If Rockstar won’t grant players free-aim lobbies:

[djb204]

Rockstar obviously doesn’t want to split up the player base. They want to keep ALL players in the same sessions. A large percentage of the player base wants free aim lobbies though, so how can everyone win?

 

What if.... any time a player using aim-assist settings engages a player using free-aim settings, the aim assist player is forced into free-aim? 

 

This way will ensure free-aim players aren’t at a disadvantage when encountering other players. Players will be notified of another players aim settings upon approaching them to avoid any unwanted battles?

 

Just a thought. I’m still brain storming on ways to incorporate free-aim session experiences without splitting up the player base and/or putting anyone at a disadvantage.

[Lonely-Martin]

No thanks, sorry. Though I do appreciate you're trying to come up with ideas of course!

 

I choose auto aim and shouldn't be forced into a different way just to please others that enjoy free aim (and vice-versa of course). Why should I be forced to change for free aim and them not forced to go auto? Why should a free aimer be forced into auto against their will. Either way it's just going to piss people off and it can only be a negative thing.

 

I see people say free aim adds to the challenge, but I'm just not interested in that challenge. Never will be. It's good for those keen, but definitely not something for all. It'd just be one more reason to hate on the game.

 

That would be detrimental to the playerbase and push many away. It's an open world game and we simply should have the freedom to play our way, unfortunately R* just wants to restrict the freedom so much here by both forcing aim preferences to clash and PvE/PvP playstyles and making us play their way. A game like this should be doing significantly more to appeal to all playstyles and not favouring any over others.

 

Someone really needs to remind R* how to make an open world game, lol. And their lame 'don't want to split the playerbase' nonsense ain't gonna fly.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Lonely-Martin
Wording.

[djb204]

1 hour ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Why should I be forced to change for free aim and them not forced to go auto?

Then don’t engage. I wrote if this aim-assist players engages/attack free-aim players they are forced to switch. The INSTIGATOR sacrifices their preferred aim setting. If a player doesn’t want to have their preferred aim style changed then don’t attack/instigate/grief. Simply mosey on by and wave. Allow the free-aim players to enjoy their aim preferences without having to deal with a griefer whose attempting to take advantage of their auto-aim advantage.

Edited December 30, 2020 by djb204

[Lonely-Martin]

12 minutes ago, djb204 said:

Then don’t engage. I wrote if this aim-assist players engages/attack free-aim players they are forced to switch. The INSTIGATOR sacrifices their preferred aim setting. If a player doesn’t want to have their preferred aim style changed then don’t attack/instigate/grief. Simply mosey on by and wave. Allow the auto-aim players to enjoy their aim preferences without having to deal with a griefer whose attempting to take advantage of their auto-aim advantage.

 

But when selling loot like trader or moonshiners, if a player charges towards to destroy/attack it, you have to engage otherwise they'll go unchallenged and be free to take the first kill or blow up our sh*t. 

 

Be easier for R* to just allow lobby choice based off aim preferences rather than create another convoluted and exploitable system IMHO.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Lonely-Martin
Autospell fail.

[*Lola]

52 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

No thanks, sorry. Though I do appreciate you're trying to come up with ideas of course!

 

I choose auto aim and shouldn't be forced into a different way just to please others that enjoy free aim (and vice-versa of course). Why should I be forced to change for free aim and them not forced to go auto? Why should a free aimer be forced into auto against their will. Either way it's just going to piss people off and it can only be a negative thing.

 

I see people say free aim adds to the challenge, but I'm just not interested in that challenge. Never will be. It's good for those keen, but definitely not something for all. It'd just be one more reason to hate on the game.

 

That would be detrimental to the playerbase and push many away. It's an open world game and we simply should have the freedom to play our way, unfortunately R* just wants to restrict the freedom so much here by both forcing aim preferences to clash and PvE/PvP playstyles and making us play their way. A game like this should be doing significantly more to appeal to all playstyles and not favouring any over others.

 

Someone really needs to remind R* how to make an open world game, lol. And their lame 'don't want to split the playerbase' nonsense ain't gonna fly.

Sounds more beneficiary to the free aim griefer/instigator.

Edited December 30, 2020 by *Lola

[Lonely-Martin]

4 minutes ago, *Lola said:

Sounds more beneficiary to the free aim griefer.

 

Yeah. Neither playstyle should be forced to play a way they prefer not to. That's just not an open world game to me. R* are better than this.

[djb204]

18 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

 

But when selling loot like trader or moonshiners, if a player charges towards to destroy/attack it, you have to engage otherwise they'll go unchallenged and be free to take the first kill or blow up our sh*t. 

