Red Orchestra Dev: CoD Has Ruined A Generation Of Gamers
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I didn't say it was "deep", but gameplay is interesting for what it is and it's fun and it is polished. I do hate how it has taken over and I do hate the whole annual releases though.Andy of Comix Inc said:
But I agree on the rest, it's basically what I meant, for what it is, CoD is good. It's not supposed to be a realistic battlefield tactics game, but more of a close combat skirmish. That is also what makes room for games which have other kind of battle tactics and gameplay included.
As a really bad twitch shooter, that had really bad fps on Black ops 2 for example, it really is not based on who has better reflexes (not that it doesn't help, but it's not crucial to get kills if you just don't run around).
And I really didn't get the part about "skills", if you play this game you'll get better, you'll see different stuff works better. I really don't see which FPS requires skills so much more that CoD is worthless.
Welcome to the MMO Genre, dude, where everyone wants to be like WoW, and everyone wants it to be like WoW.
At least people are starting to get tired of it and want more. Wait another 5, 10 years and the COD lovers will start to fade away a bit.
At least people are starting to get tired of it and want more. Wait another 5, 10 years and the COD lovers will start to fade away a bit.
I think if you offer the CoD players something worth their time that they'll be willing to turn in their instant gratification card and attempt to get better at shooters. My younger brother was the most dedicated CoD player you'd ever meet but after a few games of TF2 with me pocketing him as a Medic so he could get the hang of things, he never went back.
He's one of the best Demoman players I've ever seen to date. A better Demoman than myself (though I can play every class well and he can only play Demoman! I've still got pride as the big brother!) and he's really a credit to team!
He's one of the best Demoman players I've ever seen to date. A better Demoman than myself (though I can play every class well and he can only play Demoman! I've still got pride as the big brother!) and he's really a credit to team!
He's right (not the escapist extract, the whole article) to a degree. CoD is an 'easy' FPS, but a dangerous one. It tells players they could swim in the ocean in a hurricane whilst in reality they're paddling in a inflatable pool wearing water wings. So when players go to a 'real' FPS, they suddently feel like they've been dropped into the deep end without ever learning to swim, so they cling to CoD.
In the past, if you played a game, it could lead you onto other games within the genre. With CoD, you simply don't learn the skills to ever be competant elsewhere. No-one likes to feel like they've gone from being good to abysmal, even if the 'good' was only smoke, mirrors, and killstreaks.
In the past, if you played a game, it could lead you onto other games within the genre. With CoD, you simply don't learn the skills to ever be competant elsewhere. No-one likes to feel like they've gone from being good to abysmal, even if the 'good' was only smoke, mirrors, and killstreaks.
I'll have to disagree here - scopes are very much in demand, mostly because they give a significant advantage spotting things at longer ranges.Ultratwinkie said:
Generally speaking you don't see where the bullet came from, you have to -know- where the bullet came from, as exposing yourself to an overly wide arc of potential incoming fire is suicide.
The major problem here isn't that it fails at what it's trying to do, the problem is that its goal is incredibly niche.
Correct, minus the guilt-tripping. Your character is pretty damn stoked about it.
A good portion of the voice-acting seems to be intended to convey a sense of threat - you're not meant to idly shrug off an artillery bombardment, or an MG opening fire on your position. Again, this is an incredibly niche effect - especially as it goes against the normal narrative of the protagonist being a superhuman badass with nerves of diamond-encrusted wolfram.
Aye, it really does boil down to this, doesn't it? They've picked themselves a very narrow niche, and made a game for that. Given the resources they've had available I'd say they've accomplished their goal quite well, but at the end of the day, it's still a niche - and for many the largest turnoffs will be exactly what the game set out to do: a hyper-realistic WWII combat simulator, where the protagonist mostly is trying to live to see another day.
Which incidentally also was the reason I loved it.
They should never expect CoD-like success when they go on with this, but I for one would be a very happy bunny if they'd release a Red Orchestra 3 that iterated and improved upon the whole formula of squad-based hyper-realistic action.
Needs not be Stalingrad, needs not even be WWII.
