• LiveLM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Good Lord, so much marketing about “next-gen” yet 60 still ain’t a guarantee 🤦‍♂️

  • k1ck455kc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I hope they release as independent games, with a bundle deal ideally.

    I dont want to buy the multiplayer on console because i dont pay for console subscriptions just to play multiplayer. I will wait for a PC release to play purchase multiplayer once and not indefinitely pay for it.

  • bokherif@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Remember, they released GTAV with 30FPS first to PS5 , then they sold an upgraded PS5 version @60FPS for an additional $10 (which is free on most games).

    • k1ck455kc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      This is false information. GTA V was backwards compatible from the ps4 version which ran at 30fps. Then they released an upgraded ps5 version that ran at 60fps. It wasnt a bad deal either.

      • bokherif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Yeah but they still charged for the “upgrade”. A lot of gaming companies give you the PS5 version of a game for free if you already own the PS4 version.

        • k1ck455kc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          That is only if the game released on both consoles simultaneously, the ps4 version of gtav came out years ago, they deserved to charge for the upgrade…

          And i am the opposite of a rockstar fanboy.

        • poke@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Like entirely new movement models, gun animations, car details, and texture fidelity for supporting a good feeling first person view.

            • SolidShake@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Not really. There’s a reason the PS5 $10 upgrade isn’t compatible with the older versions in terms of online play. They updated a lot of graphics and models plus the 60fps. There are a lot of comparison videos on YouTube if you’re interested in even looking. The most noticable are like, damage models in cars is better, smoke looks more realistic and was redone, fire looks and acts better. Lighting is much better. Etc.

  • RobotZap10000@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Hey, maybe this time the script kiddies won’t be able to sabotage people’s SINGLEPLAYER GAMES!

  • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Only way I buy this:

    1. It is priced at 60 to 70 dollars (fuck that still hurts)
    2. It has a solid OFFLINE story mode.

    If they try pull 100 dollar bullshit or fill it with micro transactions then I am out. Also I will not pre order this game (I didn’t with 5) I will wait until its out and I hear good things from the players.

    Just like I did with 5. Had coworker who was bragging about the game every day. Finally and picked up a copy at Vintage Stock. This is the original PS3 version only one I have.

    • MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      Point 2 is the biggest for me. I haven’t played more than 30 minutes of gta5 online. Single player story is where it’s at. Wish we got more DLC.

      • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Same only tried it once was no fun. Yes they game was built to have multiple DLCs or hell lot more story could of been told.

        • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 🏆@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          I only recently started playing again specifically because I found out that all the missions in online mode that required you to be in a public lobby are now able to be ran in a private lobby. Playing in a solo lobby is basically like getting more SP story (there are story missions in GTAO; it’s not all races and DM). Don’t have to deal with cheaters or asshats.

    • slaacaa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I think it will be 80 dollars, with bigger editions available, eg. including online mode. For me, the 30fps is the most annoying, I was never a performance fanatic, but I’m used to 60 now.

      • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        What why they lower it? That make no sense with the new hardware of PS5 and Xbox Sx or whatever it’s called.

    • hydration9806@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Genuine question, why is $100 too much for a quality game? Completely agreed on the micro transactions though

      • shadowedcross@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        If the biggest game of the decade charges $100, every triple A game will charge the same, and other games will probably be more expensive as well, and in most cases it’ll be more money for the same steadily decreasing quality, at least in the triple A market.

      • nyctre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Hm… how much is too much, then? If 70% higher than the industry standard isn’t too nuch

        • hydration9806@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          16 hours ago

          Wow people really didn’t like my question!

          To respond to yours though, I’d say it depends on how much content there is! If a game can easily take 1000 hours with no degradation of enjoyment, I would pay $100 for it

          Edit to add: I realize this didnt exactly address your question, but I’m not sure what percentage since it heavily depends on the quality and quantity of content

          • nyctre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            12 hours ago

            Loved all gtas. Never played any for anywhere close to 1000 hours. Probably closer to 100. So that’s like… 10$? Seems fair to me, no?

            Funny enough, all the games in which I have more than 1000 hours are all f2p.

          • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            16 hours ago

            For me personally, I find it really easy to add “hours” to a game’s runtime, and I’d sooner pay more for a higher quality experience and a shorter runtime. I’ve spent about a fifth of that 1000 mark in both Baldur’s Gate 3 and Elden Ring, and they’d have been worth $100 to me. Indiana Jones was worth every bit of the $70 I paid, and it took me under 20 hours.

      • Flamekebab@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The only full price game I recall ever buying was Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 3 (back when £35 was the standard “full price” price point). Now that one was worth it, but no other AAA game that I can think of has justified the cost to me. Once we’re talking about that amount of money there’s a lot of other things I would get more enjoyment from.

        I think I paid about £10 for GTA V. I’d maybe go to £15 or £20 these days, but beyond that I simply have other things I could play.

        • Squizzy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Meh I’d drop 100 plus on standard night out. I dont buy many games but buying God of War Ragnarok for 30 and getting 100 hours of entertainment was well worth it, to the point I regret not buying it full price day one.

          • Flamekebab@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            There are many things I’d spend more on, but gaming is something that I can spend a lot of hours on without necessarily enjoying. As in, the experiences are often weirdly compulsive and before I know it I’ve tanked eighty hours without really enjoying it all that much.

            I collected all the submarine collectibles in GTA V - do I think that was more fun than a party with friends? Absolutely not. Did it take more time? Most definitely.

      • accideath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Exactly. $100 is a lot of money, however games are cheaper than ever these days (adjusted for inflation) and $100 for no micro transactions sounds fair.

        On the other hand, I wouldn’t buy it at that price either. I‘d wait for a sale…

  • Senseless@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    idc as long as it’s not coming to PC. Don’t need GTA online anyway.