@@philipevary8470 no sir you might be slightly out of the loop. It’s still not as popular as it once was before HLL kinda took over. Off world industries took it back over again and will be showing all other competitors who’s boss. I love it sooo much more than HLL, been around longer too.
@@lettuceheadgaming9337 Unfortunatly I didn´t get to try PS before the whole debacle, is it worth trying still, are the servers still populated enough?
@@NoWacko they're is usually one full surver, but every once in a while they'll be like 3 or 4 servers open, it's still a fun game and it's a very different game movement wise, It feels much more fluid in PS but I still love HLL
For me, Hell Let Loose is the perfect blend between hardcore and casual. I like that roles and communication really matter, whilst not making everything feel like a chore or unnecessarily difficult for the sake of "realism". As another user mentioned, simplicity is key (at least in certain areas). Full realism ends up being laborious and kills a lot of the fun in my opinion, and for no other reason than the sake of it. Some systems are better kept simple when there's no benefit to making them difficult. I do agree that HLL does suffer from invisible walls in a lot of places that make no sense, as well as being poorly optimized and having bugs that persist for a long time, but overall it treads a great line between hardcore gameplay and casual or simplified systems in other areas. Just my 2 cents.
Also, good video man! Some minor things like crossplay is only between consoles, not PC. You can also use bushes in HLL but hedges are inaccessible. You can still flank and make some great maneuvers as a squad in HLL, but you often have to loop REALLY far around the map to avoid detection, but it's amazing when you pull it off.
This is why I’m totally against restricting load outs to certain maps and time periods. If I want to use my STG44 satchel assault on Stalingrad, fuckin let me
In defense of the invisible walls to some extent, on maps like Carentan its clear that the point of some of them is to prevent people from climbing on top of large buildings and just sitting up there. While some buildings that have the roof blown open, you should be able to climb on the roof, but some buildings it makes sense for
As someone that has played a lot of HLL, I would say communication is more important than described. There are some matches where you can get away with no communication, and generally people are not chatty, and callouts are 50/50. Without communication, all kinds of things can go badly. Enemy airhead/supplies dropping, enemy pushes into a defense point, nearby enemy spawns, communicating any of these examples and more can result in cutting off the efforts of the enemy, which of course is vital in a versus situation where tactics are king on a relatively equal playing field. I’ve seen countless matches where people don’t say shit to each other and the enemy gets away with far too much and wins because of it. I’ve also seen matches where the team is on the ball, calls things out and converges on it. In my eyes, communication is like the spice to be added to the meal. Sure you could survive on that plain chicken, but it would certainly be better breaded and seasoned. Just my take.
@@TwinCityShredder The feedback referred to is mainly bullet impacts. Bullet impacts have a very limited render distance in Hell Let Loose which means using bullet impacts to adjust is not really a thing like it would be in Squad, Arma or Post Scriptum. This is mainly a problem with 300-500 m engagements.
I've never played Post Scriptum, but I have logged over a year and a half on HLL on PS5. The guns in HLL absolutely have recoil which varies gun to gun, they have semi auto and fully auto features on the appropriate models, and they are historically accurate (from what I can tell) as to the amount of ammo each weapon holds and how the weapon would function and recoil. Hedges in real life cannot be gone through by design. It's a well-known issue the Allies faced in France, which is why they designed the Rhino tanks to bust through them. You can, however go through and hide out in any bush in HLL. You have good points about not all buildings being usable, and that can be frustrating, but only on Carentan can I think of "invisible walls" which impede gameplay. The VAST majority of every area of the maps (outside of Carentan) are playable. Finally, the comms. From my experience, most players communicate, especially in command chat. It's even fair to say that if you're a squad leader in a full squad, the amount of comms can sometimes be overwhelming between command, squad, and proximity chats. True, a person can play lone wolf, never communicate and be on the winning team, but overall, it's the team that communicates best which typically wins. Of course there are exceptions, and a team of inexperienced players will likely lose to a more experienced team regardless of comms, but HLL is mostly about comms and working together to control territory. I've seen it time and time again, the team that spends time "getting kills" and worrying about their K/D ratios usually loses to the team that uses strategy and good communication to control the map.
They don’t have fire selector. That’s what he’s referring to. The BAR for example can fire “Fast full auto” “slow full auto” and “semi auto” in real life
@@PureNationalism13 OH! I was unaware of that. I stand corrected. I still think the poster was a bit harsh on most aspects of the game, although I have nothing to compare it to. Something else I should have pointed out, and I'm not sure if PS also attempts this, is that the HLL maps are very accurate to the actual battles, which, I get may not translate to a better gaming experience, but me personally, I really like the recreation of actual battles. Then again, I don't mind crawling in the mud for 20 minutes to try and sneak up on an objective in Purple Heart Lane. I think the realism is awesome and makes it more immersive.
As someone that first played post scriptum and then hell let loose I can tell you that the lack of communication in hell let loose is the biggest thing that put me off from playing it at first and I played both on PC and console. I'm playing it again though but most people don't communicate at all in HLL
There's definitely recoil on weapons in HLL they kick a bit. There's debris that kicks up on certain surfaces but not all. Just like anything in life both games have strengths and weaknesses
for sure there is! There is also bullet drop, I have no idea what this guy is talking about in this regard! Other pts he makes are valid. I would like a combination of the two games!
How can this video miss the most important difference between the two games which is the respawn system. PS relies on a ticket system which means there is a limited amount of times people can respawn before they loose all the tickets and hence the match, forcing players to play more cautiously and rely on other teammates to stay alive and accomplish the objective. When on the other hand HLL relies on a manpower resource which is constant replenished automatically or boosted by nodes so people can die indefinetly with little impact on the match result. Thats why on HLL players are less incentivized to play as a team and the result is a more chaotic shooter gamestyle.
This sounds right up my alley. I’m buying PS tomorrow after 1070 hours in HLL. It’s just not the same anymore, with the dolphin diving, increased run speed and having to hit people twice to kill them now with bolt action rifles past 100m.
I mean the tickets system is shit, if you go back and look at the data you will see that the 500-1000 casualty(KIA, wounded) was a lucky day in the year to get that low casualties, if you can't get more players into the field(which is bigger than most PS maps with the 80 player limit) then why would you limit the spawn times, it works in Squad as it's not a 'full scale war between multiple countries at the same time using conscription/draft'. Even in Squad and PS you get newbies who will just respawn and waste the ticket then some hardcore veteran players will just bite their head off and taking away their eagerness to play the game and learn it as most of PS players doesn't want to teach basics, just flaming and insulting them. PS just over do what they are good at, make it as complex as it can be made, yea sure it's somewhat more accurate, but it bores the not too hardcore players, to the gunplay part, sure the weapons have to kick but it's not real life where it depends/depended on your training with the gun and how talented were you to actually shoot well and have the almost perfect grip on it(mostly because of your physics and understanding how to hold and use a gun) so you can hold it or shoot multiple times without a huge kick equaling a horse's kickback. You can't get and add attributes/skills to your character to be a sharpshooter or a newbie in that period of time, and still many kick really well. The only things HLL really needs is the zeroing and the weapons/vehicles matching the date of the campaign/map. Like Stalingrad with Panthers and STG44, or now El-alamein with Panthers and STG44, plus the bullshit on the UK side from the new devs. It may end with the new devs tbh.
Problem is that most - or at least a LOT - of PS players don't really care about whether they waste tickets or their team loses the match.. They just play it casually running around randomly hoping to shoot somebody before getting shot themselves. So you have this game with all these great mechanics for communications and teamwork, but people just play it as Call of Duty anyway.
Hell let loose indeed doesn't relies on ticket system, they rather work on respawn positioning strategy. The goal is not to focus on exploiting the fact enemies don't have enough ticket to defend x or attack y, but rather on disabling communication systems between their points which is quite realistic (the mindset of it, not the concept of OP :) )
I never played HLL, but I got around 2000 hours into PS. And I have been waiting for this game since Battlefield 1942...... even though the playerbase is low, the love for the game is still there. Great but small community. PS deserves much more then what it is getting at the moment. Even with the dev drama at the moment.
It’s not just the game that deserves so much more, the community deserves so much more. We got treated like shit by the previous devs and put up with two years of silence on constant feedback posts. I still have hope because the modding community is awesome, and I’m hearing murmurs they’re looking for dev replacements behind the scenes (I have a source).
Cross play is only between consoles for Hell Let Loose, just want to clarify. Also, people don’t forget about comms just because they can ping. Only the SLs can ping exactly what a target is, everyone else just as a basic icon. In reality this should enforce people to communicate so they can relay exactly what it is they’re pinging to the SLs. You’re right about not being able to adjust sights, but there is absolutely dust pick up in Hell Let Loose. Tracers are visible as well, but maybe not as much as PS. Hedges are also used for concealment in HLL, not sure how you came to that conclusion. Just some oddities in your criticism. Most of the other stuff you said was true.
The only thing I have to disagree with is that not every building is usable in PS. However most are. There is the occasional unenterable building but they are fairly rare.
More open buildings is nice because it allows for more dynamic pushes. It also adds more of a sense of being in a war zone, because every window and every door could hold an enemy, where as in hll there are like 4 or 5 buildings you have to watch out for.
Just when you get used to something in HLL, They change it. Bullet drop-off (damage) is way too much of an overkill. I used to take someone out with a bolt action 400 meters out with a single round. Now it's a two-hit, it's an 8mm Mauser. It takes out a deer, but not a person. Makes sense.
Each game has it plus and minuses. To say one is better than the other is like comparing oranges and apples. Post Scriptum is more sim based, yes, HLL is more mixed, yes. You can twist facts to suit your standpoint in many ways. HLL has double. if not triple the servers in use compared to PS, does that make HLL a better game? Not really, just appeals to a different crowd. It all comes down to want you are looking for and what feels good for you...
I disagree with the communication don’t matter in HLL, you will get steamrolled by a team who communicates and also it may not be as realistic as PS but it’s nowhere near call of duty, PS has some good stuff that HLL doesn’t but in my opinion it’s just a lot more clunky than HLL, I don’t want to stop and drink a canteen so I can aim accurately.
That fact that PS is “hard” is not a reason why console hasn’t come out with games like these. One of the reason is that most PVP/ simulator games on pc require more functionality, thus having to push more keys and some developers don’t want to deal with the licensing and process of making a console game. The closest that console ever got to a game that required more functionality was PUBG, which turned out to be ok in my opinion. So, no it’s not because it’s “hard” there just more letters to press on 😂
I'm pretty sure there's no console and PC crossplay for Hell Let Loose. Console players aren't any less likely to have microphones either. Communication is important in Post Scriptum, and yet in most matches there's still many players who never speak or use chat that nobody notices in time, making it painful and boring to play. Yes, it's great fun when people do speak, but it's pretty much necessary, while in HLL you can do just fine without microphones, which is a really good feature. Zeroing is an absolute cope. Aiming slightly up isn't problem. Actually seeing where your bullet goes rarely happens and is irrelevant anyways- muscle memory trumps staring at the map to get range, ranging, and then actually shooting. Ballistics are fine in HLL. Chokepoints are a problem for you? Meat grinders? Try flanking and using smoke. People camp in every game on earth. HLL has some rough maps to attack on, but why should it be easy? Post Scriptum has the same shit with people running into tank campers and mg campers and sniper campers in random bushes. That's just the nature of realistic shooters; 1 guy hiding in a random place can hold off entire enemy team. Map design is good enough in HLL. Sure, some maps are questionable, but every game has bad maps. Enough buildings are enterable, the more you add, the more frustrating it becomes, as you can't possibly clear every angle, window and sightline, meaning you get shot from random places or people hiding in corners. Having clear lanes of attack makes attacking and defending way more natural. Urban maps have plenty of cover and flank routes. The gunplay argument is REALLY bad. You literally show clips of you spamming the G43 in PS with legit 0 recoil, and then a clip of you using the BAR in HLL where you have to shoot quite slowly. Both games have pretty easy to use gunplay, no noticeable recoil or whatever and that's because it's a pain in the ass to play a game with uncontrollable guns. See Tarkov. If you can't reasonably control your gun, people start hipfire spraying and abusing movement. Also that BAR clip in PS has literally no recoil. It goes up very slowly and predictably, with no screenshake or random bouncing. It's really nothing out of the ordinary lol. Guns have their strengths and weaknesses in both games, ofcourse a bolt action is better at range than an SMG.. And the gameplay you showed was just running around CoD style spraying people down with full auto guns. I get those are cool clips but it doesn't support your argument of it being realistic, tactical or less arcadey than HLL. Both games are pretty much the same thing except that PS requires more effort and communication, which can be really unfun when people don't do that. Not a bad video ,but it's very PS sided. That's okay, but I would reframe the video, ''Why I prefer PS to HLL'' because then I don't feel obliged to point anything out, as it's only your opinion and not an objective comparison.
One thing I love about PS is the choice. You (especially when you’re SL) make a choice in everything you do. Where you go and what you choose to look at makes a real impact on the game. You choose what fights you want to get into where you want to take contact. It feels like you have some tactical control on the battlefield. When you SL that feeling is tripled and you’re responsible for a whole squad and their success or failure.
So many HLL players were (and are) rabidly and childishly hostile toward PS to a ridiculous degree, while most PS players openly said they also enjoy(ed) playing HLL too. I suspect the average age of HLL players is significantly lower than that of PS.
You got it man. I think if you look at most games that get criticized on youtube for their shortcomings, the comments are often filled with "they definitely need to fix this" or "I'd play it if they fixed it", etc. You'd think the developers were their parents the way they defend video games. I look at systems and how they function against eachother. PS' shortcomings come from what the devs did specifically (eg. spending years on the AO update instead of adding content, or releasing 4.27 update which killed optimization until it was semi fixed), and how the game requires a baseline competency to function (eg. not knowing how things work will make the game quality far worse if the players are bad). You tell HLL players that they're being funneled using invisible walls and you get told you're a PS shill rather than "oh wow I didn't know we had this issue". I'm getting bombarded with a ton of hate comments, but almost every single HLL supporter refuses to face these things exist in their game and that they need to be fixed, instead they say "ha ha, your game dead". Yeah, I've definitely thought the same about the demographics. It's what you get when you have a really casual playerbase that lacks critical thinking.
This just sounds like it’s coming from someone who doesn’t understand HLL. Sounds like they came from Post Scriptum because their friends told them about HLL, played it a few times and decided it wasn’t as good, when in fact the game will truly never be as fun until you take your time to research and learn how to play it. Sure, it is designed where you CAN play the game casually, but in order to win you HAVE to have comms as either the Commander or Officers.
