RO2 Message to the Developers

[aaz777]

We can simply agree that the PPSh41 was as common as the MP38/40 on the Eastern Front in the ranks of the German Army.

No we cant just agree on this. Sorry but you need to dig some real statistics and numbers and not just " large quanities ". Just to mention that PPSh was quite rare at 1941 and its production increased to millions per year only at 1942.
As you mentioned in the end Red Army was capturing lots of panzerfausts that were even sent to special soviet units in high numbers. That doesnt mean that all fausts came directly in soviet hands from german factories and germans didnt have fausts while soviets had.

 

[Zakarro]

The good ol' USSR history books..... - love them.

Whats history?

 

[Raven1986]

No we cant just agree on this. Sorry but you need to dig some real statistics and numbers and not just " large quanities ". Just to mention that PPSh was quite rare at 1941 and its production increased to millions per year only at 1942.
As you mentioned in the end Red Army was capturing lots of panzerfausts that were even sent to special soviet units in high numbers. That doesnt mean that all fausts came directly in soviet hands from german factories and germans didnt have fausts while soviets had.

Oh that's what you are unhappy about that I made it look like as if the entire production went to the enemy. Com'on now. A lot of factories were simply overrun, question is if you really got time to pack up things and take them with you if the enemy knocks on your door.
I will post in a German Wehrmacht forums and try to find out if actual numbers exist or if the closest we get is truly "large quantities".

 

[K98-Schütze[GER]]

As far as it concerns RO2 - the exclusive "Stalingrad" setting destroyed balance.

Nobody were complaining in RO1-Berezina, that the germans didnt had Tigers and the soviets didnt had IS-2......

I agree - realistic scenarios ( = in game terms "maps") would be better.
War is war - and not chess.
"Asymetrical" warfare (equipment or inspired by real battles) like in Bridges/Myshkova is, at least for me, one of the interesting aspects on this game.

 

[PsychoPigeon]

People use the term realistic as if it's just one thing instead of just that person's view on how a game should be. It's a way for people to get around saying "this is how i want the game to be" which comes across arrogant and demanding (although there's nothing wrong with it, at least they have the balls to say it directly) so instead they say "no no, it's not my view, it's realism saying these things, so if you don't listen to me you're not going for realism".

 

[Jank]

Maybe that's just what you want realistic to mean...

 

[Raven1986]

For me there went several things wrong with RO2. First off the SP. If the singleplayer was a full fledged campaign like the Brothers in Arms series, showing the war from the German perspective, it would have struck like lightning and everyone would have gone crazy about this new game. Problem is however that it would have been singleplayer only.
So best would have been to throw out the singleplayer idea and concentrate entirely on the multiplayer.
Looking at what people post just recently what's in the game files but not in the actual game breaks one's heart. Facial animations for RO2 factions are present, work seemed to have been stopped somewhere in the midst of development.

It feels a bit like when looking into the game files of Call of Duty WaW, there you find that there was actually a British SAS campaign in the Ardennes and also missions in which you were to steer a P51 and battle Zeros.

Blending animations are partly in there already, however they are ridiculous if you look at the stoned faces with no expression in the faces, even as their arm was blown off.

The next thing I keep on wishing is Full Body, sure it is about performance, but if Crysis released in 2007 had it and it became the norm in video games, why can't my favourite WWII shooter have that?
I don't want to be a gun with two hands glued to it. Voice acting is great, it needs the right animations to kick ***.

I also wondered why Germans to this very day do not have greatcoats in vanilla RO. Evidence was provided but nothing happened. Was it a lack of time upon release that had you folks take the German standard models, get a headscarf on them, some snow texture and gloves, rather than equipping them with greatcoats. I know it is not winter clothing but it is still a lot better than just the standard field tunic.

Another thing is the way night time maps look like. If you do not light them up to full moon nights the maps look bad. There are other games with UE3 and they do not look bad in dark maps. What happened there?


The real unbalance for me happened with the unlock system. There was no such thing in the predecessors and the only things that could be imbalanced was the map design. Now additionally we have half the team running around with enemy weapons and the fact that you need to play long enough to get an upgrade for your weapon. I assume if there was no unlocking, it would be better.

 

[Lemonater47]

Improvised winter clothing was still far more prevalent and winter parkas had come about giving warmth but more suited for a combat role. Like the British preferring to take their WW1 era leather jerkin into combat over their greatcoat which they used when they weren't assaulting something. Far easier to move about in, doesn't get wet and you don't risk overheating which surpringly happened often. Greatcoats were outdated military gear only used becuase nothing else better was developed until part way through the war for all parties involved except for the british. But even then that leather jerkin was first used for trench warfare. Turned out in WW2 it had other advantages not considered back then. Yeah greatcoats were around. But they are better suited for sitting in a hole than for running around.

Unlocking is a way of simulating the rarity of weapons without putting forceful restrictions on them. There's already a lot of complaining about roles such as marksman. But if you restricted weapons that amount of complaining would increase dramatically. Unlocks are a very minor things especially for us who have pretty much unlocked everything. No idea why vets complain about unlocks when you already have the thing and we're gonna spend the time on it anyway. It would just be a different bunch of people complaining, a numerical majority rather than a vocal minority.


A singleplayer campaign takes a long time to get right. They would of had to have doubled their studio size. As well as heavily modified the engine towards being a singleplayer game. As their current modifications to unreal is in no way suited for a proper singleplayer campaign. And let's be honest. Call of duty 4 was the last good call of duty. And an aircraft mission in a call of duty game would of been awful lol we know this to be true.

 

[RandomPerson78642]

You shouldn't make so many baseless assumptions. And COD 5 was just fine thank you very much.

Unlocks should be a good mix. You should have access to all weapons right form the start, but accessories can be earned.

 

[Raven1986]

Baseless? Me?

http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Cut_Content/Call_of_Duty:_World_at_War

It wasn't just me who found that stuff hiding there. Sure the game was not bad itself, yet it would have been nice to have an additional campaign with the British in Holland. http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Holland

The P51 Mustang action evidence: http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Fly

Rarity of guns, hm, the majority of German assaults is running around with either an Mkb or the MP40/II. Particularly the latter was manufactured only about 100 times. If the mapper was to decide which things are allowed on their maps would be sweet.

 

[RandomPerson78642]

I was talking to Lemonater. I've seen some of the unused content myself.


But really guys, what is even the point of all this arguing? Tripwire isn't going to actually change anything.
They're probably not even going to see this.