Red Dead Redemption 2

[action]

does the game have treasure maps like the first one? I thought that was pretty cool in RDR1.

Also, if you shoot people in the wild, do the "cops / sherriffs" overpower you like in GTAV, or do you stand a chance?

can you get more powerfull through the game, can your weapons get more powerfull?

I ask, because I have an empty feeling, rockstar took much of the fun away that made RDR1 such a fun game, like they did with GTAV.

Edited October 6, 2019 by action

[action]

i bought RDR2 for the xbox one

for 30 euros, new in box, I decided what the hell.

the thing that convinced me to buy this game, was an image I saw of this land of trees covered in mist, and It felt like nothing I've ever seen in a game. From what I can tell, the atmosphere in this game is pretty good. Well, I won't know for sure until this game installs though. 100gb is not joke, lol.

 

[downzy]

On 2019-10-06 at 7:59 AM, action said:

does the game have treasure maps like the first one? I thought that was pretty cool in RDR1.

Yes, and they're a lot of fun to track down.  Though I'll admit that I had to rely on Google to help me find some of the locations.  

On 2019-10-06 at 7:59 AM, action said:

Also, if you shoot people in the wild, do the "cops / sherriffs" overpower you like in GTAV, or do you stand a chance?

Depends on your location.  If in an urban environment, it can be tough.  But you can often find refuge in the country-side.

Keep in mind it's not just cops you have to worry about.  Get a bad enough reputation and bounty-hunters and their posse will also try to take you down.  

[AxlRoseCDII]

I have to go back and 100% RDR2 at some point. I only finished the story mode, didn’t even scrape the surface of anything else. Is it worth it or nah?

[downzy]

On 2019-10-06 at 7:59 AM, action said:

can you get more powerfull through the game, can your weapons get more powerfull?

Not really to the first question.  Your character starts off with peak abilities.  And you can upgrade and buy better weaponry as the game progresses.  There's also a lot of different weapons stashed and hidden in various locations.  

[downzy]

On 2019-10-06 at 7:59 AM, action said:

I ask, because I have an empty feeling, rockstar took much of the fun away that made RDR1 such a fun game,

It's a very slow burn.  The game doesn't really get going until the third chapter, so just be aware that it might take awhile before it really loosens up.  But it's definitely worth the investment.

It's difficult to say whether it's more fun than GTA.  It's definitely more like RDR1 in that there's more space to breath and live.  It can be fun just to go for a ride on your horse and discover different parts of the map.  Or just spend an hour fishing in different locations.  

[downzy]

3 minutes ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

I have to go back and 100% RDR2 at some point. I only finished the story mode, didn’t even scrape the surface of anything else. Is it worth it or nah?

I achieved 100 percent in RDR1 so felt like I needed to do in RDR2 as well.  Knowing now what it takes I'm not sure I would do it again.  It's a ton of work and took a solid three months to get there.  

It's a big investment and to be honest I wish I had paid more attention to what was needed for 100 percent before I completed the game.  It would have saved me a lot of time had I knocked off the challenges during the story mode than attempting to knock them off afterward (in some cases I had to replay certain missions to complete certain challenges).  Some of the challenges are fun, other's are a huge pain in the ass (good luck trying to find a robin, let alone get a three-star condition robin).

 

[action]

I love that there's a map in the box! 

paper in game boxes. I haven't seen that for years.

[action]

51 minutes ago, downzy said:

It's a very slow burn.  The game doesn't really get going until the third chapter, so just be aware that it might take awhile before it really loosens up.  But it's definitely worth the investment.

It's difficult to say whether it's more fun than GTA.  It's definitely more like RDR1 in that there's more space to breath and live.  It can be fun just to go for a ride on your horse and discover different parts of the map.  Or just spend an hour fishing in different locations.  

I look forward to the fishing, oddly enough. fishing hasn't been fun in a video game since ocarina of time.

treasure hunting is also on my to do list. As is poker.

I heard you can wreak havoc in some towns too, and it becomes something of a warzone, with buldings burning down and stuff. Looks fun.

when my family is asleep I have the tv for myself, so I feel like I'm the start of a great adventure

Edited October 9, 2019 by action

[downzy]

5 minutes ago, action said:

I heard you can wreak havoc in some towns too, and it becomes something of a warzone, with buldings burning down and stuff. Looks fun

I didn't see this aspect of the game but maybe I wasn't causing enough havoc.

