BropolloCreed79

I imagine the intent was always to have cosmetic items be account bound, but items that are part of game play, such as rifles and weapons, are charater specific. Probably to discourage people from leveling up, starting over, and being laden with goodies from a previous character.

I discovered this accidentally a few days ago when I was bored in Van Horn. Someone made a snide comment to me, so I manually saved, pulled out my pump action shotgun, and turned his head into a cloud of pink mist. Imagine my surprise when I didn't accumulate a "wanted" level, just honor loss! I went on a TEAR through that town, holed up in the derelict building after killing the hobos, and just racked up an insane body count. Fantastic way to blow off steam.

One of the most enjoyable experiences I've had in this game was when I decided to ride into the oil fields east of Valentine and go on an Archer-esque Rampage. Climbed the ladder to the chimney on the roof of the factory, and murdered well in excess of 100 NPC's. I'd shoot them one by one as they came up the ladder, or if more than five were congregated on the stairs below, I'd toss a firebomb on them. Since the building is brick, only the bodies would burn. Sometimes, at night, I can still hear their screams as I drift off to sleep. Bountyhunters would come down the road to the north, looking to give me "The 'Ol Number Six", only to have their horses felled by flaming or poisoned arrows. Eventually, there was a lull when I had to pour another drink for myself, and the Marshals gave up and left. One of these days, I'll make a video of one of those Rampages and keep count of how many I take out, but for now, I content myself with similar sprees in different locales in single player (make sure you do a manual save first, boys and girls!) just to blow off some steam, and the benefits of such murder sprees go a long way to enhancing my enjoyment and appreciation for the rest of the game (except for Micah, who I hate more than Jar Jar Binks). And some "Cover Scent Lotion"

@Poggy, you and I have very different versions of "Self Made Fun".

If this became a thing, I'd want to be able to save up and by a steamer ship that was a floating casino with a bar, rooms, and table games. I'd never leave it.

Fixed. Good enough for me. Add him to "The List!" Credit to R* to making him a skeevy, greasy, slimeball even before they give us a story-driven reason to hate him. I was always on the fence with him from the onset, but after Strawberry, I wanted to tie him to a tree and let the wolves deal with him. The best part was if you let Micah die during that mission, and you got the "Mission Failed: Micah has died" message. I remember the first time getting that and thinking, "yeah, so?". For a game that has so many great parts in the story, like the infamous night in Valentine with Lenny, literally everything with Micah is the opposite. He's like the Bizzaro-version of King Midas: instead of everything he touches turning to gold, it all turns to sh*t. Then again, you could say the same thing about Dutch. The difference is, Dutch isn't trying to get people hurt on purpose, he just doesn't care about what happens to them while he pursues wealth. Micah WANTS to hurt people because he's a d*ck.

I don't know if that was necessarily a troll so much as perhaps a younger inexperienced player who thought he was helping. Griefing usually has a pointed, targeted method to the madness, but this was more like the crazy guy I see every day who chases pigeons in Public Square. He chases them just to chase them, and I doubt he'd even know what to do with them if he ever caught one.

They can't shoot what they don't see.

Maybe they're the "non-sparkly" vampire variant, so they can come out to play if it's merely overcast instead of being relegated to the night.

