Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaxpants
Hi, been playing SH3/GWX for a year or so and loving it. Now I am going to give SH4 a go and have just ordered the gold edition.
|
Welcome to the dark side!
Quote:
|
I was undecided over RFB and TMO, but in the end I chose RFB as apparently it is the more 'realistic' of the two. The RSRD seems like a must have.
|
Well, there's 'realism' and there's 'realism'. RFB strives to duplicate real operations and real difficulty, which can sometimes be easy and sometimes hard. The concept behind TMO isn't to make the game more difficult and less real, but to make the player behave in a more realistic fashion. Let's say the Japanese never set their depth charges for more than 200 feet. RFB might keep that precisely, which is more 'realistic'. TMO might set them for as deep as 600 feet, because the reality was that the submariners might not know they couldn't be set for more than 200 feet and having them that way, while realistic in a technical sense, gives the gamer information he wouldn't have had in real life, which means we get to cheat in the name of 'realism'.
The above example has nothing to do with the actual settings in either mod, and is just an example. But you get the idea. All of that said, I prefer RFB because while I like my game to feel 'real' to me, I don't usually bother to remember actual settings of that sort, and so I don't need to be pushed to play realistically, since I'm pretty bad at it anyway. Even with auto-targetting I tend to get pretty low tonnage scores simply because I tend to imagine it's really happing to me and so play in a fairly cautious manner.
But that's just me. I'm not trying to suggest one over the other, just point out the difference in the different concepts between the two mods and how they each deal with 'realism'.
Quote:
|
I'm presuming that SH4 doesn't require a screen resolution mod fix like SH3?
|
No. It has setting choices and runs fine at several different resolutions. Mine is set to match my screen at 1440x900.