you forgot to mention how much it would ruin game for those realism-accuracy-obsession players...
Not to mention those 2 bolts that are missplaced by 1 cm and that view slit that is 0,5 cm to wide
Upvote
0
RO getting Gamier?
- Thread starter Dheepan
- Start date
Not to mention those 2 bolts that are missplaced by 1 cm and that view slit that is 0,5 cm to wide
True, in any case, they should add animations and delays for switching positions and getting in and out of vehicles.
This would kill at least drive-by satcheling.
Another option (the best IMO) would be to implement the ZiS-42 half-track as a replacement for the BA-64.
Maybe not realistic, but is the BA-64 realistic?
And sure as hell "gameplay-and-fun-fixing"
Or by adding both the Sdkfz. 222 and ZiS-42, then you could place the Sdkfz. 222 and BA-64 on viable maps.
And I also agree about the excessive number of Panzerfausts.
Also I believe that removing the deathicons and deathmessages by standard server setup makes the game more exciting, realistic and good looking. (Tell me really, does anybody "like" the icons?)
Upvote
0
Most of the posts in this thread that support the notion that this game is getting gamier are simply complaints about the game that have been in since the release of Ostfront. So the game isn't getting any GAMIER. It simply has some issues (particularly in the tanking department) that haven't been addressed yet. Gamier doesn't mean "OH, they don't have the exact vehicle I think it should have." Gamier means bunny hopping, side-to-side jerking, crosshair having BS that's in nearly every other FPS on the market right now. I don't see RO ever going down that road.
The ONLY thing that has been implimented that is somewhat unrealistic is the smoke nades, but that's more of a numbers issue than anything else. The same could be said about the M41 and the MP41.
I love all of the complaints about how ahistorical some things are when this game is built around an idea that 16 soldiers face off against 16 soldiers AT MOST. How "realistic" can a game be when you're limited to a 2km x 2km square of terrain with only 32 people on it?
Get over yourselves!
RO is the best WWII FPS available today. Every other game should aspire to be this good. No, it's not perfect, and no game in existance will be perfect in everyone's mind.
The ONLY thing that has been implimented that is somewhat unrealistic is the smoke nades, but that's more of a numbers issue than anything else. The same could be said about the M41 and the MP41.
I love all of the complaints about how ahistorical some things are when this game is built around an idea that 16 soldiers face off against 16 soldiers AT MOST. How "realistic" can a game be when you're limited to a 2km x 2km square of terrain with only 32 people on it?
Get over yourselves!
RO is the best WWII FPS available today. Every other game should aspire to be this good. No, it's not perfect, and no game in existance will be perfect in everyone's mind.
Upvote
0
I'll call it whatever the community collectively refers to it as. Doesn't matter to me if we all know what we're talking about. Dive ISing, dolphin diving, whatever. Yes its not exactly the same as the problem that coined the phrase but does it matter?
Upvote
0
It does matter to me.
This is dolphin diving: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7493289011530154235&q=dolphin+diving
This is dolphin diving: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7493289011530154235&q=dolphin+diving
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
I stopped reading the thread after the 2nd page because it just seemed repetitive. I'm with the people who think the game's just appealing to a wider audience while maintaining core features.
Ask yourself this:
- Is the ballistics code different?
- Is it actually easier to aim and fire now than it was before?
- Is the game suddenly changing to a "Health bar" style game?
- Are there crosshairs and an unlimited sprinting ability?
- Can you jump the height of another soldier?
- Are there ammo counters (for the current magazine)?
None of these are the case. People just like to complain about stuff, especially stuff that opens this game to a wider audience. Why? Simple. They LIKE keeping the community small. It's like the old-timers who sit around in the nursing home saying "In MY day we had to eat dirt! And we walked to school uphill in the snow with no feet!"
Yeah, yeah. Spare me.
How is it such a horrible thing that you don't have to hunt around for 10 seconds before you get the one pixel lined up so that you can pick up a weapon, and how exactly is it any more or less gamey to pick up a single ammo pouch as opposed to a bunch of randomly scattered ammo clips?
