Project Reality - WIP Discussion

[nodunit 397]

...

My point was that PR is doing a similar thing ACE2 does and uses its own core and to a point units, the comparison ends there.

Edited January 15, 2011 by NodUnit

[rksl-rock 1300]

It isn't really that much different than Rock's position on his stuff.

If their position is "we dont want people hacking our stuff apart because it causes us massive support headaches" then yeah it is :P

[Twonk_Strilo 10]

If their position is "we dont want people hacking our stuff apart because it causes us massive support headaches" then yeah it is :P

It's not the support cause that's the greatest cause. I believe that what PR want to achieve is a some what more easy-to-join mod for ArmA 2. You could call it player friendly in terms of realism/teamwork or Stand alone mod for ArmA 2. What whomever said "We're doing it for a support cause" meant is that this mod will ALSO make support easier. Because if a problem happen to occour, then the R-DEV can easily point out that it's something wrong within PR, and not something from another mod that's not cooporating with PR.

However, as I mentioned. The mod is, in one direction, suppoused to be working as a "stand alone mod/easy-to-join mod" for ArmA2.

Edited January 15, 2011 by Twonk_Strilo

[galzohar 31]

It seems people look at mods way too much as "hey look extra vehicle/weapon" and completely miss the actual purpose of the mod (which is actually very different if you compare the purpose of ACE to the purpose of PR). For ACE there is a very good reason that "ACE" and "ACEX" are 2 separate folders.

The problem is that all we have really seen from PR is British Army stuff, and what PR is really trying to achieve is yet to be seen (aside from some gameplay video that showed very very little). It makes people forget what PR is really trying to do here.

I'm still wondering why PR went with all the extra units stuff, where the most important thing they are trying to achieve can be really done with the mission editor and some scripting, with all the addon-related stuff being minor (in terms of importance, not in terms of effort required, which actually makes me wonder even more). Yes there are a lot of realism/other stuff that could use fixing, but what is really missing in Arma is good multiplayer gameplay.

[Twonk_Strilo 10]

It seems people look at mods way too much as "hey look extra vehicle/weapon" and completely miss the actual purpose of the mod (which is actually very different if you compare the purpose of ACE to the purpose of PR). For ACE there is a very good reason that "ACE" and "ACEX" are 2 separate folders.

The problem is that all we have really seen from PR is British Army stuff, and what PR is really trying to achieve is yet to be seen (aside from some gameplay video that showed very very little). It makes people forget what PR is really trying to do here.

I'm still wondering why PR went with all the extra units stuff, where the most important thing they are trying to achieve can be really done with the mission editor and some scripting, with all the addon-related stuff being minor (in terms of importance, not in terms of effort required, which actually makes me wonder even more). Yes there are a lot of realism/other stuff that could use fixing, but what is really missing in Arma is good multiplayer gameplay.

As you've mentioned, very little gameplay footage has been shown in terms of picture and video. And I think I know the reason for that.

When I was testing for the mod we were very few testers on the sessions (this was early this atumn, 2010). The problem then was that the US testers had timezone problems with the european testers. And during tests you usually focused on one main area. However that was in early stage, I don't know how testing is moving along now!

All I can say is that we managed to get gameplay test session a couple of times with 5 vs 5 - 10 vs 10 when we were focusing on the gameplay modes (Counter Insurgency(CI), Assault And Secure(AAS) and Advance and Defend(AAD). Those times were a great ammount of fun. Even though we weren't able to use all the assets that has been displayed now at that time.

Now that they've added more stuff for the testers I'm pretty sure that you'll see a GOOD gameplay video before the release. I can agree with you, the last 2 gameplay videos were lame and they didn't really display the actual amount of fun/real gameplay that I and many others had while testing the game modes. The videos mostly showed us how stuff works.

But you're also wrong in your post! the R-DEV team has shown some gameplay scripts and stuff, it's just that most of it is written in text and gameplay photos isn't the same ammount of "eye candy" that models are. (because gameplay is mostly something that you need to feel or watch in videos) What's the first thing you focus on when reading a text with pictures? The pictures of course! Some pictures are looking prettier than the others, then you focus on the pretty pictures, just as you're focusing on this bold text, because its unique! :)

Here's some gameplay things they've shown and/or have told you about so far:

- IEDs in various forms

- Close Support Bridges

- Game modes; Mainly Assault And Secure(AAS) and Counter Insurgency (CI) but they've also written about Insurgency(I), Command & Controll (C&C) and Assault and Defend(AAD) which they are working on.

- The use of Firebases, Rally Points & Logistics Transportation

- Your team will be devided into Squads in the numbers of 8 players (if i remember correctly?)

- Battlefield 2 stylish Commo-rose with many options such as placing move markers, Landing Zones, healing friends, setting up static objects and spotting enemies for your team.