Then you can expect other team had very little comms too. I have multiple times dont server hopping in HLL after getting into 2-3 squad in HLL and nobody talks. @@_E_Pluribus_Unum_
All the reasons above is basically why i don't enjoy post scriptum. To much complexity the ones who got no clue won't stand a chance to get into the game. HLL already suffers hard from such, and a lot of veterans of HLL has to basically babysit a lot of the newer players lots of the time and as a casual player who tried both. I could quite frankly say. Simplicity makes perfection. Not everything needs extreme detail, the more complexity you add into something the more time it takes to master it, the more neiche things gets, the less people you will have an influx upon. That's mainly why battlefield as a comparison since that has already been drawn as a line between HLL and battlefield. Battlefield started off close to an realistic shooter in BF1942. Then slowly started to lean more and more into the more casual side of things, because it simply attracts a wider audiance. So you somewhat need to find a finite balance between super complex and simplicity. Make a super complex game will attract a small playerbase and somewhat of a loyal one but then your building a bit on a dead audiance that won't really grow from a snowball effect. While having a super simple game will make people leave too quick because they feel like they master things way too fast. That's why now, we are seeing games like planetside 2 dying off. Because their veterans of that games are now leaving, and there are nobody to fill the gaps of those wales. So this is what you have to account for.
@@yeti1944 Be careful what you wish for. You want 100% realistic war game ok 60% of your time you will spent walking ,10% digging defences ,10% dealing with trench foot and other injuries another 10% being shelled and the rest actual shooting
Frankly, I feel like Red Orchestra and the Rising Storm games achieve the best "realistic" gameplay. It's got certain unique complexities that make it feel real and gritty, but it's not so realistic that you have to spend half an hour just figuring out the basics. At the same time, while it provides arcade-y aspects to make the game more simple, it doesn't lay them on too thick to where it takes away grom the immersion. The biggest flaws I'd say are the large lack of players and servers with iffy connection quality, which aren't really related to the game itself.
I’m playing HLL for almost two years now and I still don’t understand hedges. I had games where I shot at hedges from over 100m away and I randomly hs’d someone through a part without gaps. And since a year or so hedges (to me) feel like a undestroyable wall. I wish the devs would spend some time on hedges, ballistics and enterable houses. I’d even pay for noncosmetic updates.
As stated by others and yourself, PS and HLL are on two vastly different ends of the spectrum. With HLL appealing to the more casual but still hardcore gamers with a somewhat decent learning curve, PS has a bit of a learning hill. With all these mechanics, some people would find it hard to wrap their heads around them, especially being unfamiliar with the type of game they're playing. An example is when a friend of mine got PS, he said the game was too hard to get into with most of the players already there being pros whilst playing HLL he could have fun talking to the guys in his squad with the occasional order being thrown around. However personally, I enjoy PS more. I've had more moments in PS then HLL that made me go, "wow" and that is my main factor. From the way guns feel, sound and look, to the way vehicles operate, to the maps, little details and finally the community. A moment I can recall is pushing up a road behind an M3 Half track, the 50 going absolutely wild, a squad pushing behind it whilst others flanked through the narrow alleyways to get into the buildings. Or playing as the French, the commander got down with us and ended up rallying us into a bayonet charge that won us the game but sheer fluke because we caused the other team to route.
Overall I think Post Scriptums gunplay, movement, and just overall polish is so much nicer than HLL. Performs so much better, animations and gunplay all feel consistent, and just feels more satisfying. I also prefer the freedom and maps in PS. Apart from that HLL beats it in any other category. If HLL has these things mentioned on the same level of PS it would take it to the next level
If HLL would adopt some things from PS It would honestly be the best WW2 shooter. Those things being AT/Tank gameplay, better map layouts/enterable buildings and more freedom of movement. Possibly some more weapon differences with more weapon sway and bullet drop. But aside from that it really doesn't need too much.
PS only really looks worse in videos on RUclips because of the way RUclips compresses. The game is gorgeous on high/epic settings in-game. The water especially and also the god-rays. Has some beautiful dusk maps as well. The only areas where I’d say HLL outshines it is having the maps look more war torn, mud, puddles along mud roads, and building design. HLL has some beautiful buildings, it’s just a shame you can’t use most of them. As I mentioned, so many people cover these things already in other comparisons. I wanted to display just how vastly different gunplay and gameplay mechanics are (and frankly there was a bunch of things I didn’t talk about for example how the spawn systems work where one game incentivizes frontline meat grinding and the other let’s you tactically flank from anywhere at any time with pace - so perhaps a follow up video in the future).
@@corerampage7587 It has been a while since I have played either, so it is not very fresh in my mind. I remember now post scriptum did look better depending on graphics settings. (which I usually had on the lowest) I am confused why so many people would rather play HLL. PS is so much better overall!
Call me whatever you want but HLL is way more immersive than PS. The map design and the color correction applied is on another level. In PS i feel like dark is too dark and light is waaay to light. Also, might be an unpopular opinion but the gun sounds are very weird and feel completely off to the other elements of the game. Another thing i would like to add is that i would totally prefer not being able to enter a building rather than entering it only to be met by something that looks very much unfinished. I totally agree HLL has it's issues, especially the invisible walls and the jumping/climbing mechanics but those things mess up with my experience way less than having weird graphics and sound design. Nevertheless, i guess it all comes down to personal preference but this is my honest opinion.
PS never had weird graphics for me personally and the overall looks are great. The immersion I completely disagree with, I have had much more immersion and tense battles in PS then in HLL... Especially when you're on the edge of capturing/defending a objective and you have a good team you can hear all kinds of shit happen around you.. I have had people run up to my tank to tell me where the enemy armor was, jump on the tank, guide me and then quickly hop off waiting for me to kill the fucker so they could advance... The tank mechanics in HLL are a bit better when it comes to driving, especially since I love immersion and realism and shifting gears and all is great on that, but PS has better tank mechanics overall imho and the sound/looks from a tank firing or getting blown up is incredibly, also the Artillery in PS plays a huuuuuge part as it would IRL, 1 of the great reasons that not everyone always wants to play as infantry... Both games have pros and cons, and I was hoping that HLL would be the next PS but I was deeply dissapointed imho. I love immersion, realism and I'm a big overall WW2 guy and the maps / historic accuracy in PS is great. ((I must say that Omaha Beach / Vierville sur mer and some other maps on HLL are incredibly well done, props to the design team for historic accuracy)) It's sad that the PS team has basically been laid off, was hoping for more, still love the small but good playerbase, sad for me that HLL just isn't my game when it comes to ww2 games. Also the historic accuracy is imo better in PS, the fact that you can customize your character is great in HLL but that the game allows you to wear snow camo in the middle of France, like come on lol...
I’m with u on the maps. I think the aesthetic of HLL maps r a major advantage for immersion and the maps being reconstructions of the real locations really helps aswell. Being able to go to places in game u have visited as a tourist is next level cool and I wouldn’t have it any other way
This video makes great points, but comes off as full of bias. It seems more like a video on greasing PS’s wheels rather than an actual comparison. The comments on “communication not being critical” in HLL is straight up disingenuous as far as I’m concerned. The team that communicates less gets rolled. Because of the “funnels” that you mentioned if you don’t communicate to take and hold those funnels you can’t move forward. Simple as. Those choke points are critical in the gameplay loop and you can’t just throw bodies at it continuously with no plan or support and hope it breaks. I’ve seen it tried and tested many times, and it rarely works. Not to mention lack of tank call outs, supply drops, flanking infantry, arty, etc. You lose games fast that way. The ping system doesn’t mean anything if you don’t have any context attached to random red flashes on the screen and will get ignored as meaningless information. You mention not having to move while sitting in a static position for long periods while holding an angle and being, effectively, extremely hard (or in your words “can’t counter”) to kill which is simply not true. There have been numerous instances where I have done, and seen, people do exactly as you describe and promptly get wasted for staying in one spot for too long because it gets predictable. Whether that be because of a commander ability, a tank, or simple counter sniping. They’re not that hard to find and kill. You mention lack of recoil and I laughed pretty hard. There is pretty significant recoil on SMGs and automatic rifles, I don’t know where you got this notion. If you don’t control your weapon you won’t hit anything. The clips you show of PS to contrast this don’t do a good job of proving your point. In their uniqueness of rate of fire and handling from weapon to weapon yes I can see that, but your recoil point is complete moot. Also, wdym you don’t have to adapt play style switching between weapons? That’s a pretty drastic over generalization. Clearly you’re not going to be as aggressive with a bolt-action than you would be with an SMG. You’re not going to be moving and shooting with an MG like you would with a BAR or STG. You make it seem like there’s no variation between weapons which is, again, disingenuous. And then you go on to say “certain weapons are far better in certain situations” in PS as if I can effectively and consistently take on a Thompson in close quarters with a Kar-98 in HLL. That’s ridiculous. If you’re gonna spin it that way you could at least provide an example instead of grasping at straws. And then you also say SMGs can be countered effectively in PS as if they can’t be in HLL with the same tactics you mention in the same breath? You talk about effective ranges you should engage at as if you can just do whatever you want in HLL with no adherence to proper engagement ranges for weapons when that is, yet again, disingenuous. Bolt actions are great in concealment in HLL, and SMGs are great in CQC. The STG example is exactly the same. The BAR is the same as well. I don’t understand how this is a point. There are some good points made here like the lack of seeing where your shots are landing (although from the clips you showed of PS I didn’t see much difference), and the restriction of movement (aka “funnels”). Lack of flanking routes through buildings and hedges does get annoying, but I also see how without them the maps could turn into more of a meat grinder than they already are. Something to think about. Everything else? Empty points made to make it seem like HLL is just a straight up inferior experience. This video really just seems like a another PS player trying to be “objective”, but falling short because of personal bias.
HLL is awesome but theres a time and place for post scriptum , just love the hardcore elements of the game where u actually have to plan ur next route think abit the fire fights are more sparse and unexpected that realism is what i enjoy a specific audience i suppose either way both game top
Not game Mechanics related but a decent crowd of people who play the games care about historical accuracy. HLL hasn't shown dedication to real historical accuracy like PS has. The small playerbase for PS is really what hurts it for me though also the fact that some weird shit appeared to have happened with the studio. Communication can be brutal in HLL though. It's great when you have a squad that's talking and command chat is active but, it's horribly unenjoyable when people don't speak. Nobody communicates where enemy vehicles are, places nodes, nobody defends or places garrisons. It feels like a 50/50 shot whether you'll get into a server with people talking or a server filled with all the people who've migrated from battlefield and cod. That being said though I have hundreds of hours on both games and love both but I do mainly play HLL nowadays because of the playerbase there. Sometimes the playerbase annoys me but it seems to be the only game between the two with a future.
post scriptum is better in so many ways as a game, BUT! its difficult... the game is slower and more tactical and more squad focused. wich means you have to put in more effort, use your brain etc. that element is also there in HLL but just not at all in the same spectrum. one of the first things i said when starting HLL was "wow this is so arcady compared..." and i stand by that statement and wholeheartedly believe thats the main reason it is so popular. its just easier to get into. and you dont have to put in as much effort to get a fun day of gaming: As for me, i miss the really big fights in PS, hll wont ever hold a candle to it. HLL is better in FFA though, to be fair. PS real glory is on private servers where matches are played with likeminded people..those games are beyond compare some of the coolest things you can experience in gaming. Feel free to look up "post scriptum 1 life event" . simply awesome, everyone just moves and behaves completely different. so cool. great video sir
i mean yes post scriptum is better on the realism front but still not a simulator by far, one big issue with this is how coms work, WW2 everyone didn't have a headset to communicate with each other so yeah you get where this is going, anyways own both, enjoy both for different reasons.
Likewise. In fact it’s partially why I made this video, I wanted to show people who are deciding between the two games what they’re missing out on which are wide gaps in mechanics, functional gameplay/gunplay. A lot of people who play HLL have never even heard of PS, and the way HLL players react to any PS video is like they’re scared of the boogeyman. It’s important to highlight these differences so people can know there are better gunplay/gameplay options.
I agree with everything u said but i can make top 10 reasons why is the other way around .The thing is both games could learn a thing or two form each other
This is pertaining to gunplay and gameplay functionality. the only real negatives on PS is the dev situation and the bugs/optimization due to devs leaving it in a weird state. The difference between PS players is that we shit on our own game and the devs if it’s necessary. I have no problem wanting a game to improve. HLL has potential but they would have to fix everything above to get me to play it. I wish more people knew about this specific thing when deciding between the two games.
@@corerampage7587 "The difference between PS players is that we shit on our own game and the devs if it’s necessary." Dude Black Matter would get crucified daily for their stupid decisions and poor optimization. PS players arent unique for shitting on their game
@T M C it's a solid split I'd say. There is the group that sucks HLLs dick and there's the group that puts their feet to the fire. Usually the newer vs the older players. But as for this comment section: the video is just trashing hll what did you expect?
I have tried my hand at both games, and I do prefer Post Scriptum leagues over HLL; it’s the closest game to the WWII game of my childhood dreams. I love HLL for its overall larger map design. There’s nothing quite like charging across those massive expanses of fields. But I also lament it for the invisible walls and boundaries that hinder my experience. When I’m holding a flank in an urban environment with a Browning M1919 and a full-squad of enemies turn the corner, I get the high I desire. But the difference I can feel between the games is that in HLL they turned that corner because there was no other way for them to go (and not traversing the backyards besides me), but in Post Scriptum they **chose** that way to go.
how would one just simply walk through a hedge in real life? these things can be really dense... I get some of your points but that one kinda confused me
The thing with hedge is that it’s not a one size fits all. Hedge warfare wasn’t strictly guys walking down hedge lines to the edge of a hedge, they actually shot through it and interacted with it (and sometimes it was difficult to do so and couldn’t be used). I also didn’t say “walk through”, I said “entered” The issue in HLL is that hedges act as funnels, you can’t counter someone who’s sitting at an angle waiting for people to appear at the end of a hedge because that’s the game design. sometimes there are openings which allow you to shoot back, other times there are openings where you can’t even vault it because it’s an invisible barrier. In PS you’ll walk slower through hedge if you try to go through it, but you can interact with it where you can go through and poke your gun in different areas or move through it (at the expense of speed) to shoot someone who’s on the other side. There can be argument about which is more realistic, but from a gameplay perspective it just makes it really easy for someone to “game the system” of HLL. In my first game playing HLL last year I dropped 50 kills because I figured out that they’re forced to funnel to specific points and can’t avoid the opening, couple this with really slow movement speed and I just sniped entire squads with an stg which couldn’t counter-fire me. Now when you couple this with invisible walls on backyards, inaccessible areas, the majority of buildings you can’t enter, you can see how it’s a frustrating gameplay experience where you’re forced to route specifically toward meatgrinders.
ruclips.net/video/J1dKsmV3fIU/видео.html If you go around the 11-12+ minute mark he shows himself concealing in one of these, that was true for both sides. But in HLL the majority of these are completely unusable and you’re forced to hit the edge of each side while being unable to use various parts of it to counter fire. And yes there were also hedges where they couldn’t use them at all and had to go to the ends of them and get mowed down.
