Resistance and Liberation Alpha - Patch OUT!

[KrazyKraut]

I think the RnL devs have simply noticed that there are too many limitations in a shooter engine to make a "simulator".

So either work on the engine for months possibly without any results to please a part of an already small community or design a game that is more within the scope of what the engine was built for in the first place.

 

[Murphy]

The alpha was alright for an alpha, wasn't it?
If they did nothing but to polish it and iron out the bugs and implement the rest of the weapons it would have been a solid game already.
More is welcome, but judging by the quality of the alpha I would have never guessed that the engine is simply unsuited for a realistic game. Maybe it's different for vehicles, but the infantry combat was pretty good already.

 

[DraKon2k]

"We want RnL to be an effective realistic infantry combat simulator".

They already said that this might be misinforming and they also always during development updates told the community that a realism simulation is getting more and more impossible to do(both in terms of the game actually being fun and about engine limitations).

And again if you say that everybody dislikes the slightly different approach(or as you seem to see it: making it uber arcade dodsliek lolz), it just isn't true. Just because a group of maybe 5(max 10) people start 80 threads that doesn't change anything. There's even a poll about manual bolting which is 50%-50% even. And after all YOU STILL DID NOT PLAY IT. And other than those 5-10 people nobody is really complaining(sure some ppl are like meh i would've liked that but ok i'll give it a fair try). Plus the fact that most of the complainers all registered early to mid 2008 whereas the core community has been there much longer, so again don't act as if YOU were part of the big big ultra-realism, only speak for yourself and not for everybody. And looking at it that way, yes it is an opinion.

 

[KrazyKraut]

A simulator (as advertised) is something different than what was shown in the alpha (at least in my book).

So far it seems they ARE concentrating on bugfixing and polishing, so I don't really see any issue. If some go completely nuts on how working the bolt is implemented that's their problem. Both ways are equally realistic or unrealistic.

 

[D3terioNation]

Wasnt this game created FOR realism fans?

 

[DraKon2k]

Wasnt this game created FOR realism fans?

Yes and it still is. Problem is that people think just because they tweak manual bolting the game will now become UT.

 

[D3terioNation]

What I mean is, this game doesnt really offer anything new to us realism fans. And to most of us, manual bolting is a total must!

By removing it and by comments made by the devs, are these people trying to attract DOD players (who may have tried RO for example) but who are not used to this manual bolting malarky..?

If I were them I'd remove the 2 stage IS. Totally pointless IMO and adds to the clunkiness of the game. But thats another story..

Im just saying that they are LOSING realism fans by removing MB!

 

[Murphy]

A simulator (as advertised) is something different than what was shown in the alpha (at least in my book)

I never ever thought RnL was going to be a "simulator".

What I thought was that it was going to be hard-core, slow-paced and as realistic as possible without leaving the genre.

Some call that simulator already. Those people would probably call RO a simulator too. Occasionally I do too if in a conversation "simulator" is used as a synonym for "very realistic videogame", however I am aware of what a simulator really is. Something that simulates something so you can train using the real thing by using the simulator, or try how something would behave without trying it with the real thing.
A game like RO or RnL is a very, very sloppy simulator at best and I never suffered any illusions that RnL would become a "simulator". To be honest, I wouldn't even be interested in it all that much if I thought it would.

Some quotes (not the one that caused the most recent ruccus) seemed to indicate that the devs weren't even even interested in making a hard-core, realistic game because they already started to cater for fans of regular shooters by simplifying the manual bolting.

Problem is that people think just because they tweak manual bolting the game will now become UT.

What you think about the efficiency of their new bolting is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the old method worked perfectly fine (minus the bugs) and there was no reason to change it. The new one might work equally fine in some people's opinions but there was no necessity to use it instead of the old one IF the devs really planned to make a hard-core shooter and did NOT care about alienating the faster shooter loving crowd. THAT's what's worrying about that feature. Not the feature itself.

Which is why no one posted "OMG! It's becoming UT lulz!" but "OMG! They are catering for the DoD:S (or any other faster paced shooter for that matter) crowd!"..

 

[KrazyKraut]

What you think about the efficiency of their new bolting is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the old method worked perfectly fine (minus the bugs) and there was no reason to change it. The new one might work equally fine in some people's opinions but there was no necessity to use it instead of the old one IF the devs really planned to make a hard-core shooter and did NOT care about alienating the faster shooter loving crowd. THAT's what's worrying about that feature. Not the feature itself.

