Is the online intended to encourage griefing?

[Direwrath]

2 minutes ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

If you can't handle a bit of attitude, maybe the internet isn't for you. Just saying. 
Also, pro tip, if you don't know what something is, don't ask people if they are it.

Now it has been defined multiple times, griefing does not really on the perception of the individual, but the intention of the "griefer". Go back to page one and you'll see multiple definitions, all with this underlying theme. But instead of going with established definitions, you, and others like you, have ignored them and instead have gone with what you FEEL is the definition. 
Because I doubt you'll go back to page one and actually read the previous comments, here is some common definitions of griefer (with key words highlighted) :
 

"A griefer or bad faith player is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game (trolling), using aspects of the game in unintended ways.[1] A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities. To qualify as griefing, a player must be using aspects of the game in unintended ways to annoy other players—if they are trying to gain a strategic advantage, it is instead called 'cheating'."

Here is another:
"an online game player who intentionally spoils the game for other players"

And another:
"(in an online game or community) a person who harasses or deliberately provokes other players or members in order to spoil their enjoyment."

Notice the key theme here? It all hinges on the INTENTIONS of the "griefer", not your feelings about them. 

Lol, sorry bud, but I've read your other comments against other people on this forum. You are the one who cannot seem to understand nor handle any sort of criticism placed against you. 

 

So why are you here trying to play that you know more than anyone else? Nobody here is going to fall for that high and mighty act, so just stop already before you fall flat on your face.

You seem to post in an attempt to instigate other people on this forum, but guess what, I don't have the time to play childish games. 

 

Also, you are sorely misinformed about what the definition of a griefer is. A griefer is only that when a person feels they are being affected in a negative way by a player going way too far to interrupt their game.

If people were okay with other players cheating or shooting them for no reason, than there would be no reason for the term "griefer". 

 

What a dog and pony show you are running there...

[CaliMeatWagon]

11 minutes ago, Direwrath said:

Also, you are sorely misinformed about what the definition of a griefer is. A griefer is only that when a person feels they are being affected in a negative way by a player going way too far to interrupt their game.

If people were okay with other players cheating or shooting them for no reason, than there would be no reason for the term "griefer". 

 

What a dog and pony show you are running there...

Sure, let me just take your word for it instead of the already established definitions by reputable sources...
 

Quote

A griefer or bad faith player is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game (trolling), using aspects of the game in unintended ways.[1] A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities. To qualify as griefing, a player must be using aspects of the game in unintended ways to annoy other players—if they are trying to gain a strategic advantage, it is instead called "cheating".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griefer

Quote

an online game player who intentionally spoils the game for other players

 https://www.dictionary.com/browse/griefer 

Quote

(in an online game or community) a person who harasses or deliberately provokes other players or members in order to spoil their enjoyment.

https://www.bing.com/search?q=griefer

Quote

Someone, usually in an online game, who intentionally, and usually repeatedly, attempts to degrade anothers experience or torment them.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=griefer

Quote

A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game that goes out of his or her way to annoy other players. The term griefer is derived from the idea of “giving [someone] grief”.
https://www.techopedia.com/definition/1916/griefer

 

Quote

Griefing is the act of intentionally causing distress to other players in an online game and the tactics used to cause grief vary depending on which game is being played. 
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/griefing

Quote

1. (Other Non-sporting Hobbies) an online game player who intentionally spoils the game for other players
2. (Computer Science) an online game player who intentionally spoils the game for other players
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/griefer

 

Not a single one of those definitions depend on the perceptions of the recipient. 

 

How many sourced definitions do you need for you to realize your feelings about something don't change the reality of it? 
The worlds on lockdown and I got nothing but time on my hands. 
Or are you going to double down on how you FEEL about something while completely ignoring facts? 

 

My guess is you'll ignore facts. 

Edited December 8, 2020 by CaliMeatWagon

[Direwrath]

1 minute ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

Sure, let me just take your word for it instead of the already established definitions by reputable sources...
 

 

Not a single one of those definitions depend on the perceptions of the recipient. 

