The other 80% of RO2 players dont want a "realism" mode.

[dazman76]

Hmm, I did already nominate someone for President today. Feck it. SiC-Disaster for President!

 

[GRIZZLY]

Hmm, I did already nominate someone for President today. Feck it. SiC-Disaster for President!

Looks like we've got a race

 

[Hells High]

he's not exaggerating the ratio. worse. he's stating that of the 80% of the people that bought the game and don't post here, ALL of them want relaxed realism. that is absurd!

my two cents...... if you bought the game, you have a right to add what you think it should evolve into. if you do not come to these forums and participate, you lost your choice and will just have to take it like it is. the only vote that counts, is the one that gets submitted here at tripwire.

80% of the population either don't care to change the game, or quit playing. they just do not count.

Okay, so your post is pretty ridiculous. People are playing the game the way it was intended and are simply waiting for some technical fixes, so they are unimportant? What if they don't want the game to change? What if those people are content and simply want the game to run better? Just because the vocal minority wants one thing, the rest are irrelevant?

Oh 'realism' gamers.

PS Please note, before hitting that little minus button like usual, this isn't a vote for changing the gameplay one way or another.

 

[SiC-Disaster]

Okay, so your post is pretty ridiculous. People are playing the game the way it was intended and are simply waiting for some technical fixes, so they are unimportant? What if they don't want the game to change? What if those people are content and simply want the game to run better? Just because the vocal minority wants one thing, the rest are irrelevant?

Oh 'realism' gamers.

PS Please note, before hitting that little minus button like usual, this isn't a vote for changing the gameplay one way or another.

Relaxed realism mode.
Imho the current Full realism mode is what I expected the Relaxed Realism mode to be like.

Also, I find the highlighted part to be pretty insulting.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Okay, so your post is pretty ridiculous. People are playing the game the way it was intended and are simply waiting for some technical fixes, so they are unimportant? What if they don't want the game to change? What if those people are content and simply want the game to run better? Just because the vocal majority wants one thing, the rest are irrelevant?

Correction

How do you know that the majority doesn't want changes, but don't want to be bothered to post?

Anyway, you have no facts one way or the other, except for your own opinion and those expressed by others here, same as I

 

[The Commissar]

I think that we can, at the very least, agree that the game is in a FAR better state than on it's release.
I do wish the game would be more realistic and less buggy, but I have faith that Tripwire will fulfill the community's requests.... slowly, but surely

 

[Machinist]

i loved RO1/Darkest Hour because it was arcadey yet brutal and had really awesome features, going to realistic harms the game in my opinion, i respect arma 2 which is extremely realistic, the game has died currently because its too over the top and too hard to actually fight other players, so its just A.I bashing, which sucks... imo arma 2 needs a TDM mode, and needs to be more friendly.

RO2 though just doesnt feel the same as RO1, due to game mechanics and map sizes and limitations, i think the only map which makes the game feel like RO1 is Red October, id actually prefer to play RO1 currently then RO2 by a long way and i find RO1's gameplay alot better.

 

[hockeywarrior]

I still dont get why all these new guys are complaining that they dont want added realism.
Fine. Play relaxed realism mode, so you dont have to deal with it. That was what that mode was created for, even though there is no use in playing it right now as there literally is no difference other than HUD.
And that is not what we were promised when these modes were announced.

And for the love of God, show some more respect for the people who have played RO:OST.
I see a lot of 'We dont care what RO1 players want, they are just whiners, RO2 is fine!'
Fact is that the reason you are here playing RO2 today is because we bought and supported RO1. We had expectations for the sequal of a game we love dearly. And though RO1 is not perfect, the general feel of the game was great. It was like shooter-chess, where if you wanted to be good, pretty much every move you made had to be thought out.
It was a smart game for people who wanted something more than run and shoot things.
And no, RO2 is not fine. For all it's refinements and improvements over RO1, it can't be denied that the general feel of gameplay has decreased to something less than was expected.
It is more actioney, there are design choices that remove the reasons for moving carefully.
And though it is more complex and dangerous than most games, it lacks the slower and more methodical pace of RO1, which is what made RO great. There are hundreds of shooters which try to do something unique and fail, but RO worked and became more or less popular for doing the things it did.
It might have made it harder for people to get into but damn, it was rewarding, it was unique, and it is the reason people still played it after all this time.
Now controls-wise things have much improved with blind fire, cover system, slight free-aim etc. but all the other things surrounding it have gone, and with those small things the feel of RO1 is gone.

