Why RO2 'failed'

[HLudwig]

Have I ever told you what a great guy you are Ludwig?
I actually think that if you worked on that chick not only would it have been rewarding but she is more likely to have stuck around and perhaps wife and kids in the end on cards.

But it seems you want cheap thrills You only get what you put in.

Wife and kids are so 1950s.

 

[heath4n]

I just hope TW is not stupid enough to listen to some of the imbecilic opinions that come out of this forum.

It's not rocket science, it all comes down to one single thing.

They chose realism over balance, nothing more, nothing less.

The ironic but sad thing is that people are calling for more realism, big fat sigh.

It's a fine art to try and get the balance between realism and gameplay, I think they accidently achieved it in RO1 which is what made it a great game. Darkest Hour actively sort out balance and this is why DH is the far superior game to RO1. RO2 went for realism over game play and it quite simply makes the game far less fun to play.

Seriously, its sad but amusing sometimes to read some of the stupid requests from players in the game, I'll laugh if we get jamming put into the game.

For the naive who believe that the game hasn't been an absolute fail, try living in Australia and getting a game on a local server. We had better luck getting a game of RO1 or DH on a local server before RO2 came out.

Don't get me wrong, I've played RO2 a lot and enjoy it but it's bloody simple. They chose realism over gameplay/balance.

The ultimate proof is in the fact that they spend stupid amounts of time designing the inside of tanks, seriously wow at their time management when the insides of tanks were perfect before release but they couldn't solve the biggest bug in FPS release ever to date, sometimes when you press the fire button it doesn't fire lol

 

[Schnitzel15]

This thread feels like a battlefield.

 

[SteadFast]

Wait...I haven't been on for so long, can someone tell me how many people are still on everyday? Last month I still saw like 1.3k-2k players when I play.

 

[Schnitzel15]

Wait...I haven't been on for so long, can someone tell me how many people are still on everyday? Last month I still saw like 1.3k-2k players when I play.

I think I saw 800 when I played yesterday. But I don't think that's the total player count.

 

[Nikita]

238 players on at 12:39 AM 12/7/2011.

I joined, chose Soviet tanker on Pavlovs House. Drove out behind the small building on 9th January Square, using a completely hull-down position, playing very conservatively, trying to HE the windows of the Voyentenburg Corner Ruins...

German Panzer IV blindly rushes the square. I aim at the front plate. No effect. His first shot misses. I aim at the turret (a sandbag wall prevents me from hitting the lower glacis plate of the Panzer). No penetration. His second shot kills my commander. My hull gunner begins moving to the gunner's seat. He gets killed by another penetration through the turret. I switch to the driver and try to take the gun--I'm killed by the next penetration, the tank explodes.

I switch to Rifleman. Shot by an Mkb at an absurd distance the moment I edge out from behind a bit of wall.

Esc-->Exit Red Orchestra
Are you sure you want to leave the game?
Yes.

EDIT: This post is quite negative-sounding, but I really WANT to jump onto RO2 and play for hours. Many of the mechanics have greatly improved, and some of the new features are pure genius (checking ammunition, ducking as a machine gunner, blindfire grenades...). It's like others say--a handful of bugs (STILL can't melee prone enemies, Hull MG still Davy Crockett), design choices (have barely done any Axis play, as I don't wish to be stuck with an MP40/II or MG34 with the dual mag), and very slightly flawed gameplay elements (insufficient sway, oversensitive zoom-->exaggerated long-range lethality of combat; hipfire MGs)

 

[Seamie]

I can't play this game because I've been stuck in this godforsaken country called Afghanistan for the last five months. It's really disheartening to read all the bashing occurring. Does anyone on this board like this game? Hopefully by the time I get back all the 'kinks' will have been worked out.

 

[Cyper]

I can't play this game because I've been stuck in this godforsaken country called Afghanistan for the last five months. It's really disheartening to read all the bashing occurring. Does anyone on this board like this game? Hopefully by the time I get back all the 'kinks' will have been worked out.