No. One of the key elements necessary to prove fraud is intent. Unless there's a paper trail via inter-company communications (email, memos) that proves this was an intentional element implemented to induce the customer to purchase gold via microtransactions, this does not rise to the level of fraud. This thread is the exact reason why I've elected to hoard my gold that was awarded, and not purchase additional gold until the mode is out of Beta. The final product is going to be different--which is why online games have Terms of Service or License Agreements that specifically state that as a consumer, you don't actually own the game, you're just purchasing a license to access a service. It's an important distinction, one which allows for on-the-fly changes to come without warning and with very few protections built in for the customer. A lawsuit will also be immediately challenged by R*. For those of you who skipped the EULA for Red Dead (and Red Dead Online): MISCELLANEOUS If any provision of this Agreement is held to be unenforceable for any reason, such provision shall be reformed only to the extent necessary to make it enforceable and the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected. BINDING INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION - PLEASE READ THIS SECTION CAREFULLY. IT MAY SIGNIFICANTLY ALTER YOUR RIGHTS, INCLUDING YOUR RIGHT TO FILE A LAWSUIT IN COURT. This binding individual arbitration section will not apply to the extent prohibited by the laws of your country of residence. You and the Company agree that should any dispute, claim, or controversy arise between us regarding any Company products or services (hereafter a “Dispute”), whether based in contract, statute, regulation, ordinance, tort (including fraud, misrepresentation, fraudulent inducement, or negligence), or any other legal or equitable theory, except for those matters listed in the Exclusions From Arbitration paragraph below, and expressly including the validity, enforceability, or scope of this ‘BINDING INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION’ section (with the exception of the enforceability of the Class Action Waiver clause below), shall be submitted to binding arbitration, as described below, rather than being resolved in court. The term “Dispute” is to be given the broadest possible meaning that will be enforced and includes, for example, all matters arising under this Agreement, the Privacy Policy, the Terms of Service, or any other agreement with the Company. You understand that there is no judge or jury in arbitration and that court review of an arbitration award is limited. Exclusions From Arbitration. You and the Company agree that any claim filed by You or the Company in small claims court on an individual basis are not subject to the arbitration terms contained in this Section. In addition, the Company or You shall have the right to seek an injunction against you in court in order to preserve the status quo while an arbitration proceeds. Class Action Waiver. THE ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS DESCRIBED HEREIN WILL BE CONDUCTED ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS ONLY. Neither You nor the Company shall be entitled to join or consolidate disputes by or against other individuals or entities, or to arbitrate any dispute in a representative capacity, including, without limitation, as a representative member of a class or in a private attorney general capacity, in connection with any Dispute. Further, unless both You and the Company agree, the arbitrator may not consolidate more than one person’s claim. The arbitrator may award any individual relief or individual remedies that are permitted by applicable law, but may not award relief against the Company respecting any person other than You. Right to Opt Out of Binding Arbitration. IF YOU WISH TO OPT OUT OF THIS BINDING INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION REQUIREMENT, YOU MUST NOTIFY US IN WRITING WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THAT YOU ACCEPT THIS AGREEMENT BUT ARE OPTING OUT OF BINDING INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION, UNLESS A LONGER PERIOD IS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW. Your written notification must be mailed to TAKE TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, LEGAL DEPARTMENT, ATTN: ARBITRATION OPT OUT, 110 West 44th Street, New York, New York, 10036. Your notice must include (1) your full name; (2) your mailing address; (3) your Social Club online ID, if you have one; and (4) a clear statement that you do not wish to resolve disputes with the Company through arbitration. You are responsible for ensuring the Company’s receipt of your opt-out notice, and you therefore may wish to send a notice by means that provide a written receipt. Notice of Dispute. If you have a Dispute with the Company, you must send written notice to TAKE TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, LEGAL DEPARTMENT, ATTN: ARBITRATION OF DISPUTE, 110 West 44th Street, New York, New York, 10036, in order to give the Company the opportunity to resolve the dispute informally through negotiation. Notice must be provided within two (2) years of the Dispute having arisen, but in no event after the date on which the initiation of legal proceedings would have been barred under the applicable statute of limitations. The failure to provide timely notice shall bar all claims. If the Company has a dispute with You, the Company will provide notice to the address it has on file for you, if possible. You and the Company agree to negotiate the Dispute in good faith for no less than 30 days after notice of the Dispute is provided. If the Dispute is not resolved within 30 days after receipt of notice of the Dispute, the Company or You may pursue the claim in arbitration as provided in this section. Arbitration Rules and Procedures. Arbitration shall be subject to the U.S. Federal Arbitration Act and federal arbitration law, and shall be conducted by Judicial Arbitration Mediation Services, Inc. (“JAMS”) pursuant to the JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures effective July 1, 2014 (the “JAMS Rules”), as modified by this agreement to arbitrate. The JAMS Rules, including instructions for initiating an arbitration, are available on its website at http://www.jamsadr.com/rules-streamlined-arbitration. The Company will pay its arbitration costs as required by the JAMS Rules and, in the event that you are able to demonstrate that the costs of arbitration will be prohibitive as compared to the costs of litigation, the Company will pay as much of your arbitration filing and hearing fees as the arbitrator deems is necessary to prevent the arbitration from being cost-prohibitive as compared to the cost of litigation. Each side shall pay his, her, or its own attorneys’ fees and costs unless the claim(s) at issue permit the prevailing party to be paid its fees and/or litigation costs, in which case the arbitrator shall award fees or costs as required by the applicable law. Location of Arbitration. At Your option, if an in-person hearing is required under the JAMS Rules, the hearing will occur either in New York County, New York, or in the United States county in which You reside. Decision of the Arbitrator. Any decision or award by the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties. Unless otherwise agreed, any decision or award shall set forth the factual and legal basis for the award. The arbitrator shall be permitted to award only those remedies in law or equity which are requested by the parties and which the arbitrator determines are supported by credible relevant evidence. Any decision or award may be enforced as a final judgment by any court of competent jurisdiction. If either party unsuccessfully challenges the validity of an award, the unsuccessful party shall pay the opposing party’s costs and attorneys’ fees associated with the challenge.

I believe the technical terms for those players is, "candy-ass".

I figured as much. If there's one person on the forums that I would have had to bet on to know the difference, it'd be you.

Bingo. A lot of people don't realize that the common names for firearms (as they know them) are manufacturer names (including the AR-15, which stands for "ArmaLite Rifle"--the original manufacturer, and not 'assault rifle' as many assume). As such, the names "Winchester", "Henry", and "Colt" are brand names, so including them in the game without paying a licensing fee or having the permission of the company would be grounds for a civil suit. R* doesn't own those brand names, so they can't use them without permission. And no company worth billions of dollars is going to just loan out their name and brand without (A) significant financial consideration, and/or (B) control over how their brand is represented. Having any one of those three brands with inferior stats to one or the other two companies would be bad for business and branding. That's why the names are different in the game.

You're a better man than I am. I shot him in the face. In my experience, people don't stop after they do something like that once. It's never "just the one" murder/kidnapping/assault.

I think we all know how this is going to go, but RDR2 and RDO have a rich tapestry of characters that leave quite the impression. I never really gave it too much thought, but I came across this beauty on Reddit yesterday and it still cracks me up: I'm sure Dutch will get plenty of consideration, too, but I really hate Micah. So, who do YOU hate?

I have to play online first.

Change it to the Van Horn outpost, which is a crappy place to begin with, and you have a deal. St. Denis may be dirty, but I dig the architecture.

Translation: I blew through the game so fast that I'm now bored and it's ruined for me, so I want to deprive others of any enjoyment so they're as dull and lifeless on the inside as I am. Translation: Anything that isn't explicitly banned is permitted. This is the same logic that allows sociopaths like myself to justify morally reprehensible actions with no fault or presumption of guilt. Unless said person IS a member of the development team, he or she has no idea what their intent is, and are projecting to justify their own actions. For almost 100 years, the United States allowed slavery because there was no law against it. I suppose that made it okay, too (sarcasm). Translation: I'm an emotionless monster incapable of genuine feelings, so I have to feed off the extremes of others to have any sort of satisfaction. There are a LOT of people like this in Corporate America who have nothing better to do than provoke people into a reaction. Translation: I'm so incredibly myopic and short sighted that I didn't even consider the fact that if I get people to quit, there's fewer people to abuse, limiting my opportunity to do so. I'm the sort of person who wins a year's supply of pizzas and eats them all in a week because I have no self control or awareness. Translation: Mommy and Daddy gave me everything I ever wanted in life. Ethan Crouch is my role model. Translation: I'm a walking contradiction: I have to ruin the game for others so that it isn't ruined for me. Your own enjoyment of the game means nothing as long as I'm happy. Rules for thee and not for me! Translation: My parents and teachers gave me participation ribbons and trophies for everything in life, so I have never learned the value of hard work or self-improvement. As a result, I claim to be emotionally damaged because I can't face the truth that my pain is caused by my own laziness and awareness of my own lack of self-worth as a human being. The despondency is why I lash out at others, because I want to, (as the always eloquent Mike Tyson once said) " stomp on their testicles so you could feel my pain." Pretty accurate analysis of the PvP DZ. I'd argue that playing PvE Survival gave you that same experience without the grief of the regular DZ. Sure, mobs didn't respawn, so it wasn't quite as farmable, but essentially, it's similar enough. It also provided (for me at least) the most fun version of the game. They also made a critical change to the way the DZ functions to give PvE players an opportunity to avoid "kill squads". Anyone that goes rogue is visible on both the minimap and large scale overlay, so it's simple enough to avoid them. And if a player in your vicinity decides to go Rogue, the days of them simply bushwacking you from behind and unloading an entire mag into your back are gone. They have to actively select it from their menu and there's a cooldown. You get a notification that someone near you is going Rogue, and have time to prepare. Griefers can't bait you into going Rogue by diving into your line of fire anymore to make you the aggressor. Sure, coordinated groups can camp spawns, but anyone going into the DZ has the ability to fast travel to any number of other spawn points away from those clowns and farm different landmarks. It's easy enough to avoid them with the smallest amount of planning and situational awareness--It's the DZ, and mobs will spawn right on top of you if you dither. I'm in a different place on The Division, having only come into it about a year after it was released. My perspective is VERY different from people who were hyped up by the E3 presentations and promises that never materialized on consoles--I came aboard right as the critical patches and content updates were being deployed that made it a MUCH different game (exotics, sets, incursions, Survival, the Underground, etc...). If I was a launch player, I probably wouldn't have been as forgiving of the initial experience. Looking more forward to the PvE online portions of TD2 more than I am RDO in it's current state, though, I can tell you that much.