All of you that do not agree act like we want to turn the game into this super-awkward thousandbuttonsforasingleaction slow cluster****.
We don't. In fact, that is probably the single thing that turns many people here off on ArmA 2, a game which most people might love if it was not for that.
But we want back some of the penalties of RO1, which make people play more or less realistically. Right now, though the basics are in place, the game feels like any other run of the mill shooter but with higher damage.

You know, I wasn't going to post in this thread purely out of a fear that I'd say something rash and get myself banned (undoubtedly in a blaze of counter-flaming glory), but it looks like Mr. Disaster here has done the work for me. Well done.

This post gets the "Hockeywarrior 110% Awesome No-Bull**** Seal of Approval".

 

[shadowmoses]

...What if they don't want the game to change? What if those people are content and simply want the game to run better? Just because the vocal minority wants one thing, the rest are irrelevant?

PS Please note, before hitting that little minus button like usual, this isn't a vote for changing the gameplay one way or another.

You sound like the heads of TWI right now. Not knowing what the rest of the community (the ones who arent on the forums) is thinking and so we should avoid changing anything because we would be doing something based solely on assumption. The fact is the player count is SO DAMN LOW it's pathetic: http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=q35450&jstime=1&from=1315803600000

If adding another mode to try and bring back realism focused players is all TWI has to do... even if its a few more, then why the hell wouldnt you??? I don't think there are many of the '20%'ers that want to see the game as it is change into something else. I personally just want to see another game mode that caters to me... A game that I thought I was getting, one that was promised to me before I purchased it. The old RO guys know what it's like to have a small community and the importance in keeping it up and alive. Taking out a large group like the new comers that do enjoy the game how it is (minus bugs ect) is suicidal for this game. We want everyone to enjoy what TWI has made but as it stands now, you have very very loyal chunk of the community that feels betrayed, unsatisfied, and so on.

And really... How on EARTH would another game mode effect you in the least?? If you don't want to play that mode THEN DON'T PLAY IT!

I still dont get why all these new guys are complaining that they dont want added realism.
Fine. Play relaxed realism mode, so you dont have to deal with it. That was what that mode was created for, even though there is no use in playing it right now as there literally is no difference other than HUD.
And that is not what we were promised when these modes were announced.

And for the love of God, show some more respect for the people who have played RO:OST.
I see a lot of 'We dont care what RO1 players want, they are just whiners, RO2 is fine!'
Fact is that the reason you are here playing RO2 today is because we bought and supported RO1. We had expectations for the sequal of a game we love dearly. And though RO1 is not perfect, the general feel of the game was great. It was like shooter-chess, where if you wanted to be good, pretty much every move you made had to be thought out.
It was a smart game for people who wanted something more than run and shoot things.
And no, RO2 is not fine. For all it's refinements and improvements over RO1, it can't be denied that the general feel of gameplay has decreased to something less than was expected.
It is more actioney, there are design choices that remove the reasons for moving carefully.
And though it is more complex and dangerous than most games, it lacks the slower and more methodical pace of RO1, which is what made RO great. There are hundreds of shooters which try to do something unique and fail, but RO worked and became more or less popular for doing the things it did.
It might have made it harder for people to get into but damn, it was rewarding, it was unique, and it is the reason people still played it after all this time.
Now controls-wise things have much improved with blind fire, cover system, slight free-aim etc. but all the other things surrounding it have gone, and with those small things the feel of RO1 is gone.

All of you that do not agree act like we want to turn the game into this super-awkward thousandbuttonsforasingleaction slow cluster****.
We don't. In fact, that is probably the single thing that turns many people here off on ArmA 2, a game which most people might love if it was not for that.
But we want back some of the penalties of RO1, which make people play more or less realistically. Right now, though the basics are in place, the game feels like any other run of the mill shooter but with higher damage.

