About "RO2 Dying"

[MrHat]

Funny that the RO2 defenders always avoid talking about these "features", which are my main issues with the game. Just like the mod, eh?

I swear that I read somewhere on these forums that there was acknowledgement that the injury system was not quite working as intended. Although there are stories I've heard of people being shot, and not really noticing until they see the blood, or pain kicks in later.

People are complaining about guys just taking a bullet and continuing like nothing happened. Maybe there is some realism to that... I know its frustrating because I've seen that happen plenty of times to me in game.

The insta-bandaging.. I don't like. It should at least take maybe 10 seconds, not like... 1... second lol

 

[Echo Black]

A Movie Trailer that is cut to only show awesome is exactly that.. selling Potential.. you don't see the other 87 minutes of crappy editing or bad dialog..

I meant specifically selling a product that's not-quite-finished, nothing to do with advertisement. All advertisement is about exaggerated promises. The difference is, if you pay for a film in Blu-Ray and one of its features doesn't work, heads roll. It's how it should always be, really.

---

 

[Albus_Dumbledore]

ehhh

ehhh

Thanks for the update guys. Good game all around and I know we are all looking forward to the arrival of mods and mutators. Keep it up.

 

[Alperce]

I think this thread is getting out of control. While TWI did indeed make some bad decisions gamewise, this thread starts with them admitting their mistake, and saying that they will take into account the communities requests in further updates, and the most popular mod features and try to introduce them in the game as they come along.

Many of the people I daily see complaining about this and that in general don't even post their view of how the game should be like or the fixes it need on the suggestions forum, which is where they belong and where it would help TWI improve the game.

I don't belive they sabotaged anything about this game on purpouse, and I belive we should give them time to fix the mistakes they made and support them, or we'll never have the RO2 we wanted if we don't.

Raging and ranting does not help anyone. While I understand some people's disapointment with the game, badmouthing it will only make it worse and delay the improvements and fixing it needs. The community demanded the release of RO2 when it was released, and now we have to live with it. TWI made some bad decisions about the game, and now they have to fix them, and we as a community should help them do it instead of saying "OMG ur gamez sux I'z never buying games from you again I HATE YOU AND THE GAME", because that way we'll only delay the task of turning RO2 into the game we all want to see.

These are just my 2 cents, and my opinion. I belive that with flameless sugestions, some support and a little patience, we'll see RO2 become the game we've always wanted. Or people can just continue to rant, flame and complain, which will not bring any good. Myself, I choose the first option.

 

[HarrY89]

I disagree. Paying for "potential" is like ordering a burger and being served the ingredients. The games industry is the only (entertainment) one in which authors can get away with selling "potential". Bugs and issues are a reality of software development, no game will ever be 100% bug-free. I (and most people into games, I'd wager) understand that. But I think it's far healthier in the long run for the consumer to demand a high-quality, polished experience from the get-go, regardless of who's selling it. Don't mantain a standard for Blizzard and other for Tripwire (for example). That way, standards in general keep on rising, and sloppy developers are not given any quarter.

Rev Rant: Indie Mercy - YouTube

I'm not too fond of this guy's videos, but he makes a great point.

---

+1

Cannot qoute enough.

 

[Solo4114]

I'm kinda happy that people left for BF3. Those guys weren't the ones interested in this game in long term anyway.

You're wrong about this. Folks can enjoy more than one style of gaming simultaneously. I stopped playing RO2 after playing only maybe a week or two, and am currently quite enjoying BF3 (well, when people recognize that you have to actually arm/disarm objectives in Rush mode...but I digress).

But I also played plenty of the RO UT2k4 mod, and played the HELL out of RO:Ost. Some of my fondest memories in gaming are playing Berezhina (in my opinion, the most perfectly designed combined arms map of the RO:Ost era). I loved playing the slow advance, the mad dash into an objective, praying you wouldn't get picked off by someone with a boltie, etc.

RO2, though, I've found to be....different. Not what I wanted. It tries too hard to borrow from the BF3/MW3 aspects of FPS gaming, while holding on to the RO:Ost elements, and ends up doing a disservice to both, in my opinion.

I'm very much against the high numbers of auto and semi-auto weapons on the maps, as well as the whole "avatar stat" improvement system. I accept these things in games like BF3, but I didn't want them in an RO game. I especially didn't want them the way RO seems to be doing it by literally making your avatar BETTER simply because you've played longer. It'd be one thing if you had "sidegrades" but the stat improvements are true "upgrades," which makes an already newbie-unfriendly game even more unfriendly. Frankly, I'd get rid of the whole unlock system except for cosmetic differences and meaningless baubles like "ranks" which don't confer anything on you except maybe a shiny symbol next to your name on the scoreboard or a new skin you can use.

