Red Dead Redemption 2 - now available on PC

[ColonelTeacup]

So I decided to give it one last go last night. Put it on, started a mission, set off on my horse to the mission location......on my horse on the way to the mission.......still on my horse on the way to the mission.........5 min later still on my horse on the way to the mission............

Fuck this shit, games are meant to be stimulating & fun, be it either intellectually via tactical interaction, or by getting the adrenals going with some great action. RDR2 is another game in a long line of ones which hype up chores as "fun".

Awful game, truly awful.

What's wrong with being required to travel to the destination target? Travel time has always been a staple in rpgs. Just look at new vegas, or fallout 2.

 

[Falksi]

So I decided to give it one last go last night. Put it on, started a mission, set off on my horse to the mission location......on my horse on the way to the mission.......still on my horse on the way to the mission.........5 min later still on my horse on the way to the mission............

Fuck this shit, games are meant to be stimulating & fun, be it either intellectually via tactical interaction, or by getting the adrenals going with some great action. RDR2 is another game in a long line of ones which hype up chores as "fun".

Awful game, truly awful.

What's wrong with being required to travel to the destination target? Travel time has always been a staple in rpgs. Just look at new vegas, or fallout 2.

It aint what's being done, it's how it's being done & how often.

Much like the Witcher 3, the treks to the destinations are absolutely boring as fuck. Unlike TW3 at least sometimes there's some dialogue, but even that just sends me to sleep because all you're doing is tapping X and not interacting with anything.

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route, or an action RPG like Divinity 2 where you discover all types of treasures, side-quests & enemies.

It's poor, poor, dull game design and I'm amazed folk enjoy it. The player may as well not even be there. At times I'd leave my girlfriend playing it to get me to the mission whilst I got a brew or went for a piss it was so dull & pointless.

 

[sullynathan]

In many ways, the game is just showing how mundane and quite boring a cowboy life is.

 

[Sentinel]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

 

[Falksi]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

 

[Sentinel]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

 

[Falksi]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

That's why games need to stay grounded in fantasy and not reality. Reality is often boring & why we play games in the first place.

 

[Sentinel]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

That's why games need to stay grounded in fantasy and not reality. Reality is often boring & why we play games in the first place.

A couple million people disagree

 

[Falksi]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

That's why games need to stay grounded in fantasy and not reality. Reality is often boring & why we play games in the first place.

A couple million people disagree

That's retards for you!

 

[sullynathan]

Another point to the game. This game is really pretty and polished. I'm playing on the PS4 Pro and it looks phenomenal all the time. I just recently played witcher 3 maxed and it doesn't even look close.

 

[Sentinel]

In case anyone missed this, the type of bullets affect the gore and amount of blood during gunfights.

I think high-velocity rounds produce the most blood.

 

[Gerrard]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

That's why games need to stay grounded in fantasy and not reality. Reality is often boring & why we play games in the first place.

A couple million people disagree

Humble Bundle fodder how many times? By the way, 2-5 million nice fucking estimate.

 

[Sentinel]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

That's why games need to stay grounded in fantasy and not reality. Reality is often boring & why we play games in the first place.

A couple million people disagree

Humble Bundle fodder how many times? By the way, 2-5 million nice fucking estimate.

What are you even trying to say here? The point was that there's an audience for slower, moody and atmospheric games. If your ADHD can't handle it, then move on. Not everyone wants constant action all the time, go play DMC.

 

[sullynathan]

you'd make a better point by showing how much money this game has generated & how many copies it's sold

 

[Falksi]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

That's why games need to stay grounded in fantasy and not reality. Reality is often boring & why we play games in the first place.

A couple million people disagree

Humble Bundle fodder how many times? By the way, 2-5 million nice fucking estimate.

What are you even trying to say here? The point was that there's an audience for slower, moody and atmospheric games. If your ADHD can't handle it, then move on. Not everyone wants constant action all the time, go play DMC.

You know I'm fine with slower, moody & atmospheric so long as they play well. Arthur can't even walk right.

 

[Sentinel]

you'd make a better point by showing how much money this game has generated & how many copies it's sold

Not really because he'd rightfully point out that people had no experience with it a priori so they just bought it on impulse/hype alone. Sales never correlate to game quality.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

That's why games need to stay grounded in fantasy and not reality. Reality is often boring & why we play games in the first place.

A couple million people disagree

ARMA is not a good example to prove your