Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Clash of two communities?

153 replies to this topic
TheBeeKayLounge
  • TheBeeKayLounge

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2013

#151

Posted 29 December 2013 - 03:49 AM

How about instead of insisting that others play the game wrong, we accept that some people view the game's purpose differently? So far I have just seen people saying "I play the game the right way" (and its been used for both sides of the argument) when there is no right way. It is ignorant to accuse someone of playing the game wrong just because their style doesn't appeal to you. You want to drive around peacefully in a Peyote, Bill wants to cram his Entity full of sticky bombs up your poop chute, and I want to chase you down on my bicycle and give you the finger. Embrace our differences.

 

I feel like a simple solution would have the three different lobbies like in Red Dead, and have them all have slightly different options. The roleplayers can all unite and do missions peacefully while chaos ensues in another lobby. I feel like all basic suggestions have already been made so I'll leave it there. The only thing I would not do is the Free Roam sized Deathmatch.  PvE players have free roam, PvP has the deathmatch, but the players who like both are forced to choose between no action or constant death. And I feel that majority of the community is in this middle ground, so they should be appealed to. 

  • Phyxsius- likes this

RealHoosier07
  • RealHoosier07

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2013

#152

Posted 29 December 2013 - 05:20 AM

A pvp free roam can be created in the content creator right now...you can do the same thing you do in free roam..add tanks, choppers, or whatever you want.  We don't need pvp in free roam because you can make a deathmatch that is exactly that.

  • haleyshorts likes this

beat_savy_9
  • beat_savy_9

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2013

#153

Posted 29 December 2013 - 10:35 PM

 

 

Anyone that thinks taking away pvp in free roam will kill this game...well....you haven't played very many online games then.

But it would dissatisfy those players seeking pseudo realism.  I wont advocate a mandatory passive mode free roam but at the same time, I'm aware of the frustration PvE players face there.  PvP players have no problem finding matches in free roam, shoot someone in the face, they want revenge, instant PvP.  PvE players don't have it so easy, approach a player, salute, beep, what ever, get shot in the face :).  I will however advocate modifications to the way players are presented on the map, or the way the environment reacts to certain behaviors, this to accommodate the salutes and the beeps.

People did want to play GTA IV multiplayer PvE style, but it was practically impossible, then, it also became impossible to play it PvP when it was hax to oblivion.  Similar situation happening here in my opinion, there is a glimmer of hope, but it's dim.

 

I think you misunderstand me.  I play PVP..I play PVE.  I'm a hybrid of both and have a hell of a lot of fun doing both.  That being said, I still think they need to do away with it in free roam.  Like I said, you can right now make a free roam deathmatch with the content creator...we don't need pvp in free roam.  Anybody that wants free roam pvp, well you just set the timer of the match for an hour....or more if they allow it.  This gives players the same thing they have now but you get paid instead of lose money.  They could even add to the creator to allow custom vehicles.

 

You put way too much stock into the pseudo realism...people just want a game that's fun.  If you give people A LOT more to do in free roam...then add in the content creator and how cool it can be if you actually get imaginitive with it...add in some dynamic events that bring people together...and nobody will care that pvp is gone from free roam.

 

I understand the point, it's my opinion that eradicating PVP from free roam is a Draconian measure that wont solve the issue at hand, that being accommodate PVE player match ups.  It's also too unrealistic, which I don't believe, as mentioned, should be swept under the rug.  I consider the pseudo realism the foundation of GTA and, it's greatest appeal.  There are multitudes of games on the market that embrace fantasy combat.  The success of the GTA franchise in my opinion comes from crossing the line of fantasy vs. simulation, one of the reasons production receives resistance from the press and community groups.  It was a bold move to be sure, but a necessary one in my opinion.  Simply put, what I advocate is to embrace it more, configure the system to have harsher repercussions to unwanted aggression.  It will enhance the experience for players as each act will have more meaning.  This is merely my point of view.


How about instead of insisting that others play the game wrong, we accept that some people view the game's purpose differently? So far I have just seen people saying "I play the game the right way" (and its been used for both sides of the argument) when there is no right way. It is ignorant to accuse someone of playing the game wrong just because their style doesn't appeal to you. You want to drive around peacefully in a Peyote, Bill wants to cram his Entity full of sticky bombs up your poop chute, and I want to chase you down on my bicycle and give you the finger. Embrace our differences.

 

I feel like a simple solution would have the three different lobbies like in Red Dead, and have them all have slightly different options. The roleplayers can all unite and do missions peacefully while chaos ensues in another lobby. I feel like all basic suggestions have already been made so I'll leave it there. The only thing I would not do is the Free Roam sized Deathmatch.  PvE players have free roam, PvP has the deathmatch, but the players who like both are forced to choose between no action or constant death. And I feel that majority of the community is in this middle ground, so they should be appealed to. 

I agree with the point that this game has as many ways to play as there are players, I cannot endorse the simple solution presented here however, because as I see it, the strength of GTA lies in it's ability to bring together disharmonious styles into one playing field.  Yet, at this stage, it's apparent that the system is weighted in favor of PVP.


B3astGTS
  • B3astGTS

    Why? Because cash cards...

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2013
  • None

#154

Posted 29 December 2013 - 11:41 PM

IMO Rockstar doesn't need to separate the servers further/ they just need to fix what's already there. Passive mode and bad sport are good ideas that would cover most complaints if they were implemented correctly.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users