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

[bazookatooth]

Your feedback is appropriate, but considering the passion RO vets have for the game, it is good that a thread is being allowed to run where they (we) can vent.

I certainly feel betrayed too, but I'm over it. The feedback from TWI has been very promising, and I love the game enough to wait for it.

I feel exactly the same way. I don't blame them for wanting to hit it big, but they sold out hardcore and they didn't even really warn the community. Anyone in that office had to know how the old RO guard would feel. Its like if your significant other just decided to get a new boyfriend and brought them to your own house on your birthday and just kinda sat there confused about why you wo uld feel betrayed. You just ponder in disbelief for a moment wondering what madness has stricken their minds. I'm not one of the guys that sits around *****ing about rivets and buttons. RO may or may not have been realistic..I really don't care how you choose to define it. The game had an amazing feeling that skill and cunning was what won you the victory and now that feeling has been severely curtailed and that is what burns me up about RO2. They took the feeling of accomplishment away when you actually become proficient with the weapons by making them easier to shoot through the code instead of it being a reward of skill. The bullet drop was exaggerated, but once again, it was fun because it took skill to master. The movement speed was too slow, but it got people to actually think a little more about what they did because they would have to pay an UNDESIRABLE pentalty of wasting time getting back to the battle on respawn.

You really have to take into consideration HOW tripwire earned its reputation. They ADVERTISED themselves as guys who were into realism and that they weren't going to take the direction of that cheesy arcade feel that was so popular with the masses. If they had called the game something else and NOT advertised it as a successor to Red Orchestra, I still would have been disappointed, but I wouldn't have felt betrayed. Tripwire has no obligation to create what I want, but I find it pretty vile that they allowed the the community to dream together on this forum for years on end with no intention of delivering what they clearly led people to believe they would. With RO1 they delivered something that many people were craving. A game with substance and an adult feel.

Now that I have that off my chest, I will say that I still like RO2. I will still buy Tripwire games, although I will exercise a much greater level of caution before purchasing. Ultimately the blame lays on me and others for having so much faith in Tripwire to produce a true successor to RO1. RO1 is hands down the best shooter ever created in my opinion and for that I will forever respect those who made it. I have made peace with what RO2 is and I hope that the updates that Tripwire has planned can bring the game closer to what we all have envisioned so longingly over the course of 6 years.

 

[Private Who?]

I nominate Bazookatooth for this weeks 'Golden Puck' award.

where ya at Hockey!?

 

[hockeywarrior]

I feel exactly the same way. I don't blame them for wanting to hit it big, but they sold out hardcore and they didn't even really warn the community. Anyone in that office had to know how the old RO guard would feel. Its like if your significant other just decided to get a new boyfriend and brought them to your own house on your birthday and just kinda sat there confused about why you wo uld feel betrayed. You just ponder in disbelief for a moment wondering what madness has stricken their minds. I'm not one of the guys that sits around *****ing about rivets and buttons. RO may or may not have been realistic..I really don't care how you choose to define it. The game had an amazing feeling that skill and cunning was what won you the victory and now that feeling has been severely curtailed and that is what burns me up about RO2. They took the feeling of accomplishment away when you actually become proficient with the weapons by making them easier to shoot through the code instead of it being a reward of skill. The bullet drop was exaggerated, but once again, it was fun because it took skill to master. The movement speed was too slow, but it got people to actually think a little more about what they did because they would have to pay an UNDESIRABLE pentalty of wasting time getting back to the battle on respawn.

You really have to take into consideration HOW tripwire earned its reputation. They ADVERTISED themselves as guys who were into realism and that they weren't going to take the direction of that cheesy arcade feel that was so popular with the masses. If they had called the game something else and NOT advertised it as a successor to Red Orchestra, I still would have been disappointed, but I wouldn't have felt betrayed. Tripwire has no obligation to create what I want, but I find it pretty vile that they allowed the the community to dream together on this forum for years on end with no intention of delivering what they clearly led people to believe they would. With RO1 they delivered something that many people were craving. A game with substance and an adult feel.

Now that I have that off my chest, I will say that I still like RO2. I will still buy Tripwire games, although I will exercise a much greater level of caution before purchasing. Ultimately the blame lays on me and others for having so much faith in Tripwire to produce a true successor to RO1. RO1 is hands down the best shooter ever created in my opinion and for that I will forever respect those who made it. I have made peace with what RO2 is and I hope that the updates that Tripwire has planned can bring the game closer to what we all have envisioned so longingly over the course of 6 years.