@@corerampage7587 PS captures the true feeling of the ''Battle of the Bocage''.. You never know which bush had a enemy hiding in them, the Allied forces were shit scared of the hedges at times, hence why they made the 'hedge killers' on the front of the Sherman tanks.. HLL just has a wall on a hedge lol
They're both cool but I think HLL has one massive advantage over PS that explains the massive difference in playerbase. It's fun. PS is a cool milsim and I respect it for that but the more toned down somewhat arcade elements of HLL pave the way for an overall more enjoyable experience. I might have to give PS another try at some point but compared to HLL it just feels very dry
Interesting stuff! I haven't tried Post Scriptum yet, but I'd love to after watching this. I personally appreciate the casual elements you described about HLL, because I don't have a whole lot of time to play. I might get a couple matches in a month.
People keep trying to nitpick everything said. At the end of the day, Post Scriptum doesn't have a low player count because of any mechanic or map, it has a lower player count because HLL is (in my opinion) the first real tactical FPS shooter that was made to reach a large audience. PS was never that. HLL was sort of a "gateway game" into the more intense tactical shooters such as PS, Squad ect. HLL was made to appeal to the masses and did a very good job, I have friends who hated tactical FPS games, but were warmed up to the genre through HLL.
Agree ... except many other cool things PS does so much better, to only name tanks as a huge part. Where Hell Let Loose is the pure arcarde "kiddie" game, PS is the simulation. You also see this in realism in the medic gameplay. In HLL people just respwan or kill themselves to move to a better position, because there is no real important limitation. In PS you can loose a game just by running out of forces, so you have to play much more wisely. That's why it is fun to play medic in PS, where it makes less to no sense to be one in HLL! I am really sad, that the good old days seems to be gone, where PS was more frequently used. I hope that there will be any revival of PS, because it became so much better over time!
Part of what I enjoy about HLL is that it strikes a very nice balance between the over-the-top, arcadey action of games like CoD/Battlefield and the more complex and grounded experience of hardcore mil-sims. It creates an experience that retains some of the appeal of an immersive sim without a lot of the baggage.
I haven't played PS so I can't really judge that, but I honestly don't agree at all. You need comms in HLL to win, it's just that easy, while you make it sound like it's Battlefield. You can use bushes, hedges etc to hide in HLL as well so I don't get that argument at all. To me PS looks really boring. It feels and looks very sterile, almost linear. It doesn't have the chaos that HLL offers, which feels more like war.
Hell Let Loose is "realistic enough" to not completely disappoint hardcore WWII gamers, but casual enough to attract the Battlefield and COD crowd for a more challenging game type. HLL's maps are way more vibrant and war-torn, while PS's maps look like miniature playsets with not a single thing out of place. Not to mention that the 3rd person player models run like they are missing joints in PS. The true test of which is the most successful game is player base, and it's obvious who has won that battle.
When I saw the enbloc clip pop out my my M1 Garand, bounce off the wall to my right, and physically land on the ground at my feet, and stay there (without instantly dissappearing), next to my 8 shells of empty brass, I knew this game had a more superior weapons system than any ever created in a game. Long live Post Scriptum!
@@jaydeleon8094 Those less then 10 servers still have a great base of players and most of them are PS vets and are part of a large community.. Those servers are great and everyone plays great on them. Doesn't matter the quantity of servers, in PS, quality matters cuz you genuinely need the other players around you
The differences is HLL focused on the mass, and that will always be more successful. I think if PS went to ps and xbox when HLL did it might of saved them, but it's to late now.
When you talk about meat grinders in Hell let loose, i would say that was pretty accurate for WW2. That map is meant to be a meat grinder bc that’s what it was in real life
Graphism, Marketing, Dev Communication PS is better on every aspects except graphism. HLL has a good or ok dev team and its something PS doesn't have. PS is a very low budget game, it's a squad's mod.
Because there are more children like you who would really play a Battlefield-style casual arcade shooter than one that is more realistic Do you really think COD is such a great series of games because it's popular, or do you recognize that it's actually just made for 12 year olds?
Cause they are living in transformers land and looking at their player levels. Especially younger people just want flashy thing, they get bored easily and they have attention spans of a toddler. They cant communicate right, get angered and frustrated easily. HLL is mainstream game for them. HLL as a game wins on few things, better marketing, slightly better graphics, more casual experience.
@@AndyP998 your acting like HLL is cod or something you bring up it being a "Casual game" which makes it more popular which is false look at squad it has more players than Hll what is squad? a Tactical shooter stop using the same excuses to defend your irrelevant dead game for 45 year old men who should be working their 9-5 not playing video games
map system in HLL makes more sense than PS. and the fact that you need to play a certain class more often to level them up makes the progession of the game more fun. where as PS you just fight. eh... to each their own i guess
I wanted to get into Post Scriptum but I got deterred from the game because of the elitist severs. "French only, German only..." like dude...thanks a lot.
It’s a real problem in PS, servers are definitely an issue. NA is good and so is nomads, both are very playable. Other comparison vids have already mentioned that, my main focus is meat and potatoes.
You sound yourself like some entitled person. So people who make their own server for people to play in their own language just cause maybe they dont speak your entitled language makes them elitists??
I regreted the day I spent 30$ on HLL, since I already played PS for 400+ hours. HLL is dumbed down boring fps. Played it for 30hours, now I just bought Squad which is amazing.
One thing I hate about PS, are the maps. They feel so liveless. Yes you can enter every building, but they are mostly empty. Imersion gone in an instant. Don't know on what server (chinese?) you were playing on, but most ppl use mic. You know, if you are playing against a good organized team. You will lose every game. A lot of things are broken (or annoying) in HLL, but i still love it. Good mix of arcadyness and hardcore. Except the tanks. In that point PS is supperior in every aspect. HLL can learn a lot from PS, but it's also the other way around. And a game is dead, when you can't play at any time of the day. Lowest point at 30 players with 24h peak at 300. While beeing consistant, this is not very healty. It's more on live support by a dedicated fan base. There must be something, that ppl don't like about PS. Squad is doing well and they are very similar games gameplay wise.
I get what you are saying but the reason PS is dying has nothing to do with the game it self but with the fact that there is not a dev team anymore and while there was they failed to market/show of their game to the public.
I would still prefer Post Scriptum over Hell Let Loose. Even though the two games have similar gameplay, there are two things that I question the devs: 1. Weapons unlock locked behind level progression 2. The god-awful sound sfx in the game. Explosions, gun sounds etc... 3. This one is from my friend's review. Incorrect weaponry for fronts and time. Heck, even Battlefield V explosion have more bass and treble than Hell Let Loose.
I feel that the reason HLL has more players is since it’s more flashy in its marketing and simple to play not forgetting it released to consoles so instant boost in players since they’re only other alternatives are vanguard bf5 of enlisted, whilst people are intimidated and driven off with PS since it’s more complex and dynamic
@sterlingarcher3619 it does matter, since when inevitably when those console players turn to pc if they do, they are more inclined to play hll, and i say the most simulator like aspect of PS is the tanks since cqc fights feel somewhat the same it’s just PS allows freedom of moment and choices of attacking, and midrange fights feel slightly different with it being a bit easier in PS in my opinion
It has some of the easiest gunplay of any shooter I’ve ever tried. There is almost no fat on smgs or lmgs. Be objective. Go play other games and compare recoil.
@@afoxinaviators4105indeed. Their audience is so casual that it doesn’t notice basic issues with gunplay and with weapon recoil. This should be a standard if you want to label your game a milsim, otherwise it’s just arcade shooting. I’ve played a ton of shooters in my life, HLL is by far the easiest gunplay I’ve ever experienced, and that’s because it’s made that way to appeal to a mass audience and bridge a gap between milsim and cod casuals. You should see the PS Reddit right now, I’m getting brigaded by HLL fans and they can’t retort anything in the video except attack me and PS. They think the hedges being blocks of long walls is intended design and cite outlier instances in ww2 where soldiers complained about thick hedges, except HLL gives them open gaps in the middle of hedge lines and most of the time you can’t vault them because it’s an invisible barrier. They also claim the game has ballistics, except there’s a dozen “hll ballistics” videos on RUclips showing how messed up bullet drop is. The juxtaposition between positive RUclips comments saying this is all true and Redditarded where people post for fake upvotes is funny. I don’t mind people disagreeing I asked for it at the end of the video, except they can’t counter any of this so they just hurl insults. On the other hand we’ve consistently criticized PS for its shortcomings.
@@afoxinaviators4105 he has a machine gun emplacement. he has a bipod placed not to mention he is burst firing holding down the trigger which significantly reduces recoil. get on HLL and use the BAR with a controller, then come back and tell me there is zero recoil. literally watch the G43 in the next clip on post scriptum, the gun moves but his screen doesn't, zero recoil. reminds me of MW2 "recoil". Also the way you spam fire that thing so accurately then proceed to tell me there is "more recoil bro believe me". also 2:19 you going to tell me this is peak realism? in fact you blamed HLL of the same exact thing you are actively doing in PS which is pointing and clicking > I'm not claiming the gameplay is perfect but the gunplay in def not like COD by any stretch of the imagination. and since were on recoil why isn't Post Scriptum's recoil similar to DayZ or ARMA if were trying to hit realism? I'd like to watch you spam a FAL in DayZ and be as effective as you were with that G43. those games actually require skill to handle weapons.
Anytime man, we'd love to have you. Feel free to check out my twitch, I just played earlier, It'll give you an idea of how the game plays: www.twitch.tv/videos/1816848770?t=2h22m2s
Post Scriptum is better is almost every way. The problem is money, HLL still has support and they are still earning money thanks to continuous $3 additions, etc. I really wish Post Scriptum would be supported, I very much enjoyed that sim game better. HLL is nothing but a tit-for-tat balancing act that devolves in to a CoD FPS. The hit boxes are huge, the armor modeling is a joke, and the player kits are NOT accurate in the least bit. But alas... here we are.
In my opinion Hell Let Loose isn't a Milsim. It's a good middle ground for those players that want a more grounded team oriented game but some aspects of the game are super advanced for players coming off battlefield or Call of Duty. Both hell let loose and Post Scriptum are both great games in all.
post scriptum all the way for me. matches can become so interesting and it just looks so damn good. to me hell let loose just seems sluggish and trying to navigate the map in that game is a nightmare.
mh compare these two games is kinda hard, well done. HLL is fun and i would say its more a game for a typical fps player. PS is a entire genre. Its the tactical combat sim. Operation Flashpoint, Arma, squad etc. And i actually prefer PS. Because it give us this tense firefights.. And your point with the shooting. The satisfaction with a bolt action carabine is second to none. When u aim and the enemy falls in PS it really feels awesome.
post scriptum and squad are barely comparable to the arma series, and the arma series is barely comparable to heavily modded arma, to the extent where i could barely call vanilla arma a milsim either.
@@oracuda We had a training programm, back when i served. It was basecally a mod for Operation Flashpoint later. Arma. Well i guess a mod like this will never get to the free market. Where a country train its real Combat units. All Weapon physics where in it, from the real weapon systems. No country would allow such a mod for public. Well and ofc we used our real weapons, just with a laserpointer instead of bullets. OFC u cant compare especially the old once. Technology wasnt that much developed. A bullet shot from a well done Arma II or III mod, where dirt density, wind rain etc. All the stuff, that have a impact on a flying bullet, have. Old system couldnt calculate that for every flying bullet in any size. Modern systems dont care, because of the incredible amount of multi treats and also physic engines. So that a major part can be calculated from the GPU. This addons for basecally military sims back in the days, where runned by powerfull servers. A destop PC couldnt do it.
Since this is getting a lot of traction, I'm seeing a lot of repeat comments from frustrated HLL players, so I will expand and retort to some of the comments in one place so you can all see it: 1. Noted on console not being able to crossplay with PC, that was a mistake. However, that doesn't remove the fact that in all the HLL I've played + all the streams I watched, inter squad communication was almost non-existent. One of the main criticisms of HLL players who have come over to PS is that they said no one ever talked in their squads. While you may hear command chat, squads don't often talk, and not nearly as much as they do in PS where roughly almost every squad talks except specific times of the day where it might be late in North America. I also noted that in 'public servers' it's not as key as PS because people just run to point anyways (and the game has no tickets which means people don't value their own lives as much where they have to communicate positions while dead and can't even look at the map to tell others where the guy is - which you can do in PS). 2. I made the mistake of using the word 'tracer' (yes I'm aware MGs and snipers have tracers in HLL), when I meant to just say you could see your bullet travel + dust kick up on bullets. This is shown in the Foy clip with the k98, however, youtube tends to compress the videos really poorly and it's hard to make out the dust kicking up. I've read several retorts saying "there is dust kick up", I have dozens of long range clips where I'm shooting with smgs/lmgs and you can't see any dust or bullet travel. Feel free to test this yourself at long distances, you may get it if you hit specific objects such as stone walls here and there - but the detail is so small that its hard to pick out. 3. Ballistics. I've read several retorts saying "there are ballistics and feedback". Again, test this yourself. Take your gun past 200m - 300m and start shooting people, you will have to place your sights up high as if you're using a bow and arrow, and your bullet is "looping" in an arc onto the target. This SHOULD NOT happen. That's a broken ballistics system. You can take the same shot at 300m+ and get varying results. Additionally, your sights are blocking the target, that should NEVER happen. You can watch videos of US military personnel from last year practicing on 500m gun ranges with a variety of ww2 weapons, they can take the same shot at 100m as they can at 500m, their sights are always fixed on the target, and they simply zero for distance (as is available in PS). The fact you have to block your target in order to move your sights up and get varying results on whether you hit a guy means that there aren't proper ballistics, despite what HLL players might believe. This is another situation where I've shot many people at distance and I hit them, but it took me several adjustments and I had no idea where the bullet feedback was at 250m+ - 300m+. I was simply adjusting based on where they are and then arcing my sights. 4. 'Arcadey gunplay'. I read a retort saying 'well look at the PPSh, it has crazy recoil!', outliers aren't the entire armoury of the game. Please watch videos of the BAR from COD vanguard and then compare it with HLL Bar, they act almost identical in shooting patterns, sound, and recoil. The BAR in PS kicks a lot more the faster you tap it, and on auto it's insane past the first burst. If you try to spam tap the worst the recoil gets. There are several clips there where I'm fast tapping with the stg for example and there is virtually no recoil on the weapon, I can't do that in PS nearly to the same degree. Please use an FG42 in PS and then compare it with the FG42 in HLL, it's night and day. 5. People keep saying I compared 'HLL' to 'CoD WW2'. If you listen carefully, I said gunplay is similar to CoD, not gameplay, the entire last portion is discussing gunplay. 6. People keep pushing on how 'PS is dead' and 'HLL is thriving'. That is irrelevant when discussing the game mechanics. PS modding community took over and the game is alive and well, we have games daily. If people think invisible walls/buildings you can't enter because they're funneling you into gunfire and taking 90 degree angles after 90 degree angles just to try to get to a spot are a good thing, I don't know what to tell you. 7. People get hung up on the 'hedge line' situation. This wasn't done by design, and I can already debunk it. The reason you know this is because many hedges in HLL have gaps to shoot from and your bullets won't go through them, there are also a ton of instances where there are wide open gaps inbetween hedgerows and you can't vault it because it's just an invisible barrier similar to the backyard vaulting situation. Another thing people keep citing is that infantry couldn't use hedges to fire back, which is just untrue. There were lots of places to climb over and push down brush to shoot from while in concealment in order to return fire. In fact there is a whole video here showing how they were able to do this: ruclips.net/video/J1dKsmV3fIU/видео.html There are entire hedges in PS where you can do this across the entire hedge to return fire, whereas in HLL in many hedges you're completely blocked off because it's just a barrier (and in some you can return fire in just very select pockets of the hedge) Does that mean every hedge was usable? No. There were lots of hedges where they had to funnel to the end of the hedge where MG fire was waiting, that is true. The issue here is that we're still discussing a game, and in every facet of the game you're being forced to funnel toward enemy gunfire without being able to return gunfire properly. This issue is exacerbated when you consider that an MG has tracers and can fire at you at 300m, but because of HLL's shitty ballistics, you can't return fire because you'd have to keep measuring how high your sights are just to arc a bullet onto him. 8. Lastly, if HLL is a great game I'd play it. I don't have allegiance to video games. People are so polarized when they feel their game took a slight. If HLL fixed all these issues, I would play it today and I would still play PS (I'd play both), because then we'd have two wonderful milsim style shooters. Does HLL have good aspects? Of course, but it's severely hurting in areas of gameplay and gunplay.
