Game design enables griefing

[Reyvar]

So here's a thing. I just spent the last ~30 minutes getting repeatedly murdered by a group of four players. The reason? I had no way to escape them.

You see, the game respawns you randomly at a point NEAR where you died each time. This allows players to just continually kill you, as they can just go from one spawn point right to the next indefinitely and suffer absolutely no punishment for this.

Worse, you cannot summon your horse and have any possibility of escaping as your horse takes an age and a half to arrive after summoned - far longer than it takes for malicious players like this to arrive.

They really need to implement some way to just shut off world PvP - even GTA has this, so it's incredible to me that RDR does not. They at the very least need to make it so that players who continue to kill others at least suffer some consequence or become unable to kill a given player again for a time. I mean, what is there to ever stop these people from just continuing to do this? They could have kept at it all night long, and even if I managed to escape they could have simply chased me all over the map and resumed the slaughter if I stopped for any reason.

For me anyway, that's not an acceptable design for an online game.

[Dr.Rosenthal]

You know, after being killed by the same assailant three times you get the option to Parley which makes it so that the player in question can't attack you, and you can't attack them (for 10 minutes - but it gives you plenty of time to escape).

 

In my experience, most players don't follow others around across the map for too long. But some of them will fast travel if you fast travel, which is pretty hilarious. Personally I feel like sessions are just getting more and more friendly to be honest. Back at launch it was more chaotic.

 

Sure, there will be posses fighting each other in some parts of the map, that's inevitable. But there's also plenty of room to disappear in.

I keep thinking about it, and I keep saying it over and over - but giving the cowardly "griefers" the ability to go in and out of passive will make the online environment considerably more toxic, just like it is in GTAO where people can't live with being killed once so they spend an entire afternoon passive popping to be "one up". Just plain childish behavior, that is.

If however, passive mode would be made so that it couldn't be abused, sure, why not implement it?

 

You could of course also just switch session. The game loads fast and you'll be right where you were before, in 9 times out of 10 that place will be quiet upon spawning. You learn the do's and don't's as you go along. My point is that I really don't think it's as bad as some people make it out to be.

 

Also, posse up.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Dr.Rosenthal

[Virus..]

Turn off console and fixed

[Reyvar]

3 minutes ago, Dr.Rosenthal said:

You know, after being killed by the same assailant three times you get the option to Parley which makes it so that the player in question can't attack you, and you can't attack them (for 10 minutes - but it gives you plenty of time to escape).

 

In my experience, most players don't follow others around across the map for too long. But some of them will fast travel if you fast travel, which is pretty hilarious. Personally I feel like sessions are just getting more and more friendly to be honest. Back at launch it was more chaotic.

 

Sure, there will be posses fighting each other in some parts of the map, that's inevitable. But there's also plenty of room to disappear in.

I keep thinking about it, and I keep saying it over and over - but giving the cowardly "griefers" the ability to go in and out of passive will make the online environment considerably more toxic, just like it is in GTAO where people can't live with being killed once so they spend an entire afternoon passive popping to be "one up". Just plain childish behavior, that is.

If however, passive mode would be made so that it couldn't be abused, sure, why not implement it?

 

You could of course also just switch session. The game loads fast and you'll be right where you were before, in 9 times out of 10 that place will be quiet upon spawning. You learn the do's and don't's as you go along. My point is that I really don't think it's as bad as some people make it out to be.

 

Also, posse up.

Well that's nice to know. The game never explained what "Parley" did, and I hadn't tried it. That means "talk" and I have no desire to talk to those players.

How does one go about switching sessions? I looked for exactly that option after the first dozen or so deaths and it wasn't in the free roam menu that pops up when I press the left button.

[Dr.Rosenthal]

@Reyvar I don't know what you mean by Parley being "talking", but you get the prompt when being killed, instead of pressing X/A to respawn you press Triangle/Y, I think? Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone.

 

You can switch session in a number of ways, for example either do it by joining a friend in another session (that will spawn you away from where you were and place you close to that friend, however) - you do that through the very Free Roam menu you're talking about, under "Players".

 

Or bring up the Pause menu, go down to Online and then choose any game mode (or just Free Roam if you want to spawn in in the same area as you were in).

Edited December 22, 2018 by Dr.Rosenthal

[Callahan44]

Imo spawns suck. It doesnt feel like a kill if they spawn 50 mext to you 3 secs later. You should spawn a horse-minute away. If you want to fight start a gangwar or deathmatch.

