Theres no input lag in first person, set deadzone to 0, aim accel up,.FPS STANDARD control scheme.you are a masochist? the input lag alone would make me throw my controller at the screen
The driving mehArcadey GTA were better 'Games'
Even though I did not love GTAV, the driving, the shooting, the exploration were meh. Yet I am in love with all of those characters and whenever they interact with anyone.
RDR2 (~6hrs) felt just right with amazing immersion with no negatives that GTAV had.
Realistic-GTA6 really might be GOAT that surpasses San Andreas or Vice City.
This is actually what's more important to me than the mission structure. It needs to feel like a world that I can feel myself being in and being able to explore that world and feel lost it in it. When I go to a random store to rob it, there should be some events that happen based on what I'm doing or the given situation. That is what an open world should do. It should surprise me and give me some scripted, random events that allow me to feel like the world is ever changing. That is something that RDR2 kind of did and it made the experience all the better for it.With that said, RDR2 is still one of the best looking games out there and it's been 7 years. Especially one of the most beautifully crafted open world games that was a joy to explore.
Rockstar's 3 MASSIVE ISSUES need to be resolved:
1: Imprecise and laggy controls
2: the worst gunplay known to man
3: Mission design so linear and so restrictive that even corridor shooters like CoD feel less restrictive
The free aim still has bad input lag/acceleration issues too.There is 0 wrong with the gunplay, put it on free aim and stop using their shitty lockon.
And no, they aint gonna fix the lineair missions. They want to tell a story, and in their missions you will be railroaded, and that aint changing with Gta 6.
I actually haven't, except Wildlands. Does the competition doing awful makes the remaining automatically better ?The driving meh
Bro has never played a Ubisoft game with cars in it I assume.
Absolutely ridiculous notions itt
So every Halo and Destiny player is casual player as we can't disable every assist?
If mouse has a "small" advantage means controllers sucks compared to mouse.![]()
So the need of weapon wheels and claw grip to have access to every button all the time is a matter only of being hardcore gamer with devs just letting you rebind keys??
That with the keyboard it has more than enough buttons.
![]()
Theres no input lag in first person, set deadzone to 0, aim accel up,.FPS STANDARD control scheme.
Let's agree to disagree, to this day RDR2 is still the most detailed, immersive and amazing game I've ever played, everytime I play it I find new stuff and if GTA VI doubles down on that kind of immersive gameplay mechanics I'd be eccstatic. But I do recognize that these games have different audiences so I do expect GTA VI to be a bit more casualised for the masses.Red Dread Redemption was the same thing. A complete borefest, pretentious 500 hour game. You have to maintain your guns, your horse, your horse stamina, your beard, change your clothes, feed your character, etc. I was surprised I wasn't required to do a 9-5 job within the game and pay taxes.
Could not agree more. I always felt "lost in the world" with RDR2, which made it so endearing.This is actually what's more important to me than the mission structure. It needs to feel like a world that I can feel myself being in and being able to explore that world and feel lost it in it. When I go to a random store to rob it, there should be some events that happen based on what I'm doing or the given situation. That is what an open world should do. It should surprise me and give me some scripted, random events that allow me to feel like the world is ever changing. That is something that RDR2 kind of did and it made the experience all the better for it.
the aggravating thing is that it isn't. Max Payne 3 showed that they can do proper controls... even in combination with the Euphoria physics/animations.
Fair point. People are gonna drink it even if it is Pißwasser.They dont have to prove anything. The game is gonna sell so much that it doesn't matter
Halo and Destiny have shitty controls and need excessive aim assist due to that.
if they fixed their shitty controls they could allow it to be turned off, and the games would be better off.
having a small disadvantage doesn't mean it sucks.
if you play a PC shooter on the wrong mouse you'll also have a small disadvantage over someone with the best gaming mouse on the market.
so by that logic shooters suck to play on any mouse other than the best ones.
most shooters don't need such a huge amount of buttons.
but this is indeed mostly a binding issue on controller.
jump on L1 and crouch on R3 already solves the biggest issue (that being having to leg go of the right stick for movement abilities)
you don't need to have access to all buttons at once, you also don't have that on a keyboard, or do you have 20 fingers per hand or something?
try pressing 0 on your keyboard while moving normally with WASD. if you have massive hands you can do it maybe, most people can't.
you only have the buttons in the immediate vicinity of WASD to realistically work with.
using the ones further away is often more cumbersome than an inventory wheel
it's easier to do a quick claw grip to reach the D-Pad on a dualsense than using the number keys beyond maybe the first 6 on a keyboard.
but I could do with controllers having more buttons ngl.
Nintendo only using their nee grip buttons for rebinds is disappointing.
controllers should adapt having an additional set of bumpers and at least 1 grip button per side as the new default.
even as is tho, you have a lot of buttons on a controller, more than enough for most games.
you have 4 dpad buttons, 4 face buttons, 2 bumpers, stick buttons, 2 interface buttons.
games only run out of buttons in extreme cases, of if they have a lot of unnecessary stuff bound to them (emote wheels being something that comes to mind in modern GaaS games, total waste of a button)
I've said this before but I don't get this complaintThe on-rails mission design
Really? MP3 stuffers from the exact same issues. It just looks better when doing the movement, but the aiming in particular was absolutely subpar.