To be honest, this whole video felt like a hit job on HLL for some reason. We get it, you like Post Scriptum. You and the other 500 people who still play it can keep doing so. To me PS looks like a game that is 15 years old. The UI design is garbage, the map design is garbage, the level design is garbage compared to HLL. I havne't seen one single clip where it feels like actual war in PS, it's usually one guy sitting in a house killing one guy, and it's totally quiet with almost no war sound at all in the backgroumd.
Thanks for the clarification on point #5. The way it was worded made it sound like you were saying HLL (as a whole) was far closer to BF and CoD than PS, which yeah... that definitely ain't true.
Everyone on german servers have a mic, everyone on german servers use it. Yes, HLL is more casual and has a lot more QoL Features like Ping and now actually a non-verbal communication wheel for everyone. They point is... HLL is designed to be way more friendly towards casual and new players and it still has a steep leaning curve.
Both great games but hell let loose is far better. I feel like you haven’t really played the game when you say no recoil on weapons and that you don’t have to communicate to win if the enemy team is communicating and yours isn’t you’ve lost. Both games are available and pretty much everyone who wants to play a Ww2 milsim is on hell let loose hence the bots on ps. I think the winner is clear🏆
@@Wellington-nl7vm To be honest, your whole paragraph felt like a hit job on PS for some reason. We get it, you like Hell Let Loose. You and the other 600 people who still play. To me, Hell Let Loose looks like a game that is for Battlefield players to pretend they are "realism". The UI design is garbage, the map design is garbage, the level design is garbage compared to PS. I Haven't seen one single clip where it feels like actual war in HLL, it's usually one guy running into his death and then respawning ad nauseam, and it's a total clusterfuck with awful sound design
one good thing about the 'funnelled' nature of HLL with impassable terrain is that it speeds up games massively compared to PS with games often not running for much more than an hour compared to two to three hours in PS. Also once a team takes the advantageous positions on an objective it is pretty much won which allows the commander to make much more impactful decisions for the game and also create momentum rather than the dispersed firefights and reliance on force buildup that PS creates. In essence HLL has better strategic play and PS has better tactical play, and that is probably why voice chat is much less necessary in HLL because the strategy is always directed and can be learnt for each map.
The big problem with Post Sciptum is that the main target audience for it is the same as Squad and that is a game that simply has more on offer. the slow and methidical gameplay of those games also feels more "right" for a modern conflict compared to WW2 (or WW1, god have mercy on Beyond the Wire).
Lots of inaccuracies in this comparison, for example the crossplay is only for consoles. Most servers in fact rule that you have to have a mic otherwise you are kicked out. Hedges are used for concealment in HLL. Tracers are there and so is the recoil. Also HLL runs better and has active devs. ;)
@@Alex-se3uy HLL not having crossplay isn't my opinion. Be able to counter the "uncounterable" mg placements isn't my opinion. The fact that communication in HLL is in fact critical to winning the game isn't my opinion. I could go on...
@@Alex-se3uy He addresses the crossplay. he doesnt however address the many other disingenious statements made throughout the video. i like both games but this dude is just a PS fanboy going on a rant about why his game is objectively better while being totally biased
This is a clear video wih good comparisons. I think Post Scriptum will demolish HLL when released on PS 5. And the one who figures out that we are waiting for almost 12 years to play a decent Vietnam game. Will be the game champ of that year. And the years to come when the game is rightly build.
i simply think you got filtered. hell let loose was never meant to be on the level of squad, it's alot more casual and that's what you fail to realise in this video. keeping the gunplay simple and arcade-y is why hell let loose flourishes. i can agree with the comment on invisible walls, however i think it has to do with players feeling overwhelmed vertically when in combat. comms are DEFINITELY super important in hell let loose, i think this video might be incredibly biased, and that you should try giving hell let loose a bit more of your time before jumping to conclusions about why it is worse.
I prefer the ping system. A lot more accurate. When some guy goes to the left of the building north there’s 7 buildings north. And I die. With the ping. I know where to hide from or push to. Soooo much better
I agree with everything, but i cant handle 38 fps when in the middle of a full server... My CPU struggles, HLL is much better optimised, I can manage small drops bellow 60FPS...
Unfortunately the numbers says it all. PS died because it wasn't fun. It was a chore . No progression . No competitive scene .The winning formula would be PS weapons and gun play, explosion and tank effects mixed with the HLL game structure, rank and progression framework.
PS didn't die because of any of those things. PS devs disappeared for two years to work on bad projects against the wishes of the community including the Armour Overhaul update which took over a year of development time and did nothing for tank play, and the 4.27 update which hurt optimization badly and caused half the player base to drop because it killed their FPS performance (again despite the wishes of the community). During these two updates (two years spent), they released just 3 maps (Maginot with armour update, and Foy/Haganeau with 4.27 update). They admitted they knew 4.27 would break the game but were forced to do it by the CEO. They fixed most of it before they left, but there's a few bugs remaining left over, and those people who left think the game is still broken (it isn't, but performance could certainly be better). Your comment about the competitive scene is also wrong. PS had an amazing competitive scene in the EU with a clan ladder and also an NA clan ladder and really good matches. It only died after 4.27 because a lot of people got hit hard by performance downgrades. People didn't play PS for progression or achievements - they played it because it was raw ww2 action with great gunplay and a fun gameplay loop. PS had a 5k-7k peak at one point with thousands playing daily, it was a very popular milsim shooter. They just made really bad decisions as a dev team. We collectively on discord told them exactly what path they should take with the game. They didn't once fix any QoL updates we asked for including making SL better and more accessible, improving MG bipodding, fixing specific bugs (towing for example), and map/content drops. The PS community (unlike many other games) is highly critical and demands a lot from their devs, but the original devs of the game at some point were secretly replaced by people who had zero hours in the game and didn't actually understand the game or what they were doing. People were tired of playing the same several maps over that two year period and not having a clear roadmap on content (they essentially went dead quiet during the AO update and the 4.27 update and didn't answer anyone in the community). Either way, we play daily/nightly with full servers and queues, so the game is very much still kicking with a niche player base. There's also word going around they're working on getting new devs.
@@corerampage7587 I pop in every now and then but there's no OCE servers, and the competitive nature was restricted to EU and US. I'm not a PS hater, actually one of my favourite games along with HLL. Will always have the best particle effects of any game.
I used to play on ARR which was the OCE server. I live in Asia, so I ping 200+ to NA/EU, but the netcoding is really good in this game for client side and you really don't feel it. All the top players are from Australia including Madubit and Yedrellow and a few other guys, and they regularly top the scoreboard with anywhere from 200 - 280 ping. This is Madubit's channel and he makes some amazing/hilarious PS content (plus great gunplay footage): www.youtube.com/@thepriceisdwight/videos It's not ideal, and of course the server choice in HLL is much wider, if you want to just quickly pop in and play and get out then HLL makes way more sense in that regard due to overall accessibility, but the deep rewarding experience of PS just trumps it for me to where I'm willing to take a ping hit (which doesn't effect gameplay as you can see by my various videos on this channel).
haha yep!.. I was in the barracks on the north wing first fighting people then moved down here because I kept seeing you guys moving up from the forest west of the point and funneling into that building
@@corerampage7587 yeah we got a fob just west of point. hahahah there were 5 guys in that building and we all were just screaming cuz the guys u downed wanted me to go revive them, because i think the second guy u downded was actually the commander. i came down and got fucked too
PS is definitely a better game on paper, but it just has so much downtime compared to HLL that I can't bring myself to play it anymore. I started with PS and tried HLL on a whim cause it was on sale. Didn't think I'd care for it as I already loved PS at the time. But slowly I started noticing myself booting up HLL more and more and opening PS less and less. Eventually HLL became my main game. It's just more fun to play, I don't know why. I will say that the invisible walls in HLL piss me the hell off and I love PS version of Carentan way more. I also like the radio man and squad lead mechanic which kind of forces a little more cohesion in the squad.
@@Sombre____ More people play HLL because there are more battlefield children like you who want to play an arcade shooter, not a realistic one. That's fine, go back to Baby let Loose
![Hell Let Loose vs Post Scriptum [2020] | Direct Comparison](/img/1.gif)
Just want to let everyone know PS now officially has a dev team and there are a lot of big things in store for the best milsim out there!
Yeeees the king is back to take his rightful throne! POST SCRIPTUM BABYYYYYY
We’ll how bout dat PS on top
Isn't post scriptum dead? Lmao
@@philipevary8470 no sir you might be slightly out of the loop. It’s still not as popular as it once was before HLL kinda took over. Off world industries took it back over again and will be showing all other competitors who’s boss. I love it sooo much more than HLL, been around longer too.
@@WinkingP-E-N-1-5 HLL better
You know what HLL has what PS doesn´t? A developer team continuing to work on it :-P
that was a low blow, i like it
Haha a fair statement, I really wish that it didn't die it is still so much fun
@@lettuceheadgaming9337 Unfortunatly I didn´t get to try PS before the whole debacle, is it worth trying still, are the servers still populated enough?
@@NoWacko they're is usually one full surver, but every once in a while they'll be like 3 or 4 servers open, it's still a fun game and it's a very different game movement wise, It feels much more fluid in PS but I still love HLL
@@lettuceheadgaming9337 Thx, I´ll give it a shot when it´s on sale ;-)
For me, Hell Let Loose is the perfect blend between hardcore and casual. I like that roles and communication really matter, whilst not making everything feel like a chore or unnecessarily difficult for the sake of "realism". As another user mentioned, simplicity is key (at least in certain areas). Full realism ends up being laborious and kills a lot of the fun in my opinion, and for no other reason than the sake of it. Some systems are better kept simple when there's no benefit to making them difficult. I do agree that HLL does suffer from invisible walls in a lot of places that make no sense, as well as being poorly optimized and having bugs that persist for a long time, but overall it treads a great line between hardcore gameplay and casual or simplified systems in other areas. Just my 2 cents.
Also, good video man! Some minor things like crossplay is only between consoles, not PC. You can also use bushes in HLL but hedges are inaccessible. You can still flank and make some great maneuvers as a squad in HLL, but you often have to loop REALLY far around the map to avoid detection, but it's amazing when you pull it off.
This is why I’m totally against restricting load outs to certain maps and time periods. If I want to use my STG44 satchel assault on Stalingrad, fuckin let me
post scriptum is very simple though
@@EddBSmith I wish I could play with console players while on PC LOL
In defense of the invisible walls to some extent, on maps like Carentan its clear that the point of some of them is to prevent people from climbing on top of large buildings and just sitting up there. While some buildings that have the roof blown open, you should be able to climb on the roof, but some buildings it makes sense for
As someone that has played a lot of HLL, I would say communication is more important than described. There are some matches where you can get away with no communication, and generally people are not chatty, and callouts are 50/50.
Without communication, all kinds of things can go badly. Enemy airhead/supplies dropping, enemy pushes into a defense point, nearby enemy spawns, communicating any of these examples and more can result in cutting off the efforts of the enemy, which of course is vital in a versus situation where tactics are king on a relatively equal playing field.
I’ve seen countless matches where people don’t say shit to each other and the enemy gets away with far too much and wins because of it. I’ve also seen matches where the team is on the ball, calls things out and converges on it.
In my eyes, communication is like the spice to be added to the meal. Sure you could survive on that plain chicken, but it would certainly be better breaded and seasoned. Just my take.
Couple of mistakes here... there is no crossplay, and there is feedback on your shots at a certain distance
I believe his crossplay reference was for console only, although not worded accordingly. There is definitely feedback though.
@@TwinCityShredder The feedback referred to is mainly bullet impacts. Bullet impacts have a very limited render distance in Hell Let Loose which means using bullet impacts to adjust is not really a thing like it would be in Squad, Arma or Post Scriptum. This is mainly a problem with 300-500 m engagements.
Hell let loose only has crossplay between the 2 consoles, not with pc. So you in fact don't have "loads of console players without mics" 👍
I've never played Post Scriptum, but I have logged over a year and a half on HLL on PS5. The guns in HLL absolutely have recoil which varies gun to gun, they have semi auto and fully auto features on the appropriate models, and they are historically accurate (from what I can tell) as to the amount of ammo each weapon holds and how the weapon would function and recoil.
Hedges in real life cannot be gone through by design. It's a well-known issue the Allies faced in France, which is why they designed the Rhino tanks to bust through them. You can, however go through and hide out in any bush in HLL.
You have good points about not all buildings being usable, and that can be frustrating, but only on Carentan can I think of "invisible walls" which impede gameplay. The VAST majority of every area of the maps (outside of Carentan) are playable.
