• 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/

HOS featured in Pc Gamer's "Big 10 of 2011" (new pic?)

.
I'm talking about success. I want to see Tripwire do well, I know that a good number of the clique here, like yourself want to see RO stay under the radar, you want it to be your personal playground, you want to keep out the masses.

Who do you think is in the right? The ones who want to see underground games sell a million units, or the people who want the game to be their little niche charity case. I'd clap if I saw Activision declare bankruptcy, and I'd be heartbroken to see HoS sell 80k units.


I think the "small niche clique" also wants the game to sell. Huge amounts. But like said many times already, the "small niche clique" wants the game to sell because it is RO and it is a great game because of that. I
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
People will be playing bf3 this summer.

Who cares?? That's comparing apples and golf balls.

My judgement on quality has absolutely nothing to do with sales. I'm a huge supporter of indie devs and buy countless underground games, I've probably got like 4-5 underground games on pre-order.
You are correct your judgement on quality is irrelevant. As an opinion it has value. Your prefs, likes and dislikes are personal and unlike those of many others.

I'm talking about success. I want to see Tripwire do well, I know that a good number of the clique here, like yourself want to see RO stay under the radar, you want it to be your personal playground, you want to keep out the masses.
You are talking about success and you express a desire to see RO2 "dumbed down"?? That would spell the beginning of the end. Please, do not categorize RO's players in any way.... They enjoy the experience of gameplay with RO for better than six years. That my friend, is a success story in itself. For a game to hold the intense interest of online players for that amount of time has a great deal to say about the concept and creation of the RO tradition.

Who do you think is in the right? The ones who want to see underground games sell a million units, or the people who want the game to be their little niche charity case. I'd clap if I saw Activision declare bankruptcy, and I'd be heartbroken to see HoS sell 80k units.
There is no "right" or "wrong" - All of us have the same desires and goals for RO2. Simply put dumbing it down, for whatever reason, is not the correct path to follow. We all want to see RO2 be a robust success both financially for Tripwire and gaming intensity for the users. A brain dead game is just that - brain dead.

Now if the game presented user choices to allow for "comfort zones" that would be dandy. Either pre-configured beginner, intermediate, advanced, deadly, etc.. or, user configurable would be OK if so desired.

Personally? I am all for the Original RO Concept even if its enhanced for RO2.:IS2:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Placebo Cyanide
Upvote 0
Who do you think is in the right? The ones who want to see underground games sell a million units, or the people who want the game to be their little niche charity case.

Also known as Sion Lenton syndrome.

They are not the same thing, nor can a game be properly balanced by a map.

You certainly like to bring up the hypothetical suggestion that "RO2 doesn't feature symmetrical BF\CoD like balance therefore it's going to be massive failure and everyone who disagrees with the idea is part of a small niche clique lacking the capability to think rationally while expressing extreme hostility to anyone who is right."
 
Upvote 0
actually, a map can make massive differences. But it probably won't need to, as there already exists a natural balance. Making the recoil on the SMGs realistic is okay, as suddenly it becomes a class that can be played by the many players new to RO (and the recoil will probably still be enough to balance it, just not make it act like your trying to wrestle an elephant).

In any case, there is a nice natural balance that makes it actually a negative to impose new values in on these systems. The guidelines for natural balance lies in history, and there is no point muddling it and depriving people of the full RO experience. The systems are already in place for the game to mimic realism in many cases, so why tamper with them for balance? And any marginal inbalances can be easily solved via map shifts.

So lets calm down and see what happens if we just allow things to progress the classic RO way. We advertised it as super-realistic, so let's not gimp on the product for some primal fears from other games. If there are any problems upon release, we will find a way.

Spoiler!
 
Upvote 0