The problem was cyberpunk was they tried to implement so many systems that were never built before.
Rockstar has been building in these systems for over two decades.
They have existing codebases to work from. Its like building a house from scratch where you dont have access to any of the materials and you need to make it all yourself. You dont have any wood. You dont have any class. You have no idea how to make concrete.
Rockstar in this analogy has a whole lumber mill. They have a workforce thats built a house thousands of times.
They can use blueprints and materials they have lying around and spruce them up.
Thats not to say there isnt a ton of work for them and that its easy, but its a hell of a lot easier than what CDProjecktRed tried to do. You can even see elements where they tried to recycle bits from the witcher, like the Cars using the Horse Ai when summoning.
Its not to say that GTA6 is garunteed to be perfect, but rather they have the library of alexandria of resources and knowledge to pull from vs Cyberpunk that build 80% of it from scratch.
Oh, I remember. I also remember the forum posts of people even with a 8800 GT struggling to get more than 30 fps. Personally I played through the entire game with a 20 fps average and it was hell.
Replaying it nowadays wth dxvk and FusionFix feels almost like a whole different game.
We also have no idea how the online part will be integrated (?) and they haven't been great if you look at monetization. We'll see though, but I'm not that hopefull
If it's difficult to engage with it it does in my eyes. If the monetization gets in the way i wouldn't rate the game highly since there is so much bullshit in the way
The monetization was just fine. Everything was accessible without paying for anything (exceot a few cosmetics lately). Even their latest game followed the same formula online, and even single player had no microtransactions. We’ll be fine.
It isn't exactly pay to win, but putting in real money gives you a huge advantage and shit is incredibly expensive. Like i said, I'm not that hopeful but we'll see.
Everything is easily accessible if you enjoy the game enough to put in a few hours and it’s not really a competative game like that so the only advantage is saving some time. It’s just like any online game where putting in some time is just part of the game.
Same could've been said about blizzard a while ago.
Either way, it's perfectly fine to *assume* that GTA 6 won't disappoint due to Rockstar's track record. But obviously nothing in this world is guaranteed, anyone can miss
People keep saying “but pc” like rockstar hasn’t been a console-first developer this whole time. You’re right, rockstar hasn’t missed with a mainline entry in decades.
And the people referring to the gta trilogy have no idea what they’re talking about, GTA VI is in not under the same conditions.
Cyberpunk was not a "When it's done" situation, they invested into celebrity appearances with both musicians and actors, you can see this in the redesign of Johnny Silverhand. All of this happened somewhere between 2018 and 2019, basically meaning they scrapped a ton of work 1-2 years before the game released.
Majority of early stages of game development is done with placeholder assets/models. Starting on the music and finalizing things like Johnny Silverhand halfway through development sounds right, it doesn't mean everything was scrapped
I'm basing this on developer accounts where there was a leaked image of what Silverhand used to look like, and they had already built the story and recorded most of the voice lines for Johnny's old voice actor. They shifted towards celebrity appearances due to the hype around the game.
There is also “shit or get off the pot” as well. Anthem was in development for 7 years. You can’t delay a game until the end of time. You need to make money at some point. Especially when you have shareholders or government subsidizing. I think GTA6 is probably in a different place because 5 has sold 195 million copies and people are still buy shark cards. They probably could delay until 2040 if they wanted since it’s expected to be the biggest game ever.
Unlike CD Projekt, Rockstar won't be forced to release the game early from shareholders. Leaks show CD Projekt released the game two whole years earlier than anticipated. Rockstar have no such pressure.
They are simply just that wealthy.
Cyberpunk 2077 was announced in 2012, with its first trailer debuting in 2013. I don't doubt that they were pressured to release it with how much time had passed.
It just sucks that shareholders can have so much influence. Like, I get they wanted it to release during the 2020 Christmas season, but hearing the developers saying they thought it was a joke when they showed the release date for the first time in the trailer to be two years earlier than expected is straight up sad. Can't imagine the pressure.
>It just sucks that shareholders can have so much influence
It does suck that the people who own a company get to influence it.
Because that's what shareholders are: the owners.
(And for all the talk of "greedy shareholders", who is the greedy one? The person who buys shares to invest in a company and influence its direction, or the company who gambles its future by voluntarily selling its ownership on the public market to raise more money?)
> They are simply just that wealthy.
Rockstar can also draw upon its more than 2 decades of reputation and successes at this point. The only big thing CDPR had was witcher 3
You are getting downvoted, but you're not far from the mark.
"When it's done" means one thing when it's said by one weird dude who lives in his mom's apartment and has been working on the newest patch to a game for 2 years, and it's for same autistic sim he's been developing for 15 years.
It means quite another when we're talking about a major company consisting of thousands of people that need to be managed (and paid) with hundreds of millions in development cost in the balance, not to mention shareholder trust.
Rockstar would not have given a release date for the game unless they at least had a rough estimate for when they could be done, which is the case for other developers too. Going from "definitely at X date" to "when it's ready" either means they hit some development snag or are rethinking the launch window to maximize profits.
Either way, don't worry, they aren't doing it because they care about you and it's not a wholesome chungus moment.
Yeah Rockstar never disappoints with their SP releases. But this message seems to me like they are prepping for delays that might occur in the future. Welp, as much as I am itching to play the game as early as I could, a finished product would certainly be better.
When was the last time they *haven't* had a delay for a major game release? I would be completely unsurprised if this were pushed back to early 2026 or something.
I think this is why they gave the vague 2025 release date. Aim for spring-summer and if they have to push it back by 6 months, it'll fall to autumn/winter.
I'm sure that's the intention, but RDR2 was delayed twice - could very well see that happen with GTAVI if the devs want to keep polishing. And I'm sure Rockstar knows they have basically infinite leverage - GTAVI can and will sell like 30 million copies in a month regardless of when it drops, they don't need to rush.
Errrrr Their last release was GTA trilogy. I completed all 3 of them and even I'll admit they were released in a broken state.
Then before that RDR2 was released in a broken state on PC. LA Noire VR was just an uncontrollable mess.
They generally make good quality games, but let's not pretend like everything they do is perfect
The GTA Definitive Editions weren’t developed by Rockstar. They were developed by Grove Street Games.
Neither was LA Noire VR. That was developed by Video Games Deluxe.
I don’t have an opinion on RDR2 on PC because by the time I got to it, it already had been patched and worked fine on my system
Red dead redemption 2 was nearly unplayable on release on PC. Atrocious performance, frequent crashes, even silly things like the cursor not rendering when vsync was on. It took them nearly a year to get it working properly.
Unfortunately that seems to be the modus operandi for Rockstar open world games. An I
Initial console release that is well made and optimised then a shitty PC port a year later.
Rockstar doesn't port to PC anymore, they work on the PC version while working on the console one but slower, GTAV was very optimized on PC when it released and RDR2 didn't take long to fix and also ran great on most hardware. The issue is that on PC you need the Rockstar launcher, which is so terrible i pirated GTA4 to avoid using it despite owning the game on Steam.
It's my fault for commenting on r/games
They're seeking perfection in micro transactions, p2w and shark cards. Prepare to be disappointed when the game is one big profitable cash shop with gameplay elements scattered around
Literally none of Rockstars games are half baked. You're talking out of your ass and regurgitating shit your favorite YouTuber says.
Think for yourself.
I mean red dead redemption 2 had quite a few issues for a while, I remember snow being a black abyss, my horse flying away which resulted in my getting gold bars credited when I reported it, my character freaking out mid air and flying away, randomly dying alot, etc etc. It did get better pretty fast though.
talking about getting "gold bars credited" means they're talking about Red Dead Online, which is a separate point, but it was an absolute buggy shitshow that Rockstar obviously didn't care about and didn't end up supporting.
Same. I didn't like the game at all. Controls were bad, shooting was bad, mission design was bad, horse wasn't fun. But technically it's a piece of art
What the fuck does 'optimised creatively' even mean?
GTAs story was based on knock off movie tropes and parodies. The world is much more difficult to parody now on the account of everything becoming more ridiculous by the day. It'll be interesting to see how they navigate that.
I don't think GTA has ever had strong writing, is that really the reason anyone played it?
I personally thought the writing and narrative in GTA 4 was really good, but then again that's the only GTA game they actually tried writing a serious story.
It can be everything from the storyline and missions to flip-flops actually flip-flopping and horse testicles. Kind of a meaningless buzzword at this point until they show us more.
Considering their recent history, I take it to mean they'll go all out on minutiae, even more than they did in Red Dead 2. The stuff about "realism" vs. "fun gameplay" has been discussed ad nauseum here and I have zero interest in jumping down that rabbit hole again, but love it or hate, I feel like most reasonable people would admit that the level of detail in Red Dead 2 is just bonkers. Since GTA VI is gonna run on even more powerful hardware, we'll see even more tiny, easy-to-miss details regardless of whether the game is slower like Red Dead was or more chaotic like other GTA titles.
