Horse Permadeath Online?

[Fatsanchez]

2 hours ago, KingBen said:

 

Yes of course. Player vs Environment.

 

What’s your point?

My point is that I was speculating about PvE servers on the message you quoted in the first place. I dont know what will they come up with on the PvP servers regarding horse griefing.

[KingBen]

27 minutes ago, Fatsanchez said:

My point is that I was speculating about PvE servers on the message you quoted in the first place. I dont know what will they come up with on the PvP servers regarding horse griefing.

Ok I understand. 

[Jason]

There are simply way too many ways a horse can die to make perma death work in online. Like I said, you could lag out and get killed before you ping out of the server. Your horse dead and you had literally no say in the matter.

 

Disposable horses being a playstyle is not a "good" argument for it either, I'm all for variety in playstyles, I live off that sh*t, but this would not create a bigger variety of playstyles it would create ONE playstyle. There may be a handful of people who play it all super serious and take everything slow and steady but in online when you're with friends or in a group you need to be able to keep things going.You need to create a system that works and is fun in every single situation.

 

It just won't work, it can't. Not in online. 

[Watain]

If they implement permadeaths for horses in Online then they might as well take away the PvP aspects. I'm simply not gonna spend that much money or time buying and bonding with new horses, just because my horse(s) might die every time I do a mission or encounter another player. That could literally happen every minute if griefers were camping outside of a stable, or if NPC:s are somewhat OP like in GTA's Doomsday Heist DLC.

 

If any of the "leaked information" floating around on Instagram is to believed as well, then RDO will be more grindy than story mode is. I think horses were quite expensive for a long time in story mode. It took me a good while to purchase one of the better horses. If RDO gets worse then that, then I'm definitely not keen on the idea of permadeaths. Though it would be a lucrative way for R* to sell microtransactions, I bet.

 

I'm all for our horses being able to die (since that still makes sense), but they've got to have proper insurance/resurrection options of some kind. However, I also think lost bonding with a horse gotten from insurance would be a dealbreaker, too. Otherwise that's something I could imagine R* would implement. Similar to how your GTAO character loses stats over time if not actively maintained.

 

The only reasonable bonding loss, in my opinion, would be if you keep a horse stabled for too long. But as long as you actively use a horse and has bonded with it, it should stay that way. I feel the horse aspects of RDO will be greatly determinant whether I will engage in public sessions or not. I'm simply done with griefers after having dealt with them for five years in GTAO.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Watain

[JauntyM]

On 11/20/2018 at 12:11 PM, ALifeOfMisery said:

It will be. I'll almost guarantee that within a week of RDO being live there are exploits galore over at the sinful place. 

 

There will be duping, killing without paying insurance, give horse to friends.

 

Not getting into this. It's too often used negatively or dismissively. 

I don't know how dup glitches work when Rockstar is in control of the whole game. Its almost as if they want people to use exploits so that the game would be more popular online!

[ALifeOfMisery]

3 minutes ago, JauntyM said:

I don't know how dup glitches work when Rockstar is in control of the whole game. Its almost as if they want people to use exploits so that the game would be more popular online!

I'm far from knowledgeable about the workings of such things, but I'm sure it's down to, at least in part, the P2P network as opposed to having dedicated servers.

[JauntyM]

1 minute ago, ALifeOfMisery said:

I'm far from knowledgeable about the workings of such things, but I'm sure it's down to, at least in part, the P2P network as opposed to having dedicated servers.

Another this that I detest about GTA ONLINE. Why does such a big game like GTA Online not have dedicated servers! it's amazing.

[ALifeOfMisery]

2 minutes ago, JauntyM said:

Another this that I detest about GTA ONLINE. Why does such a big game like GTA Online not have dedicated servers! it's amazing.

RDO should be better than GTAO

 

Link

 

But I'm not sure it will be enough to prevent things like horse duping.

[Gallows]

5 hours ago, Lonely-Martin said:

They already do offer horses and guns for cash directly in a way, missions too. The pre order and ultimate editions. Paid extra cash and those items are discounted to zero. Free replacements with bonding lost too.

 

(Sorry, conversation moved on since).

How do you know bonding is lost? For online that is. But that is sort of the system I’d like although, I would not mind if we have to pay a bit for our horses.

[Lonely-Martin]

22 minutes ago, Gallows said:

How do you know bonding is lost? For online that is. But that is sort of the system I’d like although, I would not mind if we have to pay a bit for our horses.

Common sense and best guess is all we have really, hence the speculation in the topic. Just my thoughts like others. Though a couple of facts must be considered too.

