Tripwire Interactive Forums

Go Back   Tripwire Interactive Forums > Red Orchestra 2 / Rising Storm Forums > RO2/RS General > General Discussion

View Poll Results: Please vote for which statements you agree with.
Normal mode wasn't accessible enough 22 11.28%
Realism mode wasn't realistic enough 139 71.28%
The game was too hard to get into 12 6.15%
The game wasn't too hard to get into. 110 56.41%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 195. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-23-2012, 09:27 PM
barakas's Avatar
barakas barakas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 402
Default Community poll

Quote:
One of the largest complaints about RO 2 from outside and within the forums was that it was still hard to get into and that there was not enough of a difference between Normal and Realistic
I'm dubious of this quotation, but I've not seen any data so I'd like to get a read from the community

Obviously the people who made those complaints might not be here any more but I'd like to see the opinion of those who remain.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-23-2012, 11:27 PM
Cpt-Praxius's Avatar
Cpt-Praxius Cpt-Praxius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canadian in Australia
Posts: 3,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barakas View Post
I'm dubious of this quotation, but I've not seen any data so I'd like to get a read from the community

Obviously the people who made those complaints might not be here any more but I'd like to see the opinion of those who remain.
As I've kind of parroted around here already, the game was just fine for me and I enjoyed it right off the bat in Beta..... bugs and glitches excluded, obviously.

Speaking for myself, additional game modes were not needed.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-24-2012, 12:30 AM
Faust.br Faust.br is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 14
Default

Well, I tried to get some friends into RO2 and I can tell by my experience doing this that people who play "normal" FPS such as BF3/CoD/CounterStrike have a bad steep learning curve in Red Orchestra 2.

The Relaxed Realism mode wasn't friendly enough for most of them. So most of them abandoned RO2 when BF3 (that is a piece of sh...) launched. Maybe if they had more time to get used to RO2, they would try and adapt better to Realism.

I don't think that cross-hair is the key here for easy accessibility. One of my friends is one of the best Insurgency players that I've met here in Brazil... yet, he couldn't adapt to RO2. And in Insurgency there is free-aim and no cross-hair.

Other friend loved Killing Floor, that doesn't have cross-hair also, but also couldn't adapt.

I think that the main problem isn't the cross-hair, the damage model or the free-aim, but maybe they can fix or mitigate some problems. What keep people out is the "speed" of the game and some maps design decision that simply doesn't go well with gameplay elements... c'mon, Rainbow Six in "realistic" didn't had cross-hair and had a high-letality, but it was pretty much accessible. Same thing with Call of Duty:Modern Warfare in Hardcore Mode. (Yes, those last examples don't have free-aim, I know)

Problem is... I think that in RO2 everything is too fast. You die too fast, you run too fast (not anymore in RO Classic), you lose too fast. When I play, the expected time of survival is barely 10 minutes, but when my friends play, I think that this goes to 1 or 2 minutes and this can be frustrating. I mean... how are you supposed to know the map if you are killed in 1-2 minutes? Oh, you mean that I'm supposed to know the maps playing the horrible campaign with bots, isn't it?

If the campaign was good and motivating, I would say that this is fair enough, but why on hell would I play a boring campaign that is just the same maps with bots if I can play online that is the real deal and the main purpose of this game? And even if I play the campaign, how I'm supposed to know if I'm playing right or wrong or know the good hiding spots and the hot zones?

And I'm not bashing TWI. I love RO2, but the single player campaign is a bad joke. Maybe with an online campaign I can help my friends, but even so... do most people have someone to help them getting in the game? If most gamers need to do this by themselves, how they are supposed to enjoy getting killed 10, 20 or more times and not managing to even play. It's hard to convince people who passed more time watching the "spawn selection" screen than playing that RO2 is fun.

Actually, I think that ARMA 2 is more accessible than RO2, even being more focussed in simulation. It's less punishing.

That being said, I must say that I don't liked RO2's Realism setting before, but I think that it's getting better. Some options such as increase sway when out of stamina or after running is great to slow down the game and help it's tactical nature. Classic mode is really what I wanted Realism to be, but again, I'm not the typical FPS player.

Tactical shooter is different from competitive shooter and simulation. I expect RO to be a tactical shooter with realistic elements. I think that most players see the game on this perspective... so what makes a shooter to be a TACTICAL shooter? For me, a tactical shooter is defined by it's gameplay - it's focussed on positioning, played with intelligence, it's slower and it's not the player with more reflexes or pin-point accuracy that wins, but the player that positions himself better, that stops to shoot instead of gunning and running and so on.

This is what TWI needs to answer. I'm not against cross-hair or whatever... what I want is to TWI to give RO2 a soul, an essence. Is RO2 a competitive shooter, a realistic simulation or a tactical shooter?

Just my 2 cents. Sorry for my bad english.

