YodaMan 3D
-
Posts
1,094 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by YodaMan 3D
-
-
3 minutes ago, The Coca-Cola Kid said:
1) Auto Aim is easier, so if you use it and claim your the best, I can see how someone might question your logic, especially with no "official" metric in which to measure players against other players.
2) Those of you who are saying people who use auto-aim suck, not all of us think we are awesome because of computer assisted kills, myself included.
3) Not everyone has the time or desire to put in the time to master video game shooting skills.
Thanks.
I personally was joking. There is a competition for some in online gaming. I personally suggest having fun should be your priority. So what, take longer to get from point A to Point B. Did you have fun doing it? Did you run with friends or do it solo? Do you have a story to tell that would make us laugh, when we compare stories?
My gaming skills aren't what they used to be and after playing a game with my son this weekend and watching him in action. I rolled my eyes a lot, picked him up off the ground a lot, but we had fun but had different techniques. I also had to set there and listen to him explain my playstyle went out with the dinosaurs,
Through all that, I smiled, I laughed. I let him have his fun. Then I reminded him I was still his father and told him to respect his elders or get grounded. We went on and had a happy new year with a lot less toxicity.
-
If released to xbox, it will be after the game is out of the Beta. That is suppose to be sometime in January. So I would expect it may be an option in Feb at the earliest.
-
I have the initial tutorial, but the freeroam seemed available after just a few missions. You may not have went far enough yet, but should be close.
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, STLSnuffy said:
Some players did not own the 360 game. The settings were private session (no pink the world is yours) Hard Core (all allowed all voluntary, troll against toll. Normal (You take your chances). Friendly free roam (Can't kill other players, they liked to shoot horse!) + Mexico, miss that one. If it was done before, why not now, all get a game they like?
I don't know exactly is coming, but yeah I missed those options as well. Unfortunately, I don't remember private sessions back then and many don't want to share the map with other PvE players. So though, the PvE vs PvP servers would fix everything in my opinion. It really comes down to how does Rockstar appease the masses, without breaking the bank and losing their profit.
-
I have tried to relate the names of my horse to cars some how. I have a thoroughbred. There is a is a car dealership nearby call Thoroughbred Ford. So my horse's name Ford and yes he has been Found On the Road Dead a few times.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Starry said:
Yet the same could be said for the players who can't aim without Auto aim 🤣
Yes, that would be correct. Everyone sucks at the game. If you auto-aim, you suck. If you free aim you suck. Great there goes our self-esteem out the window. Thanks Everyone.
-
1
-
-
On 12/11/2018 at 8:54 AM, HuDawg said:
Diving doesn't make you immune to being shot.
Diving does break auto aim lock ons..Are you saying auto aim is realistic?
The fact that you think using diving to break auto aim lock ons is an exploit is kind of funny tho.
Cause history has shown from those times, the real cowboys was known for playing rolly polly and then jump up and shoot your opponent in the head. We all understand that is just a game, but the weird ideas of should break the lock of auto aim and what shouldn't. I personally would think diving into cover should work. It doesn't though, rolling on the ground does.
-
18 hours ago, GMak81 said:
Should people be allowed to ruthlessly rob and kill NPCs and PCs? Clearly, yes, because all of these GTA/RDR games are focused on those themes. Should there be a penalty system built in to the game mechanics, like the bounty system...yes, because that happened in real life and is present in the single player.
I don't think we should confuse people's play styles with their real world personalities: an actor plays a role; a player does the same. The character that they play is not the person playing it!
See I disagree, people in real life have a tendency to play close to their heart. I can't say it isn't possible to play out of your comfort zone, but in reality are sure that isn't a nod to your ability control said traits.
I have participated in RP games majority of my life and seen lots of strange characters and their players. When I started playing online and open chat was available. Listening to what some of the players was saying. Let's just say, you don't just walk down the street saying those things to people.
Yes, they're are some that RP and I have seen them in RDR2. Majority of players aren't RPing. They're releasing stress from their lives. Players grief cause there is nothing in place to stop them. They apparently have no self-control to stop themselves. They get off on driving other players from the server, lobby, or game. Contrary to what some may think, Rockstar doesn't want to lose players regardless if the game mechanics stop you or not when it comes to griefing.
-
2
-
-
29 minutes ago, Euphoric77 said:
There are no ability cards that make you invincible.... These people are simply using an exploit. I finished all tier 3 ability cards yesterday and it just gives me higher damage output and a bit of defense boost. This ghosting needs to be dealt with by Rockstar, but I don't see this changing soon, there are worse things that need attention like the horse bonding reset and the terrible servers which do not allow you to craft over 40 items without having to sit there for 30 minutes.
It maybe a glitch and I am making an assumption that they wasn't the ones who discovered the combination. I agree the whole ghosting thing is a issue. I also think if there is a glitch or exploit can seem to make players semi-invincible. That to is a problem. As for how Rockstar prioritizes these issues. I don't know when or if they will be fixed. We need to remember they are trying to get this out of the Beta testing. Some of these issues may take a backseat or sweeped under the rug till then.
-
I took him to the camp. Saved the game and went on to finish the story, saving several times doing that. Long story short, at some point you can't access that camp and he was gone. Horses I had in the stable are still there, but not the one from camp.
-
13 hours ago, RorshachFromHell said:
Not sure if this was "Ghosting" but my girlfriend and i were out hunting, as usual 1 lonely pink dot cant help themselves and blast 2 hunters waving to a passer by..
Well at that point i'm no griefer but i will give it back if i get attacked first which usually is just getting a few kills to make a point then mosey on down the road to keep hunting.
but this day forgot the dudes name he just kept coming at us after we killed him 2-3 times and then ran off he chased us on foot/horse across the map to try and kill us.
So again we fought back and pushed him away for a few minutes.. again he comes back this time we decide to play not so serious and just take some pump actions out and pew pew.
At this stage i thought ok 2 shots make 3 with a shotgun have to be dead for sure..
This guy took 5-6 shots from both of us and never went down. turned around and killed us with 1 pistol round each. i know i'm horrible with a controller just switching from PC to console when red dead came out. but come on point blank 2 people ..
i thought it may have been lag or a latency problem but he kept coming back and then just poofed off to a diff lobby.
anyone have this issue?
That may have something to do with the ability cards. Some players that I have played with have been talking at a certain level and you upgrade your cards right, you are almost invincible and can deal some real damage. The crazy part is this player started out letting you kill them and then comes back with a invincible chip on his shoulder.
-
Has anyone heard if this is going to get dealt with in some upcoming update. Still see it on occasions, but not as often as I was.
-
Get a group and foot race from St. Denis to Tumbleweed and back. Must stay on the road, no shortcuts.
-
I like do to listen to them talk about how they are going to kill me, while they are being so sneaky and try to ambush me. It has been a crapshoot though. Not that many really use it.
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:
They simply couldn't make it that extreme. You would piss off PvPers and quite honestly, it wouldn't be fair to those who want to engage in skirmishes with other players. It would literally force a PvE environment which is not what everyone wants in Free Roam. May as well force no damage between players.
The trick is to create a balance of risk and reward. ......incentives and consequences. As it is, griefers are given carte blanche in the game.
It shouldn't piss off any real PvPers, them attacking players that have no or zero interests in being griefed. Now it would probably piss off the Griefers, who would be forced into playing PvP. Which Griefers rarely want, they don't want to be sheep, when they can be wolves. This weekend was in a posse, that was getting griefed. Our leader extended a challenge. The other party ignored it. They didn't want to have a 7v7 battle royale.
1 minute ago, madfretter said:That would work. I really like the camp only option to turn it off or on. Problem is, as always, R* wants us to be constantly murdered so it slows down the rate we earn money and buy gold.
You are right, their are some who believe without PvP, players face no challenge. What they don't get is, some players do experience a challenge in PvE. Some players try to do missions where the run solo or fewer then recommended. Thing is there are plenty of ways to limit players without attacking their progression rate. Especially when your dream is to get them to PvP.
-
3 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:
I agree..... GTAVO's system of locking the most lucrative and arguably the most fun businesses behind public sessions wasn't my favorite design either. I was one of those players who used the MTU settings to force myself into sessions where I was mostly alone. Sometimes you would have a few others join but what's funny is that they were usually doing the same thing for the same reason. .....to avoid griefers. I've actually had some good encounters with folks in those sessions. If the session began to fill up, I would simply create a new one. Doesn't work in RDO unfortunately.
I'd still love to have interactions with others in RDO but without incentives to encourage cooperative gameplay or consequences to discourage random murder, I'll stick to private sessions when or if they are implemented. .....but like you, I really don't want it exactly like GTAVO for the reasons mentioned.
Personally, I was glad to see that R* actually allowed solo players to engage in stranger missions. They give you a warning that playing with a posse will increase your chances but at least they don't prevent you from trying alone. That could be a good sign.
Curious to see what "anti-griefing" measures they have in store though.
See I am a co-op guy. I like the interaction with others without have to necessarily join their group. In the Division, I used to take my healer build into the DZ, a PvEvP arena, and run and heal downed players. Most of the time I got killed for my efforts, other times I would hear them in chat ask why the heal I didn't kill them and take their loot. I did it cause i enjoyed doing it and then I went on to do my own thing.
Unlike most griefers, my fun level doesn't and shouldn't depend on me ruining the fun of others. If I can help, I usually do. If I don't want to, then I will move on and that player won't be wiser.
