Jump to content

Time for a huge question to be answered.


Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Vaderspupil said:

How about this for a solution? You want to kill other players fine, but make it so that doing so triggers the wanted system like killing an NPC. If a witness(player or NPC) sees you killing another player, you are reported to the law. When the law brings you down, you are placed in "jail" effectively locking you out of online play for a set time period, say a couple of minutes. The more you kill before the law gets you, the longer your "jail" time. I think that would be a more realistic punishment for murder.

That I find is the biggest problem in the game....you can kill as much as you want and there is NO penalty like this.

Posted
2 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

I 100% agree.

 

Hell last night I spent an hour killing some random griefer while my friends hunted and fished.

At one point I swapped cards and went to my slippery bastard build.. and just kept tying him with a lasso and burning him alive with moltovs.  LOL

 

Man I love putting on Slippery Bastard and watching griefers get all confused. LOL. I have used the lasso/moltovs combo too. Good times. 

We were holding a wagon for a mission last night (get that xtra Xp), and this 4 man posse kept trying to get to it. For 6 mins these fools kept coming and coming. I loved every minute of it. Your typical Varmit spammers who couldn't figure out how I was tanking headshots. Thank you Slow & Steady. We all racked up tons of XP . 

My Posse does this as well, we will maybe have a player or two fend off the troll/s while the rest complete the missions. Works like a charm. But than again I roll with a lot of trigger happy gunners who have no problems shooting back. I use to run with a crew that was timid as a damn field mouse and it would drive me nuts. Not one of them wanted to stand their ground. They always wanted to run away or switch servers. I had to stop playing with them because I am not wired like that.  

Posted
2 minutes ago, Vaderspupil said:

How about this for a solution? You want to kill other players fine, but make it so that doing so triggers the wanted system like killing an NPC. If a witness(player or NPC) sees you killing another player, you are reported to the law. When the law brings you down, you are placed in "jail" effectively locking you out of online play for a set time period, say a couple of minutes. The more you kill before the law gets you, the longer your "jail" time. I think that would be a more realistic punishment for murder.

And what if they kill all the law men?

Problem is this.  Even the NPCs can be in the wrong sometimes and instigate a fight with a player, yet the player defending themselves now has to deal with the law.

Just imagine how messed up and backwards it would be in terms of pvp in free roam.

A posse of 4 decide to attack me.  I kill them all.. now I have to deal with lawmen too?  So now I have to kill players and NPC lawmen.. and for some reason the more I defend myself the more jail time il get?
 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Vaderspupil said:

How about this for a solution? You want to kill other players fine, but make it so that doing so triggers the wanted system like killing an NPC. If a witness(player or NPC) sees you killing another player, you are reported to the law. When the law brings you down, you are placed in "jail" effectively locking you out of online play for a set time period, say a couple of minutes. The more you kill before the law gets you, the longer your "jail" time. I think that would be a more realistic punishment for murder.

There is a flaw with this though. What if a player/posse is attempting to kill me and keeps getting killed by me on respawn. This idiot just keeps coming and coming. I kill him say 10X he kills me say once. Now I have to pay a fine for defending myself against this moron? How is that fair to me?  This happens daily with me. Guy pops me from behind with a shotty and keeps getting killed from that point forward by me. But under this system I would be penalized for self defense? That isn't right. Sorry. I'm not going to run away from a fight.

Edited by Savage_Reaper
Posted
On 1/28/2019 at 12:09 PM, HuDawg said:

And what if they kill all the law men?

Problem is this.  Even the NPCs can be in the wrong sometimes and instigate a fight with a player, yet the player defending themselves now has to deal with the law.

Just imagine how messed up and backwards it would be in terms of pvp in free roam.

A posse of 4 decide to attack me.  I kill them all.. now I have to deal with lawmen too?  So now I have to kill players and NPC lawmen.. and for some reason the more I defend myself the more jail time il get?
 

The lawmen are endless. The player will fall to them eventually. Even if they use the rooftop trick, it keeps them occupied from attacking other players and they'll eventually run out of ammo. As for your other point, they could set it up so that if you are not the instigator, you are allowed to defend yourself without repercussion from the law.