What you think about the efficiency of their old bolting is equally irrelevant. What is relevant, is the fact that the new system isn't more or less realistic than the old one, it's just different. Just like some games make you press and hold the right mouse button for iron sights, not my favourite, but it's not more or less realistic.

Not every change has to come out of necessity, it can come out of choice. If you (and I don't necessarily mean you, Murphy, by this) want a western front clone of RO plus maybe some new features, you might want to bet your money on DH.

 

[Murphy]

What you think about the efficiency of their old bolting is equally irrelevant.

It is, but since you don't seem to get the meaning of irrelevant I'll throw my opinion of the new one into the mix too.

What is relevant, is the fact that the new system isn't more or less realistic than the old one, it's just different. Just like some games make you press and hold the right mouse button for iron sights, not my favourite, but it's not more or less realistic.

It may not be more realistic, but it is more logical. You want to initiate an action, you press a button to do it. In the new method you have to press a button in order to NOT do something.
That's counterintuitive nonsense.
It also isn't as realistic! Granted the issue is only a small part of the game, and the difference in realism is pretty small, but as I said before, that's not what is worrying about the feature! Anyway, here is the reasoning why it isn't even as realistic:
Bolting IS a seperate action. If you fire a gun, it does not automatically bolt. You have to do that yourself. If you do eventually get so used to it that you do it automatically, good for you (or not). Just like people in RO often simply double-click without thinking about it anymore. Apart from the movement involved (clicking vs bolting) that's 100% realistic.

(it could be better, by using a different button to bolt so you could empty your rifle without fireing, but we are only talking about "clicking to bolt" vs "holding to not bolt" here)

Also, how a game feels is also an important part of how realistic you think it is while playing it. Tell me: Does it feel more realistic/immersive if you have to press "bolt" to bolt, or does it feel more realistic if you have to hold "fire" in order to NOT bolt? Be honest!

Whether iron-sights toggle or not is a completely different story! You can think of it as applying force in raising it and letting go to lower it (non-toggle) or you can think of it as deciding to raise and deciding to lower it (toggle). There is no difference in realism what-so-ever.

 

[TrOOper]

its all just a tempest in a teapot! hard to argue realism about a game....

 

[D3terioNation]

Here we go...

 

[Jaesperson]

got to play it now
gameplay feels really clunky and it crashed first time i tried to start a game, but for an alpha it

 

[KrazyKraut]

It is, but since you don't seem to get the meaning of irrelevant I'll throw my opinion of the new one into the mix too.

Oh boy. Of course, since I show you that your opinion is just as much opinion as DraKon's I of course don't "get it". And you can add as many s to your posts as you want it doesn't add anything to your crap. But please tell me how you thinking the old system works is more relevant than DraKon thinking the new one works.

It may not be more realistic, but it is more logical. You want to initiate an action, you press a button to do it. In the new method you have to press a button in order to NOT do something.
That's counterintuitive nonsense.

Aha now it's not logical. Whatever. You want to initiate an action you let go of a button. Big deal. Both are actions that have a reaction, l both are controlled by you.

It also isn't as realistic! Granted the issue is only a small part of the game, and the difference in realism is pretty small, but as I said before, that's not what is worrying about the feature! Anyway, here is the reasoning why it isn't even as realistic:
Bolting IS a seperate action. If you fire a gun, it does not automatically bolt. You have to do that yourself. If you do eventually get so used to it that you do it automatically, good for you (or not). Just like people in RO often simply double-click without thinking about it anymore. Apart from the movement involved (clicking vs bolting) that's 100% realistic.

Except four your avatar tells you that you didn't bolt yet when you are in iron sights but not in hipped mode. Very realistic. Also he magically never pulls the trigger on an empty chamber, yep, true realism. 100%.

Also, how a game feels is also an important part of how realistic you think it is while playing it. Tell me: Does it feel more realistic/immersive if you have to press "bolt" to bolt, or does it feel more realistic if you have to hold "fire" in order to NOT bolt? Be honest!

Have you tried it yet? No. Have I? No. So I'm going to make up my mind when I actually see it working. So far though, I feel the new system will actually somehow give credit to the fact that you are supposed to hold the trigger for a few miliseconds after each shot and not rip it like you can do in almost any game. So yeah that "feels" more realistic. Even if only for the bolt-actions.

