HuDawg
-
Posts
641 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
22
Posts posted by HuDawg
-
-
14 minutes ago, BropolloCreed79 said:
I have proposed many, many times that PvP/PvE status be a toggle for the player, subject to a 30 second cool down once out of combat. To date, nobody has provided an effective rebuttal to this proposal.
1st. It really splits the player base in one game mode. Players who want like the FFA feel of the game are now in game with passive players. Those two types of players IMO should not be in the same lobby. Because in both cases they are taking up in game slots. It would make more sense for dedicated lobbies for each option.
2nd. Passive players can still annoy other players. By shooting animals they are hunting or blowing up fishes where they are fishing for. And now theres NO real way to deal with or punish these players besides leaving the game.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, madfretter said:
I don't agree this is a shooting game though, it is a game that has shooting, but that's not the sole focus.
I don't think it needs to be the sole focus, but it is the games main focus in terms of game play.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, lWoodyl said:
I WAS going to buy the $100 version however... at this point im convinced Rockstar/Take2 care only about asses in seats (aka dollars spent) than the quality of their product.
Get better or be ready to accept your position as the AOL online of console gaming.
Your product is crap.
Single player is worth $100.
Don't care how good or bad RD O turns out.
I got my $100 worth out of Single player. And I can wait to play through it again.
-
4 hours ago, lWoodyl said:
Why is it that for the last 4 days I must go thru multiple rounds of Bow and Arrow or Knife games before I get to a single round of Showdown with weapons.
Lol.. Its almost as if R* designed it that way.
I feel your pain dude. I cannot stand make it count. I've spent an hour one night joining show down, landing in a Make it Count lobby, quitting, joinging a new game and landing in the SAME damn lobby.
I want nothing to do with Battle Royal Modes.. especially in a game with hard locking auto aim.
And then theres MOST WANTED. The ultimate joke PVP mode. Where someone can kill 20 players.. And one person can come in an kill that players once and be tied in scores..
Want to play TEAM pvp modes? R* be like F THAT! 32 players FFA death match. If you want team based PVP you have to wait and hope it comes up later.
Most players would have been happy with just Shoot Outs.. And Team Shoot Outs.
-
6 minutes ago, madfretter said:
That is very true. People are going to pick out the aspect of them game that they like most. Which is what makes this game awesome. R* just needs to make sure all aspects can be played without treading on the others.
That's why this game needs private sessions. Hell it needed it on day one. Including free aim lobbies.
But R* is too busy milking the beta.
15 hours ago, KylesDad7 said:I think that's the problem right there. This isn't an online shooting game. COD is. Far Cry is. Over Watch is. I would classify RDO as more of a Western Sim.
To be fair this is a shooting game.. in an open world wild west setting. This game does have more in common with Far Cry than Over Watch.
Still, when RD O starts. You're a criminal in jail, who gets freed and given weapons to KILL people.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:
If they shot at your friend, you kill them a million times and they never raised a finger to fight back, that's you just being a di*k. At some point there needs to be a line drawn. One that you don't or can't cross.
I disagree. They should parley, leave the area or leave the game. They crossed that imaginary line the moment they opened fire depending one how and when they shot.
2 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:You need a shrink in this case, not gaming where you kill people.
Lol?
Maybe I do need a shrink. This is my brain when I start fighting against griefers..
-
1
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Vaderspupil said:
Make it so that suicide will not stop pursuit from the law and have them ignore anyone who returns fire against the offender.
The game already essentially determines instigator when the players dot turns red as soon as an attack has been initiated.
The game isn't correct in determining whos an instigator. I get RED dots all time.. and a lot of the time they didn't even shoot at me. Including friends who im not possed up with, who all of a sudden are red dots.
Flooding NPCS into the game doesn't really solve anything either way.
-
8 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Why exactly, would you kill another player 50 times for killing your friend once? During those 50 killings, is there at some point that, that you may stop and ask yourself. You know this player hasn't stopped me yet? Just maybe he or she may have learned their lesson? At some point they may have just stopped firing back at you? Just saying, at some point it is you being a di*k. Your point was probably proven 47 killings ago.
I never said they killed my friend. I said they shot at him.
Now.. I will kill that player a MILLIONS and more until they leave the area. If they keep coming back they obviously are not trying to learn a lesson and just want to be a DIE HARD. I don't care if they stop firing back. Im not done till im done..
-
Just now, Born Homicidal said:
calm down there buddy, I'm sure the Auto Aim helps you out 90% of the way, Abilities are the other 10%. There is no getting "better" using that setting. It's quite hilarious actually, i use free aim and wanted to teach this kid a lesson (he follows us from lobby to lobby) i turned auto aim on and was unstoppable 3v1 and they couldn't even get close. until my controller died that is.
auto aim is pathetic and requires no skill what so ever so there is no learning curve at all just aim flick up and shoot.
Meh.. I hate auto aim. But there is skill involved. Also you can always flip on Slippery Bastard or shoot from out of auto aim range.
-
24 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Players who would defend themselves should have accountability if they fight back. It shouldn't be triggered by a Player killing another, it should be the repetition of one player being attacked and killed over and over.