Its also really stupid if you do stranger missions,killing attacking other players once isnt enough most of the time,few secs later theyre back. It could be so much better. 

If they also add a bountysystem so killing has real consequences i dont think we need passive mode or private lobbies. 

[PetrolCB]

Why didn’t you just leave? I’ll never understand how anybody ever gets in a situation where they’re being griefed. Just switch sessions and get on with yourself. 

[Talisman_83]

How can the guy leave if he doesn't have time to bring up the menu before being headshotted?

 

That's what happened to me at first launch and before I had a clue about varmint OPness or ability cards.

 

38 minutes ago, Callahan44 said:

If they also add a bountysystem so killing has real consequences i dont think we need passive mode or private lobbies. 

Maybe you personally don't need private lobbies. Many, many others do.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Talisman_83

[Virus..]

2 hours ago, PetrolCB said:

Why didn’t you just leave? I’ll never understand how anybody ever gets in a situation where they’re being griefed. Just switch sessions and get on with yourself. 

I learned from gta online in the early years being on ps3. I would make it a challange to not flee the combat because it was pretty fun for me but getting ganged up on is frustrating especially when the greifers had 

modders as friends. Anyways i think its very easy to avoid getting into a gunfight in rdr. Just always be observant of the map, always try to have somewhere to retreat to that would maybe give you an advantage to take on enemies. Look for a store and wait it out, search for a showdown and back out to find a new lobby. I have not been griefed or engaged in a freeroam gunfight i find it very boring. I 95% of the time find myself in racing or deathmatches. I guess thats why i dont come across a lot of assholes. Some have tried but i would find a store quickly lol i noticed that its the low levels that get too excited and want to get into fights but i avoid them. I dont want to make them cry to momma..all in all get your skill up, get some shottys.

 

also petrol i simply added on to what you said. Message not intended for you.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Virus..

[ThaBirdCoot]

"Are you a moron partner ?" sorry couldn't resist ^^ but seriously just go homescreen, close app and get the hell outta there dude. Ain't no point fighting spawnkilling douches with their auto aim "skills"

Edited December 22, 2018 by Sauce béarnaise

[IceD34ler]

The point of this „game design“ is to force player conflict at any time solely to cater their microtransaction system. A player who is not in danger all the time doesn‘t have a reason to grind or instantly buy money to get a better weapon/faster horse to fight back and get revenge.

 

The problem is that the frustration is superior to that „damn I need more money to get that super op gun to kill them all“ feeling. And three kills until you can parley, well, your opponent knows that. So he kills you twice and then another posse member does it twice until all of them killed you 8-9 times to annoy the hell out of you. This is indeed bad game design but somehow they couldn‘t come up with a more fun approach to cover the ongoing server costs.

 

As someone who works in the industry and studied game design I can only recommend to avoid and not support such „systems“ as they will come up more often in the future if they succeed - good game design suffers greatly from this. But there are plenty of other bad examples of failed multiplayer game systems. The Darkzone of The Division or the recent Fallout 76 which has one of the most hilarious systems I experienced for a long time. In this game you can only fight players if they shoot you first. I don‘t think I have to explain here on how many levels you can abuse such a mechanic in an mp environment. But yes, AAA games mess up too.

Edited December 22, 2018 by IceD34ler

[areyouchappin]

The Parley system is one of the multiple things that are broken. It only stops the player you Parley with from killing you, it doesn't stop his friends or anyone else from killing you.

 

And maybe walking away from the situation is the better choice but honestly no player should have to quit sessions or stop playing the game just because some douche bags decide to ruin someone's day.

 

Passive mode can be easily changed and made better, just make it so you can't toggle it whenever you want, only when a player kills you. And make it last for 5 or 10 minutes or something, then it's gone until you get killed again.

 

[ALifeOfMisery]

5 hours ago, Dr.Rosenthal said:

Personally I feel like sessions are just getting more and more friendly to be honest.

Definitely noticed this myself.

 

I don't know if it's the time of year or Arena War taking players back to GTAO or whatever, but the lobbies I've been in over the last day or two are definitely more friendly.

 

As far as the OP, I agree in that the game design does all it can to encourage conflict. Despite my recent more friendly experiences I still want an Invite Only or Friendly lobby type.

 

I have no interest whatsoever in PvP, if someone is insistent upon killing me, whatever, I'll take the 3 deaths and parley. When I'm loaded with pelts is the only time I'll consider engaging, if I get the kill I'm on my horse and out of the area and if I get killed (only happened once when loaded up so far) I'll change lobby and start again.

