Passive Mode NEEDS PvP changes.

[Guest]

Need is a strong word. Need suggests that the game is broken and unplayable with it in it's current state - this is not the case. It has been a popular game for years, it cannot be as popular as it has been if it is unplayable. You can hold your breath all you want for Rockstar to make a change but you know as well as I know, this is not changing, people have been requesting change since day one, petitions have been there since day one. Using passive yourself, the correct way, will help you avoid the majority of passive poppers.

 

If selling in a public session the chances of coming across a passive popper are slim as they would have very little reason to do so. Nobody NEEDS to passive pop when taking down a sale/re-supply.

 

 

I don't accept that anyone should be able to go passive while making a sale anyway, it's not a passive activity.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

Need is a strong word. Need suggests that the game is broken and unplayable with it in it's current state - this is not the case. It has been a popular game for years, it cannot be as popular as it has been if it is unplayable. You can hold your breath all you want for Rockstar to make a change but you know as well as I know, this is not changing, people have been requesting change since day one, petitions have been there since day one. Using passive yourself, the correct way, will help you avoid the majority of passive poppers.

Someone literally ghosting himself to avoid getting killed in a game that you claimed before that is all about PvP is not broken enough for you?

 

So yeah, in the current game, the game NEEDS to be changed, Passive Mode included. The word need fits the issue at hand.

 

Also, f you're so sure that R* will not change a damn thing about the game and that all kinds of petitions are useless, then why are you here? Let the people petition in peace, don't go around just telling people "nah, that ain't gonna happen and let me tell you why".

 

If selling in a public session the chances of coming across a passive popper are slim as they would have very little reason to do so. Nobody NEEDS to passive pop when taking down a sale/re-supply.

I've seen so many players in Hydras and Deluxos going after sales just to go Passive after being met with players defending said sale, just to pop out of Passive and try again. This doesn't need to happen on a daily basis to see how unfair it is.

 

I don't accept that anyone should be able to go passive while making a sale anyway, it's not a passive activity.

I never suggested something like this, I don't know how you came up with that.

[Guest]

It's not broken enough to stop it being the biggest selling game of all time and still receiving high numbers of players 4 years after release. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't last Christmas when they had the most players playing GTA Online of all time?

 

You're also mistaken, I have never stated GTA:O is all about PvP. You may have misquoted me from when I claimed that some weaponised vehicles are purchased for the intention of PvP, this is not the same as stating GTA:O is all about PvP. I haven't exactly hidden the fact I played GTA:O purely in a PvE capacity for years. If you're going to state that I have said something, make sure I have actually said it.

 

I'm sorry, I must have misread, I could have sworn this was a discussion forum not a petition forum. If opposing arguments (even when not opposing ffs!) offend you perhaps being on a discussion forum isn't the right place for you to spend your time. It really does seem that nobody is allowed to be here if they oppose something you say, be it an entire viewpoint or just a minor point in that viewpoint.

 

I suggested you a solution to the problem of passive poppers in a PvP environment, as per the OP, in the absence of Rockstar making any kind of changes. Why are you making such a problem about it? Learn to cope with views that challenge your own rather than tell people they shouldn't be here discussing it.

Edited May 4, 2018 by Guest

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

It's not broken enough to stop it being the biggest selling game of all time and still receiving high numbers of players 4 years after release. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't last Christmas when they had the most players playing GTA Online of all time?

Quantity ≠ quality

 

The game may be as popular as ever, but it's also pretty unstable and unbalanced because of R* refusing to adress a myriad of issues that plague the game. Most casual players either don't know or don't care.

 

I'm sorry, I must have misread, I could have sworn this was a discussion forum not a petition forum. If opposing arguments (even when not opposing ffs!) offend you perhaps being on a discussion forum isn't the right place for you to spend your time. It really does seem that nobody is allowed to be here if they oppose something you say, be it an entire viewpoint or just a minor point in that viewpoint.

