RO2 The Future

[Cyper]

This game isn't very accessible at all. RO2 is away to hard for the mainstream. Most of the COD/BF players wont enjoy the game in any sense because it's to hard and complex while the old players think the opposite. This game either aims at a audience that doesn't exist OR it simply creates a whole new niche audience which doesn't consist of casual gamers, nor old ROvets, but people that likes this new direction.

The future of ro?

Without writing a long post about this:

As long as TWI want to make this game accessible it will never become a tactical shooter. If they gamble away the core fanbase which may become tired of all complaints that never get addressed that's quite a problem. Because I don't know if these people will invest a lot of time in the game if TWI doesn't even care. The fact Ramm said that It's OUR responsibility to mdevelop the game to our liking (e.i what it was supposed to be in the first place) is crazy. While TWI aims to invest more money on making the game more ''accessible'' and at the same time selling out their old fanbase; It's this fanbase that are supposed to PAY for this game just to invest their freetime to fix it up for themself, and at the same time save the whole game by keeping it alive while TWI does absolutely nothing?

 

[Verluste]

This game isn't very accessible at all. RO2 is away to hard for the mainstream. Most of the COD/BF players wont enjoy the game in any sense because it's to hard and complex while the old players think the opposite. This game either aims at a audience that doesn't exist OR it simply creates a whole new niche audience which doesn't consist of casual gamers, nor old ROvets, but people that likes this new direction.

The future of ro?

Without writing a long post about this:

As long as TWI want to make this game accessible it will never become a tactical shooter. If they gamble away the core fanbase which may become tired of all complaints that never get addressed that's quite a problem. Because I don't know if these people will invest a lot of time in the game if TWI doesn't even care. The fact Ramm said that It's OUR responsibility to mdevelop the game to our liking (e.i what it was supposed to be in the first place) is crazy. While TWI aims to invest more money on making the game more ''accessible'' and at the same time selling out their old fanbase; It's this fanbase that are supposed to PAY for this game just to invest their freetime to fix it up for themself, and at the same time save the whole game by keeping it alive while TWI does absolutely nothing?

The more I read posts of Ramm and about Ramm the more I think he is having very unconventional ideas about games and gamedevelopment.

Whether these ideas are any good, I leave that up to other people.

 

[Zetsumei]

RO2 is a lot less accessible gameplay and control wise compared to RO1 at least for me.

RO1 was clunky, and didn't have the brilliant tactical view. Which are 2 things that help RO2 a lot. But beside the ability to lean, sprint and prone it was pretty much the same as ut2004 regarding control (although nothing was interruptible).

RO2 gained a lot more functions and buttons people have to press. In ackward positions as well. Next to that with free aim in iron sights people have to unlearn and relearn all the skill they have in other games. Its like suddenly having to relearn how to use your arms.

Lets look at the default key config.

Change fire mode of your weapon default key: 6. Nobody will ever figure that out unless he specifically looks in the config settings and tries it out. There is not even a manual, and can't remember it being told in the SP although i havent really played that much.

Change range of your weapon = weapon change.
You are in ironsight and you want to change weapon instead you change your range. If you don't know what you did you end up with a weapon that suddenly is sighted in at 1000 meters. Trying to scroll out again might change your weapon as you left ironsights not too user friendly.

Zoom = Sprint key. Again most people don't even know of this functionality, as its definitely not a natural combination. You want to zoom when you want to be still and not move and take an accurate shot. You want to sprint when you want to get the hell away. It often happens early on that you accidently sprint when you want to zoom.

Bandage = Use = Cover. I don't know about you but when trying to call arty or picking up an enemy weapon I personally often end up getting stuck to some wall. Not exactly what I call user friendly there.

With some weapons (MG's, Anti tank), you automatically go in ironsights when going prone, while with all other guns you don't. This is not really consistent. When you are used like me to quickly go into is after going prone mg's make you consistently go out of ironsights.

When in cover mode you can run away from the cover by simply moving or running away. However when you are in ironsight you can often zoom in or get stuck in the cover mode. Where you can run away from the cover mode, with the heavy machineguns you cannot run away, while intuitively people think going away is the same as in the cover mode.

Beside that there is no way to change the default set toggle keys or change the combined bindings, when most shooters of these days follow COD's input method of hold keys. So players familiar with COD will be heavily fighting against the toggle keys for the input.

Alt = prone, shift = sprint. Try to dive to prone with the default steam overlay button, and you end up in the steam overlay.