 

How many sourced definitions do you need for you to realize your feelings about something don't change the reality of it? 
The worlds on lockdown and I got nothing but time on my hands. 
Or are you going to double down on how you FEEL about something while completely ignoring facts? 

Boy you are just full of knowledge aren't you..

 

You do realize that the supposed griefer player has to actually affect the other player in a way that, that player feels is negative and disruptive before they are technically considered a "griefer" right? Basically if the other player is fine with their behavior then they are not by the definition that you posted, a griefer. At that point they are a cheater if they are using the game mechanics or hacks to do so, but if the player being attacked is okay with the bullish behavior than there is no griefing being done.

 

Once again it is all in the perception of the players being bothered.

Hence the reason why every here keeps saying that it is all indeed based on one's perspective of what is happening.

 

Lol, and I don't feel anything about griefing. Stop making assumptions. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CaliMeatWagon]

 

18 minutes ago, Direwrath said:

You do realize that the supposed griefer player has to actually affect the other player in a way that, that player feels is negative and disruptive before they are technically considered a "griefer" right? Basically if the other player is fine with their behavior then they are not by the definition that you posted, a griefer. At that point they are a cheater if they are using the game mechanics or hacks to do so, but if the player being attacked is okay with the bullish behavior than there is no griefing being done.

 

Once again it is all in the perception of the players being bothered.

Hence the reason why every here keeps saying that it is all indeed based on one's perspective of what is happening.

 

Lol, and I don't feel anything about griefing. Stop making assumptions. 

 

How'd I'd guess that you'd ignore facts and instead double down on what you FEEL the definition is? 

Let me ask you something. Why do you feel comfortable making up definitions? 

Edited December 8, 2020 by CaliMeatWagon

[CaliMeatWagon]

  

18 minutes ago, Direwrath said:

Boy you are just full of knowledge aren't you..

 It's this wonderful invention called the internet. Through it, you can access almost all of humanities knowledge. What's great about this is that ignorance is now a choice. 
You should check it out sometime. 

[Direwrath]

8 minutes ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

 

How'd I'd guess that you'd ignore facts and instead double down on what you FEEL the definition is? 

Let me ask you something. Why do you feel comfortable making up definitions? 

What is with you and "feelings" anyways? Do you know how ridiculous you sound?

 

How about this, I "FEEL" that we are at an impasse, and you are not worth my time with your sad attempts at trying to upstage me. You are taking a definition of a term relating to one's actions and looking at it in one way, I am seeing it from another. Simple and done.

 

 

1 minute ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

It's this wonderful invention called the internet. Through it, you can access almost all of humanities knowledge. What's great about this is that ignorance is now a choice. 
You should check it out sometime. 

Oh dear, now this comment here. This one is childish...

[CaliMeatWagon]

1 minute ago, Direwrath said:

What is with you and "feelings" anyways? Do you know how ridiculous you sound?

 

How about this, I "FEEL" that we are at an impasse, and you are not worth my time with your sad attempts at trying to upstage me. You are taking a definition of a term relating to one's actions and looking at it in one way, I am seeing it from another. Simple and done.

What's up with people like you thinking this is a game with prizes to be won or lost? 
This is a conversation. You spouted some BS by trying to invent definitions to established words. I corrected you. That's it. No ulterior motives. Nothing. You said something wrong, I provided the factual information. 
But please, tell me why do you think this is a game? One where I can "upstage you"? I find this thought process of yours interesting as I completely do not get it. 

[Direwrath]

Just now, CaliMeatWagon said:

What's up with people like you thinking this is a game with prizes to be won or lost? 
This is a conversation. You spouted some BS by trying to invent definitions to established words. I corrected you. That's it. No ulterior motives. Nothing. You said something wrong, I provided the factual information. 
But please, tell me why do you think this is a game? One where I can "upstage you"? I find this thought process of yours interesting as I completely do not get it. 

Corrected me? Oh boy are you naïve.. This all started because you cannot handle a bit of criticism on your part, that is all. 

You sound so laughably arrogant, prodding at me like you are really getting under my skin. 

Here's a fact that you can maybe understand, but you are not worth my time. Your insults are mediocre at best and you are really trying too hard to sound intelligent on a forum where people honestly don't care.

