YodaMan 3D
-
Posts
1,094 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by YodaMan 3D
-
-
14 hours ago, VampireKrush said:
I know some people would have but I have heard more backlash than praise. Most praises went to GTA Online.
I knew more players preferred the campaign, and disliked the online stuff. Then again I knew more then a few that followed the YouTubers and admitted to me that they used hacks to stay competitive. Honest players burned out quick and the cheats I was comfortable with playing with.
When you got players saying that the fool the servers into putting them into more or less their own private server, you got to ask how good the online really was when players avoid actually playing it to it's fullest.
-
3 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:
......but my point is that R* has proven that they are dedicated to the SP experience by delivering good, well developed campaigns. If there is one thing I have no reservations about with RDR2 is that the SP experience will be no different in that respect. I'm not sure why your judging R* on a move that others are making in the industry? I also don't like that campaigns are being cut short or otherwise simply eliminated in favor of PvP. CoD and BF are just some examples. EA obviously miscalculated just how much of an impact it would have when they forego a campaign in Battlefront. .....leading them to add it back in Battlefront II.
As far as R* cutting DLC for GTAV, I don't believe that was anything that was ever announced by them but instead assumptions. I'm not saying they didn't discuss it but I honestly never heard anything officially announced from R* that it was in development. Personally, I would have probably like some additional content for the campaign but to be honest, I rarely buy DLCs. ....but I can understand the disappointment from someone if that is something they really value.
RDO is obviously a crap shoot at the moment as to how it will work. RDR2 will be in beta in November. .....and yeah, we don't have exact dates yet but personally, I'm likely to still be neck deep in the campaign still. I'll wager we should know the exact release for the RDO beta sometime this month. Perhaps they are waiting to make sure the main game goes off without a hitch before setting that date?
I not saying they haven't delivered in the past, but the industry is changing and not sure if Rockstar will continue to do what they do now or follow the rest. They didn't used to have micro-transactions or sharkcards, but GTA got them. What will be there next be change?
The never announced the release of the extended DLCs for the campaign, they did announce in an article they got cut for the sake of online stuff, that was where they thought the money was. To a point they was right, on the other hand, that told me that there could have been more story, which I enjoyed more then the online stuff. Will they now shorten the campaign for the thought extending online stuff.
Now all of this is hypothetical on my part and have no reason to believe they have changed like everyone else, but I have watched the industry as it has been changing and watching everyone, even Rockstar made changes for the sake of money.
-
Speaking of slow cooker meals. Has anyone here tried Beer Brats in a slow cooker?
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:
Ubi was one big disappointment after another for me. I gave up the AC franchise a couple titles after Black Flag. FC5 put a nail in the FC series as far as I'm concerned. While I enjoyed the Division to an extent, it still wasn't the game they said it would be during development. .....and I'm doubtful I will buy the Division 2. I did enjoy GRW especially the co-op. ...PvP was a bust and a departure from what made the core game fun IMO. I never had an interest in For Honor nor Siege. Ubi has quickly become one of those developers I don;t trust to make a game they say they are going to make or one that will meet my expectations.
R* on the other hand hasn't made a title I've played that has disappointed me. ....personally.
I'm puzzled that you would consider GTAV as merely a tutorial for their online component. ...or am I misunderstanding? That campaign was very robust from my own experience and one of the longer lasting ones compared to others. It was a full SP experience. RDR was too and I'm sure RDR2 will be even more so.
IMO, it has been their actions that have provided me with the trust I have now that they will deliver a great product in RDR2. I can't say I have agreed with everything they have done (to my own personal taste) but I've always felt their games I've played were well worth the money I paid.
My concern that companies are pushing to get players to get to the online gameplay with micro-transactions that the SP campaigns will become nothing more then a tutorial to get you there. I saying that GTA5 was not entertaining, but when you discover that they had DLCs in the wing and cut them, so they could focus to the online stuff. Well, I become skeptical of what will happen down the road, they are delaying RDR2 online till November, but does that mean Nov 1st or Nov 30th. How soon before they see $$$$, knowing players will spend.
I'm not interested in dwelling on the negative to be honest. I'd rather be hopeful RDO will turn out for the better but I'm realistic about it too.
You don't haven't dwell on the negative, all I am suggesting is don't go in blind either. Good things, heck great things could happen with RDR2 and RDR2 Online. Then again they could be worse. I say be prepared for both.
