Forum Rules

  • Items changed, or highlighted for future attention, on 20 July 2013 are highlighted in yellow.
Global Rules
  • Forum moderators may or may not be Tripwire Interactive staff members, but either way, please respect them, as they are the authority of the forums. Speaking to them with intentional spite will not be tolerated and may result in the loss of your forum privileges.
  • Any decisions made by any member of staff or moderator are final and not subject to discussion. Doing so may result in a ban from the site. The owners of Tripwire Interactive Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason, as well as to remove access to the forums for any individuals with or without warning for breaches of the rules.
  • If you have a complaint regarding another user, PM the appropriate moderators, or if you have an administrative issue, [RO]schneidzekk.
General Behaviour
  • Use the search function before posting. Chances are your question has already been answered.
  • Use a title that describes the content of your post. Don't use all caps or special characters to draw attention either in the title or the body of the post.
  • Up to 10 emoticons are allowed in a post
  • Political discussions are prohibited.
  • Flaming - We do not tolerate abusive, malicious, personal attacks. You will be banned if you persist in this behavior.
  • Trolls - Anyone deliberately antagonizing other forum users by posting 'flame bait' type messages is not welcome. You will be banned (possibly without warning depending on the severity of the issue) if you persist in this behavior.
  • Personal insults (directed at anyone) will result in a ban. If the behavior is not corrected, it will be made more permanent.
  • Constructive criticism is welcome. However keep in mind we (and other forums goers) may not agree with you. If you can't keep the conversation civil, you will be removed from the forums.
  • The use of hyperbole, one liners, and images as part of a forum debate is likely to get you infracted. You have many ways to participate and be a constructive part of this community, even when you disagree.
  • To make the highlighted bits above 100% clear to everyone, the following WILL NOT BE TOLERATED:
    1. Personal attacks, insults, antagonism of any forum-goers, moderators or Tripwire Interactive staff.
    2. Breaches of confidentiality and privacy of any sort.
    3. Any form of racism, bigotry or attacks on race, creed or color.
    4. Linking to posts on other forums related to ANY of the above, whether you are the originator or not, without exception.
  • There has been too much in the way of abhorrent personal behaviors in the past. These will cease. It doesn't matter who started it or who reacted to it - it will all result in moderator action. If you have to indulge your hatreds, for whatever reason, go do it elsewhere - and do not try and drag our forum-goers over to enjoy your hatreds.
  • We understand that people have strong feelings about our games, what we do for a living and how we respond (or don't) to comments on the forums. We all aren't going to agree about everything. So, BE CIVIL in your disagreements!
  • DO NOT Transmit any message, information, data, text, software or graphic files, or other materials ("Content") that is unlawful (including illegal drug usage), harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful or racially, ethnically, sexually or otherwise objectionable. This includes publicizing private information, such as individual's real names, IP addresses and anything else that might be used to identify them to the freakier members of the internet. This also means you may NOT publically share private communications (PM, email or anything else) without the original poster's permission.
  • DO NOT Post or transmit any Content that contains a virus, Trojan horse or other mischievous Content.
  • DO NOT Post or transmit any unsolicited advertising, promotional materials, "junk mail", "spam", "chain letters", "pyramid schemes" or any other form of solicitation.
  • DO NOT link to posts on any other forums, or any other form of media, that breaches our rules. It will be treated just the same as if you had posted it here.
  • DO NOT Double Post, cross Post or restart closed threads.
  • DO NOT Intentionally or unintentionally violate any applicable local, state, national or international law, rule or regulation.
  • DO NOT Upload or transmit any Content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights ("Rights") of any party.
  • DO NOT complain about being banned from a server and DO NOT complain about other players on servers - that is between you and the admin, no need to get the community involved.
Username, Avatar and Signature Rules
  • Multiple registrations result in a ban.
  • No offensive user names
  • Avatars:
    Avatars are disabled.
  • All signatures should not exceed the following size limits, you can have both text and images
  • - For text signatures: 4 lines normal size, 8 lines small size and up to 100 chars per line. Font sizes above 2 are not allowed. (Blank lines count as lines.)
  • - For images in signatures: 1 image up to 400 pixels wide, 150 pixels tall and 100kb in size plus 2 lines normal size text and up to 100 chars per line
Netiquette: Written text has no inflection, and, as such, you should be careful how you write your messages as interpretation will vary from person to person. Please take advantage of the built-in emoticons to add such expression to your words. Please remember the golden rule: to treat other forum users the way you would like to be treated. Please use common courtesy, and enjoy using Red Orchestra's forums
Offensive material
The following is a list of some things that MAY be considered "offensive" by the moderators and the team. This is NOT an exclusive list and it does depend very much on context.