Finally, the comms. From my experience, most players communicate, especially in command chat. It's even fair to say that if you're a squad leader in a full squad, the amount of comms can sometimes be overwhelming between command, squad, and proximity chats. True, a person can play lone wolf, never communicate and be on the winning team, but overall, it's the team that communicates best which typically wins. Of course there are exceptions, and a team of inexperienced players will likely lose to a more experienced team regardless of comms, but HLL is mostly about comms and working together to control territory. I've seen it time and time again, the team that spends time "getting kills" and worrying about their K/D ratios usually loses to the team that uses strategy and good communication to control the map.
Amen
They don’t have fire selector. That’s what he’s referring to. The BAR for example can fire “Fast full auto” “slow full auto” and “semi auto” in real life
@@PureNationalism13 OH! I was unaware of that. I stand corrected. I still think the poster was a bit harsh on most aspects of the game, although I have nothing to compare it to.
Something else I should have pointed out, and I'm not sure if PS also attempts this, is that the HLL maps are very accurate to the actual battles, which, I get may not translate to a better gaming experience, but me personally, I really like the recreation of actual battles. Then again, I don't mind crawling in the mud for 20 minutes to try and sneak up on an objective in Purple Heart Lane. I think the realism is awesome and makes it more immersive.
Real
As someone that first played post scriptum and then hell let loose I can tell you that the lack of communication in hell let loose is the biggest thing that put me off from playing it at first and I played both on PC and console.
I'm playing it again though but most people don't communicate at all in HLL
There's definitely recoil on weapons in HLL they kick a bit. There's debris that kicks up on certain surfaces but not all. Just like anything in life both games have strengths and weaknesses
for sure there is! There is also bullet drop, I have no idea what this guy is talking about in this regard! Other pts he makes are valid. I would like a combination of the two games!
How can this video miss the most important difference between the two games which is the respawn system. PS relies on a ticket system which means there is a limited amount of times people can respawn before they loose all the tickets and hence the match, forcing players to play more cautiously and rely on other teammates to stay alive and accomplish the objective. When on the other hand HLL relies on a manpower resource which is constant replenished automatically or boosted by nodes so people can die indefinetly with little impact on the match result. Thats why on HLL players are less incentivized to play as a team and the result is a more chaotic shooter gamestyle.
This sounds right up my alley. I’m buying PS tomorrow after 1070 hours in HLL. It’s just not the same anymore, with the dolphin diving, increased run speed and having to hit people twice to kill them now with bolt action rifles past 100m.
I mean the tickets system is shit, if you go back and look at the data you will see that the 500-1000 casualty(KIA, wounded) was a lucky day in the year to get that low casualties, if you can't get more players into the field(which is bigger than most PS maps with the 80 player limit) then why would you limit the spawn times, it works in Squad as it's not a 'full scale war between multiple countries at the same time using conscription/draft'. Even in Squad and PS you get newbies who will just respawn and waste the ticket then some hardcore veteran players will just bite their head off and taking away their eagerness to play the game and learn it as most of PS players doesn't want to teach basics, just flaming and insulting them.
PS just over do what they are good at, make it as complex as it can be made, yea sure it's somewhat more accurate, but it bores the not too hardcore players, to the gunplay part, sure the weapons have to kick but it's not real life where it depends/depended on your training with the gun and how talented were you to actually shoot well and have the almost perfect grip on it(mostly because of your physics and understanding how to hold and use a gun) so you can hold it or shoot multiple times without a huge kick equaling a horse's kickback. You can't get and add attributes/skills to your character to be a sharpshooter or a newbie in that period of time, and still many kick really well. The only things HLL really needs is the zeroing and the weapons/vehicles matching the date of the campaign/map. Like Stalingrad with Panthers and STG44, or now El-alamein with Panthers and STG44, plus the bullshit on the UK side from the new devs. It may end with the new devs tbh.
Problem is that most - or at least a LOT - of PS players don't really care about whether they waste tickets or their team loses the match.. They just play it casually running around randomly hoping to shoot somebody before getting shot themselves. So you have this game with all these great mechanics for communications and teamwork, but people just play it as Call of Duty anyway.
@@Tom_Quixote I guess it makes sense. Without progression in the game their is no incentive to win
Hell let loose indeed doesn't relies on ticket system, they rather work on respawn positioning strategy. The goal is not to focus on exploiting the fact enemies don't have enough ticket to defend x or attack y, but rather on disabling communication systems between their points which is quite realistic (the mindset of it, not the concept of OP :) )
I never played HLL, but I got around 2000 hours into PS. And I have been waiting for this game since Battlefield 1942...... even though the playerbase is low, the love for the game is still there. Great but small community. PS deserves much more then what it is getting at the moment. Even with the dev drama at the moment.
It’s not just the game that deserves so much more, the community deserves so much more. We got treated like shit by the previous devs and put up with two years of silence on constant feedback posts. I still have hope because the modding community is awesome, and I’m hearing murmurs they’re looking for dev replacements behind the scenes (I have a source).
come HLL, you will loooove it
@@denizbeytekin9853 no its shit
Cross play is only between consoles for Hell Let Loose, just want to clarify. Also, people don’t forget about comms just because they can ping. Only the SLs can ping exactly what a target is, everyone else just as a basic icon. In reality this should enforce people to communicate so they can relay exactly what it is they’re pinging to the SLs. You’re right about not being able to adjust sights, but there is absolutely dust pick up in Hell Let Loose. Tracers are visible as well, but maybe not as much as PS. Hedges are also used for concealment in HLL, not sure how you came to that conclusion. Just some oddities in your criticism. Most of the other stuff you said was true.
Everything I came here to say ^
@@cell5773 same
About comms, he plays on a china server...
The only thing I have to disagree with is that not every building is usable in PS. However most are. There is the occasional unenterable building but they are fairly rare.
More open buildings is nice because it allows for more dynamic pushes. It also adds more of a sense of being in a war zone, because every window and every door could hold an enemy, where as in hll there are like 4 or 5 buildings you have to watch out for.
Just when you get used to something in HLL, They change it. Bullet drop-off (damage) is way too much of an overkill. I used to take someone out with a bolt action 400 meters out with a single round. Now it's a two-hit, it's an 8mm Mauser. It takes out a deer, but not a person. Makes sense.
Yeah I hear ya. That’s the biggest reason why I’m switching to PS. HLL doesn’t feel the same anymore.
You can one shot a guy at 400 meter with a grease gun, you know. Pretty easy.
Each game has it plus and minuses. To say one is better than the other is like comparing oranges and apples. Post Scriptum is more sim based, yes, HLL is more mixed, yes. You can twist facts to suit your standpoint in many ways. HLL has double. if not triple the servers in use compared to PS, does that make HLL a better game? Not really, just appeals to a different crowd. It all comes down to want you are looking for and what feels good for you...
Double or triple? PS has like 1-6 servers at a time at best.
He mentioned that, everybody knows, also he debates on various points in which PS is better.
HLL is basically just Battlefield. Yes, one (not HLL, not battlefield) is better than the other
@sunkintree Not even close bro. That's a total insult.
I disagree with the communication don’t matter in HLL, you will get steamrolled by a team who communicates and also it may not be as realistic as PS but it’s nowhere near call of duty, PS has some good stuff that HLL doesn’t but in my opinion it’s just a lot more clunky than HLL, I don’t want to stop and drink a canteen so I can aim accurately.
lol... you want it easy. PS isn't supposed to be easy. Otherwise, it would be on console.
@@louisavondart9178 not true the console community want a hardcore game and not wanting games to be dumbed down
That fact that PS is “hard” is not a reason why console hasn’t come out with games like these. One of the reason is that most PVP/ simulator games on pc require more functionality, thus having to push more keys and some developers don’t want to deal with the licensing and process of making a console game. The closest that console ever got to a game that required more functionality was PUBG, which turned out to be ok in my opinion. So, no it’s not because it’s “hard” there just more letters to press on 😂
I didn’t say anything about playing on console I play on PC or about the game being too hard.
I'm pretty sure there's no console and PC crossplay for Hell Let Loose. Console players aren't any less likely to have microphones either. Communication is important in Post Scriptum, and yet in most matches there's still many players who never speak or use chat that nobody notices in time, making it painful and boring to play. Yes, it's great fun when people do speak, but it's pretty much necessary, while in HLL you can do just fine without microphones, which is a really good feature.
Zeroing is an absolute cope. Aiming slightly up isn't problem. Actually seeing where your bullet goes rarely happens and is irrelevant anyways- muscle memory trumps staring at the map to get range, ranging, and then actually shooting. Ballistics are fine in HLL.
Chokepoints are a problem for you? Meat grinders? Try flanking and using smoke. People camp in every game on earth. HLL has some rough maps to attack on, but why should it be easy? Post Scriptum has the same shit with people running into tank campers and mg campers and sniper campers in random bushes. That's just the nature of realistic shooters; 1 guy hiding in a random place can hold off entire enemy team.
Map design is good enough in HLL. Sure, some maps are questionable, but every game has bad maps. Enough buildings are enterable, the more you add, the more frustrating it becomes, as you can't possibly clear every angle, window and sightline, meaning you get shot from random places or people hiding in corners. Having clear lanes of attack makes attacking and defending way more natural. Urban maps have plenty of cover and flank routes.
The gunplay argument is REALLY bad. You literally show clips of you spamming the G43 in PS with legit 0 recoil, and then a clip of you using the BAR in HLL where you have to shoot quite slowly. Both games have pretty easy to use gunplay, no noticeable recoil or whatever and that's because it's a pain in the ass to play a game with uncontrollable guns. See Tarkov. If you can't reasonably control your gun, people start hipfire spraying and abusing movement. Also that BAR clip in PS has literally no recoil. It goes up very slowly and predictably, with no screenshake or random bouncing. It's really nothing out of the ordinary lol. Guns have their strengths and weaknesses in both games, ofcourse a bolt action is better at range than an SMG..
And the gameplay you showed was just running around CoD style spraying people down with full auto guns. I get those are cool clips but it doesn't support your argument of it being realistic, tactical or less arcadey than HLL. Both games are pretty much the same thing except that PS requires more effort and communication, which can be really unfun when people don't do that.
Not a bad video ,but it's very PS sided. That's okay, but I would reframe the video, ''Why I prefer PS to HLL'' because then I don't feel obliged to point anything out, as it's only your opinion and not an objective comparison.
Hell Let Loose has more players, by a long shot. Hell Let Loose just feels good and well put together.
Not anymore, lol.
@@Hanfgurkenhasser what universe are you living in? HLL has 8k and PS has under 500 players.
@@hemporergaming Referring to "feels good and is well put together".
For mainstream audience yes, it was made for those
One thing I love about PS is the choice. You (especially when you’re SL) make a choice in everything you do. Where you go and what you choose to look at makes a real impact on the game. You choose what fights you want to get into where you want to take contact. It feels like you have some tactical control on the battlefield. When you SL that feeling is tripled and you’re responsible for a whole squad and their success or failure.
The same thing I value the most in this game❤
It's the same for HLL for me tho
@@Sakrosankt-Bierstubeno lol
So many HLL players were (and are) rabidly and childishly hostile toward PS to a ridiculous degree, while most PS players openly said they also enjoy(ed) playing HLL too. I suspect the average age of HLL players is significantly lower than that of PS.
You got it man. I think if you look at most games that get criticized on youtube for their shortcomings, the comments are often filled with "they definitely need to fix this" or "I'd play it if they fixed it", etc.
You'd think the developers were their parents the way they defend video games.
I look at systems and how they function against eachother.
PS' shortcomings come from what the devs did specifically (eg. spending years on the AO update instead of adding content, or releasing 4.27 update which killed optimization until it was semi fixed), and how the game requires a baseline competency to function (eg. not knowing how things work will make the game quality far worse if the players are bad).
You tell HLL players that they're being funneled using invisible walls and you get told you're a PS shill rather than "oh wow I didn't know we had this issue". I'm getting bombarded with a ton of hate comments, but almost every single HLL supporter refuses to face these things exist in their game and that they need to be fixed, instead they say "ha ha, your game dead".
Yeah, I've definitely thought the same about the demographics.
It's what you get when you have a really casual playerbase that lacks critical thinking.
@@corerampage7587 mate agree
@Rampage I think a lot of people or children did not watch the entire video or did not pay attention to what you were saying
This just sounds like it’s coming from someone who doesn’t understand HLL. Sounds like they came from Post Scriptum because their friends told them about HLL, played it a few times and decided it wasn’t as good, when in fact the game will truly never be as fun until you take your time to research and learn how to play it. Sure, it is designed where you CAN play the game casually, but in order to win you HAVE to have comms as either the Commander or Officers.
Then you can expect other team had very little comms too. I have multiple times dont server hopping in HLL after getting into 2-3 squad in HLL and nobody talks. @@_E_Pluribus_Unum_
All the reasons above is basically why i don't enjoy post scriptum. To much complexity the ones who got no clue won't stand a chance to get into the game. HLL already suffers hard from such, and a lot of veterans of HLL has to basically babysit a lot of the newer players lots of the time and as a casual player who tried both. I could quite frankly say. Simplicity makes perfection. Not everything needs extreme detail, the more complexity you add into something the more time it takes to master it, the more neiche things gets, the less people you will have an influx upon. That's mainly why battlefield as a comparison since that has already been drawn as a line between HLL and battlefield. Battlefield started off close to an realistic shooter in BF1942. Then slowly started to lean more and more into the more casual side of things, because it simply attracts a wider audiance. So you somewhat need to find a finite balance between super complex and simplicity. Make a super complex game will attract a small playerbase and somewhat of a loyal one but then your building a bit on a dead audiance that won't really grow from a snowball effect. While having a super simple game will make people leave too quick because they feel like they master things way too fast. That's why now, we are seeing games like planetside 2 dying off. Because their veterans of that games are now leaving, and there are nobody to fill the gaps of those wales. So this is what you have to account for.
Hell let loose > post scriptum
Everything needs to be as realistic, Historical, and Hard as it gets otherwise its Not fun.
@@yeti1944 Be careful what you wish for. You want 100% realistic war game ok 60% of your time you will spent walking ,10% digging defences ,10% dealing with trench foot and other injuries another 10% being shelled and the rest actual shooting
@@andrazstrmcnik2331 thats actually what i want
I hate all the Shooting all the time, digging, Walking, marching, singing Songs, cleaning Rifle and yourself so much fun, Like Reenactment
Frankly, I feel like Red Orchestra and the Rising Storm games achieve the best "realistic" gameplay. It's got certain unique complexities that make it feel real and gritty, but it's not so realistic that you have to spend half an hour just figuring out the basics. At the same time, while it provides arcade-y aspects to make the game more simple, it doesn't lay them on too thick to where it takes away grom the immersion. The biggest flaws I'd say are the large lack of players and servers with iffy connection quality, which aren't really related to the game itself.
