Zelnick Assures Monetization Not Priority In Red Dead Redemption 2

[NewsBot]

Take-Two Interactive has been shooting down common Red Dead Redemption 2 fan concerns in recent interviews and the latest topic on the chopping board is monetization.

When you have one of the most anticipated games of the year coming up you're going to garner a lot of interest from gamers, and amid all the anticipation there can also be worry.

Over and over again, fans find ways to draw comparisons between Red Dead Redemption 2 and Grand Theft Auto 5 even though the two are fundamentally different on multiple levels.

And yet, due to these comparisons, Rockstar and Take-Two have had to reaffirm their dedication to single player experiences, explain that expecting Red Dead Redemption 2 to match GTA 5's sales is unrealistic, and now, tell us that monetizing every aspect of their upcoming title isn't at the top of their to-do list.

GTA 5's multiplayer mode, GTA Online, allows players to purchase in-game currency with real money. There aren't any lootboxes, no RNG, no way to get an unfair advantage with purchases inaccessible to other non-spending players - you can only buy currency. This is hardly the most nefarious monetization scheme in the gaming industry, and Shark Cards have helped fund years and years of free DLC.

However, if some elements of the community are to be believed, the aforementioned also means that Red Dead Online is guaranteed to be a microtransaction-laden purchase-fest which you can only enjoy if you pump endless amounts of cash into the game.

This assumption is flawed from the very beginning, but nonetheless its spread across the fanbase to the point of becoming a widely held concern.

In fact, the concern has became so prevalent that Take-Two Interactive CEO Strauss Zelnick touched upon the topic in a recent interview with GamerDaily.biz. Zelnick was speaking about Take-Two's goal of keeping Red Dead Redemption 2 players engaged after release.

What we haven't talked about is any path to monetization because it's just not our primary concern. Our primary concern is keeping consumers engaged.

It's true that no official word of what any of the game's monetization models, if any, will look or work like - but then again there has been very little official word about anything at all. While a recent surge in official info seemed substantial compared to the utter drought that preceded it, broken only by occasion announcements of delays, we still don't know a whole lot about the game, or at least less than we'd like.

In every interview he's given, Zelnick always highlights that instead of thinking strictly in terms of "what will sell well?" the company focuses on making the best games they can, banking on the quality of their work making it sell, not a slavish adherence to trends.

He maintains that their mission with Red Dead Redemption 2 is ultimately to create the best Western the industry has ever seen and they're well on track to accomplish that.

Red Dead Redemption 2 remains one of the most anticipated games of the year and will be released on the 26th of October.

The post Zelnick Assures Monetization Not Priority In Red Dead Redemption 2 appeared first on RDR2.

Read the full story

[Suck3rPunch3d]

I have only seen a few people who really believed the game would be ruined by this. They aren't like some indie devs on Steam. They want the game to be enjoyable, not just gain a profit from the fanbase. 

[Purple Cactus]

7 minutes ago, Suck3rPunch3d said:

I have only seen a few people who really believed the game would be ruined by this. They aren't like some indie devs on Steam. They want the game to be enjoyable, not just gain a profit from the fanbase. 

Same here. Like I do see people joking about it online but most people aren't up in arms over it. Maybe this is on certain forums or something. I don't even remember reading anyone on here panicking over it. 

[YodaMan 3D]

Micro-transactions is the way of the future.  It's how GTAO was able to give update after update for free.  Others paid so everyone could get free stuff. 

I am not a fan, but I understand they have to make a cent or 2 to pay for their great big houses. 

[GatoNegro]

5 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Micro-transactions is the way of the future.  It's how GTAO was able to give update after update for free.  Others paid so everyone could get free stuff. 

I am not a fan, but I understand they have to make a cent or 2 to pay for their great big houses. 

Yeah and I get this but I think what worried a lot of people was that the game was going to become some kind of P2W garbage like you commonly find on PC (Steam). Like if someone paying has an unfair advantage to someone who isn't or can't, then I would have an issue with that.

[YodaMan 3D]

13 hours ago, GatoNegro said:

Yeah and I get this but I think what worried a lot of people was that the game was going to become some kind of P2W garbage like you commonly find on PC (Steam). Like if someone paying has an unfair advantage to someone who isn't or can't, then I would have an issue with that.

They did P2W with GTAO, where players could buy those fighter jets and fly over and bomb other players or buy the tanks and blow players up that way.

[Cokeyskunk]

This is all well and good, and I'm glad they're focusing on the single-player aspect of the game -- but the original had an AMAZING single-player campaign AND an INCREDIBLE multiplayer universe. 

Can we safely assume RDR2 will do the same? Or one better?

Gosh, they just can't get this wrong . . . 

[Benjo]

44 minutes ago, Cokeyskunk said:

an INCREDIBLE multiplayer universe. 

I'd put RDR1's multiplayer as average at best.

[Kean_1]

8 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

They did P2W with GTAO, where players could buy those fighter jets and fly over and bomb other players or buy the tanks and blow players up that way.

I think some of us have a different definition of what is "pay to win".  For instance, I don't consider GTAV:O a P2W model.  The reason is due to the fact that players are simply buying in-game currency with real money.   ......currency that all other players can still obtain themselves (without paying extra) through activities in the game.  

 

On the other hand, many free to play games are prime examples of a P2W model where players literally can't obtain the same, better weapons, vehicles, etc. that paying customers can.   

 

That's not to say that I don't agree that Shark Card purchasers don't have an advantage over others, but what separates GTAV:O from the P2W model IMO is that the player can still make cash in their game and still buy the same things Shark Card players can.

 

In a nutshell, if items that provide an advantage in a game are offered exclusively to players willing to pay for them, I would call that a classic  "pay to win" scenario.   At best, I would consider GTAV:Os model a shortcut.  In either case, I don't think RDR2 will be as "bad" as GTAV:O for various reasons.

Edited July 10, 2018 by Kean_1

[Archbell]

54 minutes ago, Benjo said:

I'd put RDR1's multiplayer as average at best.

What made RDR Multiplayer average for you? I'm very curious as I personally thought it was near perfect and the only improvements I would've added were character creation/customization and in game money along with things to purchase with said money.

[Cokeyskunk]

14 hours ago, Benjo said:

I'd put RDR1's multiplayer as average at best.

Well then, ya put ME as "average," friend. I played that multiplayer for hours every night after putting the kids to bed. Yes, it was a bit repetitive, but the shootouts, the "grab the bag" games, the Texas Hold 'Em games -- I got so good at all of 'em, I was one of the highest ranked players out there. I got to where NO one could beat me to the Quickdraw. And I came up with great tricks to win the "grab the bag" games. It was just a hell of a lot of fun to me.

 

If they can improve on that, I'll be a happy camper, indeed. 

[YodaMan 3D]

On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 5:10 PM, Kean_1 said:

I think some of us have a different definition of what is "pay to win".  For instance, I don't consider GTAV:O a P2W model.  The reason is due to the fact that players are simply buying in-game currency with real money.   ......currency that all other players can still obtain themselves (without paying extra) through activities in the game.  

 

On the other hand, many free to play games are prime examples of a P2W model where players literally can't obtain the same, better weapons, vehicles, etc. that paying customers can.   

 

That's not to say that I don't agree that Shark Card purchasers don't have an advantage over others, but what separates GTAV:O from the P2W model IMO is that the player can still make cash in their game and still buy the same things Shark Card players can.

 

In a nutshell, if items that provide an advantage in a game are offered exclusively to players willing to pay for them, I would call that a classic  "pay to win" scenario.   At best, I would consider GTAV:Os model a shortcut.  In either case, I don't think RDR2 will be as "bad" as GTAV:O for various reasons.

To me if you can buy something and it can be used to give you a heads up over other players, it is pay to win.  GTA:O follows that to me.   I did take a break from GTA:O and when I returned I knew players that was using Shark Cards to buy those jets I hate so much so that they could just fly over and blow others up.  I also understand that not all players took the easy route and they earned it the hard way.  Yet upon my return that seemed to be the way it was and for me being almost new to the game had a very difficult time earning money.  So much that I didn't want to play the online game.  I stuck it out and met a few players that was willing to help me out and when my son wanted to play, it became harder to help him, cause the game had more and more players that low levels using these same high level weapons and gear.    To me that isn't competitive or fun for those who become the victim, while the others have a blasts knowing they can't die nor is there anything that can be done about it by the people they are harassing.

[Kean_1]

6 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

To me if you can buy something and it can be used to give you a heads up over other players, it is pay to win.  GTA:O follows that to me.   I did take a break from GTA:O and when I returned I knew players that was using Shark Cards to buy those jets I hate so much so that they could just fly over and blow others up.  I also understand that not all players took the easy route and they earned it the hard way.  Yet upon my return that seemed to be the way it was and for me being almost new to the game had a very difficult time earning money.  So much that I didn't want to play the online game.  I stuck it out and met a few players that was willing to help me out and when my son wanted to play, it became harder to help him, cause the game had more and more players that low levels using these same high level weapons and gear.    To me that isn't competitive or fun for those who become the victim, while the others have a blasts knowing they can't die nor is there anything that can be done about it by the people they are harassing.

A matter of perspective I suppose but for the sake of argument, let's call GTA:O a P2W.  One would still have to see that there is a clear difference between P2W models where one must pay for those items that provide an advantage vs. models like GTA:O where everyone still has access regardless.  If anything I'd call GTA:O a "P2S" (pay to shortcut).

 

I never liked GTA:O public servers and always prefer to play on solo, "friends only" or on a public server alone.  As for the latter, that is achievable through a well known trick with the connection settings on my PS4 that would (in a way)  force the game to place you in a session by yourself.

 

Regardless, all biker missions are still possible to play on an invite-only session so you and your friends don't have to worry about griefers spoiling your fun.  I believe it's any missions / businesses where you don't have to register as a VP or CEO.  All the jobs are also possible to play with just friends provided you have enough people to fill the roster.   ....I think most jobs require 4 players. Even then, you can still join a public server and just start or join jobs without wandering the gameworld getting griefed by others.  You would still be joining randoms provided you don't have enough friends to fill all of the required slots in a crew.

 

As for VP / CEO missions, I would start a session using the trick I mentioned and then have friends join me (or play alone).  Every now and again a random might join the session but nine times out of ten they would either leave or they would do their own thing like I was. 

 

There are lots of tutorials on YouTube showing players how to make quick cash.  I have several businesses myself in GTA:O, I'm over level 200, I have a fleet of aircraft , cars ,etc. but I still rarely ever played in a session with randoms.  

 

Having said all of that, I don't like the environment of public session in GTAV:O as "griefing" is clearly tolerated and even encouraged by design.  I do hope RDR2:O is different in this respect although as far as the "pay" model, I'm ok with something similar to GTAV where I can still make in-game money for the same items.  

Edited July 16, 2018 by Kean_1

[YodaMan 3D]

16 hours ago, Kean_1 said:

A matter of perspective I suppose but for the sake of argument, let's call GTA:O a P2W.  One would still have to see that there is a clear difference between P2W models where one must pay for those items that provide an advantage vs. models like GTA:O where everyone still has access regardless.  If anything I'd call GTA:O a "P2S" (pay to shortcut).

 

I never liked GTA:O public servers and always prefer to play on solo, "friends only" or on a public server alone.  As for the latter, that is achievable through a well known trick with the connection settings on my PS4 that would (in a way)  force the game to place you in a session by yourself.

 

Regardless, all biker missions are still possible to play on an invite-only session so you and your friends don't have to worry about griefers spoiling your fun.  I believe it's any missions / businesses where you don't have to register as a VP or CEO.  All the jobs are also possible to play with just friends provided you have enough people to fill the roster.   ....I think most jobs require 4 players. Even then, you can still join a public server and just start or join jobs without wandering the gameworld getting griefed by others.  You would still be joining randoms provided you don't have enough friends to fill all of the required slots in a crew.

 

As for VP / CEO missions, I would start a session using the trick I mentioned and then have friends join me (or play alone).  Every now and again a random might join the session but nine times out of ten they would either leave or they would do their own thing like I was. 

 

There are lots of tutorials on YouTube showing players how to make quick cash.  I have several businesses myself in GTA:O, I'm over level 200, I have a fleet of aircraft , cars ,etc. but I still rarely ever played in a session with randoms.  

 

Having said all of that, I don't like the environment of public session in GTAV:O as "griefing" is clearly tolerated and even encouraged by design.  I do hope RDR2:O is different in this respect although as far as the "pay" model, I'm ok with something similar to GTAV where I can still make in-game money for the same items.  

Well, we can it whatever you like or call it whatever you like.  As long as one player can buy something that gives them an advantage, is a pay to win.  Whether or not a player can still earn becomes a different matter if you can't earn it cause the guy who bought the advantage is griefing you and keeping you from gaining the same thing. 

Unless you are in private server, I have been helping another player in a MC Mission and had players nuke us with the fighter.

[Kean_1]

6 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Well, we can it whatever you like or call it whatever you like.  As long as one player can buy something that gives them an advantage, is a pay to win.  Whether or not a player can still earn becomes a different matter if you can't earn it cause the guy who bought the advantage is griefing you and keeping you from gaining the same thing. 

Unless you are in private server, I have been helping another player in a MC Mission and had players nuke us with the fighter.

The problem with your argument is that there are several ways you can earn money (good money in some cases) in-game (including MC activities) without being in a public session as I was trying to point out (with several examples).  ....even in a public sessions there are ways to avoid griefers.  

 

As I said before, unless you begin to start dabbling in VP and CEO businesses,  there are still plenty of ways to make money without having to deal with the pitfalls of a public session.  ....and even then (as I pointed out) I have been able to use a simple, well known trick changing my MTU setting to allow me to build these businesses, play VP missions, make money on cargo deliveries, etc.  on a public session all by myself or with friends. 

 

If that's not an option then there are still activities like heists, jobs, races, etc. that can be played solo or with 2 or more players without being griefed by creating your own or joining them when you get notifications.  IIRC, these will show up even when you're in a friends session.  ......but even if you're in a public room you can still use passive mode to move around or simply spawn into a safe place like your garage, apartment, business, etc.  while you wait for an invite or set up your own mission.  The main point here is that once you're in most heists, a mission or a race, you're separated from all other randoms in that session (if there are any).  I think Doomsday heist is a different story in the setup missions (because you have to play those while dealing with everyone in the session) but you also have an option to pay (in-game) to skip those and move on to the main mission(s) in that heist.

 

Heists and jobs are also a great ways to make new friends who can help you with your MC business (which can also be played in an invite-only session unlike VP and CEO activities).    .....or you can even join a crew where you can play in public sessions with an upper hand, help others move product to make a few bucks, etc.  

 

I get that you're soured on the whole GTAV:O experience but you're making it seem like there just isn't anything you can do in that game without subjecting yourself to random griefers when that simply isn't the case.  ....quite the opposite in fact as there are plenty of ways to make money by yourself, with friends or even with randoms away from all of that as I have pointed out.

 

....and there are tons of YouTube tutorials showing you how to make good money without subjecting yourself to griefers.  

 

 

Edited July 17, 2018 by Kean_1

[Benjo]

13 hours ago, Kean_1 said:

....and there are tons of YouTube tutorials showing you how to make good money without subjecting yourself to griefers.  

I think this might be Yoda's point. The fact you have to watch YT tutorials on how to workaround the system to avoid griefers is the problem.

[Kean_1]

10 hours ago, Benjo said:

I think this might be Yoda's point. The fact you have to watch YT tutorials on how to workaround the system to avoid griefers is the problem.

In all fairness, I never mentioned that you need to watch YT tutorials to get around griefers but simply suggesting that there are examples of what I and many others have done to avoid them.  .....and they are there to help those who might want it.  Yoda seems to suggest that there are no ways to make in-game money without subjecting yourself to their torment but in fact there are plenty of ways you can.  That is my point.

 

I have said it before but I agree that griefers are definitely a problem in GTAV:O.  I don't like that the behavior is not only tolerated but also encouraged in the game.   I would love for R* to change that in RDR2 so we can still play in public sessions without the toxic PvP environment.  At the very least I hope there is still a solo and friends-only option in online like there is in GTAV.  I also hope there are still plenty of missions, jobs, etc. that we can do too.