Tactical Realism » Blog Archive » Tactical Gamer’s xTYBALTx Reviews RO

Tactical Gamer’s xTYBALTx Reviews RO

April 1st, 2006 by

D6Veteran

xTYBALTx over at Tactical Gamer has posted a review of Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45. He criticizes RO on several points for not being on a current generation engine, and overall has some issues with the TR gameplay. While I agree with some of his gameplay issues, I found it particularly interesting that he views BF2 as a better game in terms of TR.

Overall, I’d say Red Orchestra is a fine game, and if Battlefield 2 didn’t exist, it’d be a great game. Alas, Battlefield has been around for neigh a year now, and our community has grown accustomed to a certain level of tactical gameplay which RO has not delivered.

xTYBALTx claims in the beginning of the review that the learning curve is not as high as other players have pointed out, yet in his review he reveals that he hasn’t fully grasped the game’s features:

This is made worse by the fact that there are neither visual nor audio cues catching your attention when the objective begins to be taken.

This is not true (and it took me awhile to figure it out myself). A map icon warning will blink at the bottom of the screen when objectives are being captured or lost.

Looking at the comments posted to xTYBALTx’s review it appears there are a handful of players who are unhappy with how difficult it is to kill the enemy in RO — a point that I would rate extremely high on reasons why I like the RO gameplay. Other

By: D6Veteran | 04/01/06 | Reviews - Red Orchestra | Trackback | Comments [RSS 2.0]

3 Responses to “Tactical Gamer’s xTYBALTx Reviews RO” »»

ghost

Comment by ghost | 04/02/06 at 9:45 am |

My first reaction is w/e. First off taking the command features of BF2 and comparing it to the lack there of in RO is just silly and wrong to make that comparison to RO. He’s right that the command options from a communication stand point in BF2 make it standout compared to any other FPS out there, but if the game doesn’t have it.. why try to state a comparison. If anything the lack that option should force more voice communication.

Most of his dislike of the game really has to do with the lack of an updated engine. If you read between the lines on his comments, such as running over fences or making tight turns in tanks, it’s obvious to me, he doesn’t like the graphics. I agree, it’s not as pretty to CoD2 or BF2, but, is that what you want as a gamer? If you can’t stand the playability factor of RO, than the graphics won’t help it. It’s the play factor that help RO.

He also has dislikes on the disconnect on what is happening. Sorry, but again this is a playability issue. People, especially when playing TR, should be communicating. Not waiting for some kind of message from an imaginary commander who tells you in computer voice that the objective is being taken. His example of Basovka, is lacking. He makes it sound like the all of the fun and tension of that battle comes with the last objective. That just silly and obviously comes from someone that has not played enough RO. Trying to hold those first to objectives, especially if you have a competent captain calling in artillery, is by far just as much fun.

Overall, the review, seems to be more about why BF2 is better than RO than why RO, for the WW2 FPS/TR fan is a great alternative to what we have today.
zappa

Comment by zappa | 04/02/06 at 3:07 pm |

With the release of RO, a new phrase has come about, Run and Gun Realism. This is how some BF2 and COD 2 players really like to play. They also have a problem with the learning curve of RO. An example is the admisson of xTYBALTx that he hasnt fully grasped the games features. An arcade gamer such as xTYBALTx will have trouble with any game like RO.
RedLine

Comment by RedLine | 04/06/06 at 9:37 am |

in my opinion playing RO requires a lot of patience and the ability to overcome problems.

RO is uber realistic but can be super-Uber if something are fixed. i know he says you can’t jump over fences or make tight turns in the tanks (which i hope they fix both of these problems) but this is a beta in someways…no one knew how this game would turn out and im betting now that its caught fire more support and more ideas will be implemented into the game.this game is a modders dream anything or almost anything can be done to it. criticising anything else but the graphics is wrong. gameplay is what you buy a game for not graphics if you want graphics go spend the 400 bucks and buy a PS3 and play those locked console games with stock everything.

RO blows BF2 away. BF2 is a terrible excuse for a war game and the new one wont help much either. it takes almost no talent to play it and any real teamwork is shearly coincidental unless you play with a team. on all the RO servers i played one i have come across almost daily players who would rather stick together than go off on their own like in BF2. even non-clan pubs are teamming up with clan members to win the map. no one cares about the points because it falls in to place when your doing the job and helping your team. i know it can get fustrating with the lack of RL abilities that would enhance gameplay like being able to jump fences, windows, and other small objects. and being able to prone behind lumber without having to fear climbing over it. but until problems liek that ware fixed ill stick with giving this game an 8 out of 10. 9 to fix the problems and 10-10 to upgrade the graphics..

Tactical Gamer’s xTYBALTx Reviews RO

3 Responses to “Tactical Gamer’s xTYBALTx Reviews RO” »»

Leave a Reply »»