Kean_1

"Trigger" of course.

Curious to see what businesses they will offer in RDO. ......assuming they follow a similar model to GTAV:O which I'm almost certain they will. Maybe owning a saloon where you need to source and make deliveries of liquor under threat of attack from the competition, highwaymen, rival gangs, etc.

The news I keep hearing is that the "story" is 60 hours long (not in "total"). If that indeed doesn't include side quests and other related activities, this thing is going to last me a lot longer than that. IIRC, the original RDRs story was cited to be about half the length? .....and that game lasted me a long time with all of the other activities. With games like these, I think it's tough to put a time limit on such things. With talk of RDR2 potentially setting a new benchmark in open world games, it may be even tougher with the added depth of gameplay, decisions, interaction, etc. that this new title is expected to bring to the table. I expect that it will depend greatly on the player.

Well, we know NPCs are going to be a part of your gang in SP and even being able to take direction to some extent in engagements but as far as MP, I'm guessing it will be only yourself and then any live players/friends you decide to team up with. I assume NPCs will be limited to those in the game world we interact with. .....but who knows. My hope though is that there will be more of a focus on cooperative play rather than adversarial. .....at the very least that coop will be encouraged much more in this title. I did hear that you would be able to (in the campaign) select what gang members you wish to bring with you. I don't believe I heard anything about limits although I would imagine that changes for certain missions, etc. In free roam, maybe it's only one or two?

Ahhh.... ok. Thought I remembered it being included in the game but don't recall using it myself. Thanks for the clarifying. ....and yeah, the inclusion worries me too. I also hope it's limited to SP as it would become an option not to use it which is what I prefer. .....but if it's included in MP, it certainly has the potential to become OP as you mention and likely become the meta for PvP.

Yeah, not a fan of the explosive ammo idea in this game. .....or at least the way I think R* might implement it. I hope it's limited to say a particular rifle and the amount you can carry, etc. ....and I really hope this is also only for the campaign and not online. Having said that, explosive ammunition has been used and does exist. .....even in the 19th century. Although not with the effect that I would imagine R* has in store for us and certainly wasn't something most folks would have had access to I would imagine. Didn't RDR have the same thing in a special rifle / DLC?

I wouldn't dream of telling someone to buy Shark Cards. I never have and never will. .....but I would suggest they watch videos that could help show them the more lucrative and effective ways to earn cash in the game. I also play solo in public servers so I totally understand where you're coming from. I rarely stay in populated sessions for very long and never had the desire to grief someone. .....getting revenge on a griefer is a different story. As far as reaching $2 million, I've spent that much simply obtaining some of my businesses in the game and aircraft. The Buzzard was a must-have and at some point I bought a Hydra. As for businesses, the first one was a biker clubhouse and then a couple sub-businesses (e.g. counterfeiting, drugs, etc.). A bunker was next and then a hanger and so on doning VP missions. .....but it wasn't until I became a CEO and bought an office at the Maze Bank bldg when the opportunities to make fast cash started happening. ....bought a garage and started doing car theft missions and then a warehouse to acquire and move special cargo. I usually pop into GTAV:O once in a while and alternate between both of those mission types. I can easily make about $200k-$300k without too much effort. .....much more if I'm more serious about it. My most recent business was a night club which is generating about $25k per day on its own at the moment IIRC without much effort on my part. ....and I can still expand on it to make more. I only wish I would have watched some of those videos I talked about before I bought a lot of the things I did as several of them proved to be either worthless or less lucrative. .....basically a waste of money IMO. I also take advantage of the freebies R* offers usually for just logging into online. IIRC, there is one going on right now where they will give you $1 million if you already pre-ordered RDR2. They had one not too long ago where I got a few hundred grand a day (again, just by logging on) over the course of about a week or so. I think it totaled $2 million or more if you managed to signon each day during that period. I have to say, that I use aircraft whenever possible and it makes traveling between businesses and even doing the missions (where you can use them) so much easier and efficient. I think the Buzzard was one of the most expensive purchases I made early on in the game but had the most value to me.

I knew about it but never did it. ....but I also wasn't too bothered by it (in this game) As far as I was concerned, it made no difference if someone like that got their money from a exploit or acquired their wealth via Shark Cards. The result was the same. .....quick cash that can be spent on things to kill me. I worked harder for it but I still had access to the same things. Hackers on the other hand, I have less tolerance for. At least exploits get exposed and then typically fixed. As far as griefers, they suck no matter how they acquire their money. There are other ways to work the system to get relatively quick cash though (without exploits / cheating). Lots of videos on it.

