I voted for Classic only, because I think it's the decision that should have been made at the beginning of development. And since it's a poll that doesn't mean anything.
Upvote
0
Take a closer look on those reviews - their overall number, how many are positive and negative. Then take a look on exact scores given by the players: they're heavily polarised and people seem to either like it or hate it (0, 2 vs 8, 10 is a good example). In the end opinion is mixed; one player might like it, the other won't and it's up to individual taste. You need also to remember that reviews are very subjective - who is more right, a man who gave the game 0 or 10? Whom should you listen to? Who is more objective? In the end it's up to you to decide.Cyper said:What's other peoples take on this?
Here's what I assume the science behinds this is: Action mode + free weekends attracts players, players that are used to spending $15 on 3 maps, who will throw any amount of money at something they like, these people fund TW to continue making awesome games that are realistic and in some cases maybe not so much. This also allows them to hire more people to create things faster and with more detail and debugging.
So if you try to stop action mode, you're only hurting the other aspects of the game more.
For the ones who doesn't want a new game mode - use selfcontrol and don't play it then. No one forces you.
Fragment the already minuscule community???
A new gamemode will rather tie the community together agian. It will make more people play it. This is clearly what most people want on this board. If you're worried that it will scare off the mainstream, don't worry, RO2 have already done that. Its a game far removed from the mainstream type of videogames. The horrid playerdrop wasn't BFs fault, or Cods fault, or only the crashes, unstable gameplay, or the lags fault, it was TWIs own fault with their ridiculous promises of an accessible tactical shooter that promised gold and flowers to everyone. Otherwise most of the players should have return by now. But they haven't and they wont. RO2 is neither a mainstream game or a true sequel to RO OST.
EDIT: And for the record, I personally disagree with the proposed "Action Mode" unless possibly if it replaces relaxed realism.
Take a closer look on those reviews - their overall number, how many are positive and negative. Then take a look on exact scores given by the players: they're heavily polarised and people seem to either like it or hate it (0, 2 vs 8, 10 is a good example). In the end opinion is mixed; one player might like it, the other won't and it's up to individual taste. You need also to remember that reviews are very subjective - who is more right, a man who gave the game 0 or 10? Whom should you listen to? Who is more objective? In the end it's up to you to decide.
Oh Cyper this is rich. What happened to this sentiment? From this post
EDIT: And for the record, I personally disagree with the proposed "Action Mode" unless possibly if it replaces relaxed realism.
The thought crossed my mind while reading another thread. I realize this whole idea may seem very far removed, and maybe even unrealistic, but I would still like to hear other peoples opinion about it. I am not creating this thread with the thought that I would persuade the majority but rather to make people absorb and reflect about this idea. So there is no need for anyone to get bleedy about it.
The reason why this idea crossed my mind in the first place was because of action mode. I believe all different modes creates fractions within the community, and I believe the more modes you have, the more fractions you get and there is indeed many modes in this game. The question is whenever they're usefull for the game or not. How many people play Relaxed Realism? How many people will play Action Mode? Realism Mode? How many will play Classic? And who does all this modes aim at? One thing is for sure: each mode steals players from the other. Simplicity would ultimately be only to have one mode - that is RO CLASSIC - but not called Ro Classic. Not called anything at all. Just multiplayer and that's it. Sometimes Red Orchestra is just red orchestra; not action, not relaxed, not realistic, not classic.
It's not that simple.Cyper said:TWIs effort to make the game more accessible did not work out which can be understood by reading the reviews and opinion about the game and looking the the huge player dro since release. On the other hand, by far the most inaccessible game out there, arma, got a higher score both from critics and players - even despite the fact that it is a buggy mess. I don't think this is a coninsidence. I believe its just the effect that may come when you focus to make one audience happy. The same pattern was seen with Codemasters OFP series.
----- snip -----
Guess what?
Not all of us like your ideas.... Not all of us like RO Classic..... Not all of us want to be bound into playing what you want us to play, so give it up already.
You asked for our opinion..... you got it.