Try loading individual bullets into your rifle or pistol, suddenly an enemy shows up. You then have to either sprint, melee or change weapon to interrupt the reload to be able to shoot him. While you are not able to just stop reloading in another way and just shoot whoever you saw.

RO1 was clunky and didn't allow interruptions but at least it was consistent in that.

 

[Cyper]

It's not accessible for the hardcore gamers simply because It's too unrealistic while It's not accessible for the majority of the casual gamers either because it's away too realistic.. Kinda begs the question...

Who is this game accessible for? Are TWI trying to create a whole new audience? Does this audience exist to the degree that it will keep RO2 alive and at the same time give enough economical resources after RO3s release? Does this audience exist at all? How big is it?

To be honest I don't know. The only thing I know for sure is that it is very risky to change the formula for any game. Especially a game like RO which have a very small (but!) dedicated community.

 

[Flashman]

RO2? Game over.

 

[7-CLOWN-7]

I agree with most and yes the key bindings should be whatever you want.

I play all my games the exact same way. (Right hand) - My middle mouse button is both my forward (Holding it down), and scroll for switching weapons, Left mouse (fire), Right mouse (Iron site) (Doing all of this with a single finger). Side mouse button (reload), other side mouse button (use) (Thumb).

(Left hand) Keyboard Right Shift (Sprint), Right Control (Hold for crouch), arrow keys, (strafe right, left and backwards), number pad 0 (prone), number pad 1 (melee).

So Zet you can make buttons toggle by editing the .ini files properly. I've done it for my crouch.

Chat P (Public), O (Hold to speak), I (Team)

Q and E (leans right and left) I don't use anything else.

With the way it is now you have to scroll then pick a weapon (bad move). As Zet said adding 3-4 different things for a single click (bad move). I often get stuck to a wall then switch between iron site and sprint and weapon distance. Also the constant message you can't go prone here - should be able to prone anywhere and have you just move out auto from object - keeping feet from showing through wall or object. (RO1) problem.

I've played BF3 and posted my thoughts already - I'm sure their forums are full of the same (Grass is never greener on the other side).

One last thing I can say is when the dust settles we'll be back to where we were in RO1. We'll have all the die hard RO2 players left, we'll be our own community where everyone knows everyone's name (ala Cheers)... LOL

All bugs and issues will be fixed, we'll have a few good servers, and a constant player base and then the MODS and maps will start flowing in and the other content and things will be the way we've all wanted it to be. RO1 took a few years to get to where we all started really enjoying it and RO2 will do the same. I'm also here for the long haul.

See you all on the battlefield.

 

[Drecks]

I think Butch is right here. Everything is gonna be alright. And we will end up with a decent sices community and people will come back to play RO HOS.

 

[Stahlgeist]

To address something in the original post: I don't play Killing Floor, but I've seen it mentioned that Killing Floor has had some sort of event(s) going on lately, and people mentioned that to explain the jump in players as displayed on a graph comparing its activity to RO2.
If that's true, then it might still be argued that the actual, consistent player base of KF is lower and is only spiking as the typical response to a new event/additional content. This used to be observable in Ostfront and its mods when updates were released, as well.

Anyway, regarding RO2's future: I think that it is best that Tripwire continue working to address the performance issues, gameplay issues, and bugs as soon as they can so as to stabilize the game and the player base. Once that happens, we can get a better idea of how this game is going to develop and how it may stand in terms of longevity.

My personal prediction is that, should they work out the aforementioned problems, it will be roughly on par with the player count and life span for Ostfront.
While RO2 tried to appeal to a broader fan base, it doesn't seem to have succeeded in keeping many new arrivals, so it remains as a strange hybrid of its predecessor and the more loose, fast-paced games that are found in the mainstream market. I've noted before in another topic that, by its initial goals, RO2 failed to really deliver on the expectation of holding the attention of both the original fanbase and the new crowd who were intrigued by the marketing campaign. Some Ostfront fans have ceased to play RO2, and many of the fans of other franchises went right back to them without a second thought.

So what I'm left with, speculatively, is roughly the same situation as Ostfront in terms of numbers. The difference is that RO1 was designed as a niche game, whereas RO2 was meant to broaden the player base considerably. I think this is why people often claim that RO2 will die. The risks taken in marketing and development raised community expectations to see a much larger number of players, and since these have not been met, people have the impression that the game will die from the failure to impress new players or to appease the Ostfront veterans.