Kean_1

Well, I don;t know if you heard but R* had already acknowledged that griefing was a major complaint they have been receiving as feedback and will be implementing new, "anti-griefing" measures after the holidays (next year). I suspect things will really begin to ramp up as the new year begins.

.....but what's good enough for you isn't what others are necessarily looking for, right? That's why I advocate for more options. Personally, I think Free Roam can still exist as an "open engagement" environment with the right balance to satisfy those who want this kind of mode but don't necessarily like the grief-biased state it's currently in. .....and with the implementation of private sessions, you can still have that PvE experience you're looking for. R* already recognizes that people are tired of the griefing and are willing to take action so that's good news in my book. ......but like I said, in the end the mode is what it is by design. That is R*'s vision for Free Roam and I just don't see them changing that unless something drastic happens in the community. .....and yeah, I rarely hear folks on mic but I do see them respond to me when I speak (e.g. showing intention, appreciation, warning, etc.). It does make it harder to communicate which is why I likely will play most sessions in private if that ever becomes an option. More options mean more opportunities for players to find the kind of gameplay that better suits their particular kind of playstyle.

Just witnessed it myself a few days ago. Tried looking online to see if anyone has provided any details on how it's accomplished. .....no luck. I'm just going to report it and hope others are doing the same. I heard someone mention that it may be tied into stranger missions and takes more than one and a posse to make it happen. While I think the mechanic is likely tied into it, I'm not so sure his answer was the solution.

I hope so. You have to remember though, this is a beta. They are not going to include all of the features at this point that they plan to eventually release. I'll wager they have many of these components ready to go already but just waiting to iron out the foundation first. We'll just have to wait until after the holidays to see what's in store. I'm sure these past couple weeks have been reserved for stress testing.

The point of Free Roam is that there is the addition of risk. The possibility that that a fellow player may not be so friendly. I know what R* is going for. ......a more organic experience. What they need to do is add balance, incentives and consequences IMO. ....and then more session options for those not wishing to engage in skirmishes with others. Public notifications of events, invites, etc. can still come across into invite-only sessions like they do in GTA. I'm also not against a passive mode which it sounds like you are suggesting but it all depends on how it is implemented. What makes me curious is what R* meant by "seamless PvE" in the code that was discovered back in October (along with news about private sessions). I meant those players who actually enjoy the additional risk and potential that others players may turn against you or the freedom to engage other players who are taunting, inconsiderate, tracking, etc. Like it or not, some folks actually enjoy the doubt and risk Free Roam provides in player interactions but simply aren't happy with the current gameplay balance. .....e.g. lack of consequences or risk to roving aggressors. Personally, I've had some cool, tense encounters where I simply didn't know if a player was ready to draw on me. With some, I was faster but in others, not so much. Then there are those times when we're able to diffuse the situation and move on. ......or others that end up being very friendly. They weren't all situations where either of us necessarily had ill intent but simply no established trust. .....btw, my reply was in response to what I thought was an over the top penalty to a random killing. In the end, Free Roam is a PvP mode with a mix of PvE and right, wrong or indifferent, that is by design. I just prefer Free Roam to be balanced but still retain an organic feel. I like the tension, risk and freedom to be honest. If Free Roam were as penalizing as what was suggested in the response I replied to, I would remain in private sessions if given the choice.

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.

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.

I've been blocking high level players when I come across them as I simply don't wish to be in sessions with those who may obviously be using exploits, etc. and are fully kitted. They are also more prone to grief-like behavior I have noticed (perhaps due to boredom since there really isn't much else to achieve). Anyhow, on PSN when you block someone you see their profile. What's funny is that many of these higher level players I have noticed list Chinese as their language. ......hmmmmm.

