing to do with the guns or how the tanks move or how high you can jump...BF2 is all about that...

[sassback]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

Actually an Eryx would blow the **** out of an Humvee. It'd splatter a Stryker all over the landscape

Seriously,the Eryx can defeat TANKS with frikken reactive armour on it. A Humvee would go SPLAT bigtime.

Since when does a Humvee has 900mm+ of tank and reactive armour on it?

And even if this magically fantastic XM119 of yours can withstand that, since when can the Vodnik, or the Toyota truck they use in SF ?

Personally I'd love to see the stats on this XM119/A1, can you link us to them? The Humvee's in BF2 aren't even up to M1116 standards. They don't have protected gunners turrets. They are probably M1114's which come with 7.62mm Assault Rifle Armor Piercing protection, Perimeter 155mm Artillery Airburst Overhead protection and 12 lbs Front and 4 lbs Rear Anti-Tank Mine Protection.

No where does it say protected against a direct hit from a dual warhead 137mm HEAT round.

KBK

the at rockets are seriously underpowered when it comes to actually taking out armor.

[WolfAlmighty]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

The cone of fire in general doesn't bother me, but the degree to which it was taken in BF2 is a bit ridiculous. I don't expect BF:V's pre-patch M60 or anything, but when I'm circle-strafing a prone soldier 5m away with my M16 I expect that the bullets should go in the general direction of the guy, not across the street and into the neighbour's mailbox. Then again, a lot of that and other seemingly inaccurate moments with this game can be blamed on hit detection. Which brings me to my next comment.

Clean. Up. The. God. Damned. HIT. DETECTION. You've all been sitting next to your buddy on the battlefield and hearing bullets slam into him, only to watch him shake and twitch but live through it. Hit detection. You've probably all encountered the 'I emptied a clip into the guy while he charged at me and then stops running and pops me off instantly' phenomenon. Hit detection. And who here hasn't knifed someone two, three, or four times only to have them wheel around and off you. Hit detection. TOW/AT missile through the humvee/APC/FAV coming straight at you? Hit detection. Sniped someone in the head only to have it kick up dust off of their helmet? Hit detection. I'd be willing to bet that if the hit detection was cleaned up then nearly all of the problems people have with random cone of fire would disappear.

And lag. That doesn't help, either. >_<

And on the topic of immersion, the thing that's really started to irritate me is vehicle drops. As a chronic victim of artillery, it's kind of irksome to have survived a massive barrage of artillery shells only to die by a hummer falling out of the sky. Artillery can be annoying as hell, yes, but at least it fits in with the whole theme of a modern battlefield and warfare. The thought of someone making a special mission to airdrop a truck on top of an enemy soldier does not. Hopefully cartillery gets fixed in 1.4.

~Wolfgang

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

This is not a question of realism, but authenticity. Realism is impossible, authenticity is possible.

For those that claim 1 shot kills would cause everyone to be in the spawn wait for too long... you are *so* wrong about that. Try playing someone one shot one kill type games that have respawn (Red Orchestra is an example) -- the gameplay is extremely tactical for that one reason. In BF2, the only reason everyone is so jump is because they know they can get away with jumping in front of machine gun fire :)

Regarding cone of fire... I'm so with you guys. I'd like a few minutes alone with the guy that invented that. It's as if it was a big joke or something:

Dev1: Hey Dev.
Dev2: Sup Dev, whatcha doin in the office this late?
Dev1: *sigh* I'm stumped. The game is too difficult for the newcomers. An experienced gamer will always beat them because he aims the crosshair faster.
Dev2: That's the idea, no?
Dev1: No. The idea is for the new players to feel like they're winning instantly. Otherwise they will quit.
Dev2: Hmm.. how about making the bullets land in a random location based on a cone of fire? That way everyone has a chance!
Dev1: Brilliant! Haha, imagine picking up a real rifle and having random deviation.
Dev2: That would piss me off so much! Oh, the collateral damage. You might as well be throwing spears with dynamite attached to them.
Dev1: Hehe, that's so silly we might just squeeze it in for a patch.
Dev2: Aren't dolphin suit snipers up next? You know, the ones that disguise themselves as dolphins and shoot poison acid out of their knuckle hair follicles?
Dev1: Agh! Another time then!

I keed, I keed

[IAJTHOMAS]

Re: Implied realism and expectations of such.

I agree with immersion, the illusion that you are in a modern combat zone, but not a simulator. I think there should be a level of base-line likeness to reality, eg:

My plane doesn't fire lasers, but neither can it shoot fire and forget missiles from miles away from its targets and kill them, the game just wouldn't work if realsim were allowed to take over to this extent.

So base line realism should exist, but then gameplay balance and fun becomes the most important factor. However, where to draw this line to strike the perfect balance will vary from individual to individual. I know 50 cals snipers should kill in one shot, but to me this isn't really needed, snipers are effective as they are.

Things like dolphin diving and bunnyhopping I disagreed with, not because I saw it as an exploit per se, but because it ruined the immersion of the game. Its part of the game in UT, but I don't really want to see it in BF2, but again its a personal thing.

For me I would like the game, in certain areas, to lean a little more towards emulating real life. Not hugely, but just a little.