Hardcore Realism, Realism and Mainstream Mode

[Agent()()9]

My suggestion is to implement 3 modes of gameplay in order to satisfy a much wider range of players. One mistake I think most developers of FPS's make is to only have one mode of gameplay, which appeals only to a fraction of the market. With more modes of play, you satisfy a larger number of players (hardcore fans and mainstream players), which equals more people buying your game.

Easy, Novice or Mainstream Mode: Kill/Death Messages on, Friendly Fire off, increase player "hit points", weapon "balance", informative HUD/overview map etc. Basically, all the unrealistic features that appeal to the mainstream and novice player market.

Veteran or Realism Mode: Kill/Death Messages on, Friendly Fire on, realistic damage, slight weapon balancing, moderate HUD/overview map. This would probably be similar to standard RO: Ostfront-style of play.

Expert or Hardcore Realism Mode: No Kill/Death Messages, Friendly Fire on, realistic ballistics - no weapon "balancing", realistic damage, little or no HUD, etc. This mode would be similar to the HL2 mod Resistance and Liberation.

Another reason this system works well, is because it gives Mainstream or Novice players the ability to quickly and easily get into the game, and allows them to evolve to the more difficult modes of play. I've read somewhere that TI has acknowledged that a problem with RO was that new players get frustrated easily and quit because of the level of difficulty realistic play brings. Implementing multiple modes of play will not only increase the number of players in general, but also increase the numbers of hardcore realism players by way of the Mainstream Mode serving as a gateway to more expert/realistic modes of play.

I think COD: MW1 was on to something when they implemented Hardcore mode, but unfortunately I don't think they did enough. I had this idea before MW1 came out, and it amazes me that no other FPS developer has implemented this before. The biggest reasons I see as to why people don't buy a certain FPS game is because it is either too realistic, or not realistic enough for them. This system I am suggesting may be the one ring to rule them all.

[Zetsumei]

Tripwire said they will have 2 modes.

"Relaxed Realism" and "Realistic Realism"

We don't know exactly the difference between the types, but tripwire said that both will have thesame weapon damage and functionality etc. (Although tbh if some people love it i wouldnt mind an "arcade mode" either for those that like to pump 2 mags into someone before he dies as long as i don't have to play it)

The main difference with realistic realism, is probably on the helpers and notifications.

[Flogger23m]

Three modes?

Just a way to divide the community even more...

Two is understandable, just to help with sales (and it better).



And with three modes, they will either be pretty much all the same, or they will be very different. Remember, even in relaxed mode it is still supposed to be somewhat realistic. Put in a third "novice" mode, and it will turn into your average CoD game. And I don't think we'd want that.


If relaxed realism is too much for them, then they should just try a different game.

[Tank!]

Originally Posted by -SiN-bswearer

TW would never dumb down RO to the extent of the proposed "mainstream" mode. unrealistic damage? please tell me that was just an attempt at humor...

Look at the T-60/PTRD in RO1

[Agent()()9]

Hah, I knew I'd get the "It will divide the community!" argument. Read my post in its entirety. I address that argument towards the end. If you still don't get it, then let me put it this way: you will still have the current community - plus more from those who want to transition to something "harder". For most people, you're not going to get someone to try swimming in the deep end of the pool before they have a chance to try the shallow end.

[LionbI4]

Really arcade mode could have a crosshair, similar to ArmA/OFP.
I would like to be able to switch on/off any HUD elements on server side.
As well as modify damage system on server side.

[RedGuardist]

I think TWI has already done enough consessions, when there´s two modes.

That kind of "mainstream mode" would just be very lame. That is because it would be against everything the TWI is about. Making unique (semi)realistic game, that is not like the every other mainstream shooters. There are allready millions of those mainstream shooters. Gaming world seriously doen´t need one more of those.

I believe "relaxed realism" will be enough for the new players to get the idea and get used to the game. Since the bottom idea of the game is playing the "realistic realism" mode anyways.

[The_Emperor]

Originally Posted by RedGuardist

I think TWI has already done enough consessions, when there´s two modes.

That kind of "mainstream mode" would just be very lame. That is because it would be against everything the TWI is about. Making unique (semi)realistic game, that is not like the every other mainstream shooters. There are allready millions of those mainstream shooters. Gaming world seriously doen´t need one more of those.

I believe "relaxed realism" will be enough for the new players to get the idea and get used to the game. Since the bottom idea of the game is playing the "realistic realism" mode anyways.

Indeed. Otherwise we go steadily towards CoD and might even go beyond it.

[Xendance]

What if RO:HOS becomes a mainstream game with the same old gamemodes? Where's your god now huh?

My point is, a "mainstream" mode would be a ****en stupid gimmick to get more buyers. I'd die a little inside if they did that.

[FlyXwire]

It's an intertesting idea Agent, and it sounds like a way to increase market appeal for a WW2 FPS (make the game attractive to lots of potential players).

I dunno, when I think of Heroes Of Stalingrad, I'm not thinking of a game that's looking to appeal to players who probably don't care much about the history of the conflict, or the history of the combatants, or the tactics used, etc.