On 1/28/2019 at 12:14 PM, Savage_Reaper said:

There is a flaw with this though. What if a player/posse is attempting to kill me and keeps getting killed by me on respawn. This idiot just keeps coming and coming. I kill him say 10X he kills me say once. Now I have to pay a fine for defending myself against this moron? How is that fair to me?  This happens daily with me. Guy pops me from behind with a shotty and keeps getting killed from that point forward by me. But under this system I would be penalized for self defense? That isn't right. Sorry. I'm not going to run away from a fight.

Accidentally  quoted myself. See above post.

Posted
16 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

Again.. Private lobbies is not a band aid.   The game is designed to be a FFA in public free roam.  Band Aids are what you want.

And you have offered nothing that would stop griefing.    

Because when you talk about griefing you talk about getting killed by players.  Which is pvp.  So you want a band aid that prevents pvp from happening in a game where PVP is part of the game design.

Game needs private lobbies.  If you want to think of private lobbies as slap in the face or ban aid, that's your choice.  Most people will simply see that as a simple solution because that allows you to control who you play with.

You know it's funny.  I was in a discussion that the issue with open realms like this is that PvE players are just too scared to die.  So if they would just accept that dying is just part of the game.  Griefing will no longer be an issue to them.  Now this same player is a griefer in most games I know him from and when I asked why do you attack PvE players knowing that they either can't defend themselves or just won't?  Could it be you are scared of dying in PvP?   Then it only makes sense that you need to come to grips with dying and you won't be afraid to PvP with actual PvP players.  Now he took offense, but it was fair statement.

You keep saying that I haven't offered any suggestions, yet I have.  You just didn't like them, afraid you can't PvP if they was in place.  Now not saying they are the best plans and that they couldn't be tweaked, just brainstorming that could lead to both PvP and PvE players co-existing in the same realm.  You view this debate as You ( a PvP player) being attacked, like I am trying to ruin your fun.  Yet have zero issues with doing that to some one else.  

This type a realm isn't just FFA, it is PvEvP where both worlds exists.  Which means that PvE can happen. 

To define griefing, to me it isn't when I get attacked once by a player or a posse.  It is the non-stop attacking a player, doing nothing but trying to ruin another players fun for the sake of your own.  Now many in these situations feel that when you attack another player.  Those same players feel they HAVE TO run that player out of the server and make sure that they hated it so much that they just won't play the game ever again.  They don't feel they can still share the same server.  

You being one that claims it is policed.  I say by who?  You respond with the players.  I am curious, there isn't more PvP if the players are complaining to Rockstar and on here about the griefing.  Shouldn't they be complaining about all of the PvP that is going on.  If a player isn't participating in PvP, isn't fighting back.  Then it isn't PvP.  Players who participate in that isn't really playing in PvP.  They are griefers and they aren't doing the game any favors by running players off.

You have also claimed it's a FFA.  Really?  Seriously ask yourself, when you see another player.  Do you grab your gun and shoot 1st?  If you always shoot 1st, then it isn't anything can happen.  That is the mindset of the current player base.  If we all shoot 1st, then it's just a PvP game mode.  If it's just a PvP game mode, then you don't need it to be freeroam.  You don't need PvE elements.  No fishing, no hunting, no towns people.  No fences.  You just need a nice little map where players can shoot each other.  

The only ones who need the whole enchilada are those who want to do it all.   Those who want to PvEvP.  Those who truly believe anything can happen.  No griefing required.  Yes some PvE players will get shot from time to time.  Yet, it is no longer a shoot PvE players and run them out of my game.  Those who wish to PvP can still find those who want to PvP and PvE players can fish and hunt without it interrupting each others game.

  • Confused 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

And what if they kill all the law men?

Problem is this.  Even the NPCs can be in the wrong sometimes and instigate a fight with a player, yet the player defending themselves now has to deal with the law.

Just imagine how messed up and backwards it would be in terms of pvp in free roam.

