Thead about development time
- Thread starter G_Sajer
- Start date
- Status
I want to write a "Praxius" wall of text myself, but I am so tired and burned out from work and RL this week... ugh.
Good points all around though.
Good points all around though.
Best comment in thread. Thank you. I logged on in months to say that.
No offence Praxius
I do have to agree with you on many points Praxius except the RO2/RS merge- that's the only place where I think you are wrong, but hey, agree to disagree on that.
The one question I have is whether you will ever buy a tripwire game again- perhaps an RO3 or something considering you have been around since the mod?
And this is a general question within the thread I want to ask.
A lot of you guys are disappointed in TWI for the way some things were botched. I've been around RO almost as long as Praxius has, but I still think I would continue to support TWI in the future. I've logged a lot of hours on RO2 and its offered amazing value for $30 + $15 for RS.
A lot of old people left after RO2 was released, but I do hope people stick around in the future.
No offense Praxius
I do have to agree with you on many points Praxius except the RO2/RS merge- that's the only place where I think you are wrong, but hey, agree to disagree on that.
Yeah, mine was actually a compliment and I agree with your agreeing to disagree and then I pretty much agree with the rest. Agreed?
I won't preorder RO3 even if TWI adds ****ty TF2 hats to "lure" me (you really shouldn't try to appeal to that kind of playerbase imo )
until I see some gameplay to judge if they kept on going into the 'streamline' and 'modernize' it direction.
I still hope to see some Western front stuff though for RO2 or a 41-45 expansion but I doubt that'll ever happen.
(you really shouldn't try to appeal to that kind of playerbase imo )until I see some gameplay to judge if they kept on going into the 'streamline' and 'modernize' it direction.
I still hope to see some Western front stuff though for RO2
or a 41-45 expansion but I doubt that'll ever happen.
Last edited:
If that's the question you are asking of the thread, my answer would be: It depends.
I wouldn't buy or not buy solely based on TWI, it depends more on the direction they take with RO3. If it's RO2 with better graphics, then, probably not. If they veer back towards a more realistic tactical shooter, then yes.
That being said, I'm not bemoaning my purchase of the game, I have fun with it and have more than gotten my money's worth out of it. It's just not going to hold my interest in it's current state for long.
No way I'd preorder, I always wait for release and watch pubs gameplay videos first. I never trust anyone's marketing dept....
Last edited:
I never said it was an "Entirely New Game".... find me a quote of me saying this.
I said it doesn't "Add" anything to the RO2 experience anymore than Mare Nostrum or Darkest Hour did for RO1, thus claiming RS is somehow new "Content" for RO2 is a falsehood, which some here like to make it out to be. Even to this very day, the few players who play Darkest Hour are mostly players who have issues and dislike RO1 for various reasons.... I was very much the same way in my defense of RO1 and how I didn't like DH. There was a thread about this in the RO1 forum section of Steam's old Forums a few months back that I was involved in, but everything except the stickies have been removed.
Red Orchestra Combined Arms didn't actually "Add" new content to Unreal Tournament 2004.... it was a mod off of UT2004 and was completely different in almost every single way.
RS has similarities and of course it uses similar game mechanics and such as RO2, but so too did DH and MN with RO1..... but they were not interchangeable with RO1 just as RS isn't interchangeable to RO2. Besides all being based around WWII and similar game mechanics, there is nothing linking any of them to one another.
Team Fortress Classic, Day of Defeat and Counter-Strike were all mods for Half-Life, and all of them used similar game mechanics, effects and the same engine with a number of differences between each..... but would you consider them all extensions to Half-Life 1's gameplay and content?
I never did.
Opposing Force and Blue Shift added to Half-Life 1 as they all tied to the same story, same playing area, used similar weapons, etc...... TFC, DoD and CS all played in different scenarios, used different weapons, different gameplay features.
Rising Storm has Flame Throwers, Banzai Charges, Booby Traps, etc..... yet do those transfer over to RO2? Do the US forces transfer over to the Eastern Front? Do the Japanese, or do the Russians and Germans transfer over to the Pacific Front?
No.
That's a matter of opinion.
