What is your biggest fear for Red Dead Redemption II?

[Billaythekid54]

I'm ready to play this game enough talk and let's get into this world and be outlaws, rustlers, train robbers, bank robbers, fisherman, hunters, gamblers, drinkers, and go get us a whore or two. Since this is a game we can choose do what ever we want with out real world consequences. I'm just damn ready!!!!!!!

[Jono56667]

On 9/25/2018 at 7:11 PM, Archbell said:

Yeah, we're good.

Is it just me or does the guy in the background look like Seth from rdr1 

[Gh0stRyder]

I guess I would be worried about some things being too complex or time-consuming where other things aren't complex enough. 

Like I don't want the game to feel like a breeze to get through but I also don't want to spend 200 hours in game time picking daisies. 

Edited October 4, 2018 by Gh0stRyder

[watery buffalo]

I really don't have any I can think of. I feel like what I know about the game is enough to tell me I will fully enjoy it. If I start thinking about fears and worries now with the game, I will just be looking for things to get upset about when I am playing. We have enough gamers like that in the world lol

[Aimesleje]

I'm afraid that R* is going to strip customization features from the game in order to force microtransactions or get you to play online. What has me worried is - a. GTA Online. Enough said. And b. They're adding things like special outfits and black horses and special unique saddle gear for special editions of the game.

To me, anything that I get in game should be achieved organically. Any outfit I get should be earned or come across organically. Any horse I get should be bought or earned. I don't wanna have things given to me behind pay walls with no effort. Besides, the fact that they are offering a pure black horse as a special edition bonus means that you can't earn one in the base game. If you could the SE bonus wouldn't be special. No pure black horses in the base game. Let that sink in.

Honestly, I'm afraid that I (and this community) is too hyped. Rather like we were for GTA 5 five years ago. And we're blinding ourselves to the fact that R* has had some shady quick buck practices that strips features from the game just to net them extra profit in the past. I hope I'm wrong. I'm really excited for RDR2. I just can't keep letting myself get overhyped for things. I really need to commit to playing the game first.

If you think about it, we've all determined that this will be the best book in the history of literature, just by looking at the cover. None of us have played it yet. So... As the days get closer, I find myself getting wearier.

[Cokeyskunk]

13 hours ago, Aimesleje said:

just by looking at the cover

I disagree. We've also seen several videos including gameplay which have been phenomenal.

That's like judging a book by several very riveting excerpts from different chapters. Which is a far sight better than by just looking at the cover.

[Benjo]

14 hours ago, Aimesleje said:

just by looking at the cover

 

59 minutes ago, Cokeyskunk said:

I disagree. We've also seen several videos including gameplay which have been phenomenal.

That's like judging a book by several very riveting excerpts from different chapters. Which is a far sight better than by just looking at the cover.

We've also read 10 of their other books which were amazing, and other people have read this book and have said it's amazing. 

[YodaMan 3D]

1 hour ago, Cokeyskunk said:

I disagree. We've also seen several videos including gameplay which have been phenomenal.

That's like judging a book by several very riveting excerpts from different chapters. Which is a far sight better than by just looking at the cover.

The best argument I can give is the Division, they showed gameplay at E3 and at release, we didn't get that, we never got it.  I agree that things could get shady and get shady fast.  Last thing we need to do is get over-hyped before the game gets released, regardless of who else may have played it and said it is great.  That person wasn't me, so it's hard for me to believe their critiques.  Soon though, I will be playing and have my day, as well as the rest of you will as well.

[BropolloCreed79]

47 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

The best argument I can give is the Division, they showed gameplay at E3 and at release, we didn't get that, we never got it.  I agree that things could get shady and get shady fast.  Last thing we need to do is get over-hyped before the game gets released, regardless of who else may have played it and said it is great.  That person wasn't me, so it's hard for me to believe their critiques.  Soon though, I will be playing and have my day, as well as the rest of you will as well.

We're at opposite ends of the spectrum on The Division but I see your point.  For me, it wasn't on my radar at all until Baby Bro turned me onto it, almost a year after it had been released--so for me, there was no buildup, no crushing disappointment, I only paid about $30 for the game used, and another $20 for the Season Pass to get all the content at that point, and I felt like it was a good value.  

I learned my lesson with Ubisoft soon after, though, with For Honor which was a total Sierra Show on launch day and for the first three months or so.  I ditched that game and vowed to never buy another Ubisoft game at launch again (and immediately broke that promise when they announced The Division 2).  That's why I understand the frustration of so many Day 1 TD players.  Ubisoft completely craps the bed on their big releases--just look at what happened to Ghost Recon: Wildlands.  

The same thing happened with Friday the 13th: The Game, just on a smaller scale: developers over-promised and under delivered (although calling it "under delivering" is an understatement, right @Truth, @Cokeyskunk, @Freddie Mercury, @TheHansonGoons?), and with a property so beloved, on a game with so much potential, the total Sierra Show that game became makes The Division look like a damn tickle fight.

[YodaMan 3D]

1 minute ago, BropolloCreed79 said:

We're at opposite ends of the spectrum on The Division but I see your point.  For me, it wasn't on my radar at all until Baby Bro turned me onto it, almost a year after it had been released--so for me, there was no buildup, no crushing disappointment, I only paid about $30 for the game used, and another $20 for the Season Pass to get all the content at that point, and I felt like it was a good value.  

I learned my lesson with Ubisoft soon after, though, with For Honor which was a total Sierra Show on launch day and for the first three months or so.  I ditched that game and vowed to never buy another Ubisoft game at launch again (and immediately broke that promise when they announced The Division 2).  That's why I understand the frustration of so many Day 1 TD players.  Ubisoft completely craps the bed on their big releases--just look at what happened to Ghost Recon: Wildlands.  

The same thing happened with Friday the 13th: The Game, just on a smaller scale: developers over-promised and under delivered (although calling it "under delivering" is an understatement, right @Truth, @Cokeyskunk, @Freddie Mercury, @TheHansonGoons?), and with a property so beloved, on a game with so much potential, the total Sierra Show that game became makes The Division look like a damn tickle fight.

Two things, I own Friday the 13th and could never find anyone on to play the game with ever.

The second thing is TD2 was started within a few weeks of release of TD because they learned everything they needed to from TD to make TD2.  TD is almost 3 years old and keeps getting worse with each new update and keeps ignoring all suggestions by the players still playing.  Yet they learned all that they needed from a few weeks of release on how to make the new game better.  I wish you luck, but I won't be buying.  I already played the beta and the Ubi staff is awkward when dealing with issues.

[Truth]

10 minutes ago, BropolloCreed79 said:

The same thing happened with Friday the 13th: The Game, just on a smaller scale: developers over-promised and under delivered (although calling it "under delivering" is an understatement

I got the game just after launch, so I missed a lot of the pre-release bullsh*t. They still really f*cked the community though... I'm still not convinced dedicated servers are legit. My ping varies greatly depending on the lobby.

I just hope it doesn't deter anyone from making another (better) F13 game somewhere down the road. It had potential.

6 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Two things, I own Friday the 13th and could never find anyone on to play the game with ever.

I still hop on once in a while. Usually just for a match or 2 before I get bored. I spent WAAAAYYYY too much time playing it lol

[YodaMan 3D]

If I remember correctly, my son and I started playing once.  He really wanted to play so we waited forever for a server, finally got in and about 2 mins in we find each other and then we got a message about not enough players and got booted out, never could get back in.

[Kean_1]

16 hours ago, Aimesleje said:

I'm afraid that R* is going to strip customization features from the game in order to force microtransactions or get you to play online. What has me worried is - a. GTA Online. Enough said. And b. They're adding things like special outfits and black horses and special unique saddle gear for special editions of the game.

To me, anything that I get in game should be achieved organically. Any outfit I get should be earned or come across organically. Any horse I get should be bought or earned. I don't wanna have things given to me behind pay walls with no effort. Besides, the fact that they are offering a pure black horse as a special edition bonus means that you can't earn one in the base game. If you could the SE bonus wouldn't be special. No pure black horses in the base game. Let that sink in.

Honestly, I'm afraid that I (and this community) is too hyped. Rather like we were for GTA 5 five years ago. And we're blinding ourselves to the fact that R* has had some shady quick buck practices that strips features from the game just to net them extra profit in the past. I hope I'm wrong. I'm really excited for RDR2. I just can't keep letting myself get overhyped for things. I really need to commit to playing the game first.

If you think about it, we've all determined that this will be the best book in the history of literature, just by looking at the cover. None of us have played it yet. So... As the days get closer, I find myself getting wearier.

What forced microtransactions do you speak of.  As far as special game editions, this is nothing new or unique in the gaming world.  The ones R* offers in theirs is nearly all story-mode related cosmetics, a couple missions and shortcut items.  

I expect RDOs MCX model to be the same as GTAV:O where it is based on in-game cash that you have an option to buy.  That is not the same as a paywall where items are purchase-only.  You can still achieve items in the game "organically" by working for them.  No one is forcing you to buy Shark Cards, etc.  .....that's merely a shortcut for those who want that option and are willing to pay for it.

I have to say.....  I was hyped for GTAV for many of the same reasons I am hyped for RDR2 now.  ....and I was not disappointed.  GTAV delivered IMO and I even enjoyed GTAV:O to an extent.  I do believe RDO will be a little different from GTAV:O given some of the interviews and information we have seen so far. 

What we've seen so far with the in-game footage, mechanic descriptions, hands-on experiences, etc. is a lot more than just the "cover".

Too hyped?  ......naw.  I base my excitement on the track record of R*, my own satisfaction with their past games and the information I have seen thus far regarding RDR2.  

[Aimesleje]

3 hours ago, Kean_1 said:

I expect RDOs MCX model to be the same as GTAV:O where it is based on in-game cash that you have an option to buy.  That is not the same as a paywall where items are purchase-only.  You can still achieve items in the game "organically" by working for them.  No one is forcing you to buy Shark Cards, etc.  .....that's merely a shortcut for those who want that option and are willing to pay for it.

That's a lie. You cannot EARN a $20,000,000 yacht in GTAO. You cannot start as a level 1 character and work your way to having a hundred million dollars. The only people who've achieved that are shark card buyers and hackers. Hackers which R* doesn't even bother to get rid of.

5 hours ago, Benjo said:

We've also read 10 of their other books which were amazing, and other people have read this book and have said it's amazing. 

No journalist has played the final version of RDR2 from start to finish yet. A couple hours in a demo doesn't reflect a final product. I'm not trying to be cynical here, and I get everyone here is a fan. I'M A FAN. I'm just saying -- you guys are clearly expecting a 10/10 game. Not hoping, not believing. You guys are so over hyped it's blinding you.

I'm not bashing you guys. I'm hyped too. I just don't outright believe this game will be without it's faults. I'm looking closely at what's being given and I see some patterns of withholding things from games to hide behind paywalls that I don't like

[Kean_1]

2 hours ago, Aimesleje said:

That's a lie. You cannot EARN a $20,000,000 yacht in GTAO. You cannot start as a level 1 character and work your way to having a hundred million dollars. The only people who've achieved that are shark card buyers and hackers. Hackers which R* doesn't even bother to get rid of.

I've earned more than that in GTAV:O without the use of Shark Cards or hacking but yeah, it's not easy to obtain such an item when you consider everything else that you buy in the game along the way (e.g. vehicles, aircraft, businesses, weapon upgrades, etc.).  I never felt the yachts were worth it to be honest and felt they were just for bragging rights. 

There are tons of "get rich quick" videos on YT showing you how best to grind for the cash.  Some work better than others.  That's how I was able to purchase all of my businesses, etc.  If you would argue the point of grinding for cash in the game or the inflated prices of items, I would agree.  

A liar?  ....naw.  It's possible to obtain those items with honest gameplay but at this point, I don't really care to convince you of it as I don't have the tolerance to be disrespected.

5 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

The best argument I can give is the Division, they showed gameplay at E3 and at release, we didn't get that, we never got it.  I agree that things could get shady and get shady fast.  Last thing we need to do is get over-hyped before the game gets released, regardless of who else may have played it and said it is great.  That person wasn't me, so it's hard for me to believe their critiques.  Soon though, I will be playing and have my day, as well as the rest of you will as well.

Yeah, the Division wasn't nearly as good as the early in-game marketing footage showed.  They are one of those developers that I will no longer trust that their product is what it appears to be while in development.  Although I enjoyed GRW (not PvP), they came up short once again.  .....but not as bad as FC5 IMO.  I'm done with their franchises of AC, FC and likely the Division too.  I was burned one too many times.

On the other hand, I have not had any major disappointments with R*s products.  Also, most of the in-game footage and major reveals we have had so far is recent and in the final stages of the product's development.  This isn't the same situation (IMO) as the Division where we were being sold one thing and got another.  

As far as the hands-on reviews, even when you cut through the subjective opinions/fluff, just hearing about the mechanics and knowing what I know about R*s previous products gives me a really good idea of the experience I should expect from RDR2.  

[YodaMan 3D]

Earning $20 million isn't easy in GTA:O from level one.  It was easier in the beginning then it is now in my opinion, but I say that because a 1st level guy doesn't stand a chance against players that have been playing for years.  Shark Cards can help, but they don't necessarily make you a good player.   Youtube, which I am not a fan of does show players easier ways to earn money, many that exploit glitches and hacks.  RDR2:O will have those as well, I suppose. 

We are hyped and have been so for almost a decade.  Rockstar has been better then most companies, but they also gave away a lot of free updates.  Not everyone who played paid for those, they came from shark card users for GTA:O and RDR2:O will have similar upgrades.  It isn't all their fault either, it is those who abuse the system.  Regardless of cost.

I agree with you.  I am going in trying to look for the bad things till Rockstar shows me that there is no bad stuff.  Meanwhile the abusers will still be there abusing cause they can.

[Kean_1]

47 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Earning $20 million isn't easy in GTA:O from level one.  It was easier in the beginning then it is now in my opinion, but I say that because a 1st level guy doesn't stand a chance against players that have been playing for years.  Shark Cards can help, but they don't necessarily make you a good player.   Youtube, which I am not a fan of does show players easier ways to earn money, many that exploit glitches and hacks.  RDR2:O will have those as well, I suppose. 

We are hyped and have been so for almost a decade.  Rockstar has been better then most companies, but they also gave away a lot of free updates.  Not everyone who played paid for those, they came from shark card users for GTA:O and RDR2:O will have similar upgrades.  It isn't all their fault either, it is those who abuse the system.  Regardless of cost.

I agree with you.  I am going in trying to look for the bad things till Rockstar shows me that there is no bad stuff.  Meanwhile the abusers will still be there abusing cause they can.

Yeah, it's certainly a grind no doubt. 

I do hope the RDO economy isn't as out of whack as GTAV:Os.  I also hope it is geared more toward cooperative gameplay rather than the wildly toxic PvP while in the open world.  

[YodaMan 3D]

13 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:

Yeah, it's certainly a grind no doubt. 

I do hope the RDO economy isn't as out of whack as GTAV:Os.  I also hope it is geared more toward cooperative gameplay rather than the wildly toxic PvP while in the open world.  

I am sure in will be similar economy, out of whack.  I hope it is more cooperative gameplay, but that isn't the way the game industry has been heading.  The market seems to support the toxic behavior in open world environment.  I hope not but I have a bad feeling in my gut closer we get to November.

[BropolloCreed79]

25 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:

I do hope the RDO economy isn't as out of whack as GTAV:Os.  I also hope it is geared more toward cooperative gameplay rather than the wildly toxic PvP while in the open world.  

IIRC, one of the gameplay videos for RDR2 talked about skinning game and trading the pelts at a general store for cash.  I'm certain there's going to be other ways to make money in the game, it's just going to require work.

I'd rather work for it than take the quick and easy path (as Vader did).  I know @YodaMan 3D is no fan of The Division, but one of the few things they got right was how they handled microtransactions: randomized loot boxes that could be purchased with "keys" that are available in three ways: (1) real world cash (converted into another currency in-game that can be exchanged for the "keys" to the boxes); (2) randomized drops from defeating Named Enemies, opening free crates that are earned through gameplay such as daily quests, weekly quests, or point accumulation; OR (3) unlocking in-game commendations which have fractions of a key drop at predetermined intervals, such as killing a specific number of enemies, or completing specific tasks.

Those randomized loot boxes only dropped cosmetic items, such as weapon skins, backpack skins, clothing, or emotes, and granted no statistical or measurable advantage to the player (other than looking sweet).  You could purchase an assortment of randomized items with real world cash on a week to week basis, but the good stuff is usually gated behind gambling addiction, er, um, randomized loot boxes.

I can see RDR2 taking a similar tack.

[Aimesleje]

5 hours ago, Kean_1 said:

If you would argue the point of grinding for cash in the game or the inflated prices of items, I would agree.  

That's my point. R* literally designed online to be a GRIND. It was never meant to be a rewarding experience of building a criminal empire from scratch. It was intentionally created to frustrate teenagers into buying shark cards. And luxury items like yachts (which you said yourself have no utility outside of "bragging rights") were placed into the game to make teenagers jealous of each other to the point of buying shark cards to get to the level of their in game friends.

R* utilizes the same type of predatory practices that Facebook does. It creates social imbalances where people feel the need to compete. In the same way people on social media NEED people to press the like button on their photos, GTAO players (especially young teenage ones) feel the NEED to own luxury items in the game (especially when their buddies own apartments and full garages and a collection of yachts). And they'll shell out $20+ a month of their parents money to buy a couple mill a year in the game.

 You said it yourself, you needed get rich quick tutorials to help you make money in the game. You couldn't have done it intuitively by just playing missions and having fun. I'm also guessing (I may be wrong) that it wasn't all pleasant. A lot of your wealth building in game was a tireless grind. Not enjoyable or rewarding in the same way buying a shark card gives you instant gratification.

[Benjo]

1 hour ago, Aimesleje said:

That's my point. R* literally designed online to be a GRIND. It was never meant to be a rewarding experience of building a criminal empire from scratch. It was intentionally created to frustrate teenagers into buying shark cards. And luxury items like yachts (which you said yourself have no utility outside of "bragging rights") were placed into the game to make teenagers jealous of each other to the point of buying shark cards to get to the level of their in game friends.

R* utilizes the same type of predatory practices that Facebook does. It creates social imbalances where people feel the need to compete. In the same way people on social media NEED people to press the like button on their photos, GTAO players (especially young teenage ones) feel the NEED to own luxury items in the game (especially when their buddies own apartments and full garages and a collection of yachts). And they'll shell out $20+ a month of their parents money to buy a couple mill a year in the game.

 You said it yourself, you needed get rich quick tutorials to help you make money in the game. You couldn't have done it intuitively by just playing missions and having fun. I'm also guessing (I may be wrong) that it wasn't all pleasant. A lot of your wealth building in game was a tireless grind. Not enjoyable or rewarding in the same way buying a shark card gives you instant gratification.

I can't argue with any of this. In fact I can't argue with anything you've put here.

My hype for RDR2 is purely for offline mode, and I'm certain it's going to deliver. If online turns out to be a grindfest then I just won't go online.

[Kean_1]

4 hours ago, BropolloCreed79 said:

IIRC, one of the gameplay videos for RDR2 talked about skinning game and trading the pelts at a general store for cash.  I'm certain there's going to be other ways to make money in the game, it's just going to require work.

I'd rather work for it than take the quick and easy path (as Vader did).  I know @YodaMan 3D is no fan of The Division, but one of the few things they got right was how they handled microtransactions: randomized loot boxes that could be purchased with "keys" that are available in three ways: (1) real world cash (converted into another currency in-game that can be exchanged for the "keys" to the boxes); (2) randomized drops from defeating Named Enemies, opening free crates that are earned through gameplay such as daily quests, weekly quests, or point accumulation; OR (3) unlocking in-game commendations which have fractions of a key drop at predetermined intervals, such as killing a specific number of enemies, or completing specific tasks.

Those randomized loot boxes only dropped cosmetic items, such as weapon skins, backpack skins, clothing, or emotes, and granted no statistical or measurable advantage to the player (other than looking sweet).  You could purchase an assortment of randomized items with real world cash on a week to week basis, but the good stuff is usually gated behind gambling addiction, er, um, randomized loot boxes.

I can see RDR2 taking a similar tack.

Yeah, I would rather work for my in-game money too and if the gameplay is entertaining enough (with enough activities, missions, side quests, etc.), I don't mind.  

Personally, I like the virtual currency model over loot boxes / crates but Take Two has already said that future MTX opportunities may not include virtual currency.  They also came out in defense of loot boxes during the controversy.   ....so yeah, I can see them possibly adding them in RDR2 or some mixture of both.  We'll just have to see how it goes.  What I do know is that these guys are not stupid and they know that all eyes are on them right now.  .....a bad decision with RDR2 could really put a dent in their upward momentum.    

Some folks are always going to be against MTXs but the the fact is they are here to stay.  There are companies that simply do it better than others in the eye of the consumer as you mentioned in your example.  However, I have confidence that R* has put a lot of thought in regard to the potential impact of such choices in RDO.  .....but we'll just have to see how it all shakes out I suppose.

[Aimesleje]

3 hours ago, Benjo said:

My hype for RDR2 is purely for offline mode, and I'm certain it's going to deliver. If online turns out to be a grindfest then I just won't go online.

Agreed. I'm really excited for story mode. But my interest starts and ends there. Maybe R* can change my mind by making online a more player friendly -- but considering one of the exclusive digital pre-order bonuses for the $100 ultimate edition of the game is a quick rank up to level 25 in RDR2 online... All I'm seeing is red flags.

Either way, so long as they haven't stripped features from RDR2's main story (like they did for GTA5, promising your character could buy apartments before making it exclusive to GTAO) I won't be bothered by what they do with RDR online. Here's hoping our hype is justified!

[YodaMan 3D]

13 hours ago, Aimesleje said:

That's my point. R* literally designed online to be a GRIND. It was never meant to be a rewarding experience of building a criminal empire from scratch. It was intentionally created to frustrate teenagers into buying shark cards. And luxury items like yachts (which you said yourself have no utility outside of "bragging rights") were placed into the game to make teenagers jealous of each other to the point of buying shark cards to get to the level of their in game friends.

R* utilizes the same type of predatory practices that Facebook does. It creates social imbalances where people feel the need to compete. In the same way people on social media NEED people to press the like button on their photos, GTAO players (especially young teenage ones) feel the NEED to own luxury items in the game (especially when their buddies own apartments and full garages and a collection of yachts). And they'll shell out $20+ a month of their parents money to buy a couple mill a year in the game.

 You said it yourself, you needed get rich quick tutorials to help you make money in the game. You couldn't have done it intuitively by just playing missions and having fun. I'm also guessing (I may be wrong) that it wasn't all pleasant. A lot of your wealth building in game was a tireless grind. Not enjoyable or rewarding in the same way buying a shark card gives you instant gratification.

When playing online, it was about playing a game with friends.  I suggest you set that as your goal. I see no reason with the success financially that GTA did online that Rockstar would handle RDR2 any different.  Though they claimed they will treat both game very different, there is no reason for them not to follow the same model in their designs for money. 

I read once that Rockstar has had enough success over the years that unlike other companies, they don't make games just to make money, they don't to payback their fans by continuing to make the games their fans like to play out of loyalty, now to do that they have to make money.  Industry has changed and so the one they make money to support their games have changed.  Last but not least, don't lie to ourselves, they are doing it strictly for the money. 

[BropolloCreed79]

2 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

they are doing it strictly for the money. 

That's why I started my Celebrity Death Fantasy League.

[Kean_1]

3 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

When playing online, it was about playing a game with friends.  I suggest you set that as your goal. I see no reason with the success financially that GTA did online that Rockstar would handle RDR2 any different.  Though they claimed they will treat both game very different, there is no reason for them not to follow the same model in their designs for money. 

I read once that Rockstar has had enough success over the years that unlike other companies, they don't make games just to make money, they don't to payback their fans by continuing to make the games their fans like to play out of loyalty, now to do that they have to make money.  Industry has changed and so the one they make money to support their games have changed.  Last but not least, don't lie to ourselves, they are doing it strictly for the money. 

This is the only way I play PvP games is with friends.  ......again, preferring co-op scenarios instead.  It was unfortunate that at the time I was playing GTAV:O, I didn't have any PSN friends that were into the game so it was mostly a solo affair with me.  RDR2 is a bit different as I have 3 really good friends who are excited about it and those I have also met here in the forums.

Of course Take Two and Rockstar are interested in revenue but I believe they tend to make a quality product.  Also, just because a company makes a lot of money with successful titles doesn't mean their staff is bereft of passion for what they do.  

The fact is that R* has been doing something right otherwise they would not have enjoyed the success they have  While some other companies continue to make mistakes in their decisions and direction, I feel R* have shown a degree of wisdom in their judgments in this business. 

Regardless of how I or some others may feel, you can't argue that R* has enjoyed an extraordinary level of success thus far.  .....and unless they really screw something up with RDR2, I can only see that trend continuing into the future.   .....but I simply cannot fathom R* / Take Two making such a blunder as to damage that reputation given their track record.  If we were talking about a company like Ubisoft, I wouldn't have nearly as much confidence.  ....little at all in fact.

My only hope is that R* does focus more on cooperative gameplay in their PvP this time around.  Given the drastic differences in settings, I have a feeling PvP gameplay will at least be less chaotic than GTAV:O is.

 

EDIT: I never realized that you were limited to the amount of reactions you can give to posts in a day.  I went to click on a couple here and got the message that I can't.  :LOL:

Edited October 11, 2018 by Kean_1

[BropolloCreed79]

2 hours ago, Kean_1 said:

I have a feeling PvP gameplay will at least be less chaotic than GTAV:O is.

See, I have a feeling it'll be MORE chaotic, because it was the "wild, wild west", not the "reasonably whimsical west".

[YodaMan 3D]

2 hours ago, Kean_1 said:

This is the only way I play PvP games is with friends.  ......again, preferring co-op scenarios instead.  It was unfortunate that at the time I was playing GTAV:O, I didn't have any PSN friends that were into the game so it was mostly a solo affair with me.  RDR2 is a bit different as I have 3 really good friends who are excited about it and those I have also met here in the forums.

Of course Take Two and Rockstar are interested in revenue but I believe they tend to make a quality product.  Also, just because a company makes a lot of money with successful titles doesn't mean their staff is bereft of passion for what they do.  

The fact is that R* has been doing something right otherwise they would not have enjoyed the success they have  While some other companies continue to make mistakes in their decisions and direction, I feel R* have shown a degree of wisdom in their judgments in this business. 

Regardless of how I or some others may feel, you can't argue that R* has enjoyed an extraordinary level of success thus far.  .....and unless they really screw something up with RDR2, I can only see that trend continuing into the future.   .....but I simply cannot fathom R* / Take Two making such a blunder as to damage that reputation given their track record.  If we were talking about a company like Ubisoft, I wouldn't have nearly as much confidence.  ....little at all in fact.

My only hope is that R* does focus more on cooperative gameplay in their PvP this time around.  Given the drastic differences in settings, I have a feeling PvP gameplay will at least be less chaotic than GTAV:O is.

 

EDIT: I never realized that you were limited to the amount of reactions you can give to posts in a day.  I went to click on a couple here and got the message that I can't.  :LOL:

2 game manufacturers that I supported since forever was Ubisoft and Rockstar.  Until the Division happened, talking with players in different forums over the past 3 years.  I noticed a trend in what many players seemed to want in a game and developers adapted to impress those players.  When often spoke against those changes saying that they must focus on their entire player base, not just a few but the whole.  I usually found myself standing alone defending a dinosaur age. 

Rockstar will adapt to what they think the players want.  GTA5 got shafted, not because they didn't think it needed anymore.  They scrubbed the extra DLCs for no other reason then profit margin.  If GTA5 is their model for RDR2, then they will scrub any plans for the fast buck.  Not saying they can't do both, but when their SP modes are nothing but a tutorial for the online game.  They don't care for their player base, just a few and not the whole.  I wish for the best, but really not trusting them on their words alone, but their actions too.

[Kean_1]

8 minutes ago, BropolloCreed79 said:

See, I have a feeling it'll be MORE chaotic, because it was the "wild, wild west", not the "reasonably whimsical west".

😄

Well, one big difference that sticks out for me is that there won't be aircraft roaming the skies, tanks, flying cars or in this case, flying horses.  No rocket launchers, homing missiles, grenade launchers, etc.  Transportation in RDR2 will be on horseback, via train and perhaps fast travel points.  The game world in RDR2 is also allegedly much bigger than GTAV perhaps giving folks even more room to breath.

Ultimately we have to see how it shakes out but this is what I mean by "less chaotic".

......and if the info we heard before was true about the radar being proximity based in RDR2, folks won't be visible to everyone (only those nearby).

   

[YodaMan 3D]

59 minutes ago, Kean_1 said:

😄

Well, one big difference that sticks out for me is that there won't be aircraft roaming the skies, tanks, flying cars or in this case, flying horses.  No rocket launchers, homing missiles, grenade launchers, etc.  Transportation in RDR2 will be on horseback, via train and perhaps fast travel points.  The game world in RDR2 is also allegedly much bigger than GTAV perhaps giving folks even more room to breath.

Ultimately we have to see how it shakes out but this is what I mean by "less chaotic".

......and if the info we heard before was true about the radar being proximity based in RDR2, folks won't be visible to everyone (only those nearby).

   

The did crazy things in GTA, doesn't mean they can't be creative in RDR2.  Just cause it limits the range doesn't mean it will limit the griefing.