 

Be easier for R* to just allow lobby choice based off aim preferences rather than create another convoluted and exploitable system IMHO.

Yea that’s where auto-aim ruins the experience IMO.

 

All it takes is a combination of Auto-Aim, Paint It Black, and an Explosive Round to put a stop to any wagon delivery.

 

Gun fights would actually be entertaining, challenging, and last longer if they were Free-Aim, No Dead-Eye ability cards, and regular ammo only.

 

I agree 100% that the lobbies should be split, but Rock* ain’t doing it. This thread was an attempt to provide an idea of how both aim preferences could work together because it doesn’t look like Rockstar has any intention of providing free-aim lobbies.

Edited December 30, 2020 by djb204

[4eyedcoupe]

While I see where OP is getting with saying IF the aggressor is the aim assist player, but Rockstar can't get that right and we all know players find exploits and ways around forcing players to being the aggressor.  For that reason I can't agree, though I do recognize the efforts and ideas OP.

[djb204]

21 minutes ago, *Lola said:

Sounds more beneficiary to the free aim griefer/instigator.

Yea, like I said.... this is a brain storm idea. I want free aim, many players do. Rockstar doesn’t appear to be considering free aim lobbies any time soon. Trying to figure out ways on how we can get free-aim only battles while remaining in Rockstar’s forced combined lobbies, since we don’t have a choice.

Edited December 30, 2020 by djb204

[Lonely-Martin]

10 minutes ago, djb204 said:

Yea that’s where auto-aim ruins the experience IMO.

 

All it takes is a combination of Auto-Aim, Paint It Black, and an Explosive Round to put a stop to any wagon delivery.

 

Gun fights would actually be entertaining, challenging, and last longer if they were Free-Aim, No Dead-Eye ability cards, and regular ammo only.

 

I strongly agree that these stupid top trumps cards are just too childish and ruin what could be a much more balanced game without them, immersion breaking too. But as an auto aim player not looking to be challenged that way, I'll never agree auto aim ruins things. It may for some, but definitely not a universal thing. There's so much room for all playstyles in a game like this, well, unless R* knows too little play the game that they have to force players to clash to make it look better populated than it is, lol.

 

It should be an option for those wanting the challenge to be given the best chances for that to happen fairly, definitely support that, but not at the compromise of other players fun in other ways.

 

This thread of yours just highlights that this alleged open world game simply needs more freedom and shows R* up as ignorant. They should do as they said initially and just listen to their players, I mean, customers.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Lonely-Martin
Spelling fails me.

[djb204]

16 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

 

Yeah. Neither playstyle should be forced to play a way they prefer not to. That's just not an open world game to me. R* are better than this.

The Irony is free-aim players are FORCED to play with Auto-Aim players who have an obvious advantage. Free-Aim players are then FORCED to switch to auto-aim too just to have a fair fight. The reality here is free-aim players don’t get to play the way THEY want too because of mixed lobbies.

 

“Rockstar is better than this” you say? It looks like they are failing hard.

[Lonely-Martin]

9 minutes ago, djb204 said:

The Irony is free-aim players are FORCED to play with Auto-Aim players who have an obvious advantage. Free-Aim players are then FORCED to switch to auto-aim too just to have a fair fight. The reality here is free-aim players don’t get to play the way THEY want too because of mixed lobbies.

 

“Rockstar is better than this” you say? It looks like they are failing hard.

 

Yep, I fully agree. R* are just being ignorant to it as they have announced they have made lobby choices but are holding back those as a back up only.

 

IMHO, we're long past due for R* to conceed they're game needs those to arrive. This 'vision' only compromises the gaming for too many. 

 

The only reason I say R* are better than this is because of GTA:O. That game has numerous issues that can compromise players of course, but it has much more freedom and because of the options available, many wildly different communities still thrive to this day. All it takes is giving us these options and we'll make the game we want from it, and the profits to be made are significant too.

 

Really feels like R* aren't even trying here.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Lonely-Martin

[StyxTx]

1 hour ago, Lonely-Martin said:

I see people say free aim adds to the challenge, but I'm just not interested in that challenge. Never will be. It's good for those keen, but definitely not something for all. It'd just be one more reason to hate on the game.

I'm one who says that but I'm talking to those people who claim they go around killing people because they're "bored". Don't want to be bored? Use free aim.

Edited December 30, 2020 by StyxTx

[kcole4001]

Maybe a solution would be hard core servers: free aim, no cards, no tonics, maybe no explosives either, just guns & bullets.

I've little idea how much difference it would make on PC, but clearly on consoles it's a big divide.

