Red Orchestra: Heroes of Stalingrad

[Pyronick 21]

Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45 is not really a full blown game as most people apparently expect.

Instead, it's more like an optimized version of the original Red Orchestra mod. Something along the lines of CounterStrike, but more in to the Battlefield-thing.

Hence the 15 dollar price, it's a nice little game when you get bored of ArmA at times.

Because Unreal Engine 2.5 didn't provide all the needs and there were not enough engine-level programmers the game didn't really change much.

At the moment, the limited portal-based map optimalisation leads to small maps.

The lack of real teambased gameplay as you see in ArmA 2 also doesn't make the game really tactical.

There is alot of interaction with the environment though, any weapon can be rested on surfaces to reduce sway for instance.

Hopefully Unreal Engine 3.x brings us bigger maps, squad-based teamplay is announced for Heroes of Stalingrad and they have more men at work.

Only if they take enough time to properly develop the game...

Edited May 21, 2009 by SgtH3nry3

[Dwarden 1124]

on UE 3.x engine you can build game which You will not know it's UE3.x engine if i rename all the files, hash the content and prevent you see configs ...

and make it e.g. space sim or 2d adventure with 3d background :) lol

it got all the 'hiend' stuff to compete with CryEngine 3, IDsoft or even BI engine (terrain streaming for example)

take in mind all games you named are based on UE2.x engine and thus severly limited against what UE3 offers http://www.unrealtechnology.com/features.php?ref=technology-overview

in fact UT2003/4 and UT3 are just technology demos of the engine sold as 'game' :)

UE3 allows games which are not 'sandbox' anymore (tens km x tens km or even more on 64bit)

(well even UE2.x allows huge maps (kms to kms) but it was limited on the destructable items (the problem lays in netcode actors) and non streamed terrain)

saying UE3 is bad engine is just selfish :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games

Edited May 22, 2009 by Dwarden

[Baff1 0]

Once you start modifying the engine's source code, and pay a million dollars to have the privilege, it's no longer a 'mod'.

Intrestingly the now defunct 3DRealms team working on Duke Nukem Forever were paid by Epic for their modifications to the Unreal engines source code.

That's how they made their money.

Edited May 23, 2009 by Baff1

[sic-disaster 311]

Darkest Hour, one of the biggest mods for RO came out yesterday.

To celebrate, RO is only 5 bucks till the 15th of June.

Get it on Steam now if you havent got it already, it's definitely worth the price of admission.

It's a huge game with 2 years worth of additional free content, and 3 huge mods adding even more stuff and theatres to the game.

You've got Darkest Hour in 3.0 now, focussing on Western Front, you've got Mare Nostrum focussing on Africa/Italy, and then there is CC, adding Finnish equipment and even useable mortars :)

Seriously, for 5 bucks you really cant go wrong if you are into realism gaming.

[privatenoob 0]

I agree but I always preferred vanilla RO instead of the mods but im gonna give DH one more chance if I ever can get on a server.

RO is right now the ONLY FPS game Im playing. Its the best. Simple as that.

I wonder when HoS is due to come out, hopefully not too long.

[Leopardi 0]

I agree but I always preferred vanilla RO instead of the mods but im gonna give DH one more chance if I ever can get on a server.

RO is right now the ONLY FPS game Im playing. Its the best. Simple as that.

I wonder when HoS is due to come out, hopefully not too long.

AA3 will be better.

[Pyronick 21]

AA3 will be better.

Nah, I doubt it. AA always had this typical gameplay which didn't really feel tactical.

The original RO did have this gameplay/feel, but it was dumbed down because alot of features weren't really finished to my feeling and it was as if the game was lacking.

Heroes of Stalingrad is a completely new revision making it more than just a CounterStrike: Source gone tactical/realism.

[Baff1 0]

RO looked horrible and had rubbish bots.

A good revamp is well needed for this excellent concept game.

AA2 Looks great too. Same sort of gameplay, I can't like one and not the other.

[sic-disaster 311]

RO is old dude, ofcourse graphics are not top notch.

I do hope you didnt waste your time playing against the BOTS?

RO is a multiplayer-only shooter, the bots are just there to play against to master the controls, nothing else.

I feel you are not giving the name enough credit.

It started off as a mod, they won a license on unreal engine 2.5, so that is what they had to work with.

For what the engine is worth, they squeezed every last drop from the engine.

[metsapeikkoo 10]

Darkest Hour, one of the biggest mods for RO came out yesterday.

To celebrate, RO is only 5 bucks till the 15th of June.

Get it on Steam now if you havent got it already, it's definitely worth the price of admission.

It's a huge game with 2 years worth of additional free content, and 3 huge mods adding even more stuff and theatres to the game.

You've got Darkest Hour in 3.0 now, focussing on Western Front, you've got Mare Nostrum focussing on Africa/Italy, and then there is CC, adding Finnish equipment and even useable mortars :)

Seriously, for 5 bucks you really cant go wrong if you are into realism gaming.