Hmmm yesss.... YES!

*awards the weekly Hockeywarrior's "No-Bull**** Golden Puck Award"*

Congrats son. Don't spend your internet monies all in one place, now.

 

[Rumpullpus]

Thanks Yoshi Believe me when I say, we really do appreciate what you guys are doing, and we do understand that operating with a small team is very difficult. Oh yeah - and we also understand the desire to avoid promises that could be broken heh

well it gets only more difficult when they are only in the office for 2 weeks out of two months

TW deserves the sh@t storm they have been getting, they knew most of the comunity would hate the ideas being drawn up, it was voiced many times how much people didnt want MKBs everywere and unlocks with lvl progression and kill streaks. and then suddenly when it all crashes around them like a house of cards its all "sorry guys we goofed but we are gonna fix it".

im sorry but IMHO a game that is maybe 4 months into release and has barely enough players to fill up 4 servers and has even a majority of modders thinking twice about doesnt deserve to be anywere else then the $2 bargin bin right next to duke nukem and the rest of them. im not even that big of a fan because i didnt even know about ROOST until maybe 2 years ago. i feel absolutely lied to and cheated, and it will be remembered.

 

[tonton-bob]

...

Wow Zetsu, I admire you.
You are a very patient and tolerant person.

Seen how badly you've been treated and you're still here trying to help and expressing it in a very mannered way.

It's very very sad to see how the game turned out and how insulting TWI's behaviour has been towards big fans.

 

[dazman76]

Epic post Bazooka, can't really argue with anything in there. It's a shame to have to point these things out, at least in my opinion - it always feels a bit "dirty" doing it on a developer's forums too, but I do think many people agree with your take on it. Pretty much the same chain of events has occurred with Splash Damage, the creators of Wolf:ET, ET:QW, and Brink - with the latter taking an almost identical path to RO2. Appearing to provide everything the "vets" had wanted since the last game was released, and in reality delivering something quite different and very disappointing for everyone, not just the vets. Pretty much nobody plays Brink now - but SD certainly did very well out of the multi-platform sales.

It's another good example of a "follow up" - wasn't actually a sequel, new IP - but very much the same game type - being pushed towards the masses for a "wider audience". In the end, fewer people play Brink than any of the RO games. In fact, there are potentially more people still playing the UT2K4 RO:CA than there are playing Brink on an average day. Their next game will have to be pretty amazing to entice any long-time SD fans to hand over their cash again. Now they're part of Bethesda, I'm not even sure they can produce what all of their fans are expecting - they may be forced into providing the same hand-holding skill-ignoring weapon-spreading one-button-several-actions crap that Brink turned into, all over again. But hey, it's selling well on all 3 platforms right? Rejoice! *sigh*

This blatant pandering to the masses is horrible, and breaks games like nothing else. Developers are teased away from their mantras of "making the games we want to play", to making games they think everyone will like - such a game simply doesn't exist. If you don't target your game and focus on a tight audience, you absolutely risk the features that you added "for the rest of the people" to interfere with the features wanted by the core audience. If they interfere enough, the core audience won't like your game. Equally so, core features will the other portion of your target audience, and you'll lose at least some of those too. At some point in the near future, I hope developers will finally figure this out - because it's happened too many times now. I guess the lure of increased profits is too tempting, and it also seems the reality of nobody (or very few people) playing your games isn't a concern these days. Shame games aren't built to last any more

 

[RedFlagWaver]

It doesn't make any sense at all, really. It's as if the word "niche" had been erased from everybody's mind, with "market" taking its place.

 

[skittlesareyum47]

Couldn't help but notice the overwhelmingly negative response you got.

 

[Nazarov]

I feel exactly the same way. I don't blame them for wanting to hit it big, but they sold out hardcore and they didn't even really warn the community. Anyone in that office had to know how the old RO guard would feel. Its like if your significant other just decided to get a new boyfriend and brought them to your own house on your birthday and just kinda sat there confused about why you wo uld feel betrayed. You just ponder in disbelief for a moment wondering what madness has stricken their minds. I'm not one of the guys that sits around *****ing about rivets and buttons. RO may or may not have been realistic..I really don't care how you choose to define it. The game had an amazing feeling that skill and cunning was what won you the victory and now that feeling has been severely curtailed and that is what burns me up about RO2. They took the feeling of accomplishment away when you actually become proficient with the weapons by making them easier to shoot through the code instead of it being a reward of skill. The bullet drop was exaggerated, but once again, it was fun because it took skill to master. The movement speed was too slow, but it got people to actually think a little more about what they did because they would have to pay an UNDESIRABLE pentalty of wasting time getting back to the battle on respawn.

