What games are you playing now?

[JDR13]

You're better off just playing it with a gamepad until you "git gud" enough.

Tbh though, I doubt it would be worth it even if it was K+M compatible. RDR 1 hasn't aged well imo and feels simplistic after playing more recent games.

 

[danutz_plusplus]

I still dream of playing through it, at least for the story. I keep thinking about just watching a playthrough, but a thought in the back of my mind keeps telling me, what if they'll actually re-release it?

Unfortunately, it sounds like Rockstar is even more creatively bankrupt now, that they've put in so much time and money into GTA 6, and it's looking as stale and uninsteresting as it is. And I hear the experience with RDR2, while it did turn a nice profit, it is nowhere close to what the publishers probably expected, out of a project that took 8 years and thousands of people working on it. So, they'll likely double-down on GTA 6, since they can monetize that to kingdom come with the only component, which seems to have failed in Red Dead Online.

I expect RDR2 has a whole different class of audience than GTA. Probably a lot of GTA players tried RDR2, but failed to appreciate it and didn't stick around for the online part. And the ones that did appreciate it, appreciated it for the story and world, and those people refuse to be fleeced in the online component. That's my suspicion anyway.

 

[JFarrell71]

We have NO IDEA what GTA 6 looks like. It's a hodgepodge of leaks from an utterly unfinished game that will no doubt be enormous in length and scope. I thought judging games based on 3 minute trailers (a la Starfield) was bad, but now we're going to judge games based on leaks like this one?

Btw, where are you getting this idea that Take Two was unhappy with the money RDR 2 made? Are you just assuming that because you think RDR good, GTA bad? Because RDR 2 literally made the most money over an opening weekend in entertainment history ($725 million, IIRC), and over time it's made like the 7th most money of any game ever made. After it came out, Take Two stock prices went up 9%.

So no, I don't think they were disappointed.

 

[bjon045]

Btw, where are you getting this idea that Take Two was unhappy with the money RDR 2 made? Are you just assuming that because you think RDR good, GTA bad? Because RDR 2 literally made the most money over an opening weekend in entertainment history ($725 million, IIRC), and over time it's made like the 7th most money of any game ever made. After it came out, Take Two stock prices went up 9%.

So no, I don't think they were disappointed.

I have to agree that it seems an odd analysis. Not to mention that RDR2 still sells at close to full price 4 years after it came out! Both GTA5 and RDR2 have had a very long tail of sales so far. I would imagine those ongoing sales are even funding a significant part of the development on the next one. I think it takes a good vision to maintain that level of quality without falling into the trap of creating a multitude of cheap spin-offs etc. They are both well managed IP's in my humble opinion.

 

[danutz_plusplus]

I think it’s pretty common sense. They spent a boatload of money on both RDR2 and GTA 5. GTA 5 has a way bigger player base and they have been monetizing it’s online component for years, whereas they’re stopping support for Red Dead Online. I don’t think it’s odd at all.

Publishers don’t care about being profitable, but being the most profitable for the least amount of money. I have a feeling RDR2 was lobbied by the original Rockstar founders, which are now gone. So I think they’re now fully at the whim of Take2.

About GTA 6, we know it’ll be set in the same old tired setting with probably the same old mechanics, and same old way of telling the story. That for me is creatively bankrupt. If they would’ve broken off and did something truly original, like set it further in the future, or just reboot the setting, then I would have some hope. But no way are they risking that. They want the same money maker that GTA5 was, with its online component.

 

[JFarrell71]

About GTA 6, we know it’ll be set in the same old tired setting with probably the same old mechanics, and same old way of telling the story. That for me is creatively bankrupt.

We don't know. You don't know. These are assumptions you're making.

 

[danutz_plusplus]

We don't know. You don't know. These are assumptions you're making.

It's been rumored for a long time that it's set in Vice City. The leaks confirm that. Unless they scrapped everything and restarted, I think it's close enough. But regardless, I do not believe they would risk the golden pony and change anything too drastic. If they're gonna do something original it will be in a different series/game.

Considering the other rumours about GTA 6 having a difficult development cycle and shelving all remasters (including RDR1) and putting everything on GTA 6, I think it's safe to say I shouldn't expect anything too radically different from Rockstar. Even RDR2, which was pretty great, had a lot of GTA baggage.

 

[Carnifex]

For the past four or five days now I've been playing Planet Stronghold two, and have been enjoying it, though I'd not played the first in the series. A full review will be forthcoming!

 

[JDR13]

It's been rumored for a long time that it's set in Vice City. The leaks confirm that. Unless they scrapped everything and restarted, I think it's close enough. But regardless, I do not believe they would risk the golden pony and change anything too drastic. If they're gonna do something original it will be in a different series/game.

That's an odd thing to focus on tbh. So what if it's in Vice City? The last game was 20 years ago, and it's a cool setting. It's not like they're going to cut and paste the same map.

I don't recall anyone complaining when it was revealed that GTA V was taking place in San Andreas again.

