Introducing GTA+ - Reward-based Subscription for GTA Online

[Commander S]

6 hours ago, LeakyLine said:

Does anyone else think this is just them testing, waters? I feel like with GTA 6, there's a chance the online portion will be Free to Play with GTA+ the only way to make it a bearable experience. Think the type of perks Fallout First has.

 

 

Definitely feels like them trying out something for VI's version of Online - particularly because, with the influx of new players on PS5/Xbox Series, that gives them a decent test run for anything that'll be in the game at launch for 'GTAO 2' (because everyone will be a new player with the next game).

 

Don't think 'GTAO 2' will be free-to-play, though - certainly not at launch, and maybe never. Remember, part of the massive runaway success of GTA V was Online - think how much money Rockstar made from people buying the whole package just to get GTAO, and therefore how much money they'd be leaving on the table if that segment of players could just get 'Online 2' for free.

 

I reckon it's more like 'paid event weeks' (crossed with the Twitch Prime bonuses) - i.e., the only way to get extra money from certain modes, or exclusive login bonuses, is to pay a subscription, while non-paying players will get scraps, if anything. And again, I suspect that more people will be tempted by that for the new game, because everyone will be new, and so all the bonuses will be for stuff people won't necessarily have already (as well as making it easier to make progress in a time where not everyone has all the businesses and high-end money-making tools).

 

 

[edit] ...oh, and I think odds are good that they'll do something like "three free months of GTA+" with the deluxe/ultimate/collector's edition(s) of GTA VI - that way, people will use it "because it's free", and either do the typical subscription thing of forgetting to cancel it and it auto-renewing, or cancelling it and immediately seeing their game progression slow down without the bonus cash or boosters. Likewise, expect bundle deals, similar to the Shark Card bundles or Criminal Enterprise Starter Pack - in fact, I don't think we'll even need to wait until GTA VI for those. In any case, that'll work as a 'gateway drug', getting people to try the service for 'free' (because you're still technically buying it as part of a bundle!), with the hope that they'll just grow used to having it, and rationalise spending the monthly sub.

Edited March 30, 2022 by Commander S
...AND another thing!

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

 

Behold! A GTA YouTube creator with dignity! The kind we need more right now, more than ever!

Edited March 30, 2022 by Yellow Dog with Cone
no

[eyman]

GTA Online may have made Rockstar a lot of money but keeping it going for this long has really tarnished the quality. We really need to move on, no matter how you look at it this is still a PS3/X360 game for f*ck sake.

[TheGhostFromPast]

On 3/29/2022 at 1:14 AM, GTAJJ said:

 

The "catch-up or lack of free time" is a corporate lie or companies wouldn't have launched systems to "catch up" on Day 1 lol. The only time I've actually correctly seen a catch up shortcut, was on Battlefield Bad Company 2 and BF3 where EA would add shortcuts a year or so after for new comers to unlock weapons early. I don't really understand the concept of "not enough time" when there isn't really a time gate for you to miss out. Spend 45 mins in 1 on Cayo or 10 mins a day, it all works out.

 

 

Well... job and family can take so much time that in the end one has barely an hour free for video games. And I don't want to sound like a guy, who doesn't appreciate advice, but it looks like most of the Cayo heist can be done only in stealth, and stealth isn't really my thing. 

 

  

On 3/29/2022 at 1:14 AM, GTAJJ said:

Yeah, this is the ultimate end goal for these companies.

 

Unfortunately...

 

  

On 3/29/2022 at 1:14 AM, GTAJJ said:

 

If you look at COD for example:

 

To earn 100% of the DLC

• COD 4 - MW3 $15 - $50DLC pack / Pass.
• BO2 - Ghosts $50 + $1 - $3 a piece ( Pass and Cosmetic voice, camo and reticules packs.)
• AW - BO4 $50 + $1 - $3 a piece + Earnable Lootboxes (Horrible but still earnable - Cosmetic voice, camo and reticules packs.)
• MW2019 - CW $5500/$6000 ~  ($10 - $20 Bundles)

 

The up front fee is capped and the company has to re-advertise to gain more money per launch. And typically tells you exactly what you're entitled to upfront. Now by cutting everything up, they can charge stuff individually at way more inflated prices. Because people accept having a specific item rather than assessing the cost versus what they could have gotten for that same amount of money. But people get lost in conversion rates and fake currencies.