Ultratwinkie said:
I'm not trying to be dismissive of you but that is why the RO1 and RO2 have not done very well. At no point does the game emphasise the fact that a moving target is harder to hit or that its easier, and less likely to get you killed, to shoot someone from 20 meters in the back or the side than sit in static position and try to out twitch someone. Its not your fault because you are doing what the games mechanics award you for. There is no penalty for sitting in the church on Spartanovka and shooting at the Russians in the town hall with your Kar. However if the rifleman sitting in the Church moved up into the flanks of C and shoot the Russians from the direction they are not looking your team is more likely to cap the point and you are less likely to get killed. Before you say its realistic, its not, because ignoring an orderer to attack or defend an area would earn you a one way trip to a punishment battalion at best. The problem is that Tripwire have built a team based multiplayer FPS without incentivising team play or penalising camping. They should have considered ways to create the team play with game mechanics.
Yeah I agree on the way multiplayer competition is handled these days on consoles. Even the games with the unrealistic space technology have started going a bit too much toward the whole "you round the corner and you die" mentality. Striving towards realism in gameplay is another version of striving towards realism in the visual arts: it gets boring really fast.deathbydeath said:
Rather appropriate metaphor.TheComfyChair said:
Add in the instant gratification and you've got CoD in a nutshell.
Very bias examples you picked there.deathbydeath said:
"Woody the unexceptional gamer"?
Also wanted to add that deathmatch and S&D are VASTLY different in terms of pacing. Again, very bias examples.
Granted, the average Quake player is probably miles ahead in terms of pure skill than the average Call of Duty player, and yes Call of Duty stifles skill growth. But it's popular for a reason.
Some of you guys really ought to learn to read the source link before commenting.
Think of the Escapist News Room as a great place to find links to sites that have actual news.
Think of the Escapist News Room as a great place to find links to sites that have actual news.
I'm someone who doesn't play sniper in BF:BC2 or BF3 but I don't like COD either. Moreover, I also don't like Red Orchestra.
I just dislike game styles based around lying somewhere, waiting for someone to move their toe out of cover. But I also dislike games based around running around like a headless chicken shooting at stuff.
Because of that I liked the idea of someone further up to get rid of K/D and focus on W/L as well as objectives.
Map design should be so there are both open portions that can be defended by snipers as well as ample paths for flanking around them.
Just look at tactic games like Company of Heroes: It is at its best when people are covering vital areas with mgs or whatever and the attacker is flanking around. This is what -in my opinion- a ww2 shooter should be like, not about sitting in holes waiting for someone's toe to peek out of cover... that would be a ww1 shooter instead.
Compare it to BF3 for example, which is a lot more CoD-ish than BF2/other BF games but still has (depending on map and game mode) spots where snipers can be useful (though often are not because of sniper-player attitude). Because that is the biggest problem about snipers: Often they aren't useful, they are just holding the team back (see BF:BC2 or some modi/maps in BF3, also partially applies to other games).
And RO is simply mainly about sniping. Not much wrong with that if this is your inteded gameplay but don't be surprised if many people don't like it.
On the other hand, CoD took flanking etc. so far that tactic is largely pointless and people are indeed just running around like chicken.
But those are just my experiences with those games. I think some people might greatly enjoy things from the games I don't like and this is actually a great thing. Everyone should be able to play the way they want and if there are several games out there offering different playstyles and experiences for everyone, this is a good thing.
One thing related, though is the absolutely toxic attitude in some of those game communities.
Killed someone with a grenade launcher? Noob.
Killed someone with an automatic weapon (got forbid a shotgun)? Noob!
Killed someone with anything else than a headshot from 300+ m? Obviously a noob!
And it isn't limited to that. People are constantly bashing each other for playing (or enjoying) other games as well.
Go back to CoD, noob. Go back to BF, noob. Go back to RO, noob...
People should just stop this, as imo this hazardous atmosphere can be an even larger factor preventing people from checking out (and enjoying) other games.
I've experienced kinds of this hazardous attitude in all of those games and all it does is walling off one player base from another and sometimes even alienating parts of the player base that actually wanted to be a part of the community.
I just dislike game styles based around lying somewhere, waiting for someone to move their toe out of cover. But I also dislike games based around running around like a headless chicken shooting at stuff.
Because of that I liked the idea of someone further up to get rid of K/D and focus on W/L as well as objectives.
Map design should be so there are both open portions that can be defended by snipers as well as ample paths for flanking around them.
Just look at tactic games like Company of Heroes: It is at its best when people are covering vital areas with mgs or whatever and the attacker is flanking around. This is what -in my opinion- a ww2 shooter should be like, not about sitting in holes waiting for someone's toe to peek out of cover... that would be a ww1 shooter instead.
