Just some points that bug me.

  • 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/

Appleshampoo

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 27, 2011
144
32
0
The progression system isn't going anywhere, it's time to move on.

It's players like you who facilitate this mainstream garbage. If all players gave up like you and continued to be sheep, we'd all be F'd. If you thoroughly enjoy it, then fine, that's your opinion. But telling players to move on is too much. We won't move on. Players like myself will fight this until the day we die.

I'm not trying to be some kind of gaming extremist or something, I just think very certain games are able to have treadmills to run on. FPS games have really let me down in these terms. Do you guys see massive threads and rebellion about Counter-Strike? "Please give us unlocks almighty game gods, please! We want to play months to get stuff we paid for! Please!" No, probably not.
 

Proud_God

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 22, 2005
3,235
548
0
Belgium
Oh man. Where do I begin...
First of all, try to relax. What's up with all that blind rage? You seem to jump on every one of my posts like a rabid dog. Woof.

Do you realise that you called the admins of THE most popular RO2 servers ignorant? I'm sorry, but the admins of 2FJG and TWB know EXACTLY what they're doing.

I did no such thing. I mentioned most server admins don't touch custom settings. Not all. Naming 2 counter examples is perfectly inline with that statement.

Yes...and people don't like unranked servers...because...guess what, they like progression.

Unranked servers are practically hidden from users. Also, if people want to have access to all the weapons and side-grades they have to go through the progression. There are plenty of people wanting to just get it over with, eg see bot farming. Doesn't mean all those people, who are farming their levels, also like it.

It would alienate their playerbase. Their playerbase likes progression and realism mode AS IS.

Some do, others don't. No way to get exact percentages. The point is that not all people playing Realism like the progression.


Do you hear yourself? My god. Of course, why didn't I think of it before! The only thing wrong with classic is its "unappealing name" :rolleyes: and if ONLY "classic" mode was called "Hardcore realism" or some such crap, people would flock to it! And I'm deluding myself...
It is only one of the reasons. I'm not alone in this opinion. Yes, feel free to disagree with this.

Now leave me alone please, I can't be bothered doing these long discussions anymore. Everything has been said. If you want to continue with your posts, please direct them to one of the other posters in this thread who share my opinion on this.
 
Last edited:

GIGGITY ELITE

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 26, 2013
8
0
0
About parts of #2 and #4. I think the attributes are supposed to represent that veteran soldiers were more competent and tougher then the "green" soldiers. And for 4 they may mean they can't tell if he is actually dead or just faking.
 

StardogChampion

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 28, 2006
111
7
0
I have no idea how people like you could have lived during the era of the Halos, the UTs, the Quakes, the Starcrafts, the Warcrafts, the Call of Duties (pre cod4), the Medal of Honors, and the Counterstrikes.

Lack of progression does not invalidate the fun one is having in a game. We don't need an endless carrot on a stick in front of us to motivate us to play a game. If a game needs progression to be fun then something is inherently broken with it.
Well I managed during the RO1 mod. Where were you then?

Games with short matches don't need it. Try investing an hour into a round when all you get is a "You Win!" message, then it restarts from scratch with no stats to look at, etc. After a few wins, see how interesting it is to get no real credit.

Wait, so the whole point of RO to you is... Progression systems?

What about the teamwork?
What about the tactics?
What about the history?
What about the crazy charges?
What about the fury of battle?
What about the actual gameplay?

For you, I recommend Runescape.
Well done on missing the point.
 
Last edited:

bobsynergy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 8, 2010
607
118
0
Well I managed during the RO1 mod. Where were you then?

Games with short matches don't need it. Try investing an hour into a round when all you get is a "You Win!" message, then it restarts from scratch with no stats to look at, etc. After a few wins, see how interesting it is to get no real credit.

This is a stupid point because it is interesting because the game is fun....if you can't play an hour round because you feel like it's pointless then it's either you don't have fun with long rounds or your not having fun with that game.

I once saw a post that the only reason some guy played BF2 for over 2000 hours was because of the unlocks which is completely ridiculous, if you are playing a game just for the reason of getting unlocks and not playing the game to play it because you enjoy it (and even maybe get some unlocks along the way?) then how can you say you like the game?

