Jump to content


Kickstarter Deluxe Rifleman Founder
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


RLpacifist last won the day on December 23 2016

RLpacifist had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

73 Outstanding Community Member

About RLpacifist

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 12/18/1984



Recent Profile Visitors

439 profile views
  1. Well said. @Farq-S, considering your first reply I guess you really believe this video provides some deeper inside that needs to be shared, but it does not and here's why. Story-telling, regardless whether in games, books, flicks or whatever of course does reflect things that are relevant to society. Therefore this may include morals, relations, politics, religion, you name it on various levels and depths. The more sophisticated things become, the more parallels can be drawn between those plots and actual - future, present or past - ongoings IRL. So, regardless the reasons a storyline got 'politized' (that term is as awful as it gets btw.) in the first place, at some point, it necessarily will become more serious in order to rise out of the shallow waters of good vs. evil. Think about it, there's nothing new to learn here. On top of that, in contrary to the guy from the video I wouldn't expect video games to take such a prominent spot as 'subconscious educational platform' and I do believe books, cartoons, movies, religious education and the regular day-to-day-struggles to have a greater impact in this regard. Basically, all the video is about is a guy being unnecessarily surprised by the fact that some games' storylines aren't complete nonsense. The real motivation seems to boil down to him being angry about his situation. Being a video game reviewer, who rather wants to talk about politics, yet incapable of realizing a video game youtube channel isn't the most appropriate platform for doing so. Besides that. I'm kind of worried how you already adapted those infamous clickbait headlines from youtube. Look, if you really mean it, we all got to watch that video, that is, then at least put some lines above the video telling us as to why it is so important.
  2. CoDWW2 is the best $60 spent

    @Duncan, there's something wrong with that equation. If there are so many things wrong with the game, then you probably didn't exactly enjoy those 135 hours, did you? Maybe it even drove you mad at times and left you frustrated more often than not? If that was indeed the case, do you really consider some shitty anything wasting your time and ruining your evening is worth any money at all? How much is one willing to pay for having a bad time? I mean, if you were to go to a concert with terribly butchered sound, the guitarists failing to tune their devices, drummer constantly being three ticks ahead, bassist drunk and useless as usual and the singer abysmally rasp and off all the time and the band playing the same set twice due to a lack of songs and the two following bands being even worse... Would you consider getting your money's worth, standing there in the cold with warm beer, because at least the whole show lasted 4 hours? Guess not. Actually, I used to calculate it the same way, so please don't take it personally or anything. It just happened I chose to pick this occasion to vent off some anger. However, at some point, I came to realize that it's not hours played but hours enjoyed that count. And I'm talking actual joy here. I'm talking endorphin and dopamine flooding your bloodstream while rushing through round after round. You know, that silly smile running all over your face while playing fully immersed, not realizing you should have put something on your stomach and gone to bed 4 hours ago. Real JOY! Not some mindfucking I-need-to-unlock-the-next-thingy kind of junky-addiction bullshit, where playing the game happens to be nothing more than some tedious duty you have to work your way through in order to finally get rewarded with the next virtual item. My god, how much do I hate the AAA-scheme of today...
  3. Star Wars Battlefront 2 (EA/Dice)

    At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if that whole shit-show actually is EA's well-plotted campaign to promote the game and finding out how far they can get, both at the same. As everybody knows, bad publicity is publicity no less and as of now pretty much every youtuber doing game stuff is featuring the game on their channel and feeding the controversy. Considering this undying meme, EA being a bunch of greedy fucks (not my words!), has been floating around for years now, their consultants probably figured there's no image to take damage from whatever outrageous scam they'll come up with anyway. So, go for it! Big time. Like, if everyone believes you were eating little kitties for breakfast, then heck, why not try one for real? They might indeed taste delicious... I mean, seriously, I do not watch much TV, social media stuff and all that, but I haven't seen a single spot promoting the game so far. Did they cut back on those huge add campaigns suddenly, or is it really just me missing them all out successfully? - edit - Haha, typed that. Went over to youtube. Got the Battlefront trailer shoved right into my face. Alright...
  4. Star Wars Battlefront 2 (EA/Dice)

    Gosh! Like a year ago I seriously thought we were at the very peak of this bullshit and things could only get better from there. Boy, how was I wrong! While looking at this tremendously false prediction of mine, I'm starting to worry what might have changed regarding Battalion's selling model behind the curtain. You know, back there, in the dark...
  5. Cod ww2 Beta

    You got to regard COD as what it wants to be, mainstream entertainment, that is. That's all you need to know really. It's no different from mainstream music/movies/events/whatever. A little shallow, easy to digest and designed to sell well, before anything else. You usually don't feel fully satisfied by the mainstream scheme? Well, alright, then better stay away from that game. You like to play a few rounds leaned back on the couch with some friends every now and then? You might indeed enjoy the game, depends on you whether it's worth the investment or not... I spent about 8 hours on the Beta and I think the game is doing OK and it surely has its audience. However, the explicit casual game design is what left me bored and I have absolutely no incentive to ever buy the game. Simply not my cup of tea and at this price tag nothing I'd get for shit and giggles only. Anyway, I wouldn't hold my breath for COD ever becoming a more serious shooter again. Their shit sells like hotcakes, so there's no need to change the scheme.
  6. When is the next beta?