Ok...
So now if someone shoots at my friend.. ONCE. And I decided to jump in and kill that player 50 times.. I get punished?
Clearly these band aid ideas don't really work well in the long run. Again, this is a FFA game. It is what it is.
Private lobbies are the solution to public players not playing how you want. Just as the always have been in FFA games, especially R* games.
-
38 minutes ago, Vaderspupil said:
The lawmen are endless. The player will fall to them eventually. Even if they use the rooftop trick, it keeps them occupied from attacking other players and they'll eventually run out of ammo. As for your other point, they could set it up so that if you are not the instigator, you are allowed to defend yourself without repercussion from the law.
The cops are endless in GTA O. And that doesn't stop anything.
Players kill themselves on purpose to stop cops from spawning in GTA O. And cops attack players who defend themselves. Its an endless cycle of bullsh*t.
Also.. what makes you think R* can code the game to find out whos the instigator? It could be ONE person attacking me, I kill him.. Then his friends start coming at me. So now im blasting them all left and right. Does that mean I need to let his friends shoot me 1st?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Vaderspupil said:
How about this for a solution? You want to kill other players fine, but make it so that doing so triggers the wanted system like killing an NPC. If a witness(player or NPC) sees you killing another player, you are reported to the law. When the law brings you down, you are placed in "jail" effectively locking you out of online play for a set time period, say a couple of minutes. The more you kill before the law gets you, the longer your "jail" time. I think that would be a more realistic punishment for murder.
And what if they kill all the law men?
Problem is this. Even the NPCs can be in the wrong sometimes and instigate a fight with a player, yet the player defending themselves now has to deal with the law.
Just imagine how messed up and backwards it would be in terms of pvp in free roam.
A posse of 4 decide to attack me. I kill them all.. now I have to deal with lawmen too? So now I have to kill players and NPC lawmen.. and for some reason the more I defend myself the more jail time il get?
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Savage_Reaper said:
I find the best way to deal with griefers or whatever, is getting better or having some gunners in your posse. This keeps them accountable. If they attack you and you annihilate them, they will retreat most times. Learn to defend yourself. I remember I use to sherpa groups in the Dz(The Division), and it would drive me nuts when the group got jumped people rather flee than fight. Why not fight back??!! It was part of the game as much as it is in RDRO. Predators always go for the easy meal. I don't want this game to get watered down into a Western Farmville. Private lobbies is the balance, otherwise you kill the essence of Free for All. Many players don't mind being among the wolves and hyenas. For players that don't, Private servers would be your safe haven.
I 100% agree.
Hell last night I spent an hour killing some random griefer while my friends hunted and fished.
At one point I swapped cards and went to my slippery bastard build.. and just kept tying him with a lasso and burning him alive with moltovs. LOL
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Actually, there is plenty that could be done. I have offerred plenty of suggestions to Rockstar. Whether not they do any of them, well we have to wait and see. Good news is it won't affect the PvP players and will affect those who just want to grief. Greatest part is none of the suggestions are private lobby band-aids like they used in the past.
Again.. Private lobbies is not a band aid. The game is designed to be a FFA in public free roam. Band Aids are what you want.
And you have offered nothing that would stop griefing.
Because when you talk about griefing you talk about getting killed by players. Which is pvp. So you want a band aid that prevents pvp from happening in a game where PVP is part of the game design.
Game needs private lobbies. If you want to think of private lobbies as slap in the face or ban aid, that's your choice. Most people will simply see that as a simple solution because that allows you to control who you play with.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Here we go again. Or they could add some sort of accountability for the asshats to bring balance, that doesn't ruin PvP in the Freeroam.
Funny because that's exactly what I think every time I see you going on about trying to control players actions. (Yet offer no real solutions)
Either Bring your own balance and accountability.. Or ask for Private lobbies.
The game is designed to be a FREE FOR ALL. Theres nothing you can do about it without ruining the free for all aspect of the game.
-
The reality is RD O is mean to be a FFA game.
Those that do not want any sort of pvp interactions need to be asking for private lobbies.
-
1
-
-
This game needs invite only/private lobbies. Then players can hunt and fish without being forced into pvp if they don't want to pvp.
Its not more complicated then that really.
Game also needs way more butchers... Every single region should have a few butchers.
-
19 hours ago, Kean_1 said:
No, it's not just you. It's that way for a lot of millenials.
Seems rude behavior, insults and that whole "in your face" attitude are not only tolerated but encouraged in some cases over qualities like good sportsmanship.
I would not say that its encouraged.
I just look at it as.. It is what it is.
19 hours ago, Kean_1 said:As for talking smack to get in people's heads, a little ribbing is one thing but some folks using racial slurs, profanity laced threats, derogatory remarks about yourself or family members, etc. is another in my book. I mute them, report the more extreme cases and block them.
I agree. But for me I never report them.
To me someone yapping to much reminds me of the this annoying little chihuahua at the end of my street. Always yapping and barking, like hes some sort of BIG BAD DOG. When in reality its just a little rodent that I can squish with my boot in seconds.