I read game reviews today that always start by questioning why anyone would make another FPS based on WW2, and preface their opinions that they think the market has been over-saturarted by WW2 shooters anyway. The downside......now everyone makes modern era shooters based on fantastical scenarios instead.

I'm sure TW wants to sell as many copies of Heroes as possible, but they've already taken a different path in having decided to remain with the WW2 era, which will appeal to fans who never got tired of the era, its history, or its significance anyway.

There's plenty of modern shooters out now, or coming out for those who just want gunplay, and wows and the cinematics that having little basis in reality allows (I enjoy playing those games too), but Heroes is quite different because it's based on history, and so it's appeal starts there, with the fact that it's meant to ground the player in more than just what-ifs, because Heroes is about what-was, and I'm not sure you can make that resonate with players who probably don't care about any of that anyway.

[Agent()()9]

I expect that 80% of the RO fans wouldn't like the idea of a "Mainstream" mode of gameplay because that's not what they want. But here's the thing:

1) There is no negative impact to you, because you can still play the game you want on the server you want. And...

2) IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT YOU.

Stating that implementing this system will divide the community is like saying that having servers with different map cycles will divide the community. Players will not rigidly stick to one mode (at least I wouldn't).

I am as much of a fan of RO's style of gameplay as anyone else. In fact, I'm for even more realism. I would be playing Hardcore Realism mode most of the time and sometimes Realism mode if my system existed. But I understand that in order to make games, you must attract players and make money. And if you attract players, then the community will get bigger, and more people will want to make the transition to the more realistic modes of the game. Then, maybe more than a few will realize how much fun it can be to play the game with increased tactical realism. And for those who don't, they will stick with the proposed Mainstream mode, TI gets its money and the Realism community loses nothing.

I mean really people, what are you afraid of? Most of the arguments I've so far read are strongly influenced by stubborn fanboyism. FlyXWire, your argument is an exception and is the most sound one I've read so far.

[FlyXwire]

Thanks Agent.

I think your effort here is well-intentioned, so it's certainly worthy of a weighing the cost and benefits of it.

Afterall, when designers are attempting to make a new (better) game, it's making the status-quo obsolete anyway.

[Flogger23m]

Originally Posted by Agent()()9

Hah, I knew I'd get the "It will divide the community!" argument. Read my post in its entirety. I address that argument towards the end. If you still don't get it, then let me put it this way: you will still have the current community - plus more from those who want to transition to something "harder". For most people, you're not going to get someone to try swimming in the deep end of the pool before they have a chance to try the shallow end.

No.

The people who prefer realism will:

1) Go to where more people are playing. This is the dumbed down mode.

2) Stop playing the game altogether when the hard core servers are empty.


Today, I decided to play some RO. I am sick of Danzig. But it is the only server with a decent ping is the 24/7 Danzig server. So I played Danzig, because it was that or a lag fest. I quit playing the game early, because I get bored of Danzig.

The same will happen with game modes. There will only be a few hard core servers, so the people will not play as long. This means less overall people playing the hardcore mode at any given time.

Which in turn will make people stop playing the game, or just go to the dumbed down servers.


If you don't get that, then there is nothing that can convince you.

You can't make a game for everyone.

Originally Posted by Agent()()9

2) IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT YOU.

Indeed, it isn't.

But if you want a main stream game, please play one of the many that exist.

I an sure the next CoD game will be released in a few months. All of the people who want to play a main stream game can jump on that.

Just leave RO alone and don't modify it to suit your/main stream gamers needs.

[Xendance]

Originally Posted by Agent()()9

I expect that 80% of the RO fans wouldn't like the idea of a "Mainstream" mode of gameplay because that's not what they want. But here's the thing:

1) There is no negative impact to you, because you can still play the game you want on the server you want. And...

2) IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT YOU.

Stating that implementing this system will divide the community is like saying that having servers with different map cycles will divide the community. Players will not rigidly stick to one mode (at least I wouldn't).

I am as much of a fan of RO's style of gameplay as anyone else. In fact, I'm for even more realism. I would be playing Hardcore Realism mode most of the time and sometimes Realism mode if my system existed. But I understand that in order to make games, you must attract players and make money. And if you attract players, then the community will get bigger, and more people will want to make the transition to the more realistic modes of the game. Then, maybe more than a few will realize how much fun it can be to play the game with increased tactical realism. And for those who don't, they will stick with the proposed Mainstream mode, TI gets its money and the Realism community loses nothing.

I mean really people, what are you afraid of? Most of the arguments I've so far read are strongly influenced by stubborn fanboyism. FlyXWire, your argument is an exception and is the most sound one I've read so far.

Seriously, making a game because you wanna sell it to the people is in my opinion: stupid. Ultimately TWI staff (probably) wants to make a game that they want to play also, what they like. Not what the "mainstream" likes. Though if TWI decided that "mainstream" == awesome... well, tough ****.

Maybe I'm too much of an idealist :\

[FlyXwire]

What I'm hoping is that TW can ramp up their tank game within Heroes also.

If they can make the AFV interaction approach the level of the infantry action, and have it meld the arty and air support as well as it all did with Ostfront, then the game could further capture the interest of tank sim fans too.

