Call of the Day of Battlefield

[RoBroCop]

Posted this on another forum, thought Id put it here too.

With the recent beta release of Rising Storm: Vietnam, I've been reflecting on the Red Orchestra 2 franchise a bit and its safe to say, I'm salty as ****. Before I get too into this, Id just like to say that I enjoy RO2 and Rising Storm. They're fun little games. They are however, a colossal disappointment compared to what they could have been.

At the time when RO2 was released in 2011, there was really no new or unique games to to occupy the community's attention. Day of Defeat and RO1 were still tugging along, but they were getting stale. Arma2 was too buggy to be universally accepted. It was clear at that time that the next big game would set the standard for realism based FPS and military simulations for the next several years.

Then came RO2...

To this day, I'm not sure how Tripwire ****ed up so bad. They had so much going for them... Experienced developers, brand recognition, capital to develop a game. What went wrong?

First, the game brings nothing new to the table. When you get right down to it, there really isn't any brow-raising new features. That wouldn't be so much of a problem if they had included features other games had incorporated successfully.

To name a few:
-Large maps
-Destructible environments
-Armor combat
-Air combat (including paratroops)
-Practical squad play (squad based classes)
-Medic class
-Inventory system
-Multiple theaters of combat
-Multiple nations
-Weapon mechanics (zeroing, weapon maintenance, magazine merging)

Second, I still cant figure out why you would make an arcade style shooter out of a historically themed game. I mean I get that the developers wanted to capitalize on the success of a leveling system like we see in the Call of Duty franchise, but I for one had hoped Tripwire was better than that.
The historical inaccuracies are too much for me. A suppressed Nagant revolver? A double feed MP40? I suppose some would say that its a healthy balance, but I just think it looks like the retarded offspring of RO1 and Wolfenstein. I mean, what soldier in any nation's military had to see combat before being issued a bayonet?

Normally, none of this would be that big of a deal. People make shitty games all the time. They cant all be solid gold like Project Reality and Squad.

No, the reason RO2 and Rising Storm chap my ass is that Tripwire's inability to release a solid game began the process of splintering of the community in the way we are seeing today. It seems to me you cant throw a rock nowadays without hitting a new WW2 FPS, none of which achieve any kind of uniqueness or notoriety (Day of Infamy, Heroes and Generals, Battalion 1944, Days of War, Festung Europa, Traction Wars etc). Rather than having 100 players on one game, we have 20 players on 5 games.


In closing, I remember when Battlefield 1942 was released in 2002 I was in a kind of awe at how comprehensive the game was. Sure it had its flaws, but for the time, it was ground breaking. Since then, we still have yet to see anything similar. Tripwire had the opportunity to rectify this, but instead they gave us the painfully mediocre Red Orchestra 2, and now they're doing it again with Rising Storm: Vietnam.

 

[NorthDumpling]

To name a few:
-Large maps
-Destructible environments
-Armor combat
-Air combat (including paratroops)
-Practical squad play (squad based classes)
-Medic class
-Inventory system
-Multiple theaters of combat
-Multiple nations
-Weapon mechanics

-Larger maps than what we have as SongBe and AnLao is not really a need.
-Engine is not suitable for that
-Armor combat happend rarely and only if you push history too much
-Air combat is not a feature of RO series, real troops were not making monthly rate of para jumps.
-For practical squad play I agree, we need squads to be RO2 alike, so SLs are being important role.
-Medics dont suit the gameplay
-No inventory system needed

Everything else is pretty much in or will be in a game, you dont seem to follow news at all nor seem to be fan of RO series, as your suggestions clearly have a feel of Battlefield game, while you try to proove it otherwise let alone you dont know that Antimatter Games are developing RS2 and for their first game its flawless victory almostly.

You're talking more about what RO2 failed at and which has been forgotted and about Battlefield, rather than giving healthy arguements and criticism. Please take a deep knowledge about the product, before pointing fingers.

 

[RoBroCop]

-Larger maps than what we have as SongBe and AnLao is not really a need.