Here we go once again with a totally pointless debate on one of the most minor features possible.

 

[Murphy]

Oh boy. Of course, since I show you that your opinion is just as much opinion as DraKon's I of course don't "get it".

I said the efficiency of the system is irrelevant! Not that DraKon's opinion of the efficiency is. Of course it is because of that, but that's a side-product, not the main point. Of course my opinion of the efficiency is irrelevant too then, as is the opinion on the efficiency of everyone else... You pointing out secifically that MY opinion of it is irrelevant too and then throwing out your opinion of it, shows me that you, indeed, did NOT "get it".

I think we can all agree that the efficiency of that feature is almost equal to a seperate click for bolting. With both you can prolong the bolting. That's not the point most people critisize it for though.
And in my reasoning it is definately not the point why the feature is a worrying development!

And you can add as many s to your posts as you want it doesn't add anything to your crap.

Yes they do. It expresses the same meesage a real human face would emit if it would roll with its eyes and sigh. I always thought the fact that the smiley is basically a simplified image of a human face made it pretty understandable, but appearantly nothing is sufficiently idiot-proof for, ...

But please tell me how you thinking the old system works is more relevant than DraKon thinking the new one works.

I am pretty sure DraKon and I agree that both systems work.

Aside from that I already posted often enough that our opinions about whether it works or not or whether it's more realistic or not are not important.

Since you posted your opinion about it anyway, I didn't want to let it hang in mid-air and responded to it, as it is common in discussions.

Except four your avatar tells you that you didn't bolt yet when you are in iron sights but not in hipped mode. Very realistic. Also he magically never pulls the trigger on an empty chamber, yep, true realism. 100%.

Did you read this:

(it could be better, by using a different button to bolt so you could empty your rifle without fireing, but we are only talking about "clicking to bolt" vs "holding to not bolt" here)

Because if you did, what you wrote makes no sense at all.




Again, for the cheap seats:
What IS important is that the devs said that they do not care about alienating a majority. They want to make a realistic shooter and if someone can't deal with that, he/she has to play something else.
Statements like that made the mod promising for those waiting for another realistic tactical shooter.
If you read the reasoning for the new system it isn't that it is more realistic or that it works better, but that it is easier and more intuitive to new-comers who are used to other shooters where auto-bolting is in place.

That the devs already change their game to adjust it to the tastes of shooter fans as opposed to fans of realistic shooters is worrying.
It's about the stance of the devs, not about whether or not you have to press or hold a button.

 

[BadKarma]

Again, for the cheap seats:
What IS important is that the devs said that they do not care about alienating a majority. They want to make a realistic shooter and if someone can't deal with that, he/she has to play something else.
Statements like that made the mod promising for those waiting for another realistic tactical shooter.
If you read the reasoning for the new system it isn't that it is more realistic or that it works better, but that it is easier and more intuitive to new-comers who are used to other shooters where auto-bolting is in place.

That the devs already change their game to adjust it to the tastes of shooter fans as opposed to fans of realistic shooters is worrying.
It's about the stance of the devs, not about whether or not you have to press or hold a button.

That sums it up from my point of view.

 

[Switchblade]

I think I have seen enough
you guys just won't stop, here you can go on:
http://www.forum.resistanceandliberation.com/

 

[Yoshiro]

Guys I'm going to talk with the moderator team about re opening this thread. However several of you have been playinng with fire and that won't fly here anymore. No I'm not saying you can't express your opinion. I'm saying you must be cival about it and respect others while you do it. And for the love of god remember that this mod is in alpha stage. That might not mean much to you but to me that means that the feature list is not complete or final, and things are subject to change as the dev team tries new things (sometimes just small tweaks, sometimes scrapping entire systems to try something completly different).

In the stylings of on Gandolf - "Keep it cival, keep it safe!"

 

[Yoshiro]

And we are reopened for business! Remember folks, as one of the largest realism gaming communities around, your CONSTRUCTIVE critism and feedback should be invaluable to the RNL team. So keep it that way.

 

[Switchblade]

ok this thread is open again.

but I want to give some advise.
If you really disagree on something the R&L devs do it is way better to ventilate it on their boards, much more chance it will be read by them.

What I do not want to see here is an endless discussion between 2 or 3 guys giving the same opinion over and over again, if you want to play "is/is'nt" games do it somewhere else.

Respect eachothers opinion

thnx