• 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/

What will we see from RO:HoS at GamesCom 2009?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#161
plazma said:
This is very funny movie.

1. Voices and HUD are taken from ostfront
2. Someone hits you, you hide for a while and you are brand new!
3. You can see where your enemy is when he shoot to you
4. When you are entering after the window you have weapon in your hands
5. No ragdoll
6. Running soldiers looks silly
7. Graphics looks terrible
Click to expand...

1. EARLY ALPHA, DO YOU SPEAK IT?

2. He was bleeding. Slowly. You don't really know the planned features do you?

3. Yeah, I'd agree that that is bad. I'd prefer if there was an audible crack informing me from which direction the round had come, not a HUD.

4. Alpha. No, really, that's a valid excuse for most of the things here.

5. There are rag dolls- I can tell just from looking at some of the still captures. Are you blind?

6. It's Red Orchestra. Hardly known for the animations. But all the animations look beautiful to me, at least in comparison to RO:OST.

7. Alpha. Besides, I think they actually look quite good.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#163
Well, I really don't care for the radar in the bottom right corner... I really don't

Now that I got that out of the way, from what I have seen (early alpha build), I think it looks very promising. I like how they modeled the bipods and the blind firing. The animations look very good too from what I can see. Just about everything else that was described I am impressed with. I look forward to seeing more hopefully in the near future :)
Oh, nice job :D
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#164
I didn't notice the hands in front of the character during the prone/crawl animation with the MG. That is a feature that I like very much in RO. I assume that those animations simply aren't done yet in the Alpha build that we saw, so I can't complain.

I'm not too keen on the radar myself... but as long as it only shows the location of friendly players then it is o.k. I suppose. It could help to reduce friendly fire a bit. I also assume that it can be turned off client-side like the compass in RO.

The sticky-cover system looked nice and easy to use. Not like in some games where you stick to a surface and can't escape or stick to the wrong side of an object and die like an idiot.

I like the weapon collision feature a lot as well. It should fix that ugly gun-through-wall thing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#171
plazma said:
I think they may add some effects or something but textures will be the same...

btw. http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/9315/rolol.jpg
Click to expand...

Well, you have to take into consideration that Tripwire is not a major developer. Their resources, in terms of both development and marketing, are obviously not as expansive as developers like Infinity Ward (with their huge support from Activision) and Epic Games, who developed the Unreal engine. For a company who, not too long ago, started out as a mod team, they've achieved considerable progress and have gained a great reputation in the gaming community.

I'd rather Tripwire show the game as it is. The press screenshots of UT3 and Call of Duty are great, but not everyone can run the game like that. Most people end up being disappointed because the game never looks how it does in the advertisements, trailers, or screenshots. You make comparisons to Crysis, and sure it may look great, but even on good rigs does the game tend to decrease in framerate. What's the point of a good looking game if it can't be enjoyed?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#173
plazma said:
I think they may add some effects or something but textures will be the same...

btw. [url]http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/9315/rolol.jpg[/URL]
Click to expand...

Plazma did you just join the forums to tell us how bad this game is that you have never played. I am really shocked at the knee jerk reaction of some people on here. Personally I am stoked that the mantling is in, MG deployment and weapon collisions work, blind firing looked good, it really is blind firing!

As for objective markers, I like it. Helps the new players orientate themselves around a map. It can be turned off, and offers no unfair advantage, if you are 1337 then you know where the objectives are anyway so you don't need it. :) Squad controls look nice and on the fly, can get some real squad leadership going now, instantly issuing commands.

With all these new features, weapons, maps and gametypes I could not care if it looked the same as RO, which it won't, it will be much better. So shut tha hell up you doubters or fear my wrath!

*Wrath may or may not actually exist.* :p
 
Upvote 0
#176
looks good so far...
weapon collusion looks awesome...
mg deployment sweat...
coversystem and blindfire looks good,too.

only thing that suck are
1.) aiming- breathing is cool but AIMZOOM, common WTF??? :(:mad:
2.) radar - hope, will be only available on "noob(get to know the game)-servers" and offline

and did i see sprintzoom @ 0:26 part1 :confused:?
and right after that at 0:45 part1. there were blood splashes on the screen showing you the direction you were shoot from. this should be an other "noob(get to know the game)-servers" and offline option. sound is enough as indicator.
 
Upvote 0
#177
Volodnikov said:
Well, you have to take into consideration that Tripwire is not a major developer. Their resources, in terms of both development and marketing, are obviously not as expansive as developers like Infinity Ward (with their huge support from Activision) and Epic Games, who developed the Unreal engine. For a company who, not too long ago, started out as a mod team, they've achieved considerable progress and have gained a great reputation in the gaming community.

I'd rather Tripwire show the game as it is. The press screenshots of UT3 and Call of Duty are great, but not everyone can run the game like that. Most people end up being disappointed because the game never looks how it does in the advertisements, trailers, or screenshots. You make comparisons to Crysis, and sure it may look great, but even on good rigs does the game tend to decrease in framerate. What's the point of a good looking game if it can't be enjoyed?
Click to expand...

I think that unreal engine 3.5 have great opportunities for graphics but TW isn't able to or don't want use it. The games from the screenshots looks the same in-game. Crysis is working smoothly on my coputer witch cost about ~600$.

btw. I got warnign from Zips for my way of thinking about the game...

Reason: Trolling
-------
If you're going to be critical, feel free to be critical without being a massive troll.
-------
Click to expand...

lol100

true hurts...
 
Upvote 0
#179
Lucan946 said:
They all look... the same to me? Variations in settings aside, I can't tell the difference between the graphics.
Click to expand...

the call of duty 2 graphics looks much worse, the cod:waw is is from a very cinematic point of view and there is a lot of **** going on, I also don't discard the pic being photoshoped like a lot of companies do for marketing and UT3 just doesnt look better, its just that the picture itself is better but not the graphics.

and remember that those are all finished games while RO is an early alpha

I can complain about the graphics in RO:HoS (I've done it already) but you are blowing things out of proportion and trolling

also, I can manipulate too =):
http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/8624/rolololol.jpg
 
Upvote 0
#180
Fedorov said:
the call of duty 2 graphics looks much worse, the cod:waw is is from a very cinematic point of view and there is a lot of **** going on, I also don't discard the pic being photoshoped like a lot of companies do for marketing and UT3 just doesnt look better, its just that the picture itself is better but not the graphics.

and remember that those are all finished games while RO is an early alpha

I can complain about the graphics in RO:HoS (I've done it already) but you are blowing things out of proportion and trolling

also, I can manipulate too =):
[url]http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/8624/rolololol.jpg[/URL]
Click to expand...

Ahaha. Well, I'll admit, this guy isn't a total fail troll- I was suspicious at first, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt and just assumed he didn't know what he was talking about.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu