January, 30, 2012
- Thread starter Cyper
- Start date
Red orchestra as we know it is fading and is becoming more and more influenced by the mainstream corridor style shooters with the "You are leaving the combat zone" element and the weird rank up/weapon unlock system. The honor system is good but the weapon attachments just feel stupid. You can only choose from standard soldier issue things which is annoying because I should have those as a recruit but they didn't add unrealistic things as silencers or weird scopes because it would be too unrealistic. So in the end all you have is some road to nowhere unlock system which is just annoying. And that you can spawn with enemy weapons is unrealistic except for the ppsh-41 that takes much of the realistic immersion feel away atleast for me.
Well, some time passed, and eventually Ramm gave Cyper and everyone else, his answer. A ''hardcore'' mode. Classic Mode. And as far as I know, Cyper was mostly pleased with the mode.
Unfortunately, Classic Mode was not exactly the hardcore mode that most people would have envisioned, but it was rather close.
TWI seems not to like Classic much, if at all. Judging by how they only put Action Mode servers, and a ton of them, during the last free weekend.
My personal take on what Classic is right now, is a mode marked with rejection. Rejected by most players, rejected by some at TWI, rejected by many hardcore players, and only somewhat popular inside these forums.
But is hard to be sure of what TWI actually thinks about Classic. The mode is in the game and should be enjoyed by those who prefer it.
It would be interesting to have Cyper reply to Ramm's response, and give this thread, and his original complaint, some closure.
Unfortunately, Classic Mode was not exactly the hardcore mode that most people would have envisioned, but it was rather close.
TWI seems not to like Classic much, if at all. Judging by how they only put Action Mode servers, and a ton of them, during the last free weekend.
My personal take on what Classic is right now, is a mode marked with rejection. Rejected by most players, rejected by some at TWI, rejected by many hardcore players, and only somewhat popular inside these forums.
But is hard to be sure of what TWI actually thinks about Classic. The mode is in the game and should be enjoyed by those who prefer it.
It would be interesting to have Cyper reply to Ramm's response, and give this thread, and his original complaint, some closure.
Classic wasn't supposed to be a "hardcore" mode, it was supposed to be closer to the play style of RO1.
PRECISELY!
Why do you think I am so mad everyday asking for a proper hardcore (not closer to RO1) mode
Gosh! Even games such as Call of Duty have such a thing on their own ways! But when it comes down to RO, no... it has an Action Mode! Grrrrr
You can thank Santa for that!
But the point I am making is that games such as Call of Duty, went ahead and put a mode for those wanting something more hardcore, since their stock games are unarguably mainstream, which is absolutely commendable! But RO2 doesn't, which is mind boggling! Because RO2's flagship and main mode, Realism, is a crazy mix of mainstream features with hardcore gameplay. That turned out highly controversial, and still is to this day.
Many will claim that it is Classic Mode that is supposed to be the hardcore mode, and it is more hardcore on a number of features, but ins't really hardcore, or more hardcore than realism! It is simply a step back to gameplay closer to RO1.
And correct me if I'm wrong... but something such as Classic mode obviously appeals to people who were looking to RO1 HD. Classic isn't RO1 HD, but that is obviously the way it leans.
Which leads the to the conclusion that the community's desire for something more hardcore were terribly, wrongfully misinterpreted as something closer to RO1.
And now that we have Classic, anyone who does not want Realism Mode, but wants something more hardcore, is told to shut up and go play Classic, or leave.
Classic might be Cyper's hardcore mode, but I know it isn't my hardcore mode in RO2 at all. And I am highly defiant in saying that it isn't RO2's hardcore mode as well. Which you agreed.
Last edited:
I didn't expect this thread to pop up again, really. Not that it may make a difference, but since I created the thread, I may aswell give my personal opinion on all this.
To begin with, Classic Mode is quite far removed from what I was looking for. I does remove some aids, made the shooting a little bit harder, but best of all, it slowed down the gameplay, but that was not really my whole vision.
My vision could be explained that one would take RO1 & DH exactly like it is and put it into RO2. First thing to do is not to remove anything. Because keen point to press is: what made RO1 successfull? Obviously TWI did something right. Because their mod won, and it started to grow and they gained followers. Then it becomes obvious that removing to much may make the game go out of line.
