Talk:Project Reality

Bullet Ballistics?

"Ballistics are adjusted to reflect those of real weapons"

That is not totally correct. Only shots beyond 600 m are affected. So within 600m, you just aim centerally and hit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wlijiu (talk • contribs) 12:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Engine

Would it be more accurate to state this as using the Battlefield 2 engine, or the Refractor engine? I know refractor is underlying, but this is specifically a BF2 mod (and won't work with any other Refractor game). 121.98.178.172 (talk) 21:03, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Features section

I rewrote the entire thing, since it sounded more like a brochure than an encyclopedic article. Hopefully, I didn't miss anything important, but if I did, feel free to edit it in. --daranz^t 15:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

It seems quite good. There's a few lists which seem a bit extraneous, and I'm not sure whether the system requirements are different enough to warrant a section on those (I've not seen much of a hit when I play, anyway). But it's very good! Have a biscuit. --Wunderbear 11:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the copyright issue: The source of the supposed copyrighted material: I3d.net is itself copied from [Project Reality News] - the official website for the Mod in question. It was the news release issued by the Development Team on 29/08/2008. No copyright issue here.([R-DEV] Masaq, Project Reality Development Team - masaq (at) realitymod (dot) com) aka Astix 20:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject video game assessment

I've left the rating as is, it's certainly headed in the right direction but the massed subheadings and lists are scaffolding rather than flowing paragraphs. It needs breaking down into the typical video game article paragraphs (gameplay, plot (if necessary), development, reception) and if subheadings are needed at all they should be used sparingly to prevent stop-start-stop-start when reading. There shouldn't be external links in the article body - if they're cited as sources then they don't need repeating anyway. The hardware requirements can be moved to the infobox which has a section for them. It would be very helpful if the {{cite web}} template was used to cite the online sources. Take a look around the video game projects Good Articles for some ideas, there should be a complete cite web template to pinch from one of them. Someoneanother 05:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality

"Editors are currently in dispute concerning points of view expressed in this article. Please help to discuss and resolve the dispute before removing this message."

This is a reference to the reception section. Unless someone can find negative reception published about Project Reality by a reputable source that is not in the article, I will remove the notice in 5 days. If you do find some negative reception from a reputable, major source, great! Just add it in and then remove the notice.~ GeZe (talk) 23:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

New Criticism section

I've added a new section under reception. The information is verifiable but unsourced as I doubt it is likely to be disputed. If it is disputed, I can dig through the Project Reality forums to find countless instances of the described responses, but would prefer not to have to spend time doing this. WastelandSoldier (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC).

I read the portion you wrote and immediately was surprised that citation needed tags weren't applied. All the information you put there is factual, and citing individual forum posts seems a bit harsh. I hope no sticklers for sourced info come along... but, honestly, you should be able to source the whole section with a blanket link to the forum, and let doubters dig for it... though i doubt that's up to wiki standards (it should be in cases like this, though, where abstract knowledge from hundreds of small posts is boiled down). JudgeX (talk) 22:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

PR:Arma 2 (PR:A2) section

It's WAY too biased. Don't know who wrote it but it needs to be edited asap. BobVickers (talk) 20:57, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Project Reality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140725140326/http://www.crydev.net/project_db.php?action=project_profile&team_id=3325&project_id=3165 to http://www.crydev.net/project_db.php?action=project_profile&team_id=3325&project_id=3165

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:22, 25 January 2018 (UTC)