-
59 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:
😄
Well, one big difference that sticks out for me is that there won't be aircraft roaming the skies, tanks, flying cars or in this case, flying horses. No rocket launchers, homing missiles, grenade launchers, etc. Transportation in RDR2 will be on horseback, via train and perhaps fast travel points. The game world in RDR2 is also allegedly much bigger than GTAV perhaps giving folks even more room to breath.
Ultimately we have to see how it shakes out but this is what I mean by "less chaotic".
......and if the info we heard before was true about the radar being proximity based in RDR2, folks won't be visible to everyone (only those nearby).
The did crazy things in GTA, doesn't mean they can't be creative in RDR2. Just cause it limits the range doesn't mean it will limit the griefing.
-
9 minutes ago, VampireKrush said:
The thing about that too is that not everyone enjoyed the story or the characters. It had a low "repeat play" value. A lot of people didn't bother even finishing it. I think they realized it was just better to focus all their efforts with online at the point.
I don't know about players liking the characters. I personally would have liked the extensions.
-
2 hours ago, Kean_1 said:
This is the only way I play PvP games is with friends. ......again, preferring co-op scenarios instead. It was unfortunate that at the time I was playing GTAV:O, I didn't have any PSN friends that were into the game so it was mostly a solo affair with me. RDR2 is a bit different as I have 3 really good friends who are excited about it and those I have also met here in the forums.
Of course Take Two and Rockstar are interested in revenue but I believe they tend to make a quality product. Also, just because a company makes a lot of money with successful titles doesn't mean their staff is bereft of passion for what they do.
The fact is that R* has been doing something right otherwise they would not have enjoyed the success they have While some other companies continue to make mistakes in their decisions and direction, I feel R* have shown a degree of wisdom in their judgments in this business.
Regardless of how I or some others may feel, you can't argue that R* has enjoyed an extraordinary level of success thus far. .....and unless they really screw something up with RDR2, I can only see that trend continuing into the future. .....but I simply cannot fathom R* / Take Two making such a blunder as to damage that reputation given their track record. If we were talking about a company like Ubisoft, I wouldn't have nearly as much confidence. ....little at all in fact.
My only hope is that R* does focus more on cooperative gameplay in their PvP this time around. Given the drastic differences in settings, I have a feeling PvP gameplay will at least be less chaotic than GTAV:O is.
EDIT: I never realized that you were limited to the amount of reactions you can give to posts in a day. I went to click on a couple here and got the message that I can't. :LOL:
2 game manufacturers that I supported since forever was Ubisoft and Rockstar. Until the Division happened, talking with players in different forums over the past 3 years. I noticed a trend in what many players seemed to want in a game and developers adapted to impress those players. When often spoke against those changes saying that they must focus on their entire player base, not just a few but the whole. I usually found myself standing alone defending a dinosaur age.
Rockstar will adapt to what they think the players want. GTA5 got shafted, not because they didn't think it needed anymore. They scrubbed the extra DLCs for no other reason then profit margin. If GTA5 is their model for RDR2, then they will scrub any plans for the fast buck. Not saying they can't do both, but when their SP modes are nothing but a tutorial for the online game. They don't care for their player base, just a few and not the whole. I wish for the best, but really not trusting them on their words alone, but their actions too.
-
14 minutes ago, BropolloCreed79 said:
I try not to worry about things I can't control. If R* wants to heavily monetize the online component, there's not much we can do to stop them. The entire concept of "Vote with your wallet" is invalidated here with the online portion not launching until a month or more after the game itself drops in a few weeks (which I'm getting more and more excited for).
I try to pay attention to the things that I can't control, cause you never know when those things may come back to bite you in the backside. I also don't dwell on them too much either. Sometimes life just gives you lemons, the alcoholic drink you make from it just shows your creativity.
Once I became a father, I am more concerned by the actions of others and how it may affect his future.
-
1
-
-
In RDR, when John ran into all of his old friends, they had separated and went to new places. If and when you control the gang are you going to follow in the footsteps and make your mark on where your friends may set up. Head for Dutch's camp into the mountains, Fort Mercer, settle down in Beechers Hope, or head for Mexico? Or are you going to head in your own direction to see if their is better place to hang your hat?
-
13 hours ago, Aimesleje said:
That's my point. R* literally designed online to be a GRIND. It was never meant to be a rewarding experience of building a criminal empire from scratch. It was intentionally created to frustrate teenagers into buying shark cards. And luxury items like yachts (which you said yourself have no utility outside of "bragging rights") were placed into the game to make teenagers jealous of each other to the point of buying shark cards to get to the level of their in game friends.