I'm on the fence about other changes, such as the cover system (which seems cool as a concept, but also dodgy as executed), and the bandaging/bleed-out thing.

Really, though, the game just felt very much like a hybrid of two extremely distinct styles of gameplay, but didn't go far enough in either direction. I'm not sure if that can be changed. I'd hope that a robust SDK might result in community "fixes" for most of this stuff, but that also raises questions of what exactly RO:HOS brings to the party that you couldn't get from RO:Ost.

Regardless, I loved RO:Ost dearly. I'm thoroughly enjoying BF3 and enjoyed BFBC1 and BFBC2. So the notion of "F*** 'em. Let 'em leave. They were never SERIOUS RO players anyway", really isn't true. I left RO, but from my perspective, RO left me first. I'd happily return if I could get the kind of gameplay I'm looking for, but that's pretty much RO1 with maybe a few other additions to gameplay that tend towards more realistic/tactical gameplay, rather than towards the "fast shooter" approach that I get from BF3. If I want that, I'll just play BF3. If I come to RO, I want what, in my mind, is the RO experience.

 

[Nikita]

You're wrong about this. Folks can enjoy more than one style of gaming simultaneously. I stopped playing RO2 after playing only maybe a week or two, and am currently quite enjoying BF3 (well, when people recognize that you have to actually arm/disarm objectives in Rush mode...but I digress).

But I also played plenty of the RO UT2k4 mod, and played the HELL out of RO:Ost. Some of my fondest memories in gaming are playing Berezhina (in my opinion, the most perfectly designed combined arms map of the RO:Ost era). I loved playing the slow advance, the mad dash into an objective, praying you wouldn't get picked off by someone with a boltie, etc.

RO2, though, I've found to be....different. Not what I wanted. It tries too hard to borrow from the BF3/MW3 aspects of FPS gaming, while holding on to the RO:Ost elements, and ends up doing a disservice to both, in my opinion.

I'm very much against the high numbers of auto and semi-auto weapons on the maps, as well as the whole "avatar stat" improvement system. I accept these things in games like BF3, but I didn't want them in an RO game. I especially didn't want them the way RO seems to be doing it by literally making your avatar BETTER simply because you've played longer. It'd be one thing if you had "sidegrades" but the stat improvements are true "upgrades," which makes an already newbie-unfriendly game even more unfriendly. Frankly, I'd get rid of the whole unlock system except for cosmetic differences and meaningless baubles like "ranks" which don't confer anything on you except maybe a shiny symbol next to your name on the scoreboard or a new skin you can use.

I'm on the fence about other changes, such as the cover system (which seems cool as a concept, but also dodgy as executed), and the bandaging/bleed-out thing.

Really, though, the game just felt very much like a hybrid of two extremely distinct styles of gameplay, but didn't go far enough in either direction. I'm not sure if that can be changed. I'd hope that a robust SDK might result in community "fixes" for most of this stuff, but that also raises questions of what exactly RO:HOS brings to the party that you couldn't get from RO:Ost.

Regardless, I loved RO:Ost dearly. I'm thoroughly enjoying BF3 and enjoyed BFBC1 and BFBC2. So the notion of "F*** 'em. Let 'em leave. They were never SERIOUS RO players anyway", really isn't true. I left RO, but from my perspective, RO left me first. I'd happily return if I could get the kind of gameplay I'm looking for, but that's pretty much RO1 with maybe a few other additions to gameplay that tend towards more realistic/tactical gameplay, rather than towards the "fast shooter" approach that I get from BF3. If I want that, I'll just play BF3. If I come to RO, I want what, in my mind, is the RO experience.

Right on the money. I still boot up the original Halo for PC from time to time. An arcade game with no pretensions to realism, but one with plenty of fun to be had.

 

[Zetsumei]

I went from a competitive UT instagib player to Red Orchestra. Realism isn't my main concern.

But together with realism in loadouts, and human properties comes a certain balance of things. As stated above to me it feels that Red Orchestra HOS doesn't hit a sweet spot anymore.

I really love some things like not being forced to always rest your weapon on some object in RO2. Which was a major thing I hated in Ost (especially as resting your weapon modified your mouse speed).

But things just don't seem to work together that well in HOS, most features individually work better but all together the overall experience doesn't seem to come together.

Outdoor fighting for me, seems very campy with people very reluctant to cap and advance. With hardly any fire fights mostly people just die before they knew what hit them (bot on the sending and receiving end). While in close combat people continuously sprint and in a split second mow people down from the iron sights.

