Jump to content

Red Dead Redemption 2


downzy

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, downzy said:

Almost through Chapter 4, with I believe two more chapters to go.

Similar to what has already been said, the game is both breathtaking with respect to how great and frustrating it can be.  Visually, I don't believe I've seen a prettier game (save for maybe the characters).  I'm fortunate to play on the Xbox One X on a 4K LG OLED television and even after putting in 30-40 hours I'm still blown away by how authentic and realistic the open frontier looks.  The storytelling is also superb, though the first chapter or two are a bit slow and could have used some abbreviation and consolidation.  I've also enjoyed the relationships and attachments one makes throughout the game, an element that wasn't much present in most GTA games and helps differentiate RDR in its own right.  Whereas in GTA your modes of transportation are largely disposable, the attachment one has with one's horse is a nice dynamic.  In some ways it feels like you're not going through the game alone and have a partner when wondering through the wilderness.  I never got the whole pokemon or virtual pet craze, but I've enjoyed looking after my horse and have come to feel quite protective and attached to one or two of them.

But then there are the hair-losing controls.  Particularly around or on the horse, the controls are extremely wonky and have worked against my enjoyment of the game.  If the visuals immerse the player in the game, the controls do almost as good a job of doing the opposite.  While I am certainly not the best video game player out there, I don't consider myself the worst having played games for almost 35 years.  But it says something that with over 30 - 35 hours into the game I still stumble with basic character controls.  The decision to require players to access the weapon/inventory wheel to change weapons is nonsense.  I can't tell you how many times I've strangled some unsuspecting dude simply because he happened to be standing by my horse as I attempt to get on.  The dead-eye system never becomes intuitive and I'm still not 100 percent how to operate it properly.  Then there's the mess of accessing items found around your room or in cabins.  I've had to attempt numerous walk ups to desks, cabinets, shelves in attempts to take the right item.  

In many ways RDR2 is to the Red Dead series as Grand Theft Auto 4 is the GTA series.  Both upped the visual and atmospheric standards of the series in ways that were revolutionary and unseen before in the industry.  But both sacrificed elements of fun for a greater sense of realism that I think hurts the overall presentation.  The designers would have better served its audience/customer base had they included a realism slider (or different modes) to allow for players the choice in how much realism they want in the game.  Because too often I find the game gets in the way of itself for the sake of realism.  The entire warrant system feels far too cumbersome.  Too often I'll be attacked by a rival gang after coming back from a mission where I'll defend (i.e. kill everyone) against said attackers only to have some "witness" show up and attempt to report me for murder.  Which usually involves me killing the witness, and then another witness, and sometimes a third or fourth witness.  In one instance I had to kill six witnesses in addition to the 4 attackers in order to avoid being wanted and paying a heft bounty so I'm not continually harassed as I roam through that territory.  The map is so huge that it can take 5-10 minutes to get from a mission location back to the camp that it becomes cumbersome when having to fight off attackers and then mow down potential witnesses.  The moments I actually enjoy these distractions are rare, too often I just want to continue the story.  

All in all it's great game and I hope Rockstar has a follow up planned (maybe something set in a different location with different characters that aren't attached to the storyline of the this and the last game).  But going forward, let's dial back the realism (or at least, give players the option) and not let the game get in the way of the story.  And oh, perhaps do something about the insanely clunky controls while they're at it.  I'm looking forward to finishing it to see how the story wraps up and might give RDR online a chance.  If anything, I'll likely go back to complete the animal and fishing challenges.  I obtained 100 percent in RDR1 but it seems unlikely I'll achieve the same level of completion in this one.

It’s funny, I thought the same thing about GTA IV and RDR2. In its own right that’s good as while the games do have flaws with their over realistic properties that damage gameplay and the controls, the trade off is that their stories are nothing short of fantastic and rank as some of the best in gaming history to me. More specifically, I refer to the decisions you have to make throughout the story and how they shape subsequent missions and effect the characters around you, combined with realistic atmosphere and characters. These principles alone make GTA IV one of my favorite games of all time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

It’s funny, I thought the same thing about GTA IV and RDR2. In its own right that’s good as while the games do have flaws with their over realistic properties that damage gameplay and the controls, the trade off is that their stories are nothing short of fantastic and rank as some of the best in gaming history to me. More specifically, I refer to the decisions you have to make throughout the story and how they shape subsequent missions and effect the characters around you, combined with realistic atmosphere and characters. These principles alone make GTA IV one of my favorite games of all time.

GTA IV was a very interesting and impressive game.  But can you say you had a lot of fun playing it?  Outside of the expansion packs, I'm not sure I can say that.  There were some fun missions near the end (bank robbery was great), but it was ultimately the story and the New York environment that kept me hooked.  