I've said this before but I don't get this complaint
Sure, some boundaries could definitely be loosened. What do you think missions are for? That's when Rockstar locks you in and tells the story they've spent years building. You want to just stop halfway through a high stakes heist or shootout and go play golf instead?
What's next? pausing a bank robbery so Trevor can do yoga?
Missions is when Rockstar pulls you into the world for real, when the story takes the wheel and you're along for the ride
The controls? That's a separate conversation. Half the people whining about them are just bad at games
There are no open world games that do driving better so just because you didnt think it was fun millions do.I actually haven't, except Wildlands. Does the competition doing awful makes the remaining automatically better ?
GTA Liberty, Vice City, San Andreas, most of the game was just driving to places, and back in the day it was really fun.
In 2015, it wasn't good enough. Not discussing handling and friction and lol-whatnot, Just saying driving was a HUGE part of previous GTAs which didn't felt that impactful in GTA5.
The only drive mission I enjoyed were the looong road, the highway chase and one plane mission where I actually had to learn a bit.
I understand but maybe its time to come to terms with this. Gta iV, RDR1, GTA V, RDR2 all do this.you get the mission to look for someone who bystanders say went into a certain building, and you walk over an invisible barrier into an INSTANT game over...
THAT is what we're talking about here.
no time limit, no urgency... instant game over if you cross invisible limits.
or bad guys hide in a building, you try to climb up the side to look through windows... instant game over, because you were supposed to go through the door.
that is a real thing that can happen in RDR2.
That's just silly. Speed runners show there's been plenty ways to finish the PS2 Trilogy and be creative in how you accomplish many missions since their sandboxes. But since San Andreas the structure has continuously gotten more and more linear which makes zero sense considering it's taking place in a living world. They might as well make a Mafia-esque game with a dead open world.And no, they aint gonna fix the lineair missions. They want to tell a story, and in their missions you will be railroaded, and that aint changing with Gta 6.
I understand but maybe its time to come to terms with this. Gta iV, RDR1, GTA V, RDR2 all do this.
The open world is a sandbox but the missions are super structured and lineair
To expect otherwise after four/five major releases is crazy
You're asking them to develop a game that keeps account of any contingency and let a mission go however a player wants?to expect well a designed game is crazy?
I mean, I agree, most AAA games are terribly designed... but I haven't given up hope yet, and hope Rockstar finally fixes their bad game design.
Yes, the ps2 trilogy. Games that were developed in a year. And with much less going on than the newer games.That's just silly. Speed runners show there's been plenty ways to finish the PS2 Trilogy and be creative in how you accomplish many missions since their sandboxes. But since San Andreas the structure has continuously gotten more and more linear which makes zero sense considering it's taking place in a living world. They might as well make a Mafia-esque game with a dead open world.
You're asking them to develop a game that keeps account of any contingency and let a mission go however a player wants?
Yeah I dont think you understand what kind of undertaking that would be.
Just because its not what you want out of a game, doesnt mean its not well designed lmao.
If you play chess and want to do moves that arent permitted in the game do you say its badly designed as well? Because you cant do whatever you want?
Bad game design.. lol give me a fucking break. Just because the game doesnt let you solve the missions however you want, insanity.
Yup, u can still see them actually, ofc they are old by now and will be even older by 2026(be it may or more likely sept-dec 2026).Were these gameplay leak vids real on YouTube?
Definitely I was not speaking for millions, only me.There are no open world games that do driving better so just because you didnt think it was fun millions do.
have you ever played Watch Dogs 2? how is it that Watch Dogs 2 can give me a mission to fulfill a specific goal, and I can fulfill that goal in 3, 4 or 5 different ways?
giving an instant game over to a player that wants to fulfill the given goal of the mission in a creative way that makes intuitive sense is bad game design.
the game has mechanics that let you climb, let you shoot through windows, hop into windows.
yet you get a game over if you dare to use these mechanics if the game puts invisible death barriers there for no reason other than limiting player agency.
Not really. That stuff is there for the open world, not for you to fuck around with in missions.
And they make that pretty clear ingame.
And like I said, they've been designing their missions this way since GTA IV. To expect any different by now is literally insanity. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting things to change.
R* aint gonna change it. They will have very structured missions in GTA 6, maybe a few where more player agency is allowed, and hey I applaud it! I'm not saying I wouldnt want to fuck around a bit on missions. Its just not going to happen.
I am not even talking about super extremely open ended missions.
what Rockstar is doing is so limiting that it truly just bad game design. it's not just linear, but also just awful.
if a simple goal like "go into house and kill" doesn't allow you to use the game's inherent mechanics to fulfill that goal without you getting a game over without warning, then that's just bad design.
so I don't think it's unreasonable to expect good game design, even if it wasn't present in the past.
the dev team behind GTA6 is not the exact same than that behind RDR2, or GTA5, let alone GTA4 (and again, GTA4 was'n this extrme in terms of limiting creative solutions)
Well I disagree it's not 'bad game design'.
But its also not intuitive, I will agree.
Again I would like them to give some more freedom I just dont see it happening really