 

That's the core of those DLC things in story here, only logical to use the story modes base here in online and 5 years of GTA:O's huge success to assume what's probable. Not certain mind. Best guess.

 

My argument/disagreement with you is how you want this game further monitised and basically out to screw the pooch. The gameplay could work, but not over this open and unsafe P2P gaming. GTA:O showed their hand. After GTA spent 5 years growing into this way of gaming, to think RDRO will look to replicate that universal appeal to the many playstyles is to be expected, including griefers/tryhards, whatever style you can think of. Therefore, as it's already in story as a core mechanic, common sense says it's likely online to start at least.

 

Anyone that pays real cash for horses and then jumps right back over to buy another after a god mode troll takes theirs out after 5 seconds out of the stables is either a mug, or going to quit buying said things as they just aren't viable, lol. Not good business. That's just a sure fire way to reduce the playerbase IMHO far too much considering R* know a far more universally player friendly way works so well. GTA made so much money it will be influential, heavily. And we replace our cars at will there.

 

I love my cars, dickheads blowing them up doesn't devalue my game. Being able to meet those twats does if anything, but don't worry, safe space gaming will save me from showing that pratt up. But if a player had of been able to destroy my cars and I had to buy them back, even at 75% off. I simply stop buying cars. Takes much gaming away to be constantly buying cash or grinding for replacements, lol. I'd like to do other things out there.

 

I'm all for competitive gaming. But fleecing players goes too far in gaming today. And R* make games that appeal to genuine, deliberate, bad sports. It's not gaming at all.

[God-eater]

Lot of interesting opinions ITT; however, R* considered and solved this problem 5 years ago in GTA:O when they introduced vehicle insurance. They knew that in an online mp environment, cars absolutely would be destroyed, and that if this was permanent (like it always had been in SP) then you would face angry players as well as see destroying cars become a way of griefing. Thus, insurance was born. Problem solved.

 

It'll be exactly the same in RDR:O - your horse can die, but you (or whoever killed the horse) pay a fee and recover the horse exactly as it was (ie all tack, bonding, grooming, etc). Might have to get to a stable, might just as likely have some way of spawning it, but you won't lose it or any progress with it.

 

To make it any other way would open up griefing and massive backlash. 

 

[Jedster]

3 hours ago, God-eater said:

Lot of interesting opinions ITT; however, R* considered and solved this problem 5 years ago in GTA:O when they introduced vehicle insurance. They knew that in an online mp environment, cars absolutely would be destroyed, and that if this was permanent (like it always had been in SP) then you would face angry players as well as see destroying cars become a way of griefing. Thus, insurance was born. Problem solved.

 

It'll be exactly the same in RDR:O - your horse can die, but you (or whoever killed the horse) pay a fee and recover the horse exactly as it was (ie all tack, bonding, grooming, etc). Might have to get to a stable, might just as likely have some way of spawning it, but you won't lose it or any progress with it.

 

To make it any other way would open up griefing and massive backlash. 

 

I agree that this is most probably how it's going to be... BUT it's also a most unimmersive solution. For me in SP horse is not a vehicle, it's not something that get me from point A to point B, something you can instantly replace when killed for same one. 

He can be the difference between life and death and you have to invest time and effort to make it better as well as not get it killed. It's something you should care about and take care of, and that is pretty rare for an virtual animal.

With insurance, this aspect of the game is completely out of the window, your horse is practically Immortal and become just another tool you don't care about. And I have to say that insurance for car is pretty normal, but for horse at that time... nope.

I get that from gameplay point of view, permadeath would not be very fortunate solution...

I just... really don't want RDO to become GTAO clone and this aspect of the game is as far from GTAO as can be I guess...

[Gallows]

It would be horrible if you permamently lost something you bought for real money. As opposed to all those micro transactions as I am, they are just a fact of life.

 

Your horse can still die, without losing what you bought. That’s how it works in single player and it would work fine for online.

 

I just hope with the split between the PvE and PvP lobbies, that they are going to add some serious risk to balance the reward. I know it sucks losing the bond, hell it sucks losing, and it sucks getting killed. I would just like for death to mean something, through consequences.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Gallows

[God-eater]

15 hours ago, Jedster said:

I agree that this is most probably how it's going to be... BUT it's also a most unimmersive solution. For me in SP horse is not a vehicle, it's not something that get me from point A to point B, something you can instantly replace when killed for same one. 

He can be the difference between life and death and you have to invest time and effort to make it better as well as not get it killed. It's something you should care about and take care of, and that is pretty rare for an virtual animal.