-
13 minutes ago, Zampen said:
1 - no its always unprovoked
2 - not angry just sad that people cant behave and treat people nice.
Its a shame really but thats the way it is I guess, never used a headset before so i am just a bit shocked over the online climate.
You gotta understand that its a mind game and its not personal.
When you're saying.. "Its sad people can't behave'.
Why is sad? Why does it matter? This is not a kids game.
Maybe its just me.. I was born in the early 80s. I was exposed to plenty of edgy offense stuff through the 80-90's. So im totally desensitized to pretty much everything.
For me.. when people start insulting me it turns into a game. Really, the best way to deal with someone whos trying to insult you is to laugh and mock their insults.. and insult them too in the mix of it. Then they get angry, they start playing stupid and you capitalize on it.
.
-
22 hours ago, Zampen said:
I do not
I also dont tolerate racism, the n word, comments on how my dead mother smells or my fathers genitalias etc.
I would never treat my fellow brothers and sisters that way regardless, anonomys or not.
People who say things like that do so for two reasons.
1.) You pissed them off. So they just start blurting things out to blow off some steam.
2.) They are saying those things to piss you off (trash talk). And obviously if you're the type be easily offended then they win. Now you're angry.. and instead of using your brain you're being controlled by emotions.
So you should learn to tolerate it. Because it doesn't matter what they say..
For me.. I really don't care what people say.
-
1
-
-
On 1/22/2019 at 5:40 PM, Zampen said:
Getting pretty tired of dudes calling my mother this and that, telling me to do.... what the blip is wrong with people ? If this is a sign of things to come then i am doubtful i Will play on,,,, dunno what i am trying to say, just sad and frustrated
Learn to laugh or ignore it..or learn to control who you hear through your headset? Its just sh*t talking.
Not trying to be a prick here. But who cares what someone you have never met, never will meet says..?
I sometimes get people telling me they are going to kill me and my whole family. Which when that happens, I almost die from laughing.
Or my favorite. Im gonna hack you!
-
1 minute ago, YodaMan 3D said:
If your goal is to fix griefing. There no fix if you don't fix griefing. Feel free to take you band-aid and go home.
How does a griefer,... grief you in your own lobby?
You want the band aids.. Evertime you come up the non sensical solution.. Its a "BAND AID". And it also doesn't work..
4 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:So wow, your right give us all lobbies and block everything and screw the PvE players.
If that's how you see.. Then YES!
Even garbage ass Fallout 76 is getting its own PVP severs. Because you can't have both without ONE side (Be it pvp or pve) being all kinds of ****ed up.
Band Aids don't work. Lobbies do.
-
9 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Lobbies equal band-aids. They don't fix.
Lobbies = Fix.
You want the band aid (s)
9 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:Rockstar has stated they want to fix the griefing issue. In the past they never wanted to fix it. They never even tried.
They never tried?
In GTAO. They have wanted levels and cops. Bad Sport lobbies. Insurance.. And Passive mode.
All of that is used against players. And none of that stop griefers.
In GTA O. You can have cops chasing a griefer around. Who if you defend yourself against the griefer, all the cops chasing the griefer stop and shoot the player defending themselves.
Seems to me the only reason you're against private lobbies or friendly lobbies is that you're worried about R* block some content? Well, if the content is pvp related it should be blocked. Ifs it not pvp related it should be playable.
This isn't that complicated. Its far more easier to create separate lobbies than to police all forms of hostile player actions.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Dude, I'm saying the suggestion doesn't need tweaks. What I am saying is some Asshat shouldn't be allowed to run players off because he is an Asshat. If this game gets the same treatment that the GTAO got, it pushes players away. I get it you in all your wisdom assume that is the greatest thing in the world when players stop playing a game.
Players shouldn't be allows to run players off? I disagree.. I can think of many reasons why they should be able too.
Also most players want a private lobby or friendly lobby. The people who stop playing will mostly stop due to lack of private lobbies.. and lack of free aim.
1 hour ago, YodaMan 3D said:My suggestion is there are ways that Rockstar can deal with griefing without telling part of it's playerbase to FU!
None of your suggestion will stop griefing. And giving players private lobbies or friendly type lobbies isn't a FU. Its a solution to a problem.
No amount of band aids will stop players from 'griefing'. Except passive mode.. and passive mode is dumb, so might as well add proper lobbies for players tastes
1 hour ago, YodaMan 3D said:At this point for you and I think in these forums, we should just avoid these conversations. I want a fix. You want a great big Snoopy Band-Aid, which drives players away from the game. .
Actually I want the fix.. You want the band aid.
Because private lobbies does fix griefing. Your band aid ideas don't.
A big snoopy band aid.. lol?
I've yet to see any idea that could stop me from killing someone over and over again. Not one single idea.
Sure they can improve the blips and add lawmen. And that would make it more enjoyable. But it doesn't stop anyone from 'griefing'.
Time for a huge question to be answered.
in Red Dead Online
Posted
Well IMO its not about what you do most.
In Story mode.. How many main story missions involve shooting? You can't progress without killing NPCS.
In Online. Co-op mission is about shooting. PVP game modes obviously about shooting.
Even in races people shoot