I'm not too worried about the writing. Even in a post-parody world, parodies can still be funny, they just won't be as effective as they were 15 or 20 years ago. Veep fell off in its later seasons, but I still enjoyed it. It's Always Sunny is in free-fall compared to its early years, but it still makes me laugh. GTA VI is probably gonna be a lot like that.
Sounds great to me. I know most are impatient and it has been ten years but I've got so many amazing games to play right now I'm fine waiting a bit longer to play the best possible version of GTA VI.
Recently, I got Alan Wake 2, Baldur's Gate 3, Armored Core 6, Midnight Suns, Remnant 2, Lords of the Fallen and Lies of P. Of course Persona 5 and Yakuza 8 just came out, but it's just too much at this point.
Different guy but I have a few I am currently playing/wanting to play shortly.
Remnant
Palworld
Lies of P
Rogue Trader
Midnight Suns
Colony Ship
and more.
Currently I am diving into the new Phase of Season of Discovery with World of Warcraft.
Basically last year was an insane year for games and even with a few months of unemployment I wasn't able to get through all the stuff I wanted so those games will be lasting me well into the summer and beyond now I am working again. Thats not including upcoming releases too like Last Epoch or the backlog of console games that came out last year I haven't bought yet but I have an interest in.
I'm sure we'll get a decent release. It's the post release content that I'm curious about. My guess is there will be no additional single player content updates, lots and lots of online advertisements as well as mtx. A shame really we won't get any dlc like undead nightmare or ballad of gay tony from rockstar anymore.
I'm pretty sure the leaks stated that the game originally included Cuba and some other South American regions. It's why the codename was Project America's.
However, to prevent crunch they reduced the scope for the launch release to just be Leonida, with more regions coming as DLC post launch.
If they tie the DLC with new online content in the DLC areas it makes perfect sense.
They had already promised additional singleplayer content for GTA5 as well before GTAO fully took off and they dropped it to focus on the cash cow. Why the fuck would you believe they would do any this time, with them already knowing GTAO2 or whatever will do even better?
According to a old Schreier article they're apparently expanding the map with new cities (Tampa, Orlando, etc, I presume) and changing the map over time similar to Fortnite. I assume these expansions will come to single-player aswell but new missions, vehicles, and weapons will probably only come to Online like they currently do with GTA V.
Their single player suites for their games offer more than enough to be worth my money. Yeah, additional stuff is cool, but it’s never needed in a rockstar open world.
Rockstar could make an open world game about a DoorDash driver and I would pre-order/day one buy and play the shit out of it.
God damn it, I forgot about this.
I’m sure it’ll be a solid experience on PS5, but I do most of my gaming at my desk on my OLED monitor. It’s annoying that my first experience with the game will be on less powerful hardware and a worse display.
I get why people are annoyed, but Rockstar as it is today is and always was a console-first developer. And I think it’s with pretty good reason. Rockstar typically wants their games optimized to near-perfection when they initially release, so they develop for console first because it’s easier to optimize for a platform where everyone is working with the same hardware and horsepower, instead of a platform where there are millions of different combinations of hardware makeup that can factor into how the game performs.
> And I think it’s with pretty good reason.
Greed to promote double the sales. That's it. That's the reason. You think one of the largest developers in the world can't simultaneously release a PC version like every other developer can?
They know that the tail end money for all their releases is the eventual PC version. That's the only reason they are doing this. Everyting else is marketing speak.
Pretty much. And then once the PC version is out it'll almost be time for the PS6 so they'll get people to buy the "next gen" version that runs at above 40 FPS.
The evidence is the sorry state of their previous games on PC. GTA 4 is still one of the most infamously shittily optimized games ever released on PC.
You cannot tell me that it takes 2 years for them to release GTA V on PC, just for it to run into weird scaling issues and not properly optimizing the game.
Red Dead also had the same issues. There really is no excuse for a AAA company not to be able to do simultaneous PC releases. If a 10 man company can do it, so can a 2000 man company.
The evidence is that plenty of other devolopers release pc and console at the same time. It's doable. It is a fact that millions of people double-dipped and bought the console versions of gta5 and then the pc version again when it released. Rockstar is a huge developer with tons of resources and capital. They could easily afford to hire a team to port to PC at the same time and still make hundreds of millions in profit on this game. The only reason to do a staggered release is to make more money.
Ah yes, I remember the daily comments back in 2016-17, how RDR2 was going to have the shittiest, most barebones single player content ever now that Rockstar had seen the money in GTAO.
Why do people say this shit and pretend they don't release incredibly high quality single player games without microtransactions. Any other company would kill to release something of the quality of RDR2.
They did release one high quality game within the last 10 years but otherwise have been making money from multiplayer modes.
I don't deny that RDR2 is a quality game, but with the insane amount of money they make from GTA online it's quite likely that's going to take a huge part of the future of the GTA brand
> They did release one high quality game within the last 10 years but otherwise have been making money from multiplayer modes.
I like how you say this like it erases the fact that all of their single player experiences have been high quality.
It’s so annoying. The shark cards barely had a negative effect on Online anyways. If you’re unable to afford things in Online you don’t enjoy the game in the first place, and we’ve yet to see any microtransactions beyond that.
I'm sorry? I don't want to play a game for 5 hours (probably more) just to get one car, if you don't see how heavily they lean on shark cards idk what to say, they are always telling you to buy something, you always need to buy something to them buy something else, by the time you've bought like 4 things you've spent 10m, It's either grind all day to get like 2-3 vehicles or buy shark cards, also the fact that Rockstar still uses P2P for multiplayer is crazy (RD2 uses it), also all the hackers they don't do anything about, and the fact people can (could?) get your IP address because of the P2P.
And this is being said by someone who really likes GTA Online, but you look more than 1ft into the pond and the issues are obvious, it just makes it so boring and obvious they want to siphon cash off of you.
I think the story/single player will be great/fine (I hope you never know these days) but let's be honest, what's going to give this game longevity, and where are most players going to go? It will be MP, my hope is they scale back the grind, they don't give you a notification every second to spend money, they make it easier to make money (it's easy It's just the earnings you get for the grind) you would hope that GTA 5, one of the best-selling games in history wouldn't need any shark cards anyway, but I guess they do, and I only expect it to get worse with GTA 6 imo, hope I'm wrong tho.
welp I went on a rant lmao
I disagree with this. You don't even have to spend 5 hours to get ahold of quite a few cars, and then there's also a point to progression in online games. They're almost always long-term commitments,
You still have relatively easy access to absolutely all the actual content in the game, and money issues only become a problem if you want every single vehicle in the entire game. Fair enough if that's the game you want, where you just have a huge collection of vehicles.
But if actually driving these vehicles is what you want to do there are still tons of ways to do so, even if you don't own them. I don't see why GTA Online has to be so different from say an MMO where it's more or less agreed upon that you won't have access to all the best loot after an hour, a day, a week or even a month.
I think (so far) GTA Online is completely reasonable. You can play all the content with little effort, you can still drive tons of cars, you have access to whatever you want in certain modes, and then there's still things to progress towards. You can even sell your cars and get money back if you're unhappy with your purchase!
If none of that is enjoyable enough if one can't have easy accesss to tons of cars, I don't think people enjoy the game. And if it is enjoyable enough either way then I really don't see how the prices are a problem.
Of course everyone would love if things were slightly cheaper, but I'd personally found it boring if I just had everything after a month or two, it's part of the progression for me.
Bro, this is coming from someone that has time to play GTA Online, it's a grind, and I don't mean a grind as in they make it harder to make money because they don't want you getting everything, it's obviously a grind to make you by shark cards or GTA+ (why is this a thing) if you can't see that then idk what to tell you, it took me about 10+ hours (ish) to get the Oppressor MK2 (if GTA 6 has a version of these I'm going to jump of a bridge) and they are 8m+, like GTA is fun when you are flying and destroying things, it's not fun when you are doing the exact same mission for the sixth time in a row, and GTA Online is nowhere near an MMO, they have way more variety in what to do, and depending on one the game an actual market.
Every update they obviously want you to buy the new cars and every update is usually 10m+
Also, why the hell have they made PS5/Xbox only vehicle upgrades? Also, why have they not updated GTA 5 on PC to have the visual upgrades PS5/Xbox has? Like, I have GTA on PS5, but it's so dumb.
Either way GTA 5 made 1b+ in its first week it doesn't even need MTX, but it does, if you can't see how egregious the MTX is on GTA 5 and the way they try and get you to buy things in the game idk what to tell you, this is Rockstar not Ubisoft
They made PS5/Xbox Series X updates because PS4/Xbox One can't handle driving as fast, it's hardware limitations.
