Tripwire, the core gameplay of RO2 is fine

[Nazarov]

All 250 of you?

Yea.... Forget about the ~10,000 who stopped playing the game altogether...

But keep telling yourself that you are the majority and that you speak for them.

(quite the big head you have...)

the number has increased to over 600 at 1 am est since the 50% sale.
But yeah....I think the RO1 playerbase was much bigger than that during its prime.

 

[Nezzer]

But I can totally foresee that if this mode is implemented, majority of the servers will adopt the more realistic gameplay

And if the majority of servers adopt that gameplay, it means that's the gameplay the majority of the playerbase wants, isn't it? So that's a very good thing, isn't it? If the majority of the playerbase doesn't like that gameplay, there will be more servers running the standard mode, because most server admins only want to see their servers populated, regardless of what mode it is (that's why you see a lot of 24/7 bots servers).

 

[ARMY guy]

Weapon leveling, weapon unlocks, no native language but badly accented voices, choppy running, multiple insta bayonet kills, a lone PPSH wiping out germans (or MkB doing its 30 bullet course of kill streak), whack-a-mole style coverage system, bandaging system (DoD beta 3.1 had this too), lock-downs, carrying 2 main weapons (even DoD source doesn't have this), switching weapons as fas as possible, picking up the gun and long with it an entire belt of ammo, etc.

I wasnt trying to say its perfect as is, but i believe the game feels closer to OST than it does to something like DOD. Some of those items you can do in OST, i never had an issue mowing down everyone with a SMG at all. I also think the cover system was well done, but to each their own i suppose. Like what was stated previously, its probably best to have a super realistic mode and keep relaxed as it is, or similar.

 

[Nazarov]

And if the majority of servers adopt that gameplay, it means that's the gameplay the majority of the playerbase wants, isn't it? So that's a very good thing, isn't it? If the majority of the playerbase doesn't like that gameplay, there will be more servers running the standard mode, because most server admins only want to see their servers populated, regardless of what mode it is (that's why you see a lot of 24/7 bots servers).

Yes, but my point behind this point was that this is why some of the current players want to cling to the current mode.
It would indeed be a great thing for me, and perhaps many of the community that has left will come back

 

[Ender]

I'd like to think I'm speaking for the silent majority here. This is because those that are dissatisfied are the most vocal ones; the rest of us are busy playing the game. So here goes: RO2 doesn't need slower sprinting, it doesn't need less stamina and it sure as hell doesn't need disabling of strafing while sprinting, which is the most ridiculous idea I've heard in a long while (it was suggested in the 'Project Realism Changes' thread). Strafe-sprinting requires performing the expert feat of gymnastics called 'turning your head'.

If there more momentum used when strafing it wouldn

 

[Six_Ten]

One can only hope that there is a realism mode that takes input form the community and well someone could pick a few features that they don

 

[Rak]

I'd like to think I'm speaking for the silent majority here.

So you're the "majority" that is a mere 1000 left over from 8000 concurrent players. Ok, nice silent majority there.

RO2's core gameplay is terribly broken and doesn't have any character. Those "suggestions" that you dissed are just small steps to put that character back in the game.

 

[lods of emone]

So you're the "majority" that is a mere 1000 left over from 8000 concurrent players. Ok, nice silent majority there.

RO2's core gameplay is terribly broken and doesn't have any character. Those "suggestions" that you dissed are just small steps to put that character back in the game.

Hell, how many of the thousand or so left playing even think the gameplay is fine? I still play it and don't think it's fine.

 

[Nazarov]

I find it interesting that some players that like RO2 are people that are:

1) new to this kind of game
2) did not enjoy RO1 because it was had limited control over actions
3) like only the realistic aspects highlighted in RO2

To each his own, I guess.

 

[Lawnboy]

I'll say that the OP has some good points, mainly that the movement is a huge improvement over Ostfront. The problem isn't that you run faster, it's that you can run until exhausted and then raise your rifle for a crack shot at 150m. Go put on your thickest winter coat and boots, grab a pellet/airsoft gun, sprint 150m through thick snow and then try and hit something in a split second. It ain't easy, and there is no reason it should be in RO2 either.

 

[DiedTrying]

Hell, how many of the thousand or so left playing even think the gameplay is fine? I still play it and don't think it's fine.

this

 

[Colt .45 killer]

So you're the "majority" that is a mere 1000 left over from 8000 concurrent players. Ok, nice silent majority there.

RO2's core gameplay is terribly broken and doesn't have any character. Those "suggestions" that you dissed are just small steps to put that character back in the game.