You really have to take into consideration HOW tripwire earned its reputation. They ADVERTISED themselves as guys who were into realism and that they weren't going to take the direction of that cheesy arcade feel that was so popular with the masses. If they had called the game something else and NOT advertised it as a successor to Red Orchestra, I still would have been disappointed, but I wouldn't have felt betrayed. Tripwire has no obligation to create what I want, but I find it pretty vile that they allowed the the community to dream together on this forum for years on end with no intention of delivering what they clearly led people to believe they would. With RO1 they delivered something that many people were craving. A game with substance and an adult feel.

Now that I have that off my chest, I will say that I still like RO2. I will still buy Tripwire games, although I will exercise a much greater level of caution before purchasing. Ultimately the blame lays on me and others for having so much faith in Tripwire to produce a true successor to RO1. RO1 is hands down the best shooter ever created in my opinion and for that I will forever respect those who made it. I have made peace with what RO2 is and I hope that the updates that Tripwire has planned can bring the game closer to what we all have envisioned so longingly over the course of 6 years.

I award you the Golden Hockey Stick for this post.
I have yet to come in terms with Tripwire's betrayal. I most likely will not purchase any future games until I can approval from the vets 2-3 months post release, but more realistically, I guess 1-1.5 years.
To me, this may as well have been the straw that broke the camel's back.
Personally, the disappointments started with Star Wars Episode I: The Menace (It's not phantom. It's real). Then everything went down hill from there.
Looking at the current design of RO2; however, I cannot be as optimistic as you are. Hope is dwindling. By the time RO3 comes out, I'm pretty sure I won't even be playing games....I'm getting old.
Long Live Red Orchestra's spirit!

 

[wake_up]

Perhaps you should start with firing people in your company for that what you have done to Red Orchestra at first place? Don't censor people who feels fooled by your commercial campaign and political promises. People wouldn't criticize you and your product if your gameplay design decisions wouldn't ruin RO game.
You dumped down gameplay massively and copied as much as possible from CoD game to raise playerbase (and showed how you don't respect, completely ignore old community) and it didn't work at all. 1000 players online after few months after release isn't success, it is big big failure + old and new players turned away from you (and these people will think twice before buy another game from you).

This reflects exactly what i think by myself.
Before HOS, i thought that TWI is one of the better companies,
making smaller but good games, a company you could trust in.
And now - i feel cheatet by TWI, i feel ignored as part of the old
ROOST playerbase, i feel ignored as HOS player cause TWI only
answeres to problems they like.

Shame on TWI, when they think thats the way we want to be treated,
like they did the last months, then i think i

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

I feel exactly the same way. I don't blame them for wanting to hit it big, but they sold out hardcore and they didn't even really warn the community. Anyone in that office had to know how the old RO guard would feel. Its like if your significant other just decided to get a new boyfriend and brought them to your own house on your birthday and just kinda sat there confused about why you wo uld feel betrayed. You just ponder in disbelief for a moment wondering what madness has stricken their minds. I'm not one of the guys that sits around *****ing about rivets and buttons. RO may or may not have been realistic..I really don't care how you choose to define it. The game had an amazing feeling that skill and cunning was what won you the victory and now that feeling has been severely curtailed and that is what burns me up about RO2. They took the feeling of accomplishment away when you actually become proficient with the weapons by making them easier to shoot through the code instead of it being a reward of skill. The bullet drop was exaggerated, but once again, it was fun because it took skill to master. The movement speed was too slow, but it got people to actually think a little more about what they did because they would have to pay an UNDESIRABLE pentalty of wasting time getting back to the battle on respawn.

You really have to take into consideration HOW tripwire earned its reputation. They ADVERTISED themselves as guys who were into realism and that they weren't going to take the direction of that cheesy arcade feel that was so popular with the masses. If they had called the game something else and NOT advertised it as a successor to Red Orchestra, I still would have been disappointed, but I wouldn't have felt betrayed. Tripwire has no obligation to create what I want, but I find it pretty vile that they allowed the the community to dream together on this forum for years on end with no intention of delivering what they clearly led people to believe they would. With RO1 they delivered something that many people were craving. A game with substance and an adult feel.