PS: Talking about Insurgency - the one thing I loved about Insurgency is how it didn't show in its score tab the kills, deaths or the K/D ratio. I think that this has a bad effect on players psychology and need to be removed or let only on the "arcade"/action mode. For me even the "death message" is useless... you can earn points by killing, this is obvious, but it shouldn't focus on this and capturing a point or winning the game should be a lot more rewarding than killing. I don't think that it is really more rewarding right now, specially because you can get killed more easily capturing cap zones and it's easier and less dangerous to just... keep killing people away from the cap zone - that is a common problem in a lot of matches. If I were one of the devs I would take the kills, deaths and K/D ratio out of the score tab and even modify the stats so ommit that this kind of information. This doesn't need to appear - it's not a measure of how good tactical player you are, so it's useless and even dangerous for nurturing a wrong psychology on players.

Last edited by Faust.br; 04-24-2012 at 12:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-24-2012, 12:30 AM
Extension7's Avatar
Extension7 Extension7 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 1,766
Default

The game was fine in beta and on release for me, I know a lot of people had problems but I had none, and the gameplay was fine for me.

However, when trying to compare it as a successor to RO1, it did not feel realistic enough, but it was more accessable and easy to get into. I guess the lack of a giant learning curb changed the feel of the game.

Not as realistic compared to RO1, easier to get into.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-24-2012, 02:54 AM
RedFlagWaver's Avatar
RedFlagWaver RedFlagWaver is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 258
Default

Not realistic enough.
__________________
I demand bayonets! Free pigstickers for everyone! Newb or Vet, all should be equal in mle!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-24-2012, 05:51 AM
Cyper Cyper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,275
Default

Relaxed Mode wasn't accessible enough.

Realism Mode wasn't realistic enough.

None of these modes were interesting for me personally despite the fact that I like both hardcore and full-blown arcadegames.
__________________
''Much good work is lost for the lack of a little more.''
- Edward H. Harriman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabid Penguin View Post
I would rather blowtorch my nipples off than play Action Mode.

Last edited by Cyper; 04-24-2012 at 05:53 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-24-2012, 06:15 AM
Susi's Avatar
Susi Susi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 457
Default

Where is "im satisfied" option?
__________________
http://www.redorchestragame.com/forum/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=12828&dateline=120179  5074
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-24-2012, 06:18 AM
defektive's Avatar
defektive defektive is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 663
Default

I expect the above poll will reveal nothing that we don't already know: RO2 wasn't 'RO' enough for the Roosters* but it was way too hard for the casuals.

Diablo III is another game that has mixed about with two of its core attractors in this latest incarnation: it's linear now and the skill trees are gone. Perhaps unrelated (but I doubt it): the console release has now been confirmed. RO2 doesn't have consoles to blame for the simplification of its game play but the philosophical design approach is the same: simpler > broader appeal > more money. Irritatingly, Diablo III will probably still do very well indeed.

Going live with ROC will be the trigger for me revisiting RO2 and I know that I'm not alone in this regard. (A few of my old clan are also hoping to give it another roll.) If I'm honest, I'm more excited about IC:V.

* A group of players which certain individuals herein have sought to vilify and set up as scapegoats to blame for RO2 not doing as well as most would like.
__________________
defekt

Last edited by defektive; 04-24-2012 at 06:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-24-2012, 08:35 AM
slavek's Avatar
slavek slavek is offline
_〆(・∀・)_旦~ The Late Night Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UnrealEd: Viewport #1
Posts: 3,040
Default

I won't say "It wasn't realistic enough" because the term "Realism" tends to have different meaning to each individual person. Vanilla RO2 simply wasn't my cup of tea. I found it too fast paced for my tastes coming from RO1; I prefered the slower gameplay of RO1. This isn't to say I wanted RO2 to be a carbon copy of RO1 but I prefered slower tactical gameplay as opposed to what RO2 was at the time(Running into things like players playing COD style with a LMG really put me off). Much of this is remedied by RO Classic or further refinements to gameplay. In the end, everyone has different tastes and I found RO2 unappetizing at the time of release but recent changes have made it more appealing to me.
__________________

Greater Good Games
KillingFloorServer: 204.145.81.18:7707
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-24-2012, 08:48 AM
Holy.Death's Avatar
Holy.Death Holy.Death is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,420
Default

I wasn't fully satisfied with the vanilla version because of several things that has been fixed in the classic mode at last. Some changes (like removing of shift-zoom, less stamina) while unrealistic, only improved the gameplay, so I can't say that I simply wanted more realism, while at the same time I wanted the shooter to behave more natural. It was less about vanilla being too fast paced and more about too robotic aim/movement of the avatar. I don't find my answer fitting anywhere in the poll.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-24-2012, 08:52 AM
barakas's Avatar
barakas barakas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 402
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Susi View Post
Where is "im satisfied" option?
The poll is to determine the nature of peoples complaints. If you have no complaints, simply don't sign the poll (or sign "the game wasn't too hard to get into").
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-24-2012, 01:14 PM
Private Who?'s Avatar
Private Who? Private Who? is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 721
Default

I could only honestly agree with 'The game wasn't too hard to get into'.