Mega server has entered the chat LOL
I’m playing HLL for almost two years now and I still don’t understand hedges. I had games where I shot at hedges from over 100m away and I randomly hs’d someone through a part without gaps. And since a year or so hedges (to me) feel like a undestroyable wall. I wish the devs would spend some time on hedges, ballistics and enterable houses. I’d even pay for noncosmetic updates.
They need to just make the damn fence doors usable. Why even put a big white fence door in the middle of a wall if I can’t at least smack it open?
As stated by others and yourself, PS and HLL are on two vastly different ends of the spectrum. With HLL appealing to the more casual but still hardcore gamers with a somewhat decent learning curve, PS has a bit of a learning hill. With all these mechanics, some people would find it hard to wrap their heads around them, especially being unfamiliar with the type of game they're playing. An example is when a friend of mine got PS, he said the game was too hard to get into with most of the players already there being pros whilst playing HLL he could have fun talking to the guys in his squad with the occasional order being thrown around.
However personally, I enjoy PS more. I've had more moments in PS then HLL that made me go, "wow" and that is my main factor. From the way guns feel, sound and look, to the way vehicles operate, to the maps, little details and finally the community. A moment I can recall is pushing up a road behind an M3 Half track, the 50 going absolutely wild, a squad pushing behind it whilst others flanked through the narrow alleyways to get into the buildings. Or playing as the French, the commander got down with us and ended up rallying us into a bayonet charge that won us the game but sheer fluke because we caused the other team to route.
Yeah they these hell let loose scrubs can't comprehend the cinematic gameplay PS offered.
Overall I think Post Scriptums gunplay, movement, and just overall polish is so much nicer than HLL. Performs so much better, animations and gunplay all feel consistent, and just feels more satisfying. I also prefer the freedom and maps in PS. Apart from that HLL beats it in any other category. If HLL has these things mentioned on the same level of PS it would take it to the next level
My exact thoughts.
Yeah Squads systems worked well for it.
If HLL would adopt some things from PS It would honestly be the best WW2 shooter. Those things being AT/Tank gameplay, better map layouts/enterable buildings and more freedom of movement. Possibly some more weapon differences with more weapon sway and bullet drop. But aside from that it really doesn't need too much.
I have 180 hours in HLL, while having 880 hours in PS.
The only thing hell let loose is slightly better at is visuals.
PS only really looks worse in videos on RUclips because of the way RUclips compresses.
The game is gorgeous on high/epic settings in-game. The water especially and also the god-rays. Has some beautiful dusk maps as well.
The only areas where I’d say HLL outshines it is having the maps look more war torn, mud, puddles along mud roads, and building design. HLL has some beautiful buildings, it’s just a shame you can’t use most of them.
As I mentioned, so many people cover these things already in other comparisons. I wanted to display just how vastly different gunplay and gameplay mechanics are (and frankly there was a bunch of things I didn’t talk about for example how the spawn systems work where one game incentivizes frontline meat grinding and the other let’s you tactically flank from anywhere at any time with pace - so perhaps a follow up video in the future).
@@corerampage7587 It has been a while since I have played either, so it is not very fresh in my mind. I remember now post scriptum did look better depending on graphics settings. (which I usually had on the lowest)
I am confused why so many people would rather play HLL. PS is so much better overall!
Call me whatever you want but HLL is way more immersive than PS. The map design and the color correction applied is on another level. In PS i feel like dark is too dark and light is waaay to light. Also, might be an unpopular opinion but the gun sounds are very weird and feel completely off to the other elements of the game. Another thing i would like to add is that i would totally prefer not being able to enter a building rather than entering it only to be met by something that looks very much unfinished. I totally agree HLL has it's issues, especially the invisible walls and the jumping/climbing mechanics but those things mess up with my experience way less than having weird graphics and sound design. Nevertheless, i guess it all comes down to personal preference but this is my honest opinion.
PS never had weird graphics for me personally and the overall looks are great. The immersion I completely disagree with, I have had much more immersion and tense battles in PS then in HLL... Especially when you're on the edge of capturing/defending a objective and you have a good team you can hear all kinds of shit happen around you.. I have had people run up to my tank to tell me where the enemy armor was, jump on the tank, guide me and then quickly hop off waiting for me to kill the fucker so they could advance... The tank mechanics in HLL are a bit better when it comes to driving, especially since I love immersion and realism and shifting gears and all is great on that, but PS has better tank mechanics overall imho and the sound/looks from a tank firing or getting blown up is incredibly, also the Artillery in PS plays a huuuuuge part as it would IRL, 1 of the great reasons that not everyone always wants to play as infantry...
Both games have pros and cons, and I was hoping that HLL would be the next PS but I was deeply dissapointed imho. I love immersion, realism and I'm a big overall WW2 guy and the maps / historic accuracy in PS is great. ((I must say that Omaha Beach / Vierville sur mer and some other maps on HLL are incredibly well done, props to the design team for historic accuracy))
It's sad that the PS team has basically been laid off, was hoping for more, still love the small but good playerbase, sad for me that HLL just isn't my game when it comes to ww2 games.
Also the historic accuracy is imo better in PS, the fact that you can customize your character is great in HLL but that the game allows you to wear snow camo in the middle of France, like come on lol...
I’m with u on the maps. I think the aesthetic of HLL maps r a major advantage for immersion and the maps being reconstructions of the real locations really helps aswell. Being able to go to places in game u have visited as a tourist is next level cool and I wouldn’t have it any other way
Sound design and many gun sounds on HLL are way over mark. They have updated those twice? already and still missing crisp gun sounds.
This video makes great points, but comes off as full of bias. It seems more like a video on greasing PS’s wheels rather than an actual comparison.
The comments on “communication not being critical” in HLL is straight up disingenuous as far as I’m concerned. The team that communicates less gets rolled. Because of the “funnels” that you mentioned if you don’t communicate to take and hold those funnels you can’t move forward. Simple as. Those choke points are critical in the gameplay loop and you can’t just throw bodies at it continuously with no plan or support and hope it breaks. I’ve seen it tried and tested many times, and it rarely works. Not to mention lack of tank call outs, supply drops, flanking infantry, arty, etc. You lose games fast that way. The ping system doesn’t mean anything if you don’t have any context attached to random red flashes on the screen and will get ignored as meaningless information.
You mention not having to move while sitting in a static position for long periods while holding an angle and being, effectively, extremely hard (or in your words “can’t counter”) to kill which is simply not true. There have been numerous instances where I have done, and seen, people do exactly as you describe and promptly get wasted for staying in one spot for too long because it gets predictable. Whether that be because of a commander ability, a tank, or simple counter sniping. They’re not that hard to find and kill.
You mention lack of recoil and I laughed pretty hard. There is pretty significant recoil on SMGs and automatic rifles, I don’t know where you got this notion. If you don’t control your weapon you won’t hit anything. The clips you show of PS to contrast this don’t do a good job of proving your point. In their uniqueness of rate of fire and handling from weapon to weapon yes I can see that, but your recoil point is complete moot. Also, wdym you don’t have to adapt play style switching between weapons? That’s a pretty drastic over generalization. Clearly you’re not going to be as aggressive with a bolt-action than you would be with an SMG. You’re not going to be moving and shooting with an MG like you would with a BAR or STG. You make it seem like there’s no variation between weapons which is, again, disingenuous.
And then you go on to say “certain weapons are far better in certain situations” in PS as if I can effectively and consistently take on a Thompson in close quarters with a Kar-98 in HLL. That’s ridiculous. If you’re gonna spin it that way you could at least provide an example instead of grasping at straws. And then you also say SMGs can be countered effectively in PS as if they can’t be in HLL with the same tactics you mention in the same breath? You talk about effective ranges you should engage at as if you can just do whatever you want in HLL with no adherence to proper engagement ranges for weapons when that is, yet again, disingenuous. Bolt actions are great in concealment in HLL, and SMGs are great in CQC. The STG example is exactly the same. The BAR is the same as well. I don’t understand how this is a point.
There are some good points made here like the lack of seeing where your shots are landing (although from the clips you showed of PS I didn’t see much difference), and the restriction of movement (aka “funnels”). Lack of flanking routes through buildings and hedges does get annoying, but I also see how without them the maps could turn into more of a meat grinder than they already are. Something to think about. Everything else? Empty points made to make it seem like HLL is just a straight up inferior experience.
This video really just seems like a another PS player trying to be “objective”, but falling short because of personal bias.
Yea I know lol. “Hold these angles and you can’t die!!” Ever hear of smoke grenades? Or just basic quick peeking?
hell let loose is more arcady whereas post scriptum is much more realistic
HLL is awesome but theres a time and place for post scriptum , just love the hardcore elements of the game where u actually have to plan ur next route think abit the fire fights are more sparse and unexpected that realism is what i enjoy a specific audience i suppose either way both game top
Not game Mechanics related but a decent crowd of people who play the games care about historical accuracy. HLL hasn't shown dedication to real historical accuracy like PS has. The small playerbase for PS is really what hurts it for me though also the fact that some weird shit appeared to have happened with the studio. Communication can be brutal in HLL though. It's great when you have a squad that's talking and command chat is active but, it's horribly unenjoyable when people don't speak. Nobody communicates where enemy vehicles are, places nodes, nobody defends or places garrisons. It feels like a 50/50 shot whether you'll get into a server with people talking or a server filled with all the people who've migrated from battlefield and cod. That being said though I have hundreds of hours on both games and love both but I do mainly play HLL nowadays because of the playerbase there. Sometimes the playerbase annoys me but it seems to be the only game between the two with a future.
post scriptum is better in so many ways as a game, BUT!
its difficult... the game is slower and more tactical and more squad focused. wich means you have to put in more effort, use your brain etc.
that element is also there in HLL but just not at all in the same spectrum.
one of the first things i said when starting HLL was "wow this is so arcady compared..." and i stand by that statement
and wholeheartedly believe thats the main reason it is so popular.
its just easier to get into. and you dont have to put in as much effort to get a fun day of gaming:
As for me, i miss the really big fights in PS, hll wont ever hold a candle to it.
HLL is better in FFA though, to be fair.
PS real glory is on private servers where matches are played with likeminded people..those games are beyond compare some of the coolest things you can experience in gaming.
Feel free to look up "post scriptum 1 life event" . simply awesome, everyone just moves and behaves completely different.
so cool.
great video sir
Yawn.
I thought his comment was actually interesting
hell let loose is way more laid back, but post scriptum my god is the true ww2 military simulator
Hell let loose in my book has more strategy and stealth involved
While post is “take the gun! NOW GET OUT THERE!”
i mean yes post scriptum is better on the realism front but still not a simulator by far, one big issue with this is how coms work, WW2 everyone didn't have a headset to communicate with each other so yeah you get where this is going, anyways own both, enjoy both for different reasons.
@@jessicamason2526 yea thats true, but its probably the closest we are gonna get to a true ww2 milsim experience
I 100% prefer PS over HLL. I am just sad at the lack of players in PS.
Likewise. In fact it’s partially why I made this video, I wanted to show people who are deciding between the two games what they’re missing out on which are wide gaps in mechanics, functional gameplay/gunplay.
A lot of people who play HLL have never even heard of PS, and the way HLL players react to any PS video is like they’re scared of the boogeyman. It’s important to highlight these differences so people can know there are better gunplay/gameplay options.
I agree with everything u said but i can make top 10 reasons why is the other way around .The thing is both games could learn a thing or two form each other
This is pertaining to gunplay and gameplay functionality.
the only real negatives on PS is the dev situation and the bugs/optimization due to devs leaving it in a weird state.
The difference between PS players is that we shit on our own game and the devs if it’s necessary. I have no problem wanting a game to improve. HLL has potential but they would have to fix everything above to get me to play it.
I wish more people knew about this specific thing when deciding between the two games.
@@corerampage7587 "The difference between PS players is that we shit on our own game and the devs if it’s necessary."
Dude Black Matter would get crucified daily for their stupid decisions and poor optimization. PS players arent unique for shitting on their game
@T M C it's a solid split I'd say. There is the group that sucks HLLs dick and there's the group that puts their feet to the fire. Usually the newer vs the older players.
But as for this comment section: the video is just trashing hll what did you expect?
I have tried my hand at both games, and I do prefer Post Scriptum leagues over HLL; it’s the closest game to the WWII game of my childhood dreams. I love HLL for its overall larger map design. There’s nothing quite like charging across those massive expanses of fields. But I also lament it for the invisible walls and boundaries that hinder my experience. When I’m holding a flank in an urban environment with a Browning M1919 and a full-squad of enemies turn the corner, I get the high I desire. But the difference I can feel between the games is that in HLL they turned that corner because there was no other way for them to go (and not traversing the backyards besides me), but in Post Scriptum they **chose** that way to go.
how would one just simply walk through a hedge in real life? these things can be really dense... I get some of your points but that one kinda confused me
The thing with hedge is that it’s not a one size fits all. Hedge warfare wasn’t strictly guys walking down hedge lines to the edge of a hedge, they actually shot through it and interacted with it (and sometimes it was difficult to do so and couldn’t be used). I also didn’t say “walk through”, I said “entered”
The issue in HLL is that hedges act as funnels, you can’t counter someone who’s sitting at an angle waiting for people to appear at the end of a hedge because that’s the game design. sometimes there are openings which allow you to shoot back, other times there are openings where you can’t even vault it because it’s an invisible barrier.
In PS you’ll walk slower through hedge if you try to go through it, but you can interact with it where you can go through and poke your gun in different areas or move through it (at the expense of speed) to shoot someone who’s on the other side.
There can be argument about which is more realistic, but from a gameplay perspective it just makes it really easy for someone to “game the system” of HLL.
In my first game playing HLL last year I dropped 50 kills because I figured out that they’re forced to funnel to specific points and can’t avoid the opening, couple this with really slow movement speed and I just sniped entire squads with an stg which couldn’t counter-fire me.
Now when you couple this with invisible walls on backyards, inaccessible areas, the majority of buildings you can’t enter, you can see how it’s a frustrating gameplay experience where you’re forced to route specifically toward meatgrinders.
ruclips.net/video/J1dKsmV3fIU/видео.html
If you go around the 11-12+ minute mark he shows himself concealing in one of these, that was true for both sides. But in HLL the majority of these are completely unusable and you’re forced to hit the edge of each side while being unable to use various parts of it to counter fire.
And yes there were also hedges where they couldn’t use them at all and had to go to the ends of them and get mowed down.
@@corerampage7587 PS captures the true feeling of the ''Battle of the Bocage''.. You never know which bush had a enemy hiding in them, the Allied forces were shit scared of the hedges at times, hence why they made the 'hedge killers' on the front of the Sherman tanks.. HLL just has a wall on a hedge lol
The big one for me is audio, Post Scriptum is miles ahead of Hell Let Loose in that regard.