    From the information given I don't see closed beta is going to happen neither. If that's indeed the case, I wished they would just have stated so explicitly - 'There will be no closed beta.' - in the latest Kickstarter update. That washy 'going dark' and 'see you all in January' leaves a little too much space for interpretation, as we can see in here. Personally, I don't really mind if the closed beta phase will be skipped and the game jumps right into early access, that is, open beta, if everything is going as well as being told. Though, I do expect them to go through sufficient testings across a wider range of hardware in the background nonetheless, so people won't have to go through hours of troubleshooting in January. You can't pull the early-access-isn't-ready-yet-card when omitting a basic testing phase and ending up with a stunt. Not in my book anyway. However, I won't blame any beta backer growing bad feelings over this as, like RAFF points out, the closed beta has been part of the deal, to begin with.
  7. Rifle Balance

    I'm not sure what exactly is supposed to be 'impossible' here and who said SMGs will kill with 3-4 shots and where you got the RPMs from in order to make such an equation. Not intending to pick on you particularly here, but it seems some people have that one game on their minds where things are done this or that way and they happen to be incapable of allowing themselves to look into other directions. There's a ton of different shooters out there, with a whole lot of varying approaches to weapon balance and even more possible ways around and in between. Yes, yes I know, Battalion is based on COD2/4 gameplay, so why even bother bringing up any other shooter, but still, people may have different backgrounds. Just keep that in mind. Anyway, I used the term 'generally spoken' because I didn't really mean to get into the discussion without ever playing the game and therefore simply shared what appears to be more established from the selection of games which I've been playing. To be honest, 'one hit kill to the torso' doesn't sound too appealing to me, but weapon balance is too complex of a field than this would be a maker or breaker all by its own. As of now, all I can possibly say is, yeah that could work out. Depends. I might come back to the discussion once Beta is running and I can tell first hand.
  8. Joe Brammer @ DDL

    Just loving it.
  9. Rifle Balance

    Generally spoken, body+chest 2 hits and head+neck 1 hit sounds more familiar to me. Agreed, that's why I think that spot shouldn't be any larger than the neck area.
  10. What kind of mods would you like to see in Battalion 1944?

    In case you haven't come across PUBG yet.
  11. Days of War ?