Obviously all you can do is throw those lame comments in a poor attempt to rile me up and hijack this thread. 

 

The term griefer can be seen from different points of view, that is fact. You are taking the definition all too literally and not realizing that there are conditions to be met for a player to fit that term. A person can run around calling themselves a griefer all they want, but if they aren't bothering the other players enough for them to get upset over what they are doing, than they are far from it. I mean, it's just so simple a concept.

 

 

 

 

[CaliMeatWagon]

18 minutes ago, Direwrath said:

Corrected me? Oh boy are you naïve.. This all started because you cannot handle a bit of criticism on your part, that is all. 

You sound so laughably arrogant, prodding at me like you are really getting under my skin. 

Here's a fact that you can maybe understand, but you are not worth my time. Your insults are mediocre at best and you are really trying too hard to sound intelligent on a forum where people honestly don't care.

Obviously all you can do is throw those lame comments in a poor attempt to rile me up and hijack this thread. 

 

The term griefer can be seen from different points of view, that is fact. You are taking the definition all too literally and not realizing that there are conditions to be met for a player to fit that term. A person can run around calling themselves a griefer all they want, but if they aren't bothering the other players enough for them to get upset over what they are doing, than they are far from it. I mean, it's just so simple a concept.

Yes, I am arrogant, and I'm a dick with little patience for people. But you think too highly of yourself if you think I actually care about getting under your skin or riling you up. 
You stated something factually incorrect. I provide you with the correct, information, all of it sourced, which you quickly ignored, relying instead on your made up definition. That is all there is too it. 
End of story. 

"not realizing that there are conditions to be met for a player to fit that term."
Actually, I'm very cognizant of that fact. In fact, the point I've been driving, and all the established definitions confirm, is that it requires the intention, of the "griefer", to cause grief. It has nothing to do with their effectiveness of it, like you erroneously claim. 

Now this conversation has definitely gone as far as it can go. You prefer to live in  your fantasy land of made up definitions, and I refuse to budge from the realm of reality. 
We are done here, and unlike you, I actually mean it. 
Have a good day/night.  

Edited December 8, 2020 by CaliMeatWagon

[Lonely-Martin]

Well said @Direwrath. The chap is just out to grief the thread, lol.

 

Anyway Cali, you've already contradicted your views here by stating griefing doesn't exist, but then shown it can with these...

 

On 12/6/2020 at 1:13 AM, CaliMeatWagon said:

There is no such thing as Griefing in Red Dead or GTA Online. 

 

Followed by this...

 

On 12/6/2020 at 2:06 AM, CaliMeatWagon said:

I define it as players going out of there way, often abusing mechanics, to disrupt other players gameplay and cause them grief. 

Considering it's known for fact that people glitch, exploit, cheat, or use mod menu's to grief. Many have shown this in both games.

 

Then there's this little nugget...

 

3 hours ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

You prefer to live in  your fantasy land of made up definitions

Aren't all definitions made up? Don't they evolve?

 

But alas, notice at the start of that secong quote 'I define it as...'

 

So you can make your interpretations, but others shouldn't and must follow your FEELINGS in the meaning.

 

Comedy gold!

[CaliMeatWagon]

6 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

So you can make your interpretations, but others shouldn't and must follow your FEELINGS in the meaning.

 

Comedy gold!

Compare my "interpretation" to the definition posted by you, yourself. 
Then get back to me...

Edited December 8, 2020 by CaliMeatWagon

[4eyedcoupe]

Somebody needs to take their medicine. 

Edited December 8, 2020 by 4eyedcoupe

[totoohneharry]

yes sadly griefing and forced pvp is intended by r*

 

in gtao its obvious

 

 

and in rdo its more concealed

 

for example

 

when u have a bounty of 5$ and are in defensive mode

why tf do npc bountyhunters remove defensive mode and "enable" pvp

its not like i have it active on purpose cause i despise pvp and griefing fgts

 

but hey have a pve aspect u wait for cause u want to get thrown into jail, for the jailtime award, turn into pvp sh!t where this mofo just kills me and i loose 25$

 

much fun, such a great BH update

 

 

the old 10$ npcs and 20$ playerbounty was way better

 

now u get fagg0ts chasing you having 5 but you loose 25..