Bro literally only listed all „bad“ things in hell let loose and all good things in Post scriptum💀
maybe because all of PS is good?
@@louisavondart9178 lmao
But not all of Hell let loose is bad. And the developement of PS team gave up the game.
@@louisavondart9178 Ikr PS is a perfect game i sure do wonder why fuck all people play it
They're both cool but I think HLL has one massive advantage over PS that explains the massive difference in playerbase. It's fun. PS is a cool milsim and I respect it for that but the more toned down somewhat arcade elements of HLL pave the way for an overall more enjoyable experience. I might have to give PS another try at some point but compared to HLL it just feels very dry
Interesting stuff! I haven't tried Post Scriptum yet, but I'd love to after watching this. I personally appreciate the casual elements you described about HLL, because I don't have a whole lot of time to play. I might get a couple matches in a month.
Feel free to drop by and check out my stream if you want to see how it looks:
www.twitch.tv/corerampage
People keep trying to nitpick everything said. At the end of the day, Post Scriptum doesn't have a low player count because of any mechanic or map, it has a lower player count because HLL is (in my opinion) the first real tactical FPS shooter that was made to reach a large audience. PS was never that. HLL was sort of a "gateway game" into the more intense tactical shooters such as PS, Squad ect. HLL was made to appeal to the masses and did a very good job, I have friends who hated tactical FPS games, but were warmed up to the genre through HLL.
Agree ... except many other cool things PS does so much better, to only name tanks as a huge part. Where Hell Let Loose is the pure arcarde "kiddie" game, PS is the simulation. You also see this in realism in the medic gameplay. In HLL people just respwan or kill themselves to move to a better position, because there is no real important limitation. In PS you can loose a game just by running out of forces, so you have to play much more wisely. That's why it is fun to play medic in PS, where it makes less to no sense to be one in HLL!
I am really sad, that the good old days seems to be gone, where PS was more frequently used. I hope that there will be any revival of PS, because it became so much better over time!
Part of what I enjoy about HLL is that it strikes a very nice balance between the over-the-top, arcadey action of games like CoD/Battlefield and the more complex and grounded experience of hardcore mil-sims. It creates an experience that retains some of the appeal of an immersive sim without a lot of the baggage.
I haven't played PS so I can't really judge that, but I honestly don't agree at all. You need comms in HLL to win, it's just that easy, while you make it sound like it's Battlefield. You can use bushes, hedges etc to hide in HLL as well so I don't get that argument at all. To me PS looks really boring. It feels and looks very sterile, almost linear. It doesn't have the chaos that HLL offers, which feels more like war.
agree, HLL level design and graphics are insane. I love Kursk trenches.
and its historical accuracy is among worst of ww2 games, even Enlisted does it better @@AkmalAtabayev-f8y
Hell Let Loose is "realistic enough" to not completely disappoint hardcore WWII gamers, but casual enough to attract the Battlefield and COD crowd for a more challenging game type. HLL's maps are way more vibrant and war-torn, while PS's maps look like miniature playsets with not a single thing out of place. Not to mention that the 3rd person player models run like they are missing joints in PS. The true test of which is the most successful game is player base, and it's obvious who has won that battle.
Arma 3 with a WW2 mod and a good radio mod (which not every squad member will have in their kit) is the winner in my book.
When I saw the enbloc clip pop out my my M1 Garand, bounce off the wall to my right, and physically land on the ground at my feet, and stay there (without instantly dissappearing), next to my 8 shells of empty brass, I knew this game had a more superior weapons system than any ever created in a game. Long live Post Scriptum!
it's already dead.
@@jaydeleon8094 lol, say that to the still active community still playing it
@@Nova-gr5wf - It will never die for the 60 German gamers still playing it.
@@Nova-gr5wf still only has 1-6 games online at any given time. Who gives a shit if the community is active if there are less than 10 servers.
@@jaydeleon8094 Those less then 10 servers still have a great base of players and most of them are PS vets and are part of a large community.. Those servers are great and everyone plays great on them. Doesn't matter the quantity of servers, in PS, quality matters cuz you genuinely need the other players around you
The differences is HLL focused on the mass, and that will always be more successful. I think if PS went to ps and xbox when HLL did it might of saved them, but it's to late now.
I wouldve wanted post scriptum to come to console but instead hell let loose beat them too it
Post scriptum just feels better to play. The movement in Hell Let Loose feels really awkward and clanky.
I think you are missing one thing that HLL has that post scriptum doesn’t, people who play the game
people still play the game , albeit small, but people still very much play PS
When you talk about meat grinders in Hell let loose, i would say that was pretty accurate for WW2. That map is meant to be a meat grinder bc that’s what it was in real life
Except buildings that hardly can be entered, always bothered me in HLL
sounds like rly objective review:))) the only question is why noone play that all round better game:)
😂😂😂
Graphism, Marketing, Dev Communication
PS is better on every aspects except graphism.
HLL has a good or ok dev team and its something PS doesn't have. PS is a very low budget game, it's a squad's mod.
Because there are more children like you who would really play a Battlefield-style casual arcade shooter than one that is more realistic
Do you really think COD is such a great series of games because it's popular, or do you recognize that it's actually just made for 12 year olds?
Cause they are living in transformers land and looking at their player levels. Especially younger people just want flashy thing, they get bored easily and they have attention spans of a toddler. They cant communicate right, get angered and frustrated easily. HLL is mainstream game for them.
HLL as a game wins on few things, better marketing, slightly better graphics, more casual experience.
@@AndyP998 your acting like HLL is cod or something you bring up it being a "Casual game" which makes it more popular which is false look at squad it has more players than Hll what is squad? a Tactical shooter stop using the same excuses to defend your irrelevant dead game for 45 year old men who should be working their 9-5 not playing video games
map system in HLL makes more sense than PS. and the fact that you need to play a certain class more often to level them up makes the progession of the game more fun. where as PS you just fight. eh... to each their own i guess
I wanted to get into Post Scriptum but I got deterred from the game because of the elitist severs. "French only, German only..." like dude...thanks a lot.
It’s a real problem in PS, servers are definitely an issue. NA is good and so is nomads, both are very playable.
Other comparison vids have already mentioned that, my main focus is meat and potatoes.
Elitist? People from France or Germany that host servers and want to use THEIR language is Elitist? Maybe you should learn either French or German.
@@louisavondart9178 Ah yes learn an entire language to play a dead game
You sound yourself like some entitled person. So people who make their own server for people to play in their own language just cause maybe they dont speak your entitled language makes them elitists??
I regreted the day I spent 30$ on HLL, since I already played PS for 400+ hours. HLL is dumbed down boring fps. Played it for 30hours, now I just bought Squad which is amazing.
One thing I hate about PS, are the maps. They feel so liveless. Yes you can enter every building, but they are mostly empty. Imersion gone in an instant.
Don't know on what server (chinese?) you were playing on, but most ppl use mic. You know, if you are playing against a good organized team. You will lose every game.
A lot of things are broken (or annoying) in HLL, but i still love it. Good mix of arcadyness and hardcore. Except the tanks. In that point PS is supperior in every aspect. HLL can learn a lot from PS, but it's also the other way around.
And a game is dead, when you can't play at any time of the day. Lowest point at 30 players with 24h peak at 300. While beeing consistant, this is not very healty. It's more on live support by a dedicated fan base. There must be something, that ppl don't like about PS. Squad is doing well and they are very similar games gameplay wise.
I get what you are saying but the reason PS is dying has nothing to do with the game it self but with the fact that there is not a dev team anymore and while there was they failed to market/show of their game to the public.
Building interiors on PS Market garden maps are quite lifeless i agree, but they are not on other maps that came after release.
nothing can beat post scriptum
except HLL.
I would still prefer Post Scriptum over Hell Let Loose.
Even though the two games have similar gameplay, there are two things that I question the devs:
1. Weapons unlock locked behind level progression
2. The god-awful sound sfx in the game. Explosions, gun sounds etc...
3. This one is from my friend's review. Incorrect weaponry for fronts and time.
Heck, even Battlefield V explosion have more bass and treble than Hell Let Loose.
I feel that the reason HLL has more players is since it’s more flashy in its marketing and simple to play not forgetting it released to consoles so instant boost in players since they’re only other alternatives are vanguard bf5 of enlisted, whilst people are intimidated and driven off with PS since it’s more complex and dynamic
@sterlingarcher3619 it does matter, since when inevitably when those console players turn to pc if they do, they are more inclined to play hll, and i say the most simulator like aspect of PS is the tanks since cqc fights feel somewhat the same it’s just PS allows freedom of moment and choices of attacking, and midrange fights feel slightly different with it being a bit easier in PS in my opinion
Guns in Hell let loose has zero recoil? You have to be joking.
It has some of the easiest gunplay of any shooter I’ve ever tried. There is almost no fat on smgs or lmgs. Be objective. Go play other games and compare recoil.
All the guns in HLL feel like shooting airsoft, not real firearms. Literally, look at 2:50 and tell me that looks like realistic 30-06 recoil lmfao
@@afoxinaviators4105indeed. Their audience is so casual that it doesn’t notice basic issues with gunplay and with weapon recoil. This should be a standard if you want to label your game a milsim, otherwise it’s just arcade shooting. I’ve played a ton of shooters in my life, HLL is by far the easiest gunplay I’ve ever experienced, and that’s because it’s made that way to appeal to a mass audience and bridge a gap between milsim and cod casuals.
You should see the PS Reddit right now, I’m getting brigaded by HLL fans and they can’t retort anything in the video except attack me and PS. They think the hedges being blocks of long walls is intended design and cite outlier instances in ww2 where soldiers complained about thick hedges, except HLL gives them open gaps in the middle of hedge lines and most of the time you can’t vault them because it’s an invisible barrier.
They also claim the game has ballistics, except there’s a dozen “hll ballistics” videos on RUclips showing how messed up bullet drop is.
The juxtaposition between positive RUclips comments saying this is all true and Redditarded where people post for fake upvotes is funny.
I don’t mind people disagreeing I asked for it at the end of the video, except they can’t counter any of this so they just hurl insults. On the other hand we’ve consistently criticized PS for its shortcomings.
@@afoxinaviators4105 he has a machine gun emplacement. he has a bipod placed not to mention he is burst firing holding down the trigger which significantly reduces recoil. get on HLL and use the BAR with a controller, then come back and tell me there is zero recoil. literally watch the G43 in the next clip on post scriptum, the gun moves but his screen doesn't, zero recoil. reminds me of MW2 "recoil". Also the way you spam fire that thing so accurately then proceed to tell me there is "more recoil bro believe me". also 2:19 you going to tell me this is peak realism? in fact you blamed HLL of the same exact thing you are actively doing in PS which is pointing and clicking > I'm not claiming the gameplay is perfect but the gunplay in def not like COD by any stretch of the imagination. and since were on recoil why isn't Post Scriptum's recoil similar to DayZ or ARMA if were trying to hit realism? I'd like to watch you spam a FAL in DayZ and be as effective as you were with that G43. those games actually require skill to handle weapons.
@@corerampage7587 i play both post scriptum and saying that guns in hell let loose has zero recoil is so biased
I regret buying hll. It was hard to decide based on the similar videos that can convey the feeling in the game. At this point id buy PS for 5€.
Anytime man, we'd love to have you.
Feel free to check out my twitch, I just played earlier, It'll give you an idea of how the game plays:
www.twitch.tv/videos/1816848770?t=2h22m2s
The first 10ish rounds in HLL are a really bad. But after that the game opens up.
@@Napswhilewatchin It was the other way around.
Post Scriptum is better is almost every way. The problem is money, HLL still has support and they are still earning money thanks to continuous $3 additions, etc. I really wish Post Scriptum would be supported, I very much enjoyed that sim game better. HLL is nothing but a tit-for-tat balancing act that devolves in to a CoD FPS. The hit boxes are huge, the armor modeling is a joke, and the player kits are NOT accurate in the least bit. But alas... here we are.
One thing I can say without never playing PS in my life. Weapons and how they sound and react looks better than HLL.
In my opinion Hell Let Loose isn't a Milsim. It's a good middle ground for those players that want a more grounded team oriented game but some aspects of the game are super advanced for players coming off battlefield or Call of Duty. Both hell let loose and Post Scriptum are both great games in all.
Videos like this make me feel like I play an entirely different hell let loose then then pc players.
Just the fact that you can run fast in post scriptum makes me happy.
post scriptum all the way for me. matches can become so interesting and it just looks so damn good. to me hell let loose just seems sluggish and trying to navigate the map in that game is a nightmare.
Thanks for the food comparison. The invisible wall thing is a deal breaker for me for sure
mh compare these two games is kinda hard, well done. HLL is fun and i would say its more a game for a typical fps player. PS is a entire genre. Its the tactical combat sim. Operation Flashpoint, Arma, squad etc. And i actually prefer PS. Because it give us this tense firefights.. And your point with the shooting. The satisfaction with a bolt action carabine is second to none. When u aim and the enemy falls in PS it really feels awesome.
post scriptum and squad are barely comparable to the arma series, and the arma series is barely comparable to heavily modded arma, to the extent where i could barely call vanilla arma a milsim either.
@@oracuda We had a training programm, back when i served. It was basecally a mod for Operation Flashpoint later. Arma. Well i guess a mod like this will never get to the free market. Where a country train its real Combat units. All Weapon physics where in it, from the real weapon systems. No country would allow such a mod for public. Well and ofc we used our real weapons, just with a laserpointer instead of bullets. OFC u cant compare especially the old once. Technology wasnt that much developed. A bullet shot from a well done Arma II or III mod, where dirt density, wind rain etc. All the stuff, that have a impact on a flying bullet, have. Old system couldnt calculate that for every flying bullet in any size. Modern systems dont care, because of the incredible amount of multi treats and also physic engines. So that a major part can be calculated from the GPU. This addons for basecally military sims back in the days, where runned by powerfull servers. A destop PC couldnt do it.
Since this is getting a lot of traction, I'm seeing a lot of repeat comments from frustrated HLL players, so I will expand and retort to some of the comments in one place so you can all see it:
1. Noted on console not being able to crossplay with PC, that was a mistake. However, that doesn't remove the fact that in all the HLL I've played + all the streams I watched, inter squad communication was almost non-existent. One of the main criticisms of HLL players who have come over to PS is that they said no one ever talked in their squads. While you may hear command chat, squads don't often talk, and not nearly as much as they do in PS where roughly almost every squad talks except specific times of the day where it might be late in North America. I also noted that in 'public servers' it's not as key as PS because people just run to point anyways (and the game has no tickets which means people don't value their own lives as much where they have to communicate positions while dead and can't even look at the map to tell others where the guy is - which you can do in PS).