 

When someone purchases a 2400CP bundle, it is 1.7x the amount of the season drop ($12.50). So that means when you buy a bundle, you've paid for the drop and 70% of another person. Sounds okay right? What that means is roughly 30% of the playerbase needs to buy 2400CP to pay for everyone. And any purchases over that is profit land.

Now how does it hurt others? Well since this is a system that targets a small minority of players, because the 30% pay for the rest. The other 70% are "acceptable losses". And as long as this system is profitable, content for the 70% are inaccessible. This system is locking out content at ridiculous prices. A season pass costed me roughly the same amount as the game for 100% of the content, 1 CoD £50 + £50. Now they want over 100 CoDs of money from me.

 

But wait why ask for $50 for 100% when people pay $20 for less than 0.17% of content.

 

I cannot earn anything in this CoD that's in the store - it takes 8 Battle Passes to get a single 2400CP skin. If people think the store is better, then we should think about how it should be fairer as $6000 is not viable as an option for the vast majority of us. There needs to be a way of earning like lootboxes did. More CP, add bundle keys for every prestige.

This system allows me at Master Prestige to get nothing while my mate at Prestige 3 to have more because he opens his wallet. My time and effort is disregarded with this system. I think the best fix is to allow an earnable route for those to invest their time on the game. It is basically impossible to attain everything in a CoD these days unless you're filthy rich.

It's like going to the market and having your 4 multipack of drinks separated and now sold separately at higher prices which now costs more if you bought 4. So now you have to settle with less because it's too much.

 

And that is what I fear GTA will do. Because it has the similar foundations already of multiple individually priced items they can manipulate. Only they can say you HAVE to pay.

 

They also they inflated the items already versus actual paid DLCs.

 

The system is there already just like COD is.

 

This only confirms that concerns like mine aren't out of the blue or worse - prophesized through coffee grounds and tea leaves, that there's an actual reason to worry that all games sooner or later will become 100% wallet wars. Right now, things aren't just THAT bad... yet. But if the majority soon won't realize that companies are trying to squeeze them like a lemon, then it will be a surprise if things in my lifetime don't go to that point where money in all video games determines everything you can think of. After all, companies wouldn't even dare to f**k their customers so spectacularly if the majority wouldn't accept it so proudly with an excuse that nowadays this is a normal common practice among the companies.  Yes, it's normal that companies want to earn money with their products, but those pathetic cash grab attempts in which greed is so obvious that one has to be a mole in order to not see it aren't normal and shouldn't be normal.

[needforsuv]

10 minutes ago, eyman said:

still a PS3/X360 game for f*ck sake.

more like PS4/PC

That's the proper versions.

Streamsub-pocalyse is real, too many services and BS.

Too much of everyone taking advantage and not giving a f*ck

Edited March 30, 2022 by needforsuv

[Quinn_flower]

Just now, needforsuv said:

more like PS4

no its runnning on last gen gen hardware even though the builds were made parallel 

[eyman]

1 minute ago, needforsuv said:

more like PS4

it was designed with PS3 In mind.

[needforsuv]

14 minutes ago, eyman said:

it was designed with PS3 In mind.

The PS4 versions were much, much better, it was gimped back for ps3 since they added so much stuff it ran at slideshow fps and had to par it back

I start counting GTA5 as 2014/2015. OG gen really didn't count.

Basically like Cyberpunk on OG PS4

 

[Quinn_flower]

8 minutes ago, needforsuv said:

The PS4 versions were much, much better, it was gimped back for ps3 since they added so much stuff it ran at slideshow fps and had to par it back

I start counting GTA5 as 2014/2015. OG gen really didn't count.

Basically like Cyberpunk on OG PS4

 

so the billionare bounty never existed for you then? man you missed the glory days when bounties were fun and chill

[GTAJJ]

3 minutes ago, TheGhostFromPast said:

Well... job and family can take so much time that in the end one has barely an hour free for video games. And I don't want to sound like a guy, who doesn't appreciate advice, but it looks like most of the Cayo heist can be done only in stealth, and stealth isn't really my thing. 

 

Cayo can be done loudly too, and that's absolutely your choice to do so of course. If you wish to play loudly on GTA heists, go ahead player freedom and all, but the mechanics Rockstar have added into GTA when it comes to the AI is really not in your favour; so making any AI aware of you makes it generally harder for the player. So it's always advised to keep it quiet, FWIW you only need to shoot a handful of guys, you don't need to traverse around the whole compound, worrying if you will be seen. Check up on Youtube for the best paths, if you do the drainage tunnel, as soon as you're in the compound you turn around, up 2 sets of stairs and climb up the stairs railing onto the roof, and you run across the roof to the office area, shoot 3 guys and on the way out, you shoot up to 3 more and out you go. If you wish to get secondary loot, there's a few more people to kill, but you can grab the bike and yeet off the map and swim away. Easy million in 40 mins.  I'm new to Cayo too, just come back after 5 years off the account.

 

I have a job too, however time within games is typically is static. For example, having 100 hours played on a game could be across a single week or a single year, but both players will most likely be roughly at the same spot in progression, just across longer IRL periods of time. You can come back years down the line like I have on my original account and continue where you left off.

 

21 minutes ago, TheGhostFromPast said:

This only confirms that concerns like mine aren't out of the blue or worse - prophesized through coffee grounds and tea leaves, that there's an actual reason to worry that all games sooner or later will become 100% wallet wars.

 

100%. And tons of people get confused from conversion rates, or just being impressionable because they want that new and shiny thing right now, or more money than sense. The same system in COD is already in GTA, items are all separated and individually priced at an inflated rate. The only difference is that they've got the option for players to earn it (which is from the old Rockstar mentality before seeing how profitable it is). Just like a bundle on COD vs DLC season pass, a T20 on GTAO costs the same as both EFLC episodes.

 

To the people who say "it's only $6" or "I can afford to spare it". It sets a precedent for worse things to come. If McDonald's went from $1 burger to $1,000,000. Most people not only would not like that but can't afford it either. But Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos says "eh, not that much", it hurts everyone else because the company still got their money and now tons of people are locked out of it. What's even worse is that it's not an actual IRL product that costs every time to make, it's digital and using GTA+ bonuses as a prime example, 99% of it is integer changes that cost nothing to do. Every single sale is pure net versus the cost.

[IzzyBlues]

I wonder how many of us are going to subscribe to GTA+ when the online for VI comes out.

[Quinn_flower]

13 minutes ago, IzzyBlues said:

I wonder how many of us are going to subscribe to GTA+ when the online for VI comes out.

it might be the only way to get in..... 

[Jason]

1 minute ago, Quinn_flower said:

it might be the only way to get in..... 

 

I understand the fears around it but I doubt it.

 

Mandatory subs for MMO's are still very popular but it does seriously hurt the ability to bring players back on a whim, which is not well suited to something like GTAO and I doubt will be suited to GTAO2. MMO's can do it (or rather, the ones that don't die within 3 months) because those games are ridiculously vast and often become the only game people play, where as something like GTAO finds time inbetween other games for many of it's players.

 

Being able to release smaller updates and having players being able to load it up and try it out w/o having to resub is too important I think.

 

But at this point I think R* are doing with GTAO what Valve used to do with TF2 which is use it as a testing grounds for future stuff. So unless something changes, I do absolutely expect GTA+ to be in GTAO2 as an optional sub.