[Lonely-Martin]

36 minutes ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

Compare my "interpretation" to the definition posted by you, yourself. 
Then get back to me...

Na, you've shown your true intentions with many responses to Direwrath above (and me earlier in the thread which I ignored) and it's pointless considering I'm talking to...

 

4 hours ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

Yes, I am arrogant, and I'm a dick with little patience for people.

..

 

My questions were rhetorical above so no need for further discussions here and I feel your only intent is to shut the thread down because feelings.

 

Adios cowpoke. 

[CaliMeatWagon]

13 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Na, you've shown your true intentions with many responses to Direwrath above (and me earlier in the thread which I ignored) and it's pointless considering I'm talking to...

 

..

 

My questions were rhetorical above so no need for further discussions here and I feel your only intent is to shut the thread down because feelings.

 

Adios cowpoke. 

Well you are entitled to your feelings, and you seem deep into them...

[zPhoenix]

7 hours ago, kcole4001 said:

I usually found them in Valentine hanging around across the street from the butcher.

 

There were often quite a few in StDenis or the approaches along the rail line.

 

When I started keeping a list of the exploiting or cheating types, it was most often people from Brazil or China.

I'm in Eastern Canada, so I couldn't say it's a time zone thing.

Most of the time I'm pretty sure they can't tell my character's gender: either they're waiting outside a building I'm in or barrelling across a field on a wagon while I'm looking through a menu or plotting a waypoint on the map.

 

The biggest issue I have with the system is that they can blow you up with dynamite or set you on fire with thrown combustibles and they don't get put in offensive for this.

You have to wait for them to hit you with direct fire before you can retaliate without the game deciding that you are the aggressor.

So you can either stand there and wait for them to aim carefully for a headshot kill, or run around and wait for them to score a lucky hit (because they are often really bad at freeaim) before you're free to return fire.

It's like being a UN Peacekeeper FFS.

The rules of engagement favour the assholes.

 

===================================

 

For the record, I've seen far more cheaters than griefers (on PC).

The vast majority of players I've come across since PC launch are busy with their moneymaking and have no interest in bothering you (contrary to a previously posted opinion that very few players are defensive by nature and that most people love complete chaos).

But those that are intent on hassling others are not the slightest bit shy of using glitches, exploits and outright cheats to get the advantage.

When I felt like engaging them (even odds or at 1-2) and they did fight fairly, they were not very good without relying on PiB to do their aiming for them.

And I'm not a long time shooter player at all, I'm at best mediocre at pvp, it's really not something I'm interested in.

My home is in the US but I happen to be "semi long term temporarily" one country over from Brazil, I wonder if I am being put in lobbies with the cheaters and griefers due to proximity.

 

As I am not really interested in PvP (it is pointless if you play with keyboard/mouse as the ones with controllers have aim assist), so long as I can avoid griefers I could care less about cheaters... I don't care if they cheat if they leave me alone.

[StyxTx]

22 hours ago, zPhoenix said:

I get griefed about 3-4 times a day, usually by people camping the sheriff's office to interfere with bounty delivery.  I always report them but I don't think it has any effect.

• Note that when it happens I am usually in Defensive mode (it definitely happens more in Offensive), and without a bounty on me.
• It is very intentional, as it usually happens inside the "presumed safe zone" just before reaching the delivery point, and the players are either waiting in ambush or barrel in when they see you on the map.  They might also shoot to spook or kill my horse the moment I get off.

The other very common scenario is when people intentionally ram you trying to provoke you to shoot back at them.

In one of the updates a while back, R* proudly announced it had stopped the ability of people ramming into defensive players. I guess they took that away.

17 minutes ago, zPhoenix said:

My home is in the US but I happen to be "semi long term temporarily" one country over from Brazil, I wonder if I am being put in lobbies with the cheaters and griefers due to proximity.

