New Game Plus?

[SuperSaiyan3985]

I know this feature will likely never come, but if I could have one addition to RDR2 it's NG+. For anyone that's finished the story, you can probably guess why I want this feature - 

Spoiler

I wanna play as Arthur again dammit! I just don't want to start from scratch after working so hard to accumulate all my gear and outfits. I think it'd be epic to be able to play as Arthur with all my max gear from the start. 

Does anyone have hope?

[KingGuy420]

With the way they ignored any work you did in the "replay missions", I'd dig a ng+. Or at the very least I'd like to see them fix the replays.

[Feral]

I agree with why you'd want it OP because yeah lol. But I don't want it because I'm sick of this damn NG+ trend, not every game needs it.

 

Doubtful that Rockstar will add it. 

 

17 minutes ago, KingGuy420 said:

With the way they ignored any work you did in the "replay missions", I'd dig a ng+. Or at the very least I'd like to see them fix the replays.

Would've be nice if they'd made it like GTAV. Likely figured it would make getting gold too easy.

[KingGuy420]

49 minutes ago, Feral said:

Likely figured it would make getting gold too easy.

 

They already made it harder by making you get all the requirements in one run. They didn't need to nerf your Arthur too. Even if they just gave you what you had at the time it wouldn't have been as bad, but they normally give you worse lol.

 

They basically tripled down on the difficulty.

Edited March 26, 2019 by KingGuy420

[SuperSaiyan3985]

2 hours ago, KingGuy420 said:

 

They already made it harder by making you get all the requirements in one run. They didn't need to nerf your Arthur too. Even if they just gave you what you had at the time it wouldn't have been as bad, but they normally give you worse lol.

 

They basically tripled down on the difficulty.

Since I missed all the missable trophies I'm gonna be doing a second playthrough regardless so this shouldn't be an issue for me, but I agree.

3 hours ago, Feral said:

I agree with why you'd want it OP because yeah lol. But I don't want it because I'm sick of this damn NG+ trend, not every game needs it.

 

Doubtful that Rockstar will add it. 

 

Would've be nice if they'd made it like GTAV. Likely figured it would make getting gold too easy.

Why the hell would you be angry about NG+? It's a great feature that is welcome on any game. It's always free and allows you to play your favorite games from the beginning with all the best shit.

[Feral]

4 hours ago, KingGuy420 said:

 

They already made it harder by making you get all the requirements in one run. They didn't need to nerf your Arthur too. Even if they just gave you what you had at the time it wouldn't have been as bad, but they normally give you worse lol.

 

They basically tripled down on the difficulty.

I would've been happy with keeping your progress and having standard Arthur because at least then you could only be going after headshots or not using health items instead of everything.

 

They clearly just wanted to torture anyone going for the plat.

 

2 hours ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

Why the hell would you be angry about NG+? It's a great feature that is welcome on any game. It's always free and allows you to play your favorite games from the beginning with all the best shit.

You pretty much answered your own question at the end there. Starting over with the best stuff takes away the challenge especially in games that weren't all that hard to begin with like AC Odyssey or Spider-Man. They're why I've started to dislike NG+, it wasn't needed with them.

 

Games like The Witcher III, I understand getting it because it's tough on the harder difficulties and NG+ gives you a leg up. But on easy games and ones without harder difficulties it's just a no.

[ARH65512]

18 hours ago, KingGuy420 said:

With the way they ignored any work you did in the "replay missions", I'd dig a ng+. Or at the very least I'd like to see them fix the replays.

What I love about GTA 5's replay mission is that it's like NG+. Let's say your current Franklin has max stats for everything and a fucking rocket launcher, it would still be there as early as his first mission. Clothes and everything. In RDR2, they fucked it up and made it backwards. What's the point of replaying missions if we can't even use out current character, horse, items, and weapons/ammo? Like you sad, they already made it hard enough by making it one go, but they didn't need to reduce the character. I don't care what Rockstar thinks, it's a very poor design choice. 

Edited March 27, 2019 by ARH65512

[SuperSaiyan3985]

On 3/26/2019 at 9:37 PM, Feral said:

I would've been happy with keeping your progress and having standard Arthur because at least then you could only be going after headshots or not using health items instead of everything.

 

They clearly just wanted to torture anyone going for the plat.

 

You pretty much answered your own question at the end there. Starting over with the best stuff takes away the challenge especially in games that weren't all that hard to begin with like AC Odyssey or Spider-Man. They're why I've started to dislike NG+, it wasn't needed with them.

 

Games like The Witcher III, I understand getting it because it's tough on the harder difficulties and NG+ gives you a leg up. But on easy games and ones without harder difficulties it's just a no.