First off, this is a thread about RO2 as a whole, not specifically RS:V. And how can you say its not a need? Far more successul games have larger maps. ArmA2, Arma3, DayZ, Battlefield series, PUBG, etc etc. The sandbox style games have proven to have lasting popularity. Playing in a 1KM map is an arena. Playing in a 10KM map is a theater of operations.

-Engine is not suitable for that

Then they shouldnt have chosen that engine. Farcry 2 didnt seem to have that problem and that came out 3 years earlier.

-Armor combat happend rarely and only if you push history too much

Im assuming you're under the impression Im talking about RS:V, so again, this is about RO:2.

-Air combat is not a feature of RO series, real troops were not making monthly rate of para jumps.

Yeah, thats the problem. Its not a feature.

-Medics dont suit the gameplay

I think what you mean to say is that the shitty gameplay and complete lack of teamwork make medics beyond this game.

-No inventory system needed

Id like to be able to forgo a sidearm for more grenades or vice versa. Id also like to be able to merge magazines. Let me ask you. You ever been in a combat zone where theres ammo dumps littered around the battlefield? Also, you think just standing next to a crate just magically loads your mag pouches?

Everything else is pretty much in or will be in a game, you dont seem to follow news at all nor seem to be fan of RO series, as your suggestions clearly have a feel of Battlefield game, while you try to proove it otherwise let alone you dont know that Antimatter Games are developing RS2 and for their first game its flawless victory almostly.

I literally have no idea what the **** you just said.

You're talking more about what RO2 failed at and which has been forgotted and about Battlefield, rather than giving healthy arguements and criticism. Please take a deep knowledge about the product, before pointing fingers.

Take a deep knowlege? Ive been playing PC games longer than youve been alive.

 

[Tugalazix]

i Agree with this post

 

[Rak]

RO2 was basically TWI's attempt trying to "branch out" of the niche hardcore FPS market and capture the mainstream crowd. They sacrificed their established community that supported them ever since the mod times to do this. Basically the whole Ostfront community left when RO2 launched because it was basically a watered down and faster paced version of Ostfront.

 

[Jagdwyre]

So basically you're mad that Tripwire(and by extension Antimatter Games) didn't develop RO and RS into expansive giant scale combat with a ton of detailed content layered in(ignoring the increases cost of such an endeavor).
In other words you're angry this Franchise isn't Squad or Arma?

It's absurd to get mad at game developers for making "too many games" that split up some theoretically community. Variety is good in this industry. Even if every single one of those WW2 games was literally 10/10 and had DICE level of production quality people would still pick only one and play it. At best they'd play multiple but you can only play one game at a time. Tripwire making your "dream game" isn't going to magically make it a juggernaut in the genre, nor would it guarantee being played any more than RO2, and soon, RS2 is played.

On the authenticity side of things Vietnam isn't even really that good of a setting for battles utilizing hundreds of players. There were a few battles of that scale but a lot of the combat in Vietnam was smaller scale and more sporadic.
And I'm just going throw this out there but while the scale isn't large as Squad or Arma the gunplay is a hell of a lot better imo and even has more realistic nuances to it those other games do not.

 

[FishsticksII]

RO2 was basically TWI's attempt trying to "branch out" of the niche hardcore FPS market and capture the mainstream crowd. They sacrificed their established community that supported them ever since the mod times to do this. Basically the whole Ostfront community left when RO2 launched because it was basically a watered down and faster paced version of Ostfront.

This^ There was a front cover section for PC Gamer years ago that read -- Red Orchestra 2 "COD Killer" as being stated by Gibson himself I believe. All in the interest of drumming up sales.

The business is about people making a living and if you think you'll make more money making a casual style game then that's what you do. It sucks for the hardcore gamers and history buffs but the 20% hardcore do not foot the bills. The 80% casuals pay the staff and your house mortage.

 

[siftycat]

Then they shouldnt have chosen that engine. Farcry 2 didnt seem to have that problem and that came out 3 years earlier.

CryEngine was incredibly expensive to license at the time. It's a AAA engine. It had AAA costs associated with it. Unreal has relatively cheap licensing costs on a percentage basis. It's also open source and you can get royalty free components for it, which reduces development costs. The only other one I can think of right now is Frostbite, which isn't available outside EA. And the only game that actually utilises it is Battlefield, and then only to a limited degree.