This makes BF2 into the game it should have been. It's a direct extension of Desert Combat. The emphasis on realism is just amazing, yet it never gets in the way of having a good time (once you get to know the ropes).

The overhaul the mod gives BF2 is just staggering, it's hard to believe you are playing the same game the first time you get fired upon and hear the realistic tell tale snap and crack of bullets whizzing by. VOIP becomes central to the game, and squad dynamics start to play out. Check out the clip to see.

I will say that it is ridiculously hard, the arcade nature of BF2 is totally gone, guns have realistic damage and recoil, its often you get shot and have no idea what happened, making the game far more frustrating unless it's something thats up your ally. And If you don't like it after a round of playing, you will never like it.

But I'll say it's about as close to wargaming or paintball as you will get. It's the only game I play online nowdays.

I haven't played BF2 in a long time. I downloaded this MOD not to long ago, but haven't gotten around to trying it out yet.

I never really cared for BF2, but this mod actually convinced me to purchase the game. Maybe it's because I'm slowing down in my old age, but nowadays it's the more realistic shooters that interest me, mainly because they focus on tactics and out-thinking your opponents as opposed to twitch and reflexes. I still prefer America's Army to BF2, despite this reality mod, but it's nice to have a little variety now and then.

Does it fix the hitbox issues? Since playing BF2142 which seems to have mostly fixed it, I can no longer really enjoy BF2 or spec ops because they still have laggy hitboxes. The hitbox can lag up to five body widths behind a player depending on how fast they're moving and the server throughput.

Well Bedzos, I have played BF2 for over a year now and I haven't really experienced the massive problems you are talking about, what you seem to have is some serious connectivity issue as that is the only time I seen the effects you talk about. Occasionally I would get a sniper shot to the head and not register a hit, but that was rare.

However with PR 0.5 I haven't experienced anything like that so far, the very nature of the game play is different you don't get hit indicators or even console registers when you take down your opponent. Only your scoreboard shows your total KIA. So usually you are pretty aggressive in making sure your target is down, as they are in kind.

Sylvester_Ink: I agree what you say about the different game play involved, BF2 is too often of who is faster in getting off a shot as the pathways and methods to engage targets are pretty much laid out by the maps themselves. It's very hard to deviate from the standard way to engage a map, and thus the game play becomes at one point predictable. In PR there is more emphasis on cooperation between the squads and the commander, as that's the only way to achieve victory, emphasis is put on squad leaders and commanders. The way to engage a target is left up to the players themselves, but specific targets are given in order to more realistically portray the movement of battle from one contested objective to the next. Thus engaging both teams in offensive and defensive roles.

I have tried America's Army before, however I must say it's overwhelmingly handicapped in how many steps you are forced to take before actually playing the game. But I think that has more to do with it being a sell for Army then anything else. I also dislike that both BF2 and America's Army sanitize the experience of war, now am not asking for Saving Private Ryan here but there isn't even blood, grenade shock or bleed out, I think that's the wrong message entirely to send to youths. War is hell, if you're gonna go showing 10% of it, you have to show that last 90% too.

I do believe that in portraying to the masses what War is actually like, with all it's details and factors an appreciation can develop for what it actually means. As too often it is now that a disconnect exists between what supporting a war and knowing what war is exists in society. I feel it's some baby boomers fascination in attaining the same heights of the Golden WW2 era. But now am rambling.

Yeah, I agree with you on the training for AA. (That 20 minute special forces training was harsh.) But fortunately it only needs to be done once, and I got through it long ago.
As for how bloody a game should be, I've never really cared for excessive in-game violence, and I think it does distract from the gameplay, so having relatively clean violence (what an odd phrase) gets my approval. Besides, I think it's more on the idea of making the game more accessible to a wider audience as opposed to sanitizing the view of war. Less graphic violence will ensure a lower ESRB rating, and that will get more players. For BF2, it helps in sales, which is important to a commercial game. And for AA, the accessibility helps with the recruitment process. (Yeah, people can boo-hoo that whole idea all they want. I don't particularly care. I enjoy the game, so I play it.)

Hmmm . . . now I'm rambling.