Crossing the line into "offensive" territory is likely to get you asked to change your name, sig or avatar or to withdraw/delete posts. This will be done politely by the moderators. If you refuse to comply further action WILL be taken once started, ultimately leading to banning from the forums.

A key point: please attempt to use your brains. What is mild humour to you may well be deeply offensive to others. While we have no intention of acting as politically-correct "thought police", we are on the lookout for those things that can cause offense and, in some cases, are actually still illegal in some jurisdictions.
  1. Names recalling notorious war criminals or personalities.
  2. Names recalling atrocities and war crimes in general, or units with particularly odious histories.
  3. Use of obscenities and expletives.
  4. Blatant racism, mysogynism or many other "ism"s.
  5. Use of symbolism and regalia recalling Nazism or Fascism; this does not include pics of soldiers who happen to have such symbols on their uniform, unless we feel this has been done to provoke. Please note that many Nazi symbols (including the Swastika) are still illegal in Germany and other countries and considered deeply offensive by many Europeans.
  6. Use of symbolism and regalia recalling Stalinism.
  7. On both the previous two, the moderators' views on the intention and impact of use of such symbols will be final - not yours. Please be understanding if you are advised to change something.
  8. In general, if a sig/avatar represents your allegiances in-game and is clearly "in part", it is likely to be fine; if the moderators feel you are trying to demonstrate unpalatable political allegiances, or to use it in an attempt to ridicule or provoke others you WILL be asked to change it. RO is NOT the place to make any extremist political statements of any kind.
So people get the idea, some examples that would be considered offensive, numbered as above:
  1. "Hitler", "Beria"
  2. "NKVD Blocking Detachment", "Einsatzgruppen"
  3. This one should be pretty obvious...
  4. So should this - and it includes calling all Germans "Nazis" and all Soviets/Russians "Commies". It got boring 50 years ago, so stop it.
  5. Use of swastikas, fasces, SS-runes and so on for the Axis.
  6. There is actually very little overt symbolism from the Stalinist era; the hammer-and-sickle isn't offensive per se.
A simple rule-of-thumb: many Europeans find Nazi symbolism of any sort offensive; many Americans still find Soviet symbolism offensive. Engage your brain before using.

Final Note: this is NOT open to debate, so please do NOT start whining and moaning if a moderator asks you to change something. They will advise at first, giving reasons, then, if you take no notice, they will step up the pressure through to banning.
See more
See less

If there is ever another RO game

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Falkenhorst View Post
    Remember RO is a niche game. It will not compete with the bigger names and will not attract players from them. RO is a game for people looking for a realistic WWII FPS without any gimmicks.

    Things that don't belong:

    1. Unlocks
    2. Battle chatter
    3. Voices that are in anything other than German or Russian.
    4. Moral systems
    5. Prototype weapons
    6. Different game types. RO only needs one.

    Stick to what made the mod and RO:O great. Full ballistics model, realistic damage, iron sights, free-aim, weapon handling, movement speeds, large open maps and vehicles.
    Oh please tell me, what is wrong with different game modes and battle chatter?


    • #17
      Ro1 didnt needed 1000 of different gameplaytypes, when i played it for the first time it was hard compared to other shooters. But I have improved and earned some skills during time of playing this game. Adding 1000 of different gameplaytypes splits up the small community. Ro needs only one gameplaytype !
      Battle Chatters sounds ridiculous arcadsish. I hate how childish it sounds, it doesnt implement battlefieldfeeling.


      • #18
        Originally posted by Extremity View Post
        Wait OP are you implying that since RO1 is a niche game that it should remain that way?

        That they shouldn't expand and implement new features, systems, and gamemodes that will attract more crowds of people?
        Yes, because they can't attract the mainstream to RO anyway, all they can do by attempting that is drive away the RO fans.

        RO is simply never going to work as a mainstream game, it offers the mainstream nothing they want that they aren't already getting elswhere, by games that does it even better and on much larger budgets.

