GTAO is decent, but smells corporate greed all over...

[PhillBellic]

Tilemaxx, I couldn't have said it any better. Rockstar are rapidly losing respect from me!

 

Cheers.

[woggleman]

I sort of agree even though I enjoy online but any successful company is going to be money minded even if they genuinely love and care about what they produce which I believe R does. People need to lose their indy idealism. Most of your favorites feel the same way.

[TheTechPoTaToCHIP]

The way I see it, I'm glad all the corporate greed is in GTA Online, because it leaves the singleplayer with its integrity.

[RenThePyro]

Just think of the average GTA:O player, why wouldn't R* to want strain a few bucks out of em? More money towards GTA VI's development.

Edited September 1, 2014 by RenThePyro

[Fuzzknuckles]

The way I see it, I'm glad all the corporate greed is in GTA Online, because it leaves the singleplayer with its integrity.

Yeah but there's no gang wars or drug dealing in SP so Online is the anti-christ.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Fuzzknuckles

[GroundZero]

Well, Rockstar is a company that aims to earn money.

 

In order to do this, they have to "go with the flow".

 

And the flow, nowadays (sadly) is Online gaming. Rockstar, TakeTwo, etc. wouldn't be able to make money simply out of SP. They aimed to create an innovative Online mode, that's why they made GTAO. Whether this was successful or not, that's another story.

 

But I agree with the OP that SP is what made GTA what it is today.

[Saliva]

Completely agree.

[Bill Williamson]

Warning, this is not a rant, just a personal opinion.

 

I don't know, maybe i'm not the modern type of gamer, but i couldn't get hooked on GTAO no matter how hard i tried. Don't get me wrong, you all know how i love GTA V and everything, but GTAO just feels like it's made out of obligation or something. All those kinds of properties, cars, missions are really a fresh air in the game, but to me most of them should have been implemented to the SP portion of the game from day one last year.

 

The fact that R* forced the loyal SP fanbase (that made GTA what it is today) to have to switch on MP in order to gain access to extra houses, vehicles, weapons etc, is beyond me. The fact that they shifted focus to MP almost excusively after game's release, is another dissapointing fact.

 

As much as i think GTAV SP is a much better game over IV SP, IV's online portion was simpler and more fundamental resulting in a more natural and straight-forward experience for the player, allowing to just hook up and play without the extra hassle of GTAO.

 

It's almost a year since Sept. 17 2013, and the much-promised SP DLC is yet TBA, while all they have to show is another MP update that nobody cares about. GTA has never been about online in the first place.

 

 

The dlc for GTA IV did not manage to reach expected sales figures; so much for that loyal SP fanbase. So is it really a surprise they chose not to focus on it? They will probably release it with the next gen version to hype it up and maximize profit...and do you know why nobody cares about games such as Sleeping Dogs or WD anymore? Because they either don t have a multiplayer component or it isn t fleshed out enough to be interesting. GTAO keeps the game alive, and will keep it alive for many years to come, no matter how much "the loyal SP fanbase" cries. And besides, it isn t that big of a hassle to simply switch to your online character, be placed in a solo session and have access to everything you mentioned.

[Fuzzknuckles]

And besides, it isn t that big of a hassle to simply switch to your online character, be placed in a solo session and have access to everything you mentioned.

 

It's amazing that people refuse to do this, even though it grants access to loads of things they complain about not having in the game.

[~Tiger~]

it isn t that big of a hassle to simply switch to your online character, be placed in a solo session and have access to everything you mentioned.

 

 

It is a hassle for XBox360 players who don't have a Live Gold account (that they have to pay for)

[Fuzzknuckles]

 

it isn t that big of a hassle to simply switch to your online character, be placed in a solo session and have access to everything you mentioned.

 

 

It is a hassle for XBox360 players who don't have a Live Gold account (that they have to pay for)

 

And for those that are confirmed PS3 players that don't have to pay for it... it's no hassle at all, yet they make out like R* have chosen to make these things online-specific just to spite them.

 

P.S. Playstation4LYFE, etc.

 

The way I see it - if you're buying a $200-$500 console (depending on generation, model and when you bought it) AND buying a $50 game (probably more than one, who buys a console and only owns one game?), paying $50 for a year of online seems fairly reasonable.

 

I dread to think how much the combined cost of my games is. Probably a couple of thousand. So - if that much is being spent, why is the online cost such a drama? Buy one less game, buy a year of Online.

[Staten]

 

it isn t that big of a hassle to simply switch to your online character, be placed in a solo session and have access to everything you mentioned.

 

 

It is a hassle for XBox360 players who don't have a Live Gold account (that they have to pay for)

 

Just like it was a hassle for Xbox360 Arcade owners to buy a USB in order to play the singleplayer. Similar prices too.

[Teo265]

I couldn't agree more with OP. My exact thoughts!

But, at the very moment I'm much more interested about the PC version of the game. No SP DLC for the console versions is comparable to the PC version, which has unlimited possibilities with mods.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Teo265

[Osho]

Do you know why nobody cares about games such as Sleeping Dogs or WD anymore? Because they either don t have a multiplayer component or it isn t fleshed out enough to be interesting. GTAO keeps the game alive, and will keep it alive for many years to come, no matter how much "the loyal SP fanbase" cries.

I think you went a little overboard in defending Rockstar because, no one is speaking about not having ONLINE or even against it.

The main complaint(s) are:

> SP content falls short of acceptable level of satisfaction, overall, as seen in the past.

> Exclusivity exists, which works in favour of ONLINE, in order to keep up the multiplayer component as fleshed out as possible.

Though, GTA V was advertised as SP, and ONLINE was simply free.

Single-player needs to be as strong as multiplayer. Instead, you are telling us to focus ONLINE and play solo sessions for the lack of the content!

But, why the heck should I need to switch my internet connection, at all?

 

That's not how you play SP!

 

GTA IV didn't force me to divert the attention away from SP because the focus on the game was so strong that it wasn't necessary.

In case of V, they should have correctly allocated the content for both modes of gaming, than letting one of the mode ( single players ) to suffer.

It's been almost a year now, dry as hell with no news about single player updates, at all. Even flying school update was released limited for online.

[Fuzzknuckles]

 

But, why the heck should I need to switch my internet connection, at all?

 

That's not how you play SP!

 

GTA IV didn't force me to divert the attention away from SP because the focus on the game was so strong that it wasn't necessary.

In case of V, they should have correctly allocated the content for both modes of gaming, than letting one of the mode ( single players ) to suffer.

It's been almost a year now, dry as hell with no news about single player updates, at all. Even flying school update was released limited for online.

 

 

Hello, are you new to video games? Many games maintain a connection, a lot of them without you ever knowing it. And why would you switch your connection on? Bawsaq.

More importantly - I assume you have a non-dialup connection, some sort of broadband. What difference does it make when your connection is always on?

 

You really do complain about nothing. Repeatedly.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

Well, Rockstar is a company that aims to earn money.

 

In order to do this, they have to "go with the flow".

 

And the flow, nowadays (sadly) is Online gaming. Rockstar, TakeTwo, etc. wouldn't be able to make money simply out of SP. They aimed to create an innovative Online mode, that's why they made GTAO. Whether this was successful or not, that's another story.

 

But I agree with the OP that SP is what made GTA what it is today.

So basically they're becoming another sh*tty greedy company that I'll probably end up ignoring just like EA soon? I mean right now they aren't that bad but I'm worried things are gonna get a whole lot worse and more exclusive/online focused.

[GroundZero]

 

 

Well, Rockstar is a company that aims to earn money.

 

In order to do this, they have to "go with the flow".

 

And the flow, nowadays (sadly) is Online gaming. Rockstar, TakeTwo, etc. wouldn't be able to make money simply out of SP. They aimed to create an innovative Online mode, that's why they made GTAO. Whether this was successful or not, that's another story.

 

But I agree with the OP that SP is what made GTA what it is today.

So basically they're becoming another sh*tty greedy company that I'll probably end up ignoring just like EA soon? I mean right now they aren't that bad but I'm worried things are gonna get a whole lot worse and more exclusive/online focused.

That's exactly what I'm trying to say... It's sad, but it seems to be it.

[Fuzzknuckles]

 

Well, Rockstar is a company that aims to earn money.

 

In order to do this, they have to "go with the flow".

 

And the flow, nowadays (sadly) is Online gaming. Rockstar, TakeTwo, etc. wouldn't be able to make money simply out of SP. They aimed to create an innovative Online mode, that's why they made GTAO. Whether this was successful or not, that's another story.

 

But I agree with the OP that SP is what made GTA what it is today.

So basically they're becoming another sh*tty greedy company that I'll probably end up ignoring just like EA soon? I mean right now they aren't that bad but I'm worried things are gonna get a whole lot worse and more exclusive/online focused.

 

I wouldn't worry your pretty little head over it too much Sting.

 

I mean, this is just the reaction of a load of people that have decided that because they don't feel they should have to log into Online to play certain elements of the game, Rockstar have already greenlit Online only from this day forth.

 

Which, as I would hope we all know, is just conjecture originating from butthurt gamers. Which is as valuable as a piss in a typhoon.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Fuzzknuckles

[Osho]

Many games maintain a connection, a lot of them without you ever knowing it.

So? Well, I don't play such games, at all. There're plenty of games too, that don't need a constant internet connection.

And why would you switch your connection on? Bawsaq

Er, lol..okay! .. I could live without having to check BAWSAQ.

More importantly - I assume you have a non-dialup connection, some sort of broadband. What difference does it make when your connection is always on?02

Do you know what's the definition of single player?

You really do complain about nothing. Repeatedly.02

And, you are always ready to defend Rockstar for everything. Repeatedly.

[Fuzzknuckles]

 

More importantly - I assume you have a non-dialup connection, some sort of broadband. What difference does it make when your connection is always on?02

Do you know what's the definition of single player?

You really do complain about nothing. Repeatedly.02

And, you are always ready to defend Rockstar for everything. Repeatedly.

 

1. Yes, funnily enough I do. I've been playing games for over 30 years, I've worked in the games industry. I'm familiar with the concept, and I've even explained how you can play online as though it were SP. Repeatedly.

 

2. I do, it's true. Well, not everything, just the decisions I agree with. For example, I very much dislike 2 of the main protags. I dislike that there aren't as many interiors as their could have been. I've admitted that. Repeatedly.

 

Look, just be honest, if you're too poor to get an gold Live account, or have a sh*tty connection, or your mummy won't let you play online with the bigger boys, or you have no friends to play with online, that's fine. You can just say that, no one will judge you.

 

If you're going to complain about something that there is a very simple workaround for, that doesn't require you to play online with other people, and your only objections to that are that you need to have console connected to the internet, or that you feel you've been dicked because it requires you to spend 2 minutes changing to another mode, then I can't see your point or the problem.

 

And as far as I can tell your objection is 'I don't want to have to go online'. Even though it can be played without being truly 'online', with other people.

[Officer Ronson]

Seriously, corporate greed over a f*cking couple of features? IT'S NOT EVEN LIKE YOU COULD ONLY OWN ONE PROPERTY BEFORE AND THAT IS A GODDAMN APARTMENT.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

Seriously, corporate greed over a f*cking couple of features? IT'S NOT EVEN LIKE YOU COULD ONLY OWN ONE PROPERTY BEFORE AND THAT IS A GODDAMN APARTMENT.

Sometimes I wonder if you're a 12 year old with posters of Rockstar logos scattered all across your room.

[theworldfamous]

Corporate greed?

AFAIK I paid 60e for a disc with a very large single player game with very high production values and that I still regularly play. And a full bodied multiplayer game that even I enjoy (that's rare). A game that so far has been generously supported with patches, dlc packs and additional modes...all free of charge.

 

Can you please point out the corporate greed in that? So you don't like GTA online...don't play it and stick to single player. Name me one open world game that has more high quality content and production values and still receives regular updates a year after release?

[Fuzzknuckles]

Corporate greed?

AFAIK I paid 60e for a disc with a very large single player game with very high production values and that I still regularly play. And a full bodied multiplayer game that even I enjoy (that's rare). A game that so far has been generously supported with patches, dlc packs and additional modes...all free of charge.

 

Can you please point out the corporate greed in that? So you don't like GTA online...don't play it and stick to single player. Name me one open world game that has more high quality content and production values and still receives regular updates a year after release?

You obviously don't realise that gamer entitlement denial is also known as 'blaming it all on corporate greed'.

[DIEXEL]

F ROCKSTAR!!!!111!!1!11

[woggleman]

If the SP base is so loyal EFLC would have sold so much more than it did. It's criminal how much it was slept on. I was playing it last night and it's better than many full games but people didn't appreciate so R changed it's focus. I blame the fans more than I blame R.

[CarlitoDorito]

Have they cancelled the single player dlc then?

And it could be worse, they could've charged for the dlc, stopped updating already, killed all the single player characters and make you play online, its not that bad really is it?

Edited September 1, 2014 by CarlitoDorito

[DIEXEL]

If the SP base is so loyal EFLC would have sold so much more than it did. It's criminal how much it was slept on. I was playing it last night and it's better than many full games but people didn't appreciate so R changed it's focus. I blame the fans more than I blame R.

 

Maybe for you but for me, I really hated the EFLC. The main characters (Luis and Johnny), storylines and the overall themes was really boring...

[Tilemaxx]

If the SP base is so loyal EFLC would have sold so much more than it did. It's criminal how much it was slept on. I was playing it last night and it's better than many full games but people didn't appreciate so R changed it's focus. I blame the fans more than I blame R.

Both were first digital-only and Xbox timed exclusives. I don't know if MS gives digital sales data. They eventually released on PS3 almost 2 years after IV's release, so i assume most people just lost interest.

[TheTechPoTaToCHIP]

 

The way I see it, I'm glad all the corporate greed is in GTA Online, because it leaves the singleplayer with its integrity.

Yeah but there's no gang wars or drug dealing in SP so Online is the anti-christ.

 

Well, GTA V is inspired by the movie "Heat" not "Boyz in da Hood" like San Andreas was, so gang wars wouldn't really fit since the only character that has anything to do with gangs wants nothing but to avoid the gang life all together.

Edited September 1, 2014 by TheTechPoTaToCHIP