What video game are you playing?

[wizards8507]

If PlayStation is committed to the VR thing, THAT would move units.

Nobody wants VR.

 

[ulukinatme]

Dynasty Warriors 8...because I had good times playing 4 when I was a kid.

I played III and IV a bit, probably played through 4-5 characters in each. They were pretty fun for hack and slash games, but I felt like they regurgitated the same storylines between the two games. There were some minor changes, but overall the story portion for each character seemed very similar between both titles.

Yeah, I hope it stays single-player focused.

I hope so too. I played a lot of GTA Online when it first came out. Legit got to Rank 100 and had a good bit of cash, and then people started to seriously exploit the game and hack stuff. People would take multi million dollar bounties out on people and it really destroyed the game. Once that started happening people had little need for cash, so people stopped doing missions. The game devolved into people just killing other people in the lobby which gets old after awhile.

Then it took Rockstar two damn years to implement the Online Heists they promised, and they were a linear bunch of crap in the long run. Sure, they were kind of fun the first time or two, but you were severely penalized if you had an idiot in your heist crew, and if said idiot dropped out for any reason the ENTIRE 30+ minute mission would automatically fail. The whole implementation of it was screwed up, especially with how buggy the connections can be in that game. It was so incredibly delayed and disappointing that I sought out other means of co-op heisting to bide my time, which drew me to Payday 2. THAT is how online heists should go.

Long story short, GTA Online ain't that great, and if the focus is on multiplayer I have a feeling exploits and hacks will destroy Red Dead Redemption 2 as well.

 

[IrishBroker]

I played III and IV a bit, probably played through 4-5 characters in each. They were pretty fun for hack and slash games, but I felt like they regurgitated the same storylines between the two games. There were some minor changes, but overall the story portion for each character seemed very similar between both titles.



I hope so too. I played a lot of GTA Online when it first came out. Legit got to Rank 100 and had a good bit of cash, and then people started to seriously exploit the game and hack stuff. People would take multi million dollar bounties out on people and it really destroyed the game. Once that started happening people had little need for cash, so people stopped doing missions. Then it took Rockstar two damn years to implement the Online Heists they promised, and they were a linear bunch of crap in the long run. Sure, they were kind of fun the first time or two, but you were severely penalized if you had an idiot in your heist crew, and if said idiot dropped out for any reason the ENTIRE 30+ minute mission would automatically fail. The whole implementation of it was screwed up, especially with how buggy the connections can be in that game. It was so incredibly delayed and disappointing that I sought out other means of co-op heisting to bide my time, which drew me to Payday 2. THAT is how online heists should go.

Long story short, GTA Online ain't that great, and if the focus is on multiplayer I have a feeling exploits and hacks will destroy Red Dead Redemption 2 as well.

Yep. That's why I don't play online anything really....I don't know how to exploit the game like others do.

Nor do I care about playing for fictional dollars or rankings.

I get much more outta a good story and just the enjoyment of the game, I can play at my own pace.

I'm 34 years old, dammit.

 

[ulukinatme]

Yep. That's why I don't play online anything really....I don't know how to exploit the game like others do.

Nor do I care about playing for fictional dollars or rankings.

I get much more outta a good story and just the enjoyment of the game, I can play at my own pace.

I'm 34 years old, dammit.

I'm getting to that point. I'm 34 too. i used to play some competitive shooters like Counter Strike/Day of Defeat and I did Battlefront recently. At this point I find myself looking for more single player titles and co-op stuff just because there seems to be too many exploits and bullshit in online competitive titles...I'm not going to cheat to keep up with the Joneses.

 

[greyhammer90]

The counter-argument is Overwatch. They're printing money on microtransactions but it doesn't affect anything besides cosmetics.

The good side of the coin, though some pro-consumer gamers would argue that those microtransactions are still inexcusable considering it is a $60 game. I personally give it a pass because I know they will continue to create new maps/modes on that, but some disagree.

The issue I have with microtransactions is that they create a subtle mentality of distrust between developer and gamer, even if done totally right. A hypothetical example:

Situation #1: Grey comes to a room in a game that is hard. Grey dies 100 times. Grey thinks to himself, "Wow, this room is really hard." Grey judges the game. Grey is challenged and immersed.