        RO will never be a contender, even if they sell out the title 100% and make it about Americans fighting Terrorists in a modern warfare setting, which is what the mainstream thinks is "cool" right now, even then, they woulden't have a snowball's chance in hell.

        Others already tried that, like MoH:Tier1 and Homefront, and what happened to those games?

        When it comes to arcade military shooters, there is no competing with CoD or BF, those games are not just the most popular, they have become institutions, just like WOW did for the MMO scene, and CS once did for the modding scene, and nothing can hope to compete with that, absolutely nothing, bigger and richer companies than TWI have tried and failed (that includes EA! They poured hundreds of millions into MoH:Tier1, and it failed!), and they did so with games that were far better suited to the attempt than RO would ever be.

        You want to succeed with a military shooter today? Then you have to aim it at the players who do not play CoD and/or BF, you have to go to the niches, just like RO used to do, and the "Realism" niche is probably the biggest niche they can aim the game at (it's both reasonably big, and is most certainly not getting what it wants from CoD and BF), and above all, you need to offer something unique that the niche wants.

        It'll never become a cash-cow like CoD when you aim at a niche, but you will make money, whereas if you try to fish from the same lake as CoD and BF, you'll just get raped by them.

        That's not to say TWI can't or shoulden't try to expand and make money on more mainstream titles, afterall it's good to have a cash-cow to keep the company funded, it will not only make you money but also give you the financial freedom to make more risky or low-yield games that you are passionate about making, but RO is not the cash-cow and never will be, KF is, and possibly they will a new IP aswell down the line, RO is the one they should make because they care.

        And if TWI nolonger cares enough to make a good RO game if it doesen't make them rich, then they should stop making RO games and just continue making mainstream bubblegum titles.


        • #19
          Originally posted by Cpt-Praxius View Post
          Well that's your opinion.
          Falkenhorst would give you reps for life if I only could (not that these stupid symbols even matter at all, it's more of a metaphor for one's benevolence)

          Cpt-Praxius I really don't mean to offend and I have always admired your very noble, clever, compelling and exceptional asseverations in your posts. But the fact that so many people have made you red just SEEM to show how parasitic are your objections. Not saying that are wrong beacuse everyone has their own opinion as you've said but just extremely antagonistic to us "the more tactical than arcadish proponents" even though bizarrely you've been RO player or even RO mod player just as we were. It feels like as if you were one of those internet soldiers that are paid to defend at all cost the influential people's side with well elaborated statements.
          I don't know if that's truth or not, but one thing I know that the reputation is made by the "real" people.

          ^^^^ Very well made post Grobut. Just 100% truth. TWI has made a huge mistake, and now they're just simmering in their own fallacy.
          Last edited by Kashash; 04-26-2012, 07:18 PM.


          • #20
            Games like RO should try to show COD/BF players what they're missing out on, but not sacrifice anything gameplay-wise towards that end. I don't think people are necessarily born realism fans, its something you acquire after getting bored of other games. For me it is anyway, I mean I came from a HL mod (cs/tfc/DoD)/COD UO background myself and don't really have much interest in realism games beyond Red Orchestra.

            I think you should tempt players from other games but do it in a classy way. Getting people to at least try the game type is important though so I don't see a problem with at least offering similar sorts of things as games people are used to nowadays. You can do that without sacrificing too much in the gameplay department at all, but things like audio, graphics, unlocks, progression, game modes are fine imo depending on the implementation. Not everyone may like it, but you should at least make the attempt to get people to try something new, and the ones who do like it will be hooked and be on board for future games too. Theres nothing wrong with turning people away if its not for them..getting them to try it is all thats important and to offer a unique experience to the ones who do

            Niche doesn't mean "small" to me, its like having a unique selling point. RO is about accessible tactical realism, and thats what they should offer and nothing more. If they nail that and then advertise it as such, while showing whats cool about the game style and not being disingenuous about it all then they would do well imo. RO2 focussed a bit too much on gimmicks and trying to blend into the mainstream FPS market with weaker gameplay, when their USP should have been what people were actually interested in them for in the first place: setting themselves apart from other companies in not only their gameplay but in their approach to customers. If they wanted to make a mainstream shooter then they should never have experimented in that way with a name like RO
            Last edited by melipone; 04-26-2012, 10:25 PM.


