I sure hope there is some sort of single player DLC no matter how unlikely.
RDO is basically Rockstar raping the 90% of players who don't want to do microtransactions.
It's fun enough, but in order to purchase other outfits / weapons / etc. you either have to end your social life, quit your job, and just grind 24/7 OR go microtransactions.
You get paid something like $4 dollars for a mission, and things are way overpriced. $125 for a bow? That thing better be made of the rarest wood, decorated with gold and gems.
Pistols start at $450 and go all the way up to $1000.
Setting seems to be before RDR2, so there must have been a huge ass economic crisis around 1899 that dropped the prices of everything.
And they also charge you like $1 per day for having a camp and 75 cents for a stabled horse. I'm at like $60 after 7ish hours of play, and while I'll play the deathmatches and the sort for a bit, I doubt I'll last long.
I'm really puzzled about your post. This is the way to enforce people to spend real life money on the game. Just like every micro transaction game.
Clearly you won't be doing the nonstop gameplay thing.
it's funny because gun in singleplayer is like 12 ingame dollars.
The multiplayer is still a part of 60$ game, so it's weird they charge for online so much... And it's even weirder why people play gta online or rdr online if sp is so fun and huge
5080 | ps5 pro
Sin317-"im 31 years old and still surprised at how much shit comes out of my ass actually ..."
SteamDRM-"Call of Duty is the symbol of the true perfection in every aspect. Call of Duty games are like Mozart's/Beethoven's symphonies"
deadpoetic-"are you new to the cyberspace?"
I sure hope there is some sort of single player DLC no matter how unlikely.
RDO is basically Rockstar raping the 90% of players who don't want to do microtransactions.
It's fun enough, but in order to purchase other outfits / weapons / etc. you either have to end your social life, quit your job, and just grind 24/7 OR go microtransactions.
You get paid something like $4 dollars for a mission, and things are way overpriced. $125 for a bow? That thing better be made of the rarest wood, decorated with gold and gems.
Pistols start at $450 and go all the way up to $1000.
Setting seems to be before RDR2, so there must have been a huge ass economic crisis around 1899 that dropped the prices of everything.
And they also charge you like $1 per day for having a camp and 75 cents for a stabled horse. I'm at like $60 after 7ish hours of play, and while I'll play the deathmatches and the sort for a bit, I doubt I'll last long.
I'm really puzzled about your post. This is the way to enforce people to spend real life money on the game. Just like every micro transaction game.
Clearly you won't be doing the nonstop gameplay thing.
what you said is what i was saying, i'm sorry if you failed to comprehend
I'm not too surprised they're aiming to make everything one hell of a grind in RDR2 in particular, I mean I don't see how they could offer a variety of side-missions/mini-games compared to GTA Online, the vast majority of which are seriously dumb. RDR2 has this serious and realistic vibe that limits the possibilities, so it seems like online is kinda like single player atm, except it's a much slower grind so that 1. you don't reach the end content as fast as in SP 2. you cave in to micro-transactions at some point.
I mean, I can immediately see the possibilities with something like GTA Online, but RDR2 Online ? Not so much, unless they add a whole new layer of gameplay mechanics to make it unique and worthwhile ( don't know exactly, but could be territory wars, etc ).
I know people say GTA Online is an insane grind and it is if you want to reach the coolest features, but I can have fun with it with virtually no money, I don't see that happening for RDR2 Online as much.
Rockstar are probably testing the waters with such ridiculous prices and will somewhat tone them down, but it doesn't address the lack of content. Imo they should have waited longer and taken the time to add more unique multiplayer features.
Yeah. GTAOnline can still be fun without cash. I only stopped due to the hackers.
But I think the reason why GTAO is like that is because it didn't start out with insane prices and it only got to that stage after many years where they'd increase prices everytime they had a new online expansion out.
What pisses me off about GTAO though is how in the SP you ony had like 3 or 4 heists IIRC. Which I thought was the whole theme of the game. Instead the heists are in GTAO and they're not fun to do with randos.
Finally completed this last eve. Really incredible game with one my favourite ever video game protagonists, maybe even the best. It's going to be a long time before I feel this engrossed in such an absorbing gaming world.
The game and character development is fantastic. Arthur is the most convincing protagonist I've experienced and his story arc definitely effected the way I played the game. I don't feel compelled to play anything else at the moment knowing that anything I do play next won't fill the void.
Been playing this for around three hours and I have a feeling that Rockstar is being dragged down by having to develop gameplay around the story and cutscenes.
