Games lately...

[Cpt-Praxius]

Oh no, someone is calling me out on my bull****! No need to read any further and try to understand why people are getting pissed off at me!

He makes some good points, and you'd do well to read what he has to say. You don't want a discussion, you want to issue decrees from on high as to what RO2 should be and refuse to listen to anyone that says otherwise. This isn't discussing ways to improve the game, this is telling everyone that they're idiots for liking the game, it's not an RO title, and that the only way to fix it is to make it more like what YOU want.

Don't forget:
"I don't give a **** if my opinions doesn't fit into what 90% of all gamers think. I don't care If I belong to this minority that want to keep games to the Hardcore side of things. Especially not games that are SUPPOSED to be like that. If people don't want RO2 to remove the arcade crap, and move in line to where it is supposed to stand, they can leave the board."

[url]http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=70580&page=2[/URL]

This is why I don't take his arguments seriously anymore..... since this comment, I simply can't be bothered anymore, and yes.... both of your are right.... that is the attitude he spouts around here and he's not in here to debate or have some sort of discussion.... he just wants to dictate his biblical views and everybody should just nod and accept them.

And since the above thread and our detailed so-called "Discussion" over these things, it's just been one thread hi-jack after another with him, continually repeating the same crap and thus.... is a means of trolling and certainly is not contributing to the community or improving the game.

And it's clear that I'm not the only one in here who's getting a little sick of it.

 

[Manbearpig]

I think you need to learn how to play.

If open spaces are a disadvantage then that's all there is to say about it. There isn't room for 'but it is negated' primarily because the other faction has automatics and semis as well. If you say it comes down to who sees who first, then positioning is pretty much going to be king with the queen being of how aware are you (and how well your game senses are). If you're having trouble with a bolt, then I suggest you stay away from it and stop deriving conclusions from your poor usage. For every second that you experience there will be contrary ones.

Overall, I would say your issue is a learn2play issue more than anything else.

Also, secure territory by being proactive, let the other fodder and lemmings sit in an area while you attempt to spawn kill. That's how you should play pubs because that's what they're there for ... for you to stomp.

Man this is a load of...

I've been playing FPS games in a very organized tactical gameing community for 5 to 10 years. BF2, but mostly PR, some arma etc.

This game caters to and encourages run'n gun gameplay on anything but maybe a clan match.

Your learn2play theory is preposterous. On any public server, it's the run'n gunners with the MKBs that are on top nearly all rounds.

Sure once and a while a great twitch player , or a camper in a window, or a tanker.. can get a high score...

Denying this game caters to run'gun gameplay is like denying water is wet.

Project Reality, now that game is one that sure does not cater to run'n gun. When you see the differences in design decisions, it is clear what the causes are. This is a design choice problem where imo TWI dropped the ball quite a bit.

The number one fix for this would be .... more sway after running. Others could be, less stamina, axing the x% accuracy bonusses the game gives to high level players,...

The game needs this. THe whole design priciple of the game attracts people that want to play a tactical and realistic game. BUt they make it so hard on the fans of this genre by adding too much speedy gameplay, and many of the folks attracted are very very disappointed by this. It is too much like cod and BF3 at the moment. Why compete with those crap games ...money I suppose. Ive been waitying for years for a new tactical shooter to come out with good teamwork possibilities.... none has come out since BF2. (Arma is too slow for me, too large scale).

If gameplay reaches a certain speed like in RO2, it basically makes almost all RL tactics unuseable, like it is now in RO2.

AND don't you all deny that RL tactics are very hard to do in RO2. I have not seen ANYONE using proper tactics. I have not seen anyone except my community play with a full squad together...= the first step of any RL tactic.


I think some people think running to a house and shooting a sniper in the back with and smg is a proper tactic or something. ANy proper tactics that are now in the game are totally ad hoc and totally coincidental. It's just a random unorganised bunch that 'act tactically' but that is not using group tactics that ALWAYS require *organisation *communitation *time to set up.

Currently by the time you try to get your squad set up for defense, half your squad is dead and respawning on the other side of the map. It is nearly impossible to get going without 9 of your friends in the squad and then it is still very hard.

Really man the learn to play argument is total nonsense. All run'n gunners say they play tactical, I've heard it enough. "I'm supressing them by shooting them in the back at spawn, quick cap the point! OMG 1337!!1!1 teamwork points ftw!"

.
.
.
Ah I found another post of yours limz:

On certain maps being the first at the objective is not your goal, usually you want to overshoot it so you can spawn camp easier.

LOL! How could I have guessed so right in view of my previous comments!
Thank you for being one of the persons that try to ruin this game.

Seems half the players here have no other tactic than spawnraping. Fabulous *sob*. With people like this I'm sure we can make any awesome game play like crap.

Thank you so much for spawnkilling, may you get rewarded with many points perks, unlocks and a hero status from here to eternity! But plz not on our server lol. (Also we would end up banning you for spawnraping no doubt )

 

[Mekhazzio]

But beyond that if we accept that spawn killing is an issue then isn't it more of a map design issue more than anything else?

It's entirely a map design issue. The spawn placement and protected zone philosophy is very inconsistent between maps and even between objective points on the same map. Sometimes the spawns are placed close to areas that are important for gameplay on that objective, and sometimes they are not. Sometimes spawns have enormous protected areas covering them, and sometimes they do not. The worst is when they're both close to a tactically relevant area and have a huge protected area that extends into it; that just winds up artificially restricting the enemy team.

It's like the map designers couldn't figure out how they wanted to do it, which results in extreme differences like being able to drop satchels inside the Russian spawn in the basement of Pavlov's House versus the entire area north and south of the church on Spartanovka turning into a minefield when it's captured.

This is only a new thing for RO2, because RO1 had almost every spawn on every map placed very far behind the objectives. The downside of that approach is that it increases effective respawn time (I consider that a good thing, personally) but it's a much more elegant solution to the problem than the current protected zone roulette you get to play.

 

[Grimreapo]

Hm, you know we should post videos of insane moments from other realism games, because Reality Is Unrealistic (note the To Hell And Back example where Murphy used a MG42 from the hip and killed couple of MG crews when he was pissed off, I could cite an some books but Cracked is more funny.). As we all know Arma2 is praised for its realism but it has some really crazy stuff, like when they made the new DLC pack called Arrowhead which added a new gun:
ArmA II: Private Military Company - Introducing the AA-12 "Matilda" Trailer - YouTube
Yes that is a shogun downing a light chopper and yes the AA-12 is doing its job:
AA-12 Fully Automatic Shotgun!!! - YouTube
Perhaps we should add some CoD sound effects and kill streaks markers to these videos...


That CoD: HoS video is nothing next to what can be done in RL, one Harrision Summers used his Tommy gun assaulting a German barracks and killed well over 30 people by mostly himself and took many PoWs in CCQ fighting. The main issue with is only really with HoS is the LACK OF FEAR OF DEATH which was the limiting performance factor in WW2 stopping from more people doing what these heroes did all of the time, increase spawn times in hardcore and nerf bandaging then you will start to see people being more "realistic". If you dont believe me then show me footage of people "pwning" like that in Countdown...

 

[Josef Nader]

DON'T. LINK. TVTROPES.

I'LL NEVER BLOODY ESCAPE.

But yes, reality is entirely unrealistic. QED, they wanted to make a movie about Jack Churchill starring the man himself, but he declined saying that audiences would never believe it. History is FULL of people who did "impossible" things. People do "impossible" things all the time. Nobody ever wants to give them credit, because it means admitting that not everyone is as **** as they are.

 

[Holy.Death]

Cypher never gets it and never will.

It's not about what he is getting or not. It's about what is true.

You get +1 for honesty, by the way.

I would say that the gameplay is more unforgiving to the overall team rather than the individual.

It's hard to put the line between the individual and the team. The individuals are forming the team (in theory). We have a bunch of random people and it's up to these people how the game will be played.

I was defending the Grain Elevator. I told the people a couple of times not to run out to their deaths. I said that we were low on tickets and all we needed to do right then was to defend the objective C. We hold the objective as long as we had tickets to reinforce the capzone and a minute or thirty seconds before lockdown we ran out of tickets. In the end we lost. Same story happened with the Pavlov's House - we had the 8th January Square, but we lost our tickets and the Axis were able to recapture the place and the Zab's House too. Again, we lost.

 

[Dayve]

Edit: this is not directed towards anybody as an insult. Think more of a friendly jab. Sorry if I insulted somebody.

Sure it is. I foolishly bought RO2 looking for a realistic WW2 game that relied on teamwork and strategy, and what I got was Call of Duty with an insane amount of SMG's per team and way too many assault rifles on the Axis team, which didn't exist at the battle of Stalingrad and have no place in a "realistic" WW2 shooter.

I tried to play as a team but people cared only about getting kills and running around with a machine gun firing from the hip, just like in CoD. It's a piece of **** that only fanboys defend, but even they know it's a sellout and in no way realistic or different from CoD.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

As others have stated, if the game will allow you to do certain things, then there always will be players who will try to do them.

With that said, try to stick to realism oriented servers if that is the type of gameplay that you want. I have tried both types and there usually is a big difference with the attitude and the way people play.

I myself try to only play on the Realism (or Custom Realism) servers. That doesn't always mean they will be free from players trying to play COD'ish, but most of the players try to avoid playing that way. You may actually even go an entire map without seeing an MKb!!! Now if TWI can make the Realism settings more inline with how most players on the forums are requesting, I think that would make alot of people happy. Mind you, the more unrealistic gameplay settings can remain in Relaxed mode and I would not care! Just give us an actual Realistic Game Mode!

 

[Cyper]

It's not about what he is getting or not. It's about what is true.

You get +1 for honesty, by the way.


It's hard to put the line between the individual and the team. The individuals are forming the team (in theory). We have a bunch of random people and it's up to these people how the game will be played.

I was defending the Grain Elevator. I told the people a couple of times not to run out to their deaths. I said that we were low on tickets and all we needed to do right then was to defend the objective C. We hold the objective as long as we had tickets to reinforce the capzone and a minute or thirty seconds before lockdown we ran out of tickets. In the end we lost. Same story happened with the Pavlov's House - we had the 8th January Square, but we lost our tickets and the Axis were able to recapture the place and the Zab's House too. Again, we lost.

The truth is that RO2 is a dumbed down game that tries to attract to the mainstream no matter what people say. Twi themself have admitted it. Any solid argument agianst this doesn't exist it. If so bring it to me and I'll explain how wrong you are by introducing facts.

 

[Limz]

The truth is that RO2 is a dumbed down game that tries to attract to the mainstream no matter what people say. Twi themself have admitted it. Any solid argument agianst this doesn't exist it. If so bring it to me and I'll explain how wrong you are by introducing facts.

Please prove both qualitatively and quantitatively that RO2 is dumbed down. But more importantly dumbed down from what and where? You confuse a few things and you should re-examine your thoughts.

First of all, mainstream attraction doesn't necessarily mean dumbed down by any means. For example, Chess and Go are both mainstream games. Attracting the mainstream doesn't necessarily mean that the entire game is dumbed down. Quake Live is mainstream, so is Starcraft. Literature is mainstream too, is Mark Twain's work all dumbed down? How about Plato?

Secondly, in order for a game to be dumbed down the mastery curve needs to be almost nil to the point where there is almost no disparity between players. Thirdly, how much 'dumbed down' are we talking about? 10%? A quart? A gallon? Three milliliters? A quark?

It's just forum rhetoric and adds nothing to discussion. You don't really state the facts and I don't think you understand what a 'fact' is. Nor do I think you understand what 'context' is.

You're really boring and not very constructive when you say "Any solid argument against this doesn't exist" because, maybe just maybe, it doesn't warrant an existence. That argument gets people nowhere, it doesn't encourage anything, it ends with a "So... what?"

You really don't understand anything at all and if you do you just refuse to share your understanding, it's pretty selfish - and petty. You confuse many things and derive conclusions where the premises do not match. Why do you keep coming back to this thread?

 

[Holy.Death]

The truth is that RO2 is a dumbed down game that tries to attract to the mainstream no matter what people say.

What do you mean by "dumbed down"? Don't write "by not being ROOst". Give me something more specific.

 

[Cyper]

What do you mean by "dumbed down"? Don't write "by not being ROOst". Give me something more specific.

With dumbed down I mean that RO2 (compared to RO ost), have added and removed certain features in order to make the game appeal to casual gamers. For instance, adding aim assist would 'dumb down' the game even more. This statement is 100% since Tripwire themself have stated that their aim was/is to make the game more accessible. Accessible means more easy. More easy means less complex.

- Tunnelshooter constructed maps (arcade)

- Perks (arcade)

- Skillpoints (arcade)

- Scoreboards (arcade)

- XP (arcade)

- Unlocks (arcade)

- Ninja bandaging (arcade)

- Killcam (arcade)

- Tactical view (arcade)

- HUD that marks enemy positions on the screen (arcade)

- Quickaiming (arcade)

- Instant sprints (arcade)

- Instant stops (arcade)

- Twitchy movements (arcade)

- Focus on keeping the player in the action (arcade)

- Increased forgiving gameplay (arcade)

- Simplified weaponhandling with no (arcade)

- Minimap along with radar (arcade)

- Lockdown timer (arcade)

This game tries to be intresting to casual gamers. It's priority is first entertainment and action and secondly the gameplay. The reason why 80% of the gaming community don't like the arma series isn't because the game is bad. It's because It's not accessible. The game simply gives you no choice on how to play the game and more or less no assists. It rather tells you that either way you play it like it's intended, or don't play at all. Most people want to get right into the action without spending weeks or even months to learn the game mechanics. They want to have unforgiving and relaxed gameplay. Unfortunately, in a real tactical shooter, the game should only be for tactical players. Everyone else should be washed away with the fact that the game can only be played one certain way - tactical. RO2 isnt a mainstream game. But it's been suited more for the mainstream since ro ost on the expense of the realism.

 

[Temporary]

Hehe, everyone is attacking Cyper personally, how lovely

You know, like if he was the only guy who wish RO2 was tweaked toward a tactical shooter gameplay instead of enhancing "accessibility/fluidity" (side effect being run'n'gun). He's not alone. Neither do you all.

There's thousands of players enjoying RO2 as it is now, thousands not fully enjoying RO2 due to some gameplay problems (run'n'gun being one of them), and thousands not liking RO2 at all despite all their efforts.

Yet Cyper is smashed over and over again because he's taking all trolling/fanboy baits, not just a few like ordinary people do, resulting in that poor show.. ha Internet

---

Regarding realism, doesn't "realism" focused video-game are trying to recreate an environment and a gameplay close to the reality, using artificial means ?

A simulation will have "hard facts" realism, leaving the user 100% free to do everything he wants with that toolbox,

while a "realism" game will try to reproduce what would happen in reality, even if it requires using unrealistic elements.

​

Simulation : F1 grenade kill radius is around 30 meters, shrapnel can fly up to 200 meters. Users have to carefully use the grenade, like not throwing it if they're not behind cover.
=> Results if it was in a "realism-oriented" game : grenade becomes much more important during ingame combats than in real-life combats, ingame grenade spam becomes the main gameplay dynamic.

Realism-oriented game : F1 grenade kill radius is around 5 meters and there is little to no shrapnel (10 meters maximum). Players can even throw grenades on their feet and run away without being hurt. This is the case in RO1 and RO2.
=> Results : players use grenades to take out enemy bunkers/nest, to clear a room or a building. You see players laying suppressive fire on enemy positions while other players sneak closer to throw a grenade on the enemies.


Regarding RO1 vs RO2, and the conflict between people who think RO2 should stay like this and people who think RO2 should change, it seems we don't agree on the real nature of RO2 (and the Red Orchestra series : the mod, RO:Ost and now RO:HoS) :

Is it a realism-oriented game, or a simulation ?
​

For me (and thousands other gamers - like Cyper), Red Orchestra is a WW2 FPS game focusing on the Eastern Front, with a tactical shooter approach.

This is not a simulation.

This is why a T34 can take out any Axis tank in one or two shots.

This is why infantry and tanks ratio are 1:1 (with very few exceptions regarding tank ratio).

This is why there is no mines, armed air support or logistics.

This is why guns never jam or get broken, why engines never overheat, break (without being shot at) or run out of fuel.

...

In my personnal opinion, The main objective of a Red Orchestra game is having a multiplayer experience credible enough to look/feel like "the real thing", close to what we read in books, heard from veterans, saw on documentaries.

...

So if we need to add Mkb in Stalingrad to balance the game (so it won't become unfunny or not credible), it's okay as long as it's limited to its role of balancing the game.

Putting a scope on it and handing it to more than 1 player at a time (since you can loot it, it means 2 or 3 players carrying a Mkb) is going too far.
​

If we need to enhance mobility to keep the game funny and credible, it's okay to add climbing over obstacles and tweak up running speed.

Letting players run'n'gun by grealty reducing the delay between the sprinting stance and running (firing) stance and making the sprint so fast is going too far.
​

=> Even if soldiers were physically of sprinting that fast over such distances.

=> Even is some Mkb had scopes and were in Stalingrad.

Just because it's "realist", or needed to balance the game, doesn't mean it should be in the game or in the game like that.

At least that's what I think.

---

And after reading several books on WW2, talking to WW2 "true" passionates (the ones having tons of data/books/documentaries on WW2, who talked with WW2 veterans, who are playing wargames, etc), and saw some documentaries regarded as "historically correct" by passionates, some of the RO1 gameplay felt pretty close to what I read/saw/heard on WW2 combat situation. The Darkest Hour mod had such moments too.

I can't say the same regarding RO2.

I would have a single question :

When you play Red Orchestra 2 : Heroes of Stalingrad, do you ever have the feeling that what is going on ingame, is close or partially close to a real WW2 combat situation ?

I'm talking about the few moments where the game experience is credible enough that you end up having to think and feel LIKE (= from your point of view) what you read/heard/saw regarding WW2 combats, and no longer think in terms of FPS gaming (= respawn, reinforcement, time limit, capture zone).

In RO1, it happened from time to time (= rare but still there), thanks to the gameplay experience being credible enough regarding WW2 combat situation.

So what about RO2 ? Does the same thing ever happen to you ?

If the answer is "Yes", please provide a few details, because I would love to live such moments in RO2 too.

---

ps: I must say that Limz is the one of the best troll in the "Gaming" catagory I have ever seen, his piece on spawn camping and griefing are remarkable, kudos mate !

 

[Holy.Death]

This statement is 100% since Tripwire themself have stated that their aim was/is to make the game more accessible. Accessible means more easy. More easy means less complex.

Accessible (easier in use) doesn't always mean dumb. It's like saying that making some stuff more ergonomic dumb it down. More complex is not always the better. It requires more trouble/effort, sure, but being troublesome is not something I'd call smarter.

Unfortunately, in a real tactical shooter, the game should only be for tactical players. Everyone else should be washed away with the fact that the game can only be played one certain way - tactical.

You're right for a wrong reasons. Even in ARMA 2 you (everybody, in general) can run and gun. People simply don't do that. Why? Because the other people will put you into an early grave. Look at the RO2 now - if you'll act like a team then you'll wash away anyone who won't play tactical even in the most basic sense. It's up to you to do that.

Perks? Skillpoints? Scoreboards? XP? Unlocks? If you can kill a man with a bolt-action rifle on level 1st then you'd do the same on any level with any stats. How big these stats increases even are? From one topic I saw here it was rather a minor improvement and nothing special. I agree that some unlocks shouldn't be there and some of them should be possible right from the start as standard equipment (bayonet, drum mag).

Killcam? Minimap? Radar? These are turned off on hardcore servers.

Tactical view? HUD that marks enemy positions on the screen? What is wrong with these? Marks are gone very fast and it's not a bad idea to highlight threats like tanks without the need to write everything down on chatbox. Tactical view is also not exposing too much, save for some basic informations.

The rest I agree that they need changes, but I see them as gameplay problems overlooked by the developers that should be tweaked/patched rather than obvious attempt to dumb down the game.

- Increased forgiving gameplay (arcade)

Like what?

 

[Josef Nader]

Please prove both qualitatively and quantitatively that RO2 is dumbed down. But more importantly dumbed down from what and where? You confuse a few things and you should re-examine your thoughts.

First of all, mainstream attraction doesn't necessarily mean dumbed down by any means. For example, Chess and Go are both mainstream games. Attracting the mainstream doesn't necessarily mean that the entire game is dumbed down. Quake Live is mainstream, so is Starcraft. Literature is mainstream too, is Mark Twain's work all dumbed down? How about Plato?

Secondly, in order for a game to be dumbed down the mastery curve needs to be almost nil to the point where there is almost no disparity between players. Thirdly, how much 'dumbed down' are we talking about? 10%? A quart? A gallon? Three milliliters? A quark?

It's just forum rhetoric and adds nothing to discussion. You don't really state the facts and I don't think you understand what a 'fact' is. Nor do I think you understand what 'context' is.

You're really boring and not very constructive when you say "Any solid argument against this doesn't exist" because, maybe just maybe, it doesn't warrant an existence. That argument gets people nowhere, it doesn't encourage anything, it ends with a "So... what?"

You really don't understand anything at all and if you do you just refuse to share your understanding, it's pretty selfish - and petty. You confuse many things and derive conclusions where the premises do not match. Why do you keep coming back to this thread?

I was going to offer Cypher a rebuttal, but you saved me the typing.

Cheers, mate.

 

[Manbearpig]

How is limz going to tell us anything interesting about this game and where it should go if his main tactic is spawnkilling. God if that is the way teh community goes I'll ditch this game and all that goes with it in no time.

Cypher is much more correct. THere are enough run and gun games with better graphics, plz go play those. I've been waiting for years for something new and decent for PC. Now if the arcade lovers like limz and his friends here don't ruin the game, maybe we have a chance.

 

[Cyper]

Accessible (easier in use) doesn't always mean dumb. It's like saying that making some stuff more ergonomic dumb it down. More complex is not always the better. It requires more trouble/effort, sure, but being troublesome is not something I'd call smarter.

You're right for a wrong reasons. Even in ARMA 2 you (everybody, in general) can run and gun. People simply don't do that. Why? Because the other people will put you into an early grave. Look at the RO2 now - if you'll act like a team then you'll wash away anyone who won't play tactical even in the most basic sense. It's up to you to do that.

Perks? Skillpoints? Scoreboards? XP? Unlocks? If you can kill a man with a bolt-action rifle on level 1st then you'd do the same on any level with any stats. How big these stats increases even are? From one topic I saw here it was rather a minor improvement and nothing special. I agree that some unlocks shouldn't be there and some of them should be possible right from the start as standard equipment (bayonet, drum mag).

Killcam? Minimap? Radar? These are turned off on hardcore servers.

Tactical view? HUD that marks enemy positions on the screen? What is wrong with these? Marks are gone very fast and it's not a bad idea to highlight threats like tanks without the need to write everything down on chatbox. Tactical view is also not exposing too much, save for some basic informations.

The rest I agree that they need changes, but I see them as gameplay problems overlooked by the developers that should be tweaked/patched rather than obvious attempt to dumb down the game.


Like what?

That's true. But in RO2's case It's obviously not true. Increased HUD details, killcam, twitchy movements, perks, skillpoints.. These are aids for the player. It's there to make the game more intrestring for casual gamers

 

[Holy.Death]

Perks, skillpoints, unlocks, and other aids doesnt belong in a true tactical shooter. Even the option to play any other way than tactical doesnt fit into a tactical shooter. Why? Because the point of a tactical shooter is to play tactical. Your skills should be your real skills, not artificial skills the game awards you with for simply playing it.

I agreed that they shouldn't be there. I just meant that a mere fact of their existence is not changing that all these perks and skillpoints have little, minor impact on the game.

The reason why killcam, minimap, and radar are turned of in 'hardcore' is because it's for the hardcore gamers. Relaxed realism is for more casual gamers. Get it? The game is dumbed down in order to appeal to casual gamers - and - unfortunately - this changes have ALSO affected the 'hardcore mode'. That's exactly what dumb down means. Giving the players a lot of aids in terms of a minimap with magic radar.

No, I don't get it. You and I both agree that killcam, minimap and radar are turned off in hardcore game mode. Then you talk about minimap with magic radar. Things not present in hardcore mode. What am I missing?

It's the same thing with tactical view. Exactly as you said - It's there because it makes the gameplay easier.

I simply fail to see tactical view as a bad thing. Not everything that makes things easier in use is bad. Do you think that we should go back to DOS system? Because Windows is much easier in use in comparision to DOS.

Like i've said before it's always okay to enjoy the game and say ''I like the game despite the direction it has taken'' but what really bugs me off is when people come up with these dilusional argument to defend the game as more realistic than RO ost which (in most cases) isn't true in any sense.

RO2 has some areas considered to be an improvement over ROOst and much things that needs to be tweaked, redone or changed to make the game - at least in hardcore mode - better. Can you agree with such statement?

I like the game, even if I don't like a solid number of things you mentioned. From what I've been told RO2 beats ROOst in some areas and ROOst beats RO2 in others. Neither of them is fully realistic, but fact is they are different in gameplay from each other. Some people like RO2 more, some ROOst. It's fine by me.

 

[Cyper]

I agreed that they shouldn't be there. I just meant that a mere fact of their existence is not changing that all these perks and skillpoints have little, minor impact on the game.

Yes, they shouldnt be there in the first place BUT imo It would be acceptable IF it wasn't possible to use them in Hardcore mode, but it is. Right now you're forced to play with unlocks, perks, skillpoints, and all that, because you can't deactivate it.

No, I don't get it. You and I both agree that killcam, minimap and radar are turned off in hardcore game mode. Then you talk about minimap with magic radar. Things not present in hardcore mode. What am I missing?

That's correct, it isn't present in Hardcore mode. I think my point was that for the people who say that RO2 haven't changed direction at into more arcade at all while features like killcam, minimap, radar etc. kinda proves the opposite. Then it's of course great that it isn't possible to use it in hardcore mode.

I simply fail to see tactical view as a bad thing. Not everything that makes things easier in use is bad. Do you think that we should go back to DOS system? Because Windows is much easier in use in comparision to DOS.

That's true. But in my opinion there is already enough of HUD in the game.
Just pressting a button seems away to...easy. Almost all of these HUD details are in the game as an aid for the player. Tactical view is there since it's easier and quicker to use than the map. In my opinion the aids should be kept to a minimum in hardcore mode. Yet, this is not an option.

RO2 has some areas considered to be an improvement over ROOst and much things that needs to be tweaked, redone or changed to make the game - at least in hardcore mode - better. Can you agree with such statement?

My opinion is that RO2 in it's core is an amazing tactical shooter that is totally ruined by a few incredible stupid game mechanics and design decisions. So little can ruin so much. It's crazy that a lot of the old ROplayers leave the game just because these little things. To be honest, I don't really care if Relaxed Realism is in the game - as long as I am not FORCED to play it. Unfortunately, the Relaxed Realism mode that TWI focused os is developed on the expense of Hardcore mode. The hardcore mode suffer because of that. That's not right, especially not since the game in the first place was all about Hardcore gameplay.

I like the game, even if I don't like a solid number of things you mentioned. From what I've been told RO2 beats ROOst in some areas and ROOst beats RO2 in others. Neither of them is fully realistic, but fact is they are different in gameplay from each other. Some people like RO2 more, some ROOst. It's fine by me.

Yeah, I completely agree with you. Both RO ost and ro2 have it's flaws and improvements. If RO2 only took all the good from RO1 and improved it even more and then implemented it in Hardcore mode, and at the same time removed, rubbish such as skillpoints, unlocks, twitchy movements, lockdowntimer, etcetc. from hardcore mode, it would certainly make the old rofanbase that doesnt play the game start playing it. Because then it would be an improved version of ro ost and not a carbon copy, or a fake spiritual sequel, and it would at the same time give casual gamers a more arcade experience in relaxed realism.