    Actually, I'm not particularly concerned about DoW because I haven't put any money on that horse. However, them hitting such a low and seeing virtually nobody is playing the game anymore - only a couple of months after early access launch! - got me curious as to what is going on over there. So I took some time and had another look at their website, forums and the Kickstarter campaign(s) and tried to figure out myself... First off, I still don't quite understand what or who Driven Arts is in reality. It looks a lot like there isn't a real company behind that name, but rather a few guys - might be at least a core team of three heads given the number of people introduced during their campaign video - teaming up at one's garage and developing the game in their spare time around some regular day job. Nothing wrong with that of course, but that would explain the overall lack of business sense surrounding the project and kind of putting things into perspective about what one 'realistically' could expect from such an endeavor. One rather weird thing I happened to discover in the 'press' section of their website is a link being displayed as www.playdaysofwar.com, which underlying URL appears to connect you to a Twitter account of some Steve Gomez, who seems to have no relation to DoW or Driven Arts considering the complete lack of references on his page to anything related to the game. The Twitter page tells he's a Java Script coder, so maybe he's actually the guy who has scripted the page and someone forgot to change the underlying URL of that reference when changing the link-text. Or Mr. Gomez just highjacked the page and left this as a note. I don't know, but quite telling either way... Secondly, even after reviewing the campaign video a few times now I still don't quite get the idea of their vision for the game. In fact, the whole storyline behind that flick seems to be nothing more than a desperate attempt separating from BAT44's KS campaign and to make Bulkhead look bad somehow. It's kind of funny how the sole purpose of that COD scene - which cuts so awfully into the rest of the video, like a literal afterthought addition - seems to be trying to remind people of how crappy COD has become these days in hopes people might conclude any game taking COD as a role model will necessarily also become such a mess. Well, maybe that is a little far-fetched... However, they really provide us with a deep look inside their heads by explicitly pointing out how their game was oh so close to being finalized after two years of development already spent (I simply can't believe that being a fully accurate fact actually given the current state of the game) in contrary to some other 'idea that may or may not be here in two years' from then. Now, at this point, I think it's quite obvious what they had on their minds there. Get out earlier than BAT44 and pull people over simply by delivering first. Mind you, they probably weren't even aware of COD going back to WWII at that time, not to speak of the general comeback of WWII shooters in 2017. Summing it up so far, their primary goal was to get the game out of the door as fast as possible and they even put it exactly like that themselves in the video. Unfortunately, that seems to be the entire plan - let's not say vision at this point. At least, I can't find anything more than them seemingly hoping for being the first bringing back WWII back to FPS with some sort of cheap mash-up of the best features of old school shooters. Nope.. that's not how game design works mates. With that in mind, it seems quite conclusive that instead of providing a more profound explanation of what their - proclaimed to be almost finished - game is, they decided to ask the community taking part in shaping the game. Frankly, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me at all and sounds rather contradictory, doesn't it? I mean, if the game is all about being finished, read the core gameplay is settled and mostly fixed, how is it going to work out now to start and try to incorporate a whole lot of new/different ideas... Which finally brings us to the present day. The latest updates kind of underline how the game indeed hasn't been anywhere near finished at any time so far. Quote from the 'July Dev Update' (12-07-2017): Welp, erm... pardon? This most obviously doesn't add up with the central message their KS video was throwing at us and they seemingly have decided not to even keep the tiniest back door open to fall back on that myth anymore. Wow. What an astonishing move altogether. OK, putting things into a more positive light, one might say they have learned their lessons, cut their losses, starting out on a second try with their eyes steadily put on their vision - this time indeed having one, or at least having that one of Valve, when they still made games back in the day - no matter what. Yeah, maybe and why not. Past is past and today is today and isn't' everybody bound to make mistakes, right? If luck is on their side, who knows, maybe there will be enough folks giving the game another shot, dragging it back up into life out of the 0-players grave. In fact, I do believe Driven Arts is on the right track by coming back to where they (should have) started and finally try to identify their niche and start to think about how they can make a difference from the vast range of alike shooters out there. Are they going to screw over some of their 2k backers by that? I'm afraid yes, they will and most likely already have. Are they going to get another batch of players into the game from finally showing profile? I kind of doubt that, but let them prove me wrong... Finally, no this is not a matter of devs not listening to their community. How even could it be, with such a limited community? Again, there's less than 2k backers and you can consider yourself happy when there's more than 5% of the total of your base audience ever going to show up on your forums. Realize, these guys started out on a damn thin marketing plot of scamming the thirsty WWII FPS enthusiasts, unaware they are far from being the only one on the market targeting that niche. They didn't see it coming and they obviously lack a real vision of what they want to create. Look, they have been on the cheap road, half a rip-off of Day of Defeat, half a mash-up of any other WWII shooter. They said this themselves to some degree on the 'Status Update' (13-06-2017). Now, with their sad attempts reasoning the removal of ADS they even try to jump onto the CS:GO train and run along with that. Their logic, it works for them all right so it got to be an approved concept. Well, you guys over at Driven Arts. If you haven't realized yourself yet, firgging CS:GO is a whole lot more than 'not having ADS'. Got to dig a little deeper there I guess... Anyway, haven't you been talking about your vision? On a side note. There seem to be quite a lot of people wetting their pants when looking at such incredible renderings and losing all reasonability. Yep, might look awesome, but that doesn't require any advanced skills on the game developers end. That's basically an Unreal 4 engine show off. Read, anyone can pull off such renderings because all the fancy stuff is done by the engine no matter what low-quality meshes and textures you might feed into. The engine is doing the job and such 'game images' tell nothing about the overall quality you can expect. Quite cheap, maybe even closer to a misleading advertisement than anything else. Anyhow, don't let anyone fool you with some shiny graphics! --- edit --- It's been no more than 45 minutes after posting this and the Gomez-Link got fixed. Maybe coincidence only, though.
  12. How is the sound/nades in this game?

    @HypeRNT, I kind of saw you suggesting those countermeasures before and that's why I put 'practical' in front. Actually, neither idling in spawn, nor sticking that crosshair steeply up into the sky do qualify for a practical countermeasure in my book for obvious reasons. Maybe I'm judging things from too much of a CS:GO perspective here, though. Wonder if you ever have played that game competitively. I just keep picturing how it would work out on Mirage if one could throw frags from CT across the wall into the pathway leading to the ramp at A. However, you're correct. I have zero experience with the competitive side of COD, nor have I played much of the franchise at all. Only a couple of hours of COD2 and probably a few more of COD4. The sad thing is, even only that little time was more than enough to make me regard those long distance grenades a major annoyance. Especially COD2 became a frustrating sensation the instance I realized those things can be thrown from spawn to spawn. I simply don't think it's a good feature as much as I don't consider them silly killstreaks to be one of the shiniest moments in FPS innovation. You see, I really don't like it. Not even the tiniest bit and I'm afraid this won't change anytime soon, regardless your appreciated efforts convincing me of the usability of that feature in a competitive environment. I do believe you it did work out for you guys. It certainly won't for me. Wrapping things up, I'd just like to add that last sentence. The great majority of games I've been playing do pretty damn well with reasonable ranges for frags and I can only keep my fingers crossed and hope for Battalion rather following such an approach than opting for the COD style.
  13. How is the sound/nades in this game?

