More historical loadouts for Realism mode
- Thread starter SiC-Disaster
- Start date
thats true hahahaahha every day that pass the angry mob is growing, dude i wouldnt like to be a TWI worker nowadays looool! i could be lynched ad patre
(anyway i respect the work u guyz did, its just wrong about all you TWI guyz have said RO2 would be, and itsnt in the end, + that RO2 aint a RO like game with those changes undertaken)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
i keep arguing this, lets go back to the ro fps type or ro2 is dead meat, by ignoring more than ever any constructive threads, that only want the game to be better.I saw any constructive threads, pointing the bad things of the game, without whining, but with logic, are aint replyed yet by any TWI Devs...
This just doent make sense, unless it was pre disposed to be like this and to be RO2 last TWI ww2 fps game till they go for RO MW xD
hahaha sorry for the comparison, but its appealing, CoD, CoD2, then yay no more ww2, CoD MW, here we go TWI, thats the scheme prepared? ( sorry to be part of the angry mob, but on this i know im aint alone, plz at least tell us u readed us, and u would think about it, ignoring us is the badest thing ever to do)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Carefull about that or you'll get snotty PMs warning you not to. (Yes, I did get such a PM. I wonder if this post will prompt another. Better make sure I include some content then...)
Changing the standard game isn't what's being asked; it's a new game mode that servers can be set to run on out-of-the-box. 95% of forum members aren't all realism purists, of that I'm certain; however, 95% of forum members merely want to have a choice of playing what they thought Realism was going to be before the game was released.
No news could still be regarded as good(ish) news. You know you're sunk when the torpedo actually hits, until then there's always a chance you're gonna make it.
Upvote
0
Actually I can deny this
So what was the problem here? How could the forums have been so wrong? Two reasons:
1) The forums generally represent less than 1% of the playerbase in size (in the case of RO2 its probably less than 0.01%). In other words, way less than 1% of players ever even post on the forums, so you have an extremely small sample size.
2) Players almost NEVER go on to the forums to let you know that they like the status quo. You won't get a rash of people dropping in to say "you know what, I just wanted to say I love everything just the way it is". It is the nature of the internet the people usually go to the forums when they have something they want to gripe about, or have changed.
So what is a designer to do in this situation? How do you sort the minority gripes from the true problems? Well first off you have to be quick to listen, fast to investigate, but slow to change. What that means is listen to what the community are saying, investigate and get some good data, but let things ride for a little bit to see how they are truly going to flow out. It also means getting out there and playing the game with a lot of different people on a lot of different servers. If you always play the game with the same set of people, you'll always end up with similar results. So you have to jump around and test the waters.
A prime example of this was RO:Ostfront. When we first released it there were some maps that when it first came out were ALWAYS won by the same team. There were outcries on the forums about how unbalanced certain levels were. Then within a couple weeks of the launch as people learned the maps, what routes to take, where to go, etc the balance of some of these maps shifted completely in the opposite direction with no changes from the dev team. So to sum up on this point, sometimes the initial reaction from a group of players isn't the correct reaction, and as they learn the maps, gameplay, functionality, the balance or flow can change. So you have to be a little patient to see how things play out.
So with all of that said we are looking into some tweaks to countdown as in some cases it works great, and in other cases it is not working out as well as we intended. Anyone who ever spent an entire hour stuck on the first objective on Berazina in RO1 knows that a system like this was needed. It rewards the defenders for playing aggressively and forces the attackers out of their hidey holes eventually. But as I said, we're giving it a couple of weeks for people to get used to all the new gameplay mechanics before we start rashly changing things but there is likely some changes coming.
Finally, and most importantly, the great thing about an SDK is that the power is in YOUR hands now to experiment with all these things. Try taking lockdown out, adding features we didn't think of, tweaking values, etc. If one of you all make a mutator or mode that EVERYONE (the REAL everyone) just loves we'll probably adopt it as official
96% of the forum community could still be wrong since it only represents 0.01% of the actual RO2 players.
I kinda feel like they don't want feedback, or don't really give much value to it
Upvote
0
Who might also be the last people to care enough to play online. Lots of empty servers out there now.
Upvote
0
Missing the point. Forums are representative of the player base, i.e., they are a snapshot/sample set of the general populace. Add a couple of zeros to the number of votes cast above and you've predictably expanded your sample set. Devs can choose to ignore forum results if they want to but under any other mechanism of market research a 96% sway in any direction, regardless of sample size, cannot be dismissed readily. Add to this that the Realism mode didn't deliver what almost everyone thought Realism means, and you've got a pretty compelling case.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
It's a no brainer really, Realistic mode should be realistic and have no MKB. But I do agree with many others that it should be a low priority for TWI.
Upvote
0
well actually if i did my math right since 516 total people have voted so far and roughly 4k people are playing at peak hours (according to steam) then the poll actually represents 20.6% of the total RO2 community not this fake ".01%" number being thrown around.
does it say somthing now that TW is willing to dismiss that large of a player base?? maybe that they are living in a fantasy?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
So the majority is for... shut up and play. The game is 12 days old. Give everyone a chance to adjust. Some people still can't tell the teams apart regularly. If the game is broken and the majority want it changed, TWI will change it, you can be sure.
But damn, man, put away the pitchforks and flaming torches for a few weeks huh?
Upvote
0
This is pulling numbers from thin air, but just for the sake of the argument (and I do agree overall, its just the numbers)..4k peak might still have 50k, 100k, who knows how many regular players. Some play only on weekends, some sleeping etc, then you have the majority that might play an hour or 2 a day if that, or an hour only on Wednesdays or whatever etc. So for every hour of the day you have different people coming and going. 4k concurrent players isn't too shabby for a game imo, not in terms of AAA run&gun games but for a realism shooter its not bad.
