Jump to content

The Beta has Outworn its Welcome (Rant-a-tat-tat)


HuDawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Beta was easy to stomach for many people at 1st.      Because it was called a 'beta', most of us thought it would only be for a week or two.  So it was just fun to play with friends and experience the game.   

 

But now R* says the beta will last for a 'few' more months.       And the only thing they talked about is minor changes to help against 'griefing'..   When griefing is the least important thing.

Unless R* pulls its head of its ass soon.  This game will be a ghost town soon. 

 

This game needs free aim lobbies and private lobbies.  

The choice for players to HOST their own co-op and pvp missions. Be it public or private with options to suit taste.

The ability to pick what pvp modes they want to play.  NOT Show down..     If players want to play team shoot outs ONLY, let them.    Just like the OLD RDR.

 

 BASIC things that ALL online R* games have had the past 10 year.  R* has decided to NOT do it.  They sure as hell made sure to get their Gold Bar store open ASAP tho.   But in terms of game play they're literally treating their players like cattle.  No choice and no control.

Srry for the rant.  But this is just starting to become frustrating.

 

This is a billion dollar game dev.   Not Gun Media...   

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Griefing is an issue and a Major one at that.  The solutions are the same as you mentioned though.  It is a rarity that you can get on and not be griefed.  That is getting old and sucking the life out of the game.  Griefers don't want  PvP showdowns, they want 7v1.  Where they pretty much can't be touched and players dying before they can fulling spawn in.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Griefing is an issue and a Major one at that. 

No its not..      I've rarely been griefed.   When im alone, I just play it smart.  With friends, we steam roll through everyone in our way.  

And if we had Private lobbies...  Players like you who have a problem with being 'griefed'... would not be have any problems at all.

 

Dumbing this game down more and more to suit the taste of players who don't want to be killed.  Will only ruin the experience for players who like the 'anything can happen' feel of the game.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

No its not..      I've rarely been griefed.   When im alone, I just play it smart.  With friends, we steam roll through everyone in our way.  

And if we had Private lobbies...  Players like you who have a problem with being 'griefed'... would not be have any problems at all.

 

Dumbing this game down more and more to suit the taste of players who don't want to be killed.  Will only ruin the experience for players who like the 'anything can happen' feel of the game.

 

Players can live with being killed.  When a players fill a need to attack and only attack players that aren't participating in PvP is an issue.   I understand seeing a player and trying to start some PvP action, but seeing a group in a town shooting everything in sight and then deciding the those players out in the middle of no where is where the PvP action is?  Come on!  Seriously, to say there isn't a issue because you decide there isn't one. 

As you said adding those extra lobbies would actually fix the griefing, cause then players wouldn't have to partake in it if they chose not to.   Having a PvEvP freeroam is tough to make cause some players are just asshats and want to force players into playing the game the way they want and say stupid crap like that's the way the way the Devs wanted it, the complain about something else that the Devs have done.

Rockstar's 1st focus should be improving the PvE side, not PvP.  PvP players have options and what few options the PvE players are being ruined by the griefers who don't want to PvP and claim the PvE is way too easy for their superior skills.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Players can live with being killed.  When a players fill a need to attack and only attack players that aren't participating in PvP is an issue.   I understand seeing a player and trying to start some PvP action, but seeing a group in a town shooting everything in sight and then deciding the those players out in the middle of no where is where the PvP action is?  Come on!  Seriously, to say there isn't a issue because you decide there isn't one. 

 

Dude..  Private Lobbies means you can run around the map all day on a donkey while using a bow and arrow and NO ONE can mess with you.  You would have nothing to complain about if they had private lobbies.

That also means.. If you chose to play public games, you agree to deal with public randoms.  

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HuDawg said:

 

Dude..  Private Lobbies means you can run around the map all day on a donkey while using a bow and arrow and NO ONE can mess with you.  You would have nothing to complain about if they had private lobbies.

That also means.. If you chose to play public games, you agree to deal with public randoms.  

Apparently, you want to argue.  Yes, private lobbies will help the PvE players, but it isn't fixing the griefing.   I understand if you are in the PvEvP lobby, you should expect stupid players to continue to be stupid.  It doesn't mean someone fishing or hunting is waiting for you to come shoot them.  Especially, when you can see players in town shooting each other all day long, yet a player that thinks going after the guy not involved that appears to be hunting or fishing.  