Compare it to BF3 for example, which is a lot more CoD-ish than BF2/other BF games but still has (depending on map and game mode) spots where snipers can be useful (though often are not because of sniper-player attitude). Because that is the biggest problem about snipers: Often they aren't useful, they are just holding the team back (see BF:BC2 or some modi/maps in BF3, also partially applies to other games).
And RO is simply mainly about sniping. Not much wrong with that if this is your inteded gameplay but don't be surprised if many people don't like it.
On the other hand, CoD took flanking etc. so far that tactic is largely pointless and people are indeed just running around like chicken.
But those are just my experiences with those games. I think some people might greatly enjoy things from the games I don't like and this is actually a great thing. Everyone should be able to play the way they want and if there are several games out there offering different playstyles and experiences for everyone, this is a good thing.
One thing related, though is the absolutely toxic attitude in some of those game communities.
Killed someone with a grenade launcher? Noob.
Killed someone with an automatic weapon (got forbid a shotgun)? Noob!
Killed someone with anything else than a headshot from 300+ m? Obviously a noob!
And it isn't limited to that. People are constantly bashing each other for playing (or enjoying) other games as well.
Go back to CoD, noob. Go back to BF, noob. Go back to RO, noob...
People should just stop this, as imo this hazardous atmosphere can be an even larger factor preventing people from checking out (and enjoying) other games.
I've experienced kinds of this hazardous attitude in all of those games and all it does is walling off one player base from another and sometimes even alienating parts of the player base that actually wanted to be a part of the community.
Steven Bogos said:Red Orchestra Dev: CoD Has Ruined A Generation Of Gamers
"It's frustrating for me as a designer to see players come in and they're literally like 'In Call of Duty it takes 0.15 seconds to go into ironsights. In Red Orchestra 2 it takes 0.17 seconds to go into ironsights. I hate this.'"
Source: PC Gamer [http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/13/call-of-duty-red-orchestra-2-interview/]
Permalink
OMG cats are living with dogs and the sky is falling , i am actually feeling compelled to defend COD!
Iron sighting is a crux designed to help around the fact a console control is a shite way to play a fps , its about as valid to real PC FPS multiplayer as auto aim!
Its ironic that red orchestra a game i view as being the same cancerous family as cod should come out and ***** on this subject. there both "realistic " modern shooters , cod is a no skill frag fest for sure but at least it can be fun , red orchestra is all about being camped by someone you never see , about as much fun as ramming a wire brush up your urethra.
Doom , quake, sam , painkiller,UT, TF , this is the glorious heritage of PC shooters , not crap like red orchestra
I told you I picked out the video at random from a google search of "blops 2 gameplay". All I did was click halfway through the video for five seconds to make sure it was an fps; there was no bias. Here's the result of a search titled "professional blops 2":CardinalPiggles said:
Better?
Also, I know it's popular for a reason. I stated (some of) those reasons in my post: (fantastic introduction to multiplayer fps', yearly releases to prevent "growing out" of it, mirror polish,
hitting the right notes for the target audience, everybody plays it). I'm saying that the Red Orchestra Dev has a point, because gamers have "grown into" a rudimentary, simple, and very skill-less game for 6 installments over 6 years.
Red Orchestra is a game where you can be dying a shit ton and still do good for your team, even with a "bad K/D ratio, brah". It's really intense and well crafted. I played a lot of Call of Duty until I realized like he said, it usually breaks down to luck. It's not really immersive, the gameplay is stale now, and the engine is dated.
Quite so - I do think Red Orchestra is a very acquired taste to be honest as its very realistic, to the point where I didn't find it very fun - BUT if your into that sort of game, I'd imagine it'd be great.Korten12 said:
Never really took to the killing floor myself either, but hey, if we were all the same the world would be inbred and quickly die off.
It would be nice if people could both respect what a dev says and also actually listen to what they say.major_chaos said:
He isn't calling COD players "morons". If anything he is calling them spoiled or like people addicted to slot-machines, they are conditioned to have easy victories that don't value skill, just the illusion of skill.
And I totally agree with him. COD doesn't have anything like the skill set, it's a frustratingly shallow game to spite all the surface complexity like so many different guns.
He's right. COD multiplayer is basically a fisherprice my first FPS game. When I played Modern Warfare 2 a great deal, the community were bitching over how 'overpowered' the air killstreaks were - yet you could select a series of perks that would completely nullify all of them with the exception of bombing runs and the initial harrier airstrike. I found it most amusing that they lambasted the game instead of looking into the mechanics of the game they were playing and work the problem.
Fuck instant gratification.
Fuck instant gratification.