 

17 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

 

Yep, I fully agree. R* are just being ignorant to it as they have announced they have made lobby choices but are holding back those as a back up only.

 

IMHO, we're long past due for R* to conceed they're game needs those to arrive. This 'vision' only compromises the gaming for too many. 

 

The only reason I say R* are better than this is because of GTA:O. That game has numerous issues that can compromise players of course, but it has much more freedom and because of the options available, many wildly different communities still thrive to this day. All it takes is giving us these options and we'll make the game we want from it, and the profits to be made are significant too.

 

Really feels like R* aren't even trying here.

I think they're trying, but what they are stubbornly aiming for is the opposite of what players want.

[StyxTx]

1 hour ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Someone really needs to remind R* how to make an open world game, lol. And their lame 'don't want to split the playerbase' nonsense ain't gonna fly.

Separate lobbies, to me, is not splitting the player base. It's simply putting similar play styles together. I don't know what R*s stubborness is all about, dictating how the players must play while claiming players can choose their own path. They contradict themselves.

[Lonely-Martin]

2 minutes ago, StyxTx said:

I'm one who says that but I'm talking to those people who claim they go around killing people because they're "bored". Don't want to be bored? Use free aim.

 

Yeah, lol. I'll never get why people would even do something that bores them. There's many games I don't enjoy or look boring to me, but I'll never play 'em. Too easy.

 

That said, I can understand the complaint from many that love this game and waiting for new content to arrive as R* have taken it too slow to build this world up overall. 

[StyxTx]

29 minutes ago, djb204 said:

The Irony is free-aim players are FORCED to play with Auto-Aim players who have an obvious advantage. Free-Aim players are then FORCED to switch to auto-aim too just to have a fair fight. The reality here is free-aim players don’t get to play the way THEY want too because of mixed lobbies.

 

“Rockstar is better than this” you say? It looks like they are failing hard.

On PC, mouse/keyboard users don't have the option to use auto aim either. Those people in particular should be able to use free aim lobbies.

[Lonely-Martin]

2 minutes ago, StyxTx said:

Separate lobbies, to me, is not splitting the player base. It's simply putting similar play styles together. I don't know what R*s stubborness is all about, dictating how the players must play while claiming players can choose their own path. They contradict themselves.

 

Absolutely. This game before release was already seeing many knock it as a 'horsey game' and as it is the newer of R*'s 2 online games too, it only makes sense to do everything they can to grow the audience. For it to be an open world game, the basics must be to appeal to as many types of player as possible. Something seems off with this approach.

 

5 minutes ago, kcole4001 said:

I think they're trying, but what they are stubbornly aiming for is the opposite of what players want.

 

I've long given up on their 'we're listening' lines. It all just feels too wrong to believe now.

 

I do long for the day where they show otherwise though. Would be so full of praise if they did start to open this game up to unlock its potential.

[*Lola]

7 minutes ago, StyxTx said:

Don't want to be bored? Use free aim.

That's the only reason I switched to free aim in rdo.

Gtao was an easier adjustment since it has auto weapons.

Rdo has ability cards to help. LoL

 

[StyxTx]

27 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

Really feels like R* aren't even trying here.

Funny thing is, since R* is going for the money, they could probably make more if they give players the ability to play their way. They are strangling themselves.

[StyxTx]

9 minutes ago, kcole4001 said:

Maybe a solution would be hard core servers: free aim, no cards, no tonics, maybe no explosives either, just guns & bullets.

I've little idea how much difference it would make on PC, but clearly on consoles it's a big divide.

 

I think they're trying, but what they are stubbornly aiming for is the opposite of what players want.

I'd be 200% in favor of doing away with the cards and tonics.

[StyxTx]

14 minutes ago, Lonely-Martin said:

 

Yeah, lol. I'll never get why people would even do something that bores them. There's many games I don't enjoy or look boring to me, but I'll never play 'em. Too easy.

 

That said, I can understand the complaint from many that love this game and waiting for new content to arrive as R* have taken it too slow to build this world up overall. 

 

I understand their point too but I'll point to your first comment. Bored? Find something else to do until the next update. I've moved on to other things, even though I love the game overall, waiting to see if R* gets it's crap together. If I need a RDR fix I'll play some of the story, I will never go online just to screw with other people trying to enjoy the game. Those damn modders.

Edited December 30, 2020 by StyxTx

[Lonely-Martin]

2 minutes ago, StyxTx said:

 

I understand their point too but I'll point to your first comment. Bored? Find something else to do until the next update. I know I've moved on to other things, even though I love the game overall, waiting to see if R* gets it's crap together. If I need a RDR fix I'll play some of the story.