Regardless of where you spawn in, there is a town full of players shooting each other.  Why would a player think not to engage PvP there where it is happening?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Apparently, you want to argue.  Yes, private lobbies will help the PvE players, but it isn't fixing the griefing.   I understand if you are in the PvEvP lobby, you should expect stupid players to continue to be stupid.  It doesn't mean someone fishing or hunting is waiting for you to come shoot them.  Especially, when you can see players in town shooting each other all day long, yet a player that thinks going after the guy not involved that appears to be hunting or fishing.  

Clearly its not me who wants to argue.   Because private lobbies does fix griefing in the sense that, you can't be griefed in private lobbies.  (Well not by randoms anyways)

 

You know how I deal with randoms in public lobbies who try and grief me..   ?

 

 

Edited by HuDawg
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

Because private lobbies does fix griefing in the sense that, you can't be griefed in private lobbies.  (Well not by randoms anyways)

Correct that it wouldn't exists in a private lobby, but it still exist.  Not all players want to play solo in a private lobby.  Yes, they can always invite friends, but some like Co-op play.  They like to help others and move on.  Just the other day I was hunting and there was others around.  It was fun and everything was fine, till some tool decided he needed to come along and attack everyone.  Funniest part, there was a town not that far away on the map that had a group that was fighting each other.  Now in a private lobby, I won't have chance encounters where a group could work together and then part ways.  Yesterday, I rode up on a gang hideout and when I got there a player popped up on my map.  He was surrounded, so I shot at a couple NPCs and then they focused on me.  He then finished them off.  He waived and I waived back and rode off.  Guess, what he still did his thing and I did mine.  I can get that in the current state, but because of Griefers.  99% of the time I won't.  Why because Griefers have everyone on their heels, so when they see another player, they shoot 1st and ask questions later.  In PvEvP, there should be some question if a player appears, that just maybe they won't be an Asshat.  Right now, it almost a given they will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Correct that it wouldn't exists in a private lobby, but it still exist.  Not all players want to play solo in a private lobby.  Yes, they can always invite friends, but some like Co-op play.  They like to help others and move on.  Just the other day I was hunting and there was others around.  It was fun and everything was fine, till some tool decided he needed to come along and attack everyone.  Funniest part, there was a town not that far away on the map that had a group that was fighting each other.  Now in a private lobby, I won't have chance encounters where a group could work together and then part ways.  Yesterday, I rode up on a gang hideout and when I got there a player popped up on my map.  He was surrounded, so I shot at a couple NPCs and then they focused on me.  He then finished them off.  He waived and I waived back and rode off.  Guess, what he still did his thing and I did mine.  I can get that in the current state, but because of Griefers.  99% of the time I won't.  Why because Griefers have everyone on their heels, so when they see another player, they shoot 1st and ask questions later.  In PvEvP, there should be some question if a player appears, that just maybe they won't be an Asshat.  Right now, it almost a given they will be.

The attitude you have is kind of wrong.. Well id say the lack of attitude.

Im friendly.. and will help players.  I help them all the time.  But in the back of my mind im always waiting for someone to attack me and that its what makes it fun.  For me its.. go ahead, and make my day.

 

 

One of my favorite games of all time was Diablo 2.   Back in that game the griefers where called PKers.   A lot of people hated them.. I LOVED them.  Because they added sort of evil encounter feel to the game that was better than AI's.   There was also private game options..

Same applies to RD O.  

R* should not dumb this game down for players who don't like conflict with others.  They should add private lobbies OR at the very least Friendly Lobbies for PvE only players.

I don't want R* to punish griefers or hostile players.  I can do it myself.  

 

Griefing is the least important thing R* should be focusing on.  They should be adding BASIC game player features and options, some of which would end griefing by default.

 

Edited by HuDawg
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Samplemygravy said:

Griefers are a non issue. I agree with op. Played enough to know to check the map and proximities of folks. If you are getting griefed I’m sorry but you are just not very smart. 

Then that makes you and the OP wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Samplemygravy said:

Griefers are a non issue. I agree with op. Played enough to know to check the map and proximities of folks. If you are getting griefed I’m sorry but you are just not very smart. 

What has smart got to do with it?   How does checking your map help?  I'm standing there fishing and someone rides up, kills my horse then me.  What are we supposed to do, stop fishing or hunting every time we see a player on the map near us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, chocolatefinch said:

What has smart got to do with it?   How does checking your map help?  I'm standing there fishing and someone rides up, kills my horse then me.  What are we supposed to do, stop fishing or hunting every time we see a player on the map near us?

