Slim Apr 7 @ 3:46am
RO vs ARMA 3 vs Insurgency
Hi there

I am looking for a reasonably slow paced, realistic multiplayer wartime fps that offer lots of immersion, combine tactical with adrenaline 'heart in your mouth' combat moments. not something overly quick like counterstrike. but at the same not something like DayZ where it is possible to run across a map for hours without spotting an enemy (may be because the DayZ servers are maxxing at 40 players right now). something in the middle would hit the sweet spot.

I prefer a game with no flashy HUD and one shot one kill is fine with me. I guess I like realistic games which offer immersion.

I would prefer the multiplayer it to be PvP without bots, if that is possible


Have been looking around and figure RO 2, ARMA 3 or Insurgency is probably the way to go, just not 100% sure what is difference, can anyone help me work out which is best game for me given what i said? thanks!
Showing 1-15 of 22 comments
< >
Kraft Apr 7 @ 4:10am 
ArmA3 is a huge sandbox (something like 250? max - in MP) - with terrible performence which is sad because it limits your sandbox fun pretty hard...place 40 + 40 on the map and let them fight eachother.. with like 20 frames on a 4.5 GHz 8 core CPU, hurray! If you like to play around and make your own "missions" it's the best option (I played around 450hours just doing that). I'd only recommend it if you are going to use mods (if you own ArmA 2/1 or Iron front(for WW2) you can convert the models to ArmA3 pretty easily) because BIS kinda ♥♥♥♥ed up with their whole 'let's make it future - 20 years' idea (ie remodel 30% of what we had previously and make it "futuristic" with a whole new camo pattern and some slightly different shaped turrets!) and just like ArmA2 with the (awesome) ACE mod, ArmA3 is fairly "casual" for trying to be a 'simulation' so mods are needed here. The controls also feel pretty clunky and it has the highest learning curve from your list - you can tune the HUD (and pretty much everything else) to whatever you want.

Ins is a solid small scale (32 max + 8 or 6max?? coop mode that is actually quite challenging) tactical shooter, it runs awesome and is awesome. I recommend it Awesome indi devs too - you simply can't go wrong with this one imo. It can be over quickly (<32 players + a no respawn gamemode like VIP or something).. some take only 5 min while other last a lot longer. It has a very simple (imo good) and small HUD only showing what is important with the least amount of screen getting blocked.

RO2/RS is a 64 (max) player meatgrinder (SP is worthless), except for some community maps (which aren't being played all that much unless they get "official") there is hardly any tactic besides walking on the edge of the map and shooting people in the back. RO2 is also the fastest paced game in your list which is the reason why a lot of old RO1 players don't like it. It also has TONS of stupid unlocks and prototype weapons, historically completely ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ things and some pretty gamey game mechanics - so overall if you know stuff about WW2 this is going to be the least Immersive game :p oh and TWI likes to be a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. If you want to buy RO2 wait for the next update (the transport vehicles TWI promised 3 years ago ) it'll go on a free weekend + 75% off sale and be sure to buy Rising Storm on the steam store NOT red orchestra 2 GOTY or you'll bite yourself in the ♥♥♥ c:. RO2s UI and HUD are pretty much a giant cluster♥♥♥♥ :D you can fix the ingame HUD with the 'declutter my HUD' mutator from the workshop.
Last edited by Kraft; Apr 7 @ 4:57am
[F|H]Rivimies Apr 7 @ 6:08am 
Is RO2 really faster paced than Insurgency?

I have just bought Insurgency and just played the "tutorial", so I can't tell myself.
MurcDusen Apr 7 @ 6:16am 
Generally second that first answer, though I'm not really qualified to judge Insurgency since I only played the original mod, and I also didn't play the third (fourth actually I guess) ArmA, just the ones before that. Still, I'd recommend RO1/Darkest Hour (a free mod that adds the western front) and/or Armed Assault. RO2 is fun (especially if by some miracle you manage to play on a large custom map), but way behind ArmA or Red Orchestra 1 in terms of realistic and immersive gameplay. But, as mentioned, you might want to check it out during the free weekend.