Desert combat was simply emence and the only thing letting it down was the crap netcode of bf1942

For ground troops Real war has a very small degree of skill. the best game to capture varouse aspects of the realty of war is operatoin flashpiont. however unless you are playing coop ,game play that mirrors real warfar would be far to tedouse for a mass market. The most important things that FPS war games seem to miss that would make the exsperance more reolistick yet maintain fun game play. is having the player die alot esear ie very few shots kill you. inorder to implament this the wepons simulatoin would have to be quite advanced inorder to warent having difrent guns.

in the end bf2 is an arcade game aditoinaly its very hard to simulate gun combat acuretly as the actoin is mostly organick unlike say with a flight sim ore driving game where you are largely implmeting a machanical system. granted wind gravty and fricatoin afects are highy complex however u can fake these afects qute esealy due to the nature of beaing icolated from them within a vehicle aditoinaly u can play with a stearing wheel ore a flight yoke helping translate the exsperance alot esear.
pc fps games have very litel to do with shooting just as a console tenis game has very litel to do with real world tenis (evan if you are playing on a wii) its one of the more intresting things about games is how easy it is to convince sumone thay are partaking in an activty purly by lying to them with visual stimulie.

I think it's too far to say that a game fails to stimulate something just because it's an FPS. It's only now we are reaching a point where actual physical stimulation can take place. The only place where simulation happens is in things like VBS1 and dolly ran flight simulators. Even in games like Flight Sim X, there is alot of coding wankery to fake aerodynamics, not actually model it.

my piont is the limitatoins of mass market FPS is that it could never emulate the real world activity unless u could phisicly walk around with a gun and all the equpiment becuse thats one of the core things that make shooting and gun fighting what it is . where as with a plane ore a care it is done siting down and the mesheen around u is doing all the acvities so its far esear to emulate with equipment and within the game itself. fps games are esentualy advanced tank shooters where u are pioliting a vehicale represented in human form though the controles of a mouse and keybord.
although this is debetable becuse one you become emersed in a game the controle methods become erelivent so on those grounds you could still argue an fps could be reolistick.


the best fps system "game" i have seen is the ones the militry use with huge projectoin screens and real guns that fire blanks.

lol one of the ARTS of a good games designer and development team is ther implmentaton of subversive wankary and translatoin of activites though metafor this is why games are one of the more saphisticated artforms. imo

I'd disagree with you on that Westy, a few years ago we played Doom type shooters until Rainbow Six came and basically created the tactical gaming genre. It culminated with the release of Ghost Recon, Operation Flashpoint and others.

Each time a developer has actually taken the steps necessary in presenting a new way of playing the response from the public was positive, it's funny how post Operation Flashpoint, not a single developer was ballsy enough to try it, or rather no publishing firm was ballsy enough to throw money at it. Far Cry is a good example, Crysis will follow. Bohemia with Operation Flashpoint are following up with Armed Assault. These games don't dilute the formula that made them successful like Rainbow Six but go into it deeper.

As for getting FPS games right, it's not hard, people just don't fucking listen to the gaming community. Everything I can say about getting tacical gaming right has been said better by this man here http://dslyecxi.com/bestoftactical.html

Developers just don't spend the necessary time to make a FUN game, but focus primarily on the razz and stuff, thats because gaming has become a corporate activity now. Risks are rarely taken. Games like Duke Nukem, Quake and even Doom probably would never make it out now. The edge has been lost. But this is going to change as the medium matures over time.

i think we are talking about 2 seperate things i was making the piont that A fps game has as mutch to do with real world shooting as picking my nose has to do with swimming. the best you could ever do with an FPS is creat a metafor for shooting. thats why Tying to simulate Shooting using a keybord mouse ore pritty mutch all avalable controler interfaces is piontess. mutch of what shooting and ground troop bassed warefair is about human movement stamina enviromental awarness manny aspects of whitch canot be trnslated when using a keybord and mouse ore evan a light gun. (unless like i sead before you belive once sumone is emerced in a game thay have trancended the controle system evan so the game would still be missing manny core aspects that are intrensick to warfar)

aditoinaly i wouldent blame the develpers. making a half decent fps let alone a Simulatoin fps that actualy works and is @fun@ is quite a dificult process as you probably know. personaly i would not risk making a simulatoin fps as the market is to unpredictable evan if u created the best sim fps interms of logicly folowing all the rules of what would best translate and provide the player with an exsperance of Warfar. it is likely the game would not sell unless u are very lucky ore happen to get a big publisher to push it for you(evan then its quite likly the majorty of the market ore enough to make a profit would ignore the game ). most gamers are simpletons (when it comes to games) and unfortunatly that degrades the qualty of games that are made add to this the exspence of making a 3d simulatoin game the risk to cost ratoi is far to high. unlike in cinima where you can test new ideas resnably cheeply ore at least put forwardas a proof of concept very cheeply. over time gamers and and the game industry will mature with people actualy talking about games in a meture and deep way. at the moment the majorty of games players dont understand the fundimentals of what makes games what thay are. yet just about everyone watching a film understands the basics of editing and plot development and varouse other film techneeks. whats evan worse with games, is due to there interactive nature gamers intrinzicly have to understand the machanics of game worlds to progress within them. where as a retarded 4 yearold could sit through a complex film and still enjoy it for its astheticks alone.

