Current Events > The hate people have for GTAV multiplayer is just sad.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Did nothing to hurt anyone, was super popular with the majority of the fan base, but no, people whine because there's not single player DLC, or because of optional shark cards.

i think it's because R* actually nerfed mission rewards and stuff so that it's almost unfeasible to grind out in-game cash.

i've been on both sides. I grind, and i buy cards. i hate both.
---

The hate is overblown for sure. I honestly thing it's just one gigantic circlejerk at this point. I've never bought a single shark card, and earned all my money playing legitimately while also enjoying it. As for single-player DLC, it would have been nice but I lost interest when I had a bank account of $200 million+ for every character IIRC.

Anyways, I just hope RDR2 is at untouched, and 100% singleplayer. Leave all the scummy practices for multiplayer.
---

I really, really, really love GTA 5 and GTAO. I bought GTA5 twice (once on 360, once on PC).

But Rockstar made it pretty clear they didn't give a shit about actually servicing the community. Their anti-cheat software is non-existent and they don't even have basic features that you would expect in the social club - for instance, you can't see which of your friends are online from the site, you have to launch the game and wait for it to load for two minutes just to see whether or not someone's online.

And yes you *can* grind out the money for stuff like MC's, yachts and the latest content but let's face it, you're saving a ton of time by just cashing out real dollars to unlock that stuff.
---

People are mad because they cancelled the single player expansions in lieu of turning online mode into a mess of a F2P mobile game and lied when Rockstar was asked about what happened to the planned single player DLC. Been a while since i've seen TC shill for anti-consumer business practices, thought he'd given up that gimmick.
---

I dont hate it, I hate that it forever altered Rockstar making great single player content.

RDR2 will be short and full of micro transactions, mark my words.
---

Vita_Aeterna posted...

I just hope RDR2 is at untouched, and 100% singleplayer.

with how much money gta5's online portion made for rockstar, there is no way that there isn't an online mode with microtransactions in there

every game they make from now on will have that

Tbh I never really played it online and was level 5 until last fall/winter and had a lot of fun on it and got up to somewhere around 90. I can absolutely understand people being pissed the whole thing was sold out to basically paying for content with no story advancements, but once I got going into it I had some fun with it.
---

I don't care overall but I wish they still did a single player expansion.
---

I mean they did a really outstanding job with the multiplayer content but it just requires too much of an investment, especially when every other session has trolls or cheaters.

I did miss rolling with random ass Russian people though.
---

I hate GTAO because of what it's done to Rockstar's mindset as a developer.
---

Kaiganeer posted...

Vita_Aeterna posted...

I just hope RDR2 is at untouched, and 100% singleplayer.

with how much money gta5's online portion made for rockstar, there is no way that there isn't an online mode with microtransactions in there

every game they make from now on will have that

Oh yeah, RDR2 is going to basically be a massive countryside full of various things to buy and a multitude of missions very similar to GTAO. Rockstar found their money pit, they'd be fools to change it up when the novelty factor alone of RDR2 will make millions
---

Frolex posted...

People are mad because they cancelled the single player expansions in lieu of turning online mode into a mess of a F2P mobile game and lied when Rockstar was asked about what happened to the planned single player DLC. Been a while since i've seen TC shill for anti-consumer business practices, thought he'd given up that gimmick.

I'm not shilling, and this isn't anti-consumer. I go against anti-consumer practices all the time, but this isn't actually hurting anyone. People complaining about the lack of single player DLC are, by definition, entitled.

KiwiTerraRizing posted...

I dont hate it, I hate that it forever altered Rockstar making great single player content.

RDR2 will be short and full of micro transactions, mark my words.

Doubtful. Rockstar's buisiness model really isn't about mediocrity(at least for their main line games). They put a huge investment into their games, and make sure that investment pays off.

Darmik posted...

I don't care overall but I wish they still did a single player expansion.

I do too, I don't actually like the online that much, but it doesn't change that attacking them for it is extremely entitled.

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Kaiganeer posted...

Vita_Aeterna posted...

I just hope RDR2 is at untouched, and 100% singleplayer.

with how much money gta5's online portion made for rockstar, there is no way that there isn't an online mode with microtransactions in there

every game they make from now on will have that

Oh yeah, RDR2 is going to basically be a massive countryside full of various things to buy and a multitude of missions very similar to GTAO. Rockstar found their money pit, they'd be fools to change it up when the novelty factor alone of RDR2 will make millions

The online part is going to be like GTA online. Lots of microtransactions, but you can earn everything in game and there will be tons of free content online. The single player will likely be just as good as it should be.

I never played online, but the driving physics in the campaign are the epitome of terrible controls in gaming. Yes, there are obviously much worse out there, but for such a recent game, with such a huge budget, with adult gamers in mind to be that bad is pretty pathetic.

Except you can't really "earn everything in game" without a substantial and ridiculous amount of investment.

That's the argument EA / DICE used to justify their shitty character progression system in Battlefront 2...
---

masterbarf posted...

I never played online, but the driving physics in the campaign are the epitome of terrible controls in gaming. Yes, there are obviously much worse out there, but for such a recent game, with such a huge budget, with adult gamers in mind to be that bad is pretty pathetic.

The driving is absolutely fine. It isn't supposed to be realistic, and the game would be significantly worse for the vast majority if it were.

Hexenherz posted...

Except you can't really "earn everything in game" without a substantial and ridiculous amount of investment.

That's the argument EA / DICE used to justify their shitty character progression system in Battlefront 2...

Funny, there are many, many people who claim they enjoy playing through GTA O without paying. It isn't nearly as excessive as Battlefront 2 was, if it were the game wouldn't be nearly so popular.

OctilIery posted...

I'm not shilling, and this isn't anti-consumer. I go against anti-consumer practices all the time, but this isn't actually hurting anyone. People complaining about the lack of single player DLC are, by definition, entitled.

Deliberately compromising the quality of your product to sell microtransactions is the definition of an anti-consumer practice. And wanting content that rockstar repeatedly directly stated was coming has nothing to do with "entitlement" no matter how badly you want to scream those words with teary eyes.
---

They gave up on single player for multi, didn't they?
---

OctilIery posted...

I'm not shilling, and this isn't anti-consumer. I go against anti-consumer practices all the time, but this isn't actually hurting anyone. People complaining about the lack of single player DLC are, by definition, entitled.

God damn it, Octshillery is back.
---

Frolex posted...

OctilIery posted...

I'm not shilling, and this isn't anti-consumer. I go against anti-consumer practices all the time, but this isn't actually hurting anyone. People complaining about the lack of single player DLC are, by definition, entitled.

Deliberately compromising the quality of your product to sell microtransactions is the definition of an anti-consumer practice. And wanting content that rockstar repeatedly directly stated was coming has nothing to do with "entitlement" no matter how badly you want to scream those words with teary eyes.

Yeah, it really is entitlement, and they didn't compromise the quality of anything.

Cheater87 posted...

They gave up on single player for multi, didn't they?

DLC wise yes, but that's not anything you can really attack them for.

dave_is_slick posted...

OctilIery posted...

I'm not shilling, and this isn't anti-consumer. I go against anti-consumer practices all the time, but this isn't actually hurting anyone. People complaining about the lack of single player DLC are, by definition, entitled.

God damn it, Octshillery is back.

Still not shilling.

OctilIery posted...

if it were the game wouldn't be nearly so popular.

Ever think that maybe, just maybe, it's only because most people are finally starting to realize how harmful these practices are?
---

Kaiganeer posted...

Vita_Aeterna posted...

I just hope RDR2 is at untouched, and 100% singleplayer.

with how much money gta5's online portion made for rockstar, there is no way that there isn't an online mode with microtransactions in there

every game they make from now on will have that

I meant to say that I hope the singleplayer is free from the scumbag business practice while they can do whatever the hell they want with the multiplayer. If RDR2 follows the GTAO model, then I can 100% tolerate that.
---

dave_is_slick posted...

OctilIery posted...

if it were the game wouldn't be nearly so popular.

Ever think that maybe, just maybe, it's only because most people are finally starting to realize how harmful these practices are?

They aren't really harmful unless overdone, though.

Vita_Aeterna posted...

Kaiganeer posted...

Vita_Aeterna posted...

I just hope RDR2 is at untouched, and 100% singleplayer.

with how much money gta5's online portion made for rockstar, there is no way that there isn't an online mode with microtransactions in there

every game they make from now on will have that

I meant to say that I hope the singleplayer is free from the scumbag business practice while they can do whatever the hell they want with the multiplayer. If RDR2 follows the GTAO model, then I can 100% tolerate that.

It likely will be. Rockstar knows impacting the single player will kill their future sales.

The game is just below mediocre.
---

OctilIery posted...

They aren't really harmful unless overdone, though.

And it is. If you can't earn shit in-game within a reasonable timeframe, it's anti-consumer and harmful.
---

OctilIery posted...

Yeah, it really is entitlement

nope, better luck next time champ

and they didn't compromise the quality of anything.

Oh, so locking content behind arbitrary wait times that can only be skipped by paying cash is a quality gameplay mechanic eh?

dave_is_slick posted...

God damn it, Octshillery is back.

yeah it's weird, he actually became a relatively normal poster for a while
---

it kinda sucks that there's no single-player expansion, but GTAV is an amazing game, and I haven't even touched GTA:O.

if RDR2's campaign is even close to being as good as GTAV's, then idgaf about the online portion.
---

Monolith1676 posted...

The game is just below mediocre.

The vast majority disagrees.

dave_is_slick posted...

OctilIery posted...

They aren't really harmful unless overdone, though.

And it is. If you can't earn shit in-game within a reasonable timeframe, it's anti-consumer and harmful.

Not really. Taking a good deal of effort doesn't make it anti-consumer, anti-consumer is if you have to put in a significant amount of time before the game is fun without spending money. And again, tons of people find it fun without spending money.

I will say the things people have brought up about quality of life things like fighting hackers and friends list are a reasonable complaint though, and given how much it has made should've been addressed by now.

Frolex posted...

Oh, so locking content behind arbitrary wait times that can only be skipped by paying cash is a quality gameplay mechanic eh?

It's bad if the gameplay without that is bad. But it really isn't.

boxington posted...

it kinda sucks that there's no single-player expansion, but GTAV is an amazing game, and I haven't even touched GTA:O.

if RDR2's campaign is even close to being as good as GTAV's, then idgaf about the online portion.

Seriously, this. GTAV for the asking price was insanely good. Even if there were no multiplayer at all it would be amazing, the addition only improves it.

Captain_Qwark posted...

I hate that it forces you into the map.

Like goddamn i just want to search for races why do i need to spend 5 minutes loading the whole world and then another 5 to populate a lobby?

That's a fair complaint. It has some legitimate quality of life issues.

GTAIV killed my interest in the series and the multiplayer component means that it never goes on sale for a low enough amount for me to buy it on a whim
---

OctilIery posted...

It's bad if the gameplay without that is bad. But it really isn't.

No, it's a bad mechanic regardless. It only exists to detract from the gameplay experience in order to drive revenue. That fact that their are some elements of the game that aren't intentionally shit for the sake of selling microtransactions doesn't change that
---

I guess the question with GTAO and their games is how much time of playing is realistic to complete and own everything the game offers? Because I understand Rockstar entirely wanting to milk people playing and paying as much as possible but at the same time think there needs to be a better balance.

But you'll never get rid of companies making their "100% complete" goal impossible, simply because there's profit to expand more.
---

ultimate reaver posted...

GTAIV killed my interest in the series and the multiplayer component means that it never goes on sale for a low enough amount for me to buy it on a whim

It's extremely worth picking it up even at full price. I get the complaints about IV(though I actually liked it), but V addressed and improved nearly all of them.

Frolex posted...

No, it's a bad mechanic regardless

Nope.

The Great Muta 22 posted...

I guess the question with GTAO and their games is how much time of playing is realistic to complete and own everything the game offers? Because I understand Rockstar entirely wanting to milk people playing and paying as much as possible but at the same time think there needs to be a better balance.

But you'll never get rid of companies making their "100% complete" goal impossible, simply because there's profit to expand more.

Like I said, if you're not having fun before you're close to earning something new, it's bad, but the majority seem to feel that isn't the case in GTA online.

OctilIery posted...

Nope.

Yup. Go grab some tissues and see if you can and see if you can actually form an argument once you dry those eyes.
---

GTA V's multiplayer sucked imo. At its core, the gameplay is fun and its a good time to mess around with friends, but everything else is just so dull. Unlocking anything is a ridiculous grind, most things you unlock aren't even that interesting or fun or worth your time at all, and a lot of the missions are boring or shitty and usually mindlessly simple.

PvP, at least in free roam, isn't very fun because everyone is overpowered with crazy weapons. You can fight back with your own, but ammo is so expensive, sometimes just dicking around like that will cost you several missions worth of cash.

There's also a lot of weird design decisions that get in the way of fun and are just annoying. Like if one of my cars blows up, why do I have to call the insurance company, pay sometimes a huge fee depending on the car, and then call my mechanic to finally deliver it to me? Its so time consuming and boring. Why is that even a thing here?

What a weird game. And its too bad because it is a lot of fun to just play around in, but everything else just drags the game down for me. I had more fun with GTA 4's multiplayer and played that for longer.

OctilIery posted...

Nope.

The trademark of Octshillery. Why have you regressed?
---

dave_is_slick posted...

OctilIery posted...

Nope.

The trademark of Octshillery. Why have you regressed?

Never regressed. If someone makes a stupid post with no real argument or facts I'm not going to give it effort.

Frolex posted...

OctilIery posted...

Nope.

Yup. Go grab some tissues and see if you can and see if you can actually form an argument once you dry those eyes.

Maybe try forming one yourself?

Some people blow it out of proportion but there is justification to it. The level of grind if you don't want to glitch or buy shark cards is absurd and even if you do decide to pay, shark cards are completely overpriced now. It was one thing for 1.25m to be $20 back when the best car and best apartment were 1m each. Now there's things in the game that require dozens of hours of grinding or over $100 real dollars to be able to get, even if they're running the promo for extra money.

All the randoms that'll try to kill you when you can only hire 3 other people out of a 32 player lobby make the free roam mission impractical for money if you don't glitch into a private public lobby, and the heist are impossible with even one random player and don't even pay that well.

Their greedy payouts with contact missions and adversary modes means nobody plays them after the first week unless it's double money. I've tried to play some I like and people just don't join them if they're not new or double money.

It's just grind, grind, grind or be a whale and buy a bunch of shark cards. And the new cars all suck ass because they nerfed performance. They cost absurd amounts and are more expensive than the Adder there since the launch. It's bullshit.
You can argue that the new content isn't required, but why would anyone be playing it after all these years with no new content? Do you think people would've still played WoW as much if it never received expansions?
---

OctilIery posted...

If someone makes a stupid post with no real argument or facts I'm not going to give it effort.

what, mad about people stealing your gimmick?
---

OctilIery posted...

masterbarf posted...

I never played online, but the driving physics in the campaign are the epitome of terrible controls in gaming. Yes, there are obviously much worse out there, but for such a recent game, with such a huge budget, with adult gamers in mind to be that bad is pretty pathetic.

The driving is absolutely fine. It isn't supposed to be realistic, and the game would be significantly worse for the vast majority if it were.

I never said it should be Gran Turismo. I just think the primary fun factor in the series is immersion. The world the game exists in is rich and deserves a rich means of exploring it. The driving simply has zero nuance and does not behave intuitively at all. Without intuitive and nuanced physics, there can be no immersion. Removing nuance to the degree V does, removes differentiation among cars. Muscle cars do not have muscle car personality. The same can be said for 4x4s, super cars and every class. Not to memtion specific cars within the class. Then the cars do not behave as somebody with half a brain would expect. They do not turn on a curve, there is no inertia, no weight, no relationship between power, rate of acceleration and friction. The result is not only gameplay without immersion, but the cars do not feel like they're connected to world they belong to.

You don't need to go full out sim mode for there to be fun and immersion, but there has to be an intuitive relationship between a car's characteristics, its environment, and the player's inputs. Instead of describing friction, power, weight, inertia with elegant, intuitive curves, everything is either on all the way or off all the way. The gameplay is utterly destroyed.

....
.
.
.
.
.
.
Loading response
.
.
.
.
.

.....
.
.
.
Loading
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Loading
.
.
.

.
.
.
---

YellowSUV posted...

....
.
.
.
.
.
.
Loading response
.
.
.
.
.

.....
.
.
.
Loading
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Loading
.
.
.

.
.
.

As someone who enjoyed GTAO, yeah, that was awful. At least I had time to take a piss and grab a beer between races....I suppose...:/
---