The combat is fierce. The avatar weapons are very well done, it feels authentic. Cover and mantling is very good. The maps are detailed, and offer plenty of dramatic play. The fundamental offering of WW2 combat is met, which gives HOS hope for the future.
Where HOS falls down is in leaving the realism genre for an arcade offering. More accurately, it tries to straddle the fence, and predictably, slips and nuts itself with a leg on either side. In trying to please both, HOS pleases neither the realism crowd, nor the arcade crowd.
HOS incorporates all of the tired features of the successful shooters: recon planes, mini-maps, radar, automatic reloading, leveling, and skill grinding. By doing this, it is competing against the biggest gimmick shooter companies. It will lose. TWI does not have the resources to compete on the disposable game market. Therefore, the arcade shooters attracted by bells and whistles will move on to the next game, leaving RO standing in its present state before the realism audience. This will be a dire moment.
An example of one of the gimmicks that are not innovative and that get old quickly is the canned voices. The voices are cute at first, but soon get tedious, as they become the same thing over and over again, or give one away as they are trying to be stealthy. The unintended side effect of canned voices is that players are left unable to communicate in detail about the battlefield. This is an example of a major re playability error. Much more attention should have been given to what players want to say, not what the software is programmed to say.
The more a game plays itself, the more disposable it is. The more a game needs to be played, the more it will endear itself to the community that made RO successful. Canned voices is one example of the game being taken away from players.
That the game lacks any real historical context is another glaring fault that will affect it's long term chances. The maps start and stop with no contextual background, no information on the units fighting, where they are, or why they are there. There is simply a side start screen, and the map starts. An arbitrary battle that ends in a tired theme song and another canned voice.
Modders and map makers will want to tell the story of their contribution. In its present state, HOS is arbitrary in its context, and repetitive in its presentation and conclusion of the map.
HOS destroys Fog of War with recon planes and maps showing enemy locations. This type of feature firmly implants HOS in the genre of disposable game. The realism community requires the puzzle of combat, the arcade crowd required targets presented at a fast pace. When the arcade players move on, HOS will stand before the realism faithful as a redundant, self-playing game.
There are numerous examples of arcade features which violate re-playability fundamentals, but that are critical to the arcade audience.
HOS should have taken advantage of the void re: realism shooters, and entered the game world defiantly: with a solid, realistic game. Instead of blinking-lights, TWI should have focused on features that would make the game dynamic for years to come: flamethrowers, spreading and persistent fire, in-game hero effects, player placed MG positions (not the forever frozen ones it has now) and any other of a myriad of potential things that the scenario of WW2 combat gives.
HOS should have stood firm on the requirements of realism shooters. The response to "I don't know where my enemies are" should not be "Here is a radar". It should be "listen to the battle, you will learn".
It will be very interesting to see where HOS goes from here. The bugs and balance issues will be fixed. What remains to be seen is how the game will rebound from the inevitable disposal it will face, and what the realism faithful will decide to do.
Should HOS have stood firm on the successful features of RO, and elaborated on realism rather than arcade, HOS would have been much more successful, truly innovative, and the chances of producing a market worthy initial product would have been much better.
Where HOS falls down is in leaving the realism genre for an arcade offering. More accurately, it tries to straddle the fence, and predictably, slips and nuts itself with a leg on either side. In trying to please both, HOS pleases neither the realism crowd, nor the arcade crowd.
HOS incorporates all of the tired features of the successful shooters: recon planes, mini-maps, radar, automatic reloading, leveling, and skill grinding. By doing this, it is competing against the biggest gimmick shooter companies. It will lose. TWI does not have the resources to compete on the disposable game market. Therefore, the arcade shooters attracted by bells and whistles will move on to the next game, leaving RO standing in its present state before the realism audience. This will be a dire moment.
An example of one of the gimmicks that are not innovative and that get old quickly is the canned voices. The voices are cute at first, but soon get tedious, as they become the same thing over and over again, or give one away as they are trying to be stealthy. The unintended side effect of canned voices is that players are left unable to communicate in detail about the battlefield. This is an example of a major re playability error. Much more attention should have been given to what players want to say, not what the software is programmed to say.
The more a game plays itself, the more disposable it is. The more a game needs to be played, the more it will endear itself to the community that made RO successful. Canned voices is one example of the game being taken away from players.
That the game lacks any real historical context is another glaring fault that will affect it's long term chances. The maps start and stop with no contextual background, no information on the units fighting, where they are, or why they are there. There is simply a side start screen, and the map starts. An arbitrary battle that ends in a tired theme song and another canned voice.
Modders and map makers will want to tell the story of their contribution. In its present state, HOS is arbitrary in its context, and repetitive in its presentation and conclusion of the map.
HOS destroys Fog of War with recon planes and maps showing enemy locations. This type of feature firmly implants HOS in the genre of disposable game. The realism community requires the puzzle of combat, the arcade crowd required targets presented at a fast pace. When the arcade players move on, HOS will stand before the realism faithful as a redundant, self-playing game.
There are numerous examples of arcade features which violate re-playability fundamentals, but that are critical to the arcade audience.
HOS should have taken advantage of the void re: realism shooters, and entered the game world defiantly: with a solid, realistic game. Instead of blinking-lights, TWI should have focused on features that would make the game dynamic for years to come: flamethrowers, spreading and persistent fire, in-game hero effects, player placed MG positions (not the forever frozen ones it has now) and any other of a myriad of potential things that the scenario of WW2 combat gives.
HOS should have stood firm on the requirements of realism shooters. The response to "I don't know where my enemies are" should not be "Here is a radar". It should be "listen to the battle, you will learn".
It will be very interesting to see where HOS goes from here. The bugs and balance issues will be fixed. What remains to be seen is how the game will rebound from the inevitable disposal it will face, and what the realism faithful will decide to do.
Should HOS have stood firm on the successful features of RO, and elaborated on realism rather than arcade, HOS would have been much more successful, truly innovative, and the chances of producing a market worthy initial product would have been much better.
Last edited:
![Makhno [Anarchist]](/data/avatars/s/7/7653.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