Passive mode can still work. It doesn't need to be a carbon copy of GTAVO. For instance (just spitballing' here), they can change the rules for when you're able to activate it. Perhaps they can limit the option so it can only be activated/deactivated while in camp or your own property (once those are introduced). If you are a victim, maybe instead of a parley feature, give players the option to spawn back at their camp/property where they can then activate passive mode if they wish. Maybe make it a one time session option where if you want to change it, you need to join a different server. As for not being able to hunt or engage NPC's while in passive mode, there is already a friendly fire option in Posses. Simply make it apply to all human players if you have passive mode enabled. Secondary explosions and such would need to be sorted though but at least it might be a way to provide relief. I'm not sayin passive mode is a great idea but simply offering ideas on how it might still be able to work if they decide to implement it. Personally, I still think incentives and consequences are the answer for Free Roam but nothing will completely eliminate griefing except new session options.

Anti-social? Invite only (or "private" sessions) are simply options where you let in those who you want to let in. Nothing "anti-social" about that except that some would rather not be dumped into a game with a bunch of randoms. Those of us who prefer to play only with certain people of our choosing are not unsociable at all. .......we're simply selective as most are in real life as they typically choose who they want to socialize with. As far as Free Roam, several of us have said repeatedly that it must change regardless to address the griefing issue and R* has already said they recognize that. Personally, I am not advocating invite-only options as a solution for those PvE'ers who still want to enjoy Free Roam with less trolling. No one is trying to force anyone to be removed from the masses but it seems some are hell bent on depriving those of us who would rather play with just friends the option to do so. ......more options, not less. When RDR2 was first announced, my friends and I were dying for news that the main campaign would include some kind of co-op. I knew it wasn't likely but then I held out hope for private sessions in RDO. .....and we still do. Even when (or if) they are implemented, I will probably still hop into Free Roam depending on how they address the troll issue, missions, heists and (more importantly) how many of my friends are available to play at that specific time. .....but many times I just want to hang out with just "us" or especially when I am alone I would rather have the option to do that in my own session when I like. While not my cup of tea, some people like to "role play" and invite-only sessions would be a perfect way for them to vet players. ......which is what this whole private session argument is about. Providing the ability for people to vet players in their own sessions. ......that's all. 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.

There's nothing wrong with invite-only sessions IMO. Some of us just want to play with friends (co-op) or do things alone against NPCs. I much rather do that most times than deal with random idiots online. If I want to participate in PvP events, there any many other activities available. Free Roam can still have missions and activities as well. They can simply be made more lucrative for players given the increased risk of being targeted by idiots or rival players during some events. .....think incentives. Unique events can be limited to Free Roam as well. GTAVO already offers a solo and private session experience. It only makes sense that they offer something similar in RDO. .....and given some of the details revealed by data miners back in October, it appears as if they are already planning to to just that which is fine by me. Either way, something still needs to be done about the carte blanche griefers enjoy currently in RDO. Guess we'll have to see what exactly that is in the coming days. Quite frankly, I'm tired of having to constantly monitor other players to avoid them when I'm playing solo or without the protection of 2-3 friends. I mean, what's the point in being forced into Free Roam as a PvE player when most people avoid one another except for those that wish to do you harm?

I don't know if it really helps or not but I've been blocking every one I encounter or observe (sometimes entire posses). Some say PSN won't throw you in sessions with players you block.

I don't buy into that to be honest. RDO is already infested with griefers and those who will now fire on sight simply to protect themselves as a result. .....can't blame the latter really. Invite-only lobbies should be offered as an option to those of us who wish to explore the world / activities with friends or alone. Free Roam can still be relevant by retaining missions, heists, etc. (certain activities) within it that only can be played there. GTAVO already does this. ......or perhaps make missions / tasks available in both but more profitable in Free Roam Either way, there are things they can do in Free Roam to help mitigate the issue of griefing which they already are going to do. .....to what an extent or if it will actually have an impact, we'll just have to wait and see. There needs to be some accountability for those actions because as it stands, there really is none. Regardless, I don't believe RDO will ever be a troll-fest on the level of GTAVO.