 

[danutz_plusplus]

That's an odd thing to focus on tbh. So what if it's in Vice City? The last game was 20 years ago, and it's a cool setting. It's not like they're going to cut and paste the same map.

I don't recall anyone complaining when it was revealed that GTA V was taking place in San Andreas again.

As long as you're fine with the same setting remade over and over, it's fine. I personally would've liked a completely different setting than the one from San Andreas in GTA 5. And another different one than Vice City in GTA 6.

Or even better, something like RDR2, as far away from the GTA setting as possible. Personally, I'm so burned out on the satire in the mobster setting that I'd like something different. Plus, I can't get emotionally invested in a bunch of characters that are more caricature than anything else. RDR2 is such a departure from anything else Rockstar have done, that I'm convinced I only want that from them. When I was a teenager I probably would've wanted a setting where I can just cause mayhem. Now, I want stories that grip me and hold me along until the end.

I mentioned before, I'd have loved a Blade Runner game with the budget of RDR2 or GTA 5/6. Or something else, that's fresh.

I wonder if and/or when we'll have that opportunity again, from Rockstar.

 

[JDR13]

As long as you're fine with the same setting remade over and over, it's fine. I personally would've liked a completely different setting than the one from San Andreas in GTA 5. And another different one than Vice City in GTA 6.

Except that's not what they're doing, but ok.

I'm not a big fan of Rockstar, so I have no reason to defend them, but you're wildly exaggerating here. They've never reused the same city more than once, and it's been completely different when they did anyways.

That's like saying Piranha Bytes was creatively bankrupt because Gothic 2 took place on the same island.

 

[danutz_plusplus]

Except that's not what they're doing, but ok.

I'm not a big fan of Rockstar, so I have no reason to defend them, but you're wildly exaggerating here. They've never reused the same city more than once, and it's been completely different when they did anyways.

That's like saying Piranha Bytes was creatively bankrupt because Gothic 2 took place on the same island.

Considering the means and budgets that PB have compared to Rockstar, I'd say Rockstar is creatively bankrupt. Actually, I'm not even talking about the Rocktar devs. They probably would love to try something new and exciting. But their publishers/owners and Rockstar management are likely the ones pushing for the same thing. Since it's lower risk.

And to me it is the same thing over and over, just doing a round-robin between the 3 settings (Liberty City, San Andreas and Vice City). It's the same old satire, with updated jokes for whatever's happening in current culture, in a gangster setting where I can't take the characters seriously. It's all a big joke. Again, after seeing what they pulled off with RDR2, in a setting I could take seriously, I personally wouldn't mind if they completely gave up on the GTA setting. Or even reboot it completely into a serious noir crime drama. I'd even take that, as much as I'm also tired of those. I just want some characters I can take seriously, and not just caricatures.

Gothic 2 was built around Gothic 1 setting because it was a direct sequel, and it altered the original map and made it a small part of the new world map. None of the GTA games are direct sequels to each other, to my knowledge. They're just loosely tied to the same universe. And they keep hopping between the same 3 settings.

 

[JDR13]

Considering the means and budgets that PB have compared to Rockstar, I'd say Rockstar is creatively bankrupt. Actually, I'm not even talking about the Rocktar devs. They probably would love to try something new and exciting. But their publishers/owners and Rockstar management are likely the ones pushing for the same thing. Since it's lower risk.

The budgets have nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Why do they need to change to something completely different when that's probably not what the vast majority of their fanbase wants? To please you?

And to me it is the same thing over and over, just doing a round-robin between the 3 settings (Liberty City, San Andreas and Vice City). It's the same old satire, with updated jokes for whatever's happening in current culture, in a gangster setting where I can't take the characters seriously. It's all a big joke. Again, after seeing what they pulled off with RDR2, in a setting I could take seriously, I personally wouldn't mind if they completely gave up on the GTA setting. Or even reboot it completely into a serious noir crime drama. I'd even take that, as much as I'm also tired of those. I just want some characters I can take seriously, and not just caricatures.

In other words, it's not for you. That's fine, but your complaint is nonsensical. That's simply what GTA is. It's about criminals doing their thing. Complaining about that is like saying you're disappointed because you just found out the next Mass Effect game is going to be Sci-fi.

 

[danutz_plusplus]

In other words, it's not for you. That's fine, but your complaint is nonsensical. That's simply what GTA is. It's about criminals doing their thing. Complaining about that is like saying you're disappointed because you just found out the next Mass Effect game is going to be Sci-fi.

How exactly is it nonsensical to want them to make more games that I'd like, and less of those I'm not a big fan of? It would be nonsensical to expect them to do it, since there's apparently loads more people just throwing money at them in GTA online, but we're talking about wishes. I'd wish they would do other games, but I'm not expecting anything anytime soon. Sadly, I have a feeling the western genre was probably a passion project of one of the Houser brothers, so they likely lobbied heavily for it. And as far as I know they're gone.