[Spider-Vice]

1 minute ago, Jason said:

So unless something changes, I do absolutely expect GTA+ to be in GTAO2 as an optional sub.

I think this is also the reason why it got introduced so late in GTA V Online's life. It's gonna go into the next game, potentially with extra benefits for existing subscribers, the same way R* gives rewards to owners of other games (e.g. GTAO owners got stuff in RDR2/RDO)

[Nutduster]

36 minutes ago, GTAJJ said:

 

Cayo can be done loudly too, and that's absolutely your choice to do so of course. If you wish to play loudly on GTA heists, go ahead player freedom and all, but the mechanics Rockstar have added into GTA when it comes to the AI is really not in your favour; so making any AI aware of you makes it generally harder for the player.

 

Yes and no. Yes you can do Cayo loud, and yes it is easier on any heist to take the stealth option if there is one. But--the aggressive casino approach (for instance) feels properly tuned so that it's not impossibly hard and you won't lose so much money getting shot up as to make it a non-viable approach. I did it just last night with one friend, we got paid only a little less (maybe 100K each) than a Big Con or Silent & Sneaky optimal run, and there was no quick restarting, nor was it abnormally difficult.

 

By comparison, Cayo doesn't feel correctly tuned for a loud approach. Moving around the island is one thing; you can run and gun, and if you did the preps to get rid of the Buzzards, it's not too bad (although god help you if you didn't). Inside the compound is another story though. It is incredibly unforgiving. The minigun guy alone dishes out close to 1-shot-kills at will, with very little spin-up time for his gun, and is immune to headshots (which I'm fairly sure is a recent change, to boot; we used to kill him by shooting him in the back of the head, but nowadays it only makes him mad). The rest of the guards are typical overamped GTA AI--not that hard to kill, but deadly accurate at long range and prone to shoot you from unexpected angles when you least suspect it. Basically, going loud inside the compound is *likely* to result in one or more quick restarts--for which they subtract some money for your trouble, on top of whatever you lose getting shot up.

 

So loud is an option--but I don't recommend it. With my heist-heavy crew, if we get caught before or in the compound, we restart the whole thing. We only "go loud" on the exit once in a while, and then just beeline for the coast as fast as possible.

[Octane]

On 3/25/2022 at 12:17 PM, Mexicola9302 said:

Well dislikes on youtube are turned off anyway, so it wouldn't even matter.

*Laughs in "Return YouTube dislike counter browser extension"

[WildBrick142]

2 hours ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

 

Behold! A GTA YouTube creator with dignity! The kind we need more right now, more than ever!

with all due respect to broughy, and i really mean no offence, he has a rather hypocritical point.

 

his "final kick in the balls for all of this" (implying the biggest issue) is that gta+ get early access to new cars.... he literally puts early access to his own testing videos on patreon and for youtube members? how is that any different from what rockstar is doing? lmao

i get that early access to his videos is only $2, but that's all he offers for that tier. you want more from him, you have to sign up for the higher-priced tiers. and it's the same rockstar is doing, just without tiers - if early access to cars is all that r* offered for $6 then i'd agree it's not worth it, but they offer more than just that regardless of how much value anyone sees in those items.

 

i definitely agree with his later points about rockstar's questionable effort with e&e and dlc's, and their random nonsense decisions like the ardent still being non-raceable. but it's just a bit silly to see people complaining about something they essentially do themselves

[Jason]

^ This is why you don't prop up YouTubers and streamers.

 

They're more often than not playing the same hustle, and many of them just go with whatever direction the wind is blowing. I certainly saw that happening with E&E in particular.

 

Make up your own minds if it's worth it or not cause when it's your money that's the only opinion you need.

[Jenkiiii]

3 hours ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

 

Behold! A GTA YouTube creator with dignity! The kind we need more right now, more than ever!

 

Thank God for Broughy1322 and his willingness to express at a wider level what I and other people feel.

