Dear Tripwire Team. Realism/Sellout?

[Fedorov]

Combine Hoes' faster movement speed with certain other improvements and it very easily gives the impression we're talking about wnb-CoD style game.

So, a realistic speed with improved functionality, will make HOES, a less realistic game.

Sorry but I don't think I'll agree with you.

 

[Oldih]

So, a realistic speed with improved functionality, will make HOES, a less realistic game.

Impression and claiming something will happen are two quite diffrent things, considering how notable key term 'impression' is in this case. Just to get it out of the way and be frank I never said beter functionality reduces realism or that increased speed would have that negative impact, presuming they make things right. Sure it's unavoidable side-effect if you read my post that one can get such impression, but let's just rationalise here:

Since when a game that claims to be more accessible has actually done that without ruining the core of the game to ridiculous levels?

Just because the developer is Tripwire Interactive doesn't make the situation any beter for anyone who is scared (so to speak) about the whole situation as there's tons of reasons and examples why they have always failed. Even if we ignore all the paranoid types John said in one of the interviews how sceptic or even hostile PC gamers are about certain things. Only way to really remedy that is to give results which in this case would mean waiting for the beta, but applying for beta just to see if the game is actually any decent is not a good starting point in those cases.

 

[DraKon2k]

Some people think this game is gonna be less realistic than RO1, just because is gonna be easier to play.

This exactly. I haven't seen any evidence why HoS should be any less realistic(in hardcore mode at least). Not one single feature that isn't properly justified.

Also lol @your posts getting downrated for not being an arma-fanboy

 

[Fedorov]

Since when a game that claims to be more accessible has actually done that without ruining the core of the game to ridiculous levels?

Since Ramm explains in detail examples of those more accessible features with their bases on real life.

This exactly. I haven't seen any evidence why HoS should be any less realistic(in hardcore mode at least). Not one single feature that isn't properly justified.

Also lol @your posts getting downrated for not being an arma-fanboy

 

[Nordlander]

I am actually really looking forward to the little minimap in the corner. One of my main problems with RO1 is that it is lacking in situational awareness. It is really important to know where you are in relation to your teammates, and it is easy to get separated when you are trying to play as a squad especially in public play. If someone gets out of your direct line of sight they might as well have disappeared. I'm hoping your squad will show up as different colored dots on your minimap so you can keep together.

For all its faults the battlefield series really does this well. I like that RO is moving to something close to the project reality mod. It is very realistic and has just incredible teamwork even when you are pubbing with random people. I hope the RO2 community will foster gameplay like that.

Even the hyper realistic ARMA players such as the shack tactical group use a little addon that does something similar to the RO2:HOS minimap. Since you are only looking at a screen with a small FOV I think this is the perfect compromise. In the gameplay videos it is the ONLY thing on the screen unless you press the key to bring up map features etc.

I feel that this will lead to more realistic GAMEPLAY. People will find it very easy to work as squads, use tactics, and even follow a chain of command instead of sixty four armies of one fighting each other. This is the most important thing.

Apperently you have no clue about how intense the heavy fighting was in stalingrad? Its not like you had a minimap showing where you are and your friends. No you used voice communitication and sight, But here they got zoom and i do not know what in it. Just a reminder!

 

[SolitarioSoldat]

i believe you had it all wrapped out,and I think devs are doing the right thing trying to attract the COD and BF players.Once when jump overboard,many of them will eventually want to play on competitive level and start playing the realism mode.I see it as a good and smart approach,not as an approach to split the community.

 

[Fedorov]

I don't think relaxed realism will be "a lot less" realistic. It just adds some more helpfull hud elements.

The good side for the hardcores, is that the "realism" version, will have even less elements than Ostfront.

I'll join whatever populated server gives me the best pings. After all, in the end I forget what setting I'm playing, and just play. The fun is the same as long as the mechanics don't change.

 

[RedGuardist]

Apperently you have no clue about how intense the heavy fighting was in stalingrad? Its not like you had a minimap showing where you are and your friends. No you used voice communitication and sight

Afterall, it

 

[Dwin]

More hud elements =/= less realism and less hud elements =/= more realism.

 

[Flogger23m]

All true and valid points, but core-gameplay is not entirely made of features. Features influence it, but they don't change it. These simply are my fears, and they have been fed again by Ramm's talk about spray&pray in the cast.

I agree with this. Everything I have seen in the videos as well as the new gameplay modes seem to indicate "quicker and more specific battles." It feels like the pace of the gameplay has increased from RO1.

This makes it feel more quick and actiony to me.


And if you want to talk about individual features:

The running speed does look fast. Look at the videos, they can run up stairs extremely quickly.

Your eyes have variable magnification.

When you hold your breathe, your eyes zoom in.

You can "blind fire" extremely quickly.