Very true. The problem with GTAV:O IMO was that it forced players who want to build businesses, do the missions with friends, etc. into a free-for-all environment that quite frankly gave griefers a drastically unfair advantage. Players doing the missions had everything to lose (sometimes 100's of thousands of dollars) while the aggressors risked nothing, could engage with anything they wanted to in their arsenal, could respawn limitlessly, etc. It essentially painted a target on players who simply want to play the game and created a buffet for trolls. I get that some folks like that but I think they can make modes that better suit a PvP play style. HOWEVER, they also should create a mode for players who prefer a more cooperative experience where they don't force those players to have to join public free-for-all session to take advantage of activities, build businesses, perform related missions, etc. At the very least I believe they should make aggression toward other players an act with great risk as to discourage it and (rather) encourage cooperative gameplay.

It's no secret. It's got to do with the playerbase the public sessions attract these days and the fact that GTAV nutty, corrupt, self-indulgent world encourages that kind of behavior. GTAV:O is still wildly successful no matter how you slice it and while some do try to find or create private / small pop sessions (like me), there are still an abundant amount of folks who are in full public sessions. Apparently, there are even some groups that have cropped up that band together on public servers so they can have a grief-free experience while completing tasks. The trick with GTAV:O for folks like us is to play with friends, join friends only sessions or play solo. The problem I have with GTAV:O is that many of the businesses are tied to public sessions. You have to be in one in order to complete those missions. Motorcycle clubs are one of the exceptions. Having said that, heists and such are still co-op experiences where you don't need to subject yourself to the "open" world. I've had plenty of fun when I was with friends and what I hope is that RDR2 doesn't tie such things to public sessions alone. A lot of times these missions are hard enough to without having griefers ruin your day. Trolls have an unfair advantage in GTAV:O against those trying to complete missions who stand to lose everything while the griefer does not. I said it before, but while I have no doubt RDR2 will have griefers of its own, I do hope that the more "serious" nature of the game has led devs to create a gameworld much less friendly to trolls. Either way, it will be nice not to have jets and flying cars flying at you from across the map to ruin your day.

Yeah, I saw an article from late last year where they discussed why they didn't consider DLC for the GTAV campaign. Made sense to me especially what was going on for them at that time. ....PR fluff-talk aside: R* reps have reiterated their passion for the single player experience through RDR2s development so I don't anticipate that changing anytime soon especially in this title. Yeah, the virtual currency MTX model was new in GTAV but to be honest, I actually liked it better than some loot boxes, paywalls and P2W models others have. It can certainly be grindy but at least things are still obtainable through the gameplay. That's not to say I think loot boxes can't be done in a reasonable way especially if that means limiting them to cosmetic items and those things that don't give paying customers an unfair advantage. Maybe they'll choose to do both in RDR2? .....I dunno. Just remember that R* has been watching the industry as well and I'm quite sure they have taken note of the blunders we've all witnessed. Either way, you'll never be able to satisfy everyone and some will vehemently oppose MTXs regardless. We'll just have to wait for the details to be released on RDO to see what the model looks like.

Well, I can't speak for others but I found the characters fun and amusing. The whole GTA game world was based on the ridiculous aspects of modern society and then kicked it up ten notches. I liked Michael and Franklin although I will admit I never felt comfortable with Trevor. ......always kinda weirded me out. :lol:

......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?

Again, we'll have to see how it goes. 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.

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.

😄 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).

I wouldn't say it's invalidated. RDO will only be successful if they can get people to play it. ......and keep them playing it. That's where the money is. The initial cost of the game still gets customers a robust SP campaign so even if online sucks, they should still have something to show for their purchase. R* on the other hand needs RDO to succeed or this whole things could be considered a bust for them. In a way, players deciding not to play RDO is (in essence) voting with their wallets. They need a player base to make their MTX model successful.

Why can't it be both? ....and in an industry when other AAA companies are cutting back or simply eliminating the SP component from their games in favor of more profitable PvP modes, R* continues to find value in bringing the SP experience to their fans. A bad product is a bad product. Continue to create bad products, make bad decisions, go wrong directions, piss of your customers, etc. and I don't care if you have a successful franchise or not, your sales are going to suffer. One only has to look at what some of these mistakes AAA companies have made in recent years and what it nearly cost them. ....consumers still have a voice. Having said that, there are always going to be those who don't like a company's model regardless of how successful it is. Folks also need to realize that the age of "games as a service" has arrived and won't be going away anytime soon. It is the new business model and what is going to make companies thrive as they compete for consumers. Games will continue to evolve to reflect that (particularly PvP). Personally, I don't see any problem with companies using successful business models to make money. As long as I still find value in their products, I will continue to buy them. ....simple as that. It's all a matter of perspective I suppose but I don't see a reason why a game like RDR2 won't turn out to be better for them and us.

Yeah, while other AAA companies have either completely scrapped or cut back on SP elements due to a lack of profitability, R* is still committed to delivering that to their customers. They still believe in the SP experience, the story telling and the immersion it provides. There is a fan base for SP games and R* is one of those who still sees a value in producing that kind of content. R* chose to forego DLC in GTAV, but they also have explained why. Three major factors at the time included improvements to GTA Online (which was in bad shape initially), the porting of GTA V to PS4 / XB1 and the developing Red Dead Redemption II. They also felt that the single player campaign was already quite robust as is . .....and while I would have liked DLC for it, I have to agree that it was a long and satisfying game as is. What it boils down to is that they felt GTAV DLC was simply not "possible or necessary" at the time but they have expressed an interest in offering SP DLC in future games. .....so I think there is a fair chance for RDR2 in that regard. Personally, I also see nothing wrong with online either. Whether I end up playing it is another story and will depend greatly on how it caters to a cooperative playstyle. .....I am definitely not a fan of adversarial gameplay especially in the chaotic form we know in GTAV:O. All I do know is that I will be playing the hell out of the campaign and I have no doubt it will at least provide me with my monies worth. Either way, I believe R* has learned a lot from GTAV/O and I would expect that those lessons have been applied to RDR2/RDO. .....in a positive way.

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:

Yeah, I would rather work for my in-game money too and if the gameplay is entertaining enough (with enough activities, missions, side quests, etc.), I don't mind. Personally, I like the virtual currency model over loot boxes / crates but Take Two has already said that future MTX opportunities may not include virtual currency. They also came out in defense of loot boxes during the controversy. ....so yeah, I can see them possibly adding them in RDR2 or some mixture of both. We'll just have to see how it goes. What I do know is that these guys are not stupid and they know that all eyes are on them right now. .....a bad decision with RDR2 could really put a dent in their upward momentum. Some folks are always going to be against MTXs but the the fact is they are here to stay. There are companies that simply do it better than others in the eye of the consumer as you mentioned in your example. However, I have confidence that R* has put a lot of thought in regard to the potential impact of such choices in RDO. .....but we'll just have to see how it all shakes out I suppose.

I still remember one of my earlier experiences in an open session with a room full of randoms.... I saw a couple players in trouble with the law (in a firefight) so I decided to drop in and offer them a lift out. One of the players promptly pulled me out of the pilot's seat, his buddy hopped in and they took off. ......luckily it was a Chinook so I had time to break out my launcher and take them out. They respawned, killed me and then I returned the favor once again. ......same old story everyone has heard before. That was the last time I actively engaged in any PvP action in that game. I played solo almost exclusively from that time forward.

Yeah.... The Charger was my first and I still have it. I've had many offers for it over the years but I never sold it. It's currently behind a fence on the side of my house with a car cover so no one ever sees it now (sort of an RV/trailer parking area). I also have my Dads '86 4Runner he bought brand new. .....that's still in decent shape and all original too. Here's a pic from just a year or so ago:

Good question..... What was the GTAV campaign with all the side missions and such? I felt that was well worth the money. I figure with what we know about the game world size, activities and such of RDR2, it will likely be even longer than that. Some additional replayability would be nice though.

Now that I think about it, I should mention that in GTAV:O that I have used an exploit of sorts on my PS4 that allows me to join public, free roam sessions alone or with very few other randoms so I can do business missions in relative peace. I simply change my connection settings so the game places me in my own session. Sometimes a few others may be placed in the same session but most times they are there for the same reason I am and may even offer to help each other. Again, not an exploit that I use in a competitive PvP scenario but thought I should mention it nonetheless.