Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Unless you mod it the dumbasses are likely to rush into a room before the nade goes off.
Swat 4 had indeed many problems by release. I could only play it after Elite Force came about, which corrected and enforced almost all of the game's mechanics, which ultimately underlined the gameplay loop into something truly great.
Maybe, when / if RoN's SDK gets released, we'll see something similar, but some of the appointed mistakes are structural / conceptual. The vanilla gameplay loop is broken in a number of places and the senseless missions will stay like that no matter how modded the game gets.
Still, and I reinforce my point, this is the best tactical shooter in the market, if you play it modded and all-lethal. On the other hand, It's insufferable if you try playing it as a police simulator. RNG wins are the absolute worst.
But since it didn't do that, it gets a shoddy score in my book. Hell they even leaned into it with the Dark Water DLC; those operations belong to the Coast Guard (military branch).
Saying this as owner of the Supporter edition, RoN is discount bin stuff that basically needs mods else you're turning CQC into CBT for no real benefit of your time.
There's overlap between those crowds, but one of the major draws of this game is that it IS NOT kill everything on sight. There's hundreds of those types of games already, and this simple change tilts the gameplay in a way that folks myself prefer it.
And unfortunately, roughly 5% of the playerbase ever got through the game with Rank C+ or higher, so out of the 10,000 people playing right now, only about 500 care for the actual "major draw" of the game. It's been this way for a few years now.
Dare I say that if it actually did SWAT correctly, it may have not gotten as popular. Mistakes into miracles, as they say.
I'd say quite a few of my friends fall outside that 5%, and it's not for a lack of playing. They just don't care. Doesn't mean they don't like the game, or don't play it, however. From a sales perspective, if your friends are playing it, and you bought the game, win. I got a friend I play with regularly, for example, that I'd be surprised if he's bothered to get any unlocks. He even plays it solo. But, when it comes to the score screen, he literally couldn't give a damn, and that goes for all achievements for any game he owns.
Ever since I got the cosmetic achievement unlocks I wanted, I myself couldn't care less.
Further, I'd go insofar as to say a great majority of "gamers" have the attention span of a goldfish. I know people with thousands of games on their account, and regularly buy a new game every few days. If you only play this game once a month with a group of friends, you ain't unlocking anything. Hell, I'd say most of those people couldn't care if the game suddenly was patched up and perfect, or the gameplay changed. The tactical shooter niche is so incredibly small compared to other genres, it's barely a blip on the radar. The sales make it quite fine for a small indy company with limited employees, but there's a reason the largest tactical shooters with the largest playerbases have absolutely zero "tactical" gameplay. Look what's happened to the entirety of the Tom Clancy franchise.
We folks in the tactical shooter arena like to pretend we're a huge playerbase, but we truly aren't. Getting people out of ARMA, CoD, Rainbow Six is like pulling teeth, and you can't reproduce what they've been doing for 2 decades in the typical development timeline. Trying to pretend to do so is a pipedream. Just make a good game, and you'll find customers.
I agree, but not all the time. The game has the 'potential' (I came to hate that word, for all the obvious reasons) to fulfill a broader spectrum. ROE rules that change dynamically from map to map (or inside the same map) so that they work with the situation at hand.
For instance, the Streamer level starts with a simple live check and evolves into a firefight. TOC could intervene, mid-mission, saying the ROE have been changed.
The various scenarios in the EA period were a study into how the devs could make it work. It's unfortunate they simply ditched them in order to release 1.0 earlier. Potential is nothing if stuff doesn't get done.
With some worldbuilding lore, they could easily justify the fact that in RoN's timeline, SWAT has evolved into a police AND paramilitary group, very much like BOPE in Brazil. See if their mission is 'less lethal arrests'. Would be complete nonsense, as it is in some RoN's scenarios.
It had problems with SWAT 4's AI but RoN's AI is so much worse. In the <50 hours I've played 1.0 I've had RoN's officers smoke more hostages than I have the entirety (1000+ hours) of playing vanilla SWAT 3/4.
Playing the original SWAT games after playing RoN was eye opening. SWAT 4's suspect AI feels so much more dynamic. SWAT 3 did so much to set up interesting variables with their scenarios. Both games give you the option to customize levels to your heart's desire.
I truly believe RoN could be a masterpiece, but so much holds it back.Watching RoN leave early access was like watching A grade student flunk college and become a meth addict.
I've watched VOID:
So no, I don't think that's dramatic