R* utilizes the same type of predatory practices that Facebook does. It creates social imbalances where people feel the need to compete. In the same way people on social media NEED people to press the like button on their photos, GTAO players (especially young teenage ones) feel the NEED to own luxury items in the game (especially when their buddies own apartments and full garages and a collection of yachts). And they'll shell out $20+ a month of their parents money to buy a couple mill a year in the game.
You said it yourself, you needed get rich quick tutorials to help you make money in the game. You couldn't have done it intuitively by just playing missions and having fun. I'm also guessing (I may be wrong) that it wasn't all pleasant. A lot of your wealth building in game was a tireless grind. Not enjoyable or rewarding in the same way buying a shark card gives you instant gratification.
When playing online, it was about playing a game with friends. I suggest you set that as your goal. I see no reason with the success financially that GTA did online that Rockstar would handle RDR2 any different. Though they claimed they will treat both game very different, there is no reason for them not to follow the same model in their designs for money.
I read once that Rockstar has had enough success over the years that unlike other companies, they don't make games just to make money, they don't to payback their fans by continuing to make the games their fans like to play out of loyalty, now to do that they have to make money. Industry has changed and so the one they make money to support their games have changed. Last but not least, don't lie to ourselves, they are doing it strictly for the money.
-
13 hours ago, VampireKrush said:
They are going to model everything off GTAO and do it better this time around so I have no worries.
When you say do it better, do you mean for them or us? Cause game industries seem to be heading in the wrong direction when they say they are heading in the right direction nowadays. Not saying games haven't improved overtime, but their constant need to need more money to keep each game going for longer then 24 hours, seems a bit much.
-
2 hours ago, debbo89 said:
Reading through this as someone who doesn’t play online, I am interested to hear from others what makes online gaming such a draw to people? Some of the comments on this thread sum up the exact reason I don’t play online. Paying money or cheating just to stay competitive, getting robbed by people you were just trying to help, people that are 100 levels above you blowing you up with their super weapons and gadgets. I honestly don’t see what's fun about that.
Some of us like the interaction with other players, a chance to tests ourselves against others. Sometimes its running with others in co-op to make us better, while for others it's about facing others that make you better.
Some just can't handle social interaction, they feel that to impress you. They have to be the best. Like their GT will be legendary so some day you will tell your kids about the one time that you played against a player that whooped you 1 million times. For them it's fun, they don't care about being competitive, they only care about the winning. In these day and times, winning is everything and losing just bites.
-
12 hours ago, LinXX said:
I don't know if I agree with it entirely but she has a very unique way of looking at the world and she always makes me think things over so it is fun to talk about stuff like this with her.
Try looking at this way, the Egyptians have hieroglyphics that show a superior race, in translations supposedly they call them gods. What if they was real, just not from this planet. That would make them aliens to us.
So to one set of humans they saw them from a perspective of them one thing and you and I being raised in a different time, may see them if the showed up as something else. Not saying they are real, I have no real proof either way. It would be a matter of perspective based on ones' personal knowledge. Right or wrong.
-
26 minutes ago, Truth said:
Sounds harmless enough, honestly. I'm a low level and broke, so naturally people like to f*ck with me in GTA... It's rare that I can do much without some rich douchebag flying over in his stupid f*cking delorean to blow me up... I don't see how that's a fair fight to begin with, so something like that sounds totally reasonable.
Edit: Clearly I'm a little salty...
I have had that with players flying over in jets and bombing my son and I. Those same players will probably brag to their friends about what a loser you are and how great they are at PvP. lol
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:
Yeah, it's certainly a grind no doubt.
I do hope the RDO economy isn't as out of whack as GTAV:Os. I also hope it is geared more toward cooperative gameplay rather than the wildly toxic PvP while in the open world.
I am sure in will be similar economy, out of whack. I hope it is more cooperative gameplay, but that isn't the way the game industry has been heading. The market seems to support the toxic behavior in open world environment. I hope not but I have a bad feeling in my gut closer we get to November.
-
I agree with you guys and that is why I stopped playing games with the guy. It just seems odd that some players so easily cross the line rather then do the right thing.
-
I was talking with a friend from my friends' list and he was telling me that he can't remember the last time he has played a game that he hasn't used a cheat, glitch, or hack intentionally just to stay competitive, mostly a PvP player. I understand and don't need a confession here if you use them. Just curious how many feel it is ok to use a cheat, glitch, or hack if others are doing it in the game just so you can keep up?