- No 3rd person view in ANY vehicle or body

- Teamwork and at some level reality based gameplay

- Focused-destruction-on-objects (or how to put it out for you) basically destruction focused on one point. Like one hole in the wall where I just dropped my granade, not the whole wall falling down like in regular ArmA 2.

- Last but not least Micro Terrain! if you're making maps you'll know what I'm talking about.

(both focused-destruction and micro terrain is displayed in this video:

and of course there are side effects with these cells, but it's all about how you use them)

To sum things up for you. Gameplay things has been announced, but they don't get the same attention as the eye candy pictures, because pictures are prettier than words! And from my testing experience, the game play is actually very good. Especially the Counter Insurgency mode since it's the first time I've played it for ArmA 2 ;)

I should point out that I'm not a tester anymore and I haven't been since mid atumn 2010- Had to much school and other stuff to to take care off! I should probably change my signature.

I suggest you to read this interview again, it sorts some of the gameplay questions that some of you guys might have: http://battle.no/?section=news&nid=596

Edited January 15, 2011 by Twonk_Strilo

[ray243 11]

The reason why I've said using them as units in OA/Arma 2 is because people can make missions, and then let others play with it. So you can't use them in the editor as units right? Just want to be clear.

Also, will PR be in a folder, like the current addons and mods where you have to type in @mod to play, or do you have your own installer, and mod icon.

[avengerzx 10]

The situation now is PR does not require XEH like CBA to make it compatible with other 3rd party addons, so make it as a mod that only works alone.

I was afraid that we could not use Vanilla ARMA 2 units together with PR UK units in the Editor.

If we can't then it is pretty sad (as in Singleplayer not Multiplayer, yet.) as we wouldn't expect to play the game only with PR UK Forces and no USMC, US Army or even PMC Units.

Edited January 16, 2011 by avengerzx

[Twonk_Strilo 10]

The situation now is PR does not require XEH like CBA to make it compatible with other 3rd party addons, so make it as a mod that only works alone.

I was afraid that we could not use Vanilla ARMA 2 units together with PR UK units in the Editor.

If we can't then it is pretty sad (as in Singleplayer not Multiplayer, yet.) as we wouldn't expect to play the game only with PR UK Forces and no USMC, US Army or even PMC Units.

I don't know. If it'll be possible to fool around in the editor for singleplayer use, I'm pretty sure that it will be added if it's possible to split multiplayer and singleplayer in some way. And as I mentioned earlier, ArmA 2 assets will be used in PR:ArmA2- but most likely as placeholders for future assets to replace them! (And the future might be all from 1 to 100 years)

Don't forget that if this mod happens to become very popular within the ArmA 2 community, then other faction creators might hop on the train and cooporate with the R-DEV team to make new factions! Just like the Russian, Canadian, German, French, Norwegian, Dutch, African, New Zealand, Brasilian, Australian, Finnish, Polish, Israeli, Hamas, Private Sec. Contr. and in the future maybe Swedish, forces have been made from the Project Reality Community for PR:BF2.

@Ray243

Doesn't a mod have to be in the mod folder in order to work? But anyhow PR:A2 might have it's own ArmA2 launcher (call it Project Reality launcher?) or shortcut. The installer will most likely be a typical .exe or .bat file that installs it to the folder for you.

EDIT: Oh and avenger, the plan is to make it as you say, a mod that works on its own. And I should tell you that I believe that the R-DEV might look in to the fact of using the BiS US ARMY vs BiS Russian Forces on some maps in the future, the first release focuses on British Armed Forces vs. Taliban with the map/island Wardak, featuring somewhat typical PR gameplay and serving as a taste of what's to come in the future months/years from the PR:ArmA2 team.

Edited January 16, 2011 by Twonk_Strilo

[sabre 244]

Best not to bother speculating? Will probably only work to fuel further argument.

Edited January 16, 2011 by Sabre

[Twonk_Strilo 10]

Best not to bother speculating? Will probably only work to fuel further argument.

True! But I'm speculating some because I've forgotten how it's been said exactly! :P I can't run around saying that they'll have an PR:A2 Launcher similar to a typical ArmA 2 launcher when I'm unsure if that's what they actually said ,or if they said that they would just was a simple .exe shortcut for PR:ArmA2. And since I'm not an R-Dev I can't really say what's 100% sure or what's not 100% sure, since it's discussed behind closed doors. But I can use what I've read from other posts by them on both this thread and the threads on the realitymod website!

Edited January 16, 2011 by Twonk_Strilo

[Deadfast 43]

There will be nothing stopping you from using the editor in PR to play with either PR or vanilla units.

On the other hand being an MP-focused modification you might find that some essential singleplayer functionality might be missing.

[JdB 151]

On the other hand being an MP-focused modification you might find that some essential singleplayer functionality might be missing.