Rising Storm's release Date: May 30, 2013
Minimum Peak of RO2 players prior to RS release: 1,248
Average player base after the Humble Bundle sale was around 2,000
Even if what you said about there only being 600 players on RO2 prior to RS's official release, the thing you forgot to mention was how many RO2 players were trying out the early beta of RS?
Those player numbers were not interchangeable like they are now.
http://steamgraph.net/index.php?act...50q224780&from=1362056400000&to=1380549600000
^ So you're wrong on that point too, while my point still stands.
I don't see it transitioning like that. The community is still split between the two games. The same Australian Servers I played on still have the same regulars and the same amount of players as before, while RS servers are in pretty much the same boat. There are a few servers that host both RS and RO2, but most of those have player counts shift in different ways when one game loads over the other. While there are some who enjoy both games will stick around, others who don't like RO2 will leave for another server and those who don't like RS will do the same.
Regardless, the final out come is that doing any of this has not improved the player counts of RO2 or RS as a whole and the population remains the same.
Bottom line is that RS did not save RO2 and RO2 did not save RS.
Again, that's your opinion.
"If you're not that, then you must be this"
Well I don't share your personal view of the Menu/Game Environment so "I Must be Picky"
You're reading skills are still dismal at best.
I never said or expected them to take my considerations into account.... They were going to do whatever the hell they wanted. I disagreed with those plans, but it's their game in the end. The fallout is my personal disappointment in the final outcome and loss of enjoyment or desire to keep playing the game.
And I know I'm not the only one. Numbers don't lie.
If all of what you said was indeed true, then the player counts for RS/RO2 would be in the 4-5,000 range and steadily climbing because the game is sooo awesome the way it is.
The truth of the matter is that there is something wrong with the game and the process in which the game is developed (or has been developed)
It is simply not "Catching On" with many players and even if it was, their inclusion into the community is equated by those leaving the community and the game.
Last edited:
Best comment in thread. Thank you. I logged on in months to say that.
No offence Praxius
I do have to agree with you on many points Praxius except the RO2/RS merge- that's the only place where I think you are wrong, but hey, agree to disagree on that.
The one question I have is whether you will ever buy a tripwire game again- perhaps an RO3 or something considering you have been around since the mod?
And this is a general question within the thread I want to ask.
A lot of you guys are disappointed in TWI for the way some things were botched. I've been around RO almost as long as Praxius has, but I still think I would continue to support TWI in the future. I've logged a lot of hours on RO2 and its offered amazing value for $30 + $15 for RS.
A lot of old people left after RO2 was released, but I do hope people stick around in the future.
Meh, I've been poked fun at for years in regards to my long winded posts.
I can't help I can type as fast as I can think
Will I buy another TW game, or even an RO3?
I brought this up a few months ago and asked myself the same question, which I responded that I wouldn't blindly disregard and/or boycott another TW title.... but I sure as hell won't jump at the chance at buying it right away like I did with the RO2 DDE Early Access Beta.
I will be looking long and hard at their next title and doing a hell of a lot more research and background follow ups on the game's integrity before I toss any money at it.
While that still leaves the option of me paying for another TW game and supporting it & the company.... the trouble for me personally is that I now actually have to think about it and question the "Integrity" of that game..... which I never felt like I had to do that before with a TW game.
And that's not a good thing.
If it was just the whole RS / RO2 Merger thing or the slow updates, that would be one thing..... but me being like many other players who carried the RO2 flag proudly before, defended the game and the devs, tried to talk all our friends into getting the game, talking about how the game would be patched and supported like something nobody else has ever seen by a developer and the range of content in the game would be impressive and something that would look like RO1 and not the shell of the game it was...... only to turn out to look like complete fools in the end, 2.5 years after the fact & running out of things to say to defend it all..... that's a whole other situation.
It's not just my own personal view, but many players have had TW's reputation heavily tarnished in their eyes over the last couple of years.
As I said, yes.... there are many excuses for why things turned out the way they did, and some of those excuses are well justified..... but knowing those excuses and reasons and understanding them doesn't magically fix the problem.