Situation #2: Grey comes to the exact same room. Grey dies 100 times. The game says "you can skip this/get more powerful if you give x dollars." Grey thinks to himself, "This room is only hard to get me to part with my money. This game is rigged, these developers suck." Grey judges the developers and their underlying motives. Grey is frustrated and taken out of the experience.

These two situations feature the exact same gameplay, but now I suspect an ulterior motive from the developers. As a result, even though the microtransactions didn't affect my gameplay or the amount of money, they made the experience much worse.

 

[ACamp1900]

Yep. That's why I don't play online anything really....I don't know how to exploit the game like others do.

Nor do I care about playing for fictional dollars or rankings.

I get much more outta a good story and just the enjoyment of the game, I can play at my own pace.

I'm 34 years old, dammit.

I'm here... and I just don't enjoy the STYLE of play that is prevalent with online play... run around like crazy at a break neck pace and do whatever the goal for that game is.

I like to play at my own pace in my own way...

I'm 36... shit is getting real.

 

[greyhammer90]

Nobody wants VR.

You don't want VR. I'm personally disinterested until someone shows me that it will be a good investment. A good investment requires good software. Good software will come if people buy it. People will buy it if RD has an exclusive feature.

Like I said, it would move units. Which should be Sony's primary motive at this point.

 

[IrishBroker]

I'm here... and I just don't enjoy the STYLE of play that is prevalent with online play... run around like crazy at a break neck pace and do whatever the goal for that game is.

I like to play at my own pace in my own way...

I'm 36... shit is getting real.

Another fantastic point.

Shit moves too fast. And it gets too repetitive after about 15mins.

 

[wizards8507]

The good side of the coin, though pro-consumer gamers some would argue that those microtransactions are still inexcusable considering it is a $60 game. I personally give it a pass because I know they will continue to create new maps/modes on that, but some disagree.

The issue I have with microtransactions is that they create a subtle mentality of distrust between developer and gamer, even if done totally right. A hypothetical example:

Situation #1: Grey comes to a room in a game that is hard. Grey dies 100 times. Grey thinks to himself, "Wow, this room is really hard." Grey judges the game. Grey is challenged and immersed.

Situation #2: Grey comes to the exact same room. Grey dies 100 times. The game says "you can skip this/get more powerful if you give x dollars." Grey thinks to himself, "This room is only hard to get me to part with my money. This game is rigged, these developers suck." Grey judges the developer's and their underlying motives. Grey is frustrated and taken out of the experience.

These two situations feature the exact same gameplay, but now I suspect an ulterior motive from the developers. As a result, even though the microtransactions didn't affect my gameplay or the amount of money, they made the experience much worse.

I agree. I hate DLC that affects how you actually play and progress through the game. I'm completely fine with DLC that's cosmetic-only or a legitimate expansion to the base game.

I've spent about $30 on Overwatch loot boxes in addition to the base $60 for the game and I don't feel ripped off in the slightest.

Real-life example. We went to a farm on Saturday and they had a deal where you filled a wheelbarrow full of pumpkins and gourds and shit for $49. I loaded that bitch up, including one sucker that easily weighed 100 lbs. I shook the farmer's hand and happily paid him $65 because it seemed like a fair price for what I received. Blizzard have been treating their Overwatch playerbase right with new skins, maps, heroes, and events, so I'm happy to continue to support them here and there along the way.

 

[gkIrish]

I am also a purely single player gamer. Literally stopped playing Battlefront after a few hours. I will occasionally play my friends in sports games but that's about it.

Counterstrike back in the day at LAN parties is about the only online gaming I enjoyed.

 

[ACamp1900]

I agree. I hate DLC that affects how you actually play and progress through the game. I'm completely fine with DLC that's cosmetic-only or a legitimate expansion to the base game.

I've spent about $30 on Overwatch loot boxes in addition to the base $60 for the game and I don't feel ripped off in the slightest.

Real-life example. We went to a farm on Saturday and they had a deal where you filled a wheelbarrow full of pumpkins and gourds and shit for $49. I loaded that bitch up, including one sucker that easily weighed 100 lbs. I shook the farmer's hand and happily paid him $65 because it seemed like a fair price for what I received. Blizzard have been treating their Overwatch playerbase right with new skins, maps, heroes, and events, so I'm happy to continue to support them here and there along the way.

