• 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/

Most Accurate Review So Far.

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
#21
Nenjin said:
And the hardcore realism crowd makes zero concessions to anything other than what they want. Say what you will about everyone else, at least they're willing to try different things and possibly even like them all for different reasons.

I hate to say this, but if TWI were a debate about the national debt....I think I know who the Tea Party would be.
Click to expand...

Sure, if you see the implementation of 'Last Stand' and 'Regenerative Health' as something different.
 
Upvote 0
#22
And this is what I don't get. TWI gives you a body part damage system, which is realistic. They give you ability to bandage minor wounds, which is realistic. And when people get shot, sometimes things go all blurry and they pull the trigger a bunch.

If the body part damage system doesn't do enough: it's a polish point.

If the bandaging system works too well: it's a polish point.

If your accuracy seems too good when you're dying: it's a polish point.

Yet people recast these things into the worst interpretations, with their only guiding ethic being "It wasn't in RO1!"

I mean seriously. It's like RO1 is the Bible and Feature X is a belief that's not contained in the bible. Most of what TWI has tried to do has been an improvement on everything else everyone is doing right now. If that cost them some of their far right-wing realism fans, I like to believe it's because it's the kind of game TWI wanted to make and play....not because it's some cynical drive to transform into "just another major dev studio."

For such a "loyal" fanbase, that's downright insulting to them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BadKarma
Upvote 0
#24
Nenjin said:
And this is what I don't get. TWI gives you a body part damage system, which is realistic. They give you ability to bandage minor wounds, which is realistic. And when people get shot, sometimes things go all blurry and they pull the trigger a bunch.

If the body part damage system doesn't do enough: it's a polish point.

If the bandaging system works too well: it's a polish point.

If your accuracy seems too good when you're dying: it's a polish point.

Yet people recast these things into the worst interpretations, with their only guiding ethic being "It wasn't in RO1!"

I mean seriously. It's like RO1 is the Bible and Feature X is a belief that's not contained in the bible.
Click to expand...

There are many new features in RO2 which I like, such as the cover system and the bullet penetration. But, I just find it ridiculous that the reaction to being shot at a 10m range by a MG34 is to stand there in a drunken stupor and mutter to yourself. All while, of course, being able to aim and fire your weapon.
 
Upvote 0
#25
mo0nbuggy1 said:
Often I will go to metacritic for my reviews, however I only read the user reviews as they are the only trustworthy sources of feedback.

And here is why.

Written by DEnglish Sep 18, 2011
(http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/red-orchestra-2-heroes-of-stalingrad)

Score. 4/10

"The combat is fierce. The avatar weapons are very well done, it feels authentic. Cover and mantling is very good. The maps are detailed, and offer plenty of dramatic play. The fundamental offering of WW2 combat is met, which gives HOW hope for the future. Where HOS falls down is in leaving the realism genre for an arcade offering. More accurately, it tries to straddle the fence, and predictably, slips and nuts itself with a leg on either side. In trying to please both, HOS pleases neither the realism crowd, nor the arcade crowd. HOS incorporates all of the tired features of the successful shooters: recon planes, mini-maps, radar, automatic reloading, leveling, and skill grinding. By doing this, it is competing against the biggest gimmick shooter companies. It will lose. TWI does not have the resources to compete on the disposable game market. Therefore, the arcade shooters attracted by bells and whistles will move on to the next game, leaving RO standing in its present state before the realism audience. This will be a dire moment. An example of one of the gimmicks that are not innovative and that get old quickly is the canned voices. The voices are cute at first, but soon get tedious, as they become the same thing over and over again, or give one away as they are trying to be stealthy. The unintended side effect of canned voices is that players are left unable to communicate effectively about the battlefield. This is an example of a major re playability error. Much more attention should have been given to what players want to say, not what the software is programmed to say. The more a game plays itself, the more disposable it is. The more a game needs to be played, the more it will endear itself to the community that made RO successful. Canned voices is one example of the game being taken away from players. That the game lacks any real historical context is another glaring fault that will affect it's long term chances. The maps start and stop with no contextual background, no information on the units fighting, where they are, or why they are there. There is simply a side start screen, and the map starts. An arbitrary battle that ends in a tired theme song and another canned voice. Modders and map makers will want to tell the story of their contribution. In its present state, HOS is arbitrary in its context, and repetitive in its presentation and conclusion of the map. HOS destroys Fog of War with recon planes and maps showing enemy locations. This type of feature firmly implants HOS in the genre of disposable game. The realism community requires the puzzle of combat, the arcade crowd required targets presented at a fast pace. When the arcade players move on, HOS will stand before the realism faithful as a redundant, self-playing game. There are numerous examples of this effect. HOS should have taken advantage of the void re: realism shooters, and entered the game world defiantly, with a solid, realistic game. Instead of blinking-lights, TWI should have focused on features that would make the game dynamic for years to come: flamethrowers, spreading and persistent fire, in-game hero effects, player placed MG positions (not the forever frozen ones it has now) and any other of a myriad of potential things that the scenario of Stalingrad combat gives. HOS should have stood firm on the requirements of realism shooters. The response to "I don't know where my enemies are" should not be "Here is a radar". It should be "listen to the battle, you will ". It will be very interesting to see where HOS goes from here. The bugs and balance issues will be fixed. What remains to be seen is how the game will rebound from the inevitable disposal it will face, and what the realism faithful will decide to do"