You have got to be joking if you think that RS didn't bring in new players or give the game new life... I myself am one of the people who hopped on board with RS (keeping in mind that I was not new to the franchise). Besides, if you played the game you'd know that every day there are lots of new players, generally because you just get tk'd non stop...
But idk a lot of your argument seems to just be that you dislike mods, or that you dislike this particular mod (or expansion, whatever you want to call it, it's pointless semantics) because it took TWI's attention away from RO2 itself. I mean sure you can be upset about that but what's the point in even bringing it up? It won't change anything. Perhaps it just makes you feel a little bit better inside.
I think people need to realise that TWI are not a big development company like DICE or whatever, and they don't have the money nor resources to just push out updates 24/7; steam charges them to merely update the game. In reality, from a business standpoint it would make more sense to put your resources into making new games (KF2) so that you're getting more income, rather than putting money into both the development and commission of your old games free of charge. And God knows that if there were paid DLC for RS/RO2 the community would be up in arms regardless of whether you needed to buy it or not...
I trust that, for their own sake if nothing else, will have learned from their mistakes upon their next game release, but in the mean time it's kind of a pointless discussion.
But idk a lot of your argument seems to just be that you dislike mods, or that you dislike this particular mod (or expansion, whatever you want to call it, it's pointless semantics) because it took TWI's attention away from RO2 itself. I mean sure you can be upset about that but what's the point in even bringing it up? It won't change anything. Perhaps it just makes you feel a little bit better inside.
I think people need to realise that TWI are not a big development company like DICE or whatever, and they don't have the money nor resources to just push out updates 24/7; steam charges them to merely update the game. In reality, from a business standpoint it would make more sense to put your resources into making new games (KF2) so that you're getting more income, rather than putting money into both the development and commission of your old games free of charge. And God knows that if there were paid DLC for RS/RO2 the community would be up in arms regardless of whether you needed to buy it or not...
I trust that, for their own sake if nothing else, will have learned from their mistakes upon their next game release, but in the mean time it's kind of a pointless discussion.
Wow Cpt-Praxius you're slippery one, you do speak some BS and you always have to write so much of it.
The Steam chart you showed is too vague, but the smaller peaks that show 1000 were on weekends. Weekdays it was 600-800 until a Steam sale where the numbers would decline again into the same state. Player count on a Steam graph isn't conclusive proof of the player count either, at one point there were only 4 full servers at peak(most likely less than that), where the other players were, who knows, but the populated servers don't seem to represent what the player counter says. Right now at 1:39pm UK time there are more full servers than RO2 at peak prior to RS. See post #97
You keep banging on about how 'it's not part of RO2' IT IS, this is why they made the gameplay mechanics the same so people could transition over. Your narrow view that an RS weapon has to be in RO2 for it to be considered worthy of being integrated is stupid and the fact you don't take into account the situation of the game more so. It brings people to RO2. The community cannot be 'split', they are just one community. I can make maps for RO2 and RS without having to favour either side unlike it would be if they were separate and RO2 had 300 players while RS had higher I would favour the higher count as there's more chance it might get played. You can join any server you want because the games are one. RO2 would have taken a back seat if they were separate this much is clear, but now TWI can develop RO2 content for all those players who bought RS and got to experience RO2 to boot. For someone who doesn't want to game to completely die this is only a positive thing.
The Steam chart you showed is too vague, but the smaller peaks that show 1000 were on weekends. Weekdays it was 600-800 until a Steam sale where the numbers would decline again into the same state. Player count on a Steam graph isn't conclusive proof of the player count either, at one point there were only 4 full servers at peak(most likely less than that), where the other players were, who knows, but the populated servers don't seem to represent what the player counter says. Right now at 1:39pm UK time there are more full servers than RO2 at peak prior to RS. See post #97
You keep banging on about how 'it's not part of RO2' IT IS, this is why they made the gameplay mechanics the same so people could transition over. Your narrow view that an RS weapon has to be in RO2 for it to be considered worthy of being integrated is stupid and the fact you don't take into account the situation of the game more so. It brings people to RO2. The community cannot be 'split', they are just one community. I can make maps for RO2 and RS without having to favour either side unlike it would be if they were separate and RO2 had 300 players while RS had higher I would favour the higher count as there's more chance it might get played. You can join any server you want because the games are one. RO2 would have taken a back seat if they were separate this much is clear, but now TWI can develop RO2 content for all those players who bought RS and got to experience RO2 to boot. For someone who doesn't want to game to completely die this is only a positive thing.