Originally posted by F|HRivimies:
Is RO2 really faster paced than Insurgency?

I have just bought Insurgency and just played the "tutorial", so I can't tell myself.

If it's anything like the original mod, then it's not that easy to answer. I'd say RO2 is generally a tad faster, but it depends a lot on the map.
Last edited by MurcDusen; Apr 7 @ 6:21am
Kraft Apr 7 @ 7:59am 
I haven't played the original Ins mod so I can't judge if it's the same or not - the majority of people I know just says it's better than the first version, less clunky etc.

I'm playing Ins slower than RO2 mostly because everyone is going to run around with an Assault Rifle unlike RO2 where I can pretty much waste an entire team single handed with the right kit (for the map, differs). Could ofc just be my experience with RO2 (RO2 ~525hours vs Ins ~35hours). I also think the recoil + sight misalignement + "time to IS" is smaller in RO2 (atleast when you leveled up to 99+hero class -.-) and the sprinting is slower (atleast with the heavy Plate Carrier + good AR/..) than in RO2.
Last edited by Kraft; Apr 7 @ 9:25am
Keijo Apr 7 @ 9:23am 
Well I think ins and ro2 are both good for their price and theres just really nothing else on the market so you should definetely get both.
With_Teeth26 Apr 7 @ 10:23am 
For PvP multiplayer, RO2 is probably the best choice of those three. Arma 3 has great mechanics but you would be hard pressed to find a good PvP server unless you play some silly mode like Wasteland. It is however the best of the three if you want to fight against AI with some friends.

Insurgency I'm not a huge fan of, feels too much like counterstrike at times. There is generally very little teamwork and with the way the respawns work in most modes its possible to spend a lot of time spectating rather than playing.

RO2 is very tactical, don't listen to that first poster. Its just team and squad-scale tactics rather than inividual tactics. Coordinating attacks, artillery strikes and pitched defenses is incredibly exciting and rewarding. It also has way more maps and much better atmosphere than Insurgency, and much longer rounds which I personally enjoy.
Kraft Apr 7 @ 10:42am 
Originally posted by With_Teeth26:
Its just team and squad-scale tactics rather than inividual tactics.
You need 1 proper commander for arty - that's it. A few squad marks help but when I'm playing commander out of 6 guys usually no one has or uses his mic and I get around 3 people who do their marks.
I never saw a squad or something moving around together in my +500hours like it happens in Project Reality all the time.. you know why? Because you need communication for teamwork. Now imagine 6 squad leaders + Commander giving out orders and 32 guys spotting, discussing tactics and explaining the situation on a single channel . Not only couldn't you hear ♥♥♥♥ because everyone talks over everyone but it wouldn't help you anyway because before you noticed the guy who just yelled "contact °315 200m from my position" wasn't actually next to you but on the other side of the map.