Word-For-Word I Agree.
:IS2::IS2::IS2::IS2::IS2::IS2::IS2:

 

[shaqism]

Is that 80% the same people who want laser ai, that doesn't sound right because no server has tanks enabled

 

[Coopsta]

I strongly doubt + 8,000,000 of players didn't register on this board because they heard about this awesome guy Cyper. You have to wake up. The mainstream doesn't give a crap about RO2 because it isnt the next call of duty not because of me or someone else. RO2 is far removed from what the mainstream want. Otherwise they could either be on this board or playing the game right now. They don't. So your argument falls flat.

If you want to keep a tactical shooter to what it is - a tactical shooter - you can't ask the majority of what they want with it. Because the answer to that is extremely obvious. They don't want a tactical shooter. This is why the RO community, or the arma community, is called a niche audience, because its a game that gives the minority of gamers a game to play. And they have the full right to do so. I have never claimed that RO OST was or is the perfect game. I do have claimed that RO OST is away more tactical, equal and in many terms more realistic than RO2 - while RO2 in some ways is more realistic than RO OST.

Are you referring to the majority of people who play games? Or just this game? Implying that the developers would care about the opinions of people who don't own or haven't played the game is silly. Is this your irrefutable argument? That the game shouldn't be tailored to the mainstream desires of some imaginary homogenized consumer? It really is funny. Because let me tell you, the only people who Tripwire can ask anything are the ones on the forums. And on this forum, it's clear from the reps and downvotes on some of the posts in this thread that you hold the majority opinion. Until TWI adds in-game polls like Valve did for L4D2, you are the majority.

I hope people can see how fallacious and sensational the first sentence in the above quote is on their own.

If you want to keep a tactical shooter to what it is - a tactical shooter - you can't ask the majority of what they want with it.

And here you go again Cyper, implying that people who share the OP's opinion want to somehow change RO2. He's the one who wants to keep it what it is.

No one wants balance tweaks more than me, and I do not think the game is perfect or even finished, but I do not support a new game mode with dramatically changed gameplay which will fragment the already minuscule community of this game. The manpower is really better spent elsewhere in my opinion, as my desire is to see this game with more than one fully populated botless North American server (2. Fj).

It's a different game. The franchise has evolved.

 

[Cyper]

Are you referring to the majority of people who play games? Or just this game? Implying that the developers would care about the opinions of people who don't own or haven't played the game is silly. Is this your irrefutable argument? That the game shouldn't be tailored to the mainstream desires of some imaginary homogenized consumer? It really is funny. Because let me tell you, the only people who Tripwire can ask anything are the ones on the forums. And on this forum, it's clear from the reps and downvotes on some of the posts in this thread that you hold the majority opinion. Until TWI adds in-game polls like Valve did for L4D2, you are the majority.

I hope people can see how fallacious and sensational the first sentence in the above quote is on their own.


And here you go again Cyper, implying that people who share the OP's opinion want to somehow change RO2. He's the one who wants to keep it what it is.

No one wants balance tweaks more than me, and I do not think the game is perfect or even finished, but I do not support a new game mode with dramatically changed gameplay which will fragment the already minuscule community of this game. The manpower is really better spent elsewhere in my opinion, as my desire is to see this game with more than one fully populated botless North American server (2. Fj).

It's a different game. The franchise has evolved.

I refer to the majority, the mainstream - e.i all gamers. Implying that TWI doesn't care about the opinions from non-RO players outside of this board, sitting in front of BF sipping coke, is for sure not correct.

Why else did they make the game more accessible? Was it to make people on this board happy? No, it wasn't, because most people on this aren't happy with the changes in RO2 hench all the complaints. TWI made the game more accessible so it could appeal more to the mainstream. That's the whole reason behind accessibility - to make it fun, entertaining, and more easy-for-all to learn and play.

According to the majority on this board must of us want increased realism - or should I put it - what people were promised - a proper hardcore mode. This doesn't exist in RO2 atm. For the ones who doesn't want a new game mode - use selfcontrol and don't play it then. No one forces you.

