Project Reality Forums

Tannhauser wrote:So when a server like -Cough- TG -Cough- switches to a vietnam map, you suddendly crash out of the server because you lack the map? Mkay... :

How that differs from situation when you dont want to play Vietnam and simply disconnect once the server switches to that map?

I would support integrating the two together, but wouldn't that limit some possibilities for PR:V?

Like if you made a rally point change for PR, wouldn't it roll into PR:V also?
But I think if they integrated, more people would play it.

Aquiller wrote:How that differs from situation when you dont want to play Vietnam and simply disconnect once the server switches to that map?

Gives you the chance to try it out at least. I mean, you didn't even try PR:V yet and you're already shutting down on it like it's going to be an unplayable annoyance. There's more chance you might try it out if hanging with friends on a server, some of these friends will stay for the map and might encourage you to stay for the fun.

boilerrat wrote: Like if you made a rally point change for PR, wouldn't it roll into PR:V also?

I believe RP configurations can be set appropriately by factions.

There's pro's and con's for both methods. Not really going to know for sure one way or another until after v0.91 hits the shelves and we see where we're at.

If there was a method of using the "boosterpack" message vanilla BF2 used to give us, that could be a way..?

Another thing could be to ask servers to either run PR or PR:V maps, but it all depends on how things go I suppose.

[R-DEV]AfterDune wrote:If there was a method of using the "boosterpack" message vanilla BF2 used to give us, that could be a way..?

Another thing could be to ask servers to either run PR or PR:V maps, but it all depends on how things go I suppose.

That would be a bit limiting imo. It would give much more variety if servers can choose themself what maps they want. It would be a bit like forcing servers to run either AAS or insurgency.

I still believe PR:V is a myth.

Tannhauser wrote:Gives you the chance to try it out at least. I mean, you didn't even try PR:V yet and you're already shutting down on it like it's going to be an unplayable annoyance. There's more chance you might try it out if hanging with friends on a server, some of these friends will stay for the map and might encourage you to stay for the fun.

All I'm saying is that with huge gigabyte's needed to download, each one of us should have a choice either he wants to play 'Nam or not.

And besides, I'm a real enthusiast when it comes to that era, I'm looking forward to this new 'expansion pack' (can we call it like that? i think yes). On the other hand, with all that 'hype' about Huey's and 'getting some' I fear that almost nobody will enjoy playing opposing forces.

just...download it from....university.....lmfo i DLd both file and saved it on a external harddrive in 30 mins.

Maybe there should be some kind of poll. Personally I like the Vietnam scenario. Insurgency, large battles siege, airwar junglefight cityfight, if you look at the vietnam battle it displays all warfare has to offer and I think the opfor can be considered to be more on an equal footing with the opfor, unlike in the present days conflict, where the techtree for the opfor ends at the rpg.

my concern with making it seperate is either prv or origional pr will die out completely, my money would be on prv dying out after a while. so if its included it will actually get played because you dont have to switch between the two and you dont need to worry about server hosting one or the other etc.

Aquiller wrote:All I'm saying is that with huge gigabyte's needed to download, each one of us should have a choice either he wants to play 'Nam or not.

That's similar to saying insurgency mode should be a separate installer, it also has a lot of it's own content and not everyone plays it.

Aquiller wrote:All I'm saying is that with huge gigabyte's needed to download, each one of us should have a choice either he wants to play 'Nam or not.

And besides, I'm a real enthusiast when it comes to that era, I'm looking forward to this new 'expansion pack' (can we call it like that? i think yes). On the other hand, with all that 'hype' about Huey's and 'getting some' I fear that almost nobody will enjoy playing opposing forces.

The North will have some helicopters and even some airplanes. They also get some tanks too and APC.. While we are going to try and setup some realistic senarios..It is also possible that for gameplay, we may have to have some "fictitious" battles.

You can sure bet that there will be some napalm and some good search/destroy insurgency battles.

I believe the best idea would be to incorporate both together.

while one is more modern and the other is in Vietnam, they still share the same gameplay principles.

As well, the community won't be split between mods.

For example, when the Insurgency game mode was introduced, Project Reality: Insurgency wasn't made. It was incorporated within the main game.

I dont Believe that the problem lies in whether to incorporate PR:Vietnam in the mainbuild or not. In fact I do believe that this should not be an option, it should come in the main build. The real decision will be based on whether servers choose to play the BF:V rotations on their servers. The problem should not be whehter to download PR:V or not, instead choosing if you want to play on a PR:V server or not.

Incorporate V into PR and let the servers either V or PR. Don't think it's a good idea to mix the server rotation between the eras.

We need to make a poll to help the decision.

Any ideas of how many place the Vietnam will take on our hard drives along with the 0.93 ?

I think the nam" should be incorporated at first solely on purely infantry maps to test how the community react to this new environment without taking too much hard drive space / download time.

Omega_17_The_True wrote:We need to make a poll to help the decision.

The community aren't going to be the ones deciding how we handle releasing this...

And with that, I really don't see much point in keeping this open, the devs are discussing the best way to do this. There are countless other things than download size or mixed server rotations that need to be decided upon. It's not a simple thing by any means, whatever way we decide to go.

Locked.