            • #21
              Originally posted by ropeadope View Post
              If there is ever another RO game developed by TWI, I will wait at least 6 months after release until purchasing.

              i've only played 12 hours since launch and its just now getting better with the release of classic mode; would not have missed anything if i had waited.

              in fact i'll probably wait 9-12months and pick it up for 75% off during a steam sale


              • #22
                Really dude you hyped the game and then your not satisfied with what you get, on the other hand most of the people that now complain about gameplay are the same guys that spam a few month ago the forums with "when the game is coming out" threads! Dont get me wrong, I hyped the game too, and it
                Playing HOS as "Lizard-King"


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Falkenhorst View Post
                  1. Unlocks
                  2. Battle chatter
                  3. Voices that are in anything other than German or Russian.
                  4. Moral systems
                  5. Prototype weapons
                  6. Different game types. RO only needs one.
                  Bolded things I disagree with. Reasons to follow.

                  Character Unlocks/Morale - The hero system was a good idea, but it wasn't followed through. The stat improvements were okay I guess, but I was mostly excited for the prospect of some badass-looking dude herding around his squad of new players, which would've been awesome to see and really boosted the immersion RO was known for. Heroes don't look half as impressive as I expected and all the other levels are identical but for the amount of mud on their uniforms. Maybe if frontline soldiers had unbuttoned collars, rolled sleeves, looked a bit scruffy, etc., then go from there, it'd work. When TWI announced visually distinct soldiers the first thing I imagined was the protagonists of Stalingrad, not guys turned out for parade, or turned out for parade but got crash tackled into a puddle of mud on the way.

                  Weapon unlocks - I'm on the fence. I would've liked to see perhaps some cosmetic unlocks that make sense - no winter trigger guards magically installed during the encirclement, for instance. Maybe even some weapons; the PPD-40 was rare, but nowhere near as astronomically unlikely to be seen by ordinary troops as the current 'rare' weapons. The MG 42 was beginning to appear too towards the end of the battle.

                  Gametypes - If you mean levels of realism, then yes, I agree. One is enough. If you meant actual gametypes though, I think CD was and still is great and I wish more servers ran it. I think there was plenty of potential for interesting new modes of play or at the very least new takes on the traditional take-and-hold gametype, but none of them were particularly well realised and the existing Territory gameplay felt flawed because of poorly designed capzone location and cap order as well as lockdown.

                  To address the rest of your points, battle chatter was pretty immersive and I feel it could've added a lot if it was done better. As it is in most games, I am strongly against battle chatter as it gives away my position and I can't control it. If I had the option to keep my avatar mute, or to only speak when within x world units of friendlies and no enemies within y distance, I would be much happier. Immersion is nice, but not when it comes at the expense of gameplay. The fact that the default voice acting was done in goofily-accented English made it a lot less appealing, too. English voice acting should have been an option at the very most, and certainly not the default gametype. It takes all of two seconds to read the translation for voice commands in RO1 and after enough time playing, you come to recognise phrases and even specific words so you no longer need to read. Having the voices default to English was a poor move, and having the native language option promised before launch still missing from the actual retail game was an even worse one. It ruins the atmosphere of the game and makes me feel like I'm playing CoD singleplayer or an extra in some C-grade WWII flick.

                  Speaking of C-grade WWII flicks, having prototype weapons that were seldom seen at the front in the game is one thing, but having anachronistic weapon variants - or ones that did not even exist - is another. I could fill several threads just on my own if I was to point out every historical inaccuracy in the game; incorrect markings, the refurb SVT plum bolt, the way the PU reticle is centred at 100m, the list goes on... but that's just minor stuff that even sperglords like me can ignore. A rare 1941 rifle carrying a 1943 scope on a 1944 mount designed for another rifle entirely and mounted so far forwards it would not work as a scope at all, all in a game set in 8/42-2/43, is another entirely. It smacks of simply inventing weapons for the sake of either having more shiny unlocks or trying to balance weapon-for-weapon (which is shot down by the MG 34's clear supremacy over the DP anyway) rather than overall give-and-take.

                  I was okay with the prototype weapons at first, but now I find myself strongly against them. I won't argue my points here, but I simply believe as someone very much into the Eastern Front that none of them make sense in the context of Stalingrad or of the game itself, and better choices would've been the MG 42 and infantry-adapted DT-28, for instance.

                  e/ Welp, post was a lot longer than I intended, but oh well.
                  Current name ingame - [COLOR=LightBlue][B]killallmkb42s.exe[/B][/COLOR]