I don't really think that the majority of people here don't like the game. Then, obviously the majority of mainstream don't like RO2 but I don't personally care for that anyway. It's rather that many people don't like some parts of the game. Bashing RO2 totally would be really, really biased, since the core of the is not changed that much since RO OST but it's rather just extremely updated both in terms of graphics and gameplay. The complaints on this board seems to be a lot about the fact that there is no real hardcore mode in the game which is a shame.

 

[UsF]

You guys went on a bit about the separate gamemodes and that realism should be turned into real realism. Wasnt it supposed that the game was realistic on both modes and Relaxed Realism was basically the real deal with HUD training wheels? Wouldnt we need the whole game to change on that basis? I do not think that Realistic is a gamemode with HUD elements taken off, I think Relaxed is a mode with HUD elements enabled, but that is of course debatable. I think the gameplay in general is not realisic enough, as most have mentioned you need to limit a players abilities to realistic standards to have a good result.

On that basis, the MG34 hipshooting issue, I still think you should be able to do it. My assumption was that if hipshooting the MG34 would drain stamina of the player and if no stamina would mean rather heavy recoiling plus no running, hipshooting would become a last resort as well as meaning that stamina is more important as it is now. If we could combine stamina with the whole movement and shooting system more, I think gameplay would benefit from that. Right now it seems to just be a way of not letting you sprint continuously, while gunplay not really suffers from lack of stamina (especially below 200 meters).

 

[Grobut]

You guys went on a bit about the separate gamemodes and that realism should be turned into real realism. Wasnt it supposed that the game was realistic on both modes and Relaxed Realism was basically the real deal with HUD training wheels?

Yes that was the idea to a point, but not entirely, because whenever people on this forum raised concearns about gameplay and features we were seeing, we were told "This is the Relaxed mode you're seeing, so cool your heels, the Realism mode is the one made for you!".

So which was it? Contradictory statements ahoy!

We also know that the Realism mode was the last to be made, it was added just a few days before the DDE beta ended, and Ramm dropped by a server and asked people what they thought, saying he had just finished it, and that it had only been in the works for a few days.


But regardless of the intent, i do not see how keeping the modes identical has or even can work. For me and many Roosters like me, what needs to happen for us to return is that the gameplay be slowed down significantly (along with a few other things like removing fantasy weapons and the forced upgrade progression, i'd need a mode that does not have thouse things like we were promised), i'm just not having fun with this amphetamine fueled rushfest that is HoS, hell it's why i never liked CoD, BiA, BF or any of thouse, i don't like fast paced military shooters, and RO was not fast paced.

But if TWI actually did that, if they slowed down the game to what so many of their core fans would want, they will anger so many new players who do enjoy that pace, that there's no saying if the fanbase would grow, or if it would stay roughly the same size but just be played by a different audience.


Ergo i do not think one set of mechanics can work or is a good idea, it would take some significant changes to the gameplay feel for TWI to win back the Roosters, but thouse same changes could alienate their newfound fans who do enjoy the feel and pace of Ro2, so we're at an impasse.

But we woulden't have to be, if we had sepperate modes that were actually permitted to be different, then this could become a win/win for us all.

 

[UsF]

I didnt know that the Realism mode took the short straw the whole time. That is really silly. It makes sense though in the way that I presented before (make all the realistic gameplay you can get, then add all the HUD that needs to be there to make it accessible. Just remove the HUD help -> Realism. Wasnt enough unfortunately.)

Yea I agree, splitting up the modes by mechanics sounds like a good idea, at least for the fans, but then you have the problem that a person can not be eased into the game via relaxed realism to then finally move onto realism, as they might be too different for people to enjoy. Im probably moving around in circles, but from what I understood, relaxed realism was intended to ease people into the game to finally move them to realism. Separating the fanbase down the line of game modes would create the problem of separating the community somewhat as well as increasing the balancing workload for the devs, because they would have to balance the game for two different game modes on each map.

So yes, I do not know if keeping the fast paced gameplay is a good option. In my opinion, they should change the core gameplay completely and then add a checkbox for server administrators, that changes the values of stamina management, suppression, wounding etc. back to the current values, call it "fast" mode or something similar and enable it for both modes relaxed and normal realism. This fast mode would then not receive any balancing thoughts whatsoever, but you could still select it if you want. It will be tough keeping all people happy down the line of RO2s development and the serverbrowser could get really cluttered with all the custom feature settings that people desire.