I'd do that for free. If you think about it, that's next-level griefing, and smart, too. No gunshot means no noise, and he or she isn't wasting an arrow. They loot your saddlebags and abscond with XP AND loot. It's actually quite brilliant if you think about it. A candy-ass move, but no less impressive for the intent. Hell, he or she probably gets away with it more often than not, especially against players unaware of what's happening. Same. I played through the prologue and got right up to the free roam portion, and haven't touched it since. Of course, I'm still only on Chapter 3 of the story mode (50% completion) so I really haven't prioritized the online portion as of yet. But the horror stories are enough to give anyone not overly enthused with the PvP lifestyle pause. You know what we need? Traps and decoys. You set up a decoy, like a scarecrow that looks like it's fishing, then lie in wait for some griefer to approach while you hide off to the side waiting to ambush him. If they make the decoys life like enough to pass muster until someone is up close, then a whole new world is opened up for online play. Traps would be fantastic too. You tie off your horse to a hitching post and then place a bear trap near him that gets triggered if a tool tries to stab the horse or rob the saddlebags. OOOOOOH, or dynamite (I'd use the old nag for that, boobytrap a horse that blows up). Giving players the tools to bait griefers is a much better solution than relying on a broken parley system or any other solution short of private lobbies. I'd rather be proactive than reactive, relying on horse insurance and being a victim before I can fight back is for yellow-bellies and cowards; give me the ability to be cunning and ruthless without being the same kind of jabroni that I would have to act like under the current model.

Ubi is the worst. But the team at Massive (the group behind TD1 and now, the sequel) have shown me a lot of things in the 3+ years since TD launched. Granted, if I had purchased it out of the gate, I'd have been FURIOUS at the product. I jumped in about a year after it had been released, and it was fantastic (and continued to get better). Massive accomplished enough with the first one that I have no qualms about plunking down for the collector's edition in March on TD2 (the one without the statue/figure). They had a rough few years between botched launches of R6 (which improved), TD (which improved), For Honor (doa) and WIldlands (so much wasted potential). Not every game is going to be a runaway success, but the level of engagement and communication by the team at Massive with the community gave me enough faith to go all in on TD2. Oh, and I'd never trust Gun/Illfonic for anything ever again after the Friday the 13th: The Game fiasco. They botched that worse than a Kardashian nose job.

Would buy with Gold. purchases of gold, since I am still looking at other online games to satisfy the itch. The current model isn't working for me, personally, and I may look at either Fallout or wait it out for The Division 2. It's not as much fun as F13 used to be before Jason was nerfed into oblivion. Why is AA even a thing again? I get it for tracking a squirrel when hunting from horseback, but in a pvp scenario, the only thing I can think of is that they're trying to level the playing field against CronusMax users in advance. A good AA will mitigate a lot of the damage those tools can do, but at the cost of a playing field that separates players solely on skill instead of leveling it out. Next thing you know, EVERYONE will get the same reward. Like a participation ribbon that's made out of sustainable resources.

And gloves. And a pair of bedazzled suspenders, to blind your enemies during gunfights.

Only if they aren't camping your camp. I've seen griefers go through a LOT more effort for a smaller payoff. Do we really want them "more" challenging, given the paltry pittance of the reward for the effort? Making them more "challenging" almost exclusively means making them take longer to complete, especially in this context. Who gets mauled by a grizzly after it happens the first time in story mode? Am I the only one who uses dynamite to solve all his problems in the game? You'll have to elaborate on this idea a bit more, because I'm missing something here. Like "Phase 2". I'm fairly confident that players are already "afraid to die" because of how easy it is. What you're proposing would actually incentivize griefers to go after players who are out hunting and fishing, or doing some other task and just want to be left in peace. Better, but it could still be abused by large groups or posses. How? One member of a posse racks up a huge bounty, then lets his friends/co-conspirators essentially farm him for the bounty. You'd also have a hard time collecting as a solo player or a smaller group against a well organized posse. And if they get wind of you gunning for them, they could just switch servers. Additional rules for PvPvE cross-play in the same environment create too many circumstances for abuse. Players should have to select a PvE or PvP preference BEFORE logging in, and be locked into that engagement format until they relog. THAT would prevent people from rapidly switching PvPvE status and griefing players with wild abandon.

"A" coat? As in only one? Bro, I command thee to get to thy nearest haberdashery so that thou may be as resplendent enough to command the respect of strangers in an online game. GET THEE TO A HABERDASHERY!!!