Not trying to imply anything by this, but would this mean something simple like not providing SP scenarios, or could it mean something more complicated, like MP specific coding making battles against Ai in SP unbalanced because of specific PvP development?

[Jeepo 10]

Guys.................

This has been talked about before over the course of all 114 pages, multiple times, trust me I have read them all.

Lets draw a line here yet again, because it seems to be the same old haters jumping up and down on stuff they already know the answer too.........

PR is a standalone mod, its core will not be used by anyone else, and as such it is for MP only. WHEN you get to load up PR it recommends you do NOT USE IT for SP as it will break things. That is how it was made. There will be no pulling apart of the mod to use it customised online, or adding in content that the PR Devs did not put there themselves. I really hope this clarifies stuff.

I honestly think many of you are simply not quite getting the point, the PR mod is a MODIFICATION, game play and all, NOT just some extra assets. As such protection will be there to ensure that you play it the correct way, so no, you can't add in some US marines or whatever as that would break the entire mod.

As for those of you who think this is in some way unfair? Meh, really it isn't, but thats your outlook on things and your right to moan is there. All they are doing is ensuring a fair and equal level of game play across the MP servers. Think about it. Why have to download a ton of different stuff, when all you need is the PR mod and you can jump on a PR server and play. Bingo.

[coopr 10]

Guys.................

This has been talked about before over the course of all 114 pages, multiple times, trust me I have read them all.

Lets draw a line here yet again, because it seems to be the same old haters jumping up and down on stuff they already know the answer too.........

PR is a standalone mod, its core will not be used by anyone else, and as such it is for MP only. WHEN you get to load up PR it recommends you do NOT USE IT for SP as it will break things. That is how it was made. There will be no pulling apart of the mod to use it customised online, or adding in content that the PR Devs did not put there themselves. I really hope this clarifies stuff.

I honestly think many of you are simply not quite getting the point, the PR mod is a MODIFICATION, game play and all, NOT just some extra assets. As such protection will be there to ensure that you play it the correct way, so no, you can't add in some US marines or whatever as that would break the entire mod.

As for those of you who think this is in some way unfair? Meh, really it isn't, but thats your outlook on things and your right to moan is there. All they are doing is ensuring a fair and equal level of game play across the MP servers. Think about it. Why have to download a ton of different stuff, when all you need is the PR mod and you can jump on a PR server and play. Bingo.

+1 :clap:

[Psilocybe 3]

Theyre goal isnt 'were too good to allow our stuff mixed in with the rest' they just want somthing we can all get on and play - which is good and simplifies the fun.

If our community wasnt so blessed where we can mix and match our mods, and it was a game on another platform, i dont think we would actually complain, ie, HalfLife mods Counterstrike and DayofDefeat etc etc.

We'll be right Jeepo, i bet most of the angst is because people wanna play :P

[NoRailgunner 0]

So if people like to make missions or just play around with PR they have to beg PR devs for it? :confused:

Or is it more that PR devs say "Hey folks, only on those approved PR servers you will get the best PR experience - for all other things we don't and we can't take care! Of course you can try PR stuff out without PR Servers but there is no guarantee or extented support for this. We do care only about our own little MP area."

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

Theyre goal isnt 'were too good to allow our stuff mixed in with the rest' they just want somthing we can all get on and play - which is good and simplifies the fun.

If our community wasnt so blessed where we can mix and match our mods, and it was a game on another platform, i dont think we would actually complain, ie, HalfLife mods Counterstrike and DayofDefeat etc etc.

We'll be right Jeepo, i bet most of the angst is because people wanna play :P

A lot of it comes down to things like this.

1- A mod approach where its installed with an executive and everything goes like bf2 wont work. In fact .exe only installs are avoided by most players, as they can screw up your entire game when you try to uninstall it.

2- PR "supporters" and testers keep acting like its going to "save" arma 2, and that anybody who says different is a "hater".

3- I've been told by several people that PR doesn't need this community, because they have their own that's better. Yes these were "supporters" (fanboys) but they reflect back on the PR community because plenty of PR fans seem to agree.

Also, more of a sidenote but I know there are people who are still sore about Wardak becoming a PR only map.

Edited January 16, 2011 by Darkhorse 1-6

[craig.turner 10]

I can not believe we are going down this route again :(

Everything that has been said so far here is pure "speculation" ........ I have not mentioned anything like some of the things that have been said in here, and I will not start quoting any of them either.

I am also refraining from commenting and giving an answer yet as we have not created the final build, which is kinda the point.

Feel free to make your own minds up about PR, however until we actually have - you are all "speculating", and there are no final decisions yet.

Whatever decision we make, will be our decision and in the interests of realitystudios, and the Multiplayer Community.