Where did I say it was sooo awesome? Where did I say player counts should be increasing let alone to 5000 constant players? They increased without the need for constant steam sales, there are more full servers now than there were prior and that's what matters not a steam graph. You naively mistake me for defending the entire game(why do I keep having to explain that to you?). I'm defending the integration decision because I thought it was one of the better decisions TWI have made, and if anyone complained about it they better have a good reason. I don't consider whining about the background image a good reason at all or simply saying "I don't want RS".
Last edited:
I think you Guys at Tripwire shoud the game let die. You learned alot with this Project. I am disapointed too like many others but i really love this game but i hate all These Little Bugs. Some Bugs were gone and now they are in again. I think this Game is dead now. You tried to hear at everybody and this was a worst mistake like Classic and the Classic Weapon handling and Action. Hearing other more than Months again "Classic Best bla bla bla" was the most annoying Thing i saw in this Forum here. In Germany we say: "Viele K
I really can see both sides of this, the devs and the players.
It's an incredibly hard thing to do, to develop a game before any money is coming in from it, predicting how your players will react, then you got the release and initial reactions, and they do say first impressions count. Then there is the support for the game, which needs to be balanced against further plans and profit.
However, a lot of the points that players have posted here I agree with in this case. And you can bet that if they think that and I think that, there are more that do and are just not saying.
It's an incredibly hard thing to do, to develop a game before any money is coming in from it, predicting how your players will react, then you got the release and initial reactions, and they do say first impressions count. Then there is the support for the game, which needs to be balanced against further plans and profit.
However, a lot of the points that players have posted here I agree with in this case. And you can bet that if they think that and I think that, there are more that do and are just not saying.
You do remember at one point, you and those that shared those opinions only represented .0001% of the players and the rest of the players were completely happy because they chose not to speak up, right?
Yeah overhere now at 16:40 euro time there are 677 players. This probably raise to 1000 in the evening. I used gametracker. So probably vague numbers.
You have got to be joking if you think that RS didn't bring in new players or give the game new life... I myself am one of the people who hopped on board with RS (keeping in mind that I was not
new to the franchise). Besides, if you played the game you'd know that every day there are lots of new players, generally because you just get tk'd non stop...
It sure attracted new players. But if the gametracker numbers are correct loads of them already went on.
You do remember at one point, you and those that shared those opinions only
represented .0001% of the players and the rest
of the players were completely happy because they chose not to speak up, right?
.0001% of 677 players is not defenatly not much.
I don't know much about gamedevelopment but any investment in the present game won't attract many new players. Even vehicles. It might bring back players who already own the game, but not much new sales. So from a bizniz point of view. Its not logical to me to invest to much in a 2.5 years old game with 1000 players. So don't expect FREE non community made stuff.
Any paid non community made stuff will take at least another year. This must be a larger expension to attact interest. To me its hard to believe they will waste time on that.
The tracker sites aren't representative when it comes to player count, which is why I mention the number of full servers now compared with the 4 or less full servers at peak for RO2 during it's 'dying' phase. There is a difference in the number of people rotating, there has to be, because the number of full servers has tripled or even quadrupled since RS got released. At the lowest play time there are still more servers full than at the peak time for RO2 over a year ago. I don't know why the counter says there are 1200 people in game when the server populations don't reflect that unless the counter is delayed or hundreds of people are staring at the menu (maybe outraged at the change?). In fact it would be great if TWI could implement 24-hour unique IP visitor counter in game to reflect the true player count rather than this not-so-useful currently online counter. Let's say each unique player plays for 30 minutes and our average player count is 1000 at any given time. That's 48,000 users within a 24 hour time period.
