Dan Houser leaves Rockstar.

[Chubz]

RDR2 was plagued with poor design decisions that made it even more tedious than their other titles.

I'm going through it right now for the first time (on PC) and it feels like a second job. Just such a slow, clunky, tedious game to play--and bloated as all get out, with at least half a dozen systems that seem to exist for absolutely no good reason (feeding/brushing your horse and managing your diet/weight for starters).

I would normally just uninstall it, but I'm going to give it time to see how it develops since it's such a massive game. I can't say I've really enjoyed anything from Rockstar since Bully and L.A. Noire, though.

 

[hillelslovak87]

Wait, isn't the online community their player base as well?

Single Player DLC would've been a nice bonus, but given the size of the base game, it's really not necessary.

I disagree. As I've said before, GTAV had 68 story missions. This was for 3 characters with their own distinct arena within the overall game world. GTA IV, for one character, had a whopping 99 missions. This isn't really an IV>V or anything, as they both have a host of merits, but I must say, their stories needed fleshed out much more in V.

Then again, this dlc could have been a few heists with nothing to really flesh out the protagonists individual stories, so it could be entirely a moot point. I just thought I needed more time in Trevor's world that wasn't moving shipping containers or working at the port.

 

[hillelslovak87]

You're spoiled. Only one game out of the entire series has ever had DLC.

I only bring it up because they promised the dlc for years.

 

[Hitman81]

Not sure what it all means for Rockstar but I'd like to see them mix things up a bit. Red Dead Redemption 2 was the disappointment of the generation for me. That said the rumored GTA6 set in Vice City is one of my most anticipated games of next gen.

 

[Rational Poster]

I'm going through it right now for the first time (on PC) and it feels like a second job. Just such a slow, clunky, tedious game to play--and bloated as all get out, with at least half a dozen systems that seem to exist for absolutely no good reason (feeding/brushing your horse and managing your diet/weight for starters).

I would normally just uninstall it, but I'm going to give it time to see how it develops since it's such a massive game. I can't say I've really enjoyed anything from Rockstar since Bully and L.A. Noire, though.

I tried to force myself through it because the gun play and design were pretty incredible... but spending all that time riding on the horse with a fast travel system even worse than GTAV's really got to me.

I stopped playing it maybe 25% or so through the game.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

I can’t blame him. Idk what in the fuck is going on over there for fact, but what it definitely looks like is that the executives are making creative and design decisions because they believe that will lead to greater sales and profits. It does not seem that they take pride in making the game an interesting experience or delivering anything that hasn’t been done a million times already.

Look at the mission designs in GTA V and RDR2. Everything is completely linear - go here, shoot this guy, grab this. There is nothing for you to figure out because if they made a game where you had to think, it would disqualify much of their current demographic which is dumb shit kids who want to turn the online mode into Call Of Duty Light.

Look at RDR2 online. There are so many problems with it, from no wildlife to entire functions like changing your character’s appearance, that don’t work at all or are just not there. Rockstar hasn’t even acknowledged these problems and likely has no intention of fixing them because why would they? Everyone already bought the game.

It smells of corporate bullshit.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Wait, isn't the online community their player base as well?

Single Player DLC would've been a nice bonus, but given the size of the base game, it's really not necessary.

That’s the problem. They found lower hanging fruit in the kids who just want to go online and shoot other kids, you know, because there aren’t a million other games where they can do that. So they landed to them instead of taking any risk.

 

[HereticBD]

That’s the problem. They found lower hanging fruit in the kids who just want to go online and shoot other kids, you know, because there aren’t a million other games where they can do that. So they landed to them instead of taking any risk.

But they're not doing anything differently. This is what kills me about the complaints. Both GTAV and RDR2 contained more than enough single player content. They just happened to expand the experience with meaty multiplayer modes as well. They're doing the exact opposite of what people are accusing them of. The ARE NOT sacrificing any of the work they put into their SP campaigns, to focus on multiplayer. They give you the best of both worlds, which should only be applauded.

To complain that they aren't giving us any big SP expansions(which they've only ever done once) on top of it all, is just typical entitled gamer mentality. It's not like it's turned into some FPS franchise, where the campaigns are an afterthought. They're busting their asses all around.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

But they're not doing anything differently.

That’s the problem. They’re churning out pretty much the same game, except more linear with less freedom to use the sandbox. The single player campaigns are incredibly restricted in terms of how you complete them. They are no longer innovating.

And the online is just a fucking circus.

And let’s be real here. Even in single player, the world feels largely underwhelming because you can’t enter any buildings. Even in RDR2, in which there are very few buildings, you can only enter less than half of them.

 

[HereticBD]

That’s the problem. They’re churning out pretty much the same game, except more linear with less freedom to use the sandbox. The single player campaigns are incredibly restricted in terms of how you complete them. They are no longer innovating.

That's a fair take, but it has nothing to do with them being lazy. It's their core game design, and well, people seem to really, REALLY like it. However, the idea that they aren't evolving is bullshit. RDR2 was a great leap forward in their open world design. While the missions themselves could use a bit more ambition, everything surrounding it was greatly improved upon from previous titles.

And the online is just a fucking circus.

I'm not a big online gamer, but if scores of people like it, to the point where GTAV is still one of the biggest games going, what's the complaint, other than it not personally appealing to you?

And let’s be real here. Even in single player, the world feels largely underwhelming because you can’t enter any buildings. Even in RDR2, in which there are very few buildings, you can only enter less than half of them.

So your complaint is that they haven't yet created the most realistic and robust open world ever? Okay...

 

[Jack Reacheround]

That's a fair take, but it has nothing to do with them being lazy. It's their core game design, and well, people seem to really, REALLY like it. However, the idea that they aren't evolving is bullshit. RDR2 was a great leap forward in their open world design. While the missions themselves could use a bit more ambition, everything surrounding it was greatly improved upon from previous titles.



I'm not a big online gamer, but if scores of people like it, to the point where GTAV is still one of the biggest games going, what's the complaint, other than it not personally appealing to you?



So your complaint is that they haven't yet created the most realistic and robust open world ever? Okay...

No, my complaint is that any innovation seems to be only aesthetic. And not giving us any interiors? I guess in RDR2 it’s forgivable since it’s all about the outdoors. But in gta, where so much or the world is taken up by buildings, not being able to go inside any of them is criminal.

Also, there was so much potential for the RDR2 online. But they squandered it on the same recycled gta V shit simply for revenue maximization. And they refuse to fix any glitches, of which there are many, unless those glitches interfere with them optimizing micro transactions.

There are entire game functions that still do not work. Part of your rewards for buying a particular membership is changing your character’s appearance for free. But that entire piece is broken and has been for months. You can’t change your character’s appearance.

So again, my point is that they are allowing corporate to run the creative department. It’s like if Nirvana let the record execs write songs for them.

 

[HereticBD]

No, my complaint is that any innovation seems to be only aesthetic. And not giving us any interiors? I guess in RDR2 it’s forgivable since it’s all about the outdoors. But in gta, where so much or the world is taken up by buildings, not being able to go inside any of them is criminal.

Do you understand all the systems in place that they are utilizing in their already incredibly highly detailed open world environments? You may as well ask that every single NPC be individually programmed to give infinite unique reactions/responses to every single possible scenario available in the game.

Asking that every single building, house, cabin, etc, to be interactive in their gigantic open world is quite the big ask. You simply can't have it both ways as of yet. The technology isn't quite there. They could make a smaller game where that could be possible, like "Deus Ex" does, but it would rob them of their big open world sandbox design.

Also, there was so much potential for the RDR2 online. But they squandered it on the same recycled gta V shit simply for revenue maximization. And they refuse to fix any glitches, of which there are many, unless those glitches interfere with them optimizing micro transactions.

So again, my point is that they are allowing corporate to run the creative department. It’s like if Nirvana let the record execs write songs for them.

That's a different topic though. If you feel they're sleeping on the MP component, I can't really comment one way or another, as I don't really give a shit about the online component. You were originally complaining that they were getting lazy with their single player component, in favor of focusing on MP. Now you're saying that they aren't focusing on MP enough...

Which is it?

 

[TestosterOWN]

Gta 5 online is absolute Shit on PC unless things have changed. Before if I tried getting into a lobby with a friend it would join and boot and it was the lamest thing ever. Just stopped bothering with it.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Asking that every single building, house, cabin, etc, to be interactive in their gigantic open world is quite the big ask.

No. Just more than a couple would be fine.

 

[HereticBD]

No. Just more than a couple would be fine.

Meh. Unless the buildings were all unique with unique NPC's in them, I doubt anyone would notice all that much. You'd just be going into the same basic building over and over, and eventually focus on missions that gave you the unique flavor you're craving. The "depth" would show itself to be artificial real quick, when you start noticing that you're running into the same basic building with the same basic NPC's. Unless they can make all of it unique, it's really not all that important.

That said, I think games will eventually get there. It's just not possible right now.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Meh. Unless the buildings were all unique with unique NPC's in them, I doubt anyone would notice all that much. You'd just be going into the same basic building over and over, and eventually focus on missions that gave you the unique flavor you're craving. The "depth" would show itself to be artificial real quick, when you start noticing that you're running into the same basic building with the same basic NPC's. Unless they can make all of it unique, it's really not all that important.

That said, I think games will eventually get there. It's just not possible right now.

I realize that. But I would still prefer it to not being able to enter them.

 

[HereticBD]

I realize that. But I would still prefer it to not being able to enter them.

What I could really do without, is the tease that they can be. I don't need the "locked door" animations to buildings that are inaccessible. If they're props, leave them as props. Otherwise, it gives you the incentive to aimlessly try every single door, just because one out of ten might actually open. That's kind of a sick joke. Especially in a game like RDR2, where it routinely shows your character kicking down locked doors.

I'm totally cool with the invisible wall to doors that simply aren't meant to be opened.

 

[evergreenrider]

Micro transactions were in the game while it was in BETA. That should clearly demonstrate what the true motive is

 

[Cole train]

my favorite from new rockstar games is still gta iv(especially with dlc)

btw anyone else remember gta 2 intro ideo, nostalgia overload

 

[witt1021]

When top talent leaves or gets “laid off”your company suffers. Just look at blizzard as a great example.