 

Yep, story mode is just too good to uninstall this game. Really troubling if R* learn they can sell broken games outright though with the standalone. 

[Krommer]

4 hours ago, djb204 said:

 

What if.... any time a player using aim-assist settings engages a player using free-aim settings, the aim assist player is forced into free-aim?

 

First off, at least I'm on XBOX ONE so I don't have the horrible problems PC players have with people

(best idea ever, when I mainly went to xbox 360 for gaming, then later Xbox One, then soon the FANTASTIC

Xbox Series X (once you can buy them.. lols... )  )

 

Bad Idea, since I'm bad at free-aim but people still grief me (who are offensive, when I'm defensive, so they are good at free-aim.)

 

I have a better idea, though you say Rockstar doesn't want to split people up they should just have some online free-roam lobbies be free-aim.

PVP try hards could do that, then.

 

You say, "so don't engage." That would not work because those people would get creative in attempts to MAKE you engage, then

I'd be forced into free-aim.

 

To end your delivery, griefers already don't have to be "clever"; like the two guys who blew up my bounty wagon just as I'm turning into Anusburg

to drop it off at the sheriff (pretty rare on xbox one in the first place, but it might still happen) I had no defense, since I'm not thinking, "say, those guys are probably going to blow up my bounty wagon for no reason!"

Then I proceeded to kill them several times with dynamite arrows, then of course I was offensive by then, then they killed me some more, then I killed them

some more, it was kind of fun but eventually I got bored and hit "campfire/fast travel to emerald ranch from wilderness camp", then did the $$$ there

to finish my dailies    I got under those goofball's skin though, I guess, since later when I was resupplying on dynamite/making dynamite arrows

they would pop up at Emerald Station fence as well as Vanhorn fence trying to kill me more (where we killed each other several more times, then again

I fast traveled from Wilderness camp while I heard the shooting, LOVE THAT THING, BEST THING I EVER GOT IN RDO!!!!        )

 

So no one really needs some great combination of ability cards/skill whatever, since no one cares about "stealing" your hunting wagon

wares for the probably paltry amount of goods they'd get; they want to GRIEF you, so they'd probably just blow you/it up at a distance

if they really wanted to do so. With the bounty wagon, it is even more just "plain griefing" to blow that up (since you lose the bounty/can't

turn it in again later/etc. )

Edited December 30, 2020 by Krommer

[zPhoenix]

Why not just grant the aim assist option to mouse and keyboard players?   

 

I would make the whole issue moot as players would be playing in the mode they chose instead of being the only mode available to them.

[kcole4001]

3 hours ago, zPhoenix said:

Why not just grant the aim assist option to mouse and keyboard players?   

 

I would make the whole issue moot as players would be playing in the mode they chose instead of being the only mode available to them.

If it were available on PC I'd turn it off anyway, I don't want to to be locking on to something I'm not actually trying to hit if it's close to my target.

There is already too much time wasted as it is wrangling the controls out of it's self induced spin at times.

And I've noticed this a lot lately: some days I can hit a running revenuer in the head by being close and other days a carefully aimed shot goes straight through the target several times.

Lag perhaps?

Shouldn't be, I'm in a solo session, but it seems to be prevalent the whole session one way or another, it doesn't go from almost auto aim to auto missing on the same day.

[djb204]

14 hours ago, zPhoenix said:

Why not just grant the aim assist option to mouse and keyboard players?   

 

I would make the whole issue moot as players would be playing in the mode they chose instead of being the only mode available to them.

Console players want free-aim too.

[CosmicBuffalo]

Doesnt this already exist, this is basically Defensive mode.  If you end up getting kicked out defensive mode in a free aim pvp fight, just use slippery bastard and and pretend your are in COD or CS or leave the session.

[GrungeNinja]

On 12/30/2020 at 9:53 AM, kcole4001 said:

hard core servers: free aim, no cards, no tonics, maybe no explosives either, just guns & bullets.

And No Player Blips on the radar

[djb204]

7 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Doesnt this already exist, this is basically Defensive mode.  If you end up getting kicked out defensive mode in a free aim pvp fight, just use slippery bastard and and pretend your are in COD or CS or leave the session.

Defensive Mode is not free-aim PvP. Players who want free-aim sessions aren’t trying to avoid PvP. We are looking for a free-aim PvP.

 

Take wagon deliveries for example: Auto-Aim players can take out any wagon with simple combination of Auto-Aim, Paint It Black, and an explosive round. No amount of slippery bastard will prevent a Paint It Black explosive round from hitting your wagon horses.