Peaks not increasing - this says that the game doesn't hold players interests long enough, more than likely players play 1 match then leave. But then someone comes along and replaces them, so the peak count doesn't go up, but enough people are loading up the game to fill that loss. Now if there was a way to find out how many users each day opened their ROgame.exe that would tell us the real play count. My own unsupported guess is it's inbetween 25,000 and 35,000, so roughly 1000 people per hour are opening up their ROgame.exe to play a quick match. It'll be more than that though(nearer 50,000).
(This is the same mistake people make when they criticize the 1% income bracket, they ignore the tens of thousands moving in and out of the bracket every year and make it appear as this static 'thing')
Peaks not increasing - this says that the game doesn't hold players interests long enough, more than likely players play 1 match then leave. But then someone comes along and replaces them, so the peak count doesn't go up, but enough people are loading up the game to fill that loss. Now if there was a way to find out how many users each day opened their ROgame.exe that would tell us the real play count. My own unsupported guess is it's inbetween 25,000 and 35,000, so roughly 1000 people per hour are opening up their ROgame.exe to play a quick match. It'll be more than that though(nearer 50,000).
(This is the same mistake people make when they criticize the 1% income bracket, they ignore the tens of thousands moving in and out of the bracket every year and make it appear as this static 'thing')
Last edited:
About the 0.001% - I guess we will never know if the silent ones love the game or hate it, and if they are the same who play it or have left it!
About the future - RO2 was the first game I ever pre-ordered and while it continues to give me fun for my money, I won't be pre-ordering another game again, so in that sense, it's not just TWI that may miss out on my desirable cash but every other developer lol.
As far as large-scale expansion packs go, if we are talking about In Country, no thanks, not my scene, and I can't see anybody working on anything else for a game we probably can all agree has about 1000 players on average (although I have no idea what the numbers are like for other multi-player shooter type games).
Lots of mistakes were made, some have been corrected, the game is what it is now, and if we can expect some new content in terms of maps, vehicles and what-not, then fine, at the end of the day the game has had a pretty good run, could have been better but who knows?
About the future - RO2 was the first game I ever pre-ordered and while it continues to give me fun for my money, I won't be pre-ordering another game again, so in that sense, it's not just TWI that may miss out on my desirable cash but every other developer lol.
As far as large-scale expansion packs go, if we are talking about In Country, no thanks, not my scene, and I can't see anybody working on anything else for a game we probably can all agree has about 1000 players on average (although I have no idea what the numbers are like for other multi-player shooter type games).
Lots of mistakes were made, some have been corrected, the game is what it is now, and if we can expect some new content in terms of maps, vehicles and what-not, then fine, at the end of the day the game has had a pretty good run, could have been better but who knows?
I think one of the biggest factors in this dialogue is that many simply cannot wrap their heads around a business model to any functional extent. I spent 37 years in Telecommunications working for fortune 500 companies. It was a brutally competitive industry, but compared to the structure and cash flow of a small entertainment studio, the Telecoms had it easy.
I don't expect TWI to open their books, but I'll tell you this. There isn't a person here that wouldn't be considerably sobered if they could go over in detail the quarterly financial spreadsheet of a company like TWI. Income, net income, obligations and overhead, salary, that must be satisfied before one dime goes into profit. I'll bet you whole quarters have gone by flat.
The business model of a company with this small of a footprint in an industry is BRUTAL. A company with a larger financial "critical mass" probably wouldn't bother with this kind of detail. Which is again why you get "fire and forget" games with a finite shelf life. RO2's very existence is a labor of passion, and a lot of personal sweat investment. I don't have to know the details to sense the tension.
I know people are going to dismiss my remarks as those of blind support. But I have a pretty good understanding of business logistics, if not the product.
Just because many of us have spent years playing games and watching companies and products go and come doesn't begin to reveal to us the backside of what running something like this is like.
I'm not suggesting criticism isn't healthy or needed. But if you like the product at all, be glad for it, and enjoy it. I suspect the glue holding it to the wall is a lot thinner than most of us would think.
Not many do understand all that, it's true, but on the other hand, nobody is forcing them to be in this business, and if they are, they better be ready for the expectations that are generally formed by players in these times. Of course it's competitive but passion for your creation isn't going to pay the bills if the players aren't satisfied. That's not to say I don't sympathise with their situation, because I have already stated as much, but if you can't stand the heat ...
- Status