    If you have read through this other thread you may already know that with the kind help of vozER I've come to the conclusion that the possibility to cook grenades isn't an applicable feature for this game. Therefore, no I don't try to turn this discussion into something you told us up front you don't want it to be. I'm trying to respect that as good as I can, believe it or not. Actually, there are other folks having this debate in here. One is the guy I was quoting and another one of them is you because you keep holding up the argument how one technique may require more skill then the other. I didn't bring that to the table in the first place. In fact, have a look at my first reply and you'll see that from the beginning the point I'm trying to make is how the lack of practical countermeasures is a commonly agreed on KO-criteria when discussing cooked nades, while at the same time it doesn't seem to apply at all to long distance frags. I probably should have made this more obvious, to begin with. Anyhow, this is what really leaves me baffling and I honestly trouble to see the difference. Both lack a practical countermeasure, regardless how easy or hard it may be to perform on the sending end. It remains the same cheap kill viewed from the receiving end, doesn't it? On a side not though. What you call 'timing' actually is a guessing job because in your scenario you can not possibly know for sure whether there will be an enemy at the spot you are tossing the nade onto. Someone could be there if he had chosen to take that particular route and moved at a pace that you only expect one to go. Therefore, you're dealing with quite a bunch of unknown variables, which effectively turns it into a gamble. And where's the skill in pulling a slot machine? It's like pre-firing every corner all the time in hopes someone might come around. Statistically, you might even get a hit in 2 out of 3, but again, where is the skill in that? However, I could even ignore all that and go by your reasoning, but that doesn't change my question is how some more skill involved suddenly heals the lack of a practical countermeasure.
  14. How is the sound/nades in this game?

    Nope. I just tried to interpret the wide range of implications inherent to that general remark of yours. True. Though the sniper usually will have to see his opponent at least. In addition there exists at least one practical countermeasure, namely smoke grenades. CS:GO has well-implemented incendiaries, in my opinion. Setting the bombsight on fire in order to hold back the bomb plant, or leaving a lake of flames by the attackers after a successful plant is a common tactic really. It's a defensive weapon purposely used to defend objects and here again, smoke grenades serve as countermeasure since they work like an extinguisher. Nice system, to me anyway. I wouldn't call it 'tiny range' when one isn't capable of tossing grenades single-handed over full sized three stories buildings. Maybe just a matter of terms and definitions here. However, nobody is going to 'simply walk away' if there won't be grenade indicators put on the HUD. When only being able to locate a grenade by either actually seeing its world model or hearing its bouncing sounds and having a short timer of 3 - 4 sec maximum the mid range limitations work out perfectly fine. I sense what I have in mind is quite a different design than what COD4 has to offer. This being said, we both won't come to an agreement on this one I'm afraid, but we don't have to anyway. To you, long distance frags are a key feature. To me, they happen to be nothing but an avoidable joy-killer. At this point, I'd say let's wait and see what they come up with and have another talk once we had the chance to put our hands on the game. --- edit --- Like, the act of throwing a nade very high and far means I could airburst it atop the heads and the person couldn't escape, right?
  15. How is the sound/nades in this game?

    Welp, I don't have to feel being addressed here I guess. Anyhow, quite interesting you seem to consider less competitively motivated people are necessarily simple minded. You might want to rethink that one though. However, people expanding the use of the tools given to them beyond their initial purpose is where things start getting interesting of course. I did not question that at all, but really only meant to open another option in regards to diversity and utilizing another sort of grenades for defensive strategies, while notionally limiting frag grenades to reasonable throwing ranges as this obviously is my personal preference. Mind you, sometimes stuff is being diverted from its intended use only because of lack of proper equipment. The point is, frags on COD4 only work as such a defensive weapon you describe them because they can be thrown such far distances without engaging the enemy directly, right? OK, now consider I simply can`t picture me enjoying a COD2/4 alike howitzer-nades-spam-fest in Battalion, regardless being on the delivering or the receiving end actually, therefore generally disapproving the overall concept. Finally, realize that I - despite my disliking - happened to not simply put it all down, but in fact managed to come up with some alternative feature which does provide us with the same defensive potential and also adds to the diversity. Some call it compromise. So, what about taking up on that and discuss about whether or not incendiary grenades might be a thing. Shall we?