And who the hell cares that the sniper icon has a scope on it now? Why does THAT make things somehow gamey and ruin things?
Honestly, I think people are complaining because the game has, in some ways, become EASIER for newer players. The thing that they fail to realize, however, is that the things that have become easier were never things that should distinguish a skilled player from an unskilled player.
It doesn't make you "leet" because you can pick up a weapon faster than someone else, nor does it make you "leet" because you know to open the console and see if that last shot was fired from a sniper rifle. Hell, you could always just open up the scoreboard anyway and see who had the sniper class, then realize that ANY shot that came from them was a sniper kill.
The things that distinguish real skill in this game are still:
- Good understanding of tactics.
- People who know how to move intelligently through the battlefield (IE: cover to cover vs. rambo charges)
- People who get the hang of the aiming system
- People who understand the strengths and weaknesses of the tanks, have a good sense of how to use the range adjustments and how to guage range, and who know how to position tanks (IE: hull down).
NONE of that stuff has changed. The complaining about how the names of classes changed was pointless whining. The complaining about the scope icon and the ammo and weapon pickup changes are more of the same.
And this stuff about dolphin diving? Please. If you think THIS is dolphin diving, you should go play vanilla BF1942. TRUE dolphin diving is repeatedly diving across the field to try to get somewhere faster (that's why they call it DOLPHIN diving -- because you dive down, then get up and dive again, like a dolphin going in and out of water). That and diving while firing and having perfect accuracy.
None of that is the case in RO. Now, I'm all for adding in an "oomph" factor when you land (IE: the wind gets knocked out of you slightly -- loss of a small bit of stamina -- and your aim is a little of for a second as you're jarred when you hit the ground), but there's PLENTY of other things to fix and complain about.
And for those of you lacking historical perspective, if anything this game has become MORE realistic over time. I started playing in v3.0 of the mod, and with subsequent releases, aiming and such became MUCH harder. See, originally, the game actually had "hitboxes." Or at least large areas around the models where a hit would be counted. That changed to MUCH more form-fitting hit areas and made aiming and scoring kills a LOT harder.
So for all you "l337ists" out there, get a grip guys. The game isn't getting gamier. It's just getting more accessible by removing needlessly complex mechanisms.
Ask yourself this:
- Is the ballistics code different?
- Is it actually easier to aim and fire now than it was before?
- Is the game suddenly changing to a "Health bar" style game?
- Are there crosshairs and an unlimited sprinting ability?
- Can you jump the height of another soldier?
- Are there ammo counters (for the current magazine)?
None of these are the case. People just like to complain about stuff, especially stuff that opens this game to a wider audience. Why? Simple. They LIKE keeping the community small. It's like the old-timers who sit around in the nursing home saying "In MY day we had to eat dirt! And we walked to school uphill in the snow with no feet!"
Yeah, yeah. Spare me.
How is it such a horrible thing that you don't have to hunt around for 10 seconds before you get the one pixel lined up so that you can pick up a weapon, and how exactly is it any more or less gamey to pick up a single ammo pouch as opposed to a bunch of randomly scattered ammo clips?
And who the hell cares that the sniper icon has a scope on it now? Why does THAT make things somehow gamey and ruin things?
Honestly, I think people are complaining because the game has, in some ways, become EASIER for newer players. The thing that they fail to realize, however, is that the things that have become easier were never things that should distinguish a skilled player from an unskilled player.
It doesn't make you "leet" because you can pick up a weapon faster than someone else, nor does it make you "leet" because you know to open the console and see if that last shot was fired from a sniper rifle. Hell, you could always just open up the scoreboard anyway and see who had the sniper class, then realize that ANY shot that came from them was a sniper kill.
The things that distinguish real skill in this game are still:
- Good understanding of tactics.