I don't think they see the issue.  They seem to think that if you remove the complainers all of a sudden problem fixed.  Griefing will still happen, cause not all players are one side or the other, they PvEvP.  IMHO, Griefers aren't what I call real PvP players.  As said above if given the choice of engaging PvP players or go after the someone that appears to be preoccupied, fishing or hunting.  They always choose the latter. 

Most players are either PvP players or PvE players by default.  Yet some do like to play both and the gaming industry seems to want to mash them together thinking, "Hey the players will work it out and we will sit back and not say a word either way.  That Rockstar doesn't have to take sides.  Most times players assume they have the only opinion therefore it is a "Fact" in their minds.  Unfortunately, it isn't my server or yours it's ours.  There is no reason that a player should keep attacking players that have no interest.  It may happen from time to time, but after you attacked another player for a bit.  If you never lose, if they never fire back at you, if they leave the server, these are signs that another player may not be interested in PvP.   Especially if there are players that are doing PvP in the nearest town.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Then that makes you and the OP wrong. 

How exactly am I wrong?

This game needs BASIC game play options.  Most of which would solve the griefing you complain about it.

1 hour ago, chocolatefinch said:

What has smart got to do with it?   How does checking your map help?  I'm standing there fishing and someone rides up, kills my horse then me.  What are we supposed to do, stop fishing or hunting every time we see a player on the map near us?

The only time a griefer killing you can really effect you..  Is when your horse has animals bodies or a fish on it.     Since you can only carry one big fish on your horse, theres really no huge loss to being killed while fishing.  Is it annoying.. Yes.   But so is someone throwing tnt into the water while you fish

What players should be doing is asking R* for private servers and free aim lobbies.   Basically everything I listed.

 

Private servers solve everything in terms of enjoying the game and not having to deal with pests.

 

Some of use.. Like dealing with pests.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

How exactly am I wrong?

This game needs BASIC game play options.  Most of which would solve the griefing you complain about it.

Providing private servers will help, it doesn't remove Griefers from the game.  You are making the assumption that all PvE style players would go to private servers.  So as long as you think that it way, you are wrong.  It puts a Band-Aid on it, it doesn't fix it.  I feel you are making assumptions that all players want to sit around and attack each other, that isn't necessary true.  Just because when you are fishing or hunting and some player attacks you and you fight back doesn't mean, you didn't get griefed.  Especially when there might be others nearby who are actually doing PvP.

A private server separates the community, a private server doesn't have a server full of people to interact with.  Now some players would like that where they are all alone and only other players are ones they invite only.  For me, I personally preferred the way they did it in RDR.  Where it was public, I could see other players.  If I saw people attacking a hideout I could help and then leave or not partake at all.  I also joined others and played PvP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HuDawg said:

The Beta was easy to stomach for many people at 1st.  Because it was called a 'beta', most of us thought it would only be for a week or two.  So it was just fun to play with friends and experience the game.   But now R* says the beta will last for a 'few' more months.      

I didn't expect the beta to be over that fast but then again, R* didn't imply that it would.  ......quite the opposite in fact when they said the beta will continue "over the next weeks and months." before release in their Newswire announcement.  I do understand that on console most may be used to what devs call "beta" as being more marketing for their game and/or stress tests for their servers.   Those usually last a week or so before game launch and few things are typically changed in the final release.

RDO is a work in progress and I think R* was pretty up front with that since they announced it. 

 

4 hours ago, HuDawg said:

And the only thing they talked about is minor changes to help against 'griefing'..   When griefing is the least important thing.  Unless R* pulls its head of its ass soon.  This game will be a ghost town soon. 

Well, there was more than that discussed in the latest news (e.g. daily challenges, all-new missions, dynamic events, lots of new competitive modes, new weapons / clothing and "lots more that we’re not quite ready to announce just yet.").

As for griefing, R* already mentioned that it was one of the most popular topics they received feedback for.  .....so it's obviously quite important to a lot of other people although some may not feel it is.  This is why R* has made those changes a focus in the update(s) that will be coming soon.

If griefing is left unchecked, I will say that many of the co-op / PvE fans will be the ones saying the same thing you are about RDO (re: being a ghost town if they don't do something about it).  

Yeah sure, folks who aren't satisfied with the direction are going to leave (myself included if I feel the same way) but that doesn't mean everyone will abandon the game.  Folks were making similar predictions about GTAVO and yet it's still going strong.  