A posse of 4 decide to attack me.  I kill them all.. now I have to deal with lawmen too?  So now I have to kill players and NPC lawmen.. and for some reason the more I defend myself the more jail time il get?
 

Players who would defend themselves should have accountability if they fight back.  It shouldn't be triggered by a Player killing another, it should be the repetition of one player being attacked and killed over and over.  

If players fight back, then the NPCs shouldn't get involved at all.  In the old west, gun fights breakout.  Civvies ran for cover and usually the law didn't intervene till it was all over.

That way PvP can still happen if all parties are open to it.  It's when they aren't.

Posted
38 minutes ago, Vaderspupil said:

The lawmen are endless. The player will fall to them eventually. Even if they use the rooftop trick, it keeps them occupied from attacking other players and they'll eventually run out of ammo. As for your other point, they could set it up so that if you are not the instigator, you are allowed to defend yourself without repercussion from the law.

The cops are endless in GTA O.   And that doesn't stop anything.

Players kill themselves on purpose to stop cops from spawning in GTA O.  And cops attack players who defend themselves.  Its an endless cycle of bullsh*t.

Also..  what makes you think R* can code the game to find out whos the instigator?  It could be ONE person attacking me,  I kill him.. Then his friends start coming at me.  So now im blasting them all left and right.    Does that mean I need to let his friends shoot me 1st?

 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Renascent said:

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.

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.

  • Like 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Players who would defend themselves should have accountability if they fight back.  It shouldn't be triggered by a Player killing another, it should be the repetition of one player being attacked and killed over and over.  

Ok...

So now if someone shoots at my friend..  ONCE.   And I decided to jump in and kill that player 50 times..    I get punished?  

Clearly these band aid ideas don't really work well in the long run.  Again, this is a FFA game.  It is what it is.
 

Private lobbies are the solution to public players not playing how you want.   Just as the always have been in FFA games, especially R* games.

 

Posted
Just now, 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.

Meh.. I hate auto aim.  But there is skill involved.   Also you can always flip on Slippery Bastard or shoot from out of auto aim range.

Posted
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.

Posted
3 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

The cops are endless in GTA O.   And that doesn't stop anything.

Players kill themselves on purpose to stop cops from spawning in GTA O.  And cops attack players who defend themselves.  Its an endless cycle of bullsh*t.

Also..  what makes you think R* can code the game to find out whos the instigator?  It could be ONE person attacking me,  I kill him.. Then his friends start coming at me.  So now im blasting them all left and right.    Does that mean I need to let his friends shoot me 1st?

IRL, 2 people in a bar get into an argument.  1st guy gets nervous and calls his boys over.  One thing leads to another, fight breaks out.  Cops get called.  Do thing interrogate only one side or do they hear the whole story.  

It doesn't have to be who instigated it, but if you are shooting back you die.  Don't give the players an easy out kill yourself.  Make so the players hate griefing.  If you aren't shooting at all.  Then you get out of jail free card.

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.

Posted
8 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

The cops are endless in GTA O.   And that doesn't stop anything.

Players kill themselves on purpose to stop cops from spawning in GTA O.  And cops attack players who defend themselves.  Its an endless cycle of bullsh*t.

Also..  what makes you think R* can code the game to find out whos the instigator?  It could be ONE person attacking me,  I kill him.. Then his friends start coming at me.  So now im blasting them all left and right.    Does that mean I need to let his friends shoot me 1st?

 

 Make it so that suicide will not stop pursuit  from the law and have them ignore anyone who returns fire against the offender.

The game already essentially determines instigator when the players dot turns red as soon as an attack has been initiated.

Posted
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.....? ;).............

Posted
7 minutes ago, Renascent said:

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.

fair enough, I personally believe that if Free Aim was a choice in server preferences there would be less people who would get annoyed at people trying to PvP because as stated all anyone has to do is ride up and blast you, some people cant even escape it. just constant abuse.

if people actually had to aim then those who don't wish to fight or aren't in the mood for PvP then they can easily escape. Thats the True fix for all of these problems, hell even add the option for auto aim on Npcs for those who just want to play PvE.

not saying get rid of auto aim servers, i really don't care if people choose to play that way (wouldn't be the norm if they had introduced the game without it), but definitely need to have free aim lobbies. I don't see a  point in Private lobbies in this game however but idk I personally never wanted them so I have no real opinion on them.

