• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Extremely weird looking muzzle flashes

Balance > Realism. RO2 can be as real as balance will permit.


Like I said in another earlier post, your thinking is frightening. It really is.

Realism > Balance. Or actually, **** the balance. The game needs no artificial balancing. That actually destroys the immersion, which in the end destroys the game and the enjoyment. "Balancing" (curse that word) can be done through map design etc. if that
 
Upvote 0
Balance > Realism. RO2 can be as real as balance will permit.

You guys are obviously straight off the Battlefield bus..

Well you found your way over here, so that must mean you are interested in the game, and chances are, you are interested because you have realized that DICE is not the same company that made BF2 anymore, and BF3 is probably going to be yet another Console port as allways.. that's why most of the BF-Refugee's come here.


Well then it's high time you open your eyes and mind to something new, Ro2 will not be "the real BF3" as some people in the BF community like to call it, that game will probably never come and you need to accept that, EA/DICE doesen't want to make it, because the money's in the Consoles.
Ro2 will be something different, it has it's own way of doing things, and as much as they are different from what you have grown used to, they do work, and they work very well, there's a good reason why some of us have been playing this game since 2003, it's because it's fun! Yeah, realism and fun actually do mix, they are not mutually exclusive.
 
Upvote 0
The whole point of a shooter is skill and balance guy. This isn't Red Orchestra UE3.5. This is Heroes of Stalingrad. I know many of you have it in your heads this is going to be the same game, but it's not.

I'm down for realism, I'm down for new things, I'm not a one franchiser.

RO2 is not a simulation RedGuardist, I think you might be the one who's lost.

If the gameplay isn't balanced, it's not a game.
 
Upvote 0
The whole point of a shooter is skill and balance guy. This isn't Red Orchestra UE3.5. This is Heroes of Stalingrad. I know many of you have it in your heads this is going to be the same game, but it's not.

I'm down for realism, I'm down for new things, I'm not a one franchiser.

RO2 is not a simulation RedGuardist, I think you might be the one who's lost.

If the gameplay isn't balanced, it's not a game.

Thing is, I don't think anyone else is so convinced that huge balls of fire for the sake of blinding the shooter or alerting other people is a necessary addition for balance.

There are far more ways to balance the game than with unrealistic things like this.
 
Upvote 0
Thing is, I don't think anyone else is so convinced that huge balls of fire for the sake of blinding the shooter or alerting other people is a necessary addition for balance.

There are far more ways to balance the game than with unrealistic things like this.

I'm not about huge muzzle flashes in any way. I was responding to people asking for no muzzle flash. There is a muzzle flash in the day time. I've been shooting since I can remember. It definitely isn't a fireball by any means, and I don't want to see an absurd muzzle flash either Reise. I just want to make sure there is one.
 
Upvote 0
If the gameplay isn't balanced, it's not a game.

Right, balance... so let's give the MP40 a 71 round magazine then, because otherwise it wouldn't be fair against the PPSH-41. And the DP-28 should have the same rate of fire as the MG-34. And don't forget to make the Stielhandgranate perform in exactly the same way as the F1 grenade because the German grenade was inferior in terms of 'prep time' and fragmentation damage.

Sorry, but RO isn't the kind of game where balance is more important than realism. I'll assume you've never played the original RO, because otherwise you wouldn't have disagreed with Grobut. Reality isn't balanced. That's just the way it is.

The only kind of balance that RO2 needs, just like any other multiplayer game, is balanced maps. Both teams should have an equal chance of winning a map. But that doesn't mean that both teams should get the exact same loadout, amount of vehicles, cover etc. In fact, it's possible to give the defender a huge advantage over the attacker but still have a balanced map. Just give the attacker more reinforcements.

This 'balancing for the sake of balancing and making things easier' definitely doesn't belong in RO.
 
Upvote 0
Like I said in another earlier post, your thinking is frightening. It really is.

Realism > Balance. Or actually, **** the balance. The game needs no artificial balancing. That actually destroys the immersion, which in the end destroys the game and the enjoyment. "Balancing" (curse that word) can be done through map design etc. if that
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
true, if there were balancing what reason would you have when picking teams, you might aswell auto join everytime instead of being like " I love the k98 so ima go germans."

The video i posted does show a small amount of fire, and this would obviously be amplified at night, perhaps the HOS screen shot is slightly exaggerated but it is just a screeny....I've also noticed from videos that I've been watching that the longer the ppsh is fired on full auto, as in the full drum spray and pray, the more flames come out the end.
 
Upvote 0
I think the terms balancing and difficulty are getting misused in here. Balancing doesn't mean dumbing down a game so that the unwashed console masses can play at a decent standard straight away, it means adjusting the mechanics of the game to accommodate multiple playing styles so that every player doesn't feel like they have to follow this one 'killer tactic' and can have fun creating (and maybe being successful in) their own style. RO1 was considered to be more difficult than the average FPS because of its steep learning curve, however I would say that it's also well balanced since each and every role and weapon has its use and there is no one 'killer tactic' or weapon choice that wins all the time.

Adding a large muzzle flash to obscure the shooters view is fine if it prevents SMG users becoming full-auto snipers, although I have to say that I really honestly don't care because there are far more important facets of the game to concentrate on that'll make more of an impact on how it plays.
 
Upvote 0
Adding a large muzzle flash to obscure the shooters view is fine if it prevents SMG users becoming full-auto snipers, although I have to say that I really honestly don't care because there are far more important facets of the game to concentrate on that'll make more of an impact on how it plays.


This is where realism comes into play. Make the maps feature long distances, and you will not have an issue with "full auto snipers". :)

Realism often times = balanced.


In a game with map design consisting of blown out buildings with a rifleman hiding in a window, seeing your opponents general location from a muzzleflash is the difference between a skill based shooter, and a game of who saw who.


Games are about being fun. "Skillz" and scoreboards does not equal a fun game. Depth and immersion do.

Also, letting you know where the enemy is via Hollywood style muzzle flashes does not seem skillful at all. It means a game mechanic is telling you where the enemy is. Not much skill in the game playing itself for you...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Also, letting you know where the enemy is via Hollywood style muzzle flashes does not seem skillful at all. It means a game mechanic is telling you where the enemy is. Not much skill in the game playing itself for you...

Agreed. I'd like to see small, brief flashes with some lingering smoke as a separate effect. It shouldn't be that hard to spot the enemy with this, not to mention sound and peripheral indicator, zoom etc.
 
Upvote 0