By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS4: Red Dead Redemption 2 Will Have Some Sort Of Timed PlayStation Exclusivity

DonFerrari said:
EricHiggin said:

I didn't say living without Rockstar is like living without oxygen. I said trying to hate Rockstar is like trying to hate oxygen. That doesn't mean you can't hate either. You said you didn't hate them, but that it was pretty easy to ignore their games. Ignoring the air and what your lungs are doing is pretty easy.

Ignore as in not consume, not care, doesn't need. That you can't do to air, but is very easy for me to do with R*. I could hate then easily, but their games don't interest to me enough for it. Tried bully, didn't like, GTS bores me, only Warriors I appreciated.

I thought you meant ignore like you play other games, just not Rockstar games. Like how some people prefer O2 bars instead of natural oxygen. A miscommunication apparently.



Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
DonFerrari said:

Ignore as in not consume, not care, doesn't need. That you can't do to air, but is very easy for me to do with R*. I could hate then easily, but their games don't interest to me enough for it. Tried bully, didn't like, GTS bores me, only Warriors I appreciated.

I thought you meant ignore like you play other games, just not Rockstar games. Like how some people prefer O2 bars instead of natural oxygen. A miscommunication apparently.

No problem =]

It's just that I'm not much into open world, so for me to like a game that is open world it needs to be very good and probably with few sidequest and not pointless big empty world that one have to cross all the time to do missions.

I have liked HZD, GoW even WD. But would prefer them being smaller.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Game of the Year with "God of War" and "Detroit Become Human" is my prediction.



DonFerrari said:
EricHiggin said:

I thought you meant ignore like you play other games, just not Rockstar games. Like how some people prefer O2 bars instead of natural oxygen. A miscommunication apparently.

No problem =]

It's just that I'm not much into open world, so for me to like a game that is open world it needs to be very good and probably with few sidequest and not pointless big empty world that one have to cross all the time to do missions.

I have liked HZD, GoW even WD. But would prefer them being smaller.

I can see that. Some gamers are all about being constantly sucked into the games narrative instead of being aware they are in a big open virtual world just doing tasks for the sake of exploring that world and making it worth the devs time to make it so large, or to later use sections for useless DLC cash grabs. I myself have come to enjoy them. They need to tie as many of the side quests and tasks into the main story though to keep you sucked into the game. I felt HZD did a pretty good job of this.

For me, games like GTA:V or HZD or ACO are all more than large enough based on their map size. Any bigger and I think I would end up focusing more on the direct story and less on anything else to do on the side. I got fairly close to completing GTA:V, but I didn't worry about doing little stuff like hitting all the stunt jumps etc. That game and it's story is crazy fun though. I barely played it's online mode. It was fun for a bit but other games were calling.

I really don't like games that try and keep you playing that franchise non stop consistently, it's just not my thing. Worthwhile DLC from time to time is ok, just as long as it's not so much DLC that clearly some has been taken out of the main game to hold onto you and grab a few more bucks, and as long as they clearly aren't trying to keep you from playing other games. Obviously they want this though because the less you play their game, the less that dev/pub has a chance to make a few extra bucks on the side.

I used to be a pretty big fan of Destiny, but based on how the main games, DLC, and extra content have been handled over time, it's become clear to me that they want you playing their game non stop and I just won't have it. For those who like that kind of thing, great, but for everyone else, you tend to get ripped because the games are usually set up in a way to make you pay or you only receive a portion of the lesser valued content. 

I'm hoping RDR2 will be similar to GTA:V. A large enough map with a solid, long, engaging story, that makes you want to explore some. Multiplayer online would be fine as well but at the moment I'm not to worried about it. If it turns out great that's cool, if not, I'll just move on.



I think the game will be sold a lot, MUCH more than the first part.



Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
DonFerrari said:

No problem =]

It's just that I'm not much into open world, so for me to like a game that is open world it needs to be very good and probably with few sidequest and not pointless big empty world that one have to cross all the time to do missions.

I have liked HZD, GoW even WD. But would prefer them being smaller.

I can see that. Some gamers are all about being constantly sucked into the games narrative instead of being aware they are in a big open virtual world just doing tasks for the sake of exploring that world and making it worth the devs time to make it so large, or to later use sections for useless DLC cash grabs. I myself have come to enjoy them. They need to tie as many of the side quests and tasks into the main story though to keep you sucked into the game. I felt HZD did a pretty good job of this.

For me, games like GTA:V or HZD or ACO are all more than large enough based on their map size. Any bigger and I think I would end up focusing more on the direct story and less on anything else to do on the side. I got fairly close to completing GTA:V, but I didn't worry about doing little stuff like hitting all the stunt jumps etc. That game and it's story is crazy fun though. I barely played it's online mode. It was fun for a bit but other games were calling.

I really don't like games that try and keep you playing that franchise non stop consistently, it's just not my thing. Worthwhile DLC from time to time is ok, just as long as it's not so much DLC that clearly some has been taken out of the main game to hold onto you and grab a few more bucks, and as long as they clearly aren't trying to keep you from playing other games. Obviously they want this though because the less you play their game, the less that dev/pub has a chance to make a few extra bucks on the side.

I used to be a pretty big fan of Destiny, but based on how the main games, DLC, and extra content have been handled over time, it's become clear to me that they want you playing their game non stop and I just won't have it. For those who like that kind of thing, great, but for everyone else, you tend to get ripped because the games are usually set up in a way to make you pay or you only receive a portion of the lesser valued content. 

I'm hoping RDR2 will be similar to GTA:V. A large enough map with a solid, long, engaging story, that makes you want to explore some. Multiplayer online would be fine as well but at the moment I'm not to worried about it. If it turns out great that's cool, if not, I'll just move on.

I forfeit, 5 times trying to reply and internet losing the message.

I'm with you on the not liking games that needs you to keep playing forever. That is the main reason I prefer manga over comics, the first having an ending story and the later with the constant reboot and retelling the same story.

Open World with a temathic I like makes it bearable at least, but perhaps I should give RDR2 and GTAV a chance playing only main story.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:

(...)

Open World with a temathic I like makes it bearable at least, but perhaps I should give RDR2 and GTAV a chance playing only main story.

Yes of course :)

the story is really good (and funny ^^) in gta 5 xD I like to play in only very few open worlds, but in GTA 5 it is well implemented - and certainly in Red Dead Redemption 2(if you like western), I'm sure. Rockstar Games have good eyes for details :)



KazumaKiryu said:
DonFerrari said:

(...)

Open World with a temathic I like makes it bearable at least, but perhaps I should give RDR2 and GTAV a chance playing only main story.

Yes of course :)

the story is really good (and funny ^^) in gta 5 xD I like to play in only very few open worlds, but in GTA 5 it is well implemented - and certainly in Red Dead Redemption 2(if you like western), I'm sure. Rockstar Games have good eyes for details :)

We have a deal =]



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."