 

  • Like 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

Ok...

So now if someone shoots at my friend..  ONCE.   And I decided to jump in and kill that player 50 times..    I get punished?  

Clearly these band aid ideas don't really work well in the long run.  Again, this is a FFA game.  It is what it is.
 

Private lobbies are the solution to public players not playing how you want.   Just as the always have been in FFA games, especially R* games.

 

Why exactly, would you kill another player 50 times for killing your friend once?  During those 50 killings, is there at some point that, that you may stop and ask yourself.  You know this player hasn't stopped me yet?  Just maybe he or she may have learned their lesson?  At some point they may have just stopped firing back at you?  Just saying, at some point it is you being a di*k.  Your point was probably proven 47 killings ago.  

As stated before, they quit blocking content and private lobbies could be a fix.  They always block content, cause they want us all in the same servers.  So your Band-aid server fixes nothing.  Now what you are calling band-aids are weak ass attempts at fixes that they had no interests in fixing.  Proven by them giving new and better ways to grief.  If they want to fix, they need fixes.  Your private lobbies where they punish players for PvE.  Is super weak ass attempt at fixing.  Cause they aren't fixing anything they are running away from it.  They are separating their player base and then have to push players back to where they want them.  PvEvP doesn't work without balance.   FFA is called fortnite, or gunrush, or PvP only modes.  Just remember PvP doesn't need the PvE.  They can settle on some small map and be perfectly fine.  

  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Why exactly, would you kill another player 50 times for killing your friend once?  During those 50 killings, is there at some point that, that you may stop and ask yourself.  You know this player hasn't stopped me yet?  Just maybe he or she may have learned their lesson?  At some point they may have just stopped firing back at you?  Just saying, at some point it is you being a di*k.  Your point was probably proven 47 killings ago.  

I never said they killed my friend.  I said they shot at him.

Now.. I will kill that player a MILLIONS and more until they leave the area.  If they keep coming back they obviously are not trying to learn a lesson and just want to be a DIE HARD.    I don't care if they stop firing back.    Im not done till im done..

 

Posted
26 minutes ago, Vaderspupil said:

 Make it so that suicide will not stop pursuit  from the law and have them ignore anyone who returns fire against the offender.

The game already essentially determines instigator when the players dot turns red as soon as an attack has been initiated.

The game isn't correct in determining whos an instigator.  I get RED dots all time.. and a lot of the time they didn't even shoot at me.  Including friends who im not possed up with, who all of a sudden are red dots.

Flooding NPCS into the game doesn't really solve anything either way.

Posted (edited)
On 1/28/2019 at 1:46 PM, HuDawg said:

The game isn't correct in determining whos an instigator.  I get RED dots all time.. and a lot of the time they didn't even shoot at me.  Including friends who im not possed up with, who all of a sudden are red dots.

Flooding NPCS into the game doesn't really solve anything either way.

It might be our reputation score that is triggering the red dots, not current actions.

On 1/28/2019 at 1:43 PM, HuDawg said:

I never said they killed my friend.  I said they shot at him.

Now.. I will kill that player a MILLIONS and more until they leave the area.  If they keep coming back they obviously are not trying to learn a lesson and just want to be a DIE HARD.    I don't care if they stop firing back.    Im not done till im done..

 

You sound mad bro'!

Edited by BropolloCreed79
Double Post
Posted
2 minutes ago, HuDawg said:

I never said they killed my friend.  I said they shot at him.

Now.. I will kill that player a MILLIONS and more until they leave the area.  If they keep coming back they obviously are not trying to learn a lesson and just want to be a DIE HARD.    I don't care if they stop firing back.    Im not done till im done..

 

If they keep coming back and both sides are fully engaged.  Then it's call PvP.  All bets are off.  Go to town, let it rip.  If they are playing, in my opinion you have every right to play back.