2. I made the mistake of using the word 'tracer' (yes I'm aware MGs and snipers have tracers in HLL), when I meant to just say you could see your bullet travel + dust kick up on bullets. This is shown in the Foy clip with the k98, however, youtube tends to compress the videos really poorly and it's hard to make out the dust kicking up. I've read several retorts saying "there is dust kick up", I have dozens of long range clips where I'm shooting with smgs/lmgs and you can't see any dust or bullet travel. Feel free to test this yourself at long distances, you may get it if you hit specific objects such as stone walls here and there - but the detail is so small that its hard to pick out.
3. Ballistics. I've read several retorts saying "there are ballistics and feedback". Again, test this yourself. Take your gun past 200m - 300m and start shooting people, you will have to place your sights up high as if you're using a bow and arrow, and your bullet is "looping" in an arc onto the target. This SHOULD NOT happen. That's a broken ballistics system. You can take the same shot at 300m+ and get varying results. Additionally, your sights are blocking the target, that should NEVER happen. You can watch videos of US military personnel from last year practicing on 500m gun ranges with a variety of ww2 weapons, they can take the same shot at 100m as they can at 500m, their sights are always fixed on the target, and they simply zero for distance (as is available in PS). The fact you have to block your target in order to move your sights up and get varying results on whether you hit a guy means that there aren't proper ballistics, despite what HLL players might believe.
This is another situation where I've shot many people at distance and I hit them, but it took me several adjustments and I had no idea where the bullet feedback was at 250m+ - 300m+. I was simply adjusting based on where they are and then arcing my sights.
4. 'Arcadey gunplay'. I read a retort saying 'well look at the PPSh, it has crazy recoil!', outliers aren't the entire armoury of the game. Please watch videos of the BAR from COD vanguard and then compare it with HLL Bar, they act almost identical in shooting patterns, sound, and recoil. The BAR in PS kicks a lot more the faster you tap it, and on auto it's insane past the first burst. If you try to spam tap the worst the recoil gets. There are several clips there where I'm fast tapping with the stg for example and there is virtually no recoil on the weapon, I can't do that in PS nearly to the same degree. Please use an FG42 in PS and then compare it with the FG42 in HLL, it's night and day.
5. People keep saying I compared 'HLL' to 'CoD WW2'. If you listen carefully, I said gunplay is similar to CoD, not gameplay, the entire last portion is discussing gunplay.
6. People keep pushing on how 'PS is dead' and 'HLL is thriving'. That is irrelevant when discussing the game mechanics. PS modding community took over and the game is alive and well, we have games daily. If people think invisible walls/buildings you can't enter because they're funneling you into gunfire and taking 90 degree angles after 90 degree angles just to try to get to a spot are a good thing, I don't know what to tell you.
7. People get hung up on the 'hedge line' situation. This wasn't done by design, and I can already debunk it. The reason you know this is because many hedges in HLL have gaps to shoot from and your bullets won't go through them, there are also a ton of instances where there are wide open gaps inbetween hedgerows and you can't vault it because it's just an invisible barrier similar to the backyard vaulting situation.
Another thing people keep citing is that infantry couldn't use hedges to fire back, which is just untrue. There were lots of places to climb over and push down brush to shoot from while in concealment in order to return fire. In fact there is a whole video here showing how they were able to do this:
ruclips.net/video/J1dKsmV3fIU/видео.html
There are entire hedges in PS where you can do this across the entire hedge to return fire, whereas in HLL in many hedges you're completely blocked off because it's just a barrier (and in some you can return fire in just very select pockets of the hedge)
Does that mean every hedge was usable? No. There were lots of hedges where they had to funnel to the end of the hedge where MG fire was waiting, that is true. The issue here is that we're still discussing a game, and in every facet of the game you're being forced to funnel toward enemy gunfire without being able to return gunfire properly. This issue is exacerbated when you consider that an MG has tracers and can fire at you at 300m, but because of HLL's shitty ballistics, you can't return fire because you'd have to keep measuring how high your sights are just to arc a bullet onto him.
8. Lastly, if HLL is a great game I'd play it. I don't have allegiance to video games. People are so polarized when they feel their game took a slight. If HLL fixed all these issues, I would play it today and I would still play PS (I'd play both), because then we'd have two wonderful milsim style shooters. Does HLL have good aspects? Of course, but it's severely hurting in areas of gameplay and gunplay.
To be honest, this whole video felt like a hit job on HLL for some reason. We get it, you like Post Scriptum. You and the other 500 people who still play it can keep doing so. To me PS looks like a game that is 15 years old. The UI design is garbage, the map design is garbage, the level design is garbage compared to HLL. I havne't seen one single clip where it feels like actual war in PS, it's usually one guy sitting in a house killing one guy, and it's totally quiet with almost no war sound at all in the backgroumd.
Thanks for the clarification on point #5. The way it was worded made it sound like you were saying HLL (as a whole) was far closer to BF and CoD than PS, which yeah... that definitely ain't true.
Everyone on german servers have a mic, everyone on german servers use it. Yes, HLL is more casual and has a lot more QoL Features like Ping and now actually a non-verbal communication wheel for everyone. They point is... HLL is designed to be way more friendly towards casual and new players and it still has a steep leaning curve.
Both great games but hell let loose is far better. I feel like you haven’t really played the game when you say no recoil on weapons and that you don’t have to communicate to win if the enemy team is communicating and yours isn’t you’ve lost. Both games are available and pretty much everyone who wants to play a Ww2 milsim is on hell let loose hence the bots on ps. I think the winner is clear🏆
@@Wellington-nl7vm To be honest, your whole paragraph felt like a hit job on PS for some reason. We get it, you like Hell Let Loose. You and the other 600 people who still play. To me, Hell Let Loose looks like a game that is for Battlefield players to pretend they are "realism". The UI design is garbage, the map design is garbage, the level design is garbage compared to PS. I Haven't seen one single clip where it feels like actual war in HLL, it's usually one guy running into his death and then respawning ad nauseam, and it's a total clusterfuck with awful sound design
One of the based videos of all time
I like that HLL is simulating front line (can't build garrison in enemy territory)where in S44 there is 360 freedom to build fabs.
one good thing about the 'funnelled' nature of HLL with impassable terrain is that it speeds up games massively compared to PS with games often not running for much more than an hour compared to two to three hours in PS. Also once a team takes the advantageous positions on an objective it is pretty much won which allows the commander to make much more impactful decisions for the game and also create momentum rather than the dispersed firefights and reliance on force buildup that PS creates. In essence HLL has better strategic play and PS has better tactical play, and that is probably why voice chat is much less necessary in HLL because the strategy is always directed and can be learnt for each map.
After playing PS for a loong time, going to HLL feels like cod and kinda frustrating
The big problem with Post Sciptum is that the main target audience for it is the same as Squad and that is a game that simply has more on offer. the slow and methidical gameplay of those games also feels more "right" for a modern conflict compared to WW2 (or WW1, god have mercy on Beyond the Wire).
Beyond the Wire just makes me sad. Such a promising game and no one fucking played it. :'(
Carter The Farter approves this video!
you didn't mention how many active players online this month on Post Scriptum, the steam charts are so low for such a great looking game
Its less mainstream audience game than HLL, these always have smaller population.
Lots of inaccuracies in this comparison, for example the crossplay is only for consoles. Most servers in fact rule that you have to have a mic otherwise you are kicked out. Hedges are used for concealment in HLL. Tracers are there and so is the recoil.
Also HLL runs better and has active devs. ;)
Tanks explosions or others are in Post Scriptum so nice!!!
It’s so satisfying to blow up a tank!❤
Great video and straight FACTS. PS deserves more love.
theres more like 2 or 3 facts with the rest being complete bullshit
@Liam F But that's like, your opinion man.
@@Alex-se3uy HLL not having crossplay isn't my opinion. Be able to counter the "uncounterable" mg placements isn't my opinion. The fact that communication in HLL is in fact critical to winning the game isn't my opinion. I could go on...
@Liam F Go read the video creators comment that he pinned. He addresses it.
@@Alex-se3uy He addresses the crossplay. he doesnt however address the many other disingenious statements made throughout the video. i like both games but this dude is just a PS fanboy going on a rant about why his game is objectively better while being totally biased
Not one positive comment about HLL, sounds like you’re trying to keep people from leaving PS.
This is a clear video wih good comparisons. I think Post Scriptum will demolish HLL when released on PS 5. And the one who figures out that we are waiting for almost 12 years to play a decent Vietnam game. Will be the game champ of that year. And the years to come when the game is rightly build.
i simply think you got filtered. hell let loose was never meant to be on the level of squad, it's alot more casual and that's what you fail to realise in this video. keeping the gunplay simple and arcade-y is why hell let loose flourishes. i can agree with the comment on invisible walls, however i think it has to do with players feeling overwhelmed vertically when in combat. comms are DEFINITELY super important in hell let loose, i think this video might be incredibly biased, and that you should try giving hell let loose a bit more of your time before jumping to conclusions about why it is worse.
I prefer the ping system. A lot more accurate. When some guy goes to the left of the building north there’s 7 buildings north. And I die. With the ping. I know where to hide from or push to. Soooo much better
I prefer not in both games, battlefield should be chaotic and terrain should be observed.
I agree with everything, but i cant handle 38 fps when in the middle of a full server... My CPU struggles, HLL is much better optimised, I can manage small drops bellow 60FPS...
agree post scriptum is beautiful game but it's so poorly optimised :( I still play it on 40-50 fps
It's a shame that PS does not have enough players. I cant find a server where I can learn/play the game...EVER!!
Hell Let Loose basically eaten PS.
HLL has become more casualised in recent updates, still fun to play when you get a good team.
I just got PS but I can see a valid argument for playing both depending on your mood and timeframe
I consider Enlisted better than both.
I thought post scriptum was dead? Never played it but didnt it feature on one of those 'i played dead games' vids
It has only 400 players on an average day. PS may have a dev team but it is a dead game.
3 or 4 full servers whenever I play, so its not an issue joining in and have a good time
Excellent video rampage !!! Shining a wonderful light on a great game!
Good Video Rampage! (Wolfrum)
HLL for every-man-for-himself run 'n' gun. Post Scriptum for realistic tactical milsim teamplay.
I found that people play the same in both games. Run and gun.
@@Tom_Quixote True, you get a few Rambo types in PS sometimes, but mostly they don't stick around long, since it's just not that kind of game.
Unfortunately the numbers says it all. PS died because it wasn't fun. It was a chore . No progression . No competitive scene .The winning formula would be PS weapons and gun play, explosion and tank effects mixed with the HLL game structure, rank and progression framework.
PS didn't die because of any of those things. PS devs disappeared for two years to work on bad projects against the wishes of the community including the Armour Overhaul update which took over a year of development time and did nothing for tank play, and the 4.27 update which hurt optimization badly and caused half the player base to drop because it killed their FPS performance (again despite the wishes of the community).
During these two updates (two years spent), they released just 3 maps (Maginot with armour update, and Foy/Haganeau with 4.27 update). They admitted they knew 4.27 would break the game but were forced to do it by the CEO. They fixed most of it before they left, but there's a few bugs remaining left over, and those people who left think the game is still broken (it isn't, but performance could certainly be better).
Your comment about the competitive scene is also wrong. PS had an amazing competitive scene in the EU with a clan ladder and also an NA clan ladder and really good matches. It only died after 4.27 because a lot of people got hit hard by performance downgrades.
People didn't play PS for progression or achievements - they played it because it was raw ww2 action with great gunplay and a fun gameplay loop. PS had a 5k-7k peak at one point with thousands playing daily, it was a very popular milsim shooter. They just made really bad decisions as a dev team.
We collectively on discord told them exactly what path they should take with the game. They didn't once fix any QoL updates we asked for including making SL better and more accessible, improving MG bipodding, fixing specific bugs (towing for example), and map/content drops. The PS community (unlike many other games) is highly critical and demands a lot from their devs, but the original devs of the game at some point were secretly replaced by people who had zero hours in the game and didn't actually understand the game or what they were doing.
People were tired of playing the same several maps over that two year period and not having a clear roadmap on content (they essentially went dead quiet during the AO update and the 4.27 update and didn't answer anyone in the community).
Either way, we play daily/nightly with full servers and queues, so the game is very much still kicking with a niche player base. There's also word going around they're working on getting new devs.
@@corerampage7587 I pop in every now and then but there's no OCE servers, and the competitive nature was restricted to EU and US. I'm not a PS hater, actually one of my favourite games along with HLL. Will always have the best particle effects of any game.
I used to play on ARR which was the OCE server. I live in Asia, so I ping 200+ to NA/EU, but the netcoding is really good in this game for client side and you really don't feel it. All the top players are from Australia including Madubit and Yedrellow and a few other guys, and they regularly top the scoreboard with anywhere from 200 - 280 ping.
This is Madubit's channel and he makes some amazing/hilarious PS content (plus great gunplay footage):
www.youtube.com/@thepriceisdwight/videos
It's not ideal, and of course the server choice in HLL is much wider, if you want to just quickly pop in and play and get out then HLL makes way more sense in that regard due to overall accessibility, but the deep rewarding experience of PS just trumps it for me to where I'm willing to take a ping hit (which doesn't effect gameplay as you can see by my various videos on this channel).
so that was you that was killing us in that corridor on Haguenau at @4:14. Im Bimmy
haha yep!.. I was in the barracks on the north wing first fighting people then moved down here because I kept seeing you guys moving up from the forest west of the point and funneling into that building
@@corerampage7587 yeah we got a fob just west of point. hahahah there were 5 guys in that building and we all were just screaming cuz the guys u downed wanted me to go revive them, because i think the second guy u downded was actually the commander. i came down and got fucked too
PS is definitely a better game on paper, but it just has so much downtime compared to HLL that I can't bring myself to play it anymore. I started with PS and tried HLL on a whim cause it was on sale. Didn't think I'd care for it as I already loved PS at the time. But slowly I started noticing myself booting up HLL more and more and opening PS less and less. Eventually HLL became my main game. It's just more fun to play, I don't know why.
I will say that the invisible walls in HLL piss me the hell off and I love PS version of Carentan way more. I also like the radio man and squad lead mechanic which kind of forces a little more cohesion in the squad.
PS is painful to play. Everything is wrongly design. Everything is design to annoy the player. Not surprise to see than nobody is playing it.
@@Sombre____ More people play HLL because there are more battlefield children like you who want to play an arcade shooter, not a realistic one. That's fine, go back to Baby let Loose
@@sunkintree Ha yes, the famous "pro" argument coming from PS Fanboys. Sorry for you but i play only tactical shooters. ;)
@@Sombre____ like I said, babies pretending a battlefield clone is realistic
@@sunkintree I was playing Operation Flashpoint cold war crisis. You weren't even born yet. :p