All in all. I think that is easily the best review written so far. Props to DEnglish for telling it how it is.
Click to expand...

the first line of review was most accurate after that it was insane babble. although i agree with some points most of the review is **** and whoever wrote it should be shot
 
  • Like
Reactions: Echo Black and Captain_Chirac
Upvote 0
#28
Wtattearp said:
the first line of review was most accurate after that it was insane babble. although i agree with some points most of the review is **** and whoever wrote it should be shot
Click to expand...



Why because he has an opinion different to yours?
He's not right or wrong, it's just his opinion, which a lot of us share.
So, be more constructive with your feedback or piss off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CrossTrain and -=}WoLvErInE{=-
Upvote 0
#30
Wtattearp said:
the first line of review was most accurate after that it was insane babble. although i agree with some points most of the review is **** and whoever wrote it should be shot
Click to expand...

How so? Explain or your just being a cynical ignorant asshole. Wake the hell up it isn't a sequal it's like a spin off similar set up but not progressive.
 
Upvote 0
#31
The one thing that always intrigued me was that; if the wound is so minor that you can bandage it up in less than 2sec, the obviously its not major enough to warrant bleeding out from.

Is that not true?
Click to expand...

Well, depends on how deeply you want to delve into "realism."

Most people clot when bleeding from minor wounds. The only "minor" kind of gunshot wound is a grazing shot, which is rare. Those don't need bandaging.

Just about any other would, no matter where you get it, it has the potential to cause you to bleed out. ESPECIALLY when you're sprinting across a battlefield, tearing ripped flesh open even more and preventing clotting.

If you've got an actual gunshot would, bandaging will keep you alive. But if a bullet would has larger than a finger-sized exit wound.....you're pretty much dead without medical treatment. A bandage is just prolonging the inevitable so you can get treatment. And by treatment I mean surgery to close the wound, not more bandages.

Now...if you're shot in the leg with a small caliber and it doesn't hit an artery....chances are you wouldn't bleed out from that unless a) you're making the wound worse (which players would be guaranteed to do) and b) the wound never clots and continues to bleed.

So where does this leave game balance? Bandaging just doesn't take enough time, period. The effect from wounds to vital parts (like LEGS for SPRINTING) is not high enough. Way too many wounds cause bleeding that will end you in 8 seconds, but can be fixed in two. IMO more shots should be fatal, period. Whether that's the slow kind of fatal, or the REALLY slow kind of fatal, it doesn't matter. Bleeding out should take longer than it does for wounds but it should maybe even get WORSE over time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Makino and stayBlind
Upvote 0
#32
mo0nbuggy1 said:
Wall of text? Really how old are you, 10?
Click to expand...
First of all it is a wall of text, would of been a lot better if it was well constructed.

mo0nbuggy1 said:
Oh look you even have your system specs on display so everyone can marvel at how incredibly amazing you are.
Click to expand...

The reason people do this is so they don't have to keep posting their specs each time they would need that info up for support. Yes some do it to brag, but it's not right to assume otherwise.
 
Upvote 0
#33
mo0nbuggy1 said:
With a super awesome name like WoLvErInE that doesn't surprise me.
Oh look you even have your system specs on display so everyone can marvel at how incredibly amazing you are.

I think 7 years old is even pushing it for you, mate.
Click to expand...


ok son, did you come up with all of that? or did mommy help you? be honest now little man :rolleyes:.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CrossTrain
Upvote 0
#38
Look, TW wants to make a product to so they can get paid. Yes, they want to sell out. Yes, they want to make a product that is accessible to a load of people. Yes, that's going to put off the first fans. Yes, it's somewhere in the middle. Enjoyable for the moderate. Not the far realist or the far arcadeist.

But wait. They also gave mod tools. They also gave server files. They also gave the gamers total control of how the game will be played.

For the guys who want this game to be something it currently isn't, make it. Make it as real or as fake as possible. Make the maps you want, make the damage models you want, guns, vehicles, trees, chickens, whatever. The tools are there.

Liking a game is subjective and reviews don't mean ****.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu