Renascent
-
Posts
306 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Renascent
-
-
The silver turkoman was too tempting to pass up when I reached the rank. I was 15 short so I got the $20 deal after that offer and bought a new outfit with the extra. I haven't bought any since. But like someone else said, to be fair the game has given me tons of playtime and I've made a lot of friends so I don't mind giving some dollars here and there.
-
14 minutes ago, Savage_Reaper said:
The Level 10 player with starter cards is weak argument. Sorry. We all were Level 1 at some point. I didn't start online day 1 like a lot of people. I was a few weeks behind. Did anyone hold my hand ? No . If I couldn't take the heat, I would have left online.
Bottom line is that everyone wants the game to be designed to suit them and their playstyle. Their own personal version of RDRO Utopia. Do I like bitch made griefers? No . I also don't have an entitled attitude thinking R* needs to cater the game just for me.
To be fair I feel that players 1-10 should be matched into sessions with each other. Like kind of a training mode so they aren't completely blown away by someone rank 50+. But it could work all around. Like ranks 20-30 and so on could be matched together in a session. Kind of like a loose initial grouping.
-
35 minutes ago, BropolloCreed79 said:
Good enough for me. And I appreciate the level of engagement and courtesy in the discussion overall; this forum has a good thing going, and it's folks like yourself who can engage in a spirited debate without making things personal that keep this place both intellectually stimulating and entertaining.
Pleasantries aside, let's delve into this a bit more:
There is if a player's "toggle" status isn't publicly available. If the player isn't flagged at all, I would think the surprise element is intensified, rather than abated, because you will have no idea what their intentions are. Not having the status flagged or tagged for others maintains the element of surprise, so you won't know who will or won't attack you. But self-toggling is almost a way to troll a troll, because they can run up on your and try to attack, only to be met with futility. In a way, it's almost a perfect system and solution, because it ostensibly maintains the current status quo unless your aim is to attack random players for no reason other than to grief. As it stands now, literally every player is a threat, so if you're looking to mitigate the chances for a confrontation, all you have to do is avoid anyone and everyone.
Hell, that's what I do now in Free Roam--I open my map and look to where the most open sector of the map is, and then fast travel there to do Stranger Missions. When I want to PvP, I play Gun Rush. Or rather, I try to play Gun Rush, only making it out of the lobby and into the match about one time out of every 8-10 attempts. R* needs to fix their game, beta or not, the experience is lacking specifically due to the frequent disconnects.
But only if you yourself are flagged for PvP. Operating under the assumption that everyone is a threat, much as they potentially are today in the current compulsory PvP Free Roam mode, you constantly treat everyone as a threat. If a player's status isn't public information, a PvP player is then forced to continue to treat everyone as a threat. A quick toggle from PvE to PvP isn't a legitimate argument against implementing the system if the status isn't identified by the game, and only known to the individual player.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that your scenario occurs; a PvE player approaches a PvP player, toggles, and then attacks. What sin has been committed? If the PvP player didn't want to be attacked, they should have been flagged as PvE. If the PvE player toggles and attacks, under the proposed model, they'd be unable to toggle back for thirty seconds once exiting combat. 30 seconds is more than enough time to respawn and attempt to avenge yourself. Under the current map model, your killer is tagged as an aggressor and stays on your minimap as long as they're in a relative proximity to you. Keeping that system in place allows the recently slain and respawned PvP player to seek retribution. Tie combat status to that proximity marker for aggressor status, and a player seeking revenge has more than enough opportunity to pursue vengeance.
A lot of folks maintain that they love "having to watch their backs" or that they don't want R* to dilute the current experience. That logic is flawed because folks who are playing the game for it's RPG elements and leveling a character will play a Showdown Series or Gun Rush when they want to PvP--they don't actively seek out other players to indiscriminately ambush or murder. Giving PvE folks the ability to toggle off PvP status (that isn't broadcast to the rest of the players) changes nothing for anyone else on the server unless they're trying to murder that player or troll the PvE players. The "noble" PvP players who want a pure PvP experience lose nothing because those PvE players don't participate in the activity anyways. On a 32 player Free Roam server, what are the odds that a PvP player is going to be pitted against more than half a PvE population?
I suppose if you're worried about being outnumbered by PvE players on a server, there can be quotas for entry based on what you're toggled at when you last logged out, such as no more than half the slots in a server can be pre-toggled to PvE, but more than half can be PvP. This seems reasonable in assuring the PvP experience isn't watered down, apart from trolls, while providing a PvE experience for those who need it.
And if the servers fail to populate appropriately, it's just emblematic of the player population's desire for a more PvE than PvP overall, but I doubt that would happen. But if it did, R* could easily change the quota.
I'd change the time it takes to switch modes to like 5 mins. It's very easy to run away and wait out that 30s. But you got a point there though.
I guess it would work for those that like to shoot people just to shoot them. But I'm a noble pvper, I will never shoot someone in the back or if they've given me no reason to. And even then if I want to fight I am 50% of the time killing my own friends for fun (not maliciously). Not every pvper is the trigger happy kind. You got the ones like me who want a fair fight. Yeah I could go to one of the pvp modes, but often I like creating my own. Like I and some friends made a capture the flag pvp thing by which group can keep the train the longest. That was hella fun for me.
On the other hand I'd suggest making the towns themselves like safe zones unless a mission is going (much like your camp doesn't protect you while you're on a mission). That would give people a little more peace of mind. I am dying to see how this bounty system will play out. Maybe some want to roleplay as an outlaw and try to evade capture/death. Others might want to take up a bounty as a mission and take out that person if they can.
-
3
-
-
25 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Technically, it isn't FFA if all you have in it is PvP. It would be battle royale. You would be playing a different type of Fortnite. PvE elements are only there to draw in PvE players in PvEvP game. For players who don't feel PvE players should be involved, then shouldn't require a PvE elements. Which leaves PvP only.
Pve elements are there to make money not just draw in the pvers. How do you think the pvpers get their guns? By magic?
-
10 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
You are wrong. Plain and simple. If it was just FFA. There wouldn't be any PvE in the game. You wouldn't have need for fishing, hunting, NPC interactions. All you need is a great big PvP Battle Royale. They put PvE stuff into the game, therefore PvEvP exists. It makes to a 2 sided debate, not a closed minded one.
Wouldn't FFA technically include pve and not just pvp? It's everything, not just one thing.
-
2 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Why exactly can't there be true balance? Why is it ok as is, as long as it is the PvE side that get shafted? I am not making the assumption that all PvP players are bad. I am not making the assumption that all PvP won't engage in actual PvP. I have witnessed personally, players that will go out of their way to attack players that are hunting or fishing solo to the point those players will quit. Why do you assume that is ok to run players out of the game? You act as if batting an eyelash and a few kind words and all players are going to be friends skipping through the tulips. Not every PvP player is a stand up person. Some players are just asses, whether PvP or PvE.
I'm not saying that it's okay. But I'm my time of playing pvp heavy games, there is never true balance. One side or the other is always going to be unhappy. Then when the developer tries to please it sometimes ends up ruining the essence of the game.
Yeah some players are assholes, just like in real life. Take a breath and move on and forget about it. You seem to be holding on to every toxic experience.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
I have had bad experiences, but they aren't all the time. I know I haven't had it as bad as some. I have had those situations where I have been out doing my thing and had others nearby and we not just start attack one another. We aren't jumping to conclusions that all players are bad. Yet when players in PvEvP assume that they have to have a shoot 1st mentality, they no longer can say they enjoy that anything can happen. They eliminated that when they shot 1st. The whole "Surprise element of what will they do?" Is no longer there, they die or they shoot back.
As far as griefing goes, it isn't just attacking a player once. It's the non-stop attacking till they quit playing or no reason then they aren't in PvP with you mentality. If some posse and they do this pretty regular, where they have a 4+ man posse rolls up on a lone player. Can you tell me what is going to happen? In our little "anything can happen scenerio?" They attack, he dies , they attack again, he dies, rinse and repeat. What doesn't happen is them roll up and everyone hugs and kisses and ignores each other.
In some of these scenarios, I have asked why? Those few times players actually responded. "It was because, they was big bad PvP players that doesn't allow any one to get in their way". Now prey tell, there was PvP going on in the nearby town that they road around to get to me.
I experience more toxicity from unknown others then I do surprising free gifts. That is my experiences and I don't jump to the conclusion that it is only that way for everyone. Some players don't see the same things as others. They don't have the same experiences as everyone else.
If someone is killing you multiple times then hop sessions. You have nothing to lose from that. Or try making them work for their kill by being good at running (personally love a good chase. can't grief me if you can't catch me).
And honestly a whole posse rolling up on a loner and them not killing that person has happened more times than you think, at least in my experience. I know it's hella scary having like 4-7 people surrounding you though. Or idk if you've seen that YouTube video where like 10 swam up on a guy fishing and just casually walked out of the water.
Only thing I can really say is just take it with a grain of salt. I usually don't get upset when someone kills me and I definitely don't let them do it multiple times. I have no problem with moving.
-
You know damn well that there's never gonna be true balance. One side or the other will get upset. You are making the assumption that everyone that pvps want kill people who are minding their business. And yet that is how you view things. I have seen differently. I've even become friends with those that have killed me or that my posse and I have been at war with.
-
11 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
Can you answer me this, what element of surprise is there in RDO? You see player, you assume all players bad, and you shoot all players? Guess what, there is no surprise element. In arenas like this, we as players 99% of the time assume that everyone else is there to attack. It removes our need for PvE from the equation. It becomes a battle royale, with participates who don't want to be involved. When you bully someone into doing what you want and blame them for it being their fault for not wanting to play the game the way you want. You are more likely to push those players away from PvP. You and I shouldn't demand another player to play our way if they have not intent to. Griefers generally have every intent of pushing those players out of the game. Griefers generally have zero interests in actual PvP. Much like griefing in PvE scenerios, they for them to have fun it comes down to how much fun is ruined for others.
I'm not sure if you've just had a really terrible experience playing rdr. But no not everyone assumes everyone else is bad. I've had many instances where I've run alongside someone or by or chilled with people without immediately getting shot. I ran beside someone once, think I startled them but I didn't have my gun out and we just kept going. A bit later he found me and gave me several fish. I guess for not being a trigger happy idiot like so many are.
The "surprise" element is what will this person do? What are their intentions. I have a video of me and posse being in the middle of a mission/gun fight and some random guy comes and puts a fish on my horse. He almost got shot, but I told my people to stand down.
You and a lot of people like to jump to conclusions. Oh someone is nearby, they must be bad, someone is shooting at me, they must be a griefer. I look at it and ask myself why or I've gone into game chat and asked why lol. Some have apologized and left me alone. Others weren't so nice and I either messed them up or I just moved on. I pick my battles wisely.
-
19 hours ago, BropolloCreed79 said:
There's a difference between marketing a game as authentically pvp, and saying there's pve gameplay, but then not providing it.
And you can disparage PvE players all you want, but the fact of the matter is, RDRO is being branded and marketed as a Western themed MMO. Not everyone who enjoys a PvE experience is "crying to water things down", as you put it. That's an elitist attitude, one born of an intentional blindness to altruism. You and many others have repeatedly disparaged those seeking a PvE experience, clamoring for things to "not be watered down". Perhaps you could provide a detailed explanation of what you desire/expect from the free roam experience. Is it nothing but chaos? The thrill of having to "watch your back"? Or is it simply that you enjoy having the opprotunity to prey upon lower level characters or team up to harass solo players? Not judging, I'd just like to have a clearer understanding of what your specific expectations and desires are for RDRO, because at the moment, R* has completely misrepresented what the experience was going to be to a large (perhaps half) of the potential player base.
The current game caters exclusively to PvP players. Every single non-Free Roam game mode is a PvP mode. Free Roam itself is a PvP mode. There are literally no dedicated PvE elements, apart from isolated group missions, in the current Free Roam experience. 95% of the online content is geared towards PvP gameplay, so demanding things not be "watered down" is arguing in favor of maintaining a strict PvP status for the entirety of the experience, aside from a few isolated missions. Or would like to be able to betray your teammates during those missions as well?
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. Players who like the surprise element of Free Roam game play literally lose nothing. PvP players can leave their toggle active and do whatever they please to other PvP flagged players. PvE players can hunt and fish, or do missions in peace, without being shot in the back of the head exiting a cutscene before they can even orient themselves. The only "loser" in this scenario is the troll/griefer who enjoys preying upon lower level or solo characters with a pack of cohorts.
So, to summarize:
First off I'm not naturally into pvp. I used to be one of the pvers back in the day. I was so bad at pvp people that would get matched with me in pvp group modes would leave or kill themselves to get away from me lol. But at some point I decided to get better, and that's where my love of pvp began. It's an acquired taste for me. I expect rdr to be a wild west, keyword wild. There's no surprise element in toggle pvp when you know exactly who is gonna attack you. Then you'll have those people who will use the passive mode to get close to you then go into pvp mode and kill you.
No I am not a griefer or bully. Hell, I yell at my friends and posse members all the time about killing people who aren't doing anything to us. I like having to determine who's friendly and who's hostile. I like looking over my shoulder. I like that challenge. I do however advocate for private lobbies. It's worked in other games I've played.
I'm rank 99 now and I've gone through hell and back to get here. It feels good because I busted my ass to get this far. Also there is a way to hunt and do pve stuff with friends without being attacked. Not sure if they will ever patch it over, but for the time being it's a bandaid for everyone having trouble doing pve.
(I'm at work so I may not have touched on everything you asked for)
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, BropolloCreed79 said:
Thou shalt not disparage thine life-force sustaining refreshment. May The Dew of the Mountain flow forth freely that thine people may drink of it and have their extreme thirst be quenched. May their energy be replenished, and their vigor restored.
That has not been my experience.
Looking at The Division, skilled PvP players looking for a challenge tend to play Last Stand, the dedicated PvP mode. Trolls and griefers play in The Dark Zone, actively looking for easy prey, often hunting in packs against solo or unorganized players. Once PvE players no longer had to venture into the DZ to obtain gated loot, the PvE population in the DZ dwindled, and now, it's literally packs of Rogue Agents looking for solo players, and griping about "how much it sucks" now that there's nobody to kill.
RDRO is NOT a "PvEvP" environment. It's straight up PvP. PvEvP infers that the PvE crowd has an option or a choice, but there is NO choice, no dedicated PvE mode. The entire game is built to PvP gameplay, and that's fine, but R* should not market the game as having something for everyone to lure PvE players or folks looking for a western-themed RPG into what is essentially a reskin of GTA Online.
Well I'm also looking at games across PS4 and PC. I've played a lot of them and the games that are marketed for everyone but are very pvp heavy tend to hold up pretty well despite the pvers crying to water things down.
-
I played an mmo built around pvp. It ran strong for a long time, the only reason why it's in decline is due to the company being greedy and them focusing on their other games. There will always no matter what developers do, be a huge clash between pvpers and pvers. People always think that "oh once the pvers are gone what will the griefers/pvpers have left?" There's always gonna be someone to kill.
-
2 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:
I believe Rockstar can code, they made this game right? Thing is they left things out, then need dealt with. All they got to do is come up a with a plan that actually fix it.
Rockstar has a plan, but is it a good one.....? ;).............
-
3 minutes ago, 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.
Sure does help me, because I can't see very well (shittastic eyesight when people are moving faster than a walk/trot), so more often than not I can miss while someone is right in front of my face if they are dancing from side to side fast enough. And there definitely is getting better. Faster response time, using the terrain, not just relying on a gun (for them hidey people), being able to work well with others, or being able to hold your own while outnumbered. It isn't about JUST point and shoot.
-
It kinda just spread from one joining one posse. Their friends would join and I would get to know them and then their friends would join up and so on. Then the randoms I sometimes meet that are cool and it just keeps growing from there. Met a dude last night that was a friend of a friend, now we're friends.
I mean I get the irl thing. I work long hours and often on call for my job. so I only have like 8-10 hours out of a weekday that I can play (assuming I don't have anything else to do for the day). So that right there limits who I can play with. But as of right now (it's 11am), there's about 3-4 people online. At peak hours, there's as many as 20-22. Sucks you aren't on PS4, come join the ever growing family of weirdos I've found.
-
3 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. 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.
That's what I'm saying. People just wanna sit here and complain and not try to do anything about but want the game to completely change because they too weak or bad. I got my ass handed to me when I first started out. But I learned, adapted, got better, ranked up hard. Now I dare a mofo to roll up on me and try something.
Like if you aren't that great in pvp then posse up, network. Or get better at running out avoiding stuff.
-
1
-
-
I usually lone wolf when not enough of my friends are on or they doing that story mission farming thing. I've always been capable of going alone and I do like it cuz I don't have to watch anyone but myself and I die less or get dragged into unnecessary situations when alone. Plus I like to hunt with just a bow and lasso, makes it more fun but sometimes takes more time and most people are impatient.
Just network well and I have a good 30+ people to run with when I choose to log at all hours. I've had some good belly hurtin laughs with the people I play with.
-
1
-
-
I'm mainly a PC mmo person so I never really had this happen to me much. There's been a few instances that as soon as a dude realizes I'm a woman he either starts following me around harassing me by hog-tying or trying to get on my horse (I've set it to friends only now) or just straight up killing me. Or when I've killed someone and realize it then they instantly start talking smack about my lady bits or something like they even know anything. And maybe a coincidence, but almost every time a war breaks out with my posse it's cuz some person shot me while I'm standing in the middle of the group. Like, why me???
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Force58 said:
Online would be better with more things to do, more missions, etc.
Honestly if it weren't for the fact I run with several posses (about some 25-30 people altogether), it would be starting to become boring by now. But even solo, I don't get bored very easily. I mean I played The Forest on the PC for 3 months straight alone, everyday. And there isn't much to do in that game other than build aside from the lightly put together storyline.
Hell, yesterday myself and some friends were chasing each other around St Denis. Then banded together when some randoms rolled up on us. Dealt with them then back at each other. Then I decided to follow this random guy around doing the crab walk (go first person and crouch, looks creepy af). But then I guess he got nervous and was about to shoot me and I ran away. Then kept meleeing him when he was trying to shoot me still until he left.
-
Myself and another friend almost got shot down by some guy until he heard our voices (both of us women). Then he came over and started showing off and talking about how much money he has in game and irl lol.
But for real I don't even bother with in game chat unless someone looks like they trying to get my attention. I'm usually in party chat anyway so I can't hear anyone.
-
1
-
-
The birds glitching has been going on for awhile. Used to only see it near tumbleweed but now it's spread around a bit. I personally haven't seen animals spawning in large groups and/or not moving. I have seen a lot of boats randomly spawn near thieves landing. Like the boats sitting on the bridge, can't get past them.
The fire rate I haven't noticed. I sure got shot 6 times by a Schofield in 1s, so yeah... Lol.
-
I have just learned to avoid people and quickly determine friendly from hostile. If I just want to hunt and fish I go to areas where no one is around. If one area that I want isn't clear then I go to the next. I have many hunting and fishing spots. I usually don't have any problems anymore now that I do that. I do check the map every so often. And if someone does come near enough that it picks up in the minimap I check to see what they are doing and get ready to run/fight. I had a pretty clear day last Friday doing the moving around thing solo. Got a lot of missions done, hunting in between, very productive with minimal pvp.
Otherwise, I don't think I could play this game without the threat of pvp. It wouldn't be challenging enough, in my opinion. I love having to be alert. I get that some people don't want to be that vigilant though. I am in favor of private lobbies, just don't change how the pvp is now.
I do think there needs to be a few more 'safe" spots to relax (ie. the damn butcher, y'all know the pain).
-
Could be a snake like one said or a black bear. Possibly a panther (panthers don't show up unless it noticed you and their dot disappears when they go back into hiding).
-
On 1/25/2019 at 12:07 PM, Kean_1 said:
Really? I didn't know that. I'll have to try it out next time.
There are a lot of things in this game that R* didn't really reveal about the UI, mechanics, etc. No idea why.
I'm pretty sure that it does tell you that, but it was a quick tip that most would probably miss. But it's been a life saver knowing it. That's why I can run through the swamps right next to gators without getting bucked. Plus I use the fact my horse wants to gtfo to my advantage.
Only time I couldn't control my horse was when a grizzly was charging me and my horse was like AH HELL TO THE NAH and sprinted away with me in some random direction and I couldn't get her to go elsewhere. I was still holding L3 tho, which calmed her down before she probably would have run us into a tree.
Time for a huge question to be answered.
in Red Dead Online
Posted
It's what a lot of PC MMOs do. They keep the low levels on a separate map, or in this case session, so the big kids don't try to bully them and scare them away from the game. I'd advocate for ranks 1-20 at the least.