 

As I am not really interested in PvP (it is pointless if you play with keyboard/mouse as the ones with controllers have aim assist), so long as I can avoid griefers I could care less about cheaters... I don't care if they cheat if they leave me alone.

Every modder I've run across has a Russian or Chinese flag in their profile. Never saw any from S.A. It may be just the time of day I played.

Edited December 8, 2020 by StyxTx

[Lonely-Martin]

38 minutes ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

Well you are entitled to your feelings, and you seem deep into them...

Stop baiting dude, you're better than this childish nonsense.

[CaliMeatWagon]

25 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Stop baiting dude, you're better than this childish nonsense.

Right back to the heart of the matter. 
No matter how much you might like to think so, you don't get to define my, or others, intentions. 

[ShadowlessDevil]

The rare time I get griefed is by low levels thinking they are a match for someone at level 308...If they insist, I will just use an explosive arrow...One time a posse of 4 decided to attack me, I picked them off one by one...

[1898]

One thing I haven't seen explained or understand is if they do encourage griefing, why? Unless I'm missing something there's really nothing in it for them since Cards are purchased using cash not gold. I guess the guns can be bought using either. 

 

Maybe those running the online show are basically jerks who want conflict, caricatures of these two here

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

[Lonely-Martin]

35 minutes ago, CaliMeatWagon said:

Right back to the heart of the matter. 
No matter how much you might like to think so, you don't get to define my, or others, intentions. 

https://youtu.be/L0MK7qz13bU

[kcole4001]

2 hours ago, zPhoenix said:

My home is in the US but I happen to be "semi long term temporarily" one country over from Brazil, I wonder if I am being put in lobbies with the cheaters and griefers due to proximity.

 

As I am not really interested in PvP (it is pointless if you play with keyboard/mouse as the ones with controllers have aim assist), so long as I can avoid griefers I could care less about cheaters... I don't care if they cheat if they leave me alone.

 

2 hours ago, StyxTx said:

In one of the updates a while back, R* proudly announced it had stopped the ability of people ramming into defensive players. I guess they took that away.

Every modder I've run across has a Russian or Chinese flag in their profile. Never saw any from S.A. It may be just the time of day I played.

 

I think the prevalence of Brazilian and Chinese players I've encountered (whether hostile, cheating, or peaceful) has been mainly due to the sheer number of them and the time I play normally, there are very many players from both countries.

I'm normally on in the late morning - early afternoon, Brazil is 1 hour later, while China is from 9-11 hours later.

I've seen plenty of North American players, but few UK/Europeans for some reason.

I've found a tendency for the most aggressive ones to be mid-higher level Brazilians, usually from levels 100+ to 200+, but that's certainly not something I'd attribute to being determined by nationality.

 

Again, I've run into many more cheaters than purely aggressive players, and they are the ones I'd consider to be the real problem.

Griefers are easily handled once you reach a level where explosive ammo (including dynamite arrows) is available.

Even without that, they are usually pretty easy to fight at least to a draw if that concerns you.

And if it doesn't, and really there is nothing to be gained from it, then just parlay and go about your business or switch sessions.

 

Cheaters are impossible to counter except perhaps with a equivalent cheat menu, I don't know for sure since I don't get into that sort of thing.

Just note their name, take a screenshot if possible and report using social club, the in game report function will more than likely result in them getting the report rather than greedstar.

So, due to the lack of effective anti-cheat measures, I'd say that is encouraged.

In a supposedly AAA game from such a vastly profitable company in 2020 that is inexcusable.

Edited December 8, 2020 by kcole4001
spelling

[DentureDynamite]

2 hours ago, 1898 said:

One thing I haven't seen explained or understand is if they do encourage griefing, why? Unless I'm missing something there's really nothing in it for them since Cards are purchased using cash not gold. I guess the guns can be bought using either. 

 

Maybe those running the online show are basically jerks who want conflict, caricatures of these two here

I forget which interview it was in, but one of the R* lead devs stated that they like PvP.

 

What R* likes, they use their developer clout to push for in-game.

 

Even if I did like PvP (which I don't), unlike them, I don't get paid to make/play games all day. My time is limited.