That still doesn't make sense. If you don't want to "do NG+ because it makes the game too easy," then fine. Don't. Meanwhile the rest of us enjoy seeing the fruits of our labor being utilized from beginning to end. For instance, I'd like to see my end-game outfits in cinematics at the beginning - something that's impossible without NG+. Besides, Spider-Man has an ultimate difficulty which is pretty challenging so NG+ is a big help with that. 

On 3/27/2019 at 2:11 AM, ARH65512 said:

What I love about GTA 5's replay mission is that it's like NG+. Let's say your current Franklin has max stats for everything and a fucking rocket launcher, it would still be there as early as his first mission. Clothes and everything. In RDR2, they fucked it up and made it backwards. What's the point of replaying missions if we can't even use out current character, horse, items, and weapons/ammo? Like you sad, they already made it hard enough by making it one go, but they didn't need to reduce the character. I don't care what Rockstar thinks, it's a very poor design choice. 

Yeah I think Rockstar secretly hates us for implementing shit like this. There's literally no extra money to be made, they just wanted to be dicks.

[Feral]

3 hours ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

That still doesn't make sense. If you don't want to "do NG+ because it makes the game too easy," then fine. Don't. Meanwhile the rest of us enjoy seeing the fruits of our labor being utilized from beginning to end. For instance, I'd like to see my end-game outfits in cinematics at the beginning - something that's impossible without NG+. Besides, Spider-Man has an ultimate difficulty which is pretty challenging so NG+ is a big help with that. 

Can't make it any simpler. I didn't say I don't want to do a NG+ playthrough because it makes the game too easy. I said I don't see the point of it for games that are easy. If it's already easy as breathing then having all sorts of advantages makes it pointless.

Edited April 6, 2019 by Feral

[The PREDATOR]

Personally i think NG+  isn't needed, however it wouldn't hurt for those that would like the option.

[SuperSaiyan3985]

On 4/7/2019 at 4:09 AM, Two-Faced said:

Personally i think NG+  isn't needed, however it wouldn't hurt for those that would like the option.

Well with a game like RDR2, where 

Spoiler

you can no longer play as Arthur

, NG+ would remedy that. Many of us would start a new game but we don't want to start over from scratch. I spent a shit ton of time crafting all the outfits and weapons I have now and would really like to have them at the start of the story. 

On 4/6/2019 at 1:26 AM, Feral said:

Can't make it any simpler. I didn't say I don't want to do a NG+ playthrough because it makes the game too easy. I said I don't see the point of it for games that are easy. If it's already easy as breathing then having all sorts of advantages makes it pointless.

Well then you completely disregarded the second half of my statement. I said that some of us find appeal in simply having all the best gear at the beginning of the game. It has nothing to do with difficulty. 

Edited April 10, 2019 by SuperSaiyan3985

[Feral]

11 hours ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

Well then you completely disregarded the second half of my statement. I said that some of us find appeal in simply having all the best gear at the beginning of the game. It has nothing to do with difficulty. 

The second part mattered not at all. Besides you're in the minority there.

[knightcthulhu]

I think a NG+ is a welcome addition to any game honestly, I don't replay a lot of games if I need to do everything from scratch again.

[SuperSaiyan3985]

14 hours ago, Feral said:

The second part mattered not at all. Besides you're in the minority there.

Um who are you to judge whether it matters or not? It matters to me, and I am most definitely NOT in the minority here. If I was, then NG+ would cease to exist. Quit bashing a feature that most of us appreciate and doesn't mar your experience of games in any way.

[AK-1138]

If they're not going to let people redo missions with the equipment they've spent, you know, hours hunting down, maintaining and customizing, the least they could do is let people replay the game itself, doing the story missions in order as intended, with their hard-earned equipment in NG+ mode.

 

This would be completely optional and ultimately ruins nothing for insecure people who feel robbed of the "prestige" of having done things the hard (read: broken and masochistic) way.

[SuperSaiyan3985]

3 hours ago, AK-1138 said:

If they're not going to let people redo missions with the equipment they've spent, you know, hours hunting down, maintaining and customizing, the least they could do is let people replay the game itself, doing the story missions in order as intended, with their hard-earned equipment in NG+ mode.

 

This would be completely optional and ultimately ruins nothing for insecure people who feel robbed of the "prestige" of having done things the hard (read: broken and masochistic) way.

LMAO you nailed it. But let's face it, Rockstar doesn't care enough to add post-launch, free SP content like NG+.

It's sad though because us SP fans are the ones that made them all their money with RDR2. Had they shipped the game as online only they wouldn't have made jack shit. 

[AJ_Radio]

5 minutes ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

LMAO you nailed it. But let's face it, Rockstar doesn't care enough to add post-launch, free SP content like NG+.