Personally, I don't care to dissect trolls as I simply block them and move on (whether that's in the game or in the forums). I don't care to understand how they think what they value, etc. It's a wasted effort IMO. In GTA you could still run heists without dealing with trolls but business missions were another story. In all honesty, I would use the MTU setting to force myself into a public session by myself or a friend so I could run my CEO / VP businesses in peace. I really hope RDO doesn't follow the same path and lock most of the businesses / activities behind Free Roam. ......at least not without addressing the freedom from consequences trolls currently have in this game. I'm just glad R* has listened and will be implementing anti-griefing measures in RDO after the holiday. ......or should I say cautiously optimistic. I never liked their particular model for blending PvE with PvP but perhaps they can strike a balance in this game that works.

The difference between the RDO beta and some others is that RDO is actually a work in progress. Of course they will have more content, activities and options in the future. It makes sense that they would stress test before implementing more of these components. Once we are through the holidays I suspect we will begin seeing more updates rolling out and perhaps in rapid succession. I suspect they have components of the game already ready to go for the most part and are simply waiting for the right time to release, test, etc.

I wouldn't think you would lose items that are unlocked with gold. If so, that presents a problem since that means items that are possibly bought with money would be lost and a player would have to purchase them again. @Makoki I would send a message to R* through their support page and ask them specifically what happens to items that you have bought with gold and in turn real money when you create a new character. Personally, I think it should retain those items in your inventory when you create the new one (clothing, etc.) if it is not already. Either way, probably best to wait after the beta or the option Poggy mentioned to change your character's features. In GTA you can do this for a fee. I would imagine RDO will eventually have the same option.

I've been messaged before through PSN for stuff like this in GTA. I just send a report to Sony and block them.

Well, that bit of news was revealed back in October by dataminers along with possible vehicles (wagons) and properties. Some of this information came from what they found in the app.

Once I think I'm done buying the guns I want and upgrading their performance, I think I'll start doing the cosmetic thing too.

The separation of currency that can be purchased with real money is likely a move (in part) to avoid issues in the event they implement mechanics like gambling, etc. in the future. ....at least that's my guess as to one reason they went this route in RDO instead of what they did in GTA.

Merry Christmas folks

Fancy

Just because someone doesn't enjoy or understand online PvE / co-op gameplay, doesn't make it less legitimate. I never found the campaign boring and I definitely don't find things like invite-only, online sessions boring either. There is also much more to the RDO gameworld than just hunting, fishing and exploring. The NPCs are also a big part of it. A lot of times my mates and I simply want to get in a game and play missions, raid gang hideouts, experience ambushes, terrorize the locals, defend against posses, etc. without being bothered by randoms or especially trolls. That's not to say that I also would enjoy the Free Roam mode but as mentioned, something has to be done in the anti-griefing department and apparently it will after the holidays. In the meantime, both my friends and I have been pretty successful at mitigating our exposure to griefers.

Yeah, no worries. A bit harsh on the criticism although I'll admit the thought of seeing a squirrel on meth might be the funniest thing I would ever see in my life.

I'm old too. .....still think I have my C64 in one of my closets somewhere. Couple things though... RDO was never pay to win. There were some items like the insurance for some horses only being available for gold but that changed after the first week. The weapons and such were never locked behind the MTX system. When the store went live, I believe it was after that anyhow so it's really a moot point. It's not a rip off because there is no requirement to buy them. I provided a couple good examples of why they might release the gold bar system now and sure, it has to do with having the system in place ready to make money even at this early stage. Just because there is a lack of content at the moment doesn't mean squat IMO. It simply means less people may not be interested in purchasing MTXs so it only behooves the company to get more gameplay content out there to get more people playing and spark interest in buying Gold Bars. RDR2 is a GaaS model just like GTAVO. Personally, R* creates one of the better ones out there IMO because weapons and such are not locked behind paywalls. .....and R* made it point to reiterate that any items locked behind Gold Bars will be cosmetic only. Plus, players can still earn gold in game without buying it. Yeah it's a grind to do so, but it's at least possible. .....and then R* also throws in freebies from time to time just like they do in GTA. Like it or not, the MTX system is an integral part of the whole GaaS model and it makes sense (to me) why they would want to make sure it is in place and working now rather than later. ......but beyond all that, if someone doesn't like it, they simply don't have to buy into it. I guess I just don't see the dilemma here. More regular content and updates are coming after the holidays (if not sooner) as R* already stated.