• ms.lane@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’d rather wait than buy a console for a single game that will barely hit 720p/30.

        • ripcord@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I think they mean it will never be PC only, so it’d be an infinite wait. Or maybe some future release version will be console only.

          Also, “720p/30” lol

    • biscuit@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I just don’t have the patience to wait even more. I have a PS5, so why wouldn’t I play it on release??

        • biscuit@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Huh? For £70 I’m getting -

          • Huge open world
          • Very fun and emergent gameplay
          • Likely a world with multiple competing systems and subsystems to play with
          • Incredibly detailed world to get lost and immersed in
          • Given the RDR2 writing, likely a really well written story

          But you’ve decided to latch onto one aspect of the previous game (the Online mode) to try to be as contrarian as possible?

          I sure as heck will pay £70 for the above. And so will many millions of others. Sorry if that does a poo on your hate-train.

  • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Companies need to grow a spine. Good games sell regardless of what’s out. If your confidence in your own game is so low that you’d push it to a slow release date, it’s probably not worth playing anyway.

    • Psychadelligoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Ask Titanfall 2 how well launching between Battlefield and CoD went for them

      Release dates of big games matter, people only have so much disposable income

  • Wahots@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Judging by all the shark card crap they jammed into the last GTA, I fully expect them to shovel a bunch of crap in to make more money: $70 base games, deluxe editions, DLC, micro transactions, social club integration, required internet connections, all of it.

    I miss the old GTAs before they got greedy.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m not quite sure why they’re so concerned. I suspect they’re actually not and this is just things “analysts” say.

    I suspect that the release of GTA VI is going to be lukewarm compared to the release of GTA V, because everyone remembered what Rockstar did to GTA V. People are going to wait around and see how they handle GTA online because they need to do better than last time because last time was ridiculous.

    I’m certainly not all that interested in getting it day one and I know a lot of other people aren’t either.

    • Psychadelligoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      because everyone remembered what Rockstar did to GTA V

      Released a fantastic game worth replaying multiple times?

      GTA Online =/= GTA V

  • Psychadelligoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    What’s with half the commenters acting like GTA V isn’t a great game?

    Y’all know GTA Online is a different game technically, yeah? The single player of GTA V is still there and even better now that Enhanced is on PC. Rockstar didn’t fuck Up RDR2s single-player Mode so why assume they would on this?