Now that I have that off my chest, I will say that I still like RO2. I will still buy Tripwire games, although I will exercise a much greater level of caution before purchasing. Ultimately the blame lays on me and others for having so much faith in Tripwire to produce a true successor to RO1. RO1 is hands down the best shooter ever created in my opinion and for that I will forever respect those who made it. I have made peace with what RO2 is and I hope that the updates that Tripwire has planned can bring the game closer to what we all have envisioned so longingly over the course of 6 years.

 

[griffner]

I can't help but feeling that this whole topic is circling round and round. RO2 is still a "realist" game compared to all of the other FPS games out there : it is truly one of the only games in that genre. Read all of the reviews the game got : its focus on "realism" is being pointed out everywhere.

Now before berating all of the changes made in the sequel, read up on Yoshiro explaining that they're designing a "RO classic" mode for the proponents of hardcore realism.

No, TWI is not EA, it has not "sold out" to profit mongering or anything. I did not play RO1, but I'm uber-happy to have found a company that cares about its gamers and will not milk you to death with all kinds of dlcs you will have to pay for.

It's a good game ! Could it be better ? Sure. But it's a good game from a good company that is trying.

 

[r5cya]

lol! this thread is turning into the "i'm butthurt, tripwire, you let me down" thread!

 

[Grobut]

RO2 is still a "realist" game compared to all of the other FPS games out there : it is truly one of the only games in that genre. Read all of the reviews the game got : its focus on "realism" is being pointed out everywhere.

Are you familiar with the idiom "damning with faint praise"?

 

[>< f4ct0r...13]

I can't help but feeling that this whole topic is circling round and round. RO2 is still a "realist" game compared to all of the other FPS games out there : it is truly one of the only games in that genre. Read all of the reviews the game got : its focus on "realism" is being pointed out everywhere.

Now before berating all of the changes made in the sequel, read up on Yoshiro explaining that they're designing a "RO classic" mode for the proponents of hardcore realism.

No, TWI is not EA, it has not "sold out" to profit mongering or anything. I did not play RO1, but I'm uber-happy to have found a company that cares about its gamers and will not milk you to death with all kinds of dlcs you will have to pay for.

It's a good game ! Could it be better ? Sure. But it's a good game from a good company that is trying.

RO2 isn't anywhere near a realism game. Actually, every RO2 "feature" is an exact copy of CoD, with different skins. Check it out if you don't believe me.

The "reviewers" have to hug the nuts of game developers, or they will be removed from the circuit. One can't believe a word they say.

You did not play RO. In other words, you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[SparePoerisija]

Perhaps you should start with firing people in your company for that what you have done to Red Orchestra at first place? Don't censor people who feels fooled by your commercial campaign and political promises. People wouldn't criticize you and your product if your gameplay design decisions wouldn't ruin RO game.
You dumped down gameplay massively and copied as much as possible from CoD game to raise playerbase (and showed how you don't respect, completely ignore old community) and it didn't work at all. 1000 players online after few months after release isn't success, it is big big failure + old and new players turned away from you (and these people will think twice before buy another game from you).

No.

 

[LordSteve]

Perhaps you should start with firing people in your company for that what you have done to Red Orchestra at first place? Don't censor people who feels fooled by your commercial campaign and political promises. People wouldn't criticize you and your product if your gameplay design decisions wouldn't ruin RO game.
You dumped down gameplay massively and copied as much as possible from CoD game to raise playerbase (and showed how you don't respect, completely ignore old community) and it didn't work at all. 1000 players online after few months after release isn't success, it is big big failure + old and new players turned away from you (and these people will think twice before buy another game from you).

True. When i first heard that Ro2 was in development i was realy exciting, i couldnt wait till the game comes out. When i fist played it, i liked it on some ways but after a short time i was realy pissed off, all the good things that made Ro1 so special and so unic compared to other shooters i have missed in Ro2. Shooting, Aiming Running etc. too fast too easy like in other shooters, gameplay is too fast paced and too boring. The player base is realy bad for a new game, Veterans dont like it, new Players dont like it because they prefer other shooters. TWI made
A Step Back in the Right Direction, the committed nearly suicide!!

 

[MarioBava]

....I'm not one of the guys that sits around *****ing about rivets and buttons. RO may or may not have been realistic..I really don't care how you choose to define it. The game had an amazing feeling that skill and cunning was what won you the victory and now that feeling has been severely curtailed and that is what burns me up about RO2. They took the feeling of accomplishment away when you actually become proficient with the weapons by making them easier to shoot through the code instead of it being a reward of skill. The bullet drop was exaggerated, but once again, it was fun because it took skill to master. The movement speed was too slow, but it got people to actually think a little more about what they did because they would have to pay an UNDESIRABLE pentalty of wasting time getting back to the battle on respawn.

