• 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/

Here's a chance to spread the word about HoS

Most of them are not bored of ww2 games, but rather how they are depicted.

Such as You, the awsome American military vs the evil, weak and underpowered German (or Jap, depends on setting) army.

I like RO because its a side of the war we don't get to see in games, its Russia and Germany, its the eastern front. Where most of the fighting took place. Its more intresting, more diverse, more fun. And less, Well, like every other ww2 shooter out there.

The next ww2 shooter to be announced will be you, an American. Vs the horridly underpowered , weak and evil German army. Where you storm of the beaches of normandy and don't ever get hit to run out of it shooting and everything blowing up. To end with you winning easily. And thats what makes "ww2 shooters" boring and overdone.

Plus... They're consolers, and they want Vietnam and Modern Warfare as their era. Even though, They've been done to the death as well. Oh well...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nicholas
Upvote 0
It shouldn't be so much about the period rather than the gameplay.. which RO and Ro2 has in spades.. That article + comments slightly depressed me, because so many(the majority) people have it wrong and it will likely never change. I don't want to play a game merely to get bored of it and move on to the next period/war. I want a game that strives to be timeless like Ostfront.
 
Upvote 0
The period affects the gameplay. I for one am tired of seeing games with all these stamped steel tacticc00l weapons with fully automatic fire. RO brings you back to the days of bolt-action predominance and bayonet fighting ;)

Indeed, I'm not sure I'm a huge fan of all the bells and whistles most games have now. I always keep my guns stock, which is why BFBC2: Vietnam is awesome. :)
 
Upvote 0
Most of them are not bored of ww2 games, but rather how they are depicted.

Such as You, the awsome American military vs the evil, weak and underpowered German (or Jap, depends on setting) army.

I like RO because its a side of the war we don't get to see in games, its Russia and Germany, its the eastern front. Where most of the fighting took place. Its more intresting, more diverse, more fun. And less, Well, like every other ww2 shooter out there.

The next ww2 shooter to be announced will be you, an American. Vs the horridly underpowered , weak and evil German army. Where you storm of the beaches of normandy and don't ever get hit to run out of it shooting and everything blowing up. To end with you winning easily. And thats what makes "ww2 shooters" boring and overdone.

Plus... They're consolers, and they want Vietnam and Modern Warfare as their era. Even though, They've been done to the death as well. Oh well...

Win.

The period affects the gameplay. I for one am tired of seeing games with all these stamped steel tacticc00l weapons with fully automatic fire. RO brings you back to the days of bolt-action predominance and bayonet fighting ;)


Modern weapons can be cool if they're done right, they do have an awful lot of firepower, since most of the guns are basically assault rifles with the option of optics, in WW2 most guns were different and had very few accessories.

But you know what, while guns are awesome and everything, too much of it in video games is a materialistic macho fantasy, where people care more about red dot sights than actual gameplay, personally I care more about gameplay than amassing a large collection of guns and accessories.
 
Upvote 0
The only comment that's been written by somebody with more than half a braincell:
I guess it's more about how little gameplay has changed since Medal of Honor was introduced- so they thought a new coat of paint will change our perception and user satisfaction, but they've missed the point- it wasn't the setting that was getting tired, it was the limited imagination in mission design and gameplay that reduced CoD XY and MoH YZ to "just another boring WWII shooter".

Thus, I agree that the setting itself could still provide an excellent backdrop for today's FPS, but for by Jehova should they do something about the mechanics!http://kotaku.com/5739702/bring-back-world-war-ii#

I 100% agree.
http://kotaku.com/5739702/bring-back-world-war-ii#http://kotaku.com/5739702/bring-back-world-war-ii#http://kotaku.com/5739702/bring-back-world-war-ii#
 
Upvote 0
Sadly its mostly about the "cool", "forgiveness" and "simplicity" factor when it comes to consoles. Theres been so many franchises destroyed due to consoles its hard to count, Ghost Recon, Rainbow six, Call of Duty, Battlefield , Medal of Honor (started on consoles but actually became a great PC title in 2002), etc etc..

I think the arguments that some people thrive on such as "ww2 has been done to death" or "ww2 doesn't provide anything new" is just pure bull****, its more related to how well the game is made and presented, besides if anything then Modern shooters has now been done to death and their argument is invalid.

But I suppose it comes along with the new generation of console fans that just doesn't relate or care about anything else than an AK47.. to them a Kar98k is just some boring old piece of junk.. sadly and i've several friends who are just these type of gamers, and we're indeed a niche within a niche as it seems.. it's almost as if you've to have an appreciation for history to enjoy ww2, otherwise you dont relate.(sadly thats seems to be true for the most part)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: samol
Upvote 0
Yeah, But don't worry, They'll be back to playing Black Ops before long.

I personally prefer WW2 over Modern combat, if its done right. Where that 1 shot from you rifle can build up tension, and suspense. Rather than jumping from around a corner, spraying your mp5 and then jumping off around the next corner. Which has absolutly no tension, suspense or thill involved at all.

Give me a Kar98 or Mosin Nagant over a M4 any day. :)
 
Upvote 0