 

4 hours ago, HuDawg said:

This game needs free aim lobbies and private lobbies.  

The choice for players to HOST their own co-op and pvp missions. Be it public or private with options to suit taste.

The ability to pick what pvp modes they want to play.  NOT Show down..     If players want to play team shoot outs ONLY, let them.    Just like the OLD RDR.

I agree.  These are things I would enjoy seeing in RDO as well and who knows, some or even all of them may be coming.

 

4 hours ago, HuDawg said:

BASIC things that ALL online R* games have had the past 10 year.  R* has decided to NOT do it.  They sure as hell made sure to get their Gold Bar store open ASAP tho.   But in terms of game play they're literally treating their players like cattle.  No choice and no control.

Srry for the rant.  But this is just starting to become frustrating. 

Well, whether folks like it or not, MTXs are the backbone of the GaaS model.  Whether its Shark Cards or Gold Bars, MTXs are what drive sustain these online modes into the future.  

Personally, I have no problem with Gold Bars in RDO.  Anything locked behind them is essentially cosmetic and you don't need to buy them if you don't want to.  RDO is not a P2W model.  I can see their reasoning for setting up the store early to make sure it is in place before adding new content.  .....especially before Christmas.  It's just a smart business decision.

I agree that RDO is lacking content right now and features that I would also like to see implemented.  ....and yeah, I too would like to see those sooner rather than later but I think some folks expected a lot of things to come much faster than they are which is obviously not the case.  Hell, even I might shelve this game until they do but I'm not ready to abandon it all together.  I continue to keep a "wait and see" attitude about the whole thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, HuDawg said:

But now R* says the beta will last for a 'few' more months.      

Just in time for me to migrate over to The Division 2.

Seriously.  And isn't Anthem coming out in about five weeks?

Not to mention Crackdown 3 (XB1) and Days Gone (PS4). 

You have Anthem on February 22nd, and The Divison 2 on March 15th--both games that are going to be robust online experiences.  If this is still in online beta at that point, the game is going to hemorrhage players. 

5 hours ago, HuDawg said:

This game needs free aim lobbies and private lobbies.  

Agreed.  I signed on to the online for the first time in weeks last night, just to see what it was like.  After multiple disconnects, I finally got into a stable server, and was able to play for about five minutes before two Delta Bravos jumped me in Blackwater like a fratboy on a case of Natty Light.  My time to play is limited these days, and I don't need that kind of aggravation in my life.  I signed out and went back to story mode.

5 hours ago, HuDawg said:

This is a billion dollar game dev.   Not Gun Media...

Ouch.  

2 hours ago, Samplemygravy said:

Griefers are a non issue. I agree with op. Played enough to know to check the map and proximities of folks. If you are getting griefed I’m sorry but you are just not very smart. 

Intelligence has nothing to do with griefing, and conflating the two is a logical fallacy.  It's a numbers game.  If I'm on a server and there's four or five players actively trying to grief me, I have literally two choices: either quit and go to another sever, or let it keep happening.  Not everyone has five or six hours a day to dedicate to playing the game online.  

I honestly don't have an issue with griefers, personally.  I didn't buy this game for the online mode, I purchased it for the story mode.  When I finish it, I'll set it aside and wait for the "beta" tag to be removed before making any sort of final judgment as to the quality of the game.  I don't blame the griefers, I blame R*.  Enabling players to actively hinder the progression and enjoyment of an RPG game for other users is a terrible idea, but they seem content with the system they have.  The thing they're forgetting is, games are supposed to be fun.  For half of the gaming population, there's nothing "fun" about mixing a sandbox style mmo with persistent PvP elements--all you have to do is look at  World of Warcraft.  They killed independent PvP and PvE servers and made it a toggle that the player selects back in 2017.

1 hour ago, HuDawg said:

How exactly am I wrong?

Image result for walter am i wrong gif

1 hour ago, HuDawg said:

This game needs BASIC game play options.

Like being able to toggle between PvE and PvP status, a feature WoW has had for over a year now?  I can't imagine it'd be that hard to implement, just put the toggle on a 30 or 60 second cooldown to prevent people from going active and then turning it off to avoid being killed by the player they just took out after a respawn.

1 hour ago, HuDawg said:

Private servers solve everything in terms of enjoying the game and not having to deal with pests.

