Jump to content
MikeT14

Red Dead Redemption 2

Recommended Posts

On 5/6/2018 at 1:29 AM, MathMan said:

60 dollars for a single player experience is fine for me since I hate playing with other players.

Oh, I don't doubt the single-player will be epic, the online, though is probably gonna be very much P2W, see: NBA 2K18, GTA:0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KManX89 said:

Oh, I don't doubt the single-player will be epic, the online, though is probably gonna be very much P2W, see: NBA 2K18, GTA:0.

doesnt surprise me,  those basters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, MathMan said:

doesnt surprise me,  those basters.

31vYEuwVVfL._SL500_AC_SS350_.jpg

Dang Basters making everything moist and juicy!

Edited by Spartacus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

man, i came here excited to see thoughts about this game, only to get....yea it'll probably suck, look at nba2k and madden!  what the f guys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/8/2018 at 7:50 AM, bcb1213 said:

man, i came here excited to see thoughts about this game, only to get....yea it'll probably suck, look at nba2k and madden!  what the f guys

Not me! I'm super pumped. I'm really curious how the gunplay turns out. Seems like you can't just carry around 6 different rifles anymore either, which I'm all for anything to make the game more difficult / strategic.

Anything online will just be gravy to me.

Edited by cddolphin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2018 at 7:50 AM, bcb1213 said:

man, i came here excited to see thoughts about this game, only to get....yea it'll probably suck, look at nba2k and madden!  what the f guys

I never said it was gonna suck and I never said anything about Madden. I said, given Take Two (the parent company)'s track record and recent statements, we can expect the online to be filled with MTXs. They said they plan to do this with all their games moving forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is GTAV online P2W?

I dabbled in it a long time ago when it first came out on PC, but I don't remember any P2W stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2018 at 10:28 AM, Mossburg said:

How is GTAV online P2W?

I dabbled in it a long time ago when it first came out on PC, but I don't remember any P2W stuff.

Sans the racing which you can stay away from games where you use your own custom cars its really not. You can make enough money just with heists to unlock everything important to the core gameplay. That being said they started adding things like the underground bunkers which you can only play missions for if you buy them or know someone who did. I would say P2W is the wrong word for GTAV online. Pay to Fun is probably more accurate description. 

If your coming in new now with little money its probably not going to be that much fun for you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope the single player is beast and the online is trash so we don't have to wait like a decade for the next one like gtav is doing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tyty said:

Hope the single player is beast and the online is trash so we don't have to wait like a decade for the next one like gtav is doing

Anyone who didn't play RDR online, I feel really bad for. The free roam mode was incredible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This is one thing I find baffling. Naughty Dog gets a lot of praise for not going into the microtransactions model, but their games deliver a tiny fraction of the content that any of Rockstar's games do. So even if we pretend that Rockstar creates the absolutely most egregious P2W online environment, they ask for $60 for WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more single player content than a studio that is universally praised, in large part because they don't do microtransactions and make games "the way they should be made".

It's like buying a giant burrito for $5 and having the ability to buy more things to add to it that you would never pay for, or buying a much smaller burrito for $5 and having no ability to add things that you would never pay for. Then going online and making video and posts about being pissed off that this giant burrito is ran by crooks because they want to get more money from you, while the small burrito company is honorable and does things the right way.

In other words, seems to me like the more relevant complaint would be why the hell does Naughty Dog provide so little content for the same price as the competition?

Edited by Mossburg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mossburg said:

This is one thing I find baffling. Naughty Dog gets a lot of praise for not going into the microtransactions model, but their games deliver a tiny fraction of the content that any of Rockstar's games do. So even if we pretend that Rockstar creates the absolutely most egregious P2W online environment, they ask for $60 for WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more single player content than a studio that is universally praised, in large part because they don't do microtransactions and make games "the way they should be made".

It's like buying a giant burrito for $5 and having the ability to buy more things to add to it that you would never pay for, or buying a much smaller burrito for $5 and having no ability to add things that you would never pay for. Then going online and making video and posts about being pissed off that this giant burrito is ran by crooks because they want to get more money from you, while the small burrito company is honorable and does things the right way.

In other words, seems to me like the more relevant complaint would be why the hell does Naughty Dog provide so little content for the same price as the competition?

Modern gamers are so laughably spoiled.

When I was a kid, you paid full price (which werent really cheaper than games now, accounting for inflation) for a game that you couldnt read reviews for and, at tops, get a game that lasted 8-10 hours....and guess what?  You were HAPPY about that! (assuming the game was actually good).

Nowadays, gamers cry about everything.    Its insufferable, and a big reason I dont play online unless Im playing with someone I personally know.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FourThreeMafia said:

Modern gamers are so laughably spoiled.

When I was a kid, you paid full price (which werent really cheaper than games now, accounting for inflation) for a game that you couldnt read reviews for and, at tops, get a game that lasted 8-10 hours....and guess what?  You were HAPPY about that! (assuming the game was actually good).

Nowadays, gamers cry about everything.    Its insufferable, and a big reason I dont play online unless Im playing with someone I personally know.  

Countless example if social media age + bored people with too much time.

It's a recurring example of a legit movement (some studios deserve to be bashed for their business models) that gets hijacked by doofuses for self righteous reasons. The most hilarious part is they'll make fun of some SJWs on college campuses or something, and then go on doing the same thing those people do in some other place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in the day, some games actually had more content.  Look at Super Mario Brothers 3 or even Mario 64.  Those games had 1000000x the content than The Last of Us.  People complain because games are expensive and the overall lack of content is pretty low.  Unless you're talking about someone like Blizzard, Valve, Rockstar and a few others the content and replay-ability of a game you buy will be pretty poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, showtime said:

Back in the day, some games actually had more content.  Look at Super Mario Brothers 3 or even Mario 64.  Those games had 1000000x the content than The Last of Us.  People complain because games are expensive and the overall lack of content is pretty low.  Unless you're talking about someone like Blizzard, Valve, Rockstar and a few others the content and replay-ability of a game you buy will be pretty poor.

A lot of it depends on the gamer. IMO TLOU is worth the admission price because even though it's dollar per hour ratio is far from ideal, it provided an experience that I deem to be worth the price asked. The specific gripe I have is people now crapping on Rockstar, which makes no sense to me, especially if they pay for ND games, and ESPECIALLY if they praise that studio as being an ideal pro consumer business model or something.

YouTube video makers realized they can get good hits by inciting rage in viewers with microtransaction scandals, but now they have run out of companies to bash, so they've moved onto Rockstar and Valve. Anyone who actually plays their games knows what's up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×