 

My sense of disappointment at purchasing a next-gen console especially for GTA E&E but it not adding anything that warrants an upgrade was very high. I felt obliged to do so to continue playing my favorite game, but after you've played around with the new cars and got used to the longer draw distances, it's the same old game as before and boredom kicks in like it always did after an hour.

 

And thanks to people like Broughy, I don't have to be apologetic about being miserable or worry about annoying people on this forum. Someone with far greater influence than me feels equally annoyed, tired and exasperated with the direction that GTA online is going.

 

And just as I'm getting used to next-gen GTA being nothing special - it really isn't - the real reason for last-gen account deletion and lack of PC access becomes apparent. They want us to start all over again with a new account and a GTA+ subscription. They don't want us to play on last-gen or PC anymore because that doesn't make them enough money. However, they had to allow us to transfer our last-gen characters across to new-gen or there would have been an unquenchable fire that raged for years. They didn't do it for us, they did it because they had to. And that's the reality that hits home the most: we're here because Rockstar are too afraid to dump us completely, but not because they value us as long-term fans. They don't care about existing and long-term players and only want fresh and casual faces on board. We've sensed it for years and yet here we are, playing their games and moaning about them in forums. Why?

 

 

Edited March 30, 2022 by Jenkiiii

[R a f a e]

34 minutes ago, Jenkiiii said:

And just as I'm getting used to next-gen GTA being nothing special - it really isn't - the real reason for last-gen account deletion and lack of PC access becomes apparent. They want us to start all over again with a new account and a GTA+ subscription. They don't want us to play on last-gen or PC anymore because that doesn't make them enough money. However, they had to allow us to transfer our last-gen characters across to new-gen or there would have been an unquenchable fire that raged for years. They didn't do it for us, they did it because they had to. And that's the reality that hits home the most: we're here because Rockstar are too afraid to dump us completely, but not because they value us as long-term fans. They don't care about existing and long-term players and only want fresh and casual faces on board. We've sensed it for years and yet here we are, playing their games and moaning about them in forums. Why?

 

Bingo! You hit the nail on the head here lol

 

That's exactly why I suspected they deleted last gen progress upon migration, to entice people like me to start fresh on current gen and make use of the new things they implemented, career builder and now GTA+ 

 

Well... it worked lol

 

I'm honestly enjoying it and haven't gotten bored yet. I play on a PS5 and an extremely top of the line TV so the differences from playing gtao on a 1080p LCD for years to now this are night and day, literally.

 

When I go back and play the PS4 version, the differences are immediately apparent.

[Jason]

That's a very assume the worst in every single way opinion.

 

Honestly though, I do think the existence of GTA+ is in large part as an experiment for GTAO2.

 

I think perhaps the issue here isn't R* trying to monetise new players exclusively, but trying to explore new ways to monetise veterans players. The reason I think that is that the issue R* may have realised now is that the more you play the less and less desirable shark cards become as veterans who play consistently are likely sitting on decent cash reserves and have no issue earning more. The result of this is a veteran portion of the playerbase - which are always important as new players are put off by dead games - that don't purchase mtx. Compare this with other monetisation models such as premium cosmetics where all sections of the playerbase have a reason to spend.

 

So because of that I think we may see GTAO2 have a different monetisation model to the one we have in GTAO. The most obvious model is one they've half done with RDO but fell guilty of some of the issues GTAO has (being able to earn gold bars in-game), that being selling premium cosmetics. They're desirable to all portions of the playerbase and have proven to be very very profitable... especially when combined with FOMO tactics which I dislike as much as anyone but one step at a time.

 

So yea, for GTAO2 I can very much see them going with a full premium cosmetic shop w/ an optional GTA+ subscription that includes a monthly drop of that premium currency to spend in the cosmetic shop. I can totally see the premium cosmetic shop being an in-game location where they display the clothing out in the shop and stuff like that.

 

Now I know going by discussions I had pre-RDO launch here about the same issues I know many people here would be against my prediction as they prefer to be able to earn everything without paying, which is a fair opinion to hold in fairness, but both models have their pros and cons. Personally I prefer monetisation models that don't interact with the games progression in any shape or form because it has the most influence on the type of content that the game gets post-release, as well as on the progression grind its self.