Devi's advocate--you're creating "separate but equal" servers with this idea, and a Private Server just segregates players into a solo experience unless they have friends to invite.  You're precluding the second "M" in "MMO", multiplayer.  They'd ostensibly be playing a gimped version of the game and not be able to group up with randos (which is half of the fun in a game like this, at least for me).  All private servers do is put the onus on PvE players to put in additional work to enjoy the game without being randomly killed by PvP players, while limiting the enjoyment of other features.

Flip that around--have no PvP whatsoever in the main online game, and the only people who "lose out" are PvP players, who, by the way, literally have multiple alternate modes for PvP activities (but there are NO dedicated PvE modes online), and the PvP community would RIOT.

Right now, there is no dedicated PvE mode in the game--everything is tailored to PvP game play, including the alternate modes.  It's clear R* always intended it to be this way, so at the very least, they should have been more transparent up front and said, "THERE WILL BE NO TRUE PvE EXPERIENCE", because right now, the only true PvE experience is playing offline.  

Again, I don't have a dog in this fight--the online portion is like a bonus to me at this point--but telling PvE players to go to the back of the proverbial "bus" isn't the way to maintain a healthy player base.  RDR2 isn't going to have as robust a player base as GTA, it's a period-piece game with a very specific aesthetic and sensibility that is tonally different.  Making the game accessible to as large an audience as possible is the best way to ensure both a robust active player population, and stabilized income in the form of microtransactions.  

Regardless of what they do, they need to disable auto aim in PvP scenarios regardless.  Any goober with opposable thumbs can hit a tracking shot in PvP with the AA enabled, taking any measure of skill out of the game completely.  

1 hour ago, HuDawg said:

Some of use.. Like dealing with pests.

Gotta be honest, bro, I'm picturing you wearing the skin of your victims as a trophy when you say that.

7 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:

I agree that RDO is lacking content right now and features that I would also like to see implemented.  ....and yeah, I too would like to see those sooner rather than later but I think some folks expected a lot of things to come much faster than they are which is obviously not the case.  Hell, even I might shelve this game until they do but I'm not ready to abandon it all together.  I continue to keep a "wait and see" attitude about the whole thing.

You read my mind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BropolloCreed79 said:

You read my mind.

Well, then maybe that explains why I've been giving the Division 2 some hard thought lately.  ;)

Is it true that they are looking to scale back the "bullet sponge" mechanics in the game?  I know they can't dial it back too far (given the game is an RPG) but I had heard rumors that it was discussed.  To be honest, I just haven't been following its progress like I did with the original during development.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:

Well, then maybe that explains why I've been giving the Division 2 some hard thought lately.  ;)

Is it true that they are looking to scale back the "bullet sponge" mechanics in the game?  I know they can't dial it back too far (given the game is an RPG) but I had heard rumors that it was discussed.  To be honest, I just haven't been following its progress like I did with the original during development.

The Division 2 Warning you won't find on the label.

1st.)  Being made by Massive.  They started making it within weeks of the release of the 1st game, cause they realized their mistakes and learned all that they could to make the sequel.  For learning everything they needed to learn, they never could fix the 1st.  Same idiots making the sequel who destroyed the 1st.

2nd.)  Being backed and controlled by Ubisoft.  The same dictators that was going to let the game die after the 1st year and was shocked that players was still playing it after the 1st year and wanted more.  Ubisoft basically said there is no more, tough.  Then reluctantly added more that they had pulled from the original release.  Only cause they needed testing grounds for the sequel.

3rd.)  Being influenced by YouTubers.  That pushed for PvP and strived to push the PvE players out of the game.

According to a friend who still is on the forums and did partake in the Alpha Testing.  If you liked the original, you will like the sequel.  They improved somethings, but for the most part the biggest issues from the 1st game have been ignored.  Mostly PvE vs PvP differences.  Which if they don't resolve those, then it will be the same cluster**** that the original was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:

Personally, I have no problem with Gold Bars in RDO.  Anything locked behind them is essentially cosmetic and you don't need to buy them if you don't want to.  RDO is not a P2W model.  I can see their reasoning for setting up the store early to make sure it is in place before adding new content.  .....especially before Christmas.  It's just a smart business decision.

 

Im all for R* having gold bars.  My issue is R* put gold bars over basic game play options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:

Well, then maybe that explains why I've been giving the Division 2 some hard thought lately.  ;)

Is it true that they are looking to scale back the "bullet sponge" mechanics in the game?  I know they can't dial it back too far (given the game is an RPG) but I had heard rumors that it was discussed.  To be honest, I just haven't been following its progress like I did with the original during development.