Here's the teamwork you need to win a match:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=245551399
Guess what.. I don't used my mic or a single ingame command once. I just grabbed the MG-34 with 175 rounds lvl 50 and wrecked everyone before they could get in cap range ---- that's called meatgrinder.
1 good commander for anti cap arty
1 good ATer/tanker to prevent tank ♥♥♥♥
...that's it. And a squad leader who isn't camping in spawn so people can spawn on him.. but I wouldn't call that squad-scale tactics
Originally posted by With_Teeth26:
It also has way more maps and much better atmosphere than Insurgency, and much longer rounds which I personally enjoy.
It has more maps atm but that's because this game is out since 2011 and TWI keeps adding community maps.
Ins is made with the source engine and a dead monkey is able to make a good map for that because it's just so ♥♥♥♥ing easy - Ins already has more community maps than RO2 had after 1 full year and ins is out since.. like 2 months?
Last edited by Kraft; Apr 7 @ 11:03am
Keijo Apr 7 @ 12:07pm 
Well ro2 is is very noob, you can get 80 kills in 30mins with 5 iq and 0 shooting skills, but its still kinda fun for its price, if you are not too elitist. But its kinda not the point it can still be fun for a rainy day for under 20 euros which like 98% fps games are not.
MurcDusen Apr 7 @ 1:22pm 
The thing about tactical gameplay in RO2 is that on public servers there usually isn't any. With the Immersion Overhaul Mutator, the right map and coordinated teams you can get very tactical gameplay. However, in other games like ArmA or the aforementioned Project Reality you pretty much always get tactical teamplay, as these games pretty much force you to communicate and play with your team. RO2 can however also be fun if you play it like an arena shooter (and that's not necesarily a bad thing, just something I'm personally not too fond off). If you're planning to play RO2 in a clan/realsim unit (not to advertise, but the 29th does some really good stuff in RO2, ArmA 2 and Darkest Hour), then I guess it's not too bad of a choice, just don't expect to be able to join any server at any time and get really immersive, tactical combat.
[F|H]Rivimies Apr 7 @ 1:23pm 
One thing to consider is that AFAIK RO2 is the only one (out of these three mentioned) which has competitive scene (twiladder). Please correct me if I'm wrong, and there is something similar with ARMA and Ins.

I couldn't think of playing FPS without competitions, tournaments and clan vs clan matches.
SoF{GR}@work Apr 9 @ 8:04am 
get Insurgency, RO2's "realism" mode (90% of the player base play realism only) sucks donkey balls !! You can "focus" ( zoom ) for an unlimited amount of time, run like a monkey and still be able 200m shots without some rest / gun support, it also has some stupid grey blobs that simulate peripheral vision, they're so bad that every time you use to get a kill you feel guilty afterwards :(
Last edited by SoF{GR}@work; Apr 9 @ 8:06am
ZG || ToRRent Apr 9 @ 9:02am 
Insurgency
Artaxeus Apr 10 @ 9:25am 
Originally posted by Slim:
Hi there

I am looking for a reasonably slow paced, realistic multiplayer wartime fps that offer lots of immersion, combine tactical with adrenaline 'heart in your mouth' combat moments. not something overly quick like counterstrike. but at the same not something like DayZ where it is possible to run across a map for hours without spotting an enemy (may be because the DayZ servers are maxxing at 40 players right now). something in the middle would hit the sweet spot.

I prefer a game with no flashy HUD and one shot one kill is fine with me. I guess I like realistic games which offer immersion.

I would prefer the multiplayer it to be PvP without bots, if that is possible


Have been looking around and figure RO 2, ARMA 3 or Insurgency is probably the way to go, just not 100% sure what is difference, can anyone help me work out which is best game for me given what i said? thanks!

I own Insurgency and I played since it was in beta, its not really a slow paced game, there are maps where you have to run too much and be quick, somtimes its just run & gun, it gets boring too fast (At least for me).

For ArmA III, I dont own it myself but I own ArmA II, as mentioned above its a huge sandbox game and its fun if you have friends or clan to play together, you can still play offline and create your own missions or just have fun in sanxbox.

Rising Storm/Red Orchestra 2 fits well in "Slow paced realistic multiplayer (wartime) FPS".
However, there are a couple of smaller maps so SMG & Assault class rush into the enemy lines, but other than that RO2 fits very well to "Slow paced realistic multiplayer (wartime) FPS" category.
Last edited by Artaxeus; Apr 10 @ 9:26am
sebbyhogness Apr 10 @ 6:47pm 
RO2 is about sometimes cowering behind a pile of sandbags as enemy machine guns make the screen grey, and sometimes charging into a point as enemy machine guns narrowly miss. Most of the time it's about being cut down by an enemy machine gun.
skydancer Apr 11 @ 6:33am 
Well i love WW2 era so it's an easy choice for me. ;D
I find modern warfare combat pretty boring, modern scope and automatic weapons combat become very static and boring.
Showing 1-15 of 22 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50