Maybe a more positive view.

[{Core}Steven]

Lot of different posts floating around here with peoples views on RO2, so I thought I would post mine (since I feel I have been playing RO2 long enough to give this justice).

I remember when Ostfront first came out, and there was some uproar from the "veteran community" that said Ostfront was too fast paced / arcade like and destroyed what RO was all about. Roll forward a few months from that, and I would say most guys were converted to the way Ostfront was playing.
The reality was, as much as the game was changed, Ostfront was a superior game to the mod in almost every way, but it just took as some time to adjust.

Onto RO2, I suspect we could be in for the same journey. Yeah there are a lot of changes, but the game IS still RO. It's not an arcade game, and when playing it still feels how RO should feel.

There have been lots of things posted here about issues in the game and how it affects the players.
Rather than repeating that, there is a couple things from my own experience I want to share.

Stats:

I don't mind the stats system so much. I sometimes get the feeling the default response to "levelling up" etc is that is something veterans shouldnt like and that it ruins RO. The reality is, its a bit of fun to keep record of how you have been doing in the game.

Too much semi / SMG:

Not found this to be a problem. I think most of the maps an experience bolter can rack up the kills. If you have a bolt on run into a building filled with enemy SMG, you gotta expect you are not going to win every time

Maps:

Most of the maps are fun to play, but I asked myelf if I could really see myself playing these same maps in 4 years time (like I did with many of the Ostfront maps). At the moment, I would say unlikely.

Thats my view so far anyway. Most bugs that stopped me from playing got fixed relatively quickly, and yeah there some things I would like to see changed, but I am sure it will all be sorted sooner than later.

And as for alarming player drops, just wait until the new FPS games on the market get played for a few weeks. What usually happens (and has done since I started playing RO) is that the players get quickly bored and come back to RO.

Bolt rifles > Heatseeking SMG's

 

[Poerisija]

There are some issues - none gamebreaking, none too difficult to fix with adjustments to already present mechanics. I don't get all the uproar here. It's disheartening to see so many people unable to see past 1-2 next weeks and instant gratification.

 

[Nazarov]

My play time has been reduced to may be an hour in 2 weeks.
I think 2 weeks are enough time for me to forget why I prefer to play RO over RO2.
Better maps may help the game a bit, but I'm not sure.
I made a vow never to be Soviet or use non-bolt action rifle, and I still find it troubling to see so many semi's and auto's.

 

[Poerisija]

Nazarov

Do you still play RO1 now? And how many hours a week?

 

[Nazarov]

Poerisija,

Yes. I play 3-4 times a week when I have time. Usually 2 or more hours per session, again depending on how much time I have.

 

[Das Bose]

Lot of interesting stuff...Snip

Bolt rifles > Heatseeking SMG's

Now this sounds far more like the game I have been enjoying than the picture painted by some of the " others " in the forum.

Thanks for posting

 

[defektive]

Stats:

I don't mind the stats system so much. I sometimes get the feeling the default response to "levelling up" etc is that is something veterans shouldnt like and that it ruins RO. The reality is, its a bit of fun to keep record of how you have been doing in the game.

Becoming 10/30% better than someone who hasn't played the game as much as you, in addition to your already better game-play experience and game knowledge, is very far removed from being merely 'a bit of fun'. It's a very real performance boost that experienced players neither want nor need.

 

[Gudenrath]

It's a very real performance boost that experienced players neither want nor need.

Speak for yourself

 

[defektive]

Speak for yourself

I see the smilie, but I hope you mean it.

 

[Zetsumei]

I don't care much for realism. But the balance seems lost for me.

I'm primarily a rifleman, and atm the rifle is just a bastards child the semis and even assault rifles are better in pretty much every way. Including fighting at range.

I have no issues with unlocks and weapon upgrades, but I do have issues with straight stat padding upgrades. If things would have been such that every advantage got a disadvantage then I would probably like it.

But overall the main thing is a change in game play that I didn't like. In long range combat there are no longer any firefights, its just people dropping dead without seeing who killed who. And in short range there is no need to beware of getting ready before entering through a door.

 

[Poerisija]

Again, a tester complaining. How could you be so blind to miss all these features you're now complaining about in the closed beta test is something that eludes me.

That was when was your chance to make a difference.

 

[Oldih]

Ever thought about the problem being that testers made holywallofposts\threads to complain about such issues yet TWI turned blind eye for reason or another?

 

[Apos]

Again, a tester complaining. How could you be so blind to miss all these features you're now complaining about in the closed beta test is something that eludes me.

That was when was your chance to make a difference.

Stats/Player progression/Unlocks/AVT and MKB wasn't introduced in close beta phase so we couldn't test/make opinion on them (but AFAIR RO:O players wasn't happy when they first heard about them).
Fact is: TWI introduced one of most unfair player progression systems ever made for PvP FPS game. It worked for Killing Floor or any other PvE game, but here it's something that scares away new potential customers.