I hope so.  It's ridiculous to have an endgame build that requires multiple magazines to take down an enemy, even at point blank range.

If I had to guess, they're going to increase incoming damage and decrease the player health pool and armor values to offset the diminished "bullet sponge" mechanics.  But that's just a guess.  I'm staying away from spoilers myself, apart from game play trailers, but I have a Beta key for PS4, so I'm starting to get excited--ordered the Ultimate Edition because I figure I'm at the point where I only buy one or two games a year now, so I may as well splurge on the ones I do--and I loved the first one.  Not following the progress is definitely the right way to go, though.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Providing private servers will help, it doesn't remove Griefers from the game.  You are making the assumption that all PvE style players would go to private servers.  So as long as you think that it way, you are wrong.  It puts a Band-Aid on it, it doesn't fix it.  

Dude.. this is a WILD WEST game.  If people bother you, you already have 3 choices.   Out gun them, out number them OR find a new lobby.

The only thing that's missing is private lobbies.  That solves everything.    They could also add friendly servers.

But to try and fix something like randoms killings would be  a Band- Aid.   And R* has already proved with GTA O that anything they add to stop griefers gets used by griefers against players.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BropolloCreed79 said:

I hope so.  It's ridiculous to have an endgame build that requires multiple magazines to take down an enemy, even at point blank range.

If I had to guess, they're going to increase incoming damage and decrease the player health pool and armor values to offset the diminished "bullet sponge" mechanics.  But that's just a guess.  I'm staying away from spoilers myself, apart from game play trailers, but I have a Beta key for PS4, so I'm starting to get excited--ordered the Ultimate Edition because I figure I'm at the point where I only buy one or two games a year now, so I may as well splurge on the ones I do--and I loved the first one.  Not following the progress is definitely the right way to go, though.

My son who rarely ever played the 1st one, wants it.  As much as I liked the 1st.  I still had lots of issues with how it got handled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:

As for griefing, R* already mentioned that it was one of the most popular topics they received feedback for.  .....so it's obviously quite important to a lot of other people although some may not feel it is.  This is why R* has made those changes a focus in the update(s) that will be coming soon.

If griefing is left unchecked, I will say that many of the co-op / PvE fans will be the ones saying the same thing you are about RDO (re: being a ghost town if they don't do something about it).  

Most people are asking for private lobbies or friendly pve lobbies.. Which are the smart ones, and im all for it.

 

But if R* listens to what I think are the more short sighted players.  Who complain about getting killed and want passive mode or penalties for players that kill them.

Then this game will end up losing its PVP fans and the players who like that 'anything can happen' feel of the game.  

 

Either way, ONE game mode to rule them all hurts everyone.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

But to try and fix something like randoms killings would be  a Band- Aid

Again, I'm not even sure they SHOULD fix it.  But suggesting private only servers for PvE players is dismissive and insulting to players who enjoy a PvE experience.  There are enough threats out there without worrying about players shooting you in the back.

Calling it a WIld West game doesn't justify the antics of some of these players.  In the real WWW, people who indiscriminately murdered civilians were systemically hunted down by law enforcement and had to live life on the run devoid of any creature comforts.  Again, telling people to switch lobbies if they don't like it is the highest form of elitism and putting the onus on the PvE segment of the portion to "go without" if they want to play the game.

Private lobbies will limit access to all the MMO potions of the game, and is not a fair, tenable solution to the perceived issue.  Allowing players to self-flag their status with a cooldown period is.  It literally does nothing to your enjoyment of the game, unless your sole enjoyment is player killing people who are literally sitting ducks.

1 minute ago, HuDawg said:

But if R* listens to what I think are the more short sighted players.  Who complain about getting killed and want passive mode or penalties for players that kill them.

It's not short-sighted to not want to participate in PvP but being forced to do so at this stage.  Again, having a player's status be selectable eliminates the need to punish griefers, because if you don't want to be griefed, you can simply set your own, personalized setting to PvE and not have to worry about it.  The only people losing in this scenario are people who like free kills or to grief.  Players like you who enjoy that aspect of the game literally lose nothing because the players who are prone to PvP and griefing are still going to try and attack you, and you can still fight back.