To me it is lazy for Devs who don't want to create new stuff, just make it player vs griefer.
-
43 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:
I don't want to see PvE'ers forced into private sessions but on the other hand, we also don't want to be forced into a PvP environment if we don't want to be. People can say what they will about GTAVO but I think they were right in offering solo and friends-only sessions.
Or they could have offered PvE and PvEvP modes, they didn't instead forced players would wanted to do certain jobs to do so in a public arena. So players learned to glitch the system so that they could do their thing without the Trolls. Private sessions are fine, but if given the option, I would rather encounter others in the game in a PvE mode, instead of being reduced to only the easiest of jobs and have to go into PvEvP mode for the best money.
-
1
-
-
Would love to know what those negative unforseen consequences are? Cause they did it with the original and it worked. Most of your griefers back then still did their thing on the PvP server leaving the PvE players to have fun without them.
-
1
-
-
Spoiler
After the completion of the game.......
A) How does Ross tie the money to Marston? Only witnesses, are Dutch, Charles, Sadie, and John, everyone else died. You see Ross talking to people but none of them would know how Marston got the money. Honestly, I went and did a butch of side missions, some of those was treasure hunting. Not sure why I even needed a loan at that point, should have been able to by Beechers Hope out right. Shoot I had almost 20k by then.
B) I know some of the gang got happy endings, but with the passion that Ross used to capture or kill the remaining members of the gang. What really happened to the remaining gang members? Yeah, Sadie was a bounty hunter, Charles headed north, Tilly got married. Why not hunt them down too?
-
Spoiler
I took Buell back to camp and tied him to a hitching post. As i moved on in the game where Arthur dies and you take over as John. Buell was gone. I actually had 2 horses at camp and lost both of them plus my staple that I used for almost the whole campaign, when Arthur died.
I lost Buell, I guess I should have taken him to the stables and left him.
-
18 minutes ago, Poggy said:
More content - reduce boredom griefing
Choice to spawn in camp - reduce repeat killing
More butchers/doctors trappers - reduce butcher grief camping
No pelt loss from death - remove the sense of frustration from being killed
People who shoot/kill PCs/horses get highlighted as hostiles on map - allow people to avoid griefers easily
Remove pink dots from map, except for those marked hostile, on missions, or those near stores - obvious benefits
Parley system to apply to whole posse - obvious benefits
Safe zones, like churches and sheriffs offces - give people more chance to hide from griefers
Increase number and AI of NPC lawmen spawn in towns when responding to player v player violence
Hostile mark and bounty reward for repeat offenders (if your posse has killed three or more players recently) for X mins
Nice ideas, but doesn't really stop griefers. It may delay them, but it doesn't stop them. If you want to stop griefing, then you have to make the price for do so incredibly insane that no wants to do it. You need to convince these same players that they can have the same kind of fun engaging players, who want to engage into PvP. The PvP and PvEvP players don't mind actual PvP when it happens. Griefers need lambs, those players that they know they can beat and do so repeatedly.
My experiences this last weekend, where griefers seem to focus on players that they could kill easily, but tried to run from those who could kill them or get numbers in their favor to the point that they knew players would rather quit then play the game. It really blows my mind the amount of players that seem to get off on trying to agro a player so much that they won't play the game and consider that a good thing.
-
1
-
-
You used to be able to see people selling accounts on Ebay, but I haven't seen or heard of players playing for you. You give them your account access, who knows what they can do.
-
14 hours ago, Poggy said:
I think there's better solutions than separate servers, at least ones to try first.
Like what? What we currently have isn't really working. I won't play the old passive mode where I can't shoot a guy cause he went into passive mode and soon as I go by, poof! He came out of it and shoots me in the back. Piss poor idea right there. Private servers? Guess what, that isn't any different then PvE only servers, except you choose who you let and in. Great for the Anti-social, but we shouldn't have to be removed completely from other players. The original game had it right and it worked beautifully. GTA showed all the ways to do it wrong and supported griefing to the max. We really don't need that.
-
4 minutes ago, Poggy said:
Yeah, it's a difficult balance. At the moment I favour non--separate lobby solutions, but that may change.
Well, I don't want like in GTA where a player can switch back and forth in PvE vs PvP mode and shoot me in the back then switch back so I can't touch him. I say separate them, leave this one as is for those who like it and give one for those who want strictly non griefing PvE.
Griefing: Wasn't thinking about different methods.
in Red Dead Online
Posted · Edited by YodaMan 3D
Don't confuse interfered with and interact with? I play online to interact with others, sometimes as an opponent and sometimes as a friend. No one wants to play a game to have players grief them by shooting them in the back and have them run off or change servers when they can't handle it.
Last but not least, if all your players have to look forward to is griefing others, then the game isn't all that good.