Picking up stuff, moving, climbing (you can't climb, so er), tanking, seeing where objectives are, being useful, basically doing anything that involves movement or using your arms for anything.
Just played a bit of RO1...WOW
- Thread starter Yellonet
- Start date
Picking up stuff, moving, climbing (you can't climb, so er), tanking, seeing where objectives are, being useful, basically doing anything that involves movement or using your arms for anything.
I seem to recall reading that soldiers in WWII (at least German's) weren't taught to always keep the weapon at the shoulder like modern soldiers are, but that simply firing from the hip was pretty much standard for SMG users entering buildings and whatnot.
I can't remember if I read that in some historical document or if it was a random post by a random person on a random forum though.
Could someone who knows this stuff enlighten me?
I understand the reason behind the zoom, but bionic optical implants weren't that common in the 1940's and we don't really need a "focusing" system as we are all humans and can focus our vision ourselves.
You can focus on a few pixels in the game just as you can focus on something small in real life, it does however not get bigger or better resolved if you look at it longer, but your brain gets more time to interpret what you're seeing.
A few pixels sticking up behind a wall for instance, at a glance you might miss them or interpret them as part of the structure or background, if you stop and look you might see something else, a top of a helmet perhaps.
That doesn't need zoom to work, and with zoom you can always and too easily spot someone even when they have relatively good cover behind something or if they're sitting in a dark corner to which your vision would normally need a moment to adjust.
One of the worst thing about RO1 was the lack of zoom in my opinion.
It was almost impossible to see and shoot someone at 200 meters distance, that's just rubbish.
That zoom is making the snipers/marksmen useless is not because of the zoom, but because of the smaller maps.. and the mysterious mist/myst (or how do you spell that) which makes seeing (spotting enemies in windows and such) further than 200 meters in ro2 already kinda hard.
But the mist is some different issue very prone to subjective opinion.
I totally agree with the ADS aiming speed and the lack of sway. I didn't even know resting your weapon was even possible in RO2... it's just that useless
It was almost impossible to see and shoot someone at 200 meters distance, that's just rubbish.
That zoom is making the snipers/marksmen useless is not because of the zoom, but because of the smaller maps.. and the mysterious mist/myst (or how do you spell that) which makes seeing (spotting enemies in windows and such) further than 200 meters in ro2 already kinda hard.
But the mist is some different issue very prone to subjective opinion.
I totally agree with the ADS aiming speed and the lack of sway. I didn't even know resting your weapon was even possible in RO2... it's just that useless
You say this and then proceed to prove yourself wrong with the rest of the post. Well done.
It's harder to see in RO2 with the terrible depth of field effects. You wouldn't even need zoom if the blurryness was removed. It's like everyone in Stalingrad forgot their glasses.One of the worst thing about RO1 was the lack of zoom in my opinion.
It was almost impossible to see and shoot someone at 200 meters distance, that's just rubbish.
That zoom is making the snipers/marksmen useless is not because of the zoom, but because of the smaller maps.. and the mysterious mist/myst (or how do you spell that) which makes seeing (spotting enemies in windows and such) further than 200 meters in ro2 already kinda hard.
But the mist is some different issue very prone to subjective opinion.
I totally agree with the ADS aiming speed and the lack of sway. I didn't even know resting your weapon was even possible in RO2... it's just that useless
When I first joined the RO2 beta I got a feeling that something was off and didn't feel right.
As it turns out I didn't quite remember what RO1 really felt like because when I just now played it a bit, I was wowed.
In short, RO2 has nothing on RO1.
RO1 just feels so much more logical, more realistic. Better.
Just from the top of my head:
- The time to iron sights is just perfect, it seems realistic and makes close encounters more about hip shooting or melee instead of ultra fast stop, ultra fast IS with no sway and fire.
Sure, there are some details that RO2 does better and some new features that are welcome, but when it comes to the core gameplay RO2 really feels more like a BF game than a true successor to Red Orchestra.
- Recoil is easy to control when prone and with support, when standing it is much more difficult. This is realistic and makes careful positioning more effective than running and gunning.
- Sway feels natural and is also dependant on position.
- No zoom, it just feels right without zoom and it also makes concealment work.
- Ragdolls are much better in RO1, actually the best I've ever seen.
It's really a shame
Maybe I should not have played RO1 again, it really kills RO2 for me...
It's tragic, but ironic aswell, because despite RO1 old age, I've gone back to playing it instead of RO2. I've tried for 20h but I can't simply enjoy RO2. Despite the fact that there's some flaws in the accuracy of some weapons in RO1 and the weapon sway it feels more realistic COMPARED to RO2. I thought RO2 was about to be an improved version of RO1.
Even the command radial is simplified to even fit into a console game. The movements are more twitchy and arcadeish and the ability to turn around completely, aim down the sight, and shot an enemy perfectly 50m away is a matter of a sec is just ridiculous. The aiming in RO1 was also robotic like that but the lack of zoom and the high weapon sway made it at least a lot more realistic than in RO2.