They would do a really good TV show or a movie instead of a game.
I mean, isn't this true about all story-driven games?
It just happens that, to me, RDR2 and Rockstar games in general have great gameplay to go with their strong to mediocre stories.
It's definitely the strongest Rockstar story to date, but yes, the writing is nowhere near Witcher 3. Which is ok since I got more than I expected from it in the end, Arthur is definitely Rockstar's most realized and best written character.
I think with the exception of graphics, the game as a whole doesn't come close to Witcher 3. In fact, I'll even qualify that by saying that at least Witcher 3 has real HDR.
Didn't like RDR2 at all, Arthur is a klutz next to Geralt. The mechanics are clunky as heck, gameplay spoiling wanted levels etc. I could go on, but as I got out of this for a full refund there's no need. Just relieved to not have any money wasted on it.
I must be weird because I had to turn off auto-aim. I couldn't hit shit because I couldn't get used to the auto-aim. It's 100% necessary on horse though. It's not fast paced so that helps.
But even that I can live with. What annoys the fuck out of me is the amount of follow npc objectives. I hate following NPCs in any game as it removes freedom from my gameplay.
That's pretty much every modern Rockstar game I've played you described there. Their core gameplay mechanics haven't changed at all.
I can't do it guys, I just can't bring myself to finish this game.
I love immersion and I like realism stuff in games but I don't think it's good to sacrifice quality of life features for realism. The amount of time it takes to do ANYTHING in this game is just so annoying... It would be one thing if it was worth doing stuff like looting but it really isn't.
But even that I can live with. What annoys the fuck out of me is the amount of follow npc objectives. I hate following NPCs in any game as it removes freedom from my gameplay. There is a time and place for it but I feel like almost every mission is a follow mission. I can't remember if RDR1 had this but if it did I probably just had more patience for this stuff back then.
I like the characters, the story, the graphics (even if the game performs like ass) and even some of the shooting (despite shitty gamepads). But still.
I loved the game and totally understand Your point. I did not enjoyed riding and traveling too much after days of doing it. Shooting was fun in "physics" kinda of a way but the game felt pretty much guided in the mission style. Still, I greatly enjoyed the character of Arthur and his arc. The graphics were amazing and The story itself was good but Arthur takes the cake.
Rdr1 was a bit more tight and to the point but shared similar traits. This is a 70h sp game most of which is following someone, riding to next objective or simulating cowboy life.
Not sure if youtubing the ending will give You the same feeling but at least do that.
I will finish new God of War again but I will probably not never again touch this. Gta games are a bit more fun to come back to just to drive around and shoot.
And remember - Dutch has a new plan again and just needs MORE MONEY
5080 | ps5 pro
Sin317-"im 31 years old and still surprised at how much shit comes out of my ass actually ..."
SteamDRM-"Call of Duty is the symbol of the true perfection in every aspect. Call of Duty games are like Mozart's/Beethoven's symphonies"
deadpoetic-"are you new to the cyberspace?"
This is one of those games, that I should not have enjoyed, based off the description. I would have said it would be boring for me.
And it is slow, very slow.
But somehow, I am not bothered by it. The world sucks me in proper. It is very relaxing.
Overall, gameplay wise the shooting is atrocious. I never play shooters on a controller, but HZD was a blast, loved it to bits. This sucks so bad though. I play with narrow, but I find myself fighting the controller like this, not the actual enemies. But with it set to normal, it's just so damned easy ffs.
Quest design is bad as well.
But the world is better than W3 - more alive, more coherent. Story and characters are great as well.
ill refrain from any final judgement until im done but it already feels like a chore to play... dont get me wrong theres lots of excellent stuff here but the whole thing just draaags on (and im already only doing the story missions). im all for a plot that takes its time to unfold but whats here just isnt interesting enough for this kind of pacing.
also why the fuck has nobody complained about the horrible controls? everything just feels unnecessarily clunky and sluggish
ill refrain from any final judgement until im done but it already feels like a chore to play... dont get me wrong theres lots of excellent stuff here but the whole thing just draaags on (and im already only doing the story missions). im all for a plot that takes its time to unfold but whats here just isnt interesting enough for this kind of pacing.
also why the fuck has nobody complained about the horrible controls? everything just feels unnecessarily clunky and sluggish
A good chunk of users have expressed similar views about the pacing and the controls here ( and in reviews too )..
I haven't played/watched it myself, but the ending is apparently worth it - that feeling is also echoed by previous posts
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