The problem though is that the majority of these players won't necessarily post on a forum if they aren't happy with the game. They will just stop playing and tell their friends. They won't care for giving feedback to the devs. Devs shouldn't do whatever forum posters say, but they should at least treat the info with some respect as its a snapshot of their wider playerbase. You can't just go on servers and see what people think as Ramm suggested, as after a certain point it will be like saying "let me go see what people think about God by asking in random churches". I mean if people don't like the game they won't be there to give their opinion, or it will be mostly positive if the problems are big enough that people stop playing. What TWI should be doing is playing their game now when they have a chance, and not use their dev names as people will go into sycophantic "omg its a dev" mode and suddenly everything will be rosy. They should play the game and listen to all the feedback, as the majority playing probably don't dislike the game enough to not play. They should also be researching on other gaming forums besides this one. There are forums all over the place they can get neutral feedback from. I see that the forum represents a smaller number than the total players, but they are at least players that care enough to give feedback. A lot of people playing simply don't care in that way and will play whatever their friends are playing, and whatever is new
Part of the problem is TWI haven't managed to peak the "realism" crowd's interest enough with RO2 imo, and the run&gun disposable shooter crowd will be playing the next new game as soon as that shows up. TW should have made sure their no.1 go to crowd were happy with the game then made something more palatable for the arcade crowd. Its just not good for them long term if they lose their core fan base without substituting them for a larger group, especially when they insult their forum base by saying their opinion doesn't matter and ignore most of the threads. I don't think the game goes too far into arcade for it to lose all realism fans though, just that they treat them like second rate players who might end up looking for other games to play instead.
They have a realism mode but haven't really spent any time on it. You can tell all their dev time went into making sure "relaxed realism" aka the new standard mode was good for the random FPS gamer players, with Realism tacked on the end with hardly any difference to gameplay. With mostly just less HUD info rather than realism inspired gameplay tweaks. Its like the devs don't know who they want to play the game, and don't know who their core playerbase will be. I think they anticipated the game to go near the top in steam charts, then they could have ditched the "realism" crowd all together. But instead its not growing but shrinking because the crowd they seem to want are a fickle bunch, and if their stats or performance or the game has bugs then they won't give you too many chances to get it right, and they will be gone soon enough anyway. I guess TWI are banking on them coming back for DLC's when those launch
The problem though is that the majority of these players won't necessarily post on a forum if they aren't happy with the game. They will just stop playing and tell their friends. They won't care for giving feedback to the devs. Devs shouldn't do whatever forum posters say, but they should at least treat the info with some respect as its a snapshot of their wider playerbase. You can't just go on servers and see what people think as Ramm suggested, as after a certain point it will be like saying "let me go see what people think about God by asking in random churches". I mean if people don't like the game they won't be there to give their opinion, or it will be mostly positive if the problems are big enough that people stop playing. What TWI should be doing is playing their game now when they have a chance, and not use their dev names as people will go into sycophantic "omg its a dev" mode and suddenly everything will be rosy. They should play the game and listen to all the feedback, as the majority playing probably don't dislike the game enough to not play. They should also be researching on other gaming forums besides this one. There are forums all over the place they can get neutral feedback from. I see that the forum represents a smaller number than the total players, but they are at least players that care enough to give feedback. A lot of people playing simply don't care in that way and will play whatever their friends are playing, and whatever is new
Part of the problem is TWI haven't managed to peak the "realism" crowd's interest enough with RO2 imo, and the run&gun disposable shooter crowd will be playing the next new game as soon as that shows up. TW should have made sure their no.1 go to crowd were happy with the game then made something more palatable for the arcade crowd. Its just not good for them long term if they lose their core fan base without substituting them for a larger group, especially when they insult their forum base by saying their opinion doesn't matter and ignore most of the threads. I don't think the game goes too far into arcade for it to lose all realism fans though, just that they treat them like second rate players who might end up looking for other games to play instead.
They have a realism mode but haven't really spent any time on it. You can tell all their dev time went into making sure "relaxed realism" aka the new standard mode was good for the random FPS gamer players, with Realism tacked on the end with hardly any difference to gameplay. With mostly just less HUD info rather than realism inspired gameplay tweaks. Its like the devs don't know who they want to play the game, and don't know who their core playerbase will be. I think they anticipated the game to go near the top in steam charts, then they could have ditched the "realism" crowd all together. But instead its not growing but shrinking because the crowd they seem to want are a fickle bunch, and if their stats or performance or the game has bugs then they won't give you too many chances to get it right, and they will be gone soon enough anyway. I guess TWI are banking on them coming back for DLC's when those launch
Last edited:
Upvote
0
We may be 1% but we'll be the 1% who will still be here when everyone rushes off to try BF3.
I'm sure a lot of those people will come back after the first week because RO2 is a great game, but this doesn't change the fact that the hardcore (and loyal) fanbase for RO is based on people who prefer realism over arcade, so while it's fully understandable that you need to make a game that appeals to a wider audience to make it economically viable, it still makes no sense not to include a variation that appeals specifically to your loyal fanbase.
I'm sure a lot of those people will come back after the first week because RO2 is a great game, but this doesn't change the fact that the hardcore (and loyal) fanbase for RO is based on people who prefer realism over arcade, so while it's fully understandable that you need to make a game that appeals to a wider audience to make it economically viable, it still makes no sense not to include a variation that appeals specifically to your loyal fanbase.
Upvote
0
That's the point TW are missing if you ask me.
I'm in this for the long, long haul.
Most of the people registered in August will be gone in a few weeks when the BF3 beta arrives.
I'm not even buying it.
Upvote
0
I'm still fairly confident that this will be looked into properly once the core game functions have been sorted out; there really is no point piddling about with squad compositions when significant chunks of the core game are still in need of attention.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0