Because people will always look back at the previous game and compare it. If too much is changed then its risky. Tweak and improve existing features and mechanics. For instance, one could remove the drunken sway and extreme recoil, and replacing it with aim-and deadzone. This would make shooting as 'hardcore' as with RO1 system, and it would still require a lot of practising to increase your skill, but it would more realistic.
The slow running and poor stamina could be removed and replaced by a system that is based on the idea that your speed and stamina is affected by slope (hills, stairs), and terrain (snow, flat ground, rubble) and permanently (until you respawn) by injuries.
All in all, this would mean that effective use of weapons in the game would require more or less the same amount of skill as in RO1 without using handicaps. The games pace would also be slower than current RO2 Realism Mode due to the fact you wouldn't be floating up for stairs or otherwise randomly sprinting around everywhere. Sprinting would then be used as a mean to take cover and survive, not as a tactic in CQC.
The command system from RO1 could have been there with improved voice acting and possibly more commands. The command radial could serve as a form of quick commands. Because both of these systems serves its purpose. Ammo pouches could have been in the game but tweaked so that you for instance wont drop your ammo if you drop your weapon. If you drop ammo (by button-press only) and someone picks it up, you could gain score. Being able to pick up inviduall ammo for different weapons could also be possible. For instance, being able to press for example F to swap between different ammo types. In this way you could pick up a limited amount of ammo (that also increase your weight al
To begin with, Classic Mode is quite far removed from what I was looking for. I does remove some aids, made the shooting a little bit harder, but best of all, it slowed down the gameplay, but that was not really my whole vision.
My vision could be explained that one would take RO1 & DH exactly like it is and put it into RO2. First thing to do is not to remove anything. Because keen point to press is: what made RO1 successfull? Obviously TWI did something right. Because their mod won, and it started to grow and they gained followers. Then it becomes obvious that removing to much may make the game go out of line.
Because people will always look back at the previous game and compare it. If too much is changed then its risky. Tweak and improve existing features and mechanics. For instance, one could remove the drunken sway and extreme recoil, and replacing it with aim-and deadzone. This would make shooting as 'hardcore' as with RO1 system, and it would still require a lot of practising to increase your skill, but it would more realistic.
The slow running and poor stamina could be removed and replaced by a system that is based on the idea that your speed and stamina is affected by slope (hills, stairs), and terrain (snow, flat ground, rubble) and permanently (until you respawn) by injuries.
All in all, this would mean that effective use of weapons in the game would require more or less the same amount of skill as in RO1 without using handicaps. The games pace would also be slower than current RO2 Realism Mode due to the fact you wouldn't be floating up for stairs or otherwise randomly sprinting around everywhere. Sprinting would then be used as a mean to take cover and survive, not as a tactic in CQC.
The command system from RO1 could have been there with improved voice acting and possibly more commands. The command radial could serve as a form of quick commands. Because both of these systems serves its purpose. Ammo pouches could have been in the game but tweaked so that you for instance wont drop your ammo if you drop your weapon. If you drop ammo (by button-press only) and someone picks it up, you could gain score. Being able to pick up inviduall ammo for different weapons could also be possible. For instance, being able to press for example F to swap between different ammo types. In this way you could pick up a limited amount of ammo (that also increase your weight al
Last edited:
My idea of making sure RO3 sells well, and the franchise continues, is to not wait until RO3 comes around to figure out how to do that. Regardless of what people will say, there is a current situation, a very sticky one. This game's lack of a strong identity is guilty of making so that great sales did not result in happy players.
I'm terribly ambitious. And I think that it should be our responsibility to create something better than Realism Mode. Better in all fronts, not better for Sarkis and his friends, not better for the people playing classic only, and not for the people playing realism only.
A mode to end all the classic vs realism vs action phenomena. As if RO3 was launched with one grand mode in a few weeks, a grand mode that it should eventually have. But only instead of RO3, we make that now, during RO2, after Rising Storm is done. And if it doesn't work, we keep trying. RO2 sold well, Rising Storm will as well, and so did Killing Floor. Money isn't infinite, but if we accomplish something that people generally like, we can sell that! RO2 sold well based on that premise, but not because RO2 was great, but because RO1 had been. RO1 was legend, it had defied the mainstream, and had not become a clunky unusable boring game in the process.