The 'Realistic mode wasn't realistic enough' is sort of problematic for me. On the surface, it might seem true. If you stop to think about it though, it's not the realism MODE not being realistic enough, but rather some elements of realism which seemed like good ideas did not translate into better game-play. For me the prime example of this is zoom. Zoom is intended to model the human ability to focus intently on a narrow area and detect motion. The effect on GAME PLAY was to make every rifle-man a sniper and led to a greater degree of camping (in my opinion.)

My other big problem with the game as it was released last fall was load-outs, which over-loaded the game with smg's. Then there were default enemy weapon load-outs, which was just plain dumb. It could (and has) been argued that so many smg's WAS more realistic within the confines of an urban battle where smg's (especially for the Russians) were very much a standard weapon. Again, the result for game-play was less than desireable (again, in my opinion.)

So, before you check that particular box.....think about it. And also please stop to reflect that things are GETTING BETTER.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-24-2012, 02:53 PM
Ossius's Avatar
Ossius Ossius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 723
Default

My option wasn't on the poll, not enough people playing.
__________________

The Hipster melted his barrel, because he fired the Machine Gun before it was cool.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-24-2012, 03:46 PM
Nylle's Avatar
Nylle Nylle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 466
Default

What the hell man, you cant make a poll with only negative awnsers, ofcourse the results are going to be nagative.
What is the matter of a poll with only one sided awnsers.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedorov View Post
Genuine fun > grind.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-26-2012, 10:58 AM
barakas's Avatar
barakas barakas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 402
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nylle View Post
What the hell man, you cant make a poll with only negative awnsers, ofcourse the results are going to be nagative.
What is the matter of a poll with only one sided awnsers.
If you read the original post you'll see what I'm asking is to verify a claim made by Yosh that one of the biggest complaints of the game was that it was "too hard to get into" and "the modes weren't different enough".

In the context Yosh was using, "the modes weren't different enough" implied that Relaxed realism mode wasn't "relaxed" enough.

This seemed to jar with my personal experience of the community, who didn't seem very concerned that relaxed wasn't relaxed enough and didn't particularly complain that the learning curve was too steep. However I saw far more complaints about Realism mode not being realistic enough.

Quote:
My option wasn't on the poll, not enough people playing.
The poll isn't to get peoples opinion on the game, but to see how their opinion matches to what TWI think it is. I think the poll shows that (of the remaining player base on the forum), it doesn't.

There are many other threads on other problems in the game.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-26-2012, 11:06 AM
Cyper Cyper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nylle View Post
What the hell man, you cant make a poll with only negative awnsers, ofcourse the results are going to be nagative.
What is the matter of a poll with only one sided awnsers.
Anyone who consider RO2 acceptable in its current state.. is just to ignore.
__________________
''Much good work is lost for the lack of a little more.''
- Edward H. Harriman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabid Penguin View Post
I would rather blowtorch my nipples off than play Action Mode.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-26-2012, 11:25 AM
Cwivey's Avatar
Cwivey Cwivey is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: In the hills! (of England)
Posts: 2,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyper View Post
Anyone who consider RO2 acceptable in its current state.. is just to ignore.
Would you know what RO2's current state is? Or are you basing it off heavily biased opinions of the game you made six months ago?

I like the game as it is and find that comments like these make me want to...ignore you.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-26-2012, 11:31 AM
Cyper Cyper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,275
Default

RO2 is still the same codified version of roost. The best solution would be to focus on Classic Mode. Then its a good time to implement Classic Mode as a replacement for all other modes. Whatever happens with the game I'll just dump it if it doesn't please me. But right now I am hoping for the best.
__________________
''Much good work is lost for the lack of a little more.''
- Edward H. Harriman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabid Penguin View Post
I would rather blowtorch my nipples off than play Action Mode.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-26-2012, 11:35 AM
Mike_Nomad Mike_Nomad is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 5,025
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyper View Post
Anyone who consider RO2 acceptable in its current state.. is just to ignore.
Bad Attitude...... especially after having played the game for only a few hours.

I was/am satisfied with the game and look forward to the upcoming improvements and fixes.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-26-2012, 11:36 AM
melipone's Avatar
melipone melipone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,627
Default

If they want to make action mode easier to get into there are lots of options, like tutorials and low rank servers. They can even do things to the freeaim system without taking out the crosshair, like smaller freeaim area or faster iron sights

It was always laughingly shot down on these forums though any mention of a crosshair. Its just core game design and you start to wonder why someone would want to play if they can't even get their head around free-aim/no crosshair

These kind of guys will just play whatever their friends are playing, whatever is new or whatever has the biggest name. Counterstrike Go will be out soon enough, and I very much doubt RO2 will compete with the likes of that for crosshair style gameplay. I will probably be playing it too
__________________


Last edited by melipone; 04-26-2012 at 11:59 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2014, Tripwire Interactive, LLC