Like if I play with the type 100 it's because I want to play with it and that's it, I don't choose the type 100 and force myself to play with it so I can get the bayonet, if I get it?, cool. If I don't? whatever I'm having fun playing the game, if your doing something just because of unlocks then you aren't enjoying the game.

The credit is knowing you won the match and the experience the game gave you, not that you unlocked a cool scope or something.

On topic though it looks like the progression system in RS is fine as I don't see heroes running around with the enemies weapons :p and I think it's cool unlike RO2s where you got dumb stuff like the MP40/II or having to unlock standard stuff for the PPSH.
 

StardogChampion

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 28, 2006
111
7
0
This is a stupid point because it is interesting because the game is fun....if you can't play an hour round because you feel like it's pointless then it's either you don't have fun with long rounds or your not having fun with that game.
How is that true?

if you are playing a game just for the reason of getting unlocks
I haven't mentioned unlocks specifically. I would remove unlocks from the game. Leveling is more important than unlocks.
 

bobsynergy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 8, 2010
607
118
0
How is that true?


I haven't mentioned unlocks specifically. I would remove unlocks from the game. Leveling is more important than unlocks.

Dammit but we were arguing about unlocks!!! ok that post applies to people who are talking about unlocks. Now your making me look like I'm crazy.

But on the point I made: It is true because at the end of RO2, DH or RO1 I don't care about levels, I'm happy that I won or disappointed that I lost but I think about the match and the cool moments in it and that's really it. That I had a ton of fun in the match with cool moments.

If at the end of the round you feel like it was pointless because you didn't progress through a level then how can you be having fun? It's like those people that complain about their K/D, how can those people be having fun in the game if all their worried about is how many times they die?
 

Holy.Death

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 17, 2011
1,427
91
0
This post is a rant encompassing multiple problems I have with both RS and RO2, primary focused on the metagaming aspects.
Nothing new.

All of points you mentioned can, will and were argued with by many people many times already. We - as the sum total of the playerbase - won't reach any compromise in this matter. What's more, you're not even looking for it. You just want everybody to comply to your point of view, which is impossible as nobody will back down just like that. It doesn't really matter what any of us says here as all our opinions will be ignored by people who disagree with us and vice versa.

So why even start this discussion?​
 
Last edited:

Randy Newman

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 1, 2012
214
7
0
First of all, try to relax. What's up with all that blind rage? You seem to jump on every one of my posts like a rabid dog. Woof.
Naw man, its never personal. Its not rage either...

I just enjoy going after ya (and to some degree Sarkis too I admit :))because you're always a good sport to argue with (and always respond intelligently allowing me to see holes in my narrative).

I hope ya didn't take my posts the wrong way! I am sorry!:IS2:
 
Last edited:

Scarf Ace

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 16, 2011
265
282
0
Hell, Chivalry has it and I never once came across players complaining about their unlock system or how people level up..... And certainly not at the level of bickering I see players in here go on with over RO2's system.
I'm a Chivalry player.
In Chivalry, it takes 25 kills with a weapon to unlock the second one in the category, and another 50 to unlock the third one (not sure about the exact numbers). In other words, it takes no time at all. Generally, you get the more balanced/easy to use weapons in the start and then unlock more specialised, tricky versions.
Not to mention your character abilities don't improve and the new weapons are sidegrades.
These two games have very different unlock systems. RO2/RS's system is slow as hell and based on upgrades and improvements that result in advantages, Chivalry gives you variety and is so quick it's basically irrelevant.

Don't like the system?

Play Classic Mode or stick to unranked servers.
1. Classic sucks
2. Unranked servers have no players.
 
Last edited:

Cpt-Praxius

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 12, 2005
3,300
1,667
0
Canadian in Australia
It's players like you who facilitate this mainstream garbage.

Good.

If all players gave up like you and continued to be sheep, we'd all be F'd.

Yeah that's it.... I'm sheep because I like something you don't.

There is a thin line between what I find acceptable with progression systems and what I don't.

RO2 and Chivalry's progression systems are fine by me and like them..... BF's progression system is something I don't like at all..... BF2's was the worst imo.