You really have to take into consideration HOW tripwire earned its reputation. They ADVERTISED themselves as guys who were into realism and that they weren't going to take the direction of that cheesy arcade feel that was so popular with the masses. If they had called the game something else and NOT advertised it as a successor to Red Orchestra, I still would have been disappointed, but I wouldn't have felt betrayed.

I just feel like there is some contradiction going on here. If you don't care about realism and think a certain feeling or style was more what RO1 had going for it than stark realism, ok, but then you shouldn't go on to cite being "into realism" as something that TWI has gotten away from or draw any distinction between "that cheesy arcade feel" and realism.

It's a debate you seem not to want to get into, but still use the word realism in a very specific way.

My personal takeaway from RO1 is that it was great at making you feel the deadliness of the battlefield. It turns out that's almost exactly one of the things I heard Alan Wilson say they were trying to amp up for RO2, and I personally feel, be free to disagree, that it succeeds at this style of brutal WWII combat. In doing so, some of the things they've done are consciously more realistic than RO1 (for example effective range of the guns on point targets seems way more true to life than RO1), some are nonetheless regrettably unrealistic (for example hitboxes are capped as far as damage to total health, and there is no sustained impairment from non-lethal wounds). But for me, "cheesy arcade" feel is not at all descriptive of RO2; not even close.

 

[>< f4ct0r...13]

I just feel like there is some contradiction going on here. If you don't care about realism and think a certain feeling or style was more what RO1 had going for it than stark realism, ok, but then you shouldn't go on to cite being "into realism" as something that TWI has gotten away from or draw any distinction between "that cheesy arcade feel" and realism.

It's a debate you seem not to want to get into, but still use the word realism in a very specific way.

My personal takeaway from RO1 is that it was great at making you feel the deadliness of the battlefield. It turns out that's almost exactly one of the things I heard Alan Wilson say they were trying to amp up for RO2, and I personally feel, be free to disagree, that it succeeds at this style of brutal WWII combat. In doing so, some of the things they've done are consciously more realistic than RO1 (for example effective range of the guns on point targets seems way more true to life than RO1), some are nonetheless regrettably unrealistic (for example hitboxes are capped as far as damage to total health, and there is no sustained impairment from non-lethal wounds). But for me, "cheesy arcade" feel is not at all descriptive of RO2; not even close.

I like what you say, and I agree.

However, challenge accepted. For me, the cheesy arcade feel comes from recon planes, "I got him brother!", the *thwack* of a hitting bullet, contrived voices, leveling, a meaninglessly easy honor system, spawning with enemy weapons, radar, being able to see each other's reinforcements (and even cap areas), Peripheral Indicators, automatic bolting, arbitrary artillery/moratar calibers, smoke spewing in mid air, etc ad infinitum. Super cheese. Super copy. Super, NOT Ost.

 

[bazookatooth]

I just feel like there is some contradiction going on here. If you don't care about realism and think a certain feeling or style was more what RO1 had going for it than stark realism, ok, but then you shouldn't go on to cite being "into realism" as something that TWI has gotten away from or draw any distinction between "that cheesy arcade feel" and realism.

It's a debate you seem not to want to get into, but still use the word realism in a very specific way.

My personal takeaway from RO1 is that it was great at making you feel the deadliness of the battlefield. It turns out that's almost exactly one of the things I heard Alan Wilson say they were trying to amp up for RO2, and I personally feel, be free to disagree, that it succeeds at this style of brutal WWII combat. In doing so, some of the things they've done are consciously more realistic than RO1 (for example effective range of the guns on point targets seems way more true to life than RO1), some are nonetheless regrettably unrealistic (for example hitboxes are capped as far as damage to total health, and there is no sustained impairment from non-lethal wounds). But for me, "cheesy arcade" feel is not at all descriptive of RO2; not even close.

You have a point about me sounding a bit contradictory there...I was just trying to say that they have removed much of the element of skill from the game. Features such as being slowed when shot and weapon dropping when being shot in the hand made the game a lot more exciting. Having to do the dance while you are moving in slow motion and then managing to dodge shots and survive to kill one or two more. In my opinion they need to bring back those features plus others that are similar in spirit. They need to make bandaging take longer or else remove it. Just add a little more grit back to the game. This one is too buttery smooth and arcade feeling. I find it entertaining as where I found RO1 engrossing.