This game is complete alt history now

[Vasily Chuikov]

Pretty disappointed to see where we’ve ended up with the game if I’m being honest.
The devs from the get go have revealed that they really know nothing about the history of the war and don’t seem interested in learning.

I initially hoped this would be a somewhat authentic Vietnam experience but it’s just an alternate history game.

Once again they’re adding maps where fighting didn’t really ever take place.

Khe Sanh was never attacked by infantry and the Da Nang Air Base wasn’t either.

Both of these locations were the sites of artillery attacks and infiltration by small sapper units.

There are countless battles of the war that could be depicted accurately in game but time and again the devs go with fantasy.

[Boink]

They let players attack different parts of Vietnam in the campaign map in different set of year. No reason why it has to be base on history. We all know History tends to twist and favors the winning side. You can go to Vietnam and they tell an alternative scenarios of what happened.

I'm sure the game wasn't made or design to be an exact replica of events that unfold in Vietnam. Or else there be a hero in the Vietnam War named Boink who killed 100s of G.I. with just an RPG.

Also it be boring and highly exploitable if there are only a couple of maps to play on base on "history".

[Hidden]

Escrito originalmente por =(e)= Lemonater47:

Escrito originalmente por Vasily Chuikov:

Obviously I don’t want that to be the case at all.
It’s pretty obvious that it’s the case man, it’s been two years of consistently historically innaccurate decisions for no real reason besides clear ignorance.

If they were calculated choices and they were intentionally making an alternate history game like with their next title I’d feel better. But they aren’t. They advertised this as an authentic Vietnam experience.

I don't recall them using any of those words in the same sentence.

What they are making in an RO style game. It accomplishes that rather well. Immersion is the word at the end of the day.

You dont recall them using all those words in the same sentence? Okay...

Technically true, but this feels like fan semantics at best.

Its like the first claim made in the ARVN update, the trailer on the store page.

The exact phrasing is literally "Authentic Vietnam warfare"

Authentic - synonymous with original, true and accurate.

[Colonel_Sanders]

Yeah, lets make a historically accurate map where both sides sit around and spent most of the time dealing with logistics and morale and behind the scenes military work rather than fun to play combat dramatizations we see in all games that people play

[Jack Clock]

Escrito originalmente por Rogue Wolf:

Escrito originalmente por =(e)= Lemonater47:

I don't recall them using any of those words in the same sentence.

What they are making in an RO style game. It accomplishes that rather well. Immersion is the word at the end of the day.

You dont recall them using all those words in the same sentence? Okay...

Technically true, but this feels like fan semantics at best.

Its like the first claim made in the ARVN update, the trailer on the store page.

The exact phrasing is literally "Authentic Vietnam warfare"

Authentic - synonymous with original, true and accurate.

Authentic and historically accurate are dos different things, señor.

One is staying completely true to how the battles were fought, what the soldados had, as well as the outcome of the fight. This is historical accuracy. The more historical accuracy you have, the less fun a game becomes.

Authenticity is capturing the spirit of the time period, which this game does perfectly. Si, it doesn't match the war completely, but it doesn't matter, as most curious players will just look up the history of the war after playing the game anyways. It is a win-win for everyone.

Let the game be how it was. Verdun lost so much of it's playerbase due to the developers trying to hard to make a "historically accurate" game instead of a fun one.

-Z

[Hidden]

Escrito originalmente por El Zorro I (BoycottACG):

Escrito originalmente por Rogue Wolf:

You dont recall them using all those words in the same sentence? Okay...

Technically true, but this feels like fan semantics at best.

Its like the first claim made in the ARVN update, the trailer on the store page.

The exact phrasing is literally "Authentic Vietnam warfare"

Authentic - synonymous with original, true and accurate.

Authentic and historically accurate are dos different things, señor.

One is staying completely true to how the battles were fought, what the soldados had, as well as the outcome of the fight. This is historical accuracy. The more historical accuracy you have, the less fun a game becomes.

Authenticity is capturing the spirit of the time period, which this game does perfectly. Si, it doesn't match the war completely, but it doesn't matter, as most curious players will just look up the history of the war after playing the game anyways. It is a win-win for everyone.

Let the game be how it was. Verdun lost so much of it's playerbase due to the developers trying to hard to make a "historically accurate" game instead of a fun one.

-Z

Again, if you're a fan arguing semantics maybe. i literally just pointed out how Accurate and authentic were synonymous if you managed to digest my entire post.

This is just you playing semantics to justify your argument, as opposed to being objective. This is part of my problem with the RS2 community. It seems like tripwire can't do wrong, and people consistently contradict themselves for seemingly no other reason than stockholm syndrome.

It doesnt make the game any better in case you players haven't noticed.

The post i was quoting came across as disingenuous. I think it's fair to point that out and why.

I mean, im pretty sure several people on this thread were the same people crying about Claymores having a tripwire function not being viable, because despite that being an actual function to real claymores, it wasn't "historically accurate" as most instances of use weren't with it's tripwire function.

And im not just pulling words out of my ass. this is the developer's claim.

If I made a forum post claiming we should be able to start with any weapon because "fun" is more important than "historical accuracy" I'd be told to GTFO in a plethora of toxic ways because... realism! history! thats not ACCURATE to the time!

There is nothing wrong with admitting tripwire may have missed the mark a little. Tripwire isn't your girlfriend, you don't need to stand up for them in every instance guys. They don't even know your name.

[Colonel_Sanders]

Escrito originalmente por Rogue Wolf:

Escrito originalmente por El Zorro I (BoycottACG):

Authentic and historically accurate are dos different things, señor.

One is staying completely true to how the battles were fought, what the soldados had, as well as the outcome of the fight. This is historical accuracy. The more historical accuracy you have, the less fun a game becomes.

Authenticity is capturing the spirit of the time period, which this game does perfectly. Si, it doesn't match the war completely, but it doesn't matter, as most curious players will just look up the history of the war after playing the game anyways. It is a win-win for everyone.

Let the game be how it was. Verdun lost so much of it's playerbase due to the developers trying to hard to make a "historically accurate" game instead of a fun one.

-Z

Again, if you're a fan arguing semantics maybe. i literally just pointed out how Accurate and authentic were synonymous if you managed to digest my entire post.

This is just you playing semantics to justify your argument, as opposed to being objective. This is part of my problem with the RS2 community. It seems like tripwire can't do wrong, and people consistently contradict themselves for seemingly no other reason than stockholm syndrome.

It doesnt make the game any better in case you players haven't noticed.

The post i was quoting came across as disingenuous. I think it's fair to point that out and why.

I mean, im pretty sure several people on this thread were the same people crying about Claymores having a tripwire function not being viable, because despite that being an actual function to real claymores, it wasn't "historically accurate" as most instances of use weren't with it's tripwire function.

And im not just pulling words out of my ass. this is the developer's claim.

If I made a forum post claiming we should be able to start with any weapon because "fun" is more important than "historical accuracy" I'd be told to GTFO in a plethora of toxic ways because... realism! history! thats not ACCURATE to the time!

There is nothing wrong with admitting tripwire may have missed the mark a little. Tripwire isn't your girlfriend, you don't need to stand up for them in every instance guys. They don't even know your name.

Actually I am dating tripwire and I will have to fight you because you said mean things, if I dont they wont let me smash

[Vasily Chuikov]

Escrito originalmente por nflden:

Yeah, lets make a historically accurate map where both sides sit around and spent most of the time dealing with logistics and morale and behind the scenes military work rather than fun to play combat dramatizations we see in all games that people play

You realise that there were hundreds of large scale battles that actually occurred in the war that could be depicted instead, right?

[Beans]

I wish they could have maintained the historic accuracy with maps but also keeping the game fun.

Basically not having any out landish maps (Resort being one). But gameplay continouing to be fun and exciting.

[Vasily Chuikov]

Escrito originalmente por Beans:

I wish they could have maintained the historic accuracy with maps but also keeping the game fun.

Basically not having any out landish maps (Resort being one). But gameplay continouing to be fun and exciting.

Exactly. I never expected anything close to a simulator but I also never expected...this

[MR Crowley]

you guys do Know the guy that created the game his father was there . They are Vietnamese ! @Vasily Chuikov

[Hidden]

Escrito originalmente por Rootin Tootin Putin:

Escrito originalmente por Irish King:

you guys do Know the guy that created the game his father was there . They are Vietnamese ! @Vasily Chuikov

Are you talking about this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pci_gJmcof8

That man is a voice actor, he did not make the game.

Just because a vietnamese man made it does not make it authentic veitnamese.

Is this racism?

[Saladofstones]

I agree with the sentiment here. The issue isn't that we want boring maps, but that we're getting a lot of community maps that are both unbalanced and not based on history. Yes Campaign always allowed absurdities like Russia invading their own held territory or Iwo Jima being assaulted by the Japanese, but that is due to it being a campaign.

its like when they added the MG-42 and MKB-42 to Red Orchestra 2 for some reason even though it destroyed balance. The MG-42 alone was inane, since it basically decimated the Russians on Defense and it was a hip-fire god in trenches

[TIPSY TESTICLE]

OP make your own realistic vietnam game then.

[~$$~ BlackCatTheGreat]

The game is pretty fun either way who cares.

[(FIFTY)MR.ROSENGOLD]

Escrito originalmente por Vasily Chuikov:

Escrito originalmente por ♋️LunarCainEX🐶29ID:

Uh, they kinda do have SAMS...
There was a reason why the Russian sent their missile technicians, and operator/instructors to the NVA/NLF.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5gSxeiCBMY

They had SAMs in NORTH Vietnam.

There was no ground combat in North Vietnam.

You think I’d take such a strong stand on this sort of thing if I didn’t know what I was talking about?

*akshully* there was some ground combat in north vietnam from time to time, no large scale battles but there were occasional snatch and grab type ops from spec ops guys getting dropped in to grab VIPs or what not. not much tho