With insurance, this aspect of the game is completely out of the window, your horse is practically Immortal and become just another tool you don't care about. And I have to say that insurance for car is pretty normal, but for horse at that time... nope.

I get that from gameplay point of view, permadeath would not be very fortunate solution...

I just... really don't want RDO to become GTAO clone and this aspect of the game is as far from GTAO as can be I guess...

I understand where you're coming from; however, I also accept that in online games, the rule is "if there is a way for another player to f*ck with you, f*ck with you they shall". Unfortunately, so long as there are players who cannot enjoy a game without spoiling the enjoyment of others, then immersion must be sacrificed for the sake of practicality in online environments.

 

I can't see R* having one rule for horses in PvP sessions and another in PvE sessions. If that's even a thing, going by GTA's example, R* will lock the most lucrative activities to PvP sessions, so we will end up running with the Trevors sooner or later. That being the case, I'd rather not be terrified to leave my horse somewhere knowing that the first player that happens across it will shoot it for no reason beyond it'll cost me time and money and might p*ss me off. 

 

I love my horse. Found him, named him, bonded, groomed, fed him. Hitch him up everytime I can, cringe when he gets spooked by gunfire or a snake. I don't want him to become an instantly-replaced tool like cars in GTA, but I'd rather that than lose him forever just because some 12-year-old is off his meds today. 

[Revoemag]

If i were to guess at how r* could do horses would be to have a "down but not out" state . The owner of the horse would need to revive it using tonics or such.  

I say this with the idea of gtao car flipping ability.  R* devs didn't like the idea of players being stuck in the middle of no where and having to walk

Edited November 22, 2018 by Revoemag

[iddqdvie]

compared to gta, the horses are the cars.

 

in gta1 to gta5 sp, cars where never permanent. that changed with online, you would want/need a garage to store your car and the insurance made it permanent.

for rdo, they will approach a similar way.  in rdr2 sp, the special/ultimate version horses are always rebuyable (for free in this case) at the stables in valentine if you lose it.

 

my guess is, if you have a stable, a dead horse will respawn there,

with or without the previous bonding lvl, probably without.
i think i like that idea, its a kind of a minigame in online, try to get your horse to lvl4.

[Gallows]

1 hour ago, iddqdvie said:

compared to gta, the horses are the cars.

 

in gta1 to gta5 sp, cars where never permanent. that changed with online, you would want/need a garage to store your car and the insurance made it permanent.

for rdo, they will approach a similar way.  in rdr2 sp, the special/ultimate version horses are always rebuyable (for free in this case) at the stables in valentine if you lose it.

 

my guess is, if you have a stable, a dead horse will respawn there,

with or without the previous bonding lvl, probably without.
i think i like that idea, its a kind of a minigame in online, try to get your horse to lvl4.

Precisely. The fact that getting a horse to bonding level 4 and then taking care of it, making it flee from combat etc. adds layers of combat instead of removing something. Sure it sucks, losing a level 4 horse, but it would suck even more after a few months for the bonding mechanics to become irrelevant.

Edited November 22, 2018 by Gallows

[SharpiePlays]

Part of me agrees, I see where OP is coming from, but in the single player campaign I'm already very attached to my horse (let's face it, it's survived many flips, tree hits and bullets). In online you're possibly going to be with it for much longer, making that bond much deeper. Not sure I'd like to lose my Roach under those circumstances...

[Gallows]

1 hour ago, SharpiePlays said:

Part of me agrees, I see where OP is coming from, but in the single player campaign I'm already very attached to my horse (let's face it, it's survived many flips, tree hits and bullets). In online you're possibly going to be with it for much longer, making that bond much deeper. Not sure I'd like to lose my Roach under those circumstances...

I fully understand, and I would not like to lose my horse either. Part of a drama is that the protagonist does not always get what he wants. Hardship and loss are very fundamental elements of a good memorable story. You will have a grudge against the guy/gang who killed it, you will remember your horse fondly, and it will leave a mark on your story. But you will get over it. You will get a new horse, which you will Bond with. While doing so you may notice how your old horse was a better horse. But in time, your new horse becomes your best friend - until it is shot close range with a shotgun. You may also have horses you don’t remember because you didn’t have them for long.

 

I know it will suck. Hell, I’ll be furious when my horse is killed and the guy doing it will be in my book of bastards. But wouldn’t miss the drama it creates as a side effect.

 

Without loss, pain, hardship, challenges, setback etc. there can be no great tales. 

[Jason]

5 hours ago, Gallows said:

Precisely. The fact that getting a horse to bonding level 4 and then taking care of it, making it flee from combat etc. adds layers of combat instead of removing something. Sure it sucks, losing a level 4 horse, but it would suck even more after a few months for the bonding mechanics to become irrelevant.

It doesn't add layers or depth to combat, it slows it down. That's not an issue in single player but in online it is. But even then if you're having to tell your horses to flee you're then at the mercy of horse RNG, they can end up going into the middle of no mans land and getting shot in the head just as easily as they could run to somewhere safe.

 

In a town buying/selling something? There's nothing to stop a player killing your horse while you're in a shop. Rockstar want you to look after your horse in RDR2, not babysit it. Perma horse death (or even just loss of bonding) just cannot work within an online game like RDO. There are way too many ways a horse can die without you even having a say in the matter. It's a novel idea but it's unpractical because of the nature of online gaming.

[Callahan44]

21 minutes ago, Jason said:

It doesn't add layers or depth to combat, it slows it down. That's not an issue in single player but in online it is. But even then if you're having to tell your horses to flee you're then at the mercy of horse RNG, they can end up going into the middle of no mans land and getting shot in the head just as easily as they could run to somewhere safe.

 

In a town buying/selling something? There's nothing to stop a player killing your horse while you're in a shop. Rockstar want you to look after your horse in RDR2, not babysit it. Perma horse death (or even just loss of bonding) just cannot work within an online game like RDO. There are way too many ways a horse can die without you even having a say in the matter. It's a novel idea but it's unpractical because of the nature of online gaming.

Not even mentioning you probably pay a lot of money(some even real money)for good horses and you shouldnt be feared to use them. 

It just doesnt work. 

[Gallows]

I do think we’ll see bonding loss though for online. It will keep the bonding mechanic in the game permanently.

[KingBen]

On 11/21/2018 at 4:07 AM, God-eater said:

Lot of interesting opinions ITT; however, R* considered and solved this problem 5 years ago in GTA:O when they introduced vehicle insurance. They knew that in an online mp environment, cars absolutely would be destroyed, and that if this was permanent (like it always had been in SP) then you would face angry players as well as see destroying cars become a way of griefing. Thus, insurance was born. Problem solved.

 

It'll be exactly the same in RDR:O - your horse can die, but you (or whoever killed the horse) pay a fee and recover the horse exactly as it was (ie all tack, bonding, grooming, etc). Might have to get to a stable, might just as likely have some way of spawning it, but you won't lose it or any progress with it.

 

To make it any other way would open up griefing and massive backlash. 

 

 

Bingo.

 

All the idiots on here that think we will lose tack, bonding, grooming, etc when our horse dies are delusional. It will work the same as GTA online. The person who killed your horse will pay a fee and you will get your horse back exactly as it was. Rockstar isn’t going to punish you for some asshole griefer killing your horse. 

[Gallows]

6 hours ago, KingBen said:

 

Bingo.

 

All the idiots on here that think we will lose tack, bonding, grooming, etc when our horse dies are delusional. It will work the same as GTA online. The person who killed your horse will pay a fee and you will get your horse back exactly as it was. Rockstar isn’t going to punish you for some asshole griefer killing your horse. 

Idiots, asshole griefters. You just need to add the foul mouthed simpleton to the list and it’s fine.

 

You may be right, but considering horse bonding is a new mechanic I don’t think we can rule out losing horse bonding. The person killing your horse may still get a fine though or an automatic Bounty, which would work fine. If bonding is not lost, the bonding mechanic has a very short life span. I do not think we can use GTAO as a reference point for a lot of mechanics outside the stuff they have already said they use (narrative gameplay), because GTAO is a mess and they want something different for RDO.

Edited November 23, 2018 by Gallows

[iddqdvie]

2 hours ago, Gallows said:

Idiots, asshole griefters. You just need to add the foul mouthed simpleton to the list and it’s fine.

 

You may be right, but considering horse bonding is a new mechanic I don’t think we can rule out losing horse bonding. The person killing your horse may still get a fine though or an automatic Bounty, which would work fine. If bonding is not lost, the bonding mechanic has a very short life span. I do not think we can use GTAO as a reference point for a lot of mechanics outside the stuff they have already said they use (narrative gameplay), because GTAO is a mess and they want something different for RDO.

it doesnt take too long for horse to bond up to lvl4 and it would become completely useless if it only needs to be done once. i dont mind riding a lvl1 bond horse but i do mind if bonding is not a thing anymore after done once per horse. 

 

also, riding a lvl4 horse will give you a different feeling if it can loose bonding again. 

 

most of you maybe never really bonded efficiently. its really no pain i the ass

[Lonely-Martin]

4 hours ago, Gallows said:

Idiots, asshole griefters. You just need to add the foul mouthed simpleton to the list and it’s fine.

 

You may be right, but considering horse bonding is a new mechanic I don’t think we can rule out losing horse bonding. The person killing your horse may still get a fine though or an automatic Bounty, which would work fine. If bonding is not lost, the bonding mechanic has a very short life span. I do not think we can use GTAO as a reference point for a lot of mechanics outside the stuff they have already said they use (narrative gameplay), because GTAO is a mess and they want something different for RDO.

A mess maybe, but a multi billion dollar earning mess. It was a real mess, still is. But the money it earned and still earns can't be ignored. It's a huge influence I believe, possibly the biggest. That kind of money comes from appealing universally in as many ways possible.

 

I love your commitment to this, though I don't feel the mechanic will be lost as I believe if we mess up and kill our horse or lose it in a sanctioned competitive mode, we will lose bonding. In story some are already losing their horse, but in online the pace or random factor kicks in too, so many more variables, like running from a posse of players to get a stronghold position to counter the numbers coming after us, we'll have to be quick thinking there and mistakes happen, I feel there's much room for the mechanic to stay and death have consequences. On the surface, it sounds ideal and would add to immersion, but often too many look to break that just because.

 

Losing to a fair player isn't the problem. If my adversaries respect the game, it could work to an extent I really do believe that and feel you make strong points, but the cheating, bugs, and behaviour in many with the anonymous nature in online gaming, I feel horse death in freemode on a casual level from another is too much risk and too much time lost. If a mod menu popped up, we're in big trouble.

[RayD70]

On 11/19/2018 at 9:44 AM, R*Phenomenon said:

Because i dont think it will..  it would be a bad design decision imho (for the reasons mentioned above by others). 

It will be exploited and some will ONLY search for peoples horses just to piss them off and enjoy it... 

My guess will be they will somehow use horse reviver or something.. so you can knock down a horse but cant kill it completely... and have to revive it within a certain amount of time. otherwise you have to walk and it will respawn at a stables after a game day or something. purely speculation, but i guess that would work well.

Even reviving won't work since the horse would just be camped.

 

I mean, seriously, has no one ever played GTA Online? Horses will be the FIRST thing people go after.

 

Only way to allow perma-death and at the same time, discourage griefing is if you kill someone's horse, your entire stable dies and all your money, clothes and weapons are gone. And even that won't stop exploiters and griefers.

 

I get the desire to keep horses important, but it's a bridge too far for multiplayer. Even making it so permadeath exists, but if a player kills a horse, it just respawns immediately with full bonding won't stop it. There will be ways around that too.

 

[Gallows]

7 minutes ago, RayD70 said:

Even reviving won't work since the horse would just be camped.

 

I mean, seriously, has no one ever played GTA Online? Horses will be the FIRST thing people go after.

 

Only way to allow perma-death and at the same time, discourage griefing is if you kill someone's horse, your entire stable dies and all your money, clothes and weapons are gone. And even that won't stop exploiters and griefers.

 

I get the desire to keep horses important, but it's a bridge too far for multiplayer. Even making it so permadeath exists, but if a player kills a horse, it just respawns immediately with full bonding won't stop it. There will be ways around that too.

 

I want to play with my friends in private games. Cutting features because of cheaters instead of just banning them permanently is crap. I know people cheat, but it’s a fact of life that the majority of people are losers and part of that majority are too lazy to work hard or too cowardly to accept it, so they cheat. Only losers cheat, Winners don’t have to.

[RayD70]

3 minutes ago, Gallows said:

I want to play with my friends in private games. Cutting features because of cheaters instead of just banning them permanently is crap. I know people cheat, but it’s a fact of life that the majority of people are losers and part of that majority are too lazy to work hard or too cowardly to accept it, so they cheat. Only losers cheat, Winners don’t have to.

And that solves the problem how, exactly?

 

Even bad sport in GTA Online accomplished nothing. Insurance was no deterrent  because it was ridiculously cheap and exploited (no money on that character? No insurance paid).

 

All of the kumbaya in the world won't stop the a-holes of the world. It's one mechanic that just. won't. work. R* would be incredibly naive to think otherwise. They'd lose their player base in weeks.

[IamCourtney]

Don't get me wrong, I'm into the kind of high stakes gameplay permadeath entails, but it's a pretty niche interest that a lot of people straight-up hate. I just can't see R* making it the rule if they're trying to draw a large audience.

Edited November 25, 2018 by IamCourtney