Outdoor combat should in my opinion be a bit more active, as nobody listens to any commander that would normally say that someone should move up. Look at fallen heroes for instance more than half the team is not trying to cap but just tries to get pot shots.

While indoor combat should get people to act a bit more cautious, throwing in grenades before entering a room, and cutting the corner while in ironsights before advancing down the hallway.

Next to that weapons don't differentiate that much anymore, even though realistic. Every weapon is accurate up to the distances where you find encounters, this makes it such that the only real advantage of a bolt action rifle is gone and free aim in ironsight while it doesn't hamper smg's much can be a real pain when quickly trying to get off a shot with rifles.

There are a lot things good with RO2, but for me things simply don't come together gameplay wise. There is a lot of stuff really great and better than RO1 when looking at individual features, and my intial impression of RO2 was great. But things just don't seem to work together well.

And while I think that RO2 won't die quickly, I think that it could gain a lot more players by trying to listen to complains. There are always people complaining of course, but at this moment the complaining while it might seem different, are primarily in my eyes pretty similar.

 

[Josef Nader]

You're wrong about this. Folks can enjoy more than one style of gaming simultaneously. I stopped playing RO2 after playing only maybe a week or two, and am currently quite enjoying BF3 (well, when people recognize that you have to actually arm/disarm objectives in Rush mode...but I digress).

But I also played plenty of the RO UT2k4 mod, and played the HELL out of RO:Ost. Some of my fondest memories in gaming are playing Berezhina (in my opinion, the most perfectly designed combined arms map of the RO:Ost era). I loved playing the slow advance, the mad dash into an objective, praying you wouldn't get picked off by someone with a boltie, etc.

RO2, though, I've found to be....different. Not what I wanted. It tries too hard to borrow from the BF3/MW3 aspects of FPS gaming, while holding on to the RO:Ost elements, and ends up doing a disservice to both, in my opinion.

I'm very much against the high numbers of auto and semi-auto weapons on the maps, as well as the whole "avatar stat" improvement system. I accept these things in games like BF3, but I didn't want them in an RO game. I especially didn't want them the way RO seems to be doing it by literally making your avatar BETTER simply because you've played longer. It'd be one thing if you had "sidegrades" but the stat improvements are true "upgrades," which makes an already newbie-unfriendly game even more unfriendly. Frankly, I'd get rid of the whole unlock system except for cosmetic differences and meaningless baubles like "ranks" which don't confer anything on you except maybe a shiny symbol next to your name on the scoreboard or a new skin you can use.

I'm on the fence about other changes, such as the cover system (which seems cool as a concept, but also dodgy as executed), and the bandaging/bleed-out thing.

Really, though, the game just felt very much like a hybrid of two extremely distinct styles of gameplay, but didn't go far enough in either direction. I'm not sure if that can be changed. I'd hope that a robust SDK might result in community "fixes" for most of this stuff, but that also raises questions of what exactly RO:HOS brings to the party that you couldn't get from RO:Ost.

Regardless, I loved RO:Ost dearly. I'm thoroughly enjoying BF3 and enjoyed BFBC1 and BFBC2. So the notion of "F*** 'em. Let 'em leave. They were never SERIOUS RO players anyway", really isn't true. I left RO, but from my perspective, RO left me first. I'd happily return if I could get the kind of gameplay I'm looking for, but that's pretty much RO1 with maybe a few other additions to gameplay that tend towards more realistic/tactical gameplay, rather than towards the "fast shooter" approach that I get from BF3. If I want that, I'll just play BF3. If I come to RO, I want what, in my mind, is the RO experience.

A voice of reason? On TWI's forums?!

I guess it's more likely than I thought...

 

[Nezzer]

A voice of reason? On TWI's forums?!

I guess it's more likely than I thought...

If that's rare for you I guess you must be skipping a lot of posts. You've certanly skipped mine and avoided what I've been trying to ask you.

 

[Josef Nader]

If that's rare for you I guess you must be skipping a lot of posts. You've certanly skipped mine and avoided what I've been trying to ask you.

Because I've addressed it a hundred different times in a hundred different threads and I don't much feel like getting into the same tired old rehash -again-.

Forgive my lack of enthusiasm. Typing up the same crap only to have it be ignored is rather tiresome, and I actually have better things to do with my time, believe it or not.

Admit it, even if I presented a lengthy, well-constructed argument debunking everything you've posted, you'd contradict everything I said in an instant just for the sake of being arbitrary. We'd argue in circles until one of us got tired, and we'd end up right where we started, only with more carpal tunnel.