It's a petition on a forum. Also saying "will not happen", "will not get fixed", "deal with it" and similar asisine remarks on almost every thread about improving the game it's the opposite of discussing. You're just being contrarian for the sake of it.

 

I suggested you a solution to the problem of passive poppers in a PvP environment, as per the OP, in the absence of Rockstar making any kind of changes. Why are you making such a problem about it? Learn to cope with views that challenge your own rather than tell people they shouldn't be here discussing it.

You already said why going Passive against a Passive popper is not always available, that's just a Band-Aid that does not fix the issue.

 

You should learn to let people be and ask for fixes, balancing and whatnot instead of always going against the grain on purpose.

[Guest]

So you're saying it's not an issue for the majority of players... In which case you're only further confirming that you think you're some kind of special snowflake who Rockstar should tailor their game around rather than making it the way they have which most players generally don't mind or don't care about any such "issues". It is not a change that is NEEDED for the game to "work" for the majority of players, the last 4+ years have shown this. It is a change that would be welcomed, it is a change that would improve the game (depending on how they change it) but to claim it's needed is inaccurate. It's WANTED by you, it's not NEEDED by anyone.

 

I simply suggested a solution to your problem which you refuse to accept. Feel free to disregard the suggestion, that's your prerogative but you cannot deny that using the passive mode feature the intended way will counter misuse of the passive feature. Please, suggest a better way in which passive poppers can be countered at this time.

 

If people will be snowflakes I'll play Devil's Advocate - "get used to it".

Edited May 4, 2018 by Guest

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

So you're saying it's not an issue for the majority of players... In which case you're only further confirming that you think you're some kind of special snowflake who Rockstar should tailor their game around rather than making it the way they have which most players generally don't mind or don't care about any such "issues". It is not a change that is NEEDED for the game to "work" for the majority of players, the last 4+ years have shown this. It is a change that would be welcomed, it is a change that would improve the game (depending on how they change it) but to claim it's needed is inaccurate. It's WANTED by you, it's not NEEDED by anyone.

lmao, me being an snowflake because I'm just asking for changes? What's next, calling me entitled? Just plain old insulting me?

 

What about the rest here in this thread, in other similar ones, in Reddit and R* social media asking for changes too? They're also snowflakes?

 

If the mayority of players aren't claiming for this kind of QoL changes is because they're don't know better or they'll rather have the game unbalanced as f*ck to get their easy kills.

 

If people are asking for these changes since 4 years, well, that means there's demand for them, even now more than ever because of R* focus on PvP, so yeah, these fixes are needed, not by you because you seem happy with the game as it, but by many.

 

I simply suggested a solution to your problem which you refuse to accept. Feel free to disregard the suggestion, that's your prerogative but you cannot deny that using the passive mode feature the intended way will counter misuse of the passive feature. Please, suggest a better way in which passive poppers can be countered at this time.

 

If people will be snowflakes I'll play Devil's Advocate.

Going Passive against a Passive popper is not a solution and I already said why.

 

Let's see other options:

 

- Putting a Bounty on him (only possible once per player after a cooldown period)

- Kick him from the lobby (that's another can of worms I don't want to bring in this topic)

 

You're not playing Devil's Avocado, you're just being annoying for the sake of it, at least ragedandcaged was funny sometimes.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

"get used to it".

Here's to another 40 pages of pointless bickering:

 

 

Edit: uhhh why this reply didn't got added to my previous one? lol

Edited May 4, 2018 by Voodoo-Hendrix

[RyuNova]

Simple

Once you go Passive your locked into Passive for two minutes before you can disable it
When you disable it your avatar flashes
Your weapons are disabled for thirty seconds after its disabled.
You can be killed as soon as you disable it.
Passive Mode is locked by default in all vehicles that have any form of weapons even if they cannot be controlled by the driver.

[Guest]

 

So you're saying it's not an issue for the majority of players... In which case you're only further confirming that you think you're some kind of special snowflake who Rockstar should tailor their game around rather than making it the way they have which most players generally don't mind or don't care about any such "issues". It is not a change that is NEEDED for the game to "work" for the majority of players, the last 4+ years have shown this. It is a change that would be welcomed, it is a change that would improve the game (depending on how they change it) but to claim it's needed is inaccurate. It's WANTED by you, it's not NEEDED by anyone.

lmao, me being an snowflake because I'm just asking for changes? What's next, calling me entitled? Just plain old insulting me?

 

What about the rest here in this thread, in other similar ones, in Reddit and R* social media asking for changes too? They're also snowflakes?

 

If the mayority of players aren't claiming for this kind of QoL changes is because they're don't know better or they'll rather have the game unbalanced as f*ck to get their easy kills.

 

If people are asking for these changes since 4 years, well, that means there's demand for them, even now more than ever because of R* focus on PvP, so yeah, these fixes are needed, not by you because you seem happy with the game as it, but by many.

 

 

I simply suggested a solution to your problem which you refuse to accept. Feel free to disregard the suggestion, that's your prerogative but you cannot deny that using the passive mode feature the intended way will counter misuse of the passive feature. Please, suggest a better way in which passive poppers can be countered at this time.

 

If people will be snowflakes I'll play Devil's Advocate.

Going Passive against a Passive popper is not a solution and I already said why.

 

Let's see other options:

 

- Putting a Bounty on him (only possible once per player after a cooldown period)

- Kick him from the lobby (that's another can of worms I don't want to bring in this topic)

 

You're not playing Devil's Avocado, you're just being annoying for the sake of it, at least ragedandcaged was funny sometimes.

 

How does going passive against a passive popper not solve your issue of being attacked by that passive popper?

 

At least you accept you want Rockstar to tailor their game to your requirements despite those requirements not being the popular option. Guess what, this makes you entitled. Your refusal to ever accept any opposing argument to a minor point or an entire viewpoint and being triggered by such makes you a snowflake.

 

The fact I have clearly stated that passive mode could do with changes seems to have become irrelevant to you. You will still argue against me when I offer up suggestions and/or solutions for your problems. These solutions seem invalid to you for some reason.

 

The demand for the changes may be there however it hasn't been enough to warrant the changes. I'm not saying there is no demand either. However, surely if Rockstar were going to change it they would have done by now, it's been 4 years. Updates, as you claim, are nearing an end, they have what, one chance left to make this change? Join the real world, everything indicates no change is happening.

 

My posts annoy you because they oppose your viewpoint, plain and simple. I argue against an issue to ensure it is valid. Rarely do you justify the validity of an argument. You have not justified that GTA:O is unplayable due to passive abuse as millions of others clearly continue to play the game - it's simply not the way you want it to be. The change is not needed, it's simply wanted.

 

 

You're not "just" asking for changes though dude. You're continually bickering about how your viewpoint or how your changes are the only correct way to do it. You fail to validly argue against opposing views. Perhaps those opposing views are annoying to you, is this because it questions the validity of your view? Is it because you are incapable of accepting an opposing view? i.e. are you part of generation snowflake?

 

 

FYI I claimed the change would be a good change, I claimed it would be welcomed. You argued this by saying it's needed - no necessity for that argument, we were fighting the same cause. There was nothing to be gained by claiming it's needed rather than wanted. You want to be sarcastic about 40 page topics of bickering look at who decided to start the bickering here. A bunch of posts have already been removed because of your funny little lol friend and hostility towards my posting in this topic is clear, despite (for once) agreeing with the topic in hand.

 

Make valid arguments and I cannot even begin to attempt to play devil's advocate. Look at the clothing topics, valid arguments were put forward when I questioned it, I did not return to that argument. Learn from those capable of accepting that sometimes you may need to justify what you're claiming.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

Entitled, snowflake, what else you got for me?

 

Are you running out of buzzwords?

 

Ugh, I'm done, at least I already signed the petition, unlike you, I do want this game to become better instead of the cesspool of stupidity that has become.

 

Keep being happy being a conformist.

[Guest]

Do you even read?

 

Just stating facts dude, in no way am I calling you entitled or a part of generation snowflake to be offensive, merely an observation.

 

I have signed other petitions regarding this same topic, I see no point signing another one when the first three I signed made no difference. Again your comment is inaccurate.

 

What no answer to "How does going passive against a passive popper not solve your issue of being attacked by that passive popper?" Not really surprising.

 

Do yourself a favor, if you're going to be a snowflake ignore my posts, they will only aggravate you and question your views.

[CosmicBuffalo]

 

 

Bounties were not included specifically to counter passive mode; people just started using them that way as there was really no other option. The cooldown they added might have been in response to the billionaire days, but I kind of doubt that too. After all, back then a single bounty could set you up for life. It seems more likely to me that this was a typical fix for something people were griefing and trolling with.

But bounties are very clearly were intended to prevent entering passive mode, and I dont think it matters if they were specifically included to prevent passive mode popping. They do. And it from all the complaints and nothing done, I would say its pretty clear. Simply google billionaire days gta and see all the bs that occured on the backs of bounties.

 

The bounty cooldown has nothing to do with the scripting and bounty abuse that took place way back when. I don't know where you've got this from or why it seems lodged in your mind, but you are wrong.

 

My first major bounty was over two billion dollars, and no cooldown timer in the world would have made a jot of difference to me after that. They did not introduce bounty cooldowns to fight that. They introduced them to stop people spamming bounties on other players.

 

Also, bounties are nothing to do with preventing players from entering passive mode. Yes, we can use it that way now, but you didn't even used to be able to put a bounty on a player in passive mode.

So a cool down was added to prevent abuse, just as I said. The exact reason it was added is not important. I have been able to put a bounty in a passive player for as long as I cwn remember.

 

But as a "billionaire" you should feel responsible for our passive problems today. Its because of your actions we now have to wait 45 mins to set another bounty on passive popping trolls.

 

I am not even really sure why or what you disagreed with. My challenge was whether there was a cool down, not on whether the billionaires were actually responsible. If it was added to combat abuse, which even you claimed it was, does it really matter? At minimum it was a unforeseen consequence, on the other hand, it could be argued, passive has not really been changed because a tool that could fight passive popping had to be altered because of widespread abuse.

Edited May 4, 2018 by GenericGTAO

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

Just stating facts dude, in no way am I calling you entitled or a part of generation snowflake to be offensive, merely an observation.

Do yourself a favor, if you're going to be a snowflake ignore my posts, they will only aggravate you and question your views.

Sounds about right.

 

Also I'm not gonna ignore your posts, I may be an entitled snowflake but I'm not childish enough to put you on my ignore list.

[Guest]

 

Just stating facts dude, in no way am I calling you entitled or a part of generation snowflake to be offensive, merely an observation.

 

Do yourself a favor, if you're going to be a snowflake ignore my posts, they will only aggravate you and question your views.

Sounds about right.

 

Also I'm not gonna ignore your posts, I may be an entitled snowflake but I'm not childish enough to put you on my ignore list.

 

In that case I kindly request you cease taking so much offence when your viewpoint or part of it is questioned.

[tjakal]

Think it is safe to say that none of GTAO popularity stems from the quality and balance of it's PvP mechanics. If GTAO was completely broken people would not care to have it fixed, they'd move on.

This is an issue that strikes a note with scores of players in the community because it's a popular sub-aspect of a game that at large has other qualities to it.

Also the glaring magnitude of the flaw with passive-popping has expanded with the advent of effective counters to jet griefers and the ever increasing levels of mechanized combat in freemode.

Up until the more recent DLC's combat hasn't been as largely vehicular based as it often is today.

Also now having someone like Ghillie articulate and rally the PvP scene is a new development as well. It's not a big stretch of the imagination that the attention PvP videos (and GTA geographics) have gotten recently is what's behind the changes to the EWO mechanics. That alone should indicate there is plenty of reason to be hopeful tomorrow could be better than today in GTAO in this regard, despite Rockstar's past ignorance of community sentiment on the matter.

Edited May 4, 2018 by tjakal

[Furry_Monkey]

So a cool down was added to prevent abuse, just as I said. The exact reason it was added is not important. I have been able to put a bounty in a passive player for as long as I cwn remember.

But as a "billionaire" you should feel responsible for our passive problems today. Its because of your actions we now have to wait 45 mins to set another bounty on passive popping trolls.

 

I am not even really sure why or what you disagreed with. My challenge was whether there was a cool down, not on whether the billionaires were actually responsible. If it was added to combat abuse, which even you claimed it was, does it really matter? At minimum it was a unforeseen consequence, on the other hand, it could be argued, passive has not really been changed because a tool that could fight passive popping had to be altered because of widespread abuse.

 

 

I have literally no guilt whatsoever that bounties have a cooldown of 48 minutes. That was changed because people were spamming bounties on players. How is that because of my actions?

[Happy Hunter]

How does going passive against a passive popper not solve your issue of being attacked by that passive popper?

Well I'm not him, so I can't speak for him. But for myself - well, you can't really play properly if you have to be in passive mode the whole time just to deal with one guy popping in and out. You can't do the majority of the events, can't do any activities, and can't do actual PvP yourself (not all this taking turns going passive, etc.).

 

For now I get by for the most part. A lot of people doing it aren't very good, so I can just bait them into leaving, make myself look vulnerable, etc. Those who are a little better - I'll just see if I can get a kill up over them (which is usually what they're obsessed with), then find a new session.

 

Of course, when nearly everyone does it, it's problematic. Someone has to play properly for the game to work. So obviously it'd be for the best if it was made a little harder to cheese the system. Probably won't happen, but you never know.

[Guest]

Yes it would be for the best if it was made to work better, I don't think many are disputing this.

 

That's how it affects your play but doesn't stop passive mode protecting you from a passive popper until they get bored and leave (which is about 2 minutes).

[CosmicBuffalo]

 

So a cool down was added to prevent abuse, just as I said. The exact reason it was added is not important. I have been able to put a bounty in a passive player for as long as I cwn remember.

But as a "billionaire" you should feel responsible for our passive problems today. Its because of your actions we now have to wait 45 mins to set another bounty on passive popping trolls.

 

I am not even really sure why or what you disagreed with. My challenge was whether there was a cool down, not on whether the billionaires were actually responsible. If it was added to combat abuse, which even you claimed it was, does it really matter? At minimum it was a unforeseen consequence, on the other hand, it could be argued, passive has not really been changed because a tool that could fight passive popping had to be altered because of widespread abuse.

 

I have literally no guilt whatsoever that bounties have a cooldown of 48 minutes. That was changed because people were spamming bounties on players. How is that because of my actions?

Thats a joke, I literally could care less and admit I would have particpated had I been on last gen. More or less, I was trying to figure out a) if bounties didnt not have cooldowns and b) offer a plausible explanation for passive not being changed/fixed.

 

I mean the explosive sniper was added then nerfed, even ewo has had small tweaks. But passive one the most broken things in game has not had any changes and in fact has arguably regressed, public lobby requirement and running events that do not allow passive mode.

[Nutduster]

Yes it would be for the best if it was made to work better, I don't think many are disputing this.

 

That's how it affects your play but doesn't stop passive mode protecting you from a passive popper until they get bored and leave (which is about 2 minutes).

 

How did this become your whole steez - coming into threads where a basic, common sense point of view is presented, then spending all your time nitpicking tiny little loose ends in it while also claiming that you actually agree with the main thrust of the other side's argument? Why not just come in and say "You're right, passive could use some work" - or don't come in at all? I simply do not get your goal in engaging in these tedious back-and-forths over what you yourself label as lesser points.

 

I'll reply anyway: passive will (of course) protect you from a would-be passive popper. But as you already know, sometimes you don't want to go passive - because you're orged up, because you want to do free roam events, because you're already on the leaderboard for an active event, because you have a wanted level and cops are trying to kill you, etc. Sometimes you literally CAN'T go passive - because you have a VIP work or business activity in progress, because the passive popper in question slapped a bounty on you before engaging in his bullsh*t, etc. And even when you can, and are willing to, go passive, this still seems like nonsense to me. It's a textbook definition of an unbalanced game mechanic when the best (or only) counter to it is using the same mechanic yourself. That's why it should be fixed. No, it's not game-breaking; GTA Online has existed and been popular with passive being sh*tty for almost 5 years. But lots of things in lots of games are sh*tty without completely ruining the game. Pointing that out more than as a brief aside is just an excuse to argue, nothing more.

[Guest]

You'll find I did do just that, see post #2 - it was met with hostility despite agreeing that it has always been an issue yet, and not unlike yourself, pointing out that petitions have been run before with obvious disregard by Rockstar.

 

As I mentioned earlier, it's called Devil's Advocate - validate the arguments. Some of the arguments posed, such as this is game breaking, need validation. Many arguments are made where the circumstances, effects or frequency are greatly exaggerated and simply not the case.

 

Excuse me if I will argue in return to someone who claims that it's not just a case that it could do with improvement but needs it. You will find, again, that argument was not started by me. I disagree that it is game breaking and NEEDS to be improved, am I not allowed to disagree in return to someone initially disagreeing with me, you know, what do they call it... oh, discussion. Seems discussion isn't allowed unless everyone agrees though, or unless it's to begin an argument against something I have said...

 

I spend approximately 3 or 4 hours at most per week reading and responding on here, that leaves 164 hours a week. Claiming I spend "all my time nit-picking" is inaccurate, I spend 3.5% of my time nit-picking. This week you can add another 5 minutes on to that for this.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Guest

[HamwithCheese]

As I mentioned earlier, it's called Devil's Advocate - validate the arguments.

What's there to advocate?

 

Can the game be better? Yes. Why doesn't it? It won't make more money. That's it. You don't need to inflate threads by nit picking every single little letter anyone types.

Edited May 5, 2018 by HamwithCheese

[Furry_Monkey]

 

 

So a cool down was added to prevent abuse, just as I said. The exact reason it was added is not important. I have been able to put a bounty in a passive player for as long as I cwn remember.

But as a "billionaire" you should feel responsible for our passive problems today. Its because of your actions we now have to wait 45 mins to set another bounty on passive popping trolls.

 

I am not even really sure why or what you disagreed with. My challenge was whether there was a cool down, not on whether the billionaires were actually responsible. If it was added to combat abuse, which even you claimed it was, does it really matter? At minimum it was a unforeseen consequence, on the other hand, it could be argued, passive has not really been changed because a tool that could fight passive popping had to be altered because of widespread abuse.

 

I have literally no guilt whatsoever that bounties have a cooldown of 48 minutes. That was changed because people were spamming bounties on players. How is that because of my actions?

Thats a joke, I literally could care less and admit I would have particpated had I been on last gen. More or less, I was trying to figure out a) if bounties didnt not have cooldowns and b) offer a plausible explanation for passive not being changed/fixed.

 

I mean the explosive sniper was added then nerfed, even ewo has had small tweaks. But passive one the most broken things in game has not had any changes and in fact has arguably regressed, public lobby requirement and running events that do not allow passive mode.

Your response literally has no relation to the post you quoted. I attempted to engage you in discussion but it's clear that it's a pointless waste of time.

 

I'm out.

[Guest]

 

As I mentioned earlier, it's called Devil's Advocate - validate the arguments.

What's there to advocate?

 

Can the game be better? Yes. Why doesn't it? It won't make more money. That's it. You don't need to inflate threads by nit picking every single little letter anyone types.

 

Does it need to be better or do you, I or anyone else who has ever requested or supported a change just want it to be better? Are arguments for or against specific changes valid? Are claims that get thrown around valid? Many claims are greatly exaggerated.

[HamwithCheese]

 

 

As I mentioned earlier, it's called Devil's Advocate - validate the arguments.

What's there to advocate?

 

Can the game be better? Yes. Why doesn't it? It won't make more money. That's it. You don't need to inflate threads by nit picking every single little letter anyone types.

Does it need to be better or do you, I or anyone else who has ever requested or supported a change just want it to be better? Are arguments for or against specific changes valid? Are claims that get thrown around valid? Many claims are greatly exaggerated.

I can argue about anything too.

 

What is exaggeration? Where in then when is the exa or a what is the ger. Claim? When? I. B e t t e r.

Edited May 5, 2018 by HamwithCheese

[CosmicBuffalo]

Fur monkey, thanks for confirming settings bounties did not have a cool down back in the day. Other than that, yeah you wasted your time.

[RetroStyle]

Just make 2 lobbies. One for PVE, n one for PVP. Eliminate badsport and passive mode. PVE lobbies would operate like contact missions, but without being able to run each other over. And PVP would be where you go to kill ppl. Eliminate insurance for pvp, but keep it for pve, to keep ppl from blowing up unattended pv's in pve. Problem solved n everyones happy. The non pvp ppl wont have to use invite only n passive to keep griefers at bay. Pvpers wont be able to abuse passive, or pay insurance for protecting themselves from death machines. Let each lobby operate businesses. But it would cut into shark cards by a small amount, and thats why it wont happen. R* encourages griefing to keep ppl from making money in freemode, and they dont give a flip about balance or ppl abusing in game systems to gain an advantage.

Edited May 5, 2018 by RetroStyle

[Xiled]

Thanks to demonic for keeping the topic "they don't care about" at the top of gtaforums for all to see. Keep it up, and when they change passive mode, I hope they credit you for making the change possible. Please go on, you help more than you think. Ewo got changed, passive mode will as well. Your the only one who doesn't want it to change. Lets see if you make this get to 40+ pages like the other topics.

 

Remember that YOU demonic don't want this change, but its a much NEEDED change to make the game better. If YOU disagree why not take it to the B/M thread instead of derailing yet another topic. You demonic are worse than Diana. I forgot, you only go in topics like this to argue

 

Remember why this has 44 pages

http://gtaforums.com/topic/857181-gta-online-petition-allow-players-to-play-finance-felony-in-an/page-42

 

And why this has 46 pages

http://gtaforums.com/topic/896813-players-are-voting-for-you-to-be-removed-from-the-session-improve-your-behavior-or-you-will-be-kicked/page-45

 

Or that time they derailed the topic that players wanted more clothing combinations instead of having to glitch clothing combinations instead.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Xiled

[HamwithCheese]

Remember that YOU demonic don't want this change, and its a much NEEDED change to make the game better.

 

No don't you see? This game doesn't need anything. It doesn't have feelings. How could something like a disk NEED something. No, the only thing we NEED is water food air and a toilet.

 

These are all things that NEED to be said, you WANT things, okay?

 

(I'm pretending to be spaceman in case you couldn't tell.)

Edited May 5, 2018 by HamwithCheese

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

 

Remember that YOU demonic don't want this change, and its a much NEEDED change to make the game better.

 

No don't you see? This game doesn't need anything. It doesn't have feelings. How could something like a disk NEED something. No, the only thing we NEED is water food air and a toilet.

 

These are all things that NEED to be said, you WANT things, okay?

 

(I'm pretending to be spaceman in case you couldn't tell.)

You want things? What's wrong with you?

 

What are you, an entitled snowflake?