Uh, wasn't that Romanian equipment, not Finnish?

[Baff1 0]

RO is old dude, ofcourse graphics are not top notch.

I do hope you didnt waste your time playing against the BOTS?

RO is a multiplayer-only shooter, the bots are just there to play against to master the controls, nothing else.

I feel you are not giving the name enough credit.

It started off as a mod, they won a license on unreal engine 2.5, so that is what they had to work with.

For what the engine is worth, they squeezed every last drop from the engine.

I didn't waste much time playing with either.

It was old before it hit the shelves. It launched on Unreal 2 when other games were launching on Unreal 3.

With outdated graphics and usless co-op from the outset, it wasn't ever going to hold my attention. No matter how inspired I thought it was. Another crappy team deathmatch respawner, that's not for me.

Me and my friends can't all play that anymore than we can play all play AA. That sort of gameplay is anti-social. You have to choose your friends by gaming ability and I don't.

I choose games I can play with all my friends, if you see where I'm coming from.

I'm pretty keen to play the new version. It looks like those key shortfalls have been addressed.

Edited June 10, 2009 by Baff1

[Pyronick 21]

RO looked horrible and had rubbish bots.

A good revamp is well needed for this excellent concept game.

True.

It used UT2004 bots afaik, which weren't made for the tactical gameplay and speed of Red Orchestra.

I didn't waste much time playing with either.

It was old before it hit the shelves. It launched on Unreal 2 when other games were launching on Unreal 3.

As an indie developing studio, it's always a less dangerous gamble to start with something that already has been successful.

With the resources you acquire while building on your old platform, you can make your next-generation software even better.

The same strategy BIS seems to be taking.

As I see it Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45 (and their second retail title "Killing Floor") were made to gather vital resources in the form of money, networking and knowledge.

I can tell by comparing the scales of Ostfront 41-45 (MP only, very basic) to Heroes of Stalingrad (MP+SP campaign, more advanced) and the release of Killing Floor.

[JB Time 0]

Is this game likely to get an Xbox 360 release?

[privatenoob 0]

AA3 will be better.

Yes if the players who are using the word "CAMPING" is deported to another planet then maybe. One of the reason I stopped playing AA, not the game itself but the CS players who seem to been infected with ADHD. Another is the ridiculos short map-time, even the ones that are having the Border map. AA should really start using respawn, that way anyone can play their style, rambo, tactical or "realistic" and increase map time-limit.

Anyway, now Im gonna pre-load AA3 on steam. ;)

[Leopardi 0]

Yes if the players who are using the word "CAMPING" is deported to another planet then maybe. One of the reason I stopped playing AA, not the game itself but the CS players who seem to been infected with ADHD. Another is the ridiculos short map-time, even the ones that are having the Border map. AA should really start using respawn, that way anyone can play their style, rambo, tactical or "realistic" and increase map time-limit.

Anyway, now Im gonna pre-load AA3 on steam. ;)

It wasn't like that in 1.x times. Downfall started near 2.7 version

[Baff1 0]

UG.

Respawn. What a let down in game so hell bent on realism.

[metsapeikkoo 10]

UG.

Respawn. What a let down in game so hell bent on realism.

So uh, you got actually better solution for "somewhat" small player and map-size limit?

[Leopardi 0]

UG.

Respawn. What a let down in game so hell bent on realism.

How do you get an on going war without?

[Baff1 0]

Make people worry more about staying alive?

Survival is most important part of the game.

Frankly I'm not looking for an on going war. You should try Planetside for ongoing war, it's a bit old now but it rocks.

And yes I do have a better solution for small player limits and map sizes. No respawns. I can't remember the famous WW2 battle with all the respawning. What on earth have small mapsizes and player limits got to do with it?

If a gun fight takes place in my garden shed with only 4 people, no one is going to come back to life afterwards.

[privatenoob 0]

Well in all fairness it does use a reinforcement-system that means if your team dies too much your reinforments gonna end up until zero and then your team has no respawn. And that almost always means loosing the battle.

This is always part of the game-stratetic in every round, watching the reinf and taking the proper measurement depending if you are to low in regards to the other team.

[NoxNoctum 10]

You guys bashing RO are fucking insane.

The gameplay is unparalleled don't be deceived by the budget price and the old graphics (which aren't that bad really). I thought all you gameplay-whores (of which I am one to be sure) didn't care about graphics anyways? The maps are sheer epicness and there have been some pretty large custom maps released.

Play Leningrad on a full 50 player sever and come back here and tell me the game does not completely rock. Their is respawn/reinforcements to simulate a larger battle. Hopefully in ROHOS we'll be able to play on massive servers and perhaps not use respawn anymore. The feeling you get holding back massive waves of infantry in these cold, atmospheric maps is sheer bliss. The dynamic between tanks and infantry is incredible as well.

True it does not have the same level of teamplay as Project Reality for instance, but the battle lines are usually much more defined so you at least have the impression that a team is working together, there is a definite ebb and flow to a battle as the frontline moves back and forth. I've yet to see a single other game come close to representing WW2 infantry warfare so well.