Regardless, when GTA 6 eventually comes out, I'll probably have the same experience as with all GTA games. I'll try it for a dozen hours, and then probably lose interest. Happened to me with 3, 4 and 5. But I'll still try it out, hoping that they change enough to keep me interested

 

[JDR13]

How exactly is it nonsensical to want them to make more games that I'd like, and less of those I'm not a big fan of? It would be nonsensical to expect them to do it, since there's apparently loads more people just throwing money at them in GTA online, but we're talking about wishes. I'd wish they would do other games, but I'm not expecting anything anytime soon. Sadly, I have a feeling the western genre was probably a passion project of one of the Houser brothers, so they likely lobbied heavily for it. And as far as I know they're gone.

Well it started out sounding like you were making an argument that they should do it for reasons other than just you wanting something different.

If you're just talking about wishes, yeah, we all have those. I want Obsidian to make another Fallout game instead of average stuff like The Outer Worlds, and I could name a gazillion other things.

Hoping the theme or setting in GTA is going to change significantly, or that Rockstar will abandon it for something else, is a waste of time. That's not going to happen. You're better off focusing on whether or not the game is going to be good for what it is.

 

[danutz_plusplus]

Well it started out sounding like you were making an argument that they should do it for reasons other than just you wanting something different.

If you're just talking about wishes, yeah, we all have those. I want Obsidian to make another Fallout game instead of average stuff like The Outer Worlds, and I could name a gazillion other things.

Hoping the theme or setting in GTA is going to change significantly, or that Rockstar will abandon it for something else, is a waste of time. That's not going to happen. You're better off focusing on whether or not the game is going to be good for what it is.

Hope dies last.

Unfortunately, I think you're closer to another fallout game from Obsidian than I am to something new or a RDR3 from Rockstar.

 

[bjon045]

I like it when a sequel has some overlap. I like to see how the world has evolved. When you are talking about cities they can change drastically over 20 years or more. If it is a modern day vice city then it would be 50 years!

You really must not of liked Ultima 4-7!!!

 

[JDR13]

I've reached the final battle of Doom Eternal: The Ancient Gods, and it's fucking ridiculous. This might be one of those rare instances where I end up just watching the ending on YouTube.

 

[Redglyph]

I've played Kingdom Come: Deliverance for a few hours. I'm pleasantly surprised so far, I was expecting the game to be in a rougher state and running poorly, after all I read about it.

There's a lot of cinematics, but I suppose it will progressively get less frequent. I find it a little too much at the beginning because it's a series of cinematics between which I can only do a few things before the controls are taken from me again, just to remind me I'm not really free to do what I want and the game must go in that direction. But they're well done, and there's a lot of good quality spoken dialogues for an indie first game released 4 years ago and which started in 2014.

There are a few little annoyances: the save limitation (I've downloaded the mod now), the clunky and slow way to pick up objects (and why can't you pick up food when you're sat BTW?), and I fear that the micro-management with food, rest, dirt have been pushed a little too far and may become tedious after a while.

For now I like the sim aspect of it, even if it contrasts with the reduced interactivity of the world (I can't simply pick up a torch hanging on the wall, for ex) and the mandatory map and compass pointers for which there is no dedicated option.

I feel like I've only touched the surface, there's so much to discover. The graphics and attention to detail is amazing for a game with such a relatively large map. The villages are near castles where we would expect them to be, the layout is realistic and show purpose, people go about their business and are talking all the time about many different things. The tutorials and the amount of information in the codex are very helpful and well done.

 

[wiretripped]

I've played Kingdom Come: Deliverance for a few hours. I'm pleasantly surprised so far, I was expecting the game to be in a rougher state and running poorly, after all I read about it.

There's a lot of cinematics, but I suppose it will progressively get less frequent. I find it a little too much at the beginning because it's a series of cinematics between which I can only do a few things before the controls are taken from me again, just to remind me I'm not really free to do what I want and the game must go in that direction. But they're well done, and there's a lot of good quality spoken dialogues for an indie first game released 4 years ago and which started in 2014.

There are a few little annoyances: the save limitation (I've downloaded the mod now), the clunky and slow way to pick up objects (and why can't you pick up food when you're sat BTW?), and I fear that the micro-management with food, rest, dirt have been pushed a little too far and may become tedious after a while.

For now I like the sim aspect of it, even if it contrasts with the reduced interactivity of the world (I can't simply pick up a torch hanging on the wall, for ex) and the mandatory map and compass pointers for which there is no dedicated option.

I feel like I've only touched the surface, there's so much to discover. The graphics and attention to detail is amazing for a game with such a relatively large map. The villages are near castles where we would expect them to be, the layout is realistic and show purpose, people go about their business and are talking all the time about many different things. The tutorials and the amount of information in the codex are very helpful and well done.

I've re-started my initial playthrough as well. It's a great game, imo, and the (very immersive) world does open up entirely after the intro.
I am about 40h in atm and still haven't left Rattay. It does take some time to get around, even with the (limited) fast travel, especially because I am constantly over my weight limit and you gotta be careful not too fall from too high.

By the way, another tweak you might want to do is to make the cursor stay when you pull out your bow. Sure, not having it makes it more immersive, but also makes archery a lot more tedious: oh, the arrows I've spent trying to hit a fleeing rabbit...