- People who know how to move intelligently through the battlefield (IE: cover to cover vs. rambo charges)
- People who get the hang of the aiming system
- People who understand the strengths and weaknesses of the tanks, have a good sense of how to use the range adjustments and how to guage range, and who know how to position tanks (IE: hull down).
NONE of that stuff has changed. The complaining about how the names of classes changed was pointless whining. The complaining about the scope icon and the ammo and weapon pickup changes are more of the same.
And this stuff about dolphin diving? Please. If you think THIS is dolphin diving, you should go play vanilla BF1942. TRUE dolphin diving is repeatedly diving across the field to try to get somewhere faster (that's why they call it DOLPHIN diving -- because you dive down, then get up and dive again, like a dolphin going in and out of water). That and diving while firing and having perfect accuracy.
None of that is the case in RO. Now, I'm all for adding in an "oomph" factor when you land (IE: the wind gets knocked out of you slightly -- loss of a small bit of stamina -- and your aim is a little of for a second as you're jarred when you hit the ground), but there's PLENTY of other things to fix and complain about.
And for those of you lacking historical perspective, if anything this game has become MORE realistic over time. I started playing in v3.0 of the mod, and with subsequent releases, aiming and such became MUCH harder. See, originally, the game actually had "hitboxes." Or at least large areas around the models where a hit would be counted. That changed to MUCH more form-fitting hit areas and made aiming and scoring kills a LOT harder.
So for all you "l337ists" out there, get a grip guys. The game isn't getting gamier. It's just getting more accessible by removing needlessly complex mechanisms.
Upvote
0
Psychology. If you control and pre-determin the terminology used in an argument, it's like choosing the battlefield -- you instantly give yourself the advantage, assuming your opponent meets you on that same field. "Dolphin diving" is generally reviled by realism gamers. It's like saying "crosshairs." It instantly produces an emotional response and instantly is recognized as "gamey" and unrealistic. Thus, using the term almost guarantees you a win in the debate. The implication is that if you disagree that it's a problem, you automatically are viewed as wrong and as supporting dolphin diving (which no self-respecting realism gamer would do).
Unfortunately, it's not what's going on here. There's no dolphin diving in RO. The game mechanics prevent it. I WILL agree that the ability to dive and bring up IS perfectly (if that's even the case) is a minor problem, but there's plenty of other stuff more pressing to fix.
Upvote
0
Haha I started to laugh when I read that
I remember when this change was introduced. There was a bunch of old time players that said they would quit playing RO if the hit cylinders wheren't changed back the old (the old hitcylinders where about 1 m wide btw).
The claimed that the balance of the game had shifted and become to hard for riflemen.
This because you now had to *gasp* actually hit ON the soldier you where trying to kill *gasp*
Upvote
0
Yep. And then as now, the change turned out to be generally positive. Basically, people just get used to a particular system and then complain when it changes (with some exceptions). In this case, I think the complaining about these changes is much ado about nothing.
Upvote
0
LOL anyone remember the "truck of doom" from the mod? That was some funny **** having PTRD`s, DP`s and SMGers hanging off it everywhere tearing through the german spawn on the old Hedgehog.
Upvote
0
Not to mention those 2 bolts that are missplaced by 1 cm and that view slit that is 0,5 cm to wide
That would be nitpicking...
I would ask questions if the long awaited shovel-fetching attack dog barking sound would be something like "Arf arf!". I would demand that it should be changed to "Woof woof!"...
Upvote
0
I don't think people have a problem with TWI making the game more accessable, but more likely they would prefer them to spend their time fixing stuff like diveising (yep lets call it that ) and armour penetration etc. Yes selfish reasons maybe, but you must admit probably 90% of the community were happy with the class names as they were and about 50% found the old pickup system to be better. My advice to TW would be to keep an option available when the new change is put in so you don't get these types of posts on the forums. Not for everything, but for things like the new pickup thing that arguably is inferior to the old system and class names (yes done now, but if it was available when they implemeneted the changes people wouldn't have something to complain about). Also people have probably seen games get nearly destroyed by devs putting in too many things to help new players, like symbols above players heads, tutorial type messages showing up in the hud all the time, etc so i'm just hoping they don't go too far with the simplification of the game.