It's sad though because us SP fans are the ones that made them all their money with RDR2. Had they shipped the game as online only they wouldn't have made jack shit. 

 

It's sad? There's been a whole slew of AAA games that have been getting New Game Plus.

 

Red Dead Redemption 2 is long enough as it is.

 

I think you're mistaken, a lot of people bought this for the online. If it's anything like the original Red Dead Redemption online was then it should be pretty fun.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Spaz

[Feral]

5 hours ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

Um who are you to judge whether it matters or not? It matters to me, and I am most definitely NOT in the minority here. If I was, then NG+ would cease to exist. Quit bashing a feature that most of us appreciate and doesn't mar your experience of games in any way.

I'm the one that's responding, that's who I am to judge. Uh huh sure, everyone likes NG+ to see end game outfits at the beginning. I'm not bashing anything, all I ever said was I didn't like it. You're carrying on like I've shit all over it and said anyone who likes it is a dipshit. 

[SuperSaiyan3985]

On 4/8/2019 at 10:04 PM, Spaz said:

 

It's sad? There's been a whole slew of AAA games that have been getting New Game Plus.

 

Red Dead Redemption 2 is long enough as it is.

 

I think you're mistaken, a lot of people bought this for the online. If it's anything like the original Red Dead Redemption online was then it should be pretty fun.

Okay? I'm referring to how Rockstar's treating RDR2 specifically. So yes, it is sad. RDR2 being long enough as is is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. A lot of us want to play as Arthur again but don't want to have to regain our gear. End of story. Also, don't make me laugh with that last remark. People didn’t buy this for the online. Had that been the case, it wouldn't have sold well at release (as it launched as SP-only) and more than 37% of people would've started the intro of the online. 

On 4/8/2019 at 11:12 PM, Feral said:

I'm the one that's responding, that's who I am to judge. Uh huh sure, everyone likes NG+ to see end game outfits at the beginning. I'm not bashing anything, all I ever said was I didn't like it. You're carrying on like I've shit all over it and said anyone who likes it is a dipshit. 

Well that's how you're coming off. If you don't like it then simply ignore it and don't go shouting that you hate it because then developers might think we don't want it anymore. 

Edited April 10, 2019 by SuperSaiyan3985

[Feral]

8 hours ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

Well that's how you're coming off. If you don't like it then simply ignore it and don't go shouting that you hate it because then developers might think we don't want it anymore. 

Bullshit. From the get go here, you've wanted to have an argument with me simply because I disagreed with your opinion. If I don't like something I'll say it, doesn't mean I'm hating on it or that any developers are coming on PSNP just to listen to me.

 

You need to grow up and understand not everyone is going to share your opinion on everything, that's life. Also jumping down someone's throat isn't a good way to change minds. So with that I'm done, respond again if you must but I won't be as polite next time.

[TheLakota]

 

I know this is the Internet which means you're supposed to be sworn enemies and all, but shit. 

[AJ_Radio]

10 hours ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

Okay? I'm referring to how Rockstar's treating RDR2 specifically. So yes, it is sad. Rockstar being long enough as is is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. A lot of us want to play as Arthur again and don't want to have to regain our gear. End of story. Also, don't make me laugh with that last remark. No one bought this for the online. Had that been the case, it wouldn't have sold well at release and more than 37% of people would've started the intro of the online. 

 

No it’s not sad. 

 

Nobody should be forced to put in New Game Plus because a few people like yourself want it. Red Dead Redemption 2 is already long enough, you can easily spend 100 hours on the single player and not be done with everything. 

 

A big appeal of Red Dead Redemption was the online, and that holds true to this day. Rockstar would be stupid not to implement an online multiplayer mode, just look at the success GTA Online has received.

 

I will agree that getting those optional objectives done in the story missions is a bit ridiculous, especially when compared to Grand Theft Auto V where it’s story missions were more generous with what you have obtained. But still, throwing that in there to try to explain your desire for New Game Plus is also irrelevant. 

 

10 hours ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

Well that's how you're coming off. If you don't like it then simply ignore it and don't go shouting that you hate it because then developers might think we don't want it anymore. 

 

So people aren’t supposed to butt in because they have an opposing opinion? 

 

Good logic there. 

 

Grow up, because from the sounds of it you’re acting like a spoiled child with the way you so badly want New Game Plus for this title. As if a bunch of other AAA games haven’t already gotten a tacked on New Game Plus, such as Far Cry 5.

[SuperSaiyan3985]

5 hours ago, Feral said:

Bullshit. From the get go here, you've wanted to have an argument with me simply because I disagreed with your opinion. If I don't like something I'll say it, doesn't mean I'm hating on it or that any developers are coming on PSNP just to listen to me.