I didn't get 1,600+ posts in less than three months typing bug reports and goofing around. I've been arguing this mess since the beta went live. Excuse me for being tired of the whole thing. Certain individuals will never be convinced that RO2 is anything more than a flaming dog turd jammed down the barrel of a vintage K98 and used to stab their grandmother to death before being melted down and used to make dog tags for the Call of Duty 3 collectors edition or something.

 

[randumb]

Very solid post Ramm! The EA marketing part is so true! So is the killingfloor part, myself and lotsa other people still play it a lot.

ps. if TWI is finished with this awesome game plz start working on killingfloor sequel =0!

 

[Nezzer]

Because I've addressed it a hundred different times in a hundred different threads and I don't much feel like getting into the same tired old rehash -again-.

Forgive my lack of enthusiasm. Typing up the same crap only to have it be ignored is rather tiresome, and I actually have better things to do with my time, believe it or not.

Admit it, even if I presented a lengthy, well-constructed argument debunking everything you've posted, you'd contradict everything I said in an instant just for the sake of being arbitrary. We'd argue in circles until one of us got tired, and we'd end up right where we started, only with more carpal tunnel.

Just because I disagree with you in a few things doesn't mean I'll just argue against everything you say like a child and I have absolutely nothing personal against you. Actually, I agree with you in a few things like zoom and player damage, but I just don't like how you mock whoever complains about gameplay design without writing an article.

Weapon functionality (ADS time/reload time/bolting time+weapon progression and lack of inertia), damage system (extremely fast bleed out and bandaging, lack of effects from getting hit), movement in general (turning speed while sprinting, lack of inertia, lack of effects from stamina), weapon distribution and player progression bonuses/unlocks are not realistic at all and almost arcade. It's not a matter of opinion, but facts. Defending the present state of these features is defending arcade gameplay.

 

[Josef Nader]

Just because I disagree with you in a few things doesn't mean I'll just argue against everything you say like a child and I have absolutely nothing personal against you. Actually, I agree with you in a few things like zoom and player damage, but I just don't like how you mock whoever complains about gameplay design without writing an article.

Weapon functionality (ADS time/reload time/bolting time+weapon progression and lack of inertia), damage system (extremely fast bleed out and bandaging, lack of effects from getting hit), movement in general (turning speed while sprinting, lack of inertia, lack of effects from stamina), weapon distribution and player progression bonuses/unlocks are not realistic at all and almost arcade. It's not a matter of opinion, but facts. Defending the present state of these features is defending arcade gameplay.

You'd be the exception, not the rule, mate.

And I must admit I'm a bit iffy about you saying that "these things can't be defended", as it implies your mind is already totally made up. You can't have a discussion unless both sides are willing to see fault in their position.

Coming from someone who played predominately arcadey games (TF2 was and still is my shooter of choice), I can assure you that RO2 is most definitely -not- arcadey. Just because it is responsive and intuitive doesn't mean it has -anything- to do with the likes of TF2, CoD, or Gears of War. Trust me, I play all three on a regular basis. RO2 has nothing in common with them.

You're making the classic error that most people here are making, confusing responsive controls with arcadey ones. Just because I can shoot a rifle without having to go to virtual basic training for several weeks doesn't mean the game is arcadey or any less realistic.

I'll agree with you on the damage system. It seems to be a little screwy, though judging by the state of it (tracking where wounds are but not giving you any effects), it's an unfinished feature. My guess is that TWI is going to re-implement it as soon as the game-breakers are taken care of.

Again, you're confusing "clunky and sluggish" with realistic, and "tight and responsive" with arcadey. Real humans are remarkably agile, especially when -failing- to be agile means death.

Weapon distribution is ****ed, I'll give you that.

Unlocks were implemented poorly, and I'm not really a fan of something that broadens the gap between new player and veteran.

Basically, my big fight here is weapon handling and player movement, both of which are -much- more realistic than ROOST ever was, and I think many people will appreciate the new mechanics when we get some non-urban maps.

 

[YoYoBatty]

A successful person faces and acknowledges his problems head on, much like John just did here.

 

[Yurizle]

Right now its just the same guys playing on the same servers. I hardly see anybody new and although I've made friends with some great guys and I enjoy playing with them above and beyond to hell and back and I wouldn't trade it for anything in my RO2 career I feel as though more marketing is needed to get some new players would be a smart thing.