The only reason the games got slightly gamier is because people are getting better at exploiting the little bugs that still exist. I think a little more focus should be put in to fixing these things for now. But as i've said before just because TWI listens to its players, it doesn't mean we can make demands of them.
) and armour penetration etc. Yes selfish reasons maybe, but you must admit probably 90% of the community were happy with the class names as they were and about 50% found the old pickup system to be better. My advice to TW would be to keep an option available when the new change is put in so you don't get these types of posts on the forums. Not for everything, but for things like the new pickup thing that arguably is inferior to the old system and class names (yes done now, but if it was available when they implemeneted the changes people wouldn't have something to complain about). Also people have probably seen games get nearly destroyed by devs putting in too many things to help new players, like symbols above players heads, tutorial type messages showing up in the hud all the time, etc so i'm just hoping they don't go too far with the simplification of the game.The only reason the games got slightly gamier is because people are getting better at exploiting the little bugs that still exist. I think a little more focus should be put in to fixing these things for now. But as i've said before just because TWI listens to its players, it doesn't mean we can make demands of them.
Upvote
0
See, that's reasonable. If someone wants to say "Hey guys, instead of changing the weapon pick-up system, what about focusing on [insert bug/glitch/exploit here]?", I'd say that's a legitimate concern (assuming the person doesn't ask for it like an a**hole -- IE: "OMFG!! WTF???? YOO CHANGE TEH VOICEZ BUT YOO DON'T FIX THE RECOIL ON MG42???? YOO GUYS ARE TEH SUXORZ!!").
On the other hand, if there's two separate development tracks (IE: one for adding new features, one for fixing old ones), then there's a lot less of a problem. And in fairness, we don't know how TW structures their team and organizes assigning various jobs.
I think that debatable features (IE: class names, new voices, etc.) can be lessend as far as impact by allowing people to use the old or new version. If people get pissed after that, you can freely ignore them.
I still say whining about the scope icon is pointless nitpicking for the sake of pointless nitpicking.
On the other hand, if there's two separate development tracks (IE: one for adding new features, one for fixing old ones), then there's a lot less of a problem. And in fairness, we don't know how TW structures their team and organizes assigning various jobs.
I think that debatable features (IE: class names, new voices, etc.) can be lessend as far as impact by allowing people to use the old or new version. If people get pissed after that, you can freely ignore them.
I still say whining about the scope icon is pointless nitpicking for the sake of pointless nitpicking.
Upvote
0
That is some sound thinking Melipone. Make feature changes optional from the moment they are patched.
Features which depend on mapchanges probably complicate things though. It would mean multiple versions of the same map. This get's more complicated when newer features are added each time.
For instance a feature like mantling probably needs re-works of most maps. Some people will like it, some don't.
And if the way jumping/falling works is going to be changed then maps need to be altered again.
Imagine people picking combinations of features they want and don't want. This is when things get complicated.
< rambles on, complcating things even more...>
Anyway, make it so for features that are on itself and only cosmetic.
Features which depend on mapchanges probably complicate things though. It would mean multiple versions of the same map. This get's more complicated when newer features are added each time.
For instance a feature like mantling probably needs re-works of most maps. Some people will like it, some don't.
And if the way jumping/falling works is going to be changed then maps need to be altered again.
Imagine people picking combinations of features they want and don't want. This is when things get complicated.
< rambles on, complcating things even more...>
Anyway, make it so for features that are on itself and only cosmetic.
Upvote
0
Sniper Scopes can not kill you (even if it is thrown at someone's head lol) but bullets do. Therefor the icon should be a bullet not a sniper scope.
Question: If I have a sniper rifle and shoot from the hip and actually kill someone is the icon still a sniper icon?
Upvote
0
F
Field Marshal Rommel
Guest
lol ROMMEL
I dont like the cystal ball (sniper icons) ethier they give your general postion away.
Upvote
0