 

RedDagger's write up from a few years ago explains this in a good amount of detail:

 

 

tl;dr: shark cards become less and less desirable the more you play, thus perhaps R* are exploring new forms of monetisation that is more desirable to the wider playerbase over the games expected lifespan in prep for GTAO2

 

[YNNEL]

7 hours ago, Spider-Vice said:

I think that's the funny ironic part - pre-release, a lot of Youtubers were recommending people to not buy it, now they're buying it under the guise of being "forced" to do so to show off the content when... there's no exclusive content to show off atm other than 2 exclusive shirts and 2 vehicle liveries?  Maybe it's the other benefits even though that's just bonuses and freebies? All else is obtainable normally in the game, which is why I keep saying that so far this changes nothing in the game.

 

I understand as a content creator you want to show how things work and what it looks like, but it's funny when one makes a video criticising GTA+ and telling people to not buy it, but then they do it anyway.  Then again, the cancellation policy is pretty lenient and will let you keep everything including the bonuses for the month, so... Just remains to be seen how many *truly* cancel it after they're done with creating content about it.

 

One thing is if you're in favour of it and actually want it as a content creator - odds are you won't have made a video criticising it and telling people to stay away. But for those who tell people to stay away and then buy it anyway it's kind of... funny.

‘I’m buying it so you don’t have to’. Yea. I don’t believe them either lol. 
 

I think if they gave you 500k p/w then I would start to have a discussion as to whether this is worth it. That would be a good start.

[Spider-Vice]

32 minutes ago, Jason said:

So because of that I think we may see GTAO2 have a different monetisation model to the one we have in GTAO. The most obvious model is one they've half done with RDO but fell guilty of some of the issues GTAO has (being able to earn gold bars in-game), that being selling premium cosmetics. They're desirable to all portions of the playerbase and have proven to be very very profitable... especially when combined with FOMO tactics which I dislike as much as anyone but one step at a time.

 

So yea, for GTAO2 I can very much see them going with a full premium cosmetic shop w/ an optional GTA+ subscription that includes a monthly drop of that premium currency to spend in the cosmetic shop. I can totally see the premium cosmetic shop being an in-game location where they display the clothing out in the shop and stuff like that.

 

Now I know going by discussions I had pre-RDO launch here about the same issues I know many people here would be against my prediction as they prefer to be able to earn everything without paying, which is a fair opinion to hold in fairness, but both models have their pros and cons. Personally I prefer monetisation models that don't interact with the games progression in any shape or form because it has the most influence on the type of content that the game gets post-release, as well as on the progression grind its self.

Bingo, this is what I've thought of too, and is also why I think the exclusives (as in, actual exclusives, not timed) will be restricted to clothing and such cosmetic items and not vehicles, properties, or anything that might heavily fracture the community by making it so regular non-subbing players can't access it (the models that don't screw with progression you mentioned). The double currency method is used by other games and it was attempted in RDO, but it obviously wasn't super well balanced - I think them letting us earn it in-game in RDO was so it wouldn't be so "in your face", but then gold earnings were nerfed anyway.

Wouldn't be surprised to see it come back in GTAO2 and it being, again, like in RDO, cosmetic-focused, just hopefully better balanced. Skins for weapons, clothing, perhaps interior skins and what not. I think that would be much more acceptable than actually locking full content behind the subscription, and again I can't see them doing that, other than the early access thing which I think is perfectly fair if you're paying for this.

 

Not sure to what extent they'd go full Fortnite et al. with a full premium cosmetic shop, but I can definitely see a double currency for subs and for cosmetics like games like Fortnite and Fallout 76. Then again stuff like this will always, always be divisive, so I suppose it's choose the lesser of two evils in that case.

[R a f a e]

[ilRae]

33 minutes ago, Rvfae said:

snip

I need a cheat code for my phone bill. Preeeeety sure Verizon saw GTA+ and immediately added $6 to my unlimited data.

