COMMUNITY VOTE - RETICLE

  • Check out our Partnered Grand Theft Auto 5 Roleplaying Community New Day RP!

Reticle?

  • Yes

    Votes: 47 37.9%

  • No

    Votes: 77 62.1%
  • Total voters
    124
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
William Hayes

William Hayes

The Man Himself
Management
AG's Office
Whitelisted
First Settler
Oct 10, 2019
2,818
2,776
288
Hi all,

As discussed at previous community meetings, we are planning on leaving the decision on whether or not to allow a reticle (the small grey dot in the middle of your screen) up to the community. The time vote has now come, as people have had an opportunity to play on the RP server.

Once you have voted you will not be able to change your votes. Votes are anonymous.

The poll will be open for 1 week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tooth MacMarten, Anacaona, James Major and 2 others
Billy McGee

Billy McGee

Wild West Legend
Whitelisted
First Settler
Oct 10, 2019
218
129
143
UK
www.twitch.tv
If you are unsure, you can currently experience what it's like to have no reticle in the live server by typing /hud
(obviously /hud hides extra stuff too, but this vote is solely for the reticle)
 
  • Like
Reactions: James Major
Tecumseh

Tecumseh

Chief Indian
Whitelisted
Silver Supporter
Jan 26, 2020
42
32
68
I voted no, even tho ill miss it. I should probably stop having pepega aim :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warren Lee
Samuel Foster

Samuel Foster

Rootin' Tootin'
Whitelisted
Gold Supporter
Jan 30, 2020
396
53
78
At first I was hellbent on it not being removed, now after consideration and seeing the latter option, I'm completely for the removal of crosshairs. It'll make hunting a bigger challenge as well which would provide some great roleplay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tecumseh
John Camden

John Camden

Cowboy
Whitelisted
Feb 6, 2020
42
81
68
Denmark
I will admit I was iffy about no reticle for simple aesthetic reasons - I prefer admiring my cowboah over the shoulder as he stares down the sights.

BUT I took the advice here and tried turning both it and the minimap off and the first thing that happened was a wolf attack... In the woods... At night.

And it was terrifyingly awesome. I aimed at the shadows down the iron sights and blasted two rounds into the darkness. Couldn't hear them anymore and figured I had scared them off. Pulled up the weapon wheel to put away my rifle which made the minimap pop up. To my surprise it showed 2 dead animals in my vicinity. In the harrowing confusion I had managed to kill them BOTH.

So yeah, if I could change my vote I would but either way I am keeping reticle and map off from now on. Cool beans, boys.
 
  • Like
  • Yeehaw
Reactions: Mano Bolaños Costa Jamera, Warren Lee, Jack Burton and 2 others
José Bernal

José Bernal

Cowpoke
Whitelisted
First Settler
Nov 6, 2019
21
80
13
37
Patagonia Argentina
John Camden said:
I will admit I was iffy about no reticle for simple aesthetic reasons - I prefer admiring my cowboah over the shoulder as he stares down the sights.

BUT I took the advice here and tried turning both it and the minimap off and the first thing that happened was a wolf attack... In the woods... At night.

And it was terrifyingly awesome. I aimed at the shadows down the iron sights and blasted two rounds into the darkness. Couldn't hear them anymore and figured I had scared them off. Pulled up the weapon wheel to put away my rifle which made the minimap pop up. To my surprise it showed 2 dead animals in my vicinity. In the harrowing confusion I had managed to kill them BOTH.

So yeah, if I could change my vote I would but either way I am keeping reticle and map off from now on. Cool beans, boys.
Click to expand...

A while back someone recommended me to go with no HUD at all to feel the ultimate immersive experience. And just like you I was skeptical and even afraid of getting lost or annoyed. That is until I've tried that for myself and went out in the open fields, swamps and forest, no mini map, no reticle, no health bars, no nothing. I quickly understood why this roleplayed said what they said. I've begun to look for landmarks, feared going outside of the road on dangerous regions and started to use my eyes and ears a hell of a lot more.

I would even go as far as proposing to have like a few days of no HUD for the entire server and then have a voting, because a lot of people simply won't try it, but many of us once we do, never go back to the old ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mano Bolaños Costa Jamera, Jack Burton and Samuel Foster
Julius Hughes

Julius Hughes

Traveler
Whitelisted
Feb 6, 2020
4
1
53
It is a hard place to be in. I voted no, but what this means is that we will probably have a good sum of people turn on their monitor crosshair or just draw a dot, or use tape etc. It's necessary I think, the hardest thing is proving that someone is using a crosshair.
 
Henry Houser

Henry Houser

Wizard
Whitelisted
Dec 27, 2019
498
465
63
Not a lotta "yes" folks giving reasons, so I'll post mine as I voted: Yes, keep the option to display the reticle.


I'll be fine either way, and given the amount of people that seem to have difficulty separating IC from OOC, I can see why "No" would be a popular answer with such a large community, I just wish it weren't.

First, there's already the option to remove the reticle... so I can't see any argument about one's own immersion being relevant, as the ability to turn it off is there. It seems the argument is more about players forgetting that their character might not be a skilled shooter, and removing the reticle will "force" them to keep that in mind.

For me, if a player is given resources, they always have the choice whether to introduce those resources into their character. A player with shooting skills can easily play both sides; they can be a marksman, or they can play a lousy shot, purposefully missing. However, removing the reticle biases characters who have skilled players, as it places a burden on an unskilled player wanting to play a skilled gunman. Is it a big deal? No, but that's my rationale.

Really the only reason I can see to forcibly remove the reticle is the thinking that there are too many folks who'd use it inappropriately (probably without thinking or realizing it) to inflate the skill of a character. And I get it, it's a great & valid reason, and "the reticle removers" group is probably right. It just saddens me to see that we have to restrict players' freedoms because we can't trust each other. But I'm admittedly new to the massively-multiplayer roleplaying community (massive as compared to my history of RP'ing in groups of 4-8 folks where everyone knows everyone)... so I'm probably a bit naive about it.

Anyway, my thinking would be leave the option, allow players choice, and remind other community members about the merits of immersion without it as well as reminding folks that their character probably misses a lot more than they as a player do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bocephus Yates, Jack Burton and Odysseus Hall
Billy McGee

Billy McGee

Wild West Legend
Whitelisted
First Settler
Oct 10, 2019
218
129
143
UK
www.twitch.tv
Henry Houser said:
Not a lotta "yes" folks giving reasons, so I'll post mine as I voted: Yes, keep the option to display the reticle.


I'll be fine either way, and given the amount of people that seem to have difficulty separating IC from OOC, I can see why "No" would be a popular answer with such a large community, I just wish it weren't.

First, there's already the option to remove the reticle... so I can't see any argument about one's own immersion being relevant, as the ability to turn it off is there. It seems the argument is more about players forgetting that their character might not be a skilled shooter, and removing the reticle will "force" them to keep that in mind.

For me, if a player is given resources, they always have the choice whether to introduce those resources into their character. A player with shooting skills can easily play both sides; they can be a marksman, or they can play a lousy shot, purposefully missing. However, removing the reticle biases characters who have skilled players, as it places a burden on an unskilled player wanting to play a skilled gunman. Is it a big deal? No, but that's my rationale.

Really the only reason I can see to forcibly remove the reticle is the thinking that there are too many folks who'd use it inappropriately (probably without thinking or realizing it) to inflate the skill of a character. And I get it, it's a great & valid reason, and "the reticle removers" group is probably right. It just saddens me to see that we have to restrict players' freedoms because we can't trust each other. But I'm admittedly new to the massively-multiplayer roleplaying community (massive as compared to my history of RP'ing in groups of 4-8 folks where everyone knows everyone)... so I'm probably a bit naive about it.

Anyway, my thinking would be leave the option, allow players choice, and remind other community members about the merits of immersion without it as well as reminding folks that their character probably misses a lot more than they as a player do.
Click to expand...

In an ideal world, yes.
But unfortunately this is never the case, isnt it funny how so many people are expert farmers because it inflates their bank balance more than most other lines of work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tecumseh and William Penn
Status
Not open for further replies.