 

You need to grow up and understand not everyone is going to share your opinion on everything, that's life. Also jumping down someone's throat isn't a good way to change minds. So with that I'm done, respond again if you must but I won't be as polite next time.

Why are you getting angry? I'm just saying your stance that you don't want NG+ in games because they annoy you doesn't make any sense. 

And go ahead and be rude to me. I'm keeping my cool but you're getting all worked up over nothing.

3 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

No it’s not sad. 

 

Nobody should be forced to put in New Game Plus because a few people like yourself want it. Red Dead Redemption 2 is already long enough, you can easily spend 100 hours on the single player and not be done with everything. 

 

A big appeal of Red Dead Redemption was the online, and that holds true to this day. Rockstar would be stupid not to implement an online multiplayer mode, just look at the success GTA Online has received.

 

I will agree that getting those optional objectives done in the story missions is a bit ridiculous, especially when compared to Grand Theft Auto V where it’s story missions were more generous with what you have obtained. But still, throwing that in there to try to explain your desire for New Game Plus is also irrelevant. 

 

 

So people aren’t supposed to butt in because they have an opposing opinion? 

 

Good logic there. 

 

Grow up, because from the sounds of it you’re acting like a spoiled child with the way you so badly want New Game Plus for this title. As if a bunch of other AAA games haven’t already gotten a tacked on New Game Plus, such as Far Cry 5.

Did I ever say Rockstar should be forced to put in NG+? No. I'm suggesting it as a feature and if it's feasible then they should consider. RDO was a big deal in RDR1 but it's still overshadowed by the SP. It is not irrelevant whatsoever. A lot of people want to play as Arthur again but don't want to lose everything - why is that so hard for you to understand? I never said no one can have an opposing opinion I was just trying to have a civil conversation but that Feral guy got all hostile on me. 

You're telling me to grow up, yet you're the one that was bickering to me about how you hate Carlos in my DMs when I've never even encountered you before. Now that's childish. Funny how you're all of a sudden against me out of no where, like okay.

You, like that Feral dude, are acting like NG+ is a bad thing. How can you describe it as "tacked on?" How can you make a BAD NG+? It makes no sense. It's on option for those that want to utilize it. Simple as that. 

Lastly, what does “RDR2 being long enough” have ANYTHING to do NG+? No one is making the argument that it’s too short, and that NG+ is require do to fill a void of content. The main appeal towards NG+ in this case is, as I’ve said dozens of times before, to play as Arthur again. 

Edited April 10, 2019 by SuperSaiyan3985

[SuperSaiyan3985]

4 hours ago, TheLakota said:

 

I know this is the Internet which means you're supposed to be sworn enemies and all, but shit. 

Hey don’t look at me they’re the ones trying to start a war. 

[Feral]

1 hour ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

Why are you getting angry? I'm just saying your stance that you don't want NG+ in games because they annoy you doesn't make any sense. 

And go ahead and be rude to me. I'm keeping my cool but you're getting all worked up over nothing.

Did I ever say Rockstar should be forced to put in NG+? No. I'm suggesting it as a feature and if it's feasible then they should consider. RDO was a big deal in RDR1 but it's still overshadowed by the SP. It is not irrelevant whatsoever. A lot of people want to play as Arthur again but don't want to lose everything - why is that so hard for you to understand? I never said no one can have an opposing opinion I was just trying to have a civil conversation but that Feral guy got all hostile on me. 

You're telling me to grow up, yet you're the one that was bickering to me about how you hate Carlos in my DMs when I've never even encountered you before. Now that's childish. Funny how you're all of a sudden against me out of no where, like okay.

You, like that Feral dude, are acting like NG+ is a bad thing. How can you describe it as "tacked on?" How can you make a BAD NG+? It makes no sense. It's on option for those that want to utilize it. Simple as that. 

Lastly, what does “RDR2 being long enough” have ANYTHING to do NG+? No one is making the argument that it’s too short, and that NG+ is require do to fill a void of content. The main appeal towards NG+ in this case is, as I’ve said dozens of times before, to play as Arthur again. 

I'm not getting angry I'm getting annoyed by some fucking brat. You clearly haven't understood anything I've said and like to make up some bullshit while carrying on like you speak for everyone. So for the last time if you can get it through your thick skull I'll even put it in bold for you, I don't think NG+ is needed in every game. 

 

From the first response to me you've had a chip on your shoulder. Now you're trying to act like 'oh no I'm just an innocent bystander'

 

59 minutes ago, SuperSaiyan3985 said:

Hey don’t look at me they’re the ones trying to start a war. 

Don't play the victim. You started all of this.