Hmm, maybe I should finally get into BF2....

I agree that actual simulation of battlefield is impossible, but it's still achievable as shown by the link I provided previously. I mean Operation Flashpoint lead into the development of VBS1, both used by various armies to simulate combat runs. What I was talking about was simulating massive armed conflicts, as the purpose of these systems is not to teach soldiers to fire a weapon, but how to effectively respond to the pressures of battle, the chaos of war, maneuvers and tactics. As they cannot typically service out a Red Flag type of scenario or say a F-16. But enough about that... regarding game development...

But isn't that mostly due to the developers themselves not taking the risks and costs implicated in making a true hit title? Look at HL2, they knew they had to deliver some more of the same, but they decided to push the envelope further then anyone before (facial expressions, narrative progression and TONS and TONS of actual play testing not bug testing). The same is of Operation Flashpoint and STALKER at the moment.

Consequently they had a massive hit, countless awards and a fan base they basically switched on into Steam, as much as I dislike it I still have it on my computer. The development in games in going into the direction of visual wankery to me, it's all about gfx and what not. However there is little to really tell apart the games now days based on their graphics, most are dark, bloomed and that awful brownish tinge that seems to be 'realistic'.

It's the publisher's fault of trying to push developers into the same avenues, there is no freedom given to developers to provide new and compelling games. Look at God of War, Jaffe had to fight a while to be allowed to do something like that. And even now he's being forced into making God of War 3. The freedom that designers enjoyed probably got killed off by Romero and Ion Storm fiasco.

We'll see how it goes.

Yah it is strange it is realy hard to pindown the exact resoins as to why some studioes are sucsessfull i think alot of it is outside of the controle of a developer there have been plenty of games that are realy good and just get ignored this can happen afeter the game is relased and it dies. ore the publisher can just not understand the merrits of a game and just force the developer to get the game out pritty mutch killing the game. some games can survive this the advantage of the sim market is that if u develop something that simulates an aspect of something well then however buggy the game a large number of people will still get the game. and you allso end up with strong development comunities with there obvouse benofit. One of the main problems with The design of games is There are no clear rules as to what actualy works ore is comercealy sucsessfull especeaily with more complex games beaing made now. alot of the studoes aproach games design by making some engin and then just working out what the best game thay can make with that system is. so as an invester you have no idea what thay are doing ore planning. i think flashpiont started out as a actoin fps might have evan been a linear actoin fps. halo was a stratagy game then a pc 3rd person shooter before thay had had anny idea it was going to be a console fps

Love the red flag reference above - Falcon 3.0's scenario mode was called Red Flag.

Dude, you play Falcon 3.0 too Krupo??? My all-time favorite combat flight sim!

I played this mod a few weekends ago. It's pretty cool. It's takes a while to get used to it due to new rules (nothing like BF2). I was in a few squads who had VoIP going (had to tell one because his mic amphlified too high) and we had fun even though I totally sucked. Maps are great. I love the jungle ones with the blocked bridge. I like how you have to capture specific places in order. If you try to capture something else, it won't work because that's not the goal. There are always fights because of the hot spots.

I need to read http://guide.realitymod.com/index.php?title=User_Guide to understand the mod more. Hard game to get into, but very cool.


BTW, I played Falcon 3.0 too during my high school days. It was on my 286 10 Mhz. I had no voices though and I sucked at it. Remember that thick manual??!?!

"The emphasis on realism is just amazing,
yet it never gets in the way of having a good time."

Will there be a Pat Tillman scenario?
Can't get much more realistic than that.
Good times.

Westy, do you type that badly on purpose? There's something fishy about your typos, like they're pre-meditated. It's kinda creepy...

I think Westy just found the mental path of least verbal resistance.

Memorare, maybe you should stop watching the news for a lil' while.

I think this video just got me to re-install bf2. I'll be checking the mod out.