In overall, it feels more natural when you run/walk in RO1, and It's It's more scary when you're shot at or when a grenade blows up close to you.
It's pretty obvious that RO2 tried to appeal to the old fanbase and aswell the mainstream. Unfortunately, the mainstream will soon leave RO2 and stick to BF3.
Personally, I will enjoy RO1 until RO2 is fixed; and I am not talking about bigger maps, I am talking about changes in the core gameplay. If that doesn't happen I might aswell stick to arma 2 for realism and BF3 for arcade.
Last edited:
Did you really read the link? Because this post kinda demonstrates that you don't actually understand the reason behind the zoom. The zoom is not intended, as you suggest, to simulate "focusing on something small" or your brain taking "more time to interpret what you're seeing". Not at all.
In other words, it's not a "focusing" system at all. It's a correction for compromises between scale and field of view, giving a better approximation, during the time you are zoomed, of the size of objects for the distance. It only resembles "focusing" because zooming requires sacrificing some portion at the edges of your field of view, but this is just an unavoidable side effect; its not in any way the rationale for the zoom.
Although switching between zoom view and regular view is not itself a realistic experience, zoom is a compromise that allows you to see targets at a better approximation of a realistic scale for the actual distance.
Sweet jesus. Don't we already have enough of these threads. We ALL know RO1 and RO2 are different in several ways. Some agree it's for the better, some don't. Can we please get on with this?
Not meant to offend anyone but to me it feels like most of you ro1vets are just very attached and used to ostfront and would propably have found lots of stuff to complain about in ro2 even if it was slower, had no zoom and what have you.
Happens to me every time a game I like gets reworked. Because I feel lost and confused in the new environment and long for the old version since I know it by heart. Especially in tight knit community that is suddenly overrun by newcomers who seem to trod all over your yard.
I like Ostfront a lot. I always felt as a newcomer (had it for a couple of years) since it had a strong sense of community. But when I loaded up the ro2 beta I was really excited and felt, while it still had the feel and aura of the original, it improved upon it so much. I also think that in time as the mapmakers start showing their stuff there will be much more maps in the original style and even the vets will start to realise it still is Red Orchestra just with smoother gameplay and prettier graphics.
But as I said, it's just what I'm thinking and what the hell do I know about your feelings?
Happens to me every time a game I like gets reworked. Because I feel lost and confused in the new environment and long for the old version since I know it by heart. Especially in tight knit community that is suddenly overrun by newcomers who seem to trod all over your yard.
I like Ostfront a lot. I always felt as a newcomer (had it for a couple of years) since it had a strong sense of community. But when I loaded up the ro2 beta I was really excited and felt, while it still had the feel and aura of the original, it improved upon it so much. I also think that in time as the mapmakers start showing their stuff there will be much more maps in the original style and even the vets will start to realise it still is Red Orchestra just with smoother gameplay and prettier graphics.
But as I said, it's just what I'm thinking and what the hell do I know about your feelings?
Here, let me fix that for you.
wooki hit the nail on the head. Any time you take an old game with an entrenched, deeply loyal fanbase and you change -anything- about the game, the fanbase immediately flies into an ungodly rage of vengeance.
I, for one, predict that I am going to bloody hate the new The Thing movie, as I loved everything about the original, and I just don't see how they can capture the same gruesome charm as the old animatronics using CGI.
So yeah, at this point there is nothing TWI can possibly do to satisfy the ragers short of releasing a huge HD graphics update for ROOST. Even then people would rage because a particular shade of brown was never in Stalingrad and is too unrealistic.
Well that's something else. It is objectively right to hate a new The Thing movie!Josef Nader said:
RO1 aiming feels like your character has child's hands or something, like he can't hold his gun properly.
I've only fired a few guns IRL, but I can hold them more steady than an RO1 soldier.
Also RO1 soldiers can't handle any type of recoil in crouch, prone. Feels like your guy is holding the gun like Rambo.
Also would people stop complaining about the "zooming" in RO2. I'm not sure how many times it has to be explained before it gets to your thick skulls, but it replicates focusing in real life. Pixel hunting for soldiers is complete bull**** in RO1.
I've only fired a few guns IRL, but I can hold them more steady than an RO1 soldier.
Also RO1 soldiers can't handle any type of recoil in crouch, prone. Feels like your guy is holding the gun like Rambo.
Also would people stop complaining about the "zooming" in RO2. I'm not sure how many times it has to be explained before it gets to your thick skulls, but it replicates focusing in real life. Pixel hunting for soldiers is complete bull**** in RO1.
I think RO2 feels a lot less unique than RO1. If I was to say one is better than the other RO1 would win for that reason, there is a lot of games which plays fairly similar to RO2 but none that I have played is very similar to RO1.
I actually read most of the effects won't be CGI.
I actually read most of the effects won't be CGI.
There are some customers in this world who you can bring the whole dev team to their house to perform acts that cannot be discussed here, and these people will still complain about the knee prints in their carpet.
I program games as a hobby/side business with a few friends and co-workers, and honestly I don't think I will ever make a sequel to a game.