Not necessarily even that Rak, there was one person who suggested killing the strafing ability. I dont recall it getting a lot of support.

I'm personally a bit miffed with one random person popping up and suggesting something not too briliant, then in the eyes of those who can see none of HOS's wrongs, that is the opinion of all who have criticisms...

 

[Poerisija]

I still don't understand what is "more arcade" in RO2.

I really don't. No-one ever manages to tell me, either.

Wounding systems are equally bleh and stale in RO2 and OST, tanks are better in RO2, guns are better in RO2, movement is better in RO2, albeit some tweaks needed.

I really don't see where the "arcade" is. Maybe it's the MkB?

It's honestly mostly a map issue. Play Ogledow or hell even Fallen Fighters or Red October factory.

I never see run and gun players there.

 

[Kleist]

- Wounding and bandage system is a bad joke
You are hit but you can run away like a young deer, all you have to do is: get in cover an press "use" (you don

 

[palco]

I just can't believe what I am seeing.

Is this what become of red orchestra series?

Why even bother to play red orchestra if it's not realistic depiction of old warfare?

There are crazy good quality arcade shooters way way way much interesting to spend time with, bf3, cod..

What's the point of even looking at buggy, unpolished, budget game, indie game ro series if ro isn't realistic tactical shooter? which places itself between ARMA and cod 5 hitting sweet spot of dead realistic simulator and arcade shooter?

Some ppl here (mostly casual noobs) might not even notice what's realistic and what's arcady, but even the smallest feature like bandage, no injury system, movement speed can alter experience pretty drastically.

 

[Poerisija]

- Wounding and bandage system is a bad joke
You are hit but you can run away like a young deer, all you have to do is: get in cover an press "use" (you don

 

[Rocker Fox]

Progression system I agree with.

Really? you really agree with the 20% faster aiming, zooming, less suppression and such? Are you kidding? That was not a good idea even in cod like games, at least from what I've seen there you can't have all the bonuses ever at one time and can only chose ONE UPGRADE AT A TIME

The whole unlock system shouldn't have been in the first place, and not only does it not make any sense it being there in a game about realistic WW2 game but even if it did make any sense the unlocks make no sense (guns getting things that make it worse, having to unlock things that should been standard, getting this that make the gun op eg 250 round belt for one, and of corse, not being able to switch out upgrades)


edit: i may have taken your post wrong as you agree with it, if you don't agree with it then disregard my rage at you about that

 

[RJ_MacReady]

Body collision is removed for a reason. Try playing a game where you fight in closed quarters and have body collision (EG, BF?) OR even the original

Well, I used to play SWAT4 a lot in the past and, as you probably know, its action takes place mostly in very tight spaces. Despite full body collision in said game, I never experienced any blocking problems. When a player paused in a doorway or in front of a narrow corner, he always had a very good reason to do so (spotted an enemy, peeking over the cover or whatever). Even on public servers, I don't recall any major "blocking incidents" that would have spoiled the game-play.

 

[Poerisija]

Really? you really agree with the 20% faster aiming, zooming, less suppression and such? Are you kidding? That was not a good idea even in cod like games, at least from what I've seen there you can't have all the bonuses ever at one time and can only chose ONE UPGRADE AT A TIME

The whole unlock system shouldn't have been in the first place, and not only does it not make any sense it being there in a game about realistic WW2 game but even if it did make any sense the unlocks make no sense (guns getting things that make it worse, having to unlock things that should been standard, getting this that make the gun op eg 250 round belt for one, and of corse, not being able to switch out upgrades)


edit: i may have taken your post wrong as you agree with it, if you don't agree with it then disregard my rage at you about that

I agree with what the poster I was answering to said, so yeah. Edited my post for clarity.

Well, I used to play SWAT4 a lot in the past and, as you probably know, its action takes place mostly in very tight spaces. Despite full body collision in said game, I never experienced any blocking problems. When a player paused in a doorway or in front of a narrow corner, he always had a very good reason to do so (spotted an enemy, peeking over the cover or whatever). Even on public servers, I don't recall any major "blocking incidents" that would have spoiled the game-play.

SWAT4 had very few people running around. Certainly not 64. And IIRC that was a very slow-paced game. I recall several times people blocking entire teams in RO:Ost and it certainly happens a lot in BF3.

 

[Nezzer]

Body collision is removed for a reason. Try playing a game where you fight in closed quarters and have body collision (EG, BF?) OR even the original

I played on Danzig a hundred times over, with 50 players on the server, and I've never had serious door blocking problems. If body collision can lead to trolls blockign doors on purpose and annoying everyone, perhaps we should also disable friendly fire, right?

And hell, even COD has body collision...