[Spider-Vice]

Also, here's a little comparison to other services. Fallout 76 is currently $39.99 on Steam. On top of that they have Fallout 1st which costs $12.99/mo with these benefits, mostly static and with private lobbies/locked custom worlds, you instead get monthly Atoms which is their premium currency for the cosmetics shop.

Spoiler

 

Fortnite is free to play, but its subscription (Fortnite Crew) is $11.99, with these benefits, also changing monthly not unlike GTA+:

Spoiler

 

These are just two mainstream examples. I think what we're seeing is R* adapting to the times just like they adapted to the times in 2013 with the original Shark Cards. It may be jarring to see now, but I also think it was introduced this late because it's going to go well into GTA VI Online. If exclusivity is kept to cosmetics, and if they introduce some other GTA+ benefits with GTA VI Online that people might be more interested in (saw some comments about private public lobbies, kind of like Fallout's Private Adventures, but I've also seen others not wanting stuff like this locked...), then I'm not too worried, again, as long as it's kept to cosmetics and similar as much as this absolutely sucks for collectors. If there's nothing that messes with the game's progression and flow then I think us non-subs will be relatively okay even for the next version of GTAO. It just remains to be seen.

[ilRae]

10 minutes ago, Spider-Vice said:

Also, here's a little comparison to other servic

Minecraft is $19.99 unless you subscribe to GamePass. Then there is Realms Plus which is $7.99/mo to have a 10 player realm available 24/7. Realms Plus also gives you old skins and texture packs, etc.

[Kirsty]

I think the jarring thing for a lot of people is that they feel R* don't *need* that kind of stuff. With all the billions they have earned from game sales and shark cards, they don't even need to try and retain players with the content they put out. Those other games need to offer substantial stuff, so I don't see paywalled private lobbies or that kind of thing in GTAO. Remains to be seen if it happens in "GTAO2". 

 

But, it's kind of naive to think they won't try and "innovate" their own business, and want to earn more and more money as time goes on, as much as it can appear to become unfriendly to us as gamers. Like the new PS+ system versus Game Pass. One is more consumer friendly, but the other can't/won't match it because they don't have as much money to put up front as a company. It's not a complete surprise R* or T2 would have sat down and looked at what games on the current market are the best at generating revenue on the most modern hardware (to put it simply). It's gonna be the Fortnite and Fallout76 type of games they see.

 

There's too much going on in Fortnite for my old brain to handle so it's not a game for me, but I do enjoy how Epic promote it, people seem to really love and eat up the celebrity skins and sh*t, and there doesn't seem to be a huge divide between community and community management like there is with R*.

[Spider-Vice]

Also, Fallout First also had so much controversy that someone even managed to register the FalloutFirst.com domain ahead of Bethesda to replace it with anti-Fallout 1st stuff lol. It also launched with its private lobbies broken, so people paid and it wasn't actually private.

 

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2019-10-26-as-the-fallout-1st-disaster-hits-the-mainstream-fallout-76-players-head-in-game-to-protest

 

Also some familiar arguments - you may as well replace the words in the article with R* and GTA+:

Quote

"My motivation stems from a frustration with Bethesda," he said. And in general the current trend of the gaming industry. They said players had been asking for this - players never asked to pay a subscription for features hidden behind a pay wall."

Quote

Fallout 76 players are now talking about getting together in-game to protest Fallout 1st. The Fallout 76 subreddit, which had been a beacon of positivity amid a sea of negativity since the launch of the game, is now packed with threads from players who say they're done with Bethesda's controversial MMO.

 

Truth is, from people I've talked to, some actually enjoy what Fallout 1st has to offer nowadays, and I have a feeling something not too dissimilar will happen with GTA+, especially if a better month comes along or tweaks to the subscription's offers (like more money).

[IzzyBlues]

15 minutes ago, Kirsty said:

old brain

Grandma Kirsty.