Side: I'm jealous of the harvest stuff... we used to have that every year out here... now it's really hard to find with the drought and regulations on agriculture out here.

 

[wizards8507]

Side: I'm jealous of the harvest stuff... we used to have that every year out here... now it's really hard to find with the drought and regulations on agriculture out here.

That sucks. This place was pretty legit. Pumpkins were still on the vine and you went out with gloves, clippers, and mud boots and hauled them yourself.

 

[ACamp1900]

That sucks. This place was pretty legit. Pumpkins were still on the vine and you went out with gloves, clippers, and mud boots and hauled them yourself.

Yep. We had one just like it, complete with a corn stalk maze and haunted hay rides and such... it was almost within walking distance of our house... now fast forward two/three years and that whole area is just dirt and tumble weeds... in fact every single patch like that I can think of in my area is now defunct... I'd say ten years ago there were probably five different ones that went on yearly.

 

[ulukinatme]

Nobody wants VR.

You don't want VR. I'm personally disinterested until someone shows me that it will be a good investment. A good investment requires good software. Good software will come if people buy it. People will buy it if RD has an exclusive feature.

Like I said, it would move units. Which should be Sony's primary motive at this point.

I'm definitely a bit interested in VR, but not at the current price point because I'm cheap and kids sap a lot of my cash these days. I find myself buying more and more games on Steam sales than anything, so I end up getting games a year or two after everyone else has already played them. It's worked out well for me, mostly because I'm rarely wasting my cash these days since there's been plenty of time to review and critique these games. I figure in a couple years I can probably find the PlayStation VR stuff for $100 second hand, and hopefully by then it'll work well and have a lot of support.

 

[BeauBenken]

I played III and IV a bit, probably played through 4-5 characters in each. They were pretty fun for hack and slash games, but I felt like they regurgitated the same storylines between the two games. There were some minor changes, but overall the story portion for each character seemed very similar between both titles.

Oh the story in the end is the exact same (it's been based on a, but you get the chance to see it from like 40 different perspectives due to all the characters. It was best playing with a friend on a difficult mode and following each characters intended path as opposed to just slaughtering everything and everyone on the battlefield.

 

[IrishInFl]

I had VR once. It was called Virtual Boy!

World of Final Fantasy demo came out for ps4 today. It's actually pretty awesome. I prefer it over FFXV.

 

[Henges24]

I'm in the same boat. I'm hoping that CoD is almost obligated to go back to historical warfare with one of their next two releases... if they keep going the way they're going, it's going to be Star Wars. Unless, of course, that is their grand-master plan, to fold into the Disney/Star Wars franchise.

Having said that, I'm gonna grab Battlefield 1 at Black Friday I think. Never played the Battlefield games, as I was a loyal CoD guy up to the first Black Ops. But, since Battlefield is the first to go back to historical warfare on the new gen, and since I haven't played any CoD's since MW3, Battlefield has temporarily earned my loyalty.

If I don't like it, and CoD actually steps back in time again, I'll give them another whirl.

CoD needs desperately to go back to a Normandy to Berlin style WW2 game... do it big and do it right... I think that market was seriously over saturated at one point, but now it's just the opposite. I'd be all in.

I agree and disagree with this. COD WaW used to be my favorite COD game of all time (or so I thought). Recently it went backwards compatible on the Xbox One and I have been playing it. There is something about it that I don't like anymore. Yes, I know it's an older game and probably one of the better games of its time but after playing Modern Warfare you learn to miss the more modern game (not futuristic BOs or IW). I think going back to WW2 would be a great idea and I'd be all in but I think I am learning more towards a modern era game. Middle East based would be dope.

 

[greyhammer90]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">RED DEAD REDEMPTION 2<br>Coming Fall 2017<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RDR2?src=hash">#RDR2</a><a href="https://t.co/ZacUJ48wvE">https://t.co/ZacUJ48wvE</a> <a href="https://t.co/lffZvn42pR">pic.twitter.com/lffZvn42pR</a></p>— Rockstar Games (@RockstarGames) <a href="https://twitter.com/RockstarGames/status/788363842329903104">October 18, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It is done. Trailer dropping Thursday at 11 AM EST.

 

[gkIrish]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">RED DEAD REDEMPTION 2<br>Coming Fall 2017<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RDR2?src=hash">#RDR2</a><a href="https://t.co/ZacUJ48wvE">https://t.co/ZacUJ48wvE</a> <a href="https://t.co/lffZvn42pR">pic.twitter.com/lffZvn42pR</a></p>— Rockstar Games (@RockstarGames) <a href="https://twitter.com/RockstarGames/status/788363842329903104">October 18, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It is done.

Crap it looks like they are trying to focus on a big multiplayer aspect. Not what I was hoping for.

 

[wizards8507]

Crap it looks like they are trying to focus on a big multiplayer aspect. Not what I was hoping for.

I'm hoping they can do justice to both a robust single player campaign as well as the online multiplayer.

I also hope "Red Dead Redemption 2" isn't the final title. Also, Fall 2017!? Waaaaaah! Also their official website says the trailer comes out at on Thursday at 11:00 EST but it's EDT and that's one of my biggest pet peeves.

0/10 will not buy.

 

[greyhammer90]

but it's EDT and that's one of my biggest pet peeves.

0/10 will not buy.

Someone had to take a stand.

 

[ACamp1900]

Crap it looks like they are trying to focus on a big multiplayer aspect. Not what I was hoping for.

Where are you seeing that? Just a take from the picture?

 

[IrishBroker]

Thanks to this board, I cracked open The Witcher again last night and got sucked down the rabbit hole.........

Until 2 am.

 

[wizards8507]

Where are you seeing that? Just a take from the picture?

Developed by the creators of Grand Theft Auto V and Red Dead Redemption, Red Dead Redemption 2 is an epic tale of life in America’s unforgiving heartland. The game’s vast and atmospheric world will also provide the foundation for a brand new online multiplayer experience.

 

[gkIrish]

Where are you seeing that? Just a take from the picture?

If you click on the link in the tweet you get to a page that says the following:

Developed by the creators of Grand Theft Auto V and Red Dead Redemption, Red Dead Redemption 2 is an epic tale of life in America’s unforgiving heartland. The game’s vast and atmospheric world will also provide the foundation for a brand new online multiplayer experience.

I am just worried they are going to focus on the multiplayer more than the single player that made Read Dead Redemption so good.

Edit: wiz beat me to it.

 

[IrishBroker]

If you click on the link in the tweet you get to a page that says the following:



I am just worried they are going to focus on the multiplayer more than the single player that made Read Dead Redemption so good.

Edit: wiz beat me to it.

ugggggg...Please no.

 

[ACamp1900]

Just give us a game the size and depth of RDD with modern graphics and a few new bells and whistles, and do whatever the hell you want with online... if it's a 10-20 hours long story that's clearly second to online I would honestly pass... even for a RDD sequel. GTAv was very fun but it was borderline too short and limited in the heists and such... I hope they don't further that trend.

 

[ACamp1900]

Developed by the creators of Grand Theft Auto V and Red Dead Redemption, Red Dead Redemption 2 is an epic tale of life in America’s unforgiving heartland. The game’s vast and atmospheric world will also provide the foundation for a brand new online multiplayer experience.

If you click on the link in the tweet you get to a page that says the following:



I am just worried they are going to focus on the multiplayer more than the single player that made Read Dead Redemption so good.

Edit: wiz beat me to it.

Yeah sorry guys... I'm not the most twitter savvy person... thanks.

 

[gkIrish]

Just give us a game the size and depth of RDD with modern graphics and a few new bells and whistles, and do whatever the hell you want with online... if it's a 10-20 hours long story that's clearly second to online I would honestly pass... even for a RDD sequel. GTAv was very fun but it was borderline too short and limited in the heists and such... I hope they don't further that trend.

Yeah that is what I was getting at. GTA V was barely enough single player. If I'm not getting 50+ hours worth if single player I will definitely not buy on the release date.

 

[greyhammer90]

I think it's a bit of a leap to say that sentence indicates anything about the game's focus. If I was writing a paragraph and wanted to also tell people that the game had online multiplayer that sentence would be how I would write it.