Personally I hope they choose the side of slower paced combat and realistic player restrictions, but if they do stay/switch to the fast paced route entirely, I can understand that the whole game in itself should change, not turned into little pieces. I do not think that this would be the right direction though. The competition on that side of the battlefield might be too much and the flow of things too fast. Dont take that as a challenge though!

 

[defektive]

The ultimate proof is in the fact that they spend stupid amounts of time designing the inside of tanks, seriously wow at their time management when the insides of tanks were perfect before release but they couldn't solve the biggest bug in FPS release ever to date...

Modellers and texture artists generally don't work on code. It's not as if you can pull the art team away from their screens to help the coders. I appreciate that from the customers' point of view it appears to be a glaring mismanagement of manpower but things are rarely as simple as they might first appear.

 

[Zeraphinos]

But u guys realize that u want an unrealistic gameplay if u slow down the gameplay ? Its Heroes of Stalingrad and not Eastern Front 2 ! The battle for Stalingrad was also called
The Red Verdun ! It was a war of attrition . Close combats house and street fights reflect reality . The ingame maps , gameplay reflect the battle of Stalingrad ! U cant expect from twi to adjust their game to ur playstyle bcs u fail to adjust urs to the game . U asking for a softcore shooter instead of hardcore . ANd u cant call game arcade bcs of one map ! Believe me u dont want to be in a team with full of run and gunners , i prefer to be in a team that holds tactical position and change their position accordingly to targets , in such team i want to be .

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Modellers and texture artists generally don't work on code. It's not as if you can pull the art team away from their screens to help the coders. I appreciate that from the customers' point of view it appears to be a glaring mismanagement of manpower but things are rarely as simple as they might first appear.

True. I'm sure the team is made up of a certain amount of people, some who are PR, office management, coders, texture artists, mappers etc etc and they each have their own specialties and assignments. Some may be working on new material for a future update, others fixing bugs, mappers optimizing. I'm sure that work is also prioritized. It probably ends up with less people working on certain things than the public may realize because of their specific jobs. This is obvious to most of us, but it seems not so obvious to others.

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

RO2 went for realism over game play...They chose realism over balance, nothing more, nothing less...They chose realism over gameplay/balance...

Then why is the PTRS 784(r) penetrating things like the frontal T34? Why can you 'rambo' around effectively with an undeployed MG 34? Why are the MP 40/2, MkB 42, Nagant silencer, and AVT 40 a part of this so called realism game?

The ultimate proof is in the fact that they spend stupid amounts of time designing the inside of tanks, seriously wow at their time management when the insides of tanks were perfect

Actually, the entire inside hull of the Panzer IVF2/G is wrong. Click here. Also, the T34 interior has multiple errors as well, the drivers hatch periscopes being the most 'in your face' obvious.



.

 

[Grobut]

We really should stop using the word "realism", as it is far to easy to bend that word, and start using "historical accuracy" instead.

Just to make an example here: I could argue that Bunnyhopping is "realistic", because in the real world nothing would stop me from doing it, i can hop, it's easy enough.

But i could not argue that Bunnyhopping is a "historically accurate" tactic employed by soldiers of WWII, because that statement is demonstrably false and quite laughable.


Just food for thought gents.


EDIT: And i should reply to UsF on this aswell:

Yea I agree, splitting up the modes by mechanics sounds like a good idea, at least for the fans, but then you have the problem that a person can not be eased into the game via relaxed realism to then finally move onto realism, as they might be too different for people to enjoy. Im probably moving around in circles, but from what I understood, relaxed realism was intended to ease people into the game to finally move them to realism. Separating the fanbase down the line of game modes would create the problem of separating the community somewhat as well as increasing the balancing workload for the devs, because they would have to balance the game for two different game modes on each map.

You are forgetting one thing, namely that they don't have have to turn the "Realism" mode into the slower paced one, that is just one option they could choose.

Nothing's stopping them from adding a new mode, call it the "Ro1 mode" or the "Tactical" mode or whatever, for that matter they could add 2 new ones, the Tactical mode and the Tactical + HUD helper mode, this is perfectly possible (though it seems a little redundant to me, as i doubt there would be much demand for a Ro1-esque mode + HUDclutter).