Moral of the story: If you don't have RO, go buy it now, it's dirt cheap. If you "tried" RO briefly and called it shit because of the aged graphics/anims/your other bullshit misconceptions, go back and play it some more. You'll get addicted, guaranteed.

The fact that there's a real art to mastering the weapons (yes even the SMGs) is a big plus factor too.

Everyone knows the bots suck this is a multiplayer only game.

TBH I'm looking forward to this more than ARMA2.

RO was not just a shameless money grab to fund RO:HOS either (like ARMA was)... you guys complaining about simplicity simply HAVE NOT PLAYED IT ENOUGH. The fact that it was MP only does not detract from it in the least since it's tied with PR for the top realistic shooter experience out there IMO (the two games are drastically different though obviously).

Edited June 11, 2009 by NoxNoctum

[thepiespy 2]

frankly RO is one of the best games ive ever spent money on. I think a lot of people got turned off because they saw it and thought "oh another WWII game", selling it that short is like saying ArmA 2 is just COD4. A very dedicated group of people went into making the game and many of it's features (weapon resting, very good bipod deployment, swapping MG barrels) has yet to be implemented as well (if even at all) in most other realistic shooters. I agree that perhaps respawns could be lengthened but totally removing them seems a bit overboard. I fail to see how people said RO looks bad compared to AA? They look practically the same. Anyone who is part of these forums should know anyway that graphics =/= fun.

Its only real drawback is fairly small and restricted maps that often get nade spammed, although i highly recommend the Darkest Hour mod that adds much more open maps.

I await HOS with baited breath, i just hope TWI doesn't make the game too "user friendly" to the point it alienates the original fans, but TWI doesn't seem like the people to do that.

Edited June 12, 2009 by thepiespy

[Baff1 0]

Well in all fairness it does use a reinforcement-system that means if your team dies too much your reinforments gonna end up until zero and then your team has no respawn. And that almost always means loosing the battle.

This is always part of the game-stratetic in every round, watching the reinf and taking the proper measurement depending if you are to low in regards to the other team.

Unlike a lot of worse respawn games, RO has the decency to spawn you all at the same time so that teamwork isn't completly thrown out of the window. Although, it is clearly for anyone who bothered to stay alive when all else died!

[sic-disaster 311]

You guys bashing RO are fucking insane.

The gameplay is unparalleled don't be deceived by the budget price and the old graphics (which aren't that bad really). I thought all you gameplay-whores (of which I am one to be sure) didn't care about graphics anyways? The maps are sheer epicness and there have been some pretty large custom maps released.

Play Leningrad on a full 50 player sever and come back here and tell me the game does not completely rock. Their is respawn/reinforcements to simulate a larger battle. Hopefully in ROHOS we'll be able to play on massive servers and perhaps not use respawn anymore. The feeling you get holding back massive waves of infantry in these cold, atmospheric maps is sheer bliss. The dynamic between tanks and infantry is incredible as well.

True it does not have the same level of teamplay as Project Reality for instance, but the battle lines are usually much more defined so you at least have the impression that a team is working together, there is a definite ebb and flow to a battle as the frontline moves back and forth. I've yet to see a single other game come close to representing WW2 infantry warfare so well.

Moral of the story: If you don't have RO, go buy it now, it's dirt cheap. If you "tried" RO briefly and called it shit because of the aged graphics/anims/your other bullshit misconceptions, go back and play it some more. You'll get addicted, guaranteed.

The fact that there's a real art to mastering the weapons (yes even the SMGs) is a big plus factor too.

Everyone knows the bots suck this is a multiplayer only game.

TBH I'm looking forward to this more than ARMA2.

RO was not just a shameless money grab to fund RO:HOS either (like ARMA was)... you guys complaining about simplicity simply HAVE NOT PLAYED IT ENOUGH. The fact that it was MP only does not detract from it in the least since it's tied with PR for the top realistic shooter experience out there IMO (the two games are drastically different though obviously).

This. Nuff said.

Besides, ArmA1/2 have respawn too. Get off the high horse.

[metsapeikkoo 10]

Make people worry more about staying alive?

Survival is most important part of the game.

Frankly I'm not looking for an on going war. You should try Planetside for ongoing war, it's a bit old now but it rocks.

And yes I do have a better solution for small player limits and map sizes. No respawns. I can't remember the famous WW2 battle with all the respawning. What on earth have small mapsizes and player limits got to do with it?

If a gun fight takes place in my garden shed with only 4 people, no one is going to come back to life afterwards.

Last time I checked the battle of Kursk wasn't fought by 25 guys on the soviet side and 25 guys on the german side.

Nor was the battle(s) of Berlin:

LmyXVbIYFE4

RO learning curve:

First day: You totally hate this game.

Second day: You give it a try, you start liking it littlebit.

Third day: You just basically fall love with this game once you've learned the basics and basic-tactics.

Edited June 13, 2009 by metsapeikkoo