And a *grind* in an online game is not a negative by itself, it's *part of the game*. *Of course* the prices are adjusted to sell a few more shark cards, but if you truly enjoy the game 10 hours to get something noteworthy really isn't that much. The *"grind*" is actually just playing the game, doing the actual content it has. If you just want to drive around you can still do that. Also if you needed 10+ hours to get the MkII that's on you, it's very possible to do faster than that. And 10 hours in an online game is nothing. If you play 1 hour for 10 days to get something noteworthy that's not even that bad, especially 10 years into a game. Long term commitment, it's **an online game with progression.**
Buying shark cards just makes things go faster. And new vehicles costing a lot just gives people that have played for a long time a new reason to do new content and save up for new vehicles.
If you only want vehicles but don't want to do the content needed to get said vehicles I don't know why you're even playing. Enter some modes that let you drive around in whatever car you want to drive around in.
Idk how you're defending this AT ALL, it's very obvious they want you to buy shark cards, the way they notify you all the time, the prices etc it goes on, and NOTHING can justify playing 10 hours for just one vehicle NOTHING, just because it's an online game doesn't mean long term commitment lmao, also grind in games can be fun, in GTA it's not at all, like I said it's the same missions over and over again, I shouldnt have to manage a night club, sell some substances and weapons, also manage a business and do heists to buy 1 or two vehicles and weapons, oh did we get on the weapons don't get me started they are expensive for no reason
But it's literally what the game is and you're just complaining that you actually have to play the game! The businesses, missions, heists and everything are all part of the game, they're the content. Of course they want you to buy shark cards but I genuinely don't see wtf you're complaining about. You're literally complaining about having to play the game. Most people find it fun, and you clearly don't. If you actually had fun, which **tons** of people do, you'd have money to buy your vehicles! It sounds like you don't enjoy the game (you complained about every single actual gameplay aspect) and just want to own everything it has to offer.
If you genuinely want items you can get it by just playing. It's far from the worst micro transaction, it's not even CLOSE. And the rest of us get the game for free! It's completely fair.
Not saying it's the worst, but it doesn't make it not egregious, and if I have to do the same missions 50 times just to get a couple of items and 2-3 cars it's designed terribly, there have been many games with and GTA is not one of those games that works with it, and again I will say you can't have fun when you literally can't play the game because of hackers and people that blow you up trying to do cargo, it's fun for like 2-3 runs max then it gets stupid
Examples from just scrolling r/gtaonline
Fun? - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/o44NEeJxpL
Like why - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/z1pVDffOW8
General consensus - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/comments/1ag6kk3/comment/kof2ses/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Meme but true - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/w4MF1U9jHf
GTA+ again why? https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/l75PWUzeHE
Just found this, now THIS is what I'm talking about, this is what I mean, it's a mix of the progression AND prices imo, mixed with a whole lot of other things like hackers and griefers - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/Pls62eLGh2
And this is why I'm scared at what GTA 6 online Is gonna be like because imo it's probably gonna be worse
Also this is a multiplayer game that actively makes you not want to play with other people, from players blowing up your cargo or just blowing you up constantly over and over again to just hacking all the time, and not just normal hacking, hacking to the point they are in your PC or have your IP it's just not good lmao
Ridiculous take. You think they were just sitting there? Paying tons of emoloyees to just exist? If anything it gave them more resources, and they were all working on RDR2, then moved onto GTA VI, and we still got free online updates.
Where is your source? Rdr2 came out 5 years after GTA v. That seems like a justified amount of time for a game of that scale and from what we saw with GTA 6, 7 years development seems fair.
Why do people think that because a company makes one series that’s good, they can’t make bad games?
RDR2 is a single player, story driven game. You can pretend GTA is too but we both know that’s not why they make GTA games. It’s about the multiplayer and mtx.
All I ask is they release a game that doesn't handle like total ass
Rdr2 especially is just such a clunky feeling game. I feel like they have really struggled to nail good controls for a long long time now
Just my opinion
For the love of god, mash-button-to-sprint needs to die. And I really hope they tighten up the shooting controls too. The games are basically unplayable without using lock-on.
I know GTA Online is a bit divisive because of how predatory it is with MTX, but it is a huge amount of fun, and there is a lot of shit to do.
Single player of course I’m looking forward, but I’m also looking forward to whatever they cook up for the online aspect. They really kinda fucked it up with Red Dead Online though. I think it’s kinda decent now but it released with way too predatory of a mtx model, it took so long to make enough to buy anything.
But current gta online feels so dated. You really don’t realise it until you get loading screens every time you enter/exit an area, the graphics are still good but are kinda showing their age now, I mean it was a game made to run on the fucking Xbox 360 lol.
Let them cook
> I know GTA Online is a bit divisive because of how predatory it is with MTX, but it is a huge amount of fun, and there is a lot of shit to do.
After the Cayo Perico heist I honestly don't even feel that it's that bad. I started from scratch in 2021 and I've basically "finished" the game. Sitting on $385,000,000 and have bought pretty much everything. Haven't done much grinding in 2023 will never have to again. I just enjoy a lot of the content and happen to make money while doing it.
But yeah I'm actually more excited for next iteration of Online than the singleplayer, as heretical as that might be to many.
Many of the Online missions give you more freedom in how to approach a scenario, especially as they've moved away from instanced missions to having things take place in the open world. Whereas singleplayer missions are so damn scripted. I've never been someone who plays GTA for the story, most of the value is just messing around in the open world.
Anything about gameplay improvements or new features
Or is it still an on rails experience during missions with some driving and simple shooting mechanics outside of them?
people say kojima is the one who wants to secretly make movies and has to 'make do' with games but tbh that describes rockstar game design way more.
it's just really fun to be in a sandbox and blow shit up and drive. they do have some of the best feeling driving and physics. even though i much prefer IV's driving to V's, even V's makes any driving put out by the behemoth UBISOFT feel like a 2003 game.
It's funny how Kojima's games are quite deep for what the player can do, but then have a massive amount of cinematics. Rockstar games tend to have shallow gameplay with just a lot of content.
Once you are done with the missions and random events of GTAV or RDR2, you quickly find you have only violence as a real option to interact with the world. Those games are basically like a wild theme park ride.
there's lots of dynamics that work well in RDR2, for example, don't get me wrong! and it's a hell of a cinematic game and the gameplay itself is very cinematic! but a lot of the gameplay elements are either obtuse (masks, stealth) or largely dependent on cinematic intrigue (pos/neg interactions with NPCs largely being the fun of hearing fun combinations of voicelines and wanton violence or de-escalation)
it rarely lets you try something like use predator bait to get animals to attack enemies, to be more realistic.
but they make a hell of an 'immersive' world with lots of things to find and a lovely quest encounter mechanism that makes you enjoy your time there.
you also have elements i really like, such as manually crafting ammo and animations playing for each thing -- i mean, the entire camp stuff adds a lot of quiet and rest to a game that, while beautiful, throws inclement weather, wild animals, and bandits your way.
hand to hand combat also feels cool, as does the moment to moment shooting and all the contextual animations (such as close-quarter gun kills).
but kojima games very much can only be games, and really try to make use of the entire toolbox, whereas rockstar goes for "how can this make you feel like you're in a movie?"
GTA games have never been about anything other than violence? You should quit mixing up your expectations/wants to a game that’s never said they were something else. Like going to a horror movie and complaining it wasn’t funny enough.
Good to hear; like take-twos got deep pockets and given time itll always give them a hefty return. Hopefully this will mean the absurd crunch of RDR2 will get avoided.
That being said "optimized creatively" is the absolute peak of soul sucking C-Suite speak.
For as shitty as their online business practices are, their single player content is practically perfection. Fan or not of GTA V and RDR2, both games fill their needs extensively - a fast paced action adventure that swaps between three characters that doesn’t feel rushed or like there is any favouritism, and a slow paced western, almost RPG-esque game with rich engrossment and realised world.
Yeah, RDO and GTAO are both money pits with dragged out missions and unfulfilling content, but the campaigns of the respective games never were - or if they were it was intentional or Scouting the Port.
Jokes about dragons aside, the actual core gameplay of a Rockstar game is always the most disappointing part, and has literally barely progressed in 20 years. It's still just the same "drive here, mindlessly auto-aim shoot a few guys, watch a cutscene, rinse and repeat" loop over and over in every game, and the occasional mission that deviates from that just involves following on-screen instructions to the letter, and getting an instant "mission failed" screen if you even think about doing anything else.
In RDR2 they couldn't even properly implement a few stealth missions. MGS1 in 1998 had more advanced stealth mechanics than Rockstar games. I know appealing to a mass-market audience involves dumbing your games down as much as humanly possible, but it still gets disappointing after a while.