Contrast it with GTA: San Andreas.  Probably the most fun I've had playing a video game.  Not the most interesting story, but the missions were a lot of fun.  Plus I loved trying to capture rival gang territories after the main storyline was over.  

GTA V felt like a nice balance between GTA:SA and IV.  Not as strong a narrative as IV but was a bit more fun to play like SA.  

For me, RDR1 was the best overall for balancing fun, story and environment.  Its controls were relatively simple all things considered and the story did stuff that had never been attempted in video games.  Plus it didn't take itself too seriously like RDR2 does far too often.  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, downzy said:

GTA IV was a very interesting and impressive game.  But can you say you had a lot of fun playing it?  Outside of the expansion packs, I'm not sure I can say that.  There were some fun missions near the end (bank robbery was great), but it was ultimately the story and the New York environment that kept me hooked.  

Contrast it with GTA: San Andreas.  Probably the most fun I've had playing a video game.  Not the most interesting story, but the missions were a lot of fun.  Plus I loved trying to capture rival gang territories after the main storyline was over.  

GTA V felt like a nice balance between GTA:SA and IV.  Not as strong a narrative as IV but was a bit more fun to play like SA.  

For me, RDR1 was the best overall for balancing fun, story and environment.  Its controls were relatively simple all things considered and the story did stuff that had never been attempted in video games.  Plus it didn't take it too seriously like RDR2 does far too often.  

 

 

The missions in GTA IV were often drab. They comprised of chasing someone in a car for x amount of time before the game decided to continue, stealing cars, or random shootouts. It definitely was a game that was carried by its story and at the time immersive world. When this game came out I had never seen anything like it. You could call friends to hang out, the world felt realistic, pedestrians would interact with you in such interesting ways and the world felt like a breathing and lively virtual version of New York. 

V failed to capture most of that with Los Angeles (and I live near LA so trust me, I know) in my opinion. The world feels almost dead and there isn’t a lot to interact with. However by comparison the missions were much more varied and I think the gameplay itself was much, much better.

RDR2 definitely takes the IV approach of realism over fun, like you mentioned in your original post.

It’s an interesting debate to what makes a better game. Ultimately, it may come down to the gamer’s specific taste. I prefer my games to be a bit on the immersion/story side to be quite frank. I find myself on the edge of my seat more often and excited to pick up the game night after night. RDR2 for that reason quickly became one of my favorites of all time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

It’s an interesting debate to what makes a better game. Ultimately, it may come down to the gamer’s specific taste. I prefer my games to be a bit on the immersion/story side to be quite frank. I find myself on the edge of my seat more often and excited to pick up the game night after night. RDR2 for that reason quickly became one of my favorites of all time.

I agree that it comes down to individual tastes.  I know a lot of people rant and rave about The Last of Us and the various Uncharted games, but I can't get through them.  I tried multiple times to get through The Last of Us and I stopped playing it somewhere close to the end.  I have to enjoy more than just the story to get into something.

RDR2 benefits from having such an immersive world that I wasn't that bothered by the slow start to the story.  I didn't feel the need to play it initially to see what happens as I didn't have any anticipation as to what was about to happen next.  But that began to change by the end of chapter 3 and now I look forward to my evenings to pick up where I left off (fyi, the O'Driscolls just hit the camp and Dutch attempts to rob the train station).  Desperation is starting to set in and the story is picking up steam which is great.  Just kind of nuts it took 20+ hours to get to this point.  But like I said, the pretty visuals and the amount of polish rendered has been enough to keep me going and thankfully now the story has my attention.  It's just a shame that the controls continually take me out of the experience and for that reason I can't put RDR2 above RDR1 or GTA:SA.

Funny how you mention GTA V not faithfully replicating LA.  The last time I was in LA (2015) I couldn't believe how much I kept thinking of the game and how well it nailed certain aspects of the city.  Santa Monica, Venice Beach, Malibu - it all felt like faithful representations (but then again, I'm just a tourist).  I understand what you mean about the lack of people (and traffic), but I always assumed this was due to a technical limitation and not one of conscious game design so I accepted the drawback for what it was.  I would assume that had the game been released during this generation of consoles the game would feel much more alive.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, downzy said:

GTA IV was a very interesting and impressive game.  But can you say you had a lot of fun playing it?  Outside of the expansion packs, I'm not sure I can say that.  There were some fun missions near the end (bank robbery was great), but it was ultimately the story and the New York environment that kept me hooked.  

Contrast it with GTA: San Andreas.  Probably the most fun I've had playing a video game.  Not the most interesting story, but the missions were a lot of fun.  Plus I loved trying to capture rival gang territories after the main storyline was over.  

GTA V felt like a nice balance between GTA:SA and IV.  Not as strong a narrative as IV but was a bit more fun to play like SA.  

For me, RDR1 was the best overall for balancing fun, story and environment.  Its controls were relatively simple all things considered and the story did stuff that had never been attempted in video games.  Plus it didn't take it too seriously like RDR2 does far too often.  

 

 

I had the most fun by far playing GTA: Vice City. The setting was just perfect. I’m really hoping they go back there with GTA VI.

Edited by Dazey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, downzy said:

I agree that it comes down to individual tastes.  I know a lot of people rant and rave about The Last of Us and the various Uncharted games, but I can't get through them.  I tried multiple times to get through The Last of Us and I stopped playing it somewhere close to the end.  I have to enjoy more than just the story to get into something.

RDR2 benefits from having such an immersive world that I wasn't that bothered by the slow start to the story.  I didn't feel the need to play it initially to see what happens as I didn't have any anticipation as to what was about to happen next.  But that began to change by the end of chapter 3 and now I look forward to my evenings to pick up where I left off (fyi, the O'Driscolls just hit the camp and Dutch attempts to rob the train station).  Desperation is starting to set in and the story is picking up steam which is great.  Just kind of nuts it took 20+ hours to get to this point.  But like I said, the pretty visuals and the amount of polish rendered has been enough to keep me going and thankfully now the story has my attention.  It's just a shame that the controls continually take me out of the experience and for that reason I can't put RDR2 above RDR1 or GTA:SA.

Funny how you mention GTA V not faithfully replicating LA.  The last time I was in LA (2015) I couldn't believe how much I kept thinking of the game and how well it nailed certain aspects of the city.  Santa Monica, Venice Beach, Malibu - it all felt like faithful representations.  I understand what you mean about the lack of people (and traffic), but I always assumed this was due to a technical limitation and not one of conscious game design so I accepted the drawback for what it was.  I would assume that had the game been released during this generation of consoles the game would feel much more alive.    

For me the actual aesthetics of the city were done great but what I meant moreso was that the in game city felt so lifeless. Little to do, zombie people, crappier physics, stupid rules (standing near a police officer gets you arrested). This all took away from the immersion in my opinion and made me feel like I was living in some cartoon world. Compared to IV which felt like a breathing lively city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

For me the actual aesthetics of the city were done great but what I meant moreso was that the in game city felt so lifeless. Little to do, zombie people, crappier physics, stupid rules (standing near a police officer gets you arrested). This all took away from the immersion in my opinion and made me feel like I was living in some cartoon world. Compared to IV which felt like a breathing lively city.

I suppose it might be relative as I've been to NYC numerous times and New York in GTA IV didn't feel all that "liveable" compared to its real world counterpart.   Then again, it's been 10+ years since I played GTA IV.  

You got arrested for standing near a police officer in GTA V?  Was it Trevor and was he drunk?  Never seen that before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, downzy said:

I suppose it might be relative as I've been to NYC numerous times and New York in GTA IV didn't feel all that "liveable" compared to its real world counterpart.   Then again, it's been 10+ years since I played GTA IV.  

You got arrested for standing near a police officer in GTA V?  Was it Trevor and was he drunk?  Never seen that before.

 

Happens with any character. The cops in this game are stupid unrealistic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

 

Happens with any character. The cops in this game are stupid unrealistic. 

Maybe...  Try standing one foot from an American cop without moving for more than 5 seconds (particularly if you're black) and see what kind of response you get? :P 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wagszilla said:

I'm bored with them. 

I wouldn't say that I'm bored with Rockstar games, but it's starting to feel like they're making the same building but with a different coat of paint.  

Nobody does storytelling and pays the same level of details like Rockstar in my opinion.  

They might stumble a bit here or there, but they ain't no Bethesda or EA.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

This confirms what @action was saying. I'll still look forward to the inevitable PC port which probably/hopefully will have much better controls.

Thank fuck for Nintendo who makes 'videogames' for 'fun' rather than time-sink cinematic experiences which may as well be movies instead. I loved Red Dead Redemption, I wish they'd put it on PC or Switch.

I also wish for GTA San Andreas and Vice City but with modern graphics. That would be fucking amazing.

I’d love for them to port San Andreas and Vice City to Switch. Those games are already playable on the majority of consoles as is, would be cheap to port over, and would sell like hot cakes. I see no reason for them not to.

Edited by AxlRoseCDII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um...  So...  Did anyone else get raped during the game?  Some backyard yokel invited Arthur for a meal, hits Arthur over the head, there’s a few dark scenes where you hear “something,” a cut scene where the yokel says something about putting up a good fight, then fade to black followed by Arthur waking up in a field with his horse besides him and only $1 taken. Arthur then mutters “oh dear lord.”