PvE players aren't going to attack you if you're as benign as you purport to be, so there's literally no reason to oppose a measure to have a player's status be self selectable, unless you enjoy killing players who are participating in PvE activities because they won't fight back.

I fail to see the issue with having the status be selectable with a cooldown.  There'd be no need to implement these penalties for griefers, and it's the simplest, most elegant solution short of having separate lobbies.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BropolloCreed79 said:

Again, I'm not even sure they SHOULD fix it.  But suggesting private only servers for PvE players is dismissive and insulting to players who enjoy a PvE experience.  There are enough threats out there without worrying about players shooting you in the back.

Well im not trying to be insulting..   

Im just trying to be realistic about it.  

Like, If myself and friends just want to drink a case of beer, shoot animals and fish all night.  We don't need other players around.  We would just play in a private lobby.

So much random and fun stuff can be done in private lobbies.   Hell I want private lobbies, just for myself..lol

 

Id be all for friendly public lobbies too.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HuDawg said:

Well im not trying to be insulting..   

 Im just trying to be realistic about it.  

No worries bro, the argument could be perceived as insulting, but I know you're coming from a good place, and I definitely see your point.  I just disagree with the idea of private lobbies being a solution to a PvE player's issues, because they're effectively locked out of grouping for content unless they have a group of friends available to play with at all times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

Dude.. this is a WILD WEST game.  If people bother you, you already have 3 choices.   Out gun them, out number them OR find a new lobby.

The only thing that's missing is private lobbies.  That solves everything.    They could also add friendly servers.

But to try and fix something like randoms killings would be  a Band- Aid.   And R* has already proved with GTA O that anything they add to stop griefers gets used by griefers against players.

 

How is fixing griefers a Band-Aid?  Making players accountable for their actions a problem to you.  In the campaign, did you get to rape, pillage, and grief towns people unmolested?  No.  You break wind the wrong way and you had a wanted level.  NPCs would hunt you till you was dead.  Why do you feel that the online should be no less?  If incentive for players to want to hunt griefers.  

Put players in a situation where if they want to PvP that they want to do it with players who are already PvPing.  Not those who aren't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, YodaMan 3D said:

How is fixing griefers a Band-Aid?  Making players accountable for their actions a problem to you.  

Because anything that fixes 'griefing'..  Which is really just killing other players.  Will also effect the players who defend themselves.  So the game just becomes... .whats the word.

Ugh?

Some sort of yella bella city slicker type of horse shiiiit.

Hell, the biggest griefers I deal with are mostly my friends..  Who when posse'd up kill each other, hog tie each other, drop each other off cliffs..    burn each other alive..   And when a random 'griefer' does show up.  It turns into a massive feeding frenzy.  Like all the zombies in the church in 28 days later poppin their heads up. (Fresh MeaT?)

I play alone and set my profile offline all the time.  Just so I can be attacked by 'griefers' in peace...lol

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

Because anything that fixes 'griefing'..  Which is really just killing other players.  Will also effect the players who defend themselves.  So the game just becomes... .whats the word.

Ugh?

Some sort of yella bella city slicker type of horse shiiiit.

Hell, the biggest griefers I deal with are mostly my friends..  Who when posse'd up kill each other, hog tie each other, drop each other off cliffs..    burn each other alive..   And when a random 'griefer' does show up.  It turns into a massive feeding frenzy.  Like all the zombies in the church in 28 days later poppin their heads up. (Fresh MeaT?)

I play alone and set my profile offline all the time.  Just so I can be attacked by 'griefers' in peace...lol

I tend to agree with your stance in this matter. Griefers don't really bother me. I actually enjoy the competition. Cause to be honest, the NPCs in RDRO provide very little challenge. They are pretty much a joke. I had people messing with my wagon transporting mission last night and it made it exciting. No they weren't griefing, they were playing the game as intended. I think having the unknown factor of what players are going to do keep it exciting and interesting. I love PVE just as much as PVP. I never understood why you have to pick a side in this age old argument. Some people actually are capable of liking both equally. Whether I am running solo or with my posse, my Companion App is up. This keeps me alive and allows me to see the map at all times. Like my 45acp, I never leave home without it. Private lobbies wouldn't fix griefers. I too believe it is just a Band-aid. I do believe the "griefer" issue is being a little bit blown out of proportion. I am in my mid 70s and I have yet to leave a lobby because someone was trolling me. 

Edited by Savage_Reaper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

LATEST RDR2 NEWS CLIPS

×
×
  • Create New...