What was intentional and what wasn't.

[Raneman]

Some of the things we don't like- were they intentional? Were they designed this way on purpose?

I always wonder these things, as I notice the game design in it's current state focuses on trying to keep the players in constant combat, with no time to group up, move out, secure positions, all of it is replaced by
BLAMBLAMBLAM you will respawn in 3 seconds BLAMBLAMBLAM you have won

Is this the game they were trying to make?

 

[r5cya]

it would look that way. they must have had plenty of time testing it to see if it played the way they wanted it to.

 

[slyder73]

I don't think this has anything more to do with the size of the current maps.

Wait for much larger, true RO style maps and the teamwork and good gameplay you are hinting at will come back.

 

[Mekhazzio]

I don't think this has anything more to do with the size of the current maps.

Wait for much larger, true RO style maps and the teamwork and good gameplay you are hinting at will come back.

It's not like Danzig wasn't a total clusterf in RO1 too. It's just Apartments, Barracks, and parts of Station & Grain that are designed to be knife-fight maps. If people really wanted to avoid that type of gameplay, you'd be seeing servers weighting their map rotation away from those and more towards the Factory, Sparta, Pavlov's, Fighters & Commissar's.

 

[The Beast (nl)]

I think that that depends on your fightstyle.

When you have real teamwork with tactic, then you have a whole other game.

 

[MarioBava]

Some of the things we don't like- were they intentional? Were they designed this way on purpose?

I always wonder these things, as I notice the game design in it's current state focuses on trying to keep the players in constant combat, with no time to group up, move out, secure positions, all of it is replaced by
BLAMBLAMBLAM you will respawn in 3 seconds BLAMBLAMBLAM you have won

Is this the game they were trying to make?

I don't know. I feel like your description is hyperbolic. It doesn't sound like the game I'm playing let alone the question of the direction they wanted it to go. Unless you are playing Firefight mode, in which case the answer is yes, they designed Firefight mode to play that way.

 

[Tomcat_ha]

well first of all ro2 has a lot more automatics sadly and this has been stated to be intentional....

 

[Richey79]

I think that that depends on your fightstyle.

When you have real teamwork with tactic, then you have a whole other game.

Agree with you if you mean a team communicating on mic and working together.

If you camp and try to play tactikewly, the run-n-gunners on your team will run down the tickets and have all the fun. You can't control the pace of the game just by slowing down your own play-style.

I sometimes wish there was much more of a penalty for dying in the game: at the moment it doesn't really mean much.

 

[RJ_MacReady]

I don't know. I feel like your description is hyperbolic. It doesn't sound like the game I'm playing let alone the question of the direction they wanted it to go. Unless you are playing Firefight mode, in which case the answer is yes, they designed Firefight mode to play that way.

I agree. BF3 is a BLAMBLAMBLAM type of game. In RO2 pace is much more slower, although still way to fast for a tactical shooter.

 

[shadowmoses]

Some of the things we don't like- were they intentional? Were they designed this way on purpose?

I always wonder these things, as I notice the game design in it's current state focuses on trying to keep the players in constant combat, with no time to group up, move out, secure positions, all of it is replaced by
BLAMBLAMBLAM you will respawn in 3 seconds BLAMBLAMBLAM you have won

Is this the game they were trying to make?

This is exactly how TWI wanted the game to be (minus the bugs I'm sure). They knew they would be putting aside the niche community by making these design and gameplay decisions. The game they wanted was one that expanded to a new [larger] audience. Unfortunately now they are having to find a way to bring back the high number of 'new audience' that jumped ship when the game was at its worse early on. It's also unfortunate that they threw many of the older and more dedicated niche players overboard in this whole process by neglecting their expectations (Pardon my nautical puns ). I'm sure many suggestions were made in-house over at TWI to help make the change for the older players easier, blogs, other gameplay directions, ect but much of which was filtered out once those suggestions reached the top of the ladder I reckon.

 

[Raneman]

Why abandon fans of your IP to try to get an entirely different audience? Makes no sense.

 

[shadowmoses]

Why abandon fans of your IP to try to get an entirely different audience? Makes no sense.

Keep in mind that TWI is no longer a mod team (tho some would say they still act like it at times). They are a full fledged game development studio now and ultimately a business. At the end of the day they want to make money from the products that they make. To grow into larger shoes they can no longer rely on the [relatively] smaller niche community. They must expand and change their game's fundamentals to reach a larger audience and ideally appease to both sides of the spectrum. Now weather they have achieved that or not is debatable.

 

[Calumhm]

RO1 can be played retardedly too, the difference is that nearly the entire RO1 community you remember were veterans, because it's 6 years old.

 

[MarioBava]

RO1 can be played retardedly too, the difference is that nearly the entire RO1 community you remember were veterans, because it's 6 years old.

This is an excellent point. But there was a lot of cry about lack of team play on public RO servers too. Subjectively, to me it feels about the same between the two games in terms of the amount of tactical play/teamwork.