Fragment the already minuscule community???

A new gamemode will rather tie the community together agian. It will make more people play it. This is clearly what most people want on this board. If you're worried that it will scare off the mainstream, don't worry, RO2 have already done that. Its a game far removed from the mainstream type of videogames. The horrid playerdrop wasn't BFs fault, or Cods fault, or only the crashes, unstable gameplay, or the lags fault, it was TWIs own fault with their ridiculous promises of an accessible tactical shooter that promised gold and flowers to everyone. Otherwise most of the players should have return by now. But they haven't and they wont. RO2 is neither a mainstream game or a true sequel to RO OST.

 

[KrvKrvavu]

Well, we all see how TWIs litlle excursion to mainstream ended, number of players says it all.
I want RO1 realism, that is what i expected of the RO2 in first place, so i even bought "deluxe" version, to help TWI, they deserved it..
I hope TWI will continue to work on a game performance, maybe even change it litlle more towards "20%", there is still time, SDK will defenetly help, somebody will make mode that RO1 veterans wants.

 

[[-project.rattus-]]

Text

Your whole argument is bonkers IMHO. You want a more accessible mainstream oriented RO? fine, Go play COD: WaW, that's exactly that.

See, we all know that realistic games are a niche. Problem is though, that you don't belong to that niche, but want our niche product to be more attractive to people outside of the niche for the cost of alienating the people in the niche.
Now, depsite having used the word niche much too often, I say go away and actually play a game that fits you rather than trying to alter a game that doesn't fit you to your tastes.

But thats sadly only half of the problem. The other half is that somebody at TWI at least partially agreed with you. And we'll see where that has landed us: the niche isn't happy anymore and doesn't play it, and the mainstream still didn't really notice it, let alone play it.

And concerning the fragmentation: adding new gamemodes has nevver ever caused a community to grow closer and bigger. As I see it now, with CD, territory and FF, we already have too many game modes which differ drastically in how they are played and thus attract different people without bringing them together. The mod and Ostfront both worked fine only offering a single mode.

 

[Schreq]

What makes me wonder is that most people want more realism and are refering to ostfront style. Besides bandaging, hip mg and maybe other small things, hos has more realistic gunplay imo. People can be almost invisible and due to zoom, such an 'invisible' player is far more dangerous than somebody would be in ostfront.

What made ostfront better is the visibility, the hipshooting which was far more effective and how iron sights worked. Slower transition into them, plus no ****ing free-aim which now totally favors the player who is already aiming, since fast snap shots are ruined by the inconsistent mouse speed.

I even thought about modding the game into a state closer to ostfront but a) most clanplayers wouldn't agree with my changes and b) it's really not worth it to invest the time.

 

[Cyper]

Your whole argument is bonkers IMHO. You want a more accessible mainstream oriented RO? fine, Go play COD: WaW, that's exactly that.

See, we all know that realistic games are a niche. Problem is though, that you don't belong to that niche, but want our niche product to be more attractive to people outside of the niche for the cost of alienating the people in the niche.
Now, depsite having used the word niche much too often, I say go away and actually play a game that fits you rather than trying to alter a game that doesn't fit you to your tastes.

But thats sadly only half of the problem. The other half is that somebody at TWI at least partially agreed with you. And we'll see where that has landed us: the niche isn't happy anymore and doesn't play it, and the mainstream still didn't really notice it, let alone play it.

And concerning the fragmentation: adding new gamemodes has nevver ever caused a community to grow closer and bigger. As I see it now, with CD, territory and FF, we already have too many game modes which differ drastically in how they are played and thus attract different people without bringing them together. The mod and Ostfront both worked fine only offering a single mode.

No, I don't want a more accessible RO. TWI wanted that. They officially stated that aswell if I remember it correctly. They made the game more like any other mainstream game, with unlocks, perks, restricted maps, superhuman movements yadayadayada, and then basicly removed the HUD and labeled that as hardcore mode.

TWI can either make RO into a real arcade game and compete with the others (such as cod) or they can stay true to the niche audience they've got. Personally speaking, I want RO2 to remain a niche game, but not in the state it is now: RO OST was a niche game because it didn't taste well for the mainstream and that was about it. RO2 on the other hand is even more niche because it neither appeals to the mainstream or the old fanbase. So I rather see RO2 as more inaccessible than RO OST.

This is the result when you're trying to make a perfect game which genre is ''All'', a game that everyone is supposed to enjoy. Codemasters did the same thing with Dragon Rising. The Hardcore mode was by the way almost identical to the one found in RO2 - it was arcade/easy mode with no HUD labeled Hardcore mode. Bohemia Interactive does exactly the opposite and despite the fact their Arma-series is by no doubt A LOT more inaccessible to the mainstream than RO their community is at the same time A LOT bigger than RO's simply because the niche audience that arma cater to are happy with the game. If arma was made into an accessible mainstreamed 'tactical' shooter, with perks, unlocks, no perks, no unlocks, Relaxed Realism, Hardcore, no this, no that, some of this, more of this, less of that blablabla the community would fall apart; neither the mainstream or the old arma players would be intrested in the game anymore.


Personally speaking, I will ditch the game if it becomes another arcade game. In that way I may aswell play battlefield or cod. I will also ditch the game if it remains a bland between a tactical shooter and COD - like it is now. There is only one mode for me: Red Orchestra, not a carbon copy of ro ost, not ro ost mixed with cod, but an improved sequel with identical formula that aims at community, realism and freedom.

 

[Proud_God]

No, I don't want a more accessible RO. TWI wanted that. They officially stated that aswell if I remember it correctly. They made the game more like any other mainstream game, with unlocks, perks, restricted maps, superhuman movements yadayadayada, and then basicly removed the HUD and labeled that as hardcore mode.

TWI can either make RO into a real arcade game and compete with the others (such as cod) or they can stay true to the niche audience they've got. Personally speaking, I want RO2 to remain a niche game, but not in the state it is now: RO OST was a niche game because it didn't taste well for the mainstream and that was about it. RO2 on the other hand is even more niche because it neither appeals to the mainstream or the old fanbase. So I rather see RO2 as more inaccessible than RO OST.

This is the result when you're trying to make a perfect game which genre is ''All'', a game that everyone is supposed to enjoy. Codemasters did the same thing with Dragon Rising. The Hardcore mode was by the way almost identical to the one found in RO2 - it was arcade/easy mode with no HUD labeled Hardcore mode. Bohemia Interactive does exactly the opposite and despite the fact their Arma-series is by no doubt A LOT more inaccessible to the mainstream than RO their community is at the same time A LOT bigger than RO's simply because the niche audience that arma cater to are happy with the game. If arma was made into an accessible mainstreamed 'tactical' shooter, with perks, unlocks, no perks, no unlocks, Relaxed Realism, Hardcore, no this, no that, some of this, more of this, less of that blablabla the community would fall apart; neither the mainstream or the old arma players would be intrested in the game anymore.


Personally speaking, I will ditch the game if it becomes another arcade game. In that way I may aswell play battlefield or cod. I will also ditch the game if it remains a bland between a tactical shooter and COD - like it is now. There is only one mode for me: Red Orchestra, not a carbon copy of ro ost, not ro ost mixed with cod, but an improved sequel with identical formula that aims at community, realism and freedom.

I agree with you Cyper, and the funny thing is, I bet alot of TWI employees do as well, but are powerless to do something about it.

 

[MeFirst]

As already said a few times. I think the mistake TW did was going way too much on "middle of the road" developement. The old realism fans dislike main core parts of the game and the people who are supposed to be the new audience are eventually busy playing battlefield 3. I can only hope that (and I have hope) that TW realized that and they will make the changes the community is looking forward to.

Also for me there is a difference between being the member of a community and being a player.

 

[CopperHead]

Judged plainly on number of votes to the ops post, I'd say he had the statistics back-***-wards. But that's typical of the knowitall folks.

... the .001% folks.

 

[DiedTrying]

Fact of the matter is, any small market company/product looking to expand into a larger market faces extreme challenges that shouldn't be taken lightly.

The reality is, the majority fail to achieve their goals.