[AxlRoseCDII]

1 hour ago, downzy said:

I achieved 100 percent in RDR1 so felt like I needed to do in RDR2 as well.  Knowing now what it takes I'm not sure I would do it again.  It's a ton of work and took a solid three months to get there.  

It's a big investment and to be honest I wish I had paid more attention to what was needed for 100 percent before I completed the game.  It would have saved me a lot of time had I knocked off the challenges during the story mode than attempting to knock them off afterward (in some cases I had to replay certain missions to complete certain challenges).  Some of the challenges are fun, other's are a huge pain in the ass (good luck trying to find a robin, let alone get a three-star condition robin).

 

Yeah, I used to 100% games when I was a kid but I just don’t have the time anymore. If I were to 100% every game I may only get through 2-3 a year, if that. I make exceptions for games such as BOTW, my favorite game of all time, which I’ve been on and off playing for almost 3 years now to get 100%. RDR2 was an amazing game but I cant imagine trying to 100% it. I still want to do some of the side missions though, but stuff like hunting doesn’t really interest me at all.

[action]

24 minutes ago, downzy said:

I didn't see this aspect of the game but maybe I wasn't causing enough havoc.

this is the comment I read (posted under some youtube video)

I got into a 30 minute fight with the law in Valentine. By the time it was over Arthur was caked in mud and blood and the town looked like a warzone . Corpses everywhere, buildings charred and blackend, and debris everywhere from the fight. It was fantastic.

[downzy]

2 minutes ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

I still want to do some of the side missions though, but stuff like hunting doesn’t really interest me at all

The hunting and pelt challenges take a lot of time.

You're probably best not to try if you already completed the main storyline.  It begins to feel like work versus nice little breaks between missions in the story.  And when I say three months to get 100 percent, that was three months after beating the story and epilogue, with 15-20 hours per week within those three months.

What's annoying is that even getting 100 percent doesn't mean you did everything in the game.  The game designers were arbitrary in what was required to achieve 100 percent.  So you won't feel like you've completely finished the game.  The main reason why I think they did that is because some aspects of the game become inaccessible after the main story.  If you're looking to study, kill, and pelt every living animal in the game, that needs to be during the story missions.  There's no way to go back to Guarma after you've left the island.  So if you didn't study, kill, and pelt animals living on Guarma while you were there, it's impossible to completely finish the animal achievement (something they don't tell you about ahead of time).  

[AxlRoseCDII]

1 hour ago, downzy said:

The hunting and pelt challenges take a lot of time.

You're probably best not to try if you already completed the main storyline.  It begins to feel like work versus nice little breaks between missions in the story.  And when I say three months to get 100 percent, that was three months after beating the story and epilogue, with 15-20 hours per week within those three months.

What's annoying is that even getting 100 percent doesn't mean you did everything in the game.  The game designers were arbitrary in what was required to achieve 100 percent.  So you won't feel like you've completely finished the game.  The main reason why I think they did that is because some aspects of the game become inaccessible after the main story.  If you're looking to study, kill, and pelt every living animal in the game, that needs to be during the story missions.  There's no way to go back to Guarma after you've left the island.  So if you didn't study, kill, and pelt animals living on Guarma while you were there, it's impossible to completely finish the animal achievement (something they don't tell you about ahead of time).  

GTA V did the same things. Most of the optional missions in that game didn’t count towards anything. I get in both cases why RDR2 and V do this (don’t want to spoil either) but it still leaves the player unsatisfied.

That Guarma thing is completely unfair. Why have an animal achievement system if you can’t legitimately complete it without prior knowledge that Guarma would be locked off? On a first playthrough it’s impossible to know. 

Rockstar has the knack to tell some of the best stories of the media but their game design decisions are baffling sometimes. Mechanically not much further above GTA IV, even though it released a decade prior.

[action]

my experience so far:

technical observations:

- two discs, and most of the game is on the discs. only 13 or so GB to download. Good for my internet limit.

- installing "only" lasted a couple of hours. Could play the game the evening of the day I bought it

- my X1X runs very silent, even playing this game. Read some horror stories, and I feared it would be like a jet engine, but it's ok.

on the game itself:

- controlling isn't half as bad as I feared. various reviewers made more hoo-haa about this than was necessary. controlling is alright in this game. I don't experience the problems some people report. Horse mounting is fine, horse riding is fine, shooting is fine... Nothing to mention here.

- I haven't encountered any anti-consumer measures so far. no microtransaction, which is a very, very big plus. (I only play singleplayer)

- no always online, another huge, huge bonus.

- what I played was very story driven, but it captivated me none the less. I enjoyed my first hours with this game. Can't wait to see what's next.

This truly feels like an AAA experience. Hell, for this quality, I feel they should add another A.

[action]

I'm going with first person mode in this as much as possible. this improves control overall. Searching drawers, shooting, walking, horse riding, everything is improved and easier when in first person mode. 

The camp mechanic has been criticised, but I love it. 

I'm usually not the guy for playing story driven games. I need action in my games, I quickly lose interest. But this is the first game I play, where doing mundane stuff has a purpose and is enjoyable in and of itself. it feels rewarding contributing money to your camp, it feels rewarding slashing firewood, as this improves various statistics and it just genuinly feels relaxing doing this stuff.

the dialogue in cutscenes have been criticised as being too much of one monologue against another monologue, implying that this is the only form of interaction in the game. But when you approach NPC's and talk, the conversation is much more natural.

 

Edited October 10, 2019 by action

[MillionsOfSpiders]

I really miss playing RDR2. I played through the game twice and then I gave the disc away to a friend. Best game ever.

[action]

I'd like to make that stew that they're cooking in the camp sometime! it looks delicious

[DeadSlash]

On 10/4/2019 at 8:16 PM, Oldest Goat said:

 I'm just glad it's not on the Epic game store!

Et tu, Goate?   Nooooooo!  I really get frustrated with all of the "Never Epic" discussions.  I have no idea what your full take is on the situation, and you might have some legit reasons for saying that, but 90% of what people keep copy pastaing on Steam about EGS is like uber false.  Seriously, a  small, militant, dedicated group of haters that are pissed because they like having their games all in one launcher, and having achievements, but knowing that "I don't want to clutter my desktop!" or "I like my friends being able to see my achievements!" is not an argument that wins hearts and minds have spread a lot of horseshit in order to try and kill Epic.  A lot of youtubers have jumped on the bandwagon because it get you hits out the ass right now.  To be clear, I don't give a fuck about EGS, I just hate the concept that people will swear that the employees of Epic eat fried baby skin as they worship the devil... because a second launcher is too much "clutter."

 

Some of my "favorites"

"Epic has no return policy" - Epic has the exact same return policy as Steam.

"Epic created something called 'Terms of Service' or a 'ToS"  I'm supremely confident you are not among them, but I swear to god, this was a rumor that people believed, and parroted for about a month after the exclusives started.  To be absolutely clear, it was widely discussed on Steam that Epic created the first ever "Terms of Service." That was actually how the whole existence of the "Epic is the devil" debate.  People on Steam were quoting the generic legal jargon of a ToS and telling people that the concept was created by Epic in January of 2019.  I became hooked on the debate when I got flamed for clarifying that Term of Service agreements have been around for years and basically every company ever has one.  I was called an "Epic shill."  

"Epic is flagged as a virus/spyware on <changes weekly>"  Epic isn't flagged by any of the major antivirus/malware programs.

"Epic is owned by Tencent" - Tencent has stock in Epic, but doesn't own it.  Tencent is like the 7th largest company in the world, they are an investment company.  They own stock in A LOT of companies, including reddit.... the main source of "EGS is the devil" rumors.

"Epic steals credit card information and gives it to the Chinese government."  - Yeah, EGS has cleaned out the accounts of 400 million EGS customers, and nobody noticed, but Reddit...

 

I hope we can still be friends, the current popular thinking seems to be people who own a game on Epic cannot associate with people who use Steam.  Idk, it's just a store to me.  These are my main points for not caring:

1. 80% of PC games can only be played on Steam.  I don't understand how one could be livid about Epic having .001% of PC games being exclusive to EGS for a short period of time, but fully supportive of Valve/Steam.  You can be a PC gamer and never download Epic.  You CANNOT be a PC gamer unless you have Steam on your computer.

2. Valve and Steam are assholes, not the white knight champion of the consumer.  They only have a return policy because they were sued by multiple countries. They used to hold access to your library of your head.  Prior to the lawsuits, there was a policy of no returns, ever, under any circumstance.  If you did a chargeback, Steam support would openly tell you that they would remove your online access to your entire library, rendering your games worthless. Not for 30 or 60 days, forever.  I know this for a fact because support literally told me this when I was trying to get a refund for Aliens: Colonial Marines. 

3. Tencent doesn't own Epic, they have stock in Epic.... BUT even if they owned it outright, it would be backward logic to think they were branching out to global markets as a means to spread Chinese control globally as opposed to getting out from under the thumb of the Chinese government so they could make more money.

 

Also, a nice fringe benefit of embracing Epic, I've gotten 8 free games so far.  7 more than Steam has given me in the past 14 years.

 

/rant  I'm sorry you all had to see that side of me.  I'm excited af to play RD2 on my PC!

Edited October 17, 2019 by DeadSlash

[DeadSlash]

You want to talk about super creepy coincidence?  I swear to God this is 100% true.  I've been on the road for the last week and a half, and at the Norfolk Virginia airport, they had a candy store with a bunch of gimmick candy soda's... and one of them was "Roddy Piper's All Out Of Bubblegum" Bubblegum soda.  What an amazingly random thing to pop up in my life 2 times in a 4 day period!

[action]

epic store / steam store... what the fuck are you all talking about?

I don't have a clue, but it sure sounds bad, almost orwellian.

*pops in street fighter II cartridge in snes and starts playing within 5 seconds* aaaah. the feel of physical games that are made like concrete bricks

[DeadSlash]

On 10/18/2019 at 8:30 AM, action said:

epic store / steam store... what the fuck are you all talking about?

I don't have a clue, but it sure sounds bad, almost orwellian.

*pops in street fighter II cartridge in snes and starts playing within 5 seconds* aaaah. the feel of physical games that are made like concrete bricks

In a nutshell, Valve/Steam is a $1.5b juggernaut has/had a monopoly on PC games.  If you game on a PC, you do it via Steam.  A competitor has emerged in a company called Epic and they have about 12 games on a 6 month exclusive.  They paid Developers money to have exclusive rights to sell some dozen or so games for 6 months before they can be sold on Steam.  A lot of people are having a meltdown because they like having all of their games on one launcher and it's basically a nuclear pissing war between the people that hate Epic and the people that just see it as another store.

 

I, much like you, LOVED the idea of having physical games in my possession, but that is not a thing in the realm of PC gaming.  Even if you buy a game in the store, you cannot install it without using Steam.  Many people don't know this, but when you buy a physical copy of the game, all that matters is the key.  You can't install off of the disc only, AND, if you never pop the disc in your PC and simply type the key in, it loads exactly the same.  The disc is a cosmetic prop with no value at all.  I have always HATED Valve for taking away my ownership of the games I buy and eliminating hard copies from relevancy.   In other words, if Steam was console based, when you popped in your SFII cart, you'd have to validate through Steam, or not play it.  

[action]

3 hours ago, DeadSlash said:

In a nutshell, Valve/Steam is a $1.5b juggernaut has/had a monopoly on PC games.  If you game on a PC, you do it via Steam.  A competitor has emerged in a company called Epic and they have about 12 games on a 6 month exclusive.  They paid Developers money to have exclusive rights to sell some dozen or so games for 6 months before they can be sold on Steam.  A lot of people are having a meltdown because they like having all of their games on one launcher and it's basically a nuclear pissing war between the people that hate Epic and the people that just see it as another store.

 

I, much like you, LOVED the idea of having physical games in my possession, but that is not a thing in the realm of PC gaming.  Even if you buy a game in the store, you cannot install it without using Steam.  Many people don't know this, but when you buy a physical copy of the game, all that matters is the key.  You can't install off of the disc only, AND, if you never pop the disc in your PC and simply type the key in, it loads exactly the same.  The disc is a cosmetic prop with no value at all.  I have always HATED Valve for taking away my ownership of the games I buy and eliminating hard copies from relevancy.   In other words, if Steam was console based, when you popped in your SFII cart, you'd have to validate through Steam, or not play it.  

that's why emulators are king

[Crazyman]

I pre-ordered the PC version from Rockstar to get all the extra shit.

Now I just need to wait until Black Friday/Cyber Monday to get a nice desktop on a deal

[Wagszilla]

I’m a legend.

I finally finished those Gold Medals.