Edited December 8, 2020 by DentureDynamite

[StyxTx]

3 hours ago, DentureDynamite said:

I forget which interview it was in, but one of the R* lead devs stated that they like PvP.

 

What R* likes, they use their developer clout to push for in-game.

 

Even if I did like PvP (which I don't), unlike them, I don't get paid to make/play games all day. My time is limited.

But what's odd is that their own numbers show a vast majority of players do not play pvp. Once again, it's what R* wants, not the players.

[kcole4001]

4 minutes ago, StyxTx said:

But what's odd is that their own numbers show a vast majority of players do not play pvp. Once again, it's what R* wants, not the players.

And once again, or more accurately, continuously they show arrogant disregard for what their customers want to push their own agendas.

And that some players are pleased with their choices clearly doesn't matter them either, it's greedstar's own opinions that matter, not players'.

Pvp players wanted showdowns with no cards and tonic...what do they get? Showdowns with no cards and tonics, but limited weaponry to pick ups only.

G*: "we gave you what you wanted"

players: "no, we wanted A and got B"

G*: "f*cking ungrateful bastards"

[Direwrath]

11 hours ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Well said @Direwrath. The chap is just out to grief the thread, lol.

 

Indeed, and their "opinion" that griefing cannot exist within the game does not negate the fact that there are actual accounts of griefing behavior in RDRO. Nor, does it invalidate the frustrations from the many players who are angry about having to deal with it without any permanent help from R*.

 

R* implemented "anti griefing" measures for goodness sake? Even the company knows it tends to be a problem...

 

Short story, it does exist.

 

And I stand by my opinion on that I feel griefing is a matter of perspective for the players involved.

 

Basically I disputed their claim and they could not take the facts as they are.

Although maybe I took my comments a little too far, stooped to their level, but I'm not here to fight with anyone.

Thank you @Lonely-Martin

 

3 hours ago, StyxTx said:

But what's odd is that their own numbers show a vast majority of players do not play pvp. Once again, it's what R* wants, not the players.

Makes me think that they have no idea just what they are doing in the first place. I don't play many Online games, but are other ones so chaotic in terms of anti griefing mechanics as R* games? 

 

2 hours ago, kcole4001 said:

And once again, or more accurately, continuously they show arrogant disregard for what their customers want to push their own agendas.

And that some players are pleased with their choices clearly doesn't matter them either, it's greedstar's own opinions that matter, not players'.

Pvp players wanted showdowns with no cards and tonic...what do they get? Showdowns with no cards and tonics, but limited weaponry to pick ups only.

G*: "we gave you what you wanted"

players: "no, we wanted A and got B"

G*: "f*cking ungrateful bastards"

It almost seems like they are not happy with implementing anything the majority of players want. And when they feel forced they "punish" the players by giving them a portion of what they asked for all the while tainting it with something to leave a bad taste in their mouths.

 

[Lonely-Martin]

7 minutes ago, Direwrath said:

Indeed, and their "opinion" that griefing cannot exist within the game does not negate the fact that there are actual accounts of griefing behavior in RDRO. Nor, does it invalidate the frustrations from the many players who are angry about having to deal with it without any permanent help from R*.

 

R* implemented "anti griefing" measures for goodness sake? Even the company knows it tends to be a problem...

 

Short story, it does exist.

 

And I stand by my opinion on that I feel griefing is a matter of perspective for the players involved.

 

Basically I disputed their claim and they could not take the facts as they are.

Although maybe I took my comments a little too far, stooped to their level, but I'm not here to fight with anyone.

Thank you @Lonely-Martin

 

Yeah, it's such a subjective thing with many forms of it out there, and a topic that really consistently shows to invoke a passionate response sometimes too, lol. No matter how we play, we all want our game of is all. 

 

Don't sweat it. Take it from me, one who got caught up in far too many similar discussions on this stuff in the GTA:O cesspit, err, I mean, section. It can get messy and often just ends up going around in circles a bit. People have their own views on it and that's fair of course, but often these types of threads tend to see folk double down on their POV if anything. I know I've learned not to get too caught up in it and to remember not to get pulled in and carried away, but I do enjoy a meaty discussion all too much too.