Sticking with a game, a gameplay, that is not strongly loved by its own community is not ambitious enough, is not a good long term strategy either.
We need to try to break away from the multitude of modes, rally everyone beneath a common flag. But the modes are made, that can't be changed, should not be really, there is no way of going forwards, not until we go backwards first.
I really have no problem with making 2 or 3 new modes, provided making them is not a crazy waste of resources. If they fail, there is little harm done. If they succeed however, that would be everything that none of our current modes have: Succeed.
Trying to attract the larger audience was an honest mistake, but perhaps it's time to try to attract the smaller audience, simply because we are more proficient at that, and should achieve better results.
Drunken naked Churchill's quote went: ''If you're going through Hell... Keep going''. We're in Hell right now, and going nowhere fast.
And an inspiring song:
Spoiler!
Last edited:
I really have to wonder what people mean by "deadzone" every time they say it, because people keep misusing that term for all sorts of things. A deadzone is a setting where X% input (And below) becomes 0% output; it exists only to eliminate the jitter from cheap joystick pots, something we don't need with mice (Which have no directly analog to it, though you could manage a superficially similar threshold system... there's just no use for it). It's gotten bad enough that Flashpoint started using it to describe its free-aim, and since then it's been misused for all manner of things, many of which have no relation to each other.
So if you don't mind, what do you actually mean by "deadzone?"
Isn't dead-zone your weapon moving, but your screen staying montionless? (so not what we have in RO2) As seen here:
ArmA II: Aiming Deadzone test - YouTube
ArmA II: Aiming Deadzone test - YouTube
No, but that's one of the (many) things people have mis-used it for. As I said, Flashpoint popularized that particular mis-use, but it's only one of many.
It makes it particularly strange to see the term used in RO2, where we already have a fairly well-established term (free-aim) to describe the de-coupling of weapon and vision movement. What Flashpoint (And it's successors) call dead-zone is the same thing, just with a different setup (The vision only moves, at full-speed, when the weapon is far enough to the side, while in RO2 it still moves, at a reduced rate, inside that area). The difference is fairly small, and pretty much negligible in effect, which simply makes the confusion all the greater when someone says to add dead-zone to RO2; the most common thing people mean by it is very close to what we have already.
Although I will allow the exception that Arma does it rather worse than RO2. Needing to flick the aim excessively far to the side to pan the view over as far as you want, then bring the aim back, is awkard, excessively cumbersome, and unrealistic.
RO1 was great and I enjoyed it.
RO2 came out and I enjoyed it too.
I do understand the valid bug posts when RO2 came out.
The game is pretty solid now though.
I find the forum somewhat puzzling in that some people post far more than they play.
Over and over. Hundreds of posts from people with maybe a dozen or so admitted hours playing.
Where as I play almost daily and have a blast on the same maps they are posting about.
Merry Christmas to the fans of Red Orchestra 2! See you on the maps!
*just one added comment edit : > Post all you want about what you want to see done with the game.
RO2 came out and I enjoyed it too.
I do understand the valid bug posts when RO2 came out.
The game is pretty solid now though.
I find the forum somewhat puzzling in that some people post far more than they play.
Over and over. Hundreds of posts from people with maybe a dozen or so admitted hours playing.
Where as I play almost daily and have a blast on the same maps they are posting about.
Merry Christmas to the fans of Red Orchestra 2! See you on the maps!
*just one added comment edit : > Post all you want about what you want to see done with the game.
Last edited:
I am glad with this game and i love the realistic mode the most.
BUT removing zooming and the white borders (radar) will give this mode
a boost. Then you can play more realistic, you can flank and hide you
between the enemies. Now that is impossible.
Now it is more an adhd game.
And i wish that the ai get a refreshing. I hate now the laserguided snipers.
For example the bridges....map isn`t nice playing against ai.
And bandaging when you are wounded, why not entering a medic in the game?
Maybe that gives us some more teamwork.
BUT removing zooming and the white borders (radar) will give this mode
a boost. Then you can play more realistic, you can flank and hide you
between the enemies. Now that is impossible.
Now it is more an adhd game.
And i wish that the ai get a refreshing. I hate now the laserguided snipers.
For example the bridges....map isn`t nice playing against ai.
And bandaging when you are wounded, why not entering a medic in the game?
Maybe that gives us some more teamwork.