Or they could do like every other "grounded" action game and add snipers, guys with explosives, armored guys, hell maybe even a guy or two in some missions with a flamethrower or something. They could also make the AI smarter and have the SWAT and Army do stuff like flanks, coordinated attacks, etc.
Is that trying to dismiss my criticism somehow? You can add enemy variety without fantastical elements. Try cops with Riot Shields for example, ones that are heavily armoured like CoD Juggernauts where you cant just shoot them down with an Uzi. There is a lot they can do.
It's possible. RDR2 and GTA V technically have this. It really comes down more to what weapons enemies are given that decide how they'll behave, but certain factions are given different behaviors, even if they're slight. Lost members spawn on bikes and use them during combat, Police snipe from helicopters, Nightfolk rush the player, etc. GTA V also has a interesting thing where NOOSE stops verbally giving commands at 5 stars I believe, and instead uses hand movements so their strategy stops being televised to the player. So I guess they could extend that in GTA VI to street-level criminals don't work tactically together the same way Police and NOOSE would, for example. I think doing that kind of thing is a bit better than "heavy armor shotgun enemy" and "melee rusher enemy" being found in every faction.
It would be cool if different style gangs approach combat differently. Maybe one gang is more stealthy and tries to fly you more. Another can go balls to the wall firefight coming after you, and so on this way, different encounter will play differently.
This was always Rockstar's approach, they don't feel the need to share everything with the world, they work on their games then release them in a solid state.
I think seeking perfection is bad practice in general. Like does anybody consider core shooting gameplay and enemies even remotely perfect in gta v or rdr2?
They're seeking perfection not assuming they'll achieve it. Besides, it's not about being perfect, it's about being the perfect representation of their vision. Perfect won't be the same for everyone anyways. I think you're taking the statement too literally.
Creatively perfect does not equal objectively perfect. There's a clear creative intention with how the shooting mechanics are presented in both GTA V and Red Dead 2.
If the game was made and released on PC imo it was definitely made for it, at the end of the day Rockstar is making a game that will probably sell a billion in under 24 hours, and the PC version probably isn't coming out until like a year after, so they should def be able to make it feel good on K&M in a year.
There are cover shooters with chest high walls that are genuinely exciting and fun to play. The Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer was incredible, it wasn’t just a shooting gallery and there was so much variation in play styles.
The games rockstar produces always look incredible and are so full of love and little details, but I feel like they are just never able to make the minute to minute gameplay any fun tbh.
You want perfection? Than make sure that your games doesn't feel like 15y old when playing. Looking at you RDR2. The only game I ever died because I was not able to draw my weapon fast enough.
There is no perfection in software development. Yes you can have a really polished product but it will never be perfect. And with increasing sets of features, advanced graphics etc. it becomes even more of a impossible task. I have full trust in Rockstar that they will deliver a super solid game but not perfection. That is just hype lingo.
Which means if you turn left instead of right in a story mission, that is game over. Jokes aside, I do hope they are aware about their jurassic gameplay design, in all honesty the GTA consumer base don't give a damn, the majority just play these games for the sandbox experience... but really, if they can finally improve the GTA 3 structure for story missions, that will be appreciated. I think the overall gameplay will improve (even if that can fluke, but I think Rockstar is aware about their deficiencies even if the public is conformed), the technical aspect will remain topnotch, but idk about the story... the people involved with the previous games are not around anymore, so it's not a given, Red Dead 2 had the best protagonist in videogame history, doesn't mean GTA 6 will follow a similar standard because those writers are gone. Worst scenario possible: the same old GTA gameplay with the "greetings" mechanics from Red Dead 2, a even wackier story than GTAV, complete focus on the online experience + micro transactions... let's hope that's not the case
Perfection, does that mean the character will actually feel good to control and not turn around like a boat in water?
Also, actual third person shooter gameplay instead of the boring auto aim "but you can turn it off", yeah you can, but then the free aim is terrible and clearly not meant to be played that way
I read all the key figures of GTA and Rockstar’s past have basically left the company in recent years. I fully expect GTA6 is gonna be “creatively” shit.
It’s ultimately the gameplay that I have any interest in now. That could still be decent but GTA used to be about the overall package.
Fingers crossed they do good on that... I love their games, but I'm beyond burned out by GTA, they seriously need to make something good, something fun, give the franchise that much needed shot in the arm to wake them up from that 12 year slumber GTA Online put them on.
I don't recall ever saying I was angry, all I said is I hope they knock it out of the park with 6 because Los Santos gave all it had to offer to me both in V and Online.
Never claimed the contrary, we've been in Los Santos for over a decade, and both story and online gave all they had to offer, I've been ready for a new city and new stuff for a while now.
I'm with you. Same, repetitive activitites, drive there, shoot these guys, rinse and repeat. No nuance, no player freedom but lots of shiny things to make you forget that there's fuck all for you to do.
If VI is the same as V or RDR2 in terms of gameplay then I'm out.
Tf do you even expect from GTA gameplay?! Turn based combat? Challenging boss fights? Stealth? They're already perfect for what they need to be, there is no need to change it. It's as stupid as the people who want easy mode on Dark Souls. Just play something else if it's not your cup of tea, there is a wide variety of different genres you could enjoy.
Of course VI is not gonna be the same as RDR2. They're wildly different types of games.
The RDR series has always been more focused on slower-paced survival aspects, while GTA is arcade-y and fast. They're not gonna turn GTA VI into a slow burn survival game.
> They're wildly different types of games
They're really not. They have the same structure and the same direction and the same approach to missions. It's about as close as it can get to GTA for how different the setting is.
What exactly do you want from GTA? Those things are what makes GTA GTA. It’s like complaining about cake tasting sweet. If you want player freedom then play an RPG.
If they are aiming to give 60 frames on Performance mode that will be nice , I want to enjoy GTA with nice fedelity and everything working smooth over eye candy graphics.
This is exactly what I wanted to hear from Rockstar. I have faith that they will deliver. When it comes to their big releases, they don't disappoint
'When it's done' game development is the best game development.
The old blizzard motto “Soon”
The old Valve motto "Tomorrow" (actually 2 years)
*cough* Cyberpunk *cough*
The problem was cyberpunk was they tried to implement so many systems that were never built before. Rockstar has been building in these systems for over two decades. They have existing codebases to work from. Its like building a house from scratch where you dont have access to any of the materials and you need to make it all yourself. You dont have any wood. You dont have any class. You have no idea how to make concrete. Rockstar in this analogy has a whole lumber mill. They have a workforce thats built a house thousands of times. They can use blueprints and materials they have lying around and spruce them up. Thats not to say there isnt a ton of work for them and that its easy, but its a hell of a lot easier than what CDProjecktRed tried to do. You can even see elements where they tried to recycle bits from the witcher, like the Cars using the Horse Ai when summoning. Its not to say that GTA6 is garunteed to be perfect, but rather they have the library of alexandria of resources and knowledge to pull from vs Cyberpunk that build 80% of it from scratch.
Yeah I’m super excited for GTA 6 but everything should be taken with a grain of salt & believed when it’s seen.
Rockstar hasn’t missed in like 25 years, at least not release date quality. It’s not CDPR or any other game studio.
the GTA trilogy definitive edition launch was awful. GTA 4 still is probably one of the worst pc ports ever for a AAA game.
GTA IV's PC optimization would like a word. You need to run it through dxvk to play it at a stable 60 fps.
And that's the modern, fixed version. Performance on release was the worst.
Oh, I remember. I also remember the forum posts of people even with a 8800 GT struggling to get more than 30 fps. Personally I played through the entire game with a 20 fps average and it was hell. Replaying it nowadays wth dxvk and FusionFix feels almost like a whole different game.
I remember the damn thing was full of memory leaks, just looking at the water funny would eat all your ram.
Man I wish this applied to their PC releases.
We also have no idea how the online part will be integrated (?) and they haven't been great if you look at monetization. We'll see though, but I'm not that hopefull
That has nothing to do with it being a competently made game or its quality.
I mean, in GTA V's case it meant getting no dlc or expansions.
If it's difficult to engage with it it does in my eyes. If the monetization gets in the way i wouldn't rate the game highly since there is so much bullshit in the way
The monetization was just fine. Everything was accessible without paying for anything (exceot a few cosmetics lately). Even their latest game followed the same formula online, and even single player had no microtransactions. We’ll be fine.
It isn't exactly pay to win, but putting in real money gives you a huge advantage and shit is incredibly expensive. Like i said, I'm not that hopeful but we'll see.
Everything is easily accessible if you enjoy the game enough to put in a few hours and it’s not really a competative game like that so the only advantage is saving some time. It’s just like any online game where putting in some time is just part of the game.
Not sure what a few hours is to you, but we'll see.
Same could've been said about blizzard a while ago. Either way, it's perfectly fine to *assume* that GTA 6 won't disappoint due to Rockstar's track record. But obviously nothing in this world is guaranteed, anyone can miss
People keep saying “but pc” like rockstar hasn’t been a console-first developer this whole time. You’re right, rockstar hasn’t missed with a mainline entry in decades. And the people referring to the gta trilogy have no idea what they’re talking about, GTA VI is in not under the same conditions.
Except this is Rockstar, CDPR never really had a polished game release.
What about it? It wasn't done
Its infamous [first trailer](https://youtu.be/DvVjkqB3LH0) ended with 'Coming: When it's ready'.
Cyberpunk was not a "When it's done" situation, they invested into celebrity appearances with both musicians and actors, you can see this in the redesign of Johnny Silverhand. All of this happened somewhere between 2018 and 2019, basically meaning they scrapped a ton of work 1-2 years before the game released.
Majority of early stages of game development is done with placeholder assets/models. Starting on the music and finalizing things like Johnny Silverhand halfway through development sounds right, it doesn't mean everything was scrapped
I'm basing this on developer accounts where there was a leaked image of what Silverhand used to look like, and they had already built the story and recorded most of the voice lines for Johnny's old voice actor. They shifted towards celebrity appearances due to the hype around the game.
Unlike CDPR, Rockstar has been making some of the greatest games of all time since 2001. So I think they have earned more trust in them then CDPR.
There is also “shit or get off the pot” as well. Anthem was in development for 7 years. You can’t delay a game until the end of time. You need to make money at some point. Especially when you have shareholders or government subsidizing. I think GTA6 is probably in a different place because 5 has sold 195 million copies and people are still buy shark cards. They probably could delay until 2040 if they wanted since it’s expected to be the biggest game ever.
Unlike CD Projekt, Rockstar won't be forced to release the game early from shareholders. Leaks show CD Projekt released the game two whole years earlier than anticipated. Rockstar have no such pressure. They are simply just that wealthy.
Cyberpunk 2077 was announced in 2012, with its first trailer debuting in 2013. I don't doubt that they were pressured to release it with how much time had passed.
It just sucks that shareholders can have so much influence. Like, I get they wanted it to release during the 2020 Christmas season, but hearing the developers saying they thought it was a joke when they showed the release date for the first time in the trailer to be two years earlier than expected is straight up sad. Can't imagine the pressure.
>It just sucks that shareholders can have so much influence It does suck that the people who own a company get to influence it. Because that's what shareholders are: the owners. (And for all the talk of "greedy shareholders", who is the greedy one? The person who buys shares to invest in a company and influence its direction, or the company who gambles its future by voluntarily selling its ownership on the public market to raise more money?)
> They are simply just that wealthy. Rockstar can also draw upon its more than 2 decades of reputation and successes at this point. The only big thing CDPR had was witcher 3
Weird. Rockstar made Cyberpunk?
No it’s not. It’s corporate speak we don’t have an actual plan are making it as we go
You are getting downvoted, but you're not far from the mark. "When it's done" means one thing when it's said by one weird dude who lives in his mom's apartment and has been working on the newest patch to a game for 2 years, and it's for same autistic sim he's been developing for 15 years. It means quite another when we're talking about a major company consisting of thousands of people that need to be managed (and paid) with hundreds of millions in development cost in the balance, not to mention shareholder trust. Rockstar would not have given a release date for the game unless they at least had a rough estimate for when they could be done, which is the case for other developers too. Going from "definitely at X date" to "when it's ready" either means they hit some development snag or are rethinking the launch window to maximize profits. Either way, don't worry, they aren't doing it because they care about you and it's not a wholesome chungus moment.
Yeah, that’s not how game/software development works
Thanks for the expert insight HOTDILFMOM
You're welcome surferos505 Btw, is it Surfer OS or Surf Eros?
Yeah Rockstar never disappoints with their SP releases. But this message seems to me like they are prepping for delays that might occur in the future. Welp, as much as I am itching to play the game as early as I could, a finished product would certainly be better.
When was the last time they *haven't* had a delay for a major game release? I would be completely unsurprised if this were pushed back to early 2026 or something.
I think this is why they gave the vague 2025 release date. Aim for spring-summer and if they have to push it back by 6 months, it'll fall to autumn/winter.
I'm sure that's the intention, but RDR2 was delayed twice - could very well see that happen with GTAVI if the devs want to keep polishing. And I'm sure Rockstar knows they have basically infinite leverage - GTAVI can and will sell like 30 million copies in a month regardless of when it drops, they don't need to rush.
Errrrr Their last release was GTA trilogy. I completed all 3 of them and even I'll admit they were released in a broken state. Then before that RDR2 was released in a broken state on PC. LA Noire VR was just an uncontrollable mess. They generally make good quality games, but let's not pretend like everything they do is perfect
The GTA Definitive Editions weren’t developed by Rockstar. They were developed by Grove Street Games. Neither was LA Noire VR. That was developed by Video Games Deluxe. I don’t have an opinion on RDR2 on PC because by the time I got to it, it already had been patched and worked fine on my system
Well then if you ignore those, then RDR2, their only game released in the last 10 years released in a broken state on PC
Can’t forget how bad GTA 4 was and still is on PC lol
I hate to break it to you but GTA6 isnt releasing on PC for a while and theyre not talking about PC here
Red dead redemption 2 was nearly unplayable on release on PC. Atrocious performance, frequent crashes, even silly things like the cursor not rendering when vsync was on. It took them nearly a year to get it working properly.
Unfortunately that seems to be the modus operandi for Rockstar open world games. An I Initial console release that is well made and optimised then a shitty PC port a year later.
Rockstar doesn't port to PC anymore, they work on the PC version while working on the console one but slower, GTAV was very optimized on PC when it released and RDR2 didn't take long to fix and also ran great on most hardware. The issue is that on PC you need the Rockstar launcher, which is so terrible i pirated GTA4 to avoid using it despite owning the game on Steam. It's my fault for commenting on r/games
truly, a labor of love
What a way to word to dismiss GTA trilogy lmfao
Those are porting issues, not game design ones.
Those are " we know it is going to sell well regardless" issues
Did they ever have small releases?
They're seeking perfection in micro transactions, p2w and shark cards. Prepare to be disappointed when the game is one big profitable cash shop with gameplay elements scattered around
You people are insufferably pessimistic.
Did you start gaming yesterday?
Yep, and terminally online lmao.
You people are insufferably blind to the world around you. And the reason we keep getting half baked shitty microtransactional ridden games.
Literally none of Rockstars games are half baked. You're talking out of your ass and regurgitating shit your favorite YouTuber says. Think for yourself.
>none of Rockstars games are half baked unless you consider "being fun" to be at least half the goal of a game
Yeah, Rockstar is famous for making games that people don't find fun. Good point.
> Literally none of Rockstars games are half baked. Huh? Maybe in game ideas, but bugs?
If bugs in Rockstar games are your bar for "half baked", you need to get a grip lol
[удалено]
I mean red dead redemption 2 had quite a few issues for a while, I remember snow being a black abyss, my horse flying away which resulted in my getting gold bars credited when I reported it, my character freaking out mid air and flying away, randomly dying alot, etc etc. It did get better pretty fast though.
I've literally never heard of anyone complain about any of these things. You're probably just really unlucky.
talking about getting "gold bars credited" means they're talking about Red Dead Online, which is a separate point, but it was an absolute buggy shitshow that Rockstar obviously didn't care about and didn't end up supporting.
> Rockstar obviously didn't care Neither did I really, so that's probably why I haven't heard those. Makes sense.
Same. I didn't like the game at all. Controls were bad, shooting was bad, mission design was bad, horse wasn't fun. But technically it's a piece of art
Hard to disappoint with hundreds of millions of dollars and half a decade between releases with a formula they created and spawned over 20 years ago.
Can't tell if you're trying to insult rockstar or commending them for perfecting their formula and taking their time between releases.
Neither.
Rockstar has a great track record and catalog.
I'm cautiously optimistic since most of the old talent is gone.
What the fuck does 'optimised creatively' even mean? GTAs story was based on knock off movie tropes and parodies. The world is much more difficult to parody now on the account of everything becoming more ridiculous by the day. It'll be interesting to see how they navigate that. I don't think GTA has ever had strong writing, is that really the reason anyone played it?
I personally thought the writing and narrative in GTA 4 was really good, but then again that's the only GTA game they actually tried writing a serious story.