And aslong as the new mode gets fair treatment by the server browser (IE we can actually find servers running this mode, and don't have to go dumpster diving amongst the "Custom" servers in hopes of finding one), then i don't think anyone would have any problems with adding this, thouse who aren't interested in playing it woulden't have to, and they would lose nothing, and thouse who do want to play it can play it. Who loses there? Who would it hurt?


As for map balance, i don't forsee many problems working with this, other games are doing it ("Standard" versus "Hardcore" modes) without headache, the modes would use quite similar mechanics and weapons (though a few be turned on or off for either), the main difference between them will be the pace of the gameplay and their feel, and that should not violently change map balancing, changes could probably be handled by toying around with reinforcement numbers if needed.

 

[Nordlander]

At that fackin part where they gained a rediculess upgrade system and level system into the game.

Thats why and where it failed,

 

[wake_up]

TWIs biggest fail is, to ignore all the people and dont give us a statement
what they will change in the future.
I didn

 

[CopperHead]

238 players on at 12:39 AM 12/7/2011.

I joined, chose Soviet tanker on Pavlovs House. Drove out behind the small building on 9th January Square, using a completely hull-down position, playing very conservatively, trying to HE the windows of the Voyentenburg Corner Ruins...

German Panzer IV blindly rushes the square. I aim at the front plate. No effect. His first shot misses. I aim at the turret (a sandbag wall prevents me from hitting the lower glacis plate of the Panzer). No penetration. His second shot kills my commander. My hull gunner begins moving to the gunner's seat. He gets killed by another penetration through the turret. I switch to the driver and try to take the gun--I'm killed by the next penetration, the tank explodes.

I switch to Rifleman. Shot by an Mkb at an absurd distance the moment I edge out from behind a bit of wall.

Esc-->Exit Red Orchestra
Are you sure you want to leave the game?
Yes.

EDIT: This post is quite negative-sounding, but I really WANT to jump onto RO2 and play for hours. Many of the mechanics have greatly improved, and some of the new features are pure genius (checking ammunition, ducking as a machine gunner, blindfire grenades...). It's like others say--a handful of bugs (STILL can't melee prone enemies, Hull MG still Davy Crockett), design choices (have barely done any Axis play, as I don't wish to be stuck with an MP40/II or MG34 with the dual mag), and very slightly flawed gameplay elements (insufficient sway, oversensitive zoom-->exaggerated long-range lethality of combat; hipfire MGs)

Yeah. After not playing the game for about a month and a half, i decided to come back and give it a try. It was fun, as it was the first few days back in September, until I came to the wall of problems again. For instance. I was in a short bolt duel with another fellow, and after we both missed each other, I bayo charged. He didn't even run away... he friggin PRONED, so that I could not kill him.
I don't understand how such a blatant bug could still not be fixed after all the patches.

I go to play on the one NA server that I can still find hopping, and I discover that even in combined arms maps, no tanks are allowed... because the Aimbot still has not been removed.

I get the impression that there are a few devs in TWI who think they know everything, they sure did act like it when they were talking about why they would implement a feature, as it was "something that happened on a real battlefield" of course, them never having set foot on even a continent with an active battlefield on it. It's as if they don't want to see something they implemented taken out of the game, even if what is left of the community pleads for it.

Just my opinion. At least they took some of the assault classes out of the clusterf**k.

 

[DasFist]

Ergo i do not think one set of mechanics can work or is a good idea, it would take some significant changes to the gameplay feel for TWI to win back the Roosters, but thouse same changes could alienate their newfound fans who do enjoy the feel and pace of Ro2, so we're at an impasse.

This is always something I find interesting, I always wonder how many of the people playing now are new fans, or are people who are still waiting for good things to happen, because I am new to the ro series and I find myself agreeing with all the roosters.

I own most big releases when it comes to fps, if I want to play fast paced game I will play something that does it better; cod4, ut2k4, ut3, quake etc. I bought ro2 for it's slow pace, realistic gameplay, all the stuff people complain isnt there.

Maybes a lot of new players think like me, they wanted ww2 arma, or just a good, tough fps, but got something that is just meh, hence the low playerbase.