WTF?

Wonder if the eventual PC Port will show the actual deed, a la “black coffee.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, downzy said:

Um...  So...  Did anyone else get raped during the game?  Some backyard yokel invited Arthur for a meal, hits Arthur over the head, there’s a few dark scenes where you hear “something,” a cut scene where the yokel says something about putting up a good fight, then fade to black followed by Arthur waking up in a field with his horse besides him and only $1 taken. Arthur then mutters “oh dear lord.”

WTF?

Wonder if the eventual PC Port will show the actual deed, a la “black coffee.”

I didnt think it was rape. I thought they just robbed me. Idk

36 minutes ago, Wagszilla said:

If Red Dead 3 isn't a prohibition era Boardwalk Empire clone, I'll be shocked.

SHOCKED, Alex.

SHOCKED.

Id like that. It could be about Jack or Jack's kid or something. Not Italian, though

Edited by ZoSoRose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

This confirms what @action was saying. I'll still look forward to the inevitable PC port which probably/hopefully will have much better controls.

Thank fuck for Nintendo who makes 'videogames' for 'fun' rather than time-sink cinematic experiences which may as well be movies instead. I loved Red Dead Redemption, I wish they'd put it on PC or Switch.

I also wish for GTA San Andreas and Vice City but with modern graphics. That would be fucking amazing.

nintendo is often criticised for making games that lack any original story (princess gets abducted, hero saves princess...) and their games are perceived to lack real progress in new ideas. but compare super mario bros with mario odyssey and you'll soon realise this isn't true.

but for those who want it, nintendo also makes games that offer a bit of fanservice like the new super mario bros series. they recycle a lot of assets and gameplay, but as the sales numbers show; there is a very real market for it.

odyssey is great and all, but it feels like coming home whenever I fire up new super mario bros U deluxe. I'm happy to have the option to play a more standard mario game. that's not a flaw: it's a feature.

the sales numbers of RDR2 also show, there is a very real market for cinematic games with lots of scripted events, handholding and lack of gameplay. sometimes, people just want to be guided and be thrown into an experience that unfolds without too much input from the player. that's fine of course, if you like that kind of game. the only time it becomes a problem is, when you buy the game thinking you'll get an action filled gameplay focused game, and you regret your purchase. that's why you should never believe marketing and hype, but should wait until people start to tell their own experiences with the game. look up as many gameplay videos as you can, and make up your own mind.

Everyone has different taste, and that's all fine to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, action said:

the sales numbers of RDR2 also show, there is a very real market for cinematic games with lots of scripted events, handholding and lack of gameplay. sometimes, people just want to be guided and be thrown into an experience that unfolds without too much input from the player. that's fine of course, if you like that kind of game. the only time it becomes a problem is, when you buy the game thinking you'll get an action filled gameplay focused game, and you regret your purchase. that's why you should never believe marketing and hype, but should wait until people start to tell their own experiences with the game. look up as many gameplay videos as you can, and make up your own mind.

The scripted stuff only really applies to the story though.  

Like GTA, I think most people buy RDR and similar games for the freedom to roam and to what they want.  I played RDR2 Online last night for the first time with a friend and someone else he plays with.  They told me they spend most of their time hunting and fishing.  I think that's where Rockstar excels in ways that most other games do not.  There's a level of detail and polish (save for some control issues and some people's need to see a dick when a character takes a piss).  It allows for people to get lost in world that feels as close to being real as they come.  As of yet no other studio comes close to Rockstar in pulling this off in my opinion.  That said, Cyberpunk 2077 looks like it might give Rockstar a run for its money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ZoSoRose said:

Was it the dude with the sister? They took more from me. That's weird

No, you must have been at different cabin (or there was no sister when I was present).  

It's located just south of Lakay in the bayou (just east of the river that snakes down from Lagras).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished Chapter 6/the main story. I couldnt put the game down the entire chapter. 

What a game. The controls are wonky and the wanted system sucks, but for every mishap the game takes 10 steps forward. This is one of the only games I have played this generation that feels truly "next gen" after the 360 and PS4 console cycle. It may even surpass Witcher 3 for me. Awesome sequel to the first game where it, in my opinion, surpasses it in almost every way. The detail Rockstar has put in the world blows my mind. I really like the "realism".

I hear the epilogue portion of the game is very long so Im hoping I have a long way to go, still. Going to take my time with it. 

As I said earlier, I hope GTA VI or Red Dead 3 or whatever takes place in the 20 s-50s. A game with this high caliber story telling and detail set in that time period would be so cool. Thatd be my most anticipated game along with Cyberpunk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...