Not everybody has a black and white mentality or gets so upset over such trivial things.

If you thoroughly enjoy it, then fine, that's your opinion. But telling players to move on is too much. We won't move on. Players like myself will fight this until the day we die.

:rolleyes: over a video game..... yeah, keep fighting the good fight.

I'm not trying to be some kind of gaming extremist or something, I just think very certain games are able to have treadmills to run on. FPS games have really let me down in these terms. Do you guys see massive threads and rebellion about Counter-Strike? "Please give us unlocks almighty game gods, please! We want to play months to get stuff we paid for! Please!" No, probably not.

I don't know anybody who plays Counter-Strike.

As a counter, do you see threads upon threads in BF forums of players demanding they remove that progression system?? Now that your CS argument has been rendered moot, let's move on shall we?

The only thing I think the RO2 progression system needs is a tweak for some weapons and classes to level up faster than they currently do.

The Marksman, AT Class, Pistols, AT Rifle, etc. all take a long time compared to other weapons.

Either way, you keep on fighting the good fight..... fight the power. I'm sure some day it'll make a difference.

But not today.

I didn't get into RO in the mod days because of progression or unlocks. I got into the game due to its level of realism, immersion, new weapons to try out, combined arms combat, gameplay overall, and the challenge of winning a match.

^ None of that has changed, although the Combined Arms aspect needs a bit of improvement.

As I said, I was worried about the RO2 progression system, thinking it'd be like BF's stupid system and didn't like the path being headed into.... but when I played, it was certainly nowhere near what I feared and isn't really that bad.

It could use improvements and some changes here and there, but for me, with all of the things I mentioned above that I enjoyed about RO, this adds a bit more on top of all of that for me to enjoy.

And as difficult as it is for some in here to understand, I can enjoy all of the things above while enjoying the existing progression system...... I don't have to like one or the other, I have enough brain matter in my head to enjoy more than one thing at a time.

I play RO2 just exactly as I used to play ROCA and RO1.... it's just now at the end of the match, there's a little extra something that pops in.

The progression system doesn't dictate how I play the game.... if it does for others, then that's just sad, but the fault lies in themselves, not the system.

I'm a Chivalry player.
In Chivalry, it takes 25 kills with a weapon to unlock the second one in the category, and another 50 to unlock the third one (not sure about the exact numbers). In other words, it takes no time at all.

Depends on how often you play and how good you are at killing compared to getting killed.... much like in RO2... go figure.

In RO2, it's much easier killing an enemy than it is in Chivalry (One well placed shot vs. completely different combat of multiple hits and critical timing + differing battle tactics between 2 or more players) thus I feel the number of kills for either game are balanced decently based on the type of game being represented.

Generally, you get the more balanced/easy to use weapons in the start and then unlock more specialised, tricky versions.

Besides the MKB42, AVT40, Scoped SVT40 and Scoped G41, you get all of the weapons in RO2 from the start (no specialized limitations).

If you bought the DDE of RO2, then you got the above as well..... with a DDE upgrade always available in the Steam Store if you don't want to wait to level them up.

Not to mention your character abilities don't improve and the new weapons are sidegrades.

All of the unlocks in RO2 are side grades..... bayonet, bigger magazine, no sight hood, different muzzle brake, etc.

Bigger magazines? Big deal, you get to hold a lot more ammo per mag, yet you get less magazines (PPSH gets either 3 drum mags or 6 stick mags) so you only worry about reloading more often or not..... pretty trivial.

These two games have very different unlock systems. RO2/RS's system is slow as hell and based on upgrades and improvements that result in advantages, Chivalry gives you variety and is so quick it's basically irrelevant.

Again that depends on how well you play in either game.

With the stock weapons in Chivalry, I'm pretty crappy with some of them, while much better with other weapons.... yet I have to struggle and grind my way through with weapons I'm not good with in order to eventually get to the weapons I'm better with.... which can make it take a lot longer if I keep getting destroyed against other players who have those other weapons.

In RO2, I have all of the weapons available for me to choose from.

1. Classic sucks
2. Unranked servers have no players.

Well those are your options, you can't have everything you want in life.

/thread
 
Last edited: