Should players be off radar (debate)

[REXX]

It would be cool to somehow implement if you have over 100 players in a session and with certain things like having someone in eyesight or them making noise making them visible, but right now it would just seem like you're always solo in a session.

Pretty sure 100 players in a session would be an absolute lag-fest

[fw3]

As someone that plays with no minimap for fun...

@FlacidJack, you had me at this ^

 

There is a genuine rush to turning the HUD off and playing blind. In a loaded lobby, everything seems faster, clearer, and much more energized.

 

It truly offers a unique, fresh perspective on the game to create a more injected immersion, which I dig, too.

 

Of course, other players still use the minimap, so if you're not careful, you can easily become both an appetizer AND an entrée for others.

 

And that's no fun.

[Nacho Z]

As someone that plays with no minimap for fun sometimes I find it funny that others think it would be hard to find players without the help of blips. All our tuned cars and aircraft make so much noise compared to the npc vehicles and if you want to find groups of players for PvP all you need to do is listen for the sirens then follow the police.

 

No blips makes you look at the beautiful graphics to locate players, that 's the only difference. If it was added it would have to be optional anyways so it wouldn't affect anyone that didn't chose to play in those lobbies. I doubt the OP is suggesting we change the entire game to suit his desires, right?

 

I HATE PLAYER BLIPS. This is not the game I payed 70$ for...

So if you were in Sandy Shores and some players were having a battle at the docks you'd have no problem following your nose and finding them? The map is too big for no player icons and presumably for GTA6 it will be bigger still.

 

Not that I love them but to me they're essential like it or not. You can say that it could be an option for a private session but so could loads of other silly ideas that wouldn't work for public free roam.

[gtafan26]

So, if a jet is coming at you, you now would have no idea about it...?

 

I'm sure that'd solve the trolling issues people are already complaining about, lol.

 

-Bill

I think you missed it, if there are no blips, the player in the jet wouldnt know where the ground players are. It would give players on the ground a slight advantage to over the jets

[TreFacTor]

 

So, if a jet is coming at you, you now would have no idea about it...?

 

I'm sure that'd solve the trolling issues people are already complaining about, lol.

 

-Bill

I think you missed it, if there are no blips, the player in the jet wouldnt know where the ground players are. It would give players on the ground a slight advantage to over the jetsBut it gives the advantage of groups vs the lone wolf.

 

In Red Dead Hardcore it's impossible to take out a group that uses the advantage of the aggro map. In GTAO I can handle myself if out numbered thanks in part to knowing where my attackers are unless they remove themselves from the radar. I think the tools available although coming at a cost work well with groups or the solo free roam player.

 

As for work well it's illegal work so if you can't deal with the open free roam there are other ways to make money uncontested.

Edited October 27, 2016 by TreFacTor

[IceDree]

Perhaps they could implement the system from DMs. You get a blip if you got the other player in your line of sight or when someone discharges a weapon.

 

Of course you can't implement such a system if someone is selling crates\products with the current system (big red box on the map) ... Maybe give them the Hunt The Beast FME system, but only for occupied vehicles, that way everyone get a fair chance.

[FlacidJack]

 

 

As someone that plays with no minimap for fun sometimes I find it funny that others think it would be hard to find players without the help of blips. All our tuned cars and aircraft make so much noise compared to the npc vehicles and if you want to find groups of players for PvP all you need to do is listen for the sirens then follow the police.

No blips makes you look at the beautiful graphics to locate players, that 's the only difference. If it was added it would have to be optional anyways so it wouldn't affect anyone that didn't chose to play in those lobbies. I doubt the OP is suggesting we change the entire game to suit his desires, right?

I HATE PLAYER BLIPS. This is not the game I payed 70$ for...

 

 

So if you were in Sandy Shores and some players were having a battle at the docks you'd have no problem following your nose and finding them? The map is too big for no player icons and presumably for GTA6 it will be bigger still.

Not that I love them but to me they're essential like it or not. You can say that it could be an option for a private session but so could loads of other silly ideas that wouldn't work for public free roam.

if I was in a semi-full lobby in Sandy Shores and couldn't hear any action up there I'd have a better idea of where to start moving if I wanted to join the fight, yes.

I've played since release, I get the advantage of having constant blips roaming the map, it has saved my life many times. It's not a little pointless preference though, it would drastically change the gameplay to turn blips off in some lobbies but we'd have the choice to stay in the current lobbies or choose these ones.

I assume anyone else that's played for this long would consider joining some kind of "hardcore" lobby with stricter server side options like free-aim only & no blips, especially if there was incentive to try it out.

 

I made my mind up a long time ago about these blips, in the end I'm happy I can turn mine on & off and go ghost / OTR. I just hope the next GTAO has real serverside options, I doubt it for this one but I'll never give up. I literally HATE those dots even though I love having them, it's not healthy.

[TreFacTor]

Don't get me wrong a good enough player can be an assassin in this mode (I double prestiged in hardcore mode on Read Dead). But it would be merely a niche setting that would quickly have empty sessions.

Edited October 28, 2016 by TreFacTor

[KornbreadMaf1a]

As a lobby option where they become temporarily visible on the map if they're witnessed on an another player's camera view or fire an unsilenced weapon in their vicinity?

 

Sure, but it's never happening because Rockstar hates balanced challenges that are fun, everything has to be totally mundane or ultimately broken in the balance region.

Why do you play this game? You obviously hate the game because most of your post are negative. If the game makes you that irritated you can play one of the other thousands of games out there instead of playing one that makes you miserable. I don't get the people like you who always post negative sh*t about something you don't have to play. Life isn't long enough to go through it hating what you do especially when it's something that is just something you do in your spare time.

[Skycam]

I'm all for different options. Personally I wouldn't play in them because the game is already slow enough. If I don't want to be bothered I don't get bothered. That said, if this was a new "mode" I would hardly call it hardcore seeing as it would be boring and slow (at least for me).

[gtarusty]

 

I think it could be good as a lobby option, in a similar way to Free Aim/Assisted Aim lobbies.

 

But I also think if it was a thing there'd be an increase in camping/prox mines at key locations like LSC and apartments though.

 

This.

To completely remove blips would not suddenly fix freeroam like some people tend to think here.

Sure it might bring some advantages, like jets not finding targets as easy as before, but beyond that, there would be far more campers...in a way it would be 2014 all over again....minus tanks, which, if those keep their blip, would be completely obsolete.

 

And if not...well, then its even worse, since you do not want tanks to sneak up on you ever.

 

I like this and agree with you. But it is funny while your flying and the person your chasing goes off radar but you can still see them with those wonderful lights under the car. Plus if you switch to missles, they show right up. lol

[gtafan26]

 

 

So, if a jet is coming at you, you now would have no idea about it...?

 

I'm sure that'd solve the trolling issues people are already complaining about, lol.

 

-Bill

I think you missed it, if there are no blips, the player in the jet wouldnt know where the ground players are. It would give players on the ground a slight advantage to over the jets

But it gives the advantage of groups vs the lone wolf.

 

In Red Dead Hardcore it's impossible to take out a group that uses the advantage of the aggro map. In GTAO I can handle myself if out numbered thanks in part to knowing where my attackers are unless they remove themselves from the radar. I think the tools available although coming at a cost work well with groups or the solo free roam player.

 

As for work well it's illegal work so if you can't deal with the open free roam there are other ways to make money uncontested.

 

Right, having no blips will work for some things, and for others, not so much.

[OptiCog]

I say having it be free roam but with how the radar works similarly to how it does in Deathmatch would be more interesting.

Running? You ping to those in the immediate vicinity.

 

Shooting? You ping within the range of the expanded radar.

 

Cause an explosion? You ping a significant distance beyond the expanded radar.

 

Driving a hydra, lazer, tank, or armed helicopter? Permanently on radar to everyone until a minute after you bail from the vehicle.

 

None of these apply? Ping to everyone with direct line of sight with a thirty-second delay on it cutting off after losing line of sight.

[DangerZ0neX]

 

As a lobby option where they become temporarily visible on the map if they're witnessed on an another player's camera view or fire an unsilenced weapon in their vicinity?

 

Sure, but it's never happening because Rockstar hates balanced challenges that are fun, everything has to be totally mundane or ultimately broken in the balance region.

Why do you play this game? You obviously hate the game because most of your post are negative. If the game makes you that irritated you can play one of the other thousands of games out there instead of playing one that makes you miserable. I don't get the people like you who always post negative sh*t about something you don't have to play. Life isn't long enough to go through it hating what you do especially when it's something that is just something you do in your spare time.I'll tell you what I don't get; people like you who only think of their own of view and how you won't mind your own goddamn business.

 

I'll tell you what's my honest problem with you, you have this broad black-and-white view of the world, you unironically believe that if I'm criticizing the game's weakest attributes then I must absolutely loathe the game and I treat it like the anti-christ.

 

Because you have this incredibly narrow tunnel vision, you proceed to let your brain erase out and ignore every single positive comment I have ever made about this game. You refuse to let go of this childish naivety for some unknown reason, you don't want to understand that someone can like the game and criticize it at the same time because you have the judgement skills of a 6 year old.

 

I don't understand why you even talk to me out of all people, there are other people who bitched about the game far more and longer than I have, and then you pick me out of all people and dare to say that you don't understand me?

 

Understand how the world works, what I talked about in this post is a basic lobby option that was featured in GTA IV and RDR's multiplayer, Rockstar refused to implement such a good feature back for no reason and they rightfully deserve criticism for it. Don't be a self-centered white knight.

[Skeve613]

At the very least, I'd rather the game didn't constantly put giant target labels over everyone trying to do anything in free mode unless it's a free mode event.

[GrungeNinja]

 

As someone that plays with no minimap for fun sometimes I find it funny that others think it would be hard to find players without the help of blips. All our tuned cars and aircraft make so much noise compared to the npc vehicles and if you want to find groups of players for PvP all you need to do is listen for the sirens then follow the police.

 

No blips makes you look at the beautiful graphics to locate players, that 's the only difference. If it was added it would have to be optional anyways so it wouldn't affect anyone that didn't chose to play in those lobbies. I doubt the OP is suggesting we change the entire game to suit his desires, right?

 

I HATE PLAYER BLIPS. This is not the game I payed 70$ for...

So if you were in Sandy Shores and some players were having a battle at the docks you'd have no problem following your nose and finding them? The map is too big for no player icons and presumably for GTA6 it will be bigger still.

 

Not that I love them but to me they're essential like it or not. You can say that it could be an option for a private session but so could loads of other silly ideas that wouldn't work for public free roam.

 

They are essential for situations, Blips should work with your behavior, just like mental state, you kill people around the street, your Blip shows up for some time, and the more you kill, the more you stay flagged (Blip color goes red), you got a bounty for stealing an angry npc car, you got the Bounty Blip, aswell Event Blips, Cargos, Supplies, etc.

 

It can work, its like preferences, you wanna get involved in pvp? make yourself be noticed, or go to the ones flagged on the map, wanna stay out of pvp doing your own things? play quiet, low profile, when get involved in npc fight, wait for the Blip goes off and the "good behavior" mode comes back, these are options, it should have in Free Roam to suit everyone's playstyle.

Edited October 28, 2016 by GrungeNinja

[chainsoar]

So, if a jet is coming at you, you now would have no idea about it...?

 

I'm sure that'd solve the trolling issues people are already complaining about, lol.

 

-Bill

 

And the jet pilot would have no idea you're there. I'd say that about levels the playing field.

[-LN-]

I agree that it should be added as an option for lobbies. I also understand the view that the map is quite large and that finding individuals would indeed be something of a task--especially if you were roaming the Paleto Forest and everyone else were at LSIA or Sandy Shores, but a modified, hybrid system with different lobby options could work.

 

Let's say that instead of calling Lester to hide your blip, you could phone him to reveal all players (similar to deathmatches) for about one to two minutes (max) but with a more appropriate cool down period. Let's say once every five to ten minutes (minimum). Also, perhaps you could not use the option if you were in passive mode and you could not enter passive until the two minutes have expired. In addition and not necessarily related, passive mode should have a longer cool down period (about ten minutes minimum).

 

I like the idea of blips appearing when you are near other players. Although I think that within deathmatches/captures/LTS, you should also have the option to play matches with all blips present, all blips hidden, or the mixed system where they only appear when you see or hear the other players.

 

Jets, tanks, any vehicle with weapons should always be visible on the radar and passive mode should always be prohibited when you are using them.

 

The option for friends and crewmates to either always be visible on your radar or mostly invisible like everyone else.

 

Lobbies with original options, these options+others, and lobbies with no blips at all to cater to various playing styles and preferences.

 

I'm sure there are other options and preferences that could be added, but I do think varied lobby options would be a good start.

 

Seriously, I would f*cking love it if our supposedly "secret" biker and CEO missions were actually discreet and only visible to players within the vicinity instead of, y'know, notifying the entire goddamn map of your position in the slowest van in the game and prompt a dickhead in a Hydra to fly towards me.

 

Also, very much this^^

Edited October 28, 2016 by -LN-

[blackindia]

I have mixed feelings but it could have been an option at least. I think GTA IV had it right. On Xbox 360 you could choose different blip options like Near, Far, On, Off. Also other options like spawn distances (Near Medium or Far). On PC you could even choose how many lobby filters you wanted to add then select between several lobbies to join.

 

I actually enjoyed blips On more but could then also choose to have Freeaim only, (No mix in with Assisted) Spawn Medium or even far. Make respawn longer like 10-30 seconds. It was a totally differnt feeling from GTA V. The spawn is way too close in my opinion and people suicide alot.

 

GTA IV you lost your guns if suiciding. You had option to spawn further apart. Killed player run for new guns. Surviving player go for health and to lose cops. When meet again its like a new fight. In GTA V if fighting over a object (suitcase) you often have to kill the same player several times just to get away because of the lame close spawn distance.

 

So im all for different settings to suit different style of playing. Im more into criminal role playing then just COD style shooting and respawning in endless cycles.

[KornbreadMaf1a]

 

 

As a lobby option where they become temporarily visible on the map if they're witnessed on an another player's camera view or fire an unsilenced weapon in their vicinity?

Sure, but it's never happening because Rockstar hates balanced challenges that are fun, everything has to be totally mundane or ultimately broken in the balance region.

Why do you play this game? You obviously hate the game because most of your post are negative. If the game makes you that irritated you can play one of the other thousands of games out there instead of playing one that makes you miserable. I don't get the people like you who always post negative sh*t about something you don't have to play. Life isn't long enough to go through it hating what you do especially when it's something that is just something you do in your spare time.

I'll tell you what I don't get; people like you who only think of their own of view and how you won't mind your own goddamn business.

I'll tell you what's my honest problem with you, you have this broad black-and-white view of the world, you unironically believe that if I'm criticizing the game's weakest attributes then I must absolutely loathe the game and I treat it like the anti-christ.

Because you have this incredibly narrow tunnel vision, you proceed to let your brain erase out and ignore every single positive comment I have ever made about this game. You refuse to let go of this childish naivety for some unknown reason, you don't want to understand that someone can like the game and criticize it at the same time because you have the judgement skills of a 6 year old.

I don't understand why you even talk to me out of all people, there are other people who bitched about the game far more and longer than I have, and then you pick me out of all people and dare to say that you don't understand me?

Understand how the world works, what I talked about in this post is a basic lobby option that was featured in GTA IV and RDR's multiplayer, Rockstar refused to implement such a good feature back for no reason and they rightfully deserve criticism for it. Don't be a self-centered white knight.

Where did I say anything about my point of view? Did I say you only complain? No I said "most" and last time I checked most doesn't mean only. The reason I singled you out is because more times than not if you reply to a thread it is going to be negative.

 

How exactly does me asking you why you play the game when you complain so much about it make me a white knight? (I'm genuinely curious at the answer to this). I can understand that people like the game and also have complaints but there is a difference between complaining and whining about everything.

 

You are clearly upset because I asked that question because if you weren't you wouldn't have sprinkled so many insults in your reply trying to get me to attack you back but that's not going to happen because getting mad on a forum is something kids like you do. You obviously haven't read many of my post on here because I'm one of the most open minded people on this forum and regularly call people out for only believing their opinion is the one that matters.

 

You're also the guy who can't pick up on sarcasm and you proved that yesterday in the one of the threads about modders being banned because you thought someone calling for genocide and mass murder of people who mod was a serious post and argued that you were right and everyone else was wrong but for some reason you disappeared when the person who wrote the post said it was meant to be sarcastic. So you pretty much proved you are narrow minded and don't know who the world works so you might want take your own advice. Personally I am wrong all the time and have no problem admitting it when I'm wrong. I'm also a smartass who doesn't take myself too seriously on the Internet and most of the time my replies are either sarcastic or I'm playing devils advocate because to me that's what the Internet is for.

[Zader]

Just having it as an option would be nice.

[DangerZ0neX]

Let me break it down for you because you're honestly a very irritating guy to deal with. I'm only going to reply to this one here, if you want to continue this argument then continue it with me on PM.

 

Where did I say anything about my point of view? Did I say you only complain? No I said "most" and last time I checked most doesn't mean only.

You do realize that saying most doesn't make it remotely better? You only said it to cover your ass and not out of honesty, you can't bother to actually remember the positive things I said and how I participate in fun forum games like Mr. Los Santos and the Show Your Characters threads for example.

 

The reason I singled you out is because more times than not if you reply to a thread it is going to be negative.

You singled me out of every other dozen users who do the exact same thing, even to a bigger degree than mine? No, you're just looking to argue, I remember when we both argued about the Lynx and how you defend Rockstar's lousy move but that's about it, I didn't even talk to you then and it's evident you're upset as f*ck about each time we debate instead of moving on like an actual adult, you just want to start an argument with me for no good reason.

 

How exactly does me asking you why you play the game when you complain so much about it make me a white knight? (I'm genuinely curious at the answer to this).

A white knight only listens to those he defends and refuses to take anything that is factual and sincere from the other side, why do you drive your car if you complain about traffic all the time? I seriously don't f*cking understand how you only want to say this to me but not to anyone else, you're only holding a grudge.

 

I can understand that people like the game and also have complaints but there is a difference between complaining and whining about everything.

So you don't consider me as the former because you refuse to acknowledge the fact that I also like the game? Incredible, I have to spell it out to you to make sure you understand instead of you using your own common sense, or at least try to look a bit deeper into my types of posts.

 

You are clearly upset because I asked that question because if you weren't you wouldn't have sprinkled so many insults in your reply trying to get me to attack you back but that's not going to happen because getting mad on a forum is something kids like you do.

Someone pushes your buttons over a grudge, he sees an action done so many times by other people but when you do it he singles you out, are you really that hypocritical? I absolutely despise close-minded people who claim they're "open-minded" without even being remotely fair in judgement, I've had your type of posts given to me so many times I'm starting to believe it's some form of copypasta.

 

You obviously haven't read many of my post on here because I'm one of the most open minded people on this forum and regularly call people out for only believing their opinion is the one that matters.

If you really were open minded, then you wouldn't be making false accusations.

 

You're also the guy who can't pick up on sarcasm and you proved that yesterday in the one of the threads about modders being banned because you thought someone calling for genocide and mass murder of people who mod was a serious post and argued that you were right and everyone else was wrong but for some reason you disappeared when the person who wrote the post said it was meant to be sarcastic.

Hahaha holy sh*t, you just exposed yourself here. You seriously still think that post was sarcasm? You either have no knowledge about what sarcasm is or you are a liar because that exact same "sarcastic" user shouted the same type of "joke" in the other Account Ban thread, but nah, because he's on your side you are giving him a free pass and try to excuse every rancid sh*t he types out on this forum just because he agrees with your position. How petty and hypocritical.

 

So you pretty much proved you are narrow minded and don't know who the world works so you might want take your own advice.

Don't rephrase my own words into your own, come up with something original. You can't chant about me being close-minded if you yourself are being defendant of radical users that agree with you, you singled me out for that reason, more proof of tunnel vision.

 

Personally I am wrong all the time and have no problem admitting it when I'm wrong. I'm also a smartass who doesn't take myself too seriously on the Internet and most of the time my replies are either sarcastic or I'm playing devils advocate because to me that's what the Internet is for.

The internet is for me to voice my opinion, it's also there for my needed information. If you really have the desire to admitting you're wrong, go ahead, I do that too. However, don't think you're such hot sh*t if someone calls you out for your mistakes, you honestly think you're the only entitled to calling anyone out?

 

People who take pride in being smartasses are shallow in my humble opinion, all you did was take a quirk and force it as your personality, all it does is make you obnoxious.

 

Then again, you claim you're sarcastic without having any idea what sarcasm really is, make of that as you will.

[scs151]

This is great feature if it was ever added to GTA but i don't like it being an option, right now i feel like the game it too divided and if you add this option as well you would do that even more.

There shouldn't be options in a game that split the community.

[jdwarfer]

I think I'd feel safer if we were all off radar.

I don't see this coming at all tho.

We would be on radar only for friends and crew members.

Or, it would be great if we could choose to be off radar anytime, like passive mode.

[KornbreadMaf1a]

Let me break it down for you because you're honestly a very irritating guy to deal with. I'm only going to reply to this one here, if you want to continue this argument then continue it with me on PM.

Where did I say anything about my point of view? Did I say you only complain? No I said "most" and last time I checked most doesn't mean only.

You do realize that saying most doesn't make it remotely better? You only said it to cover your ass and not out of honesty, you can't bother to actually remember the positive things I said and how I participate in fun forum games like Mr. Los Santos and the Show Your Characters threads for example.

The reason I singled you out is because more times than not if you reply to a thread it is going to be negative.

You singled me out of every other dozen users who do the exact same thing, even to a bigger degree than mine? No, you're just looking to argue, I remember when we both argued about the Lynx and how you defend Rockstar's lousy move but that's about it, I didn't even talk to you then and it's evident you're upset as f*ck about each time we debate instead of moving on like an actual adult, you just want to start an argument with me for no good reason.

How exactly does me asking you why you play the game when you complain so much about it make me a white knight? (I'm genuinely curious at the answer to this).

A white knight only listens to those he defends and refuses to take anything that is factual and sincere from the other side, why do you drive your car if you complain about traffic all the time? I seriously don't f*cking understand how you only want to say this to me but not to anyone else, you're only holding a grudge.

I can understand that people like the game and also have complaints but there is a difference between complaining and whining about everything.

So you don't consider me as the former because you refuse to acknowledge the fact that I also like the game? Incredible, I have to spell it out to you to make sure you understand instead of you using your own common sense, or at least try to look a bit deeper into my types of posts.

You are clearly upset because I asked that question because if you weren't you wouldn't have sprinkled so many insults in your reply trying to get me to attack you back but that's not going to happen because getting mad on a forum is something kids like you do.

Someone pushes your buttons over a grudge, he sees an action done so many times by other people but when you do it he singles you out, are you really that hypocritical? I absolutely despise close-minded people who claim they're "open-minded" without even being remotely fair in judgement, I've had your type of posts given to me so many times I'm starting to believe it's some form of copypasta.

You obviously haven't read many of my post on here because I'm one of the most open minded people on this forum and regularly call people out for only believing their opinion is the one that matters.

If you really were open minded, then you wouldn't be making false accusations.

You're also the guy who can't pick up on sarcasm and you proved that yesterday in the one of the threads about modders being banned because you thought someone calling for genocide and mass murder of people who mod was a serious post and argued that you were right and everyone else was wrong but for some reason you disappeared when the person who wrote the post said it was meant to be sarcastic.

Hahaha holy sh*t, you just exposed yourself here. You seriously still think that post was sarcasm? You either have no knowledge about what sarcasm is or you are a liar because that exact same "sarcastic" user shouted the same type of "joke" in the other Account Ban thread, but nah, because he's on your side you are giving him a free pass and try to excuse every rancid sh*t he types out on this forum just because he agrees with your position. How petty and hypocritical.

So you pretty much proved you are narrow minded and don't know who the world works so you might want take your own advice.

Don't rephrase my own words into your own, come up with something original. You can't chant about me being close-minded if you yourself are being defendant of radical users that agree with you, you singled me out for that reason, more proof of tunnel vision.

Personally I am wrong all the time and have no problem admitting it when I'm wrong. I'm also a smartass who doesn't take myself too seriously on the Internet and most of the time my replies are either sarcastic or I'm playing devils advocate because to me that's what the Internet is for.

The internet is for me to voice my opinion, it's also there for my needed information. If you really have the desire to admitting you're wrong, go ahead, I do that too. However, don't think you're such hot sh*t if someone calls you out for your mistakes, you honestly think you're the only entitled to calling anyone out?

People who take pride in being smartasses are shallow in my humble opinion, all you did was take a quirk and force it as your personality, all it does is make you obnoxious.

Then again, you claim you're sarcastic without having any idea what sarcasm really is, make of that as you will.

 

I singled you out because I knew you would overreact and I wasn't wrong.

[DangerZ0neX]

-snip-

 

I singled you out because I knew you would overreact and I wasn't wrong.

I'm taking all of this to PM since you refuse to be responsible about what you started like I asked of you to do, it'll continue there and not in here. Edited October 28, 2016 by DangerZ0neX

[KamikaziOtter]

Personally, I would'nt be opposed to a "Hardcore Mode"... Minimal Radar (only when shooting), realistic Police (5 minute response time), locked first person mode ect... that could be exciting and add a interesting dimension to the game.

[evd]

Their blips should appear when we see them. Just like deathmatches.

and disappearing after 5 seconds offscreen?

 

we should also see hot zones on the map, like police or rampaging.

the less the better.

 

Bounty Hunting would be very interestic and more realistic.

Edited October 28, 2016 by evd

[Da Elite Ninjah]

The "off radar" lobbies in gtaIV where awesome!!

 

Just listening to the other players. hear them say where they where gonna meet and then try to find them. f*cking awesome!

To bad that went missing....

[Budfox]

They should only become visible when you are within lets say 1 mile of them. Other than that only crew members and work members like CEO/VIP and MC club member should be visible as there is no friendly fire for them.

 

Anyone in a pegasus vehicle should be visible within about 3 miles

 

All of a sudden games would become much more forgiving and enjoyable

Edited October 28, 2016 by Budfox