If they shot at your friend, you kill them a million times and they never raised a finger to fight back, that's you just being a di*k.  At some point there needs to be a line drawn.  One that you don't or can't cross.  Players that are not participating in PvP.  Shouldn't be punished because players have personal anger management issues.  You need a shrink in this case, not gaming where you kill people.

Thing is you don't ever see a difference.  Between PvP or PvE, you see your way and that's it.  You don't see how wrong you are, because you are in denial.  PvEvP is not FFA, it is where bothsides come together and co-exists.  

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Why exactly, would you kill another player 50 times for killing your friend once?  During those 50 killings, is there at some point that, that you may stop and ask yourself.  You know this player hasn't stopped me yet?  Just maybe he or she may have learned their lesson?  At some point they may have just stopped firing back at you?  Just saying, at some point it is you being a di*k.  Your point was probably proven 47 killings ago.  

As stated before, they quit blocking content and private lobbies could be a fix.  They always block content, cause they want us all in the same servers.  So your Band-aid server fixes nothing.  Now what you are calling band-aids are weak ass attempts at fixes that they had no interests in fixing.  Proven by them giving new and better ways to grief.  If they want to fix, they need fixes.  Your private lobbies where they punish players for PvE.  Is super weak ass attempt at fixing.  Cause they aren't fixing anything they are running away from it.  They are separating their player base and then have to push players back to where they want them.  PvEvP doesn't work without balance.   FFA is called fortnite, or gunrush, or PvP only modes.  Just remember PvP doesn't need the PvE.  They can settle on some small map and be perfectly fine.  

To be fair, a lot of these morons will keep running at you . You have to kill them repeatedly. They are dense and can’t take a hint. But I will happily kill you as many times as you like. No need to chase you because you keep coming to me with your lemming mentality. 

Much like The Divsion, people want an open world game to cater to a certain pve crowd. The DZ was a sh*t show but I loved the chaotic vibe. I bought the game knowing this and was fine with it. I wouldn’t expect a game to cater to my play style. If I don’t like it, I move on ( ie For Honor). This argument will never end because PVE only players  want to hunt in peace and harmony, others want to watch the world burn and people like me learn to adapt. Best thing R* can do is stick to whatever their vision is for the game. When you start chopping and dicing core mechanics.....you end up with a waterdown product. This is the main reason I left Destiny 2. Bungie listened to the whiners, causing a watered down product.

Edited by Savage_Reaper
  • Like 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Savage_Reaper said:

To be fair, a lot of these morons will keep running at you . You have to kill them repeatedly. They are dense and can’t take a hint. But I will happily kill you as many times as you like. No need to chase you because you keep coming to me with your lemming mentality. 

Much like The Divsion, people want an open world game to cater to a certain pve crowd. The DZ was a sh*t show but I loved the chaotic vibe. I bought the game knowing this and was fine with it. I wouldn’t expect a game to cater to my play style. If I don’t like it, I move on ( ie For Honor). This argument will never end because PVE only players  want to hunt in peace and harmony, others want to watch the world burn and people like me learn to adapt. Best thing R* can do is stick to whatever their vision is for the game. When you start chopping and dicing core mechanics.....you end up with a waterdown product. This is the main reason I left Destiny 2. Bungie listened to the whiners, causing a watered down product.

In all fairness, a player who keeps charging at you guns a blaze.  Aren't poor innocent victims.  They are participating in PvP.  They are openly begging for your assists to respawn.  Regardless if it be you, HuDawg, or any other player, everyone is participating in PvP.  Go to town.  Have fun with it.

Please don't confuse catering to and balance as being the same.  The DZ was chaotic, it could have been balanced as well.  It never was once again Ubisoft and Massive didn't want it balanced.  They wanted wolves and they wanted sheep.   Yet they advertised PvEvP.  They advertised it as PvE where PvP could happen.  They also made it the End Game and gave players no option but to play PvP.  Yet I enjoyed both, pending on my mood.  Now when you have 20 PvP players standing there and doing nothing but waiting for some PvE farmers to come in and take down a landmark.  There is and issue with your PvP.  Though they claimed not to fear dying in the DZ, none of them wanted to take a chance and become a sheep.  They all wanted to be a wolf.  So they stood around bored until someone volunteered to be a sheep.  By the way just incase you are one of those, "Don't touch my DZ, leave it as is!" die hard PvP players.  You got a DZ that got dumbed down, not balanced, cause they kept striving to force PvE players into the DZ.  Each update they kept nerfing the DZ, cause fewer and fewer PvE players was going in.  The PvP players kept pushing them out, cause they refused to PvP with their peers.  All I can say is being a Day 1 player, sure missed the Day 1 DZ.  Back then PvP meant something.  PvE never really did get any End Game and TD2 sounds like it is going to be treated exactly the same.

On the other hand, at least a PvE player does have a chance to fight back as where Ubisoft and Massive created 2 different builds either PvP and PvE.  Where a PvE player couldn't hurt a well built PvP build.  Ubisoft really hated PvE players.  Lost 90% of their player base in just a few months and said good riddance. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Vaderspupil said:

How about this for a solution? You want to kill other players fine, but make it so that doing so triggers the wanted system like killing an NPC. If a witness(player or NPC) sees you killing another player, you are reported to the law. When the law brings you down, you are placed in "jail" effectively locking you out of online play for a set time period, say a couple of minutes. The more you kill before the law gets you, the longer your "jail" time. I think that would be a more realistic punishment for murder.

The problem I see with this solution is that basically all you are doing by sending lawman after them is feeding them xp.

As for jail time, one in game day is not long at all, maybe two days and some monetary loss followed by public hanging.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
21 hours ago, HuDawg said:

Hell last night I spent an hour killing some random griefer while my friends hunted and fished.

The only counter-point to this would be what happened to me last night; I accepted a stranger mission to retrieve a boat, which I was doing solo.  A posse of three rode after me, but I made it to the point in the river where I entered a cut scene.  The millisecond I came out of the cut scene, I took a head shot, got called a "noob b*tch" and then harassed for the next five minutes by this threesome, riding down on me within seconds of spawning and just running a train on me.

It didn't bother me, but when you literally have folks approaching level 100 grouping up on a level 8 player, no amount of head shots or tactics are going to offset better weaponry, equipped cards, etc., I can easily see why some folks would be aggrieved and just quit the game. 

Once they got bored, I rode to the nearest fast-travel post and just jumped across the map to greener pastures.  No sweat off my nose.  The game's mechanics encourage players to gang up and bully folks like a bunch of Alpha Hotels that didn't get enough hugs from mom and dad growing up.  Judging from the voices, I'd put them at high-school age or maybe college, but far from fully formed adults.  But the point is, not everyone has the luxury to posse up with a group of good, let alone reliable, players.

I'm slowly building my group up, but when I'm forced to endure constant disconnects when I do try to join a session, R* is effectively putting up roadblocks to the very activity that is most commonly proscribed to truncate being victimized or aggrieved.

Telling folks that they need to posse up or wait for R* to implement private lobbies isn't a viable solution when neither is reliably available at this juncture.

19 hours ago, Savage_Reaper said:

They are dense and can’t take a hint.

I'm not into taking hints, but I am a glutton for punishment.  On the plus side, every moment a griefer spends focused on me, other innocent players can get away.  I'm content to waste someone's time who doesn't realize their being distracted.

19 hours ago, Savage_Reaper said:

When you start chopping and dicing core mechanics.....you end up with a waterdown product.

When R* is marketing the game as an RPG with PvE gameplay, having the entirety of the experience be nothing but PvP is misleading.  Not advocating that they change the core mechanics, but they'd be alienating half the game playing population by having no PvE elements.  And right now, that's exactly what they have, ZERO true PvE gameplay.  Literally every mode is PvP, from the entire showdown and Gun Rush game variants, to "Free Roam" which is really just a playground for opportunists to prey up on players of disproportionate skill.

There's literally five or six other game modes devoted to PvP, is it really so unreasonable to allow players who wish to opt out of the PvP experience and have a PvE environment.  You seem to be focused on what is necessary for your own personal enjoyment of the game, which  is fine, but  ignoring that there's a very large portion of the player population who view the online mode as an online story mode that lets them play with friends.  R* markets the game as such, so it's disingenuous to expect everyone to buy into the online experience when it's entirety is PvP.  Labeling Free Roam "PvEvP" is a blatant misrepresentation because PvP is ALWAYS on.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: making PvP and PvE status a toggle with a 30 or 60 second cool down once out of combat is still the most effective way to cater to all parties in a fair and equitable way.  PvP players lose nothing, they can still PvP against anyone else so inclined.  If anything, it adds complexity and nuance as players could have PvE decoys to lure PvP players in and then pounce on them.  PvE players gain the peace and serenity of not being bushwacked and ganged up on by a bunch of trolling losers whose only enjoyment comes from aggrieving others.  Trolls are the only losers in this scenario, and I have yet to see a valid argument against this model.

If it's good enough for the most successful MMORPG of all time (WoW), it should be good enough for RDRO.

19 hours ago, Savage_Reaper said:

The DZ was a sh*t show but I loved the chaotic vibe

Exactly my point.  The core gameplay of TD was built around cooperative gameplay that allowed players to actively choose when to endanger themselves by entering the DZ of their own volition.  And I agree about the rush--I don't personally PvP, but I knew what to expect when going into the DZ and goofing around.  It's a great "change of pace" mechanic from the main game play, but I couldn't see an entire game built around that mechanic being sustainable in the long term, and that's what we're in danger of with RDRO--once the PvE players go away, and there's nobody for the Trolls to prey upon, they'll get bored as well.  

You go into the DZ now in TD, and all you hear about is people whining about how much it sucks now because PvE players aren't forced to go in there for loot like they were back when some of the best loot was gated in there.  

Can you imagine if the entire TD experience was like the DZ?  It'd never be sustainable long term--if it were, TD2 would have gone that route, but they didn't.

19 hours ago, HuDawg said:

Flooding NPCS into the game doesn't really solve anything either way.

Completely agree.  There's plenty of NPC's and anyone begging for more needs to step up and go into St. Denis with a posse pulling "a Number 6".  No shortage of NPC's there...

  • Like 4
Posted
45 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

In all fairness, a player who keeps charging at you guns a blaze.  Aren't poor innocent victims.  They are participating in PvP.  They are openly begging for your assists to respawn.  Regardless if it be you, HuDawg, or any other player, everyone is participating in PvP.  Go to town.  Have fun with it.

Please don't confuse catering to and balance as being the same.  The DZ was chaotic, it could have been balanced as well.  It never was once again Ubisoft and Massive didn't want it balanced.  They wanted wolves and they wanted sheep.   Yet they advertised PvEvP.  They advertised it as PvE where PvP could happen.  They also made it the End Game and gave players no option but to play PvP.  Yet I enjoyed both, pending on my mood.  Now when you have 20 PvP players standing there and doing nothing but waiting for some PvE farmers to come in and take down a landmark.  There is and issue with your PvP.  Though they claimed not to fear dying in the DZ, none of them wanted to take a chance and become a sheep.  They all wanted to be a wolf.  So they stood around bored until someone volunteered to be a sheep.  By the way just incase you are one of those, "Don't touch my DZ, leave it as is!" die hard PvP players.  You got a DZ that got dumbed down, not balanced, cause they kept striving to force PvE players into the DZ.  Each update they kept nerfing the DZ, cause fewer and fewer PvE players was going in.  The PvP players kept pushing them out, cause they refused to PvP with their peers.  All I can say is being a Day 1 player, sure missed the Day 1 DZ.  Back then PvP meant something.  PvE never really did get any End Game and TD2 sounds like it is going to be treated exactly the same.

On the other hand, at least a PvE player does have a chance to fight back as where Ubisoft and Massive created 2 different builds either PvP and PvE.  Where a PvE player couldn't hurt a well built PvP build.  Ubisoft really hated PvE players.  Lost 90% of their player base in just a few months and said good riddance. 

I played Division for a good 18months(Day1 player). I just burned myself out. But I had no issues with players. I enjoyed farming, rouge hunting and their version of raids. I sometimes would have people in the Dz with me who thought they should be able to farm in peace. Their refusal to even attempt to defend themselves hurt not only  just them but the team. I understand if your playstyle is PVE....but why play games that force you to PVP too? I don’t know why you would do that to yourself. 

Posted

Rockstar's promotional material says Red Dead Redemption 2 Online is to be a "fun and fair environment for everyone" and that we can "Explore the world solo or with friends."

Getting headshot while spawning in or while fishing doesn't quite fit that bill for me.

Rockstar is going to do what they are going to do. I just wish they would be more honest about it. If they want the bullies to continue to act that way with no repercussions, they need to say so and let us know they're not going to follow what was said in their promotional material. Some people actually counted on them keeping their word (as stated in their own press releases).

Of course, it's still a beta and maybe Rockstar will clean up the mess that this game is now. My best solution is to give us PvE servers along with whatever these servers are now. 

If that's not going to happen, I'm in favor of punishment fitting the crime for these back shooting bullies. If the combat is not mutual combat, the perpetrator needs to be dealt with, just like in the Old West. Loss of money doesn't hurt enough and neither does time in jail.

I want 10 of their levels to disappear for every occurrence of nonmutual combat and their loss of levels would also prevent them from using weapons, clothing, etc., based on their new level.

Sure, you can grief if you want, but it's going to cost you.

I'd take that headshot a little better knowing there are some actual consequences behind the act. 

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Savage_Reaper said:

I played Division for a good 18months(Day1 player). I just burned myself out. But I had no issues with players. I enjoyed farming, rouge hunting and their version of raids. I sometimes would have people in the Dz with me who thought they should be able to farm in peace. Their refusal to even attempt to defend themselves hurt not only  just them but the team. I understand if your playstyle is PVE....but why play games that force you to PVP too? I don’t know why you would do that to yourself. 

Cause it was advertised that there was PvE End Game.  There wasn't.  PvE End Game was going into the DZ to be Sheep.  For the longest time, PvE was refused any kind of End Game Experience.  Ubisoft/Massive added HVTs, LZ Bosses, and eventually WSP.  Rewards for the longest time was still better in the DZ then any where else.  Players liked the PvE.  PvP players refused to share.  Any time PvE players asked for anything, terms like snowflake, entitlement, carebears, etc..........was thrown at them.  At one PvE players was able to build Skill Builds, which could hurt the PvP players in the DZ and PvP players cried for nerfs of everything.  If I pay just as much for the game as you or anyone else, am I not allowed to make suggestions that can improve the game.  Many times players asked for stuff and they wasn't doing it to be selfish, yet was rejected and ridiculed for it.  

Now Rockstar that is different style, but in GTAO they punished the PvE players for being in different lobbies, safe lobbies if you will.  PvP players who griefed those same players went unpunished.  No balance was ever tried, if anything they gave more options to grief with.  

Rumors and just rumors I am hearing, they are going to use the same business model for RDR2.  Are you in the agreement, Rockstar should just say FU to all those players who don't like to be griefed.   Maybe they shouldn't have bought the game, no refunds and a big FU to boot.  How dear them think they should be able to enjoy the game.  Quite simply put.  Rockstar says they want to make it right and fix the griefing issue.  It isn't about players putting themselves through anything.  It's about Rockstar doing as they say they would and fix griefing.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

If they shot at your friend, you kill them a million times and they never raised a finger to fight back, that's you just being a di*k.  At some point there needs to be a line drawn.  One that you don't or can't cross. 

I disagree.    They should parley, leave the area or leave the game.    They crossed that imaginary line the moment they opened fire depending one how and when they shot.

2 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

  You need a shrink in this case, not gaming where you kill people.

Lol?

Maybe I do need a shrink.  This is my brain when I start fighting against griefers..

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

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
×
×
  • Create New...