That's what I'd like to see Heroes able to do in order to bring in as many customers as possible (appeal to players that have been basically playing in two seperate genres) .

[Agent()()9]

Originally Posted by Flogger23m

No.

The people who prefer realism will:

1) Go to where more people are playing. This is the dumbed down mode.

2) Stop playing the game altogether when the hard core servers are empty.


Today, I decided to play some RO. I am sick of Danzig. But it is the only server with a decent ping is the 24/7 Danzig server. So I played Danzig, because it was that or a lag fest. I quit playing the game early, because I get bored of Danzig.

The same will happen with game modes. There will only be a few hard core servers, so the people will not play as long. This means less overall people playing the hardcore mode at any given time.

Which in turn will make people stop playing the game, or just go to the dumbed down servers.


If you don't get that, then there is nothing that can convince you.

You can't make a game for everyone.



Indeed, it isn't.

But if you want a main stream game, please play one of the many that exist.

I an sure the next CoD game will be released in a few months. All of the people who want to play a main stream game can jump on that.

Just leave RO alone and don't modify it to suit your/main stream gamers needs.

First off, don't give me the "If you want to play a main stream game, go play X." I already said that I like RO and prefer increased realism. I'm not suggesting this because I prefer a mainstream-type RO. I'm suggesting it with the hopes that something like this would increase the player base and entice new people to try out the realism servers.

I do see your point with the Danzig thing, but I personally don't think this will happen. The people who like playing on the Danzig server would probably not be playing otherwise if that map/server wasn't available.

Another reason I don't think what you say would happen: Would you stop playing on the hard core servers if mainstream-mode servers were available? I'm willing to wager not, as I'm willing to wager that the current RO community would not. I know I wouldn't. The current RO realism loving community would not stop playing hard core servers if mainstream-mode servers were available. If this were true, then why isn't the current RO community slowly flocking to DoD:Source? It's the same concept, isn't it? An unrealistic WW2 shooter.

[Floyd]

Geesh, the easy answer is to give the server owners choices. Make the options server-sided. At the very least, give options within the options (ie, don't just have modes, have line item choices).People will flock to servers that offer the style of play that they like. Once we "tweaked" a few things in MOH:AA for a couple of years we had the server full 24/7 of people that liked to play how we liked to play (and this was from 1,000's of servers to choose). Of course there were always those newcomeres that didn't kwow what our CYGR-tweaks were. They either cussed us, told us it sucked and left never to come back, or they loved it and came back day after day after day. Either way we played with like-minded folks and had a ball.

Of course this was before the day of "acheivements", "perks" and the assundry of other items meant to keep the attention of the majority of our apparently attention deficeit gamers of today. I'd be the first to admit that it is a different gaming world now.........

[Agent()()9]

Lots of server-sided options would work well, too.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Agent()()9

My suggestion is to implement 3 modes of gameplay in order to satisfy a much wider range of players. One mistake I think most developers of FPS's make is to only have one mode of gameplay, which appeals only to a fraction of the market. With more modes of play, you satisfy a larger number of players (hardcore fans and mainstream players), which equals more people buying your game.

Mainstream Mode: Kill/Death Messages on, Friendly Fire off, increase player "hit points", weapon "balance", informative HUD/overview map etc. Basically, all the unrealistic features that appeal to the mainstream and novice player market.

Realism Mode: Kill/Death Messages on, Friendly Fire on, realistic damage, slight weapon balancing, moderate HUD/overview map. This would probably be similar to standard RO: Ostfront-style of play.

Hardcore Realism: No Kill/Death Messages, Friendly Fire on, realistic ballistics - no weapon "balancing", realistic damage, little or no HUD, etc. This mode would be similar to the HL2 mod Resistance and Liberation.

Another reason this system works well, is because it gives Mainstream or Novice players the ability to quickly and easily get into the game, and allows them to evolve to the more difficult modes of play. I've read somewhere that TI has acknowledged that a problem with RO was that new players get frustrated easily and quit because of the level of difficulty realistic play brings. Implementing multiple modes of play will not only increase the number of players in general, but also increase the numbers of hardcore realism players by way of the Mainstream Mode serving as a gateway to more expert/realistic modes of play.

I think COD: MW1 was on to something when they implemented Hardcore mode, but unfortunately I don't think they did enough. I had this idea before MW1 came out, and it amazes me that no other FPS developer has implemented this before. The biggest reasons I see as to why people don't buy a certain FPS game is because it is either too realistic, or not realistic enough for them. This system I am suggesting may be the one ring to rule them all.

NO. This is a bad decision, and thus, a waste of time.
I think Tripwire Interactive cares more about customer satisfaction then popularity. It would not be satisfactory to know that Tripwire Interactive, the developer who has stood out and tried something bold, turned their back on its main fanbase.

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I can understand wanting to make the game more popular, but I think the two modes that TWI already announced are just fine. I hate to see a dumbing down of the game, even if it allows options for a more hardcore realism.

With all the modern weapon games coming out, ROHOS will probably stand out on its own already. If it is a quality release, I can easily see that with TWI's reputation, the game will surpase its predecessor ROOST in sales and popularity.