...perhaps TWI should release the singleplayer campaign as free for steam users. Paid upgrade to use online / multiplayer.
To bloat our playerbase...
- Thread starter kipp73
- Start date
what is the problem with the current player base? it is ten times better than RO1 or DH has been in the past 4 years.
DAT is 100% right but the idea is not that bad, but I stretch the whole "not that bad" part but I can see it as a positive as well.
Nothing wrong with the player base people is used to mainstream arcade games with 100 full servers running.When they don't see this they say "the game is dead" its a niche game and has a large learning curve.The average casual fps'er will rage log in mins due to the fact they have to learn.Not having arcade game mechanics to hold their hand while they play.
A lot of us played Ost for years with only 2-3 servers populated at any given time and still had some awesome matches.I will take quality over quantity any day in a tactical fps.This game will only get better and many people are just playing other games atm but,many will return seeking something different.
Myself I have always took small breaks from RO its the only fps I play its hard for me to just grind months on end.I always come back tho and ro2 will be no different the coolest thing about RO is when you do take a break and return you see mostly the same guys still playing.
Releasing the single player campaign for free to attract new players is the worst move TWI could do imho.
Rather than attracting new players to play the game, I am pretty sure that most players would say that it's bad and so would the Multiplayer be then in their assumption.
The singleplayer campaign is nothing you would use for marketing except mentioning it to have one more game content point to list in the feature list.
People that are used to BF and CoD style Hollywood campaigns would think that the RO 2 campaign is cheap ****e. Besides, the bots are so brainless that it would do more harm than good.
If the game is stable by beginning of December, adding 2 more tanks and maybe a map or 2 and then give a free trial weekend, will probably have an impact for xmas sales.
Rather than attracting new players to play the game, I am pretty sure that most players would say that it's bad and so would the Multiplayer be then in their assumption.
The singleplayer campaign is nothing you would use for marketing except mentioning it to have one more game content point to list in the feature list.
People that are used to BF and CoD style Hollywood campaigns would think that the RO 2 campaign is cheap ****e. Besides, the bots are so brainless that it would do more harm than good.
If the game is stable by beginning of December, adding 2 more tanks and maybe a map or 2 and then give a free trial weekend, will probably have an impact for xmas sales.
Sensemann, people can appreciate that bots are dumb, just like they can anticipate the difference experienced when playing against and with real players. The idea behind suggesting a free-campaign release, would be to allow people that have never played the game a chance to appreciate the mechanics.. the gratification of a kill, that feeling this game provides when firing weapons which is distinct from other shooters. The bolt-bliss..
kipp73
Please note that I don't have a problem with you bringing up the idea at all. It just shows that you are interested.
BUT, the reason why I am totally disagreeing is the following: CoD, for years, uses bots that are not very smart, standing at the same time and the same spot over and over again. If I wanted to be insulting, I would say: Moorhuhn hunt with better graphics (I don't know if you know Moorhuhn, right now, because it's German and I donno if it was popular out of Europe).
However, CoD has great graphics and effects that are intense and keeping loads of players, and with those I definitly mean the casual players that play for 1-2 hours a day in between their normal daily life, coming back, because it's like smoking weed: You take it, are high for 1-2 hours and then back to normal.
The scripted AI of CoD however allows their bots to run into cover more naturally than HOS does and in that regard, their combat behavior is (as sad as it sounds) more realistic than the bots in HOS, where you can mow down 15 bots in 1 door and still, they will keep on coming.
Furthermore, playing RO 2 against bots with less effects (crash, boom, bang...) makes Joe Average getting a lesser fix than CoD offers. Those guys don't want to learn about the gratification of a kill, or how I see RO more: gratification of surviving. Those dudes get gratification of killing enemies in the hundreds, getting the feeling that "if I had fought for the Wehrmacht, Germany would have won".
If you release multiplayer to those however, you will still only attract a few of those guys, but, because they are playing against humans, they think that they can achieve this set of kills their online master just had. In the end, he is a human as well and learned. People don't like to get owned in MP.
Please note that I don't have a problem with you bringing up the idea at all. It just shows that you are interested.
BUT, the reason why I am totally disagreeing is the following: CoD, for years, uses bots that are not very smart, standing at the same time and the same spot over and over again. If I wanted to be insulting, I would say: Moorhuhn hunt with better graphics (I don't know if you know Moorhuhn, right now, because it's German and I donno if it was popular out of Europe).
However, CoD has great graphics and effects that are intense and keeping loads of players, and with those I definitly mean the casual players that play for 1-2 hours a day in between their normal daily life, coming back, because it's like smoking weed: You take it, are high for 1-2 hours and then back to normal.
The scripted AI of CoD however allows their bots to run into cover more naturally than HOS does and in that regard, their combat behavior is (as sad as it sounds) more realistic than the bots in HOS, where you can mow down 15 bots in 1 door and still, they will keep on coming.
Furthermore, playing RO 2 against bots with less effects (crash, boom, bang...) makes Joe Average getting a lesser fix than CoD offers. Those guys don't want to learn about the gratification of a kill, or how I see RO more: gratification of surviving. Those dudes get gratification of killing enemies in the hundreds, getting the feeling that "if I had fought for the Wehrmacht, Germany would have won".
If you release multiplayer to those however, you will still only attract a few of those guys, but, because they are playing against humans, they think that they can achieve this set of kills their online master just had. In the end, he is a human as well and learned. People don't like to get owned in MP.
Just have a free weekend of the full game near the end of November and then have a christmas sale...... since 95% of all the major bugs & issues have been resolved, the game will stand a better chance at a first impression then it did back on original release..... and more people can easily get sucked into the game.
I can't agree with just a single player freebie, as in regards to first impressions & while I think the bots/single player is a drastic improvement from previous bots/practice in RO1/ROCA, they still have their dumb moments and some new players might carry that over to the online play.
I got my old supervisor back in Canada to try RO1, but he only tried the single player..... he said he didn't like how robotic the movement was (the bots) and felt there were too many keys to remember..... so he stopped after playing SP and didn't even give the MP a chance.
Doesn't surprise me since he was a big CoD fanatic..... but just have a free weekend before December and then have a christmas sale..... that should get the hype for RO2 back up to snuff.
I can't agree with just a single player freebie, as in regards to first impressions & while I think the bots/single player is a drastic improvement from previous bots/practice in RO1/ROCA, they still have their dumb moments and some new players might carry that over to the online play.
I got my old supervisor back in Canada to try RO1, but he only tried the single player..... he said he didn't like how robotic the movement was (the bots) and felt there were too many keys to remember..... so he stopped after playing SP and didn't even give the MP a chance.
Doesn't surprise me since he was a big CoD fanatic..... but just have a free weekend before December and then have a christmas sale..... that should get the hype for RO2 back up to snuff.
See that post above yours, that's what I would call a good reply. Most people I know with Aspergers Syndrome are well articulated and they put thought into their opinion.
Funny that you're not well articulated, no thought in your opinion, no contribution to this topic and rather offensive to those that have it and need to struggle with the daily complications it can bring.
I wonder what's your excuse?
There isn't really a reason to let people play singleplayer, I never find that playing against bots gives a good representation of what the game is truly like.
I think Red Orchestra 2 gets it's playerbase from the immersion it "can" bring. If TWI manages to polish this game, players will come automatically once they get the chance to play it in a free weekend.
why would you want to bloat the playerbase? do you have aspergers?
I actually think that would be a great marketing strategy. The single player is more like a tutorial anyway.I bet their sales would benefit.