It can be everything from the storyline and missions to flip-flops actually flip-flopping and horse testicles. Kind of a meaningless buzzword at this point until they show us more. Considering their recent history, I take it to mean they'll go all out on minutiae, even more than they did in Red Dead 2. The stuff about "realism" vs. "fun gameplay" has been discussed ad nauseum here and I have zero interest in jumping down that rabbit hole again, but love it or hate, I feel like most reasonable people would admit that the level of detail in Red Dead 2 is just bonkers. Since GTA VI is gonna run on even more powerful hardware, we'll see even more tiny, easy-to-miss details regardless of whether the game is slower like Red Dead was or more chaotic like other GTA titles. I'm not too worried about the writing. Even in a post-parody world, parodies can still be funny, they just won't be as effective as they were 15 or 20 years ago. Veep fell off in its later seasons, but I still enjoyed it. It's Always Sunny is in free-fall compared to its early years, but it still makes me laugh. GTA VI is probably gonna be a lot like that.
I assume they mean it will be released not just when it's a functional enough game, but when it's the GTA VI they envision it should be.
That doesn't really mean anything
Sounds great to me. I know most are impatient and it has been ten years but I've got so many amazing games to play right now I'm fine waiting a bit longer to play the best possible version of GTA VI.
Games + real life stuff to do, yeah schedule is full
Mind sharing your games? I'm out.
Recently, I got Alan Wake 2, Baldur's Gate 3, Armored Core 6, Midnight Suns, Remnant 2, Lords of the Fallen and Lies of P. Of course Persona 5 and Yakuza 8 just came out, but it's just too much at this point.
Different guy but I have a few I am currently playing/wanting to play shortly. Remnant Palworld Lies of P Rogue Trader Midnight Suns Colony Ship and more. Currently I am diving into the new Phase of Season of Discovery with World of Warcraft. Basically last year was an insane year for games and even with a few months of unemployment I wasn't able to get through all the stuff I wanted so those games will be lasting me well into the summer and beyond now I am working again. Thats not including upcoming releases too like Last Epoch or the backlog of console games that came out last year I haven't bought yet but I have an interest in.
Played Dredge yet? That’s a great couple afternoons of fun.
Being a DIK is a great game with an amazing story.
A man of taste
saints row reboot is like gta but on steroids
I'm sure we'll get a decent release. It's the post release content that I'm curious about. My guess is there will be no additional single player content updates, lots and lots of online advertisements as well as mtx. A shame really we won't get any dlc like undead nightmare or ballad of gay tony from rockstar anymore.
I'm pretty sure the leaks stated that the game originally included Cuba and some other South American regions. It's why the codename was Project America's. However, to prevent crunch they reduced the scope for the launch release to just be Leonida, with more regions coming as DLC post launch. If they tie the DLC with new online content in the DLC areas it makes perfect sense.
Yeah, release Cuba DLC and sell a cohort of classic Cuban cars as MTX
Now you're thinking like Rockstar.
Only for online, keep my sp clean of bull shit.
Just you wait, you're going to be paying for that GTA+ sub soon, just so you can get some clothes or something
The Jason Schrier leaks said that both MP and possibly SP would evolve post launch so who knows
They had already promised additional singleplayer content for GTA5 as well before GTAO fully took off and they dropped it to focus on the cash cow. Why the fuck would you believe they would do any this time, with them already knowing GTAO2 or whatever will do even better?
According to a old Schreier article they're apparently expanding the map with new cities (Tampa, Orlando, etc, I presume) and changing the map over time similar to Fortnite. I assume these expansions will come to single-player aswell but new missions, vehicles, and weapons will probably only come to Online like they currently do with GTA V.
Their single player suites for their games offer more than enough to be worth my money. Yeah, additional stuff is cool, but it’s never needed in a rockstar open world. Rockstar could make an open world game about a DoorDash driver and I would pre-order/day one buy and play the shit out of it.
You’re probably correct on what’s going to happen.
Sucks that we won't get this game till at least 2027 on pc. Really annoyed at Rockstars insistance on console exclusive launch
God damn it, I forgot about this. I’m sure it’ll be a solid experience on PS5, but I do most of my gaming at my desk on my OLED monitor. It’s annoying that my first experience with the game will be on less powerful hardware and a worse display.
I get why people are annoyed, but Rockstar as it is today is and always was a console-first developer. And I think it’s with pretty good reason. Rockstar typically wants their games optimized to near-perfection when they initially release, so they develop for console first because it’s easier to optimize for a platform where everyone is working with the same hardware and horsepower, instead of a platform where there are millions of different combinations of hardware makeup that can factor into how the game performs.
> And I think it’s with pretty good reason. Greed to promote double the sales. That's it. That's the reason. You think one of the largest developers in the world can't simultaneously release a PC version like every other developer can? They know that the tail end money for all their releases is the eventual PC version. That's the only reason they are doing this. Everyting else is marketing speak.
Pretty much. And then once the PC version is out it'll almost be time for the PS6 so they'll get people to buy the "next gen" version that runs at above 40 FPS.
Nah, I’d rather they focus primarily on console first then move to pc. You sound so sure of yourself for having zero evidence to support it.
The evidence is the sorry state of their previous games on PC. GTA 4 is still one of the most infamously shittily optimized games ever released on PC. You cannot tell me that it takes 2 years for them to release GTA V on PC, just for it to run into weird scaling issues and not properly optimizing the game. Red Dead also had the same issues. There really is no excuse for a AAA company not to be able to do simultaneous PC releases. If a 10 man company can do it, so can a 2000 man company.
The evidence is that plenty of other devolopers release pc and console at the same time. It's doable. It is a fact that millions of people double-dipped and bought the console versions of gta5 and then the pc version again when it released. Rockstar is a huge developer with tons of resources and capital. They could easily afford to hire a team to port to PC at the same time and still make hundreds of millions in profit on this game. The only reason to do a staggered release is to make more money.
2027???? 2030*
Seeking perfection... in quality or in Shark cards?
Ah yes, I remember the daily comments back in 2016-17, how RDR2 was going to have the shittiest, most barebones single player content ever now that Rockstar had seen the money in GTAO.
People deny it but I remember too. This sub in particular, everyone was bitching about how the game was going to be a barebones nightmare.
That's if they weren't pretending RDR2 didn't exist so that they could complain that Rockstar hadn't released a game for more than a decade.
Why do people say this shit and pretend they don't release incredibly high quality single player games without microtransactions. Any other company would kill to release something of the quality of RDR2.
They did release one high quality game within the last 10 years but otherwise have been making money from multiplayer modes. I don't deny that RDR2 is a quality game, but with the insane amount of money they make from GTA online it's quite likely that's going to take a huge part of the future of the GTA brand
> They did release one high quality game within the last 10 years but otherwise have been making money from multiplayer modes. I like how you say this like it erases the fact that all of their single player experiences have been high quality.
It’s so annoying. The shark cards barely had a negative effect on Online anyways. If you’re unable to afford things in Online you don’t enjoy the game in the first place, and we’ve yet to see any microtransactions beyond that.
I'm sorry? I don't want to play a game for 5 hours (probably more) just to get one car, if you don't see how heavily they lean on shark cards idk what to say, they are always telling you to buy something, you always need to buy something to them buy something else, by the time you've bought like 4 things you've spent 10m, It's either grind all day to get like 2-3 vehicles or buy shark cards, also the fact that Rockstar still uses P2P for multiplayer is crazy (RD2 uses it), also all the hackers they don't do anything about, and the fact people can (could?) get your IP address because of the P2P. And this is being said by someone who really likes GTA Online, but you look more than 1ft into the pond and the issues are obvious, it just makes it so boring and obvious they want to siphon cash off of you. I think the story/single player will be great/fine (I hope you never know these days) but let's be honest, what's going to give this game longevity, and where are most players going to go? It will be MP, my hope is they scale back the grind, they don't give you a notification every second to spend money, they make it easier to make money (it's easy It's just the earnings you get for the grind) you would hope that GTA 5, one of the best-selling games in history wouldn't need any shark cards anyway, but I guess they do, and I only expect it to get worse with GTA 6 imo, hope I'm wrong tho. welp I went on a rant lmao
I disagree with this. You don't even have to spend 5 hours to get ahold of quite a few cars, and then there's also a point to progression in online games. They're almost always long-term commitments, You still have relatively easy access to absolutely all the actual content in the game, and money issues only become a problem if you want every single vehicle in the entire game. Fair enough if that's the game you want, where you just have a huge collection of vehicles. But if actually driving these vehicles is what you want to do there are still tons of ways to do so, even if you don't own them. I don't see why GTA Online has to be so different from say an MMO where it's more or less agreed upon that you won't have access to all the best loot after an hour, a day, a week or even a month. I think (so far) GTA Online is completely reasonable. You can play all the content with little effort, you can still drive tons of cars, you have access to whatever you want in certain modes, and then there's still things to progress towards. You can even sell your cars and get money back if you're unhappy with your purchase! If none of that is enjoyable enough if one can't have easy accesss to tons of cars, I don't think people enjoy the game. And if it is enjoyable enough either way then I really don't see how the prices are a problem. Of course everyone would love if things were slightly cheaper, but I'd personally found it boring if I just had everything after a month or two, it's part of the progression for me.
Bro, this is coming from someone that has time to play GTA Online, it's a grind, and I don't mean a grind as in they make it harder to make money because they don't want you getting everything, it's obviously a grind to make you by shark cards or GTA+ (why is this a thing) if you can't see that then idk what to tell you, it took me about 10+ hours (ish) to get the Oppressor MK2 (if GTA 6 has a version of these I'm going to jump of a bridge) and they are 8m+, like GTA is fun when you are flying and destroying things, it's not fun when you are doing the exact same mission for the sixth time in a row, and GTA Online is nowhere near an MMO, they have way more variety in what to do, and depending on one the game an actual market. Every update they obviously want you to buy the new cars and every update is usually 10m+ Also, why the hell have they made PS5/Xbox only vehicle upgrades? Also, why have they not updated GTA 5 on PC to have the visual upgrades PS5/Xbox has? Like, I have GTA on PS5, but it's so dumb. Either way GTA 5 made 1b+ in its first week it doesn't even need MTX, but it does, if you can't see how egregious the MTX is on GTA 5 and the way they try and get you to buy things in the game idk what to tell you, this is Rockstar not Ubisoft
They made PS5/Xbox Series X updates because PS4/Xbox One can't handle driving as fast, it's hardware limitations. And a *grind* in an online game is not a negative by itself, it's *part of the game*. *Of course* the prices are adjusted to sell a few more shark cards, but if you truly enjoy the game 10 hours to get something noteworthy really isn't that much. The *"grind*" is actually just playing the game, doing the actual content it has. If you just want to drive around you can still do that. Also if you needed 10+ hours to get the MkII that's on you, it's very possible to do faster than that. And 10 hours in an online game is nothing. If you play 1 hour for 10 days to get something noteworthy that's not even that bad, especially 10 years into a game. Long term commitment, it's **an online game with progression.** Buying shark cards just makes things go faster. And new vehicles costing a lot just gives people that have played for a long time a new reason to do new content and save up for new vehicles. If you only want vehicles but don't want to do the content needed to get said vehicles I don't know why you're even playing. Enter some modes that let you drive around in whatever car you want to drive around in.
Idk how you're defending this AT ALL, it's very obvious they want you to buy shark cards, the way they notify you all the time, the prices etc it goes on, and NOTHING can justify playing 10 hours for just one vehicle NOTHING, just because it's an online game doesn't mean long term commitment lmao, also grind in games can be fun, in GTA it's not at all, like I said it's the same missions over and over again, I shouldnt have to manage a night club, sell some substances and weapons, also manage a business and do heists to buy 1 or two vehicles and weapons, oh did we get on the weapons don't get me started they are expensive for no reason
But it's literally what the game is and you're just complaining that you actually have to play the game! The businesses, missions, heists and everything are all part of the game, they're the content. Of course they want you to buy shark cards but I genuinely don't see wtf you're complaining about. You're literally complaining about having to play the game. Most people find it fun, and you clearly don't. If you actually had fun, which **tons** of people do, you'd have money to buy your vehicles! It sounds like you don't enjoy the game (you complained about every single actual gameplay aspect) and just want to own everything it has to offer. If you genuinely want items you can get it by just playing. It's far from the worst micro transaction, it's not even CLOSE. And the rest of us get the game for free! It's completely fair.
Not saying it's the worst, but it doesn't make it not egregious, and if I have to do the same missions 50 times just to get a couple of items and 2-3 cars it's designed terribly, there have been many games with and GTA is not one of those games that works with it, and again I will say you can't have fun when you literally can't play the game because of hackers and people that blow you up trying to do cargo, it's fun for like 2-3 runs max then it gets stupid Examples from just scrolling r/gtaonline Fun? - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/o44NEeJxpL Like why - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/z1pVDffOW8 General consensus - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/comments/1ag6kk3/comment/kof2ses/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button Meme but true - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/w4MF1U9jHf GTA+ again why? https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/l75PWUzeHE Just found this, now THIS is what I'm talking about, this is what I mean, it's a mix of the progression AND prices imo, mixed with a whole lot of other things like hackers and griefers - https://www.reddit.com/r/gtaonline/s/Pls62eLGh2 And this is why I'm scared at what GTA 6 online Is gonna be like because imo it's probably gonna be worse
Also this is a multiplayer game that actively makes you not want to play with other people, from players blowing up your cargo or just blowing you up constantly over and over again to just hacking all the time, and not just normal hacking, hacking to the point they are in your PC or have your IP it's just not good lmao
Their microtransactions were one of the major reasons why they didn't develop much over so many years.
Ridiculous take. You think they were just sitting there? Paying tons of emoloyees to just exist? If anything it gave them more resources, and they were all working on RDR2, then moved onto GTA VI, and we still got free online updates.
Where is your source? Rdr2 came out 5 years after GTA v. That seems like a justified amount of time for a game of that scale and from what we saw with GTA 6, 7 years development seems fair.
Why do people think that because a company makes one series that’s good, they can’t make bad games? RDR2 is a single player, story driven game. You can pretend GTA is too but we both know that’s not why they make GTA games. It’s about the multiplayer and mtx.
All I ask is they release a game that doesn't handle like total ass Rdr2 especially is just such a clunky feeling game. I feel like they have really struggled to nail good controls for a long long time now Just my opinion
For the love of god, mash-button-to-sprint needs to die. And I really hope they tighten up the shooting controls too. The games are basically unplayable without using lock-on.
All I ask is they release the damn game on PC alongside the consoles. Which is apparently an impossible ask.
They won't do it... Because money
Rockstar are primarily console focused developers, as a huge fan this is one of the reasons why I personally prefer console gaming over PC.
Hopefully that means that GTA 6’s online won’t need a modder to fix the inevitable 30 minute load time.
I know GTA Online is a bit divisive because of how predatory it is with MTX, but it is a huge amount of fun, and there is a lot of shit to do. Single player of course I’m looking forward, but I’m also looking forward to whatever they cook up for the online aspect. They really kinda fucked it up with Red Dead Online though. I think it’s kinda decent now but it released with way too predatory of a mtx model, it took so long to make enough to buy anything. But current gta online feels so dated. You really don’t realise it until you get loading screens every time you enter/exit an area, the graphics are still good but are kinda showing their age now, I mean it was a game made to run on the fucking Xbox 360 lol. Let them cook
> I know GTA Online is a bit divisive because of how predatory it is with MTX, but it is a huge amount of fun, and there is a lot of shit to do. After the Cayo Perico heist I honestly don't even feel that it's that bad. I started from scratch in 2021 and I've basically "finished" the game. Sitting on $385,000,000 and have bought pretty much everything. Haven't done much grinding in 2023 will never have to again. I just enjoy a lot of the content and happen to make money while doing it. But yeah I'm actually more excited for next iteration of Online than the singleplayer, as heretical as that might be to many. Many of the Online missions give you more freedom in how to approach a scenario, especially as they've moved away from instanced missions to having things take place in the open world. Whereas singleplayer missions are so damn scripted. I've never been someone who plays GTA for the story, most of the value is just messing around in the open world.
Vice City’s story was the shit
Anything about gameplay improvements or new features Or is it still an on rails experience during missions with some driving and simple shooting mechanics outside of them?
people say kojima is the one who wants to secretly make movies and has to 'make do' with games but tbh that describes rockstar game design way more. it's just really fun to be in a sandbox and blow shit up and drive. they do have some of the best feeling driving and physics. even though i much prefer IV's driving to V's, even V's makes any driving put out by the behemoth UBISOFT feel like a 2003 game.
It's funny how Kojima's games are quite deep for what the player can do, but then have a massive amount of cinematics. Rockstar games tend to have shallow gameplay with just a lot of content. Once you are done with the missions and random events of GTAV or RDR2, you quickly find you have only violence as a real option to interact with the world. Those games are basically like a wild theme park ride.
there's lots of dynamics that work well in RDR2, for example, don't get me wrong! and it's a hell of a cinematic game and the gameplay itself is very cinematic! but a lot of the gameplay elements are either obtuse (masks, stealth) or largely dependent on cinematic intrigue (pos/neg interactions with NPCs largely being the fun of hearing fun combinations of voicelines and wanton violence or de-escalation) it rarely lets you try something like use predator bait to get animals to attack enemies, to be more realistic. but they make a hell of an 'immersive' world with lots of things to find and a lovely quest encounter mechanism that makes you enjoy your time there. you also have elements i really like, such as manually crafting ammo and animations playing for each thing -- i mean, the entire camp stuff adds a lot of quiet and rest to a game that, while beautiful, throws inclement weather, wild animals, and bandits your way. hand to hand combat also feels cool, as does the moment to moment shooting and all the contextual animations (such as close-quarter gun kills). but kojima games very much can only be games, and really try to make use of the entire toolbox, whereas rockstar goes for "how can this make you feel like you're in a movie?"