SMG/Semi problem - reported to TWI, they reduced number of available Assaults a bit, but number of Semi/Automatic weapons is still around 75% of total player count, which is obviously wrong.

Maps - It's really hard to judge all 10 maps when you have available only few of them and most of time you spend looking for bugs or testing stuff, etc.
Fact: these feel really small comparing to RO:O, Darkest Hour or even BF series, however I believe when TWI release APCs, (way) bigger and open maps will be added to the game.

thread: I generally agree with Zetsumei (again!).
Currently bolts are in minority and due game and maps design these suffer most. PPsH/MP40 player can easily kill you from any range, so only pros of bolt players doesn't exist in RO2.
Unlocks, I don't care (much) I just need an option to chose unlocked stuff or not and attach/detach my bayo during play, however option to play w/o them (unlocks) would be also great.

 

[Zetsumei]

Again... complaining...

I just try to give feedback, on my personal opinions in a civilized way. Steven likes the game and gives his opinion on some points, similarly I gave my opinion on some points. If everybody where to agree with each other there wouldn't be any discussions going on.

 

[monster]

What amazes me is that there is no concern about the ability to see enemy positions.

Sad state of online gaming, or just a missed detail?

 

[radix]

How about inertia from RO:OST/MOD?

IIRC sometime in the history of RO (MOD/OST cant remember) the inertia was introduced whit nice feedback from the community. For the new players was a little bit strange at the begining but was quite "natural" and the new players were accomodating fast.

In RO2 it seemsthat inertia is not existing (or just my impression) or is just tunned down.

EDIT: I've played some rounds as MG Rambo style and I was embarresed by the ammount of kills I've made. I was sorry for the guys playing against me and I was expecting any moment someone to yell at me "WTF are you doing rambo". I'll never touch MG again, I prommise. Back to my trusty rifle.

 

[Mekhazzio]

Becoming 10/30% better than someone who hasn't played the game as much as you...

30% better? Come on, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. The experience bonuses don't give you more health and they don't make you deal more damage. They don't make you run faster, they don't make you see farther, and they don't make you a smaller target. In short, they don't do anything that would affect the outcome of virtually any encounter in the game.

But overall the main thing is a change in game play that I didn't like. In long range combat there are no longer any firefights, its just people dropping dead without seeing who killed who.

Wait, what? You actually played RO1, right? This is absolutely nothing new. You poke your head out anywhere around the combat area in RO1 and you'll get it shot off in about a second. The bolt actions were just as pinpoint precise as they are in RO2, and that's why 3/4ths or more of the players were using them on most maps. See target, shoot at target, target dies. I don't know what game you were playing where people fired at random just for the fun of putting rounds down range, but in RO1, doing that would give your position away and get you dead very quickly.

 

[DesiQ]

30% better? Come on, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. The experience bonuses don't give you more health and they don't make you deal more damage. They don't make you run faster, they don't make you see farther, and they don't make you a smaller target. In short, they don't do anything that would affect the outcome of virtually any encounter in the game.

I see you haven't even looked at the character progression screen.

Run faster? Check. See farther? If you count 'weapon focus', then check. More stamina, and more resistance to draining stamina? Check. Resist suppression? You betcha.

This is ignoring the weapon bonuses that do affect melee damage and increase damage output, in the form of reduced recoil and better handling and reload speed.

Aw hell, I'll include weapons too, just to show you how spectacularly wrong you are.

Less recoil, faster reload, faster shouldering, less sway. Nope, not gonna change the outcome of an encounter at all. Nothing to see here, folks! These bonuses improve your attributes and lessen your penalties by a maximum of 30%, but hey, there's nothing wrong with that! It's not gonna change the outcome of a >300m shootout if a guy has 30% less sight sway than you do, and is less prone to suppression than you are, right?

 

[Nazarov]

how could there be sway reduction when already there is almost no sway?

 

[DesiQ]

how could there be sway reduction when already there is almost no sway?

There will be even less sway. I was bugged onto Rank 99 shortly after the Beta, and the rifle sight swayed within about a centimeter on the screen. They've increased sway since then (I think), so it may be more now.

If you think about it, having so little sway is a good thing, since there's not too large a gap between high and low ranks; if lower ranks had Ostfront sway, and higher ranks had RO2 sway, then it would just be a scenario of the rich getting richer.

In fact, the only thing that's saving this game from complete imbalance thanks to the stat improvement system is the size of the maps. At ranges of 50-100m, sway and recoil don't terribly factor into it. It's a negligible part of combat; a noob can still make a hit at Rank 10 with level 0 weapons at 50-100m. It's when we start seeing larger RO1-style maps that the system will really suffer. As I said above, at ranges greater than 300m (and RO2 weapons are capable of such ranges), that 10-30% of sway and recoil reduction and so on are going to factor a lot heavier into battles.