In this topic I try to open some eyes mostly blinded by hate or nostalgia or I don't even know what. Try both games. I've tried to describe both games truthfully and unbiasedly. If I failed somewhere, please notify me and I'll correct my post.
I'll say it here first so you keep on reading. RO1 is a wonderful game that changed the world for me and many others. RO2 is a wonderful game that refined what RO1 did, and with slight tweaking will grow and be something we all wanted from old Ro:CA players to newcomers seeking tactical realism they've wanted.
I played Ro1 for over 200 hours and DH for 150 hours more and currently at 125 hours in RO2 retail and 67 hours of beta. While there are differences in RO1 and RO2 realism in many different areas, you cannot say RO1 was more realistic. Let me elaborate below.
While I haven't been in actual combat, I've played Airsoft games for years with my trusty MP40 and I've been to army where we had training exercises with laser guns. RO2 is much closer to what my perception of "actual combat" is based on army exercises and training, and to a lesser degree - airsoft.
Above is a picture of the system we were wearing in these simulations - laser attached to gun shooting blanks and detection system attached to combat gear.
Again, this is just MY opinion and NOT based on any actual hard facts someone is sure to dig out. Please read the whole thread before hitting down/upvote.
RO1 non-realistic quirks - some present in RO2, mentioned below.
You can reload while crawling. Without losing any speed.
You can aim down the sights while crawling and it's very accurate. This one in particular is rather game-breaking.
You can go from crouching to standing without losing the aimpoint. You'll be 100% accurate while pop-up-shooting. Again, gamebreaking. Also present in Ro2.
You cannot aim accurately beyond 50-100 meters without crouching and putting your nose up against the screen. I realized this the other day while playing FallenHeroes and trying to shoot someone in the middle of the park (about 70 meters or so from where I was) - I couldn't see him if I was slouched back on my chair, I had to crouch and put my face about 30cm away from my 22" screen. Engagement ranges are nowhere near realistic or even sensible. Also, it's bad on your back to nerd-crouch.
You cannot accurately fire SMG's to any degree beyond 40-50 meters.
PTRD and in general tanks - again very unrealistic due to wtf-angling and bad penetration data guns and armor data on most tanks. I blame the old engine on this one.
General clumsiness and slowness of everything. You can't hipfire MG without pressing mb2 first, you cannot cancel reloading except by tossing your gun away, you're slow, unresponsive and cannot run, even if in mortal danger, for more than 10 seconds or so. This is one of the biggest unrealistic things about RO1. I'm not fit my any standards but I can run for a few kilometers at faster pace than RO1 soldiers can - with all the modern gear we had to carry in the army.
And now, to be fair and not biased, I'll list non-realistic quirks about RO2, some present in RO1, also mentioned.
Speed of aiming down the sight after sprinting. This one seems bugged, since It's much faster after sprinting than say, trying to do it while standing still - where it's almost perfect.
Slight lack of inertia. Inertia IS there and it's ALMOST perfect, but sometimes you can stop slightly too fast. Also there's the issue where people run up and down stairs way too fast and over rubbled ground there should be a, again, SLIGHT speed decrease. Maybe 5% or 10%. Running over uneven ground doesn't so much slow you down as it increases the risk of tripping and falling on your face, thought I'm sure this won't get modelled. The best abstraction is slowing guys down while running over rough rubble.
PTRS again is way too powerful, the omnipotent AT rifles have been a problem in the series always. Tanks also seem bugged in the armor department - PzIV is invulnerable from the sides (damn near so at least) and T34 front armor is too vulnerable to PTRS. Again, I hope these are bugs and will get fixed. Again, present in RO1 with a different AT-rifle.
Tank Aimbot-AI. AI - good idead. Aimbotting AI hullgunner? Bad idea.
The weapons distribution - while there are way too many MkB's around I cannot blame the game on too many smg's. It's Stalingrad, known for it's brutal close encounter combats AND unrealistic weapon loadouts were present in RO1 too. I didn't comment it on there, I won't comment it on RO2. Except for the MkB, which in my opinion, is the sole single biggest unrealistic thing in RO2. Having 1 is maybe ok, but 6? No. Just no. Also present in RO1, with MP41's available and PPD's where it had been phased out long ago. No-one complained about it there.
Guns are bit too accurate. Adding again SLIGHTLY more weight to them would be perfect. ARMA:OA did it almost perfectly. Copy them.
Lack of stamina effect on gun accuracy. This is the number one gamebreaker in RO2. Again, copy ARMA:OA, they did it perfectly.
I'd also tweak the ability to steady breathing to be affected by stamina more and in general - you don't shoot while holding your breath. It makes your muscles involuntarily tremble due to body oxygen preservation kicking in. You let breath out and don't inhale while taking the shot. This is how pressing shift should be in RO2. It only gives a window of 2-3 seconds of near-perfectly accurate aiming and then you have to inhale or start trembling. The zoom is ok, no issues with 1:1 scaling with real world.
Things present in both games - protected areas. In RO1 these were minefields that sometimes spawned on you when enemy capped an area and you were instantly blown up. People didn't complain about it in RO1, but are now complaining about it in RO2.
Wounding system. RO2 seems like it SHOULD have a deeper wounding system that just isn't implemented. Hopefully this will be fixed and RO1 had nonsense wounding system where you basically got a handicap for a couple of seconds and were free to go afterwards. Both have faults. I'm hoping RO2's system gets fixed soon.
Small maps. Maps weren't larger in RO1, at least not the stock maps. Faster movement (which is realistic - soldier in RO2 isn't inhumanly fast. He runs at about 5kp/h which is actually quite a medium speed) and ability to scale everything to 1:1 scale (the dreaded zoom) makes them seem smaller, IE:exactly the size they ARE. Some maps are too small to hold 64 players too.
Player models are too noticeable from the terrain - I suspect this is an engine issue, was also present in RO1 but to a lesser degree. More moving grass and bushes should do the trick. Looking at original Ghost Recon - where it was done good.
Progression system - I was against it from the start. I still am.
I'll edit my post if I come up with more while playing.
Thank you if you read through it - and didn't hit downvote as soon as possible.
I'll say it here first so you keep on reading. RO1 is a wonderful game that changed the world for me and many others. RO2 is a wonderful game that refined what RO1 did, and with slight tweaking will grow and be something we all wanted from old Ro:CA players to newcomers seeking tactical realism they've wanted.
I played Ro1 for over 200 hours and DH for 150 hours more and currently at 125 hours in RO2 retail and 67 hours of beta. While there are differences in RO1 and RO2 realism in many different areas, you cannot say RO1 was more realistic. Let me elaborate below.
While I haven't been in actual combat, I've played Airsoft games for years with my trusty MP40 and I've been to army where we had training exercises with laser guns. RO2 is much closer to what my perception of "actual combat" is based on army exercises and training, and to a lesser degree - airsoft.
Above is a picture of the system we were wearing in these simulations - laser attached to gun shooting blanks and detection system attached to combat gear.
Again, this is just MY opinion and NOT based on any actual hard facts someone is sure to dig out. Please read the whole thread before hitting down/upvote.
RO1 non-realistic quirks - some present in RO2, mentioned below.
You can reload while crawling. Without losing any speed.
You can aim down the sights while crawling and it's very accurate. This one in particular is rather game-breaking.
You can go from crouching to standing without losing the aimpoint. You'll be 100% accurate while pop-up-shooting. Again, gamebreaking. Also present in Ro2.
You cannot aim accurately beyond 50-100 meters without crouching and putting your nose up against the screen. I realized this the other day while playing FallenHeroes and trying to shoot someone in the middle of the park (about 70 meters or so from where I was) - I couldn't see him if I was slouched back on my chair, I had to crouch and put my face about 30cm away from my 22" screen. Engagement ranges are nowhere near realistic or even sensible. Also, it's bad on your back to nerd-crouch.
You cannot accurately fire SMG's to any degree beyond 40-50 meters.
PTRD and in general tanks - again very unrealistic due to wtf-angling and bad penetration data guns and armor data on most tanks. I blame the old engine on this one.
General clumsiness and slowness of everything. You can't hipfire MG without pressing mb2 first, you cannot cancel reloading except by tossing your gun away, you're slow, unresponsive and cannot run, even if in mortal danger, for more than 10 seconds or so. This is one of the biggest unrealistic things about RO1. I'm not fit my any standards but I can run for a few kilometers at faster pace than RO1 soldiers can - with all the modern gear we had to carry in the army.
And now, to be fair and not biased, I'll list non-realistic quirks about RO2, some present in RO1, also mentioned.
Speed of aiming down the sight after sprinting. This one seems bugged, since It's much faster after sprinting than say, trying to do it while standing still - where it's almost perfect.
Slight lack of inertia. Inertia IS there and it's ALMOST perfect, but sometimes you can stop slightly too fast. Also there's the issue where people run up and down stairs way too fast and over rubbled ground there should be a, again, SLIGHT speed decrease. Maybe 5% or 10%. Running over uneven ground doesn't so much slow you down as it increases the risk of tripping and falling on your face, thought I'm sure this won't get modelled. The best abstraction is slowing guys down while running over rough rubble.
PTRS again is way too powerful, the omnipotent AT rifles have been a problem in the series always. Tanks also seem bugged in the armor department - PzIV is invulnerable from the sides (damn near so at least) and T34 front armor is too vulnerable to PTRS. Again, I hope these are bugs and will get fixed. Again, present in RO1 with a different AT-rifle.
Tank Aimbot-AI. AI - good idead. Aimbotting AI hullgunner? Bad idea.
The weapons distribution - while there are way too many MkB's around I cannot blame the game on too many smg's. It's Stalingrad, known for it's brutal close encounter combats AND unrealistic weapon loadouts were present in RO1 too. I didn't comment it on there, I won't comment it on RO2. Except for the MkB, which in my opinion, is the sole single biggest unrealistic thing in RO2. Having 1 is maybe ok, but 6? No. Just no. Also present in RO1, with MP41's available and PPD's where it had been phased out long ago. No-one complained about it there.
Guns are bit too accurate. Adding again SLIGHTLY more weight to them would be perfect. ARMA:OA did it almost perfectly. Copy them.
Lack of stamina effect on gun accuracy. This is the number one gamebreaker in RO2. Again, copy ARMA:OA, they did it perfectly.
I'd also tweak the ability to steady breathing to be affected by stamina more and in general - you don't shoot while holding your breath. It makes your muscles involuntarily tremble due to body oxygen preservation kicking in. You let breath out and don't inhale while taking the shot. This is how pressing shift should be in RO2. It only gives a window of 2-3 seconds of near-perfectly accurate aiming and then you have to inhale or start trembling. The zoom is ok, no issues with 1:1 scaling with real world.
Things present in both games - protected areas. In RO1 these were minefields that sometimes spawned on you when enemy capped an area and you were instantly blown up. People didn't complain about it in RO1, but are now complaining about it in RO2.
Wounding system. RO2 seems like it SHOULD have a deeper wounding system that just isn't implemented. Hopefully this will be fixed and RO1 had nonsense wounding system where you basically got a handicap for a couple of seconds and were free to go afterwards. Both have faults. I'm hoping RO2's system gets fixed soon.
Small maps. Maps weren't larger in RO1, at least not the stock maps. Faster movement (which is realistic - soldier in RO2 isn't inhumanly fast. He runs at about 5kp/h which is actually quite a medium speed) and ability to scale everything to 1:1 scale (the dreaded zoom) makes them seem smaller, IE:exactly the size they ARE. Some maps are too small to hold 64 players too.
Player models are too noticeable from the terrain - I suspect this is an engine issue, was also present in RO1 but to a lesser degree. More moving grass and bushes should do the trick. Looking at original Ghost Recon - where it was done good.
Progression system - I was against it from the start. I still am.
I'll edit my post if I come up with more while playing.
Thank you if you read through it - and didn't hit downvote as soon as possible.
Last edited: