Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Diamond Casino & Resort
      2. DLC
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

allgoodinthehood

Did RDR Online *FAIL* because of the lack of "Invite Only Mode?"

Recommended Posts

Lonely-Martin
33 minutes ago, 1898 said:

The only reason it might fail is if they keep tweaking the fun and challenge out everything because everyone is afraid THEY MIGHT GET SHOT IN A WESTERN THEMED VIDEO GAME. 

 

I yearn for the pink dot days where I had to plan my paths and strategies and in spite of that had a success rate of at least 90%. Now you go out there and it's almost like a solo session. Running missions and fighting those lame NPCs can get old really fast. You can do all of that in single player.

Big difference to being shot at than griefing, and we can't play story mode together. Co-op gaming has been huge for years, for both PvE and PvP. I find 'use single player' is a weak excuse. (Not aimed at you, others say the same 'go story mode then' crap).

 

3 hours ago, gtmike said:

The problem with private lobbies is that all the cool, chill people will instantly disappear from public lobbies like Thanos just snapped his fingers. The only reason to enter a public lobby will be to fight, just like it is in GTA now. Even worse, Rockstar will try to manufacture ways to force people into public lobbies, just like they did in GTA.

(If too long, don't read. No worries)

 

Many of the cool chill players also have or are walking away too. And as many are showing, some like public now too with how it's set up. I'm sure many will stay to interact with strangers for those cool moments out there that they are getting now as that's what they seek. I've got many buddies added from gaming and most of them would jump straight back if options to remove cheats, glitchers, ability cards, and bad sports from our game.

 

2 huge things invite lobbies can do. It'd allow more and more choice which allows a wider audience. Secondly, bigger audience, potentially more sales, if even just the game itself. If R* don't meet expectations set, DLC/content could slow earlier than hoped. GTA:O still thrives and is due more content too, purely because it draws money still. This game has to meet regular targets.

 

Plus, I know I'm now a more frequent visitor to that sins site looking for glitches to get private public these days, can't be bad for the game to see some head there to play their way, I'm sure they'll ignore the other glitches. /s. ;)(Not that I want to play alone, which is a very common misunderstanding. But I'd sooner be alone than public. So I become a part of a bigger problem, lol).

 

I do find it weird that some are so against it. Not all of course, but it's like some want a simple and limited game with lesser and lesser choice and a smaller playerbase that could compromise the longevity of this game, as it is made with longevity in mind. It's like some want to be called a griefer for playing PvP ways out there, because that's what's happening all too often.

 

I put on my 'leave me alone' defensive bollocks, folk see it as a 'let's f*ck with them tag' Its like a moth to a flame, as griefers just want to waste you/my life, nothing more, and this is nothing more than that while it costs a pathetic 50c to be a knob with all the glitches R* allowed to go unpunished. (As I said, and now I'm a party of that problem - Though I don't cheat cash, just seek peace - Not that it's any excuse).

 

5 minutes ago, AmyStone said:

If I really want to get away from all the randoms and do a bit of hunting then a few of us will just start a story mission and not complete it right away. It has the bonus that when you do complete the mission you get maximum xp and payout too. So you can earn more that way than in an invite only session.

Kind of defeats the point in not adding them. I really don't get why you initially say they aren't needed, but then you go and create one anyway, lol.

2 hours ago, ALifeOfMisery said:

I just hope that the player roles aren't an analogue of GTAO freeroam businesses. Because we all know where that goes. 

That's a given I feel. 

 

I think the freeroam missions are the basic premise for most of it all really. By allowing them to be destroyed rather than listen the many complaints in GTA:O over that. Many have been saying to make these challenging for the attacker in that they have to steal it and deliver it to the drop off or to a fence/the plod instead.

 

But instead we get unlimited lives and explosive rounds vs wagons. Though I genuinely expected no less. 🤣

 

Sorry for the long one guys, I respect all opinions but feel strongly about this. It's killing my love of R*'s games. Much of it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AmyStone
1 minute ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Kind of defeats the point in not adding them. I really don't get why you initially say they aren't needed, but then you go and create one anyway, lol.

They aren't needed because it's possible to create them that way. Duh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lonely-Martin
4 minutes ago, AmyStone said:

They aren't needed because it's possible to create them that way. Duh.

If that's how folk are making their game of it, awesome. I'll look into it as I didn't know we could do missions with friends. Could be a great solution for me, thanks. 

 

But if this is common, it can compromise randoms that join and don't want to hang about and would rather do the jobs though. I don't feel this is a good reason not to add them, if anything it shows they should come if they are more common than I thought. If folk are doing this anyway, it wouldn't do anything but help the game. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1898
10 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Big difference to being shot at than griefing, and we can't play story mode together. Co-op gaming has been huge for years, for both PvE and PvP. I find 'use single player' is a weak excuse. (Not aimed at you, others say the same 'go story mode then' crap).

 

*snip*

Ok if I was paying more attention to my post I was would have said -  "that" can all be done in single player not "you" . I'd never suggest anyone leave. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CMCSAVAGE

The game is perfectly fine as it is with the defensive mode (could use a tweak or two). I'd like to know where all these griefers are at that people keep complaining about. It may sound weird, but I actually miss getting griefed, it's been a long time since I had to school someone.

 

Not knocking those that want one, but I don't think IO lobbies are necessary, I would never use one. As already mentioned, they'd be restricted as to what you could do anyway, so what's the point, to hunt and fish in peace? I can do that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lonely-Martin
11 minutes ago, 1898 said:

Ok if I was paying more attention to my post I was would have said -  "that" can all be done in single player not "you" . I'd never suggest anyone leave. 

No worries, I was more just using the point to make another as I do see some saying if you want peace or to be alone to go back to story. I know you weren't going there. 👍

 

I don't want to be alone, lol. Same with GTA, I play spells alone when friends can't jump on of course, but 99% of the time I'm in all sorts of modes helping or learning. Heists were a huge hit for me, much like these story missions here, I love them. All I want is a spawn in spot safe from the drama so I can join jobs. A fixed/safe camp would do so much, but not enough as I'll be changing sessions after each job, lol.

 

I'm a PvE player only, and I love R*'s PvE stories. That's all I'm here for, I don't fight players at all. I'd race, but even all of those are full of guns, lol. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Labovasha

RDO will never fail. It might end up being a bad online game for its entire life spam but it will never fail or even be considered to be failure. GTA O turned into a steaming pile of crap and it is doing fine.

 

This is not EA, rockstar did a great job at protecting their image and public perception and they have protections against certain criticism and observations, this extends to their game. Rockstar "fixed griefing" the very first time they adjusted the map markers months ago and they "fixed the economy" the very moment they touched the prices. They are good when they do good and they are good when they do bad, all of the ideas they push out are sound automatically so no lobbies options are good.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ALifeOfMisery
1 hour ago, Lonely-Martin said:

That's a given I feel. 

If they aren't initially, they will be. In the Gameinformer interview this was said:

 

“What we're doing with this game is asking what are the steps involved if it took you months, years, or whatever to get to that,” Nelson says. “What would it be for you to start your business in your camp to becoming a Leviticus Cornwall and owning a railway or a mine?” 

 

Obviously it might be a long time away, or plans may change, but freeroam businesses such as railways and mines are in R*s plans.

 

Freeroam businesses were always going to come, but it's how they are handled which will matter. 

 

If they are handled in the same way as GTAO freeroam businesses, that's a negative in my opinion. But, if some care and thought are put into the implementation, no lobby wide alerts, no lobby wide blip visibility, no destroying cargo etc. then they could be fun.

 

It all depends on how much R* have listened to the years of GTAO complaints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lonely-Martin
11 minutes ago, ALifeOfMisery said:

If they aren't initially, they will be. In the Gameinformer interview this was said:

 

“What we're doing with this game is asking what are the steps involved if it took you months, years, or whatever to get to that,” Nelson says. “What would it be for you to start your business in your camp to becoming a Leviticus Cornwall and owning a railway or a mine?” 

 

Obviously it might be a long time away, or plans may change, but freeroam businesses such as railways and mines are in R*s plans.

 

Freeroam businesses were always going to come, but it's how they are handled which will matter. 

 

If they are handled in the same way as GTAO freeroam businesses, that's a negative in my opinion. But, if some care and thought are put into the implementation, no lobby wide alerts, no lobby wide blip visibility, no destroying cargo etc. then they could be fun.

 

It all depends on how much R* have listened to the years of GTAO complaints.

Reading the roleplaying aspects being mentioned does fill me with probably more encouragement than anything at the moment. Even the prop changes for the casino in GTA are helping in this regard too, so I'm hoping they do keep up with their wanting grief to go and the good gaming thrive. It's not too late for me as I am a sucker for my R* games. We'll see.

 

I'm not hyped for whatever RDRO has coming as I'm really not bothered anymore, I need sessions or more consequences for people imposing their will on me, but don't want to kill freemode or stop PvP for those keen. I gave up, though it's clear in this thread I'm still hopeful, lol.

 

I think I'm just a story mode only guy going forward and GTA:O was a fluke, been having so much fun with the 3d games and even gonna try Bully tomorrow when I can get on. That's how far back I'm looking for some new R* gaming. No complaints, well, anymore. This thread is my last on it all. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leftover Pizza

The thing that strikes me most is why people are so much opposed of letting others have their choice of playing field. If anyone does so wish, they can play in any lobby type they want at any time. For me it is a matter of having a choice. Whatever floats my boat on a certain day is where I wanna play. Would I like some challenge and see more life (or death) in a public lobby, I'd have a choice to go there, or to avoid it in the same way. Having I/O lobbies doesn't mean I'll be playing in them all the time. I would certainly do my dailiy challenges in them, to get the jobs done without a hassle, and might resort into some dick hunting later on that day (or being hunted myself). it's all in the choice. The same choice anyone else would have. How is that wrong? Everyone plays their own game.

I see many valid reasons for either having them or not, but the thing I wonder most about is why some people think others shouldn't have the choice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
netnow66
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Van_Hellsing said:

Defensive mode is no deterrent for griefing anymore. Now the novelty has worn off, I do get shot at all the time I go to the butcher in Valentine.. 

And that is the reason why RDO is a failure in my opinion though maybe not financially. I began playing the online version with one friend and two acquaintances. After the initial constant griefing, we were ticked off, especially because we felt lied to after Rockstar promoted the online game as a "fun and fair environment" that you could play solo. We fired feedback at Rockstar constantly asking for the "fun and fair." Months dragged on and Rockstar sat there twiddling their griefing thumbs. My guys played even less than me at this point and I logged on using glitches to play in solo/passive lobbies most of the time and replaying the missions (those missions actually make the game worthwhile for me--and I think I'm developing a crush on the murderous [rightfully so} Ms. LeClerk).

 

I got them to come back and give it another try once Defensive dropped--but I did report that I got shotgunned in the back the very first day. They stumbled back and found the game to be too much of the same in terms of griefing. I don't think they bother logging in at all anymore (I play Division 2 with some of them but RDO is avoided). Griefing is not considered "fun and fair" to us.

 

Even with Defensive, which is the only mode I play in (and I've been popped in the time it takes for Defensive to kick in--Rockstar is so pro griefing the game can't remember I logged out in Defensive mode?!?!!?), there is still more griefing than I want to deal with. Hell, there are YouTube videos showing players getting griefed in Defensive mode, so I know I'm not the only one.

 

There is at least one player I'm aware of who refused to play the game until Defensive was implemented--and they are happy playing the game now. So, as expected, Rockstar knew there are some willing to accept at least a certain level of griefing, so rather than get rid of griefing totally, they just started lessening the occurrence of it, enough to appease some who were so against it at one point

 

But, I remain firmly anti griefer based on what was advertised. I'm the only one left from the group I started with--and I play free roam in glitched solo/passive lobbies.

 

So, yeah, RDO might not be a commercial failure but I lost my posse because Rockstar won't stop the griefing--so it's mostly a failure to me. If not for Ms LeClerk...

Edited by netnow66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leftover Pizza
1 hour ago, netnow66 said:

And that is the reason why RDO is a failure in my opinion though maybe not financially. I began playing the online version with one friend and two acquaintances. After the initial constant griefing, we were ticked off, especially because we felt lied to after Rockstar promoted the online game as a "fun and fair environment" that you could play solo. We fired feedback at Rockstar constantly asking for the "fun and fair." Months dragged on and Rockstar sat there twiddling their griefing thumbs. My guys played even less than me at this point and I logged on using glitches to play in solo/passive lobbies most of the time and replaying the missions (those missions actually make the game worthwhile for me--and I think I'm developing a crush on the murderous [rightfully so} Ms. LeClerk).

 

I got them to come back and give it another try once Defensive dropped--but I did report that I got shotgunned in the back the very first day. They stumbled back and found the game to be too much of the same in terms of griefing. I don't think they bother logging in at all anymore (I play Division 2 with some of them but RDO is avoided). Griefing is not considered "fun and fair" to us.

 

Even with Defensive, which is the only mode I play in (and I've been popped in the time it takes for Defensive to kick in--Rockstar is so pro griefing the game can't remember I logged out in Defensive mode?!?!!?), there is still more griefing than I want to deal with. Hell, there are YouTube videos showing players getting griefed in Defensive mode, so I know I'm not the only one.

 

There is at least one player I'm aware of who refused to play the game until Defensive was implemented--and they are happy playing the game now. So, as expected, Rockstar knew there are some willing to accept at least a certain level of griefing, so rather than get rid of griefing totally, they just started lessening the occurrence of it, enough to appease some who were so against it at one point

 

But, I remain firmly anti griefer based on what was advertised. I'm the only one left from the group I started with--and I play free roam in glitched solo/passive lobbies.

 

So, yeah, RDO might not be a commercial failure but I lost my posse because Rockstar won't stop the griefing--so it's mostly a failure to me. If not for Ms LeClerk...

 

As much as I am against griefing I am also against total immunity. Getting killed once or twice shouldn't be a reason to even consider invite only sessions and nor is it anywhere close to being griefed. I do understand the lack of fun for being killed, even when in Defensive Mode, but as many already have said (me included) it needs tweaking and is far from failing the game as a whole. 

To deem a game as failed for the lack of a total immunity system is not right. Actually, if a total immunity system was implemented, the game would actually have failed. 

There is always the possibility to die from something be it another player or wildlife or simply by your own mistake. I do want invite only as an option, but not because I think Defensive Mode doesn't work. I have my own reasons to play solo or with friends and should be able to do so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blackwolfred

Is RDO a failure because no IO? No. Not yet. But, every game that I play has the ability to be able to opt in/out of pvp. Even EA’s half assed Battlefront 1 and 2 have it... And that is a game based around pvp. Is the game more tolerable with “ Defensive” ? Yes. As the previous post said, tho. If R* didn’t placate to griefers , it could of been better. Some of the blame rests on the player base, tho. If they are stupid enough to try and get my attention by plowing their red chestnut Arabian into my Ardennes.... enjoy buying that Horse Reviver as I ride off leaving you in the dust. 😆👌

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TyrionV
3 hours ago, CMCSAVAGE said:

The game is perfectly fine as it is with the defensive mode (could use a tweak or two). I'd like to know where all these griefers are at that people keep complaining about. It may sound weird, but I actually miss getting griefed, it's been a long time since I had to school someone.

 

 

100% this. 

 

Griefing just doesn’t happen on the scale that some folk on here bang on about. In fact it rarely happens at all. 

 

I play for a few hours every night and haven’t been randomly shot at for weeks. 

 

It’s funny that that the ones complaining about it and requesting invite only lobbies are the ones who claim not to play the game anymore!!

 

They’re missing out big time. Every lobby feels like an invite only one and as you say you can easily run stranger missions solo with only the NPCs to deal with. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lonely-Martin
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TyrionV said:

100% this. 

 

Griefing just doesn’t happen on the scale that some folk on here bang on about. In fact it rarely happens at all. 

 

I play for a few hours every night and haven’t been randomly shot at for weeks. 

 

It’s funny that that the ones complaining about it and requesting invite only lobbies are the ones who claim not to play the game anymore!!

 

They’re missing out big time. Every lobby feels like an invite only one and as you say you can easily run stranger missions solo with only the NPCs to deal with. 

When were you over watching my experiences dude? I'd have made a brew.

 

R* tweaked the lobby dynamics so wherever you go on the map, the servers change to make sure players are in an around you wherever we go, folk aren't far away.

 

We each have our own experiences out there, and limits as to what's grief or not too. I find often that some people here known for a more aggressive style underplay the impact they have too. Over-exaggerating the peace and tranquillity out there to help their narrative, maybe. But mostly as some are naturally more aggressive and have a higher tolerance for grief than others, they see less as grief in the first place. And of course, those seeking to inflict some. ;)

 

As for missing out, I don't feel so. It's not a game for me atm so I can't be missing out. Besides, Sony has me covered with all the free sh*t, and R* chucking gold at me each week, lol. :)

Edited by Lonely-Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
netnow66
1 hour ago, Leftover Pizza said:

 

As much as I am against griefing I am also against total immunity. Getting killed once or twice shouldn't be a reason to even consider invite only sessions and nor is it anywhere close to being griefed. I do understand the lack of fun for being killed, even when in Defensive Mode, but as many already have said (me included) it needs tweaking and is far from failing the game as a whole. 

To deem a game as failed for the lack of a total immunity system is not right. Actually, if a total immunity system was implemented, the game would actually have failed. 

There is always the possibility to die from something be it another player or wildlife or simply by your own mistake. I do want invite only as an option, but not because I think Defensive Mode doesn't work. I have my own reasons to play solo or with friends and should be able to do so. 

I understand, of course, it depends on the individual and what they find acceptable in this game or in regards to griefing. I said I viewed RDO as "mostly a failure" and I still do. I only feel comfortable in free roam when I'm in glitched solo/passive lobbies, especially when I'm fishing. A game that I have to glitch to play the way Rockstar advertised, I classify as "mostly a failure."

 

Some people found the game acceptable when it was first released...some found it acceptable when the dot system was implemented...some found it acceptable when Defensive dropped.

 

I advocate solo lobbies because, in my opinion, Rockstar can't get Defensive right, or what I consider right. Again, a game advertised as a "fun and fair' environment for everyone should be just that for anyone who spent money on the game. If Rockstar won't give all of us "fun and fair," they shouldn't have advertised it.

 

Yes, we want invite/private lobbies for different reasons. I noticed that early on. But I don't care that our reasons are different, I just want them because Rockstar can't seem to get Defensive right, or at least right enough to satisfy some of those who bought into the "fun and fair" that was advertised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TyrionV

I’m in a lobby of 22 players right now.

 

I’ve been in St Denis for the last hour and haven’t seen one other dot on the map or player in the town. Why is that if R* makes sure there are other players around?

 

Guess I’m just lucky.  I’m on every evening for a few hours and never experience anything like what you describe.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leftover Pizza
1 minute ago, netnow66 said:

I understand, of course, it depends on the individual and what they find acceptable in this game or in regards to griefing. I said I viewed RDO as "mostly a failure" and I still do. I only feel comfortable in free roam when I'm in glitched solo/passive lobbies, especially when I'm fishing. A game that I have to glitch to play the way Rockstar advertised, I classify as "mostly a failure."

 

Some people found the game acceptable when it was first released...some found it acceptable when the dot system was implemented...some found it acceptable when Defensive dropped.

 

I advocate solo lobbies because, in my opinion, Rockstar can't get Defensive right, or what I consider right. Again, a game advertised as a "fun and fair' environment for everyone should be just that for anyone who spent money on the game. If Rockstar won't give all of us "fun and fair," they shouldn't have advertised it.

 

Yes, we want invite/private lobbies for different reasons. I noticed that early on. But I don't care that our reasons are different, I just want them because Rockstar can't seem to get Defensive right, or at least right enough to satisfy some of those who bought into the "fun and fair" that was advertised.

 

Well, I think you get the concept of Defensive Mode wrong, even though many have explained to you already (me included) that Defensive Mode is not a total immunity mode. If you can't get that concept right, I can imagine you see that part of the game as a failure. Rockstar needs to tweak and tune Defensive Mode here and there, and probably more the Hostility system more than Defensive Mode itself. 

You can whine about it as much as you want, but you're doing so for the wrong reasons. Defensive Mode doesn't grant you an immunity bubble with a 100% uptime. The game doesn't only advertise as Fun and Fair, but also free to be played by anyone who has bought RDR2. Like I said before, everyone has a place in this game, griefers included. As much as you want to exclude yourself from a certain type of gameplay, you can not exclude others from theirs. If you absolutely can't stand being shot at, even in Defensive Mode, this might not be the game for you. I'm not saying that in the manner of "not having the right to play the game", but if it annoys you so badly, why play?

 

I've been very pro invite only sessions, very very pro. But Defensive Mode has really done a lot of change to the game so far. The main factor is and always will be, the player. You can't blame or deem a game failed due to player attitude or your own misunderstanding of a concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
netnow66
2 minutes ago, Leftover Pizza said:

 

Well, I think you get the concept of Defensive Mode wrong, even though many have explained to you already (me included) that Defensive Mode is not a total immunity mode. If you can't get that concept right, I can imagine you see that part of the game as a failure. Rockstar needs to tweak and tune Defensive Mode here and there, and probably more the Hostility system more than Defensive Mode itself. 

You can whine about it as much as you want, but you're doing so for the wrong reasons. Defensive Mode doesn't grant you an immunity bubble with a 100% uptime. The game doesn't only advertise as Fun and Fair, but also free to be played by anyone who has bought RDR2. Like I said before, everyone has a place in this game, griefers included. As much as you want to exclude yourself from a certain type of gameplay, you can not exclude others from theirs. If you absolutely can't stand being shot at, even in Defensive Mode, this might not be the game for you. I'm not saying that in the manner of "not having the right to play the game", but if it annoys you so badly, why play?

 

I've been very pro invite only sessions, very very pro. But Defensive Mode has really done a lot of change to the game so far. The main factor is and always will be, the player. You can't blame or deem a game failed due to player attitude or your own misunderstanding of a concept.

I have a problem with Rockstar advertising a game as "fun and fair" and then approving/allowing griefing/bullying to take place in that game. If the game had been advertised clearly, gamers would have known what to expect. People have left this game because of the griefing.

 

In terms of Defensive, none of us knew what to expect from it until it dropped. That's when we found out the extent of safety it provided. The level of safety it offers now could be raised--or lowered. So, Defensive isn't defensive to me as it is now. I will admit I get griefed less, but I still get griefed, just as some others do.

 

As far as "you can not exclude others from theirs," why sure I could. If Rockstar gave us private lobbies. Meanwhile, I and others will continue to glitch the game to achieve "fun and fair."

 

And I explained in my first comment that there are definitely parts of the game that I enjoy. It's just that I find free roam to still be a trainwreck, only playable when I glitch the lobby.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leftover Pizza
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, netnow66 said:

I have a problem with Rockstar advertising a game as "fun and fair" and then approving/allowing griefing/bullying to take place in that game. If the game had been advertised clearly, gamers would have known what to expect. People have left this game because of the griefing.

 

In terms of Defensive, none of us knew what to expect from it until it dropped. That's when we found out the extent of safety it provided. The level of safety it offers now could be raised--or lowered. So, Defensive isn't defensive to me as it is now. I will admit I get griefed less, but I still get griefed, just as some others do.

 

As far as "you can not exclude others from theirs," why sure I could. If Rockstar gave us private lobbies. Meanwhile, I and others will continue to glitch the game to achieve "fun and fair."

 

And I explained in my first comment that there are definitely parts of the game that I enjoy. It's just that I find free roam to still be a trainwreck, only playable when I glitch the lobby.

 

 

 

 

While your conception of "fun and fair" doesn't match someone else's, it doesn't mean the game isn't fun and fair. I'm mostly on your side, but not for the same reasons, nor for misconception of what Defensive Mode should have been if tailored to my wishes. If anything is wrong in their advertising, it is your interpretation of it. 

Again, everyone has a place in this game, griefers included. They probably have a lot of fun griefing others and although we might not understand or agree with them, we can't deny them their perception of fun, so we can pursue our own. That would be selfish. 

And again (again), Defensive mode is no immunity bubble. Players can still kill you if they do so wish. You are wearing nothing but a bit of extra armor, can't be locked on, and a "please don't bother me" sign shows up when you are aimed at. You have a defensive playstyle, you are not defended from every element in the game. Rockstar has done a good part to prevent griefing, but they can not and simply will not exclude players from having fun in the game, as much as we dislike in some cases. No one likes griefing, except the griefers. The game isn't failing. Players are. 

 

Edited by Leftover Pizza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
netnow66
1 hour ago, Leftover Pizza said:

 

 

While your conception of "fun and fair" doesn't match someone else's, it doesn't mean the game isn't fun and fair. I'm mostly on your side, but not for the same reasons, nor for misconception of what Defensive Mode should have been if tailored to my wishes. If anything is wrong in their advertising, it is your interpretation of it. 

Again, everyone has a place in this game, griefers included. They probably have a lot of fun griefing others and although we might not understand or agree with them, we can't deny them their perception of fun, so we can pursue our own. That would be selfish. 

And again (again), Defensive mode is no immunity bubble. Players can still kill you if they do so wish. You are wearing nothing but a bit of extra armor, can't be locked on, and a "please don't bother me" sign shows up when you are aimed at. You have a defensive playstyle, you are not defended from every element in the game. Rockstar has done a good part to prevent griefing, but they can not and simply will not exclude players from having fun in the game, as much as we dislike in some cases. No one likes griefing, except the griefers. The game isn't failing. Players are. 

 

You're entitled to your opinion, no doubt. But, in my opinion, it's Rockstar that is failing the gamers. And while you quickly grabbed onto the word "fun," you totally ignored the word "fair."

 

Separate lobbies (since they are achievable--that new hunting mode prevents players from offensive contact with one another, I believe) would serve more people than Defensive/Offensive as a "fun and fair" alternative. Period. That would be closer to "fun and fair" for everyone than the tepid implementation of Defensive that we have now.

 

And when we first heard of Defensive, neither of us knew the level of protection it would give players. If Defensive, as is, offers players (let's estimate) 50% immunity, my question is, why not 90% or 95%? You apparently view the estimated 50% as "Rockstar has done a good part to prevent griefing." I and some others would disagree. Like the players griefed/bullied in the video I provided.

 

I'm anti griefer, just as I'm anti bully. Excuse me if I'm mislabeling, but you seem rather complacent regarding both in the confines of this game, you can take them or leave them. And you're certainly entitled. We're never going to agree. So, we'll just have to settle for you being happy in an environment where players can be griefed/bullied. And I'll have to settle for glitching the game to avoid that environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leftover Pizza
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, netnow66 said:

You're entitled to your opinion, no doubt. But, in my opinion, it's Rockstar that is failing the gamers. And while you quickly grabbed onto the word "fun," you totally ignored the word "fair."

 

Separate lobbies (since they are achievable--that new hunting mode prevents players from offensive contact with one another, I believe) would serve more people than Defensive/Offensive as a "fun and fair" alternative. Period. That would be closer to "fun and fair" for everyone than the tepid implementation of Defensive that we have now.

 

And when we first heard of Defensive, neither of us knew the level of protection it would give players. If Defensive, as is, offers players (let's estimate) 50% immunity, my question is, why not 90% or 95%? You apparently view the estimated 50% as "Rockstar has done a good part to prevent griefing." I and some others would disagree. Like the players griefed/bullied in the video I provided.

 

I'm anti griefer, just as I'm anti bully. Excuse me if I'm mislabeling, but you seem rather complacent regarding both in the confines of this game, you can take them or leave them. And you're certainly entitled. We're never going to agree. So, we'll just have to settle for you being happy in an environment where players can be griefed/bullied. And I'll have to settle for glitching the game to avoid that environment.

 

If you have read more of my replies, and not only in this thread, you will notice I am as much anti-grief as you are. I just draw a line a bit less close to Zero. Also, again again again and again, oh, and again and again and again again, Defensive mode is not an immunity mode. Defensive Mode is the mode you PLAY in, not a mode in the game that DEFENDS you.

Nor am I overly happy to play in a world with griefers, which you might have noticed if you've read more of my replies here and there, but I deal with it, without expecting Rockstar to tailor the game around my own personal wishes. 

speaking of mislabeling.... , yeah, okay. The video you link is all nice and bully bits, but I have seen 1 player being killed twice while in Defensive mode. All other players, during the while I took the time to watch your video  (to halfway down) ARE NOT IN DEFENSIVE MODE. There is no shield popping up when he aims at them, except in a few occasions of which one he didn't even shoot the player. Nor is the uploader of the vid in Defensive Mode himself. But, I'm pretty much done with this discussion as nothing seems to get through to you anyway. 

Edited by Leftover Pizza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ghoffman9

I been getting shot at fairly regularly despite being in defensive. Just yesterday I was doing some crafting at the campfire in Valentine when some guy decided to try and pop me just for the sh*ts and giggles. Thanks to defensive I was able to exit crafting and pop him before he could finish me off. Players also have increasingly taken to exploiting the loophole with horses to force you out of defensive so that they can grief you with no penalty. The worst people get for attacking others in defensive is not being able to turn on defensive themselves, which they had no intent of doing cause they want to pick fights to begin with. Not much of a punishment, and it shows since people don't seem to care whether you're in defensive or not.

 

Nothing Rockstar can do will be fool proof and open to loopholes and/or exploits in some form. If they really want this vision of keeping players together the best approach is creating PvE and PvP servers, instead of mashing them together and trying to implement flawed systems to try and please both. Course the chances of them doing this is slim to none so the next best thing is private sessions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Diablo 702

I think the only thing we all can agree on is we have different play styles and expectations for this game.  Adding lobby choice would end this argument over what players want, you want pvp go to that lobby, you want pve or friendly play go to that lobby, you want to tear up a lobby with friends only go to that lobby and so on.  By R* adding features that can/will/are used as exploits will not help this game.  But to answer the OP’s question, no, this game is not failing due to lack of I/o lobbies. This game didn’t/hasn’t/ and won’t fail as long as players keep playing. We all have/had different expectations for what a game should be so this 1 size fits all obviously isn’t for everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roggek
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Ghoffman9 said:

I been getting shot at fairly regularly despite being in defensive. Just yesterday I was doing some crafting at the campfire in Valentine when some guy decided to try and pop me just for the sh*ts and giggles. 

The campfire at Valentine is a no,no…
In fact the whole Valentine is a no-go zone...

giphy-downsized.gif

Edited by roggek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CosmicBuffalo
Posted (edited)

This thread is ignorant and borderline disguised as "please bring invite onlys to the game" rather than seeking an actual answer to the question. 

 

RDO hasnt failed..its successful compared to most online games.  GTAO's success has nothing to do with invite only.  The most popular updates require public free mode.

Edited by CosmicBuffalo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leftover Pizza
27 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

This thread is ignorant and borderline disguised as "please bring invite onlys to the game" rather than seeking an actual answer to the question. 

 

RDO hasnt failed..its successful compared to most online games.  GTAO's success has nothing to do with invite only.  The most popular updates require public free mode.

 

While this is partly true, there are a lot of people residing in glitched solo public sessions to do their things without the disturbance of other players, me included. Setting to MTU 710 will get me a worry free solo public session and enjoy all the soloable content. Of course, Heist = yeah problem, but doing sell missions is easy peasy and worry free. Things I wouldn't have done nor considered to buy the needed property for, if the solo public glitch was never possible. 

 

In this game, though, there is no need for invite only indeed. Desire, yes, need no. Both for obvious reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lonely-Martin
52 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

This thread is ignorant and borderline disguised as "please bring invite onlys to the game" rather than seeking an actual answer to the question. 

 

RDO hasnt failed..its successful compared to most online games.  GTAO's success has nothing to do with invite only.  The most popular updates require public free mode.

I guarantee you many stay with GTA:O long after the switch to public only because crews team up and kick, and solo public is widely known in many ways for each platform.

 

There, if you don't like it, the game offers many options. (Legitimate or not so much). Here, public only, or quit. There's no middle ground unlike GTA.

 

Not only us GTA in an era more universally appealing, It's vastly more flexilible and appealing to all playstyles which I firmly believe contribute to the games success and longevity. (Plus it was launched with so much more content to the point R* didn't need to launch GTA:O with 2x event weeks or free cash for logging in on a certain day like RDRO has needed to attract players in).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CosmicBuffalo

^People are actually glitching RDO to get solo sessions or atleast they were.  Not sure, never felt compelled to even try it.  Havent solo public in years in GTAO.  GTAO has a feature that allows players to connect to a public lobby rather than just not be able to connect.  Public FM is still required to play GunRunning, Crates, Night Clubs, and Car selling, even DDH require setups in FM. GTAO was designed to essentially play solo...RDO is not and later GTAO updates are not, but the inital setup was. 

 

The thread says invite only not solo publics...they arent the same, and solo publics have very little to do with success of GTAO, but they definitely have more than invite only.  The thread is bait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lonely-Martin
59 minutes ago, roggek said:

The campfire at Valentine is a no,no…
In fact the whole Valentine is a no-go zone...

giphy-downsized.gif

Why?

 

Coz grief? Ahh...

 

3 hours ago, Leftover Pizza said:

Again, everyone has a place in this game, griefers included.

I get where ya going with your posts, but R* themselves have said they add defensive etc to stop griefing, therefore IMHO, they're not welcome.

 

At least that's my take on it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.