Cheers

[Zardok 10]

Who cares about Project Reality. I prefer mods that actually deliver new content, like the CLSA or RACS mod, and not only a few reskins or subvariants of vehicles that are already ingame.

If Project Reality would have kept quiet until their release, and just said "look this is what we have, maybe youll like it, maybe you dont" all would have been well.

But this incredible amount of talk, about "saving ArmA" about delivering "a new level of gameplay", without having really anything to SHOW, except three screenshots of vehicles already ingame....Sorry but again: Who cares?

[Cyteless 10]

Who cares about Project Reality. I prefer mods that actually deliver new content, like the CLSA or RACS mod, and not only a few reskins or subvariants of vehicles that are already ingame.

If Project Reality would have kept quiet until their release, and just said "look this is what we have, maybe youll like it, maybe you dont" all would have been well.

But this incredible amount of talk, about "saving ArmA" about delivering "a new level of gameplay", without having really anything to SHOW, except three screenshots of vehicles already ingame....Sorry but again: Who cares?

I've never done public Arma 2 PvP, so yes, I do care.

@UK_Force, this is your thread, mate. Go ahead and put the foot down. You're doing this for the community, do as you wish. I for one hate seeing drama on a forum about a computer game.

I wish you and the rest of the team the best of luck.

[hellfire257 3]

Who cares about Project Reality. I prefer mods that actually deliver new content, like the CLSA or RACS mod, and not only a few reskins or subvariants of vehicles that are already ingame.

If Project Reality would have kept quiet until their release, and just said "look this is what we have, maybe youll like it, maybe you dont" all would have been well.

But this incredible amount of talk, about "saving ArmA" about delivering "a new level of gameplay", without having really anything to SHOW, except three screenshots of vehicles already ingame....Sorry but again: Who cares?

Troll much? I care and so do hundreds, maybe thousands of others.

PR will be what PR will be. As it has been said before, speculation will get you nowhere.

[Kristian 47]

I do believe this thread is to discuss PROJECT REALITY and its content, not "How project Reality Affects ArmA2 community".

I personally am looking forwards to play properly on public servers, where I know I only need ONE mod making the gameplay sweet and smooth. Not could everyone PLEASE drop the speculation and BS? :(

[Twonk_Strilo 10]

Here's a sum of all the news post on the realitystudios forums!

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/77777-project-reality-arma2.html - PR:A2 Announced to be WIP

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/78655-pr-arma2-highlights-reel-1-a.html - PR:A2 Highlights Reel #1

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/85421-pr-arma2-highlights-reel-2-part-1-a.html - PR:A2 Highlights Reel #2 (pt1)

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/85569-pr-arma2-highlights-reel-2-part-2-a.html - PR:A2 Highlights Reel #2 (pt2)

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/85802-pr-arma2-highlights-reel-2-part-3-a.html - PR:A2 Highlights Reel #2 (pt3)

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/85968-pr-arma2-highlights-reel-2-part-4-a.html - PR:A2 Highlights Reel #2 (pt4)

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/88061-pr-arma2-highlights-reel-3-a.html - PR:A2 Highlights Reel #3

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/93393-pr-arma2-highlights-reel-4-a.html - PR:A2 Highlights Reel #4

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f509-mini-updates-team/86865-1-sep-10-a.html - Mini-updates #1

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f509-mini-updates-team/87251-2-sep-10-a.html - Mini-updates #2

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f509-mini-updates-team/88764-3-mastiff-update.html - Mini-updates #3 (which you should've seen already the other links- this was the first post of the finished model)

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f509-mini-updates-team/88824-4-wardak-map-update.html - Mini-updates #4

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f509-mini-updates-team/89440-5-pr-arma2s-micro-terrain.html - Mini-updates #5

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f509-mini-updates-team/89960-6-entry-testing-micro-terrain.html - Mini-updates #6

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f509-mini-updates-team/91394-7-wardak-map-update-2-a.html - Mini-updates #7

http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f509-mini-updates-team/92135-8-pr-arma2-podcast.html - Mini-updates #8

Anyhow, school starts again tomorrow & I'm off for another semester! Cya when the mod is out hopefully, or when I get some sparetime to check these forums.

EDIT: Edited post to avoid drama-war!

EDIT2:

Expect this in PR:A2

MZMlITOAMpw

ggiBdI7orAI

_iPlXQeG1y4

Edited January 16, 2011 by Twonk_Strilo

[kremator 1064]

Those videos nearly made me spit my beer all over the keyboard !

[BigMorgan 11]

UK_Force;1835849'

Everything that has been said so far here is pure "speculation" ........

In order to get things back "on track" would you care to briefly discuss what, if any, plans you guys have in creating an OPFOR? I know the plan is for "Taliban-style" OPFOR but will that include new units and weapons, or just using the BIS Takistani Locals?