[MostlyPonies]

The best thing you can do is to give Rockstar feedback on their website. Suggest a solution to them. Since this is a beta, it's probably the only time big changes to the game will happen.

 

https://www.rockstargames.com/reddeadredemption2/online/feedback

 

500 character limit, not working on mobile

[aurther61287]

Lots of ways out of that situation. 

 

Online-choose a state you'll most likely be put in new server if not at least you can hop to a new state far away easily through options.

 

Quick join story mission pops in about 2 seconds for me I've used it plenty to get out of situations even on the fly running. Once in match just leave and you'll be at mission start for whatever mission you joined.

[TCA]

8 hours ago, IceD34ler said:

The point of this „game design“ is to force player conflict at any time solely to cater their microtransaction system. A player who is not in danger all the time doesn‘t have a reason to grind or instantly buy money to get a better weapon/faster horse to fight back and get revenge.

 

The problem is that the frustration is superior to that „damn I need more money to get that super op gun to kill them all“ feeling. And three kills until you can parley, well, your opponent knows that. So he kills you twice and then another posse member does it twice until all of them killed you 8-9 times to annoy the hell out of you. This is indeed bad game design but somehow they couldn‘t come up with a more fun approach to cover the ongoing server costs.

 

As someone who works in the industry and studied game design I can only recommend to avoid and not support such „systems“ as they will come up more often in the future if they succeed - good game design suffers greatly from this. But there are plenty of other bad examples of failed multiplayer game systems. The Darkzone of The Division or the recent Fallout 76 which has one of the most hilarious systems I experienced for a long time. In this game you can only fight players if they shoot you first. I don‘t think I have to explain here on how many levels you can abuse such a mechanic in an mp environment. But yes, AAA games mess up too.

Yup. The DZ is a sh*t show. Noting but straight up Nomad running around with nothing but flame turrets EVERYWHERE! I basically just gave up...not to mention the horrible lag.

[Reyvar]

8 hours ago, IceD34ler said:

The point of this „game design“ is to force player conflict at any time solely to cater their microtransaction system. A player who is not in danger all the time doesn‘t have a reason to grind or instantly buy money to get a better weapon/faster horse to fight back and get revenge.

 

The problem is that the frustration is superior to that „damn I need more money to get that super op gun to kill them all“ feeling. And three kills until you can parley, well, your opponent knows that. So he kills you twice and then another posse member does it twice until all of them killed you 8-9 times to annoy the hell out of you. This is indeed bad game design but somehow they couldn‘t come up with a more fun approach to cover the ongoing server costs.

 

As someone who works in the industry and studied game design I can only recommend to avoid and not support such „systems“ as they will come up more often in the future if they succeed - good game design suffers greatly from this. But there are plenty of other bad examples of failed multiplayer game systems. The Darkzone of The Division or the recent Fallout 76 which has one of the most hilarious systems I experienced for a long time. In this game you can only fight players if they shoot you first. I don‘t think I have to explain here on how many levels you can abuse such a mechanic in an mp environment. But yes, AAA games mess up too.

Maybe, but I don't think it really accomplishes that goal either. Some of the cheapest guns are some of the best available simply due to the OP nature of a headshot. I'm guessing they'll end up nerfing those somehow, but it'll be tough to do that while also maintaining the level of realism they seem to want.

[CrimsonFolo]

yea the best option would have just been to find a fresh session instead of getting killed. I started a stranger mission yesterday which was delivering mail and a guy went out of his way to fast travel to the other side of the map and beeline straight for me to steal my mailbag. I just went to find a new session straight away, cba to fight just to deliver some mail 

[Callahan44]

22 minutes ago, The FoolYT said:

yea the best option would have just been to find a fresh session instead of getting killed. I started a stranger mission yesterday which was delivering mail and a guy went out of his way to fast travel to the other side of the map and beeline straight for me to steal my mailbag. I just went to find a new session straight away, cba to fight just to deliver some mail 

Thats the whole point of these missions,without enemies theyre just super boring. But i guess thats just my opinion...im always happy if i see people hunting me in these missions,by far the most exciting part of the game. Sadly rewards for interrupting missions suck,so im pretty sure in a few months you will really enjoy the missions because they will be boring every single time.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Callahan44

[Reyvar]

11 minutes ago, Callahan44 said:

Thats the whole point of these missions,without enemies theyre just super boring. But i guess thats just my opinion...im always happy if i see people hunting me in these missions,by far the most exciting part of the game. Sadly rewards for interrupting missions suck,so im pretty sure in a few months you will really enjoy the missions because they will be boring every single time.

The missions typically spawn enemies to fight. Adding players to the mix just makes the whole thing a mess because players come right back immediately after dying.

[Callahan44]

2 minutes ago, Reyvar said:

The missions typically spawn enemies to fight. Adding players to the mix just makes the whole thing a mess because players come right back immediately after dying.

I never felt that way and i played a lot of them. But yes,the spawning sucks,wrote that earlier in this thread already. If you kill someone he shouldnt be a problem for a minute.

 

Edit: or you mean that in some missions you get attacked by a handful of npcs? That doesnt make the missions exciting...

Edited December 22, 2018 by Callahan44

[BUT THE BENZ]

I hear ya OP, being a lone wolf and getting attacked by a "posse" just because you were hunting for some pelts or delivering a stagecoach somewhere...well, it happens. I can take an extra challenge, 1 human enemy would be okay maybe even 2 backstabbing cowards, but not a whole posse should be allowed to attack a lone wolf during a mission. the game is supposedly still in "beta", could have that changed but likely will not happen.

you know ..."it's all in the game..." - said the guy who got shot in the back by a kid (damn well fitting quote/metaphor right here, *pats self on shoulder*)

 

I just carry on and lau/h at those "cool" and "dangerously sounding" posse names 'cause I know they're just a bunch of losers trying to f*ck up an "innocent" guy's day. pathetic people, good for laughs ;D

well it is what it is, and you should just switch sessions until you find your peaceful lobby. there are many black sheep, apparently, but that doesn't mean the whole herd is corrupted.

 

Edited December 22, 2018 by BUT THE BENZ

[Ghoffman9]

14 hours ago, Dr.Rosenthal said:

In my experience, most players don't follow others around across the map for too long. But some of them will fast travel if you fast travel, which is pretty hilarious. Personally I feel like sessions are just getting more and more friendly to be honest. Back at launch it was more chaotic.

I think this mostly has do with how large the map is and how long it takes to travel.

In Gta Online, with the vehicles you have available you can be on one side of the map and be on the opposite in a matter of 30 seconds or more. In Red Dead Online, the travel time is much longer, players don't bother cause they find the travel time to not be worth popping you a few times. I think that is the source. If you're nearby however, then its a different story.

[Fatsanchez]

Im thinking here, what if they make us respawn at camp after being killed? I mean first they would need to solve the issue with Cripps packing you camp to the freaking other side of the map all the time. But I think it could be better. Also it would be a much-needed setback to being killed. Right now there is just nothing that makes us fear death. Only losing stuff on our horse. The camp right now is pretty much useless, only a waste of daily fees IMO.

[Dr.Rosenthal]

@Fatsanchez Could be a good idea if it was properly balanced.. But what if someone kills you for no reason, and you have to spawn back at camp which happens to be on the other side of the map? That would be really annoying, lol. Maybe I missed some important prerequisite here though.

 

I see what you mean about that there should be something to make us fear death.. At the same time, some people seem to think it's annoying to be killed even though they don't even have any pelts to lose. Whereas others say they willfully get killed three times in order to become "ghosted" straight away. Different folks and different strokes and all that.. I think this is where a (functioning) bounty-system should come in. But I haven't thought out how that would work, lol. Just that it would create incentives to play as either good or bad, as well as creating incentives to survive (killstreaks or robbery streaks or something like that maybe, contra arrest-streaks or yada yada - you get the point). And it would also "take care of the problem" with innocent hunters, fishermen and generally peaceful players getting wrongfully attacked by more PvP-oriented players..

 

Ideally, this is what I hope R* are working on. But I have a feeling they might implement a lazy passive mode that'll only serve to function as a respite for PvP happy players who can then choose when to attack (and open up for attack), and when not to, so that it really wouldn't change much for those who deserve the respite - namely friendlies, lone wolves or high honor-posses. I guess we'll see.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Dr.Rosenthal

[Callahan44]

1 hour ago, Fatsanchez said:

Im thinking here, what if they make us respawn at camp after being killed? I mean first they would need to solve the issue with Cripps packing you camp to the freaking other side of the map all the time. But I think it could be better. Also it would be a much-needed setback to being killed. Right now there is just nothing that makes us fear death. Only losing stuff on our horse. The camp right now is pretty much useless, only a waste of daily fees IMO.

That would be just annoying...i would prefer to lose a bit of money each time. Perhaps we also get a bank someday and it can function similar to gta,only without a phone(you could use camp and post offices to send cash to the bank though and also get cash there if you request it via some kind of catalogue). 

Its not good dying has no consequences,but no consequences for killing other players is the bigger issue.

[Fatsanchez]

Yeah I agree with you both, there must be some bounty system, better law enforcement, something like that. Like Callahan said, consequences for killing others. About the respawn in camp thing, I was thinking that way we could kill griefers and effectively get rid of them, but I guess I didnt think it all the way lol. You guys are probably right about it just being annoing at the end.

[CrimsonFolo]

3 hours ago, Callahan44 said:

Thats the whole point of these missions,without enemies theyre just super boring. But i guess thats just my opinion...im always happy if i see people hunting me in these missions,by far the most exciting part of the game. Sadly rewards for interrupting missions suck,so im pretty sure in a few months you will really enjoy the missions because they will be boring every single time.

yea but I'm literally delivering mail...... it doesn't make sense that other players should know this and intervene. e.g. Bonnie asks me to retrieve a wagon and suddenly every single player in the lobby knows I'm doing this and can attack. Sure if i was robbing a bank or a train or doing some big, it would make sense (in a way) for players to know.

 

The cash is already sh*t for the stranger missions, and you get a ok amount of XP. Other players intervening just wastes your time. I would rather prefer A.I. to ambush me in the mission or something rather than telling everyone i'm delivering mail.......

 

They should have had free mode events like robbing trains or something along those lines which encourage combat and competition but these stranger missions are generally sh*t. 

Also players can one shot you and vice versa making the combat with players even more boring, atleast if there was free aim, i would accept that as players can't just lock on straightaway when they see ya.

[Callahan44]

20 minutes ago, The FoolYT said:

yea but I'm literally delivering mail...... it doesn't make sense that other players should know this and intervene. e.g. Bonnie asks me to retrieve a wagon and suddenly every single player in the lobby knows I'm doing this and can attack. Sure if i was robbing a bank or a train or doing some big, it would make sense (in a way) for players to know.

 

The cash is already sh*t for the stranger missions, and you get a ok amount of XP. Other players intervening just wastes your time. I would rather prefer A.I. to ambush me in the mission or something rather than telling everyone i'm delivering mail.......

 

They should have had free mode events like robbing trains or something along those lines which encourage combat and competition but these stranger missions are generally sh*t. 

Also players can one shot you and vice versa making the combat with players even more boring, atleast if there was free aim, i would accept that as players can't just lock on straightaway when they see ya.

We play red dead and not the post office simulator. It doesnt make sense but it makes boring as f*ck missions become the most intense missions in the game.

 

Payout is okay,it just sucks completing a job fast is the worst you can do. Its basically completely the opposite to how it should be. Never saw a boss that pays more if you work slow. Id be ok if payment would always be the same,but sitting around for minutes 10m before you reach your destination is incredible stupid. Probably will never get changed as it was the same in gta. 

 

I also want a lot weaker autoaim and different spawning. Theres a lot room for improvement. But removing other players from strangermissions would just make the missions 100% uninteresting for me.

[Ghoffman9]

2 hours ago, Callahan44 said:

We play red dead and not the post office simulator. It doesnt make sense but it makes boring as f*ck missions become the most intense missions in the game.

 

Payout is okay,it just sucks completing a job fast is the worst you can do. Its basically completely the opposite to how it should be. Never saw a boss that pays more if you work slow. Id be ok if payment would always be the same,but sitting around for minutes 10m before you reach your destination is incredible stupid. Probably will never get changed as it was the same in gta. 

 

I also want a lot weaker autoaim and different spawning. Theres a lot room for improvement. But removing other players from strangermissions would just make the missions 100% uninteresting for me.

Its boring regardless, the players only determine whether your efforts will be for nothing or not.

The smart players however only do stranger missions in areas not densely populated by players. Due to the long travel time in Red Dead Online, most are not willing to do several minutes worth of riding just to stop players from delivering mail or guarding a caravan. My favorite strat is spawning in New Austin, then make my way to Leymone and do stranger missions there. I mainly do them from time to time just to slowly make progress towards the associated gold buckle award.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Ghoffman9