 

One thing I'll give R* a little credit for, after GTA:O, it was/is great to see R* address this area far more and at least actually acknowledge the potential for grief to occour. That's certainly a start. But as GTA:O has also shown, R* needs to keep on top of it rather than just slap a bandaid over it and leave be, to keep tweaking things to improve things as players bring methods forward. PC for example, there's just no excuses for how messy that can get with mod menu's and such.

 

Of course, they'd make it much less of an area that needs attention if they gave us the freedom many seek to take matters in our own hands to reduce the impact. The often mentioned lobby choice would help so much. PvE players get the PvE experience they seek, and PvP players just won't get called griefer just for looking for a tumble out there. But alas, no dice unfortunately.

 

Still, we can always try with a topic like this to shed light and hope the players ask for more or if lucky, the top brass see it as they look for ways to expand the playerbase. Some healthy competition wouldn't hurt creative too, ha ha.

[Direwrath]

34 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Yeah, it's such a subjective thing with many forms of it out there, and a topic that really consistently shows to invoke a passionate response sometimes too, lol. No matter how we play, we all want our game of is all. 

 

Don't sweat it. Take it from me, one who got caught up in far too many similar discussions on this stuff in the GTA:O cesspit, err, I mean, section. It can get messy and often just ends up going around in circles a bit. People have their own views on it and that's fair of course, but often these types of threads tend to see folk double down on their POV if anything. I know I've learned not to get too caught up in it and to remember not to get pulled in and carried away, but I do enjoy a meaty discussion all too much too.

 

One thing I'll give R* a little credit for, after GTA:O, it was/is great to see R* address this area far more and at least actually acknowledge the potential for grief to occour. That's certainly a start. But as GTA:O has also shown, R* needs to keep on top of it rather than just slap a bandaid over it and leave be, to keep tweaking things to improve things as players bring methods forward. PC for example, there's just no excuses for how messy that can get with mod menu's and such.

 

Of course, they'd make it much less of an area that needs attention if they gave us the freedom many seek to take matters in our own hands to reduce the impact. The often mentioned lobby choice would help so much. PvE players get the PvE experience they seek, and PvP players just won't get called griefer just for looking for a tumble out there. But alas, no dice unfortunately.

 

Still, we can always try with a topic like this to shed light and hope the players ask for more or if lucky, the top brass see it as they look for ways to expand the playerbase. Some healthy competition wouldn't hurt creative too, ha ha.

R* just likes to use a regular band-aid for a gaping wound is all.

 

And R* needs to see conversations like these, they need to see that the way that they are pushing players together is not working, and it is the sole reason that the player base is coming apart. 

They are just making horrible decisions and it's ruining what could be an epic game.

 

[Lonely-Martin]

20 minutes ago, Direwrath said:

R* just likes to use a regular band-aid for a gaping wound is all.

 

And R* needs to see conversations like these, they need to see that the way that they are pushing players together is not working, and it is the sole reason that the player base is coming apart. 

They are just making horrible decisions and it's ruining what could be an epic game.

So much potential. I love the map and feel of its absorbing atmosphere so much, it's the only reason I come back and persist/try to get going out there. 

 

As a world, RDRO wins hands down, but for the freedom I enjoy, GTA:O clinches it still. I was hoping between the 2 games I'd have my own lil' Westworld type of thing going off, lol. Bounce around between the 2 virtual worlds and indulge.

 

Must add, I know I can come across as anti-PvP and be a bit flippant about it with throwaway comments, but I'm really not. I'll never be against PvP. There's more than enough room for all playstyles to thrive and GTA:O shows all too clearly, that freedom/appeal works wonders financially for R*/T2. I just don't understand, especially with the game showing issues with full lobbies anyway, why they don't just look to appeal to more with this fantastic map. 

 

It's like burger king not selling fries and drinks but burgers only, while GTA is the McDonald's just down the road with a full meal on offer. It's limiting itself so much I feel. Burger king has the better burgers, but without fries and such, it's just easier to pop down the road. (If my analogy makes sense).