Red Dead Redemption 2 - now available on PC

[Ezekiel]

Anyway, stop/walk and shoot is something I want in my horror games, not freaking shooters.

Both are here

The player has been standing or walking any time they've held out a gun in all the footage I can recall. Other times, they just show dead eye, which was always a gay feature. Doesn't look fun. You should be able to shoot with R1/LMB whether you're holding the gun out or not. Meaning, you should be able to shoot from the hip instantly, like in a true western.

This L1 + R1 shit is overdone to death.

Speaking of dead eye, the slow mo from Max Payne would have been equally fitting in a western like this without being so gay.

 

[Makabb]

^ autism

 

[Kem0sabe]

I don't think it's homophobic of me to point out how gay all this discussion about shooting is.

 

[sullynathan]

Meaning, you should be able to shoot from the hip instantly, like in a true western.

You really should watch the videos before typing shit.


Shown with the shotgun, shooting from the hip

 

[Oracsbox]

The shooting mechanics in rockstar games have always been a bit shit I can let it slide as long as everything else works.

Anyway in real life gunfights/murders usually involved being shot in the back John Wesley Hardin was a master at it.

 

[Ezekiel]

Meaning, you should be able to shoot from the hip instantly, like in a true western.

You really should watch the videos before typing shit.


Shown with the shotgun, shooting from the hip

Can you shoot just by holding R1/R2? I doubt it. It will double as a punch button or some shit. The fact that the camera is zoomed makes that obvious. Looks like you may have two levels of zoom when pressing the trigger.

The shooting mechanics in rockstar games have always been a bit shit I can let it slide as long as everything else works.

Anyway in real life gunfights/murders usually involved being shot in the back John Wesley Hardin was a master at it.

I would argue Max Payne 3 had good shooting mechanics. Moreso in the multiplayer, where you have faster movement, a melee button and grenades. All their other games have bad shooting.

 

[sullynathan]

The shooting mechanics in rockstar games have always been a bit shit I can let it slide as long as everything else works.

Max Payne 3 was excellent with some animation & design problems. RDR2 is following the Max Payne 3 weapon loadout system from what we see

Can you shoot just by holding R1/R2? I doubt it. It will double as a punch button or some shit. The fact that the camera is zoomed makes that obvious. Looks like you may have two levels of zoom when pressing the trigger.

or you have a reticle showing when your gun is pulled out which allows you to shoot and then pressing L2/LT zooms in more like in previous R* games.

 

[Stella Brando]

 

[Kem0sabe]

So hyped for this and unfortunately stuck with 2 broken ass rpgs that I can't play until they are patched well into next year, pathfinder and insomnia.

 

[Oracsbox]

We Wuz Kowboys N Shiet

 

[TheHeroOfTime]

pls no i dont want to get hyped by this

 

[curry]

I remember reading that there were a lot of black cowboys in the late 1800's where the game takes place.

 

[Oracsbox]

I remember reading that there were a lot of black cowboys in the late 1800's where the game takes place.

Yes there was but the issue with the video I posted above was the author of the IGN article reviewed and I'm sure more to come in a similar vein is the constant use of identity politics and finding any excuse to ruin enjoyement anyone might have with it seems anything.
The IGN guy just dislikes white people and is happy to use any platform to vent said hatred.

 

[sullynathan]

so a non-issue. Not watching a 20 minute video

 

[Ezekiel]

We Wuz Kowboys N Shiet

Oh my god, who the fuck cares? Just ignore IGN and move on. Why do YouTube people make such a big deal about everything?

 

[sullynathan]

There is weapon degradation in the game

 

[SpoilVictor]

I lost faith in Rockstar after GTA IV and give up after GTA V so I'm not really following news on RDR2.

Did they spilled the beans how much content and activities they want to offload to Online part of the game? And for what we are supposed do grind money (better yet buy it from R*): golden guns? tuned horses? flying stagecoaches?

Just asking.

 

[orcinator]

And for what we are supposed do grind money (better yet buy it from R*): golden guns? tuned horses? flying stagecoaches?

Don't think so. I too want to know what will be the equivalent of the Orbital Cannon(only 10$ per shot) but I don't think we'll know for a long time since R✡ knows too well that the less info you reveal the less likely someone might think something looks bad.

 

[sullynathan]

Is this where people complain more about the optional multiplayer component and ignore the fact that the newer R* games had more content than the older ones?

 

[unfairlight]

Multiplayer shit isn't "content" considering most of it can't be accessed in the single player, not to mention how GTA IV had 2 pretty lengthy DLCs while GTA V had none.

 

[sullynathan]

Multiplayer shit isn't "content" considering most of it can't be accessed in the single player, not to mention how GTA IV had 2 pretty lengthy DLCs while GTA V had none.

No one gives a shit about DLC, people always bring up GTA 4 DLC because the base game is so banal shit boring and devoid of content compared to San Andreas. it was never the norm for GTA, it's the only GTA that had single player DLC.

 

[Modron]

No one gives a shit about DLC, peopel always bring up GTA 4 DLC because the base game is so banal shit boring and devoid of content compared to San Andreas. it was never the norm for GTA, it's the only GTA that had single player DLC.

GTA V is so shit boring and devoid of content compared to 4.

 

[sullynathan]

No one gives a shit about DLC, peopel always bring up GTA 4 DLC because the base game is so banal shit boring and devoid of content compared to San Andreas. it was never the norm for GTA, it's the only GTA that had single player DLC.

GTA V is so shit boring and devoid of content compared to 4.

it isn't and you won't prove so.

 

[Modron]

There are huge swaths of GTA V that are absolutely devoid of content beyond a few random collection items, they killed off all kinds of side activity and content. Sure it's got what 2-3 memorable heists versus 4's one memorable heist but the rest of the game is lifeless. The focus on multiplayer on GTA V had a negative impact and all but the most diehard fans can see it.

All in all Rockstar is just like Bethesda where each further iteration of a series is a whittling down of what came before it and I was highly disappointed by GTA V such that anytime Rockstar starts hyping multiplayer content now it turns me into Metro in the sense I am not buying that game until 75% off the goty version.

 

[sullynathan]

There are huge swaths of GTA V that are absolutely devoid of content beyond a few random collection items, they killed off all kinds of side activity and content. Sure it's got what 2-3 memorable heists versus 4's one memorable heist but the rest of the game is lifeless. The focus on multiplayer on GTA V had a negative impact and all but the most diehard fans can see it.

GTA V is about 3 times the size of 4, just like San Andreas was about twice the size of 4. Of course the larger game has large swaths of land that has nothing going on it, just like GTA 4 did but GTA4 is far smaller.

What Side Activity did they kill off and content? By pure numbers GTA V has more content than GTA 4, a point you have failed to counter. Instead, you would rather point out the only decent main mission in GTA 4 something that is not a side content or optional activity. Go replay three leaf clover ad infinitum if it is that fun to you, but I would rather not replay 1 out of the 90 shitty missions in GTA 4 and use that as a reason for GTA V being devoid of content, nor do i want to hang out with my retarded cousin as side content.

All in all Rockstar is just like Bethesda where each further iteration of a series is a whittling down of what came before it and I was highly disappointed by GTA V such that anytime Rockstar starts hyping multiplayer content now it turns me into Metro in the sense I am not buying that game until 75% off the goty version.

I don't give a shit about their multiplayer content, I don't play them. I do want to see why you have barely any real complaints about GTA V outside of "muh multiplayer" yet have no complaints about the whittling down that happened between San Andreas to GTA 4 and the fact that GTA V returned to the scale and large amount of content of San Andreas.