The whole blind fire thing will be over used far too much. Can you do it in real life? Yes. Is it really done that frequently? No.

Being "warped" mid game depending on the game mode.


I can go on to.

I disagree. ARMA is so unaccessible and stiff that it stops being realistic.

ArmA feels realistic. RO does certian things better, ArmA does certian things better.

ArmA feels more realistic because the game takes place in realistic sized maps in an open world.

RO has better weapon modelling, and better movement in some aspects.

Each game has its strengths and weaknesses in terms of realism.

 

[Nimsky]

No offense Fed, but you need to drop the ArmA bashing. You are keen on repeating that over and over again. You're wrong about that. The controls aren't "stiff" at all. In ArmA maybe, but not in ArmA 2 and OA. The controls are very smooth and natural now, except during room clearance perhaps (but that can be fixed with the ShackTac movement addon). You can reload while running, you can change stance while on the move, you can stay in iron sights while changing stance, you can vault over wooden fences, and I can go on and on about the way BIS improved the controls in their games since ArmA 2.

Just because you can't change stance in A2:CO without getting an aiming penalty doesn't mean that the controls are stiff. That is a perfectly realistic feature. And just because the gameplay is more complex than RO's doesn't mean that it's a difficult or frustrating game.

RO and ArmA are both realistic, but in very different ways. BIS games simulate modern combat very well and are much more tactical than RO. But RO simulates massive WWII battles and does that very well. Both a different beast. Needless to say, there is a huge difference between WWII combat and modern combat. If you'd put ArmA's controls in RO it would feel stiff and frustrating. But if you'd put RO's controls in ArmA, it would feel arcady and limiting.

MilSim clearly isn't your cup of tea, and there's nothing wrong with that. But your criticism of ArmA is unfounded and I hope you'll quit using those arguments from now on.

 

[Flogger23m]

That is the theory.

i believe you had it all wrapped out,and I think devs are doing the right thing trying to attract the COD and BF players.

I'll disagree.

You can take the team killing, name calling, and mic spamming kids from those games.

RO, compared to other shooters has always had less of this for me.

 

[Moyako]

Why not wait until the beta is up before filling pages and pages about RO2 "realism", if we haven't play the game yet :s

:IS2:

 

[DraKon2k]

RO and ArmA are both realistic, but in very different ways. BIS games simulate modern combat very well and are much more tactical than RO. But RO simulates massive WWII battles and does that very well. Both a different beast. Needless to say, there is a huge difference between WWII combat and modern combat. If you'd put ArmA's controls in RO it would feel stiff and frustrating. But if you'd put RO's controls in ArmA, it would feel arcady and limiting.

I'd rather have CoD movement + stamina in ArmA than the broken movements mechanics they have now. And just saying "You're wrong" doesn't break his point, neither does saying "But if you download 20 patches it's actually ok". Most people don't stay away from ArmA2 because gameplay is so slow or anything, but because movement etc feels so stiff/wrong that it gives the impression of the game being extremely inaccessable(and thus also giving the impression that realism = extremely hard, like Fed said).

 

[Extension7]

I believe the relaxed realism will be more open for new comers.

And when they're ready they can try their hands at the actual realism

All will be revealed next year

 

[SolitarioSoldat]

That is the theory.



I'll disagree.

You can take the team killing, name calling, and mic spamming kids from those games.

RO, compared to other shooters has always had less of this for me.

I doubt that RO2 will bring in the 12 year olds from BF and COD,but it will bring the hardcore gamers age maeby 25 and up.

 

[Oldih]

And just saying "You're wrong" doesn't break his point

Neither does bickering how "ArmA2 sucks" or "ArmA2 doesn't really suck" help the discussion about people having some legit concerns or having poor impression about the game, even if we drop some of the more sillier arguments or those so-called paranoid types.

Apperently you have no clue about how intense the heavy fighting was in stalingrad? Its not like you had a minimap showing where you are and your friends. No you used voice communitication and sight, But here they got zoom and i do not know what in it. Just a reminder!

Now that we're at it last time I checked wars weren't fought when sitting on front of some weird object pressing odd buttons while being in your own room.

Now that's out of the way there's perfectly valid reasons to have a zoom in game unless we're comparing on abstract, naiv

 

[Brozex]

I doubt that RO2 will bring in the 12 year olds from BF and COD,but it will bring the hardcore gamers age maeby 25 and up.

I think I was 13 when I started playing RoOst... so there's no problem are different kinds of 12 year old kids,but the mic spamming kids who have ultra high voices that you can find above all in source games should not be in Ro:Hos...

 

[Apos]

Difference between normal mode and relaxed realism will affect on HUD only, nothing more.

btw: why people think that realism is so bad for games?

 

[Sichartshofen]

1. Relaxed Realism
2. Gamers sick of CoD
3. ????
4. PROFIT!

This is how a business model works.