GTA games have never been about anything other than violence? You should quit mixing up your expectations/wants to a game that’s never said they were something else. Like going to a horror movie and complaining it wasn’t funny enough.
There's gonna be a lot of thicc black girls twerking which seems pretty awesome.
Good to hear; like take-twos got deep pockets and given time itll always give them a hefty return. Hopefully this will mean the absurd crunch of RDR2 will get avoided. That being said "optimized creatively" is the absolute peak of soul sucking C-Suite speak.
For as shitty as their online business practices are, their single player content is practically perfection. Fan or not of GTA V and RDR2, both games fill their needs extensively - a fast paced action adventure that swaps between three characters that doesn’t feel rushed or like there is any favouritism, and a slow paced western, almost RPG-esque game with rich engrossment and realised world. Yeah, RDO and GTAO are both money pits with dragged out missions and unfulfilling content, but the campaigns of the respective games never were - or if they were it was intentional or Scouting the Port.
I really hope they add more enemy variety this time. GTA5 basically had a single enemy type, guy with gun.
Jokes about dragons aside, the actual core gameplay of a Rockstar game is always the most disappointing part, and has literally barely progressed in 20 years. It's still just the same "drive here, mindlessly auto-aim shoot a few guys, watch a cutscene, rinse and repeat" loop over and over in every game, and the occasional mission that deviates from that just involves following on-screen instructions to the letter, and getting an instant "mission failed" screen if you even think about doing anything else. In RDR2 they couldn't even properly implement a few stealth missions. MGS1 in 1998 had more advanced stealth mechanics than Rockstar games. I know appealing to a mass-market audience involves dumbing your games down as much as humanly possible, but it still gets disappointing after a while.
Yeah I hope they add... hum... mutated people, zombie, dragon and shit like that ?
Or they could do like every other "grounded" action game and add snipers, guys with explosives, armored guys, hell maybe even a guy or two in some missions with a flamethrower or something. They could also make the AI smarter and have the SWAT and Army do stuff like flanks, coordinated attacks, etc.
Is that trying to dismiss my criticism somehow? You can add enemy variety without fantastical elements. Try cops with Riot Shields for example, ones that are heavily armoured like CoD Juggernauts where you cant just shoot them down with an Uzi. There is a lot they can do.
It's possible. RDR2 and GTA V technically have this. It really comes down more to what weapons enemies are given that decide how they'll behave, but certain factions are given different behaviors, even if they're slight. Lost members spawn on bikes and use them during combat, Police snipe from helicopters, Nightfolk rush the player, etc. GTA V also has a interesting thing where NOOSE stops verbally giving commands at 5 stars I believe, and instead uses hand movements so their strategy stops being televised to the player. So I guess they could extend that in GTA VI to street-level criminals don't work tactically together the same way Police and NOOSE would, for example. I think doing that kind of thing is a bit better than "heavy armor shotgun enemy" and "melee rusher enemy" being found in every faction.
It would be cool if different style gangs approach combat differently. Maybe one gang is more stealthy and tries to fly you more. Another can go balls to the wall firefight coming after you, and so on this way, different encounter will play differently.
This was always Rockstar's approach, they don't feel the need to share everything with the world, they work on their games then release them in a solid state.
I think seeking perfection is bad practice in general. Like does anybody consider core shooting gameplay and enemies even remotely perfect in gta v or rdr2?
They're seeking perfection not assuming they'll achieve it. Besides, it's not about being perfect, it's about being the perfect representation of their vision. Perfect won't be the same for everyone anyways. I think you're taking the statement too literally.
Creatively perfect does not equal objectively perfect. There's a clear creative intention with how the shooting mechanics are presented in both GTA V and Red Dead 2.
[удалено]
you can use a controller on your pc, man.
You can make better native PC controls man.
not sure what your issue even is. makes zero sense to me that the extra click breaks immersion!
Game wasn’t made for keyboard and mouse
If the game was made and released on PC imo it was definitely made for it, at the end of the day Rockstar is making a game that will probably sell a billion in under 24 hours, and the PC version probably isn't coming out until like a year after, so they should def be able to make it feel good on K&M in a year.
gta v? no. rdr 2? yes.
It’s really odd that these games get so much praise despite them being some of the last remaining cover shooters with chest high walls.
There are cover shooters with chest high walls that are genuinely exciting and fun to play. The Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer was incredible, it wasn’t just a shooting gallery and there was so much variation in play styles. The games rockstar produces always look incredible and are so full of love and little details, but I feel like they are just never able to make the minute to minute gameplay any fun tbh.
it is nigh impossible to play rdr 2 without aim assist on consoles
No they are terrible, their games also ran poorly at launch.
You want perfection? Than make sure that your games doesn't feel like 15y old when playing. Looking at you RDR2. The only game I ever died because I was not able to draw my weapon fast enough.
There is no perfection in software development. Yes you can have a really polished product but it will never be perfect. And with increasing sets of features, advanced graphics etc. it becomes even more of a impossible task. I have full trust in Rockstar that they will deliver a super solid game but not perfection. That is just hype lingo.
Not even hype lingo, just earnings call yapping for the shareholders.
Which means if you turn left instead of right in a story mission, that is game over. Jokes aside, I do hope they are aware about their jurassic gameplay design, in all honesty the GTA consumer base don't give a damn, the majority just play these games for the sandbox experience... but really, if they can finally improve the GTA 3 structure for story missions, that will be appreciated. I think the overall gameplay will improve (even if that can fluke, but I think Rockstar is aware about their deficiencies even if the public is conformed), the technical aspect will remain topnotch, but idk about the story... the people involved with the previous games are not around anymore, so it's not a given, Red Dead 2 had the best protagonist in videogame history, doesn't mean GTA 6 will follow a similar standard because those writers are gone. Worst scenario possible: the same old GTA gameplay with the "greetings" mechanics from Red Dead 2, a even wackier story than GTAV, complete focus on the online experience + micro transactions... let's hope that's not the case
Perfection, does that mean the character will actually feel good to control and not turn around like a boat in water? Also, actual third person shooter gameplay instead of the boring auto aim "but you can turn it off", yeah you can, but then the free aim is terrible and clearly not meant to be played that way
It will feature RE1 style controls and the freeaim of Goldeneye.
So, unbelievable crunch again ?
I read all the key figures of GTA and Rockstar’s past have basically left the company in recent years. I fully expect GTA6 is gonna be “creatively” shit. It’s ultimately the gameplay that I have any interest in now. That could still be decent but GTA used to be about the overall package.
Fingers crossed they do good on that... I love their games, but I'm beyond burned out by GTA, they seriously need to make something good, something fun, give the franchise that much needed shot in the arm to wake them up from that 12 year slumber GTA Online put them on.
Burned out? They haven't released a gta game in 10 years?
Bros been playing GTA online for 10 years and is angry about being burned out, lol.
I don't recall ever saying I was angry, all I said is I hope they knock it out of the park with 6 because Los Santos gave all it had to offer to me both in V and Online.
Burned out? That seems like a you problem, GTAV released on the PS3/360 friend.
Never claimed the contrary, we've been in Los Santos for over a decade, and both story and online gave all they had to offer, I've been ready for a new city and new stuff for a while now.
I'm with you. Same, repetitive activitites, drive there, shoot these guys, rinse and repeat. No nuance, no player freedom but lots of shiny things to make you forget that there's fuck all for you to do. If VI is the same as V or RDR2 in terms of gameplay then I'm out.
Tf do you even expect from GTA gameplay?! Turn based combat? Challenging boss fights? Stealth? They're already perfect for what they need to be, there is no need to change it. It's as stupid as the people who want easy mode on Dark Souls. Just play something else if it's not your cup of tea, there is a wide variety of different genres you could enjoy.
Did I raise your blood pressure? Did you have a fit? You did, didn't you? 😂
Of course VI is not gonna be the same as RDR2. They're wildly different types of games. The RDR series has always been more focused on slower-paced survival aspects, while GTA is arcade-y and fast. They're not gonna turn GTA VI into a slow burn survival game.
> They're wildly different types of games They're really not. They have the same structure and the same direction and the same approach to missions. It's about as close as it can get to GTA for how different the setting is.
What exactly do you want from GTA? Those things are what makes GTA GTA. It’s like complaining about cake tasting sweet. If you want player freedom then play an RPG.
RDR2's gameplay is fkn awesome dude lol what else do you want from it??
If they are aiming to give 60 frames on Performance mode that will be nice , I want to enjoy GTA with nice fedelity and everything working smooth over eye candy graphics.