-40 bucks for this game is a great price. 10% off would be good also.
-Free weekened of gameplay would be chill.
-Double Exp but only for new comers. Yes I said it but limit it to like Honor 40 so they atleast have to grind to Veteran. I know many will disagree with this but right about everyone is high level (bot servers play a major role in it as well)
-Keep patching and try to patch the things we give feedback on. Demo mode is not really a major thing to implement as opposed to Tank AI and being invinsible to melee. If you cannot find the problem let us know. Its better knowing than not we wont give you crap about it.
-In my opinion dont give us SDK. I want to play your content instead of user based content and although it worked great in RO I want to see what you guys can make.

I know its business and its nothing personal because I do it also at my job but you have to bend backwards for customers when they ask for things in this economy. We are only trying to help.

 

[MarioBava]

I do.... it did it's thing, my total hours spent playing RO:Ost is 68 hours, Since RO2 came out, I have played 71 hours.

An additional 35 hours in the Beta.

And it hasn't even been that long since RO2 came out.

I'm not speaking for anybody else but myself..... but I wasn't such an RO1 fan as most in here and I'm glad RO2 came along and took RO and made it better. I tried to play RO1 as much as possible, but it was just lacking something I missed from the mod. I can't even put my finger on exactly what it is in RO2 that reminds me so much of the Mod, as there's so many things.... but with better graphics, more immersion, improved movement.... and on and on.

I basically gave RO1 a pass and started looking forward to RO2.

Rep me down all anybody wants, I don't care, cuz I actually enjoy the game and I actually feel it's an improvement with piles more content to be stuffed into it as time goes on.

I don't see how people could rep you down for an honest and polite post like this, but they did. I'm kind of sad for the community (here comes rep down for me, too...).

I also really like RO2. I loved RO1 to death. I mean that almost literally. It embodied the things I liked about the typical "tactical" playstyles grafted onto other games by modders and clans, without any of the arbitrarily unrealistic crap like "thou shalt not sprint, EVER" or "If ye pull the trigger, thine eye shall have been GLUED to your iron sights, lest ye be banned"...at least without most of it. I played it until it died for me and I felt its limitations and yearned for a sequel. By that time, I have to be honest, I was a little underwhelmed with DH, and it couldn't console me. But not very many games can truly hold my attention for as long as RO1 did. I think RO2 is going to be one of them.

 

[Nezzer]

Basically, my big fight here is weapon handling and player movement, both of which are -much- more realistic than ROOST ever was, and I think many people will appreciate the new mechanics when we get some non-urban maps.

I'm not saying the game itself is arcadey, but a lot of its features are.

-The game doesn't take into account the weight of each weapon, so every weapon, from a pistol to and AT rifle can be moved around your screen at the same speed. For heavier weapons there should be a delay similar to the tank cannon delay as they are not easy to handle.

-Sway is fine, we could have a little bit more though. What is not fine is that sway doesn't suffer any significant impact from stamina, suppression and wounds. You can also exploit the stabilization feature and have zero sway for as long as you want by holding and releasing shift periodically.

-Reloading/bolting speeds suffer too much effect from weapon progress, letting you reload your belt-fed MG-34 in 4 seconds. Switching weapons is also too fast

-ADS speed would be fine if you are standing still, but when you are sprinting, jogging or prone it takes a lot more time to shoulder your weapon IRL

-The main problem with player movement is lack of inertia. You can turn 180

 

[Dr.Phibes]

Right now its just the same guys playing on the same servers. I hardly see anybody new and although I've made friends with some great guys and I enjoy playing with them above and beyond to hell and back and I wouldn't trade it for anything in my RO2 career I feel as though more marketing is needed to get some new players would be a smart thing.

-40 bucks for this game is a great price. 10% off would be good also.
-Free weekened of gameplay would be chill.
-Double Exp but only for new comers. Yes I said it but limit it to like Honor 40 so they atleast have to grind to Veteran. I know many will disagree with this but right about everyone is high level (bot servers play a major role in it as well)
-Keep patching and try to patch the things we give feedback on. Demo mode is not really a major thing to implement as opposed to Tank AI and being invinsible to melee. If you cannot find the problem let us know. Its better knowing than not we wont give you crap about it.
-In my opinion dont give us SDK. I want to play your content instead of user based content and although it worked great in RO I want to see what you guys can make.

I know its business and its nothing personal because I do it also at my job but you have to bend backwards for customers when they ask for things in this economy. We are only trying to help.

A retail release in Germany would help too. But that's what you get for doing business with Morphicon/Petergames, bad 1C

 

[Beefmaker]

Havent read the entire thread but wanted to throw in my 2 cents to the whole declining playerbase and BF3 thing.

I stopped playing a few weeks ago and have not even a passing interest in BF3. I went back to Ostfront and will be back once a mod comes out that turns RO2 into Ostfront HD + bullet penetration.