-
1
-
-
Earning $20 million isn't easy in GTA:O from level one. It was easier in the beginning then it is now in my opinion, but I say that because a 1st level guy doesn't stand a chance against players that have been playing for years. Shark Cards can help, but they don't necessarily make you a good player. Youtube, which I am not a fan of does show players easier ways to earn money, many that exploit glitches and hacks. RDR2:O will have those as well, I suppose.
We are hyped and have been so for almost a decade. Rockstar has been better then most companies, but they also gave away a lot of free updates. Not everyone who played paid for those, they came from shark card users for GTA:O and RDR2:O will have similar upgrades. It isn't all their fault either, it is those who abuse the system. Regardless of cost.
I agree with you. I am going in trying to look for the bad things till Rockstar shows me that there is no bad stuff. Meanwhile the abusers will still be there abusing cause they can.
-
If I remember correctly, my son and I started playing once. He really wanted to play so we waited forever for a server, finally got in and about 2 mins in we find each other and then we got a message about not enough players and got booted out, never could get back in.
-
15 hours ago, LinXX said:
I believe in aliens. Not because I have valid proof but because I can't help but feel like there is life that exists elsewhere in the giant universe. My one friend always says that if you want to be technical if you believe in God, angels, demons, ect. you also have to believe in aliens because by definition, they are not from or of this world.
Valid point and pending on one's perspective they maybe the same thing.
-
@Truth I got stuck on the island chasing after the dragon guy and some how got too much loot and can't seem to sell it fast enough. My favorite sidekick is stuck on the mainland because at the time it wouldn't let you bring them on the boat ride. So I eventually just called it.
-
1 minute ago, BropolloCreed79 said:
We're at opposite ends of the spectrum on The Division but I see your point. For me, it wasn't on my radar at all until Baby Bro turned me onto it, almost a year after it had been released--so for me, there was no buildup, no crushing disappointment, I only paid about $30 for the game used, and another $20 for the Season Pass to get all the content at that point, and I felt like it was a good value.
I learned my lesson with Ubisoft soon after, though, with For Honor which was a total Sierra Show on launch day and for the first three months or so. I ditched that game and vowed to never buy another Ubisoft game at launch again (and immediately broke that promise when they announced The Division 2). That's why I understand the frustration of so many Day 1 TD players. Ubisoft completely craps the bed on their big releases--just look at what happened to Ghost Recon: Wildlands.The same thing happened with Friday the 13th: The Game, just on a smaller scale: developers over-promised and under delivered (although calling it "under delivering" is an understatement, right @Truth, @Cokeyskunk, @Freddie Mercury, @TheHansonGoons?), and with a property so beloved, on a game with so much potential, the total Sierra Show that game became makes The Division look like a damn tickle fight.
Two things, I own Friday the 13th and could never find anyone on to play the game with ever.
The second thing is TD2 was started within a few weeks of release of TD because they learned everything they needed to from TD to make TD2. TD is almost 3 years old and keeps getting worse with each new update and keeps ignoring all suggestions by the players still playing. Yet they learned all that they needed from a few weeks of release on how to make the new game better. I wish you luck, but I won't be buying. I already played the beta and the Ubi staff is awkward when dealing with issues.
-
15 hours ago, LinXX said:
I see this kind of stuff more so with the 14 to 24 age range. Most older gamers, guys and gals, don't act like this or react these ways.
Regardless of age, nowadays no guy should act that way. Trying to raise a son in this world where I tell him to be respectful regardless of your differences and then have others do the exact opposite. I have tried to explain they are showing him "what not to do".
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Cokeyskunk said:
I disagree. We've also seen several videos including gameplay which have been phenomenal.
That's like judging a book by several very riveting excerpts from different chapters. Which is a far sight better than by just looking at the cover.
The best argument I can give is the Division, they showed gameplay at E3 and at release, we didn't get that, we never got it. I agree that things could get shady and get shady fast. Last thing we need to do is get over-hyped before the game gets released, regardless of who else may have played it and said it is great. That person wasn't me, so it's hard for me to believe their critiques. Soon though, I will be playing and have my day, as well as the rest of you will as well.
-
1
-
Once I became a father, I am more concerned by the actions of others and how it may affect his future.
Question about cameos.
in Red Dead Redemption 2
Posted
I know for months we have asked who would be returning from RDR, but what about cameos from the RDRevolver game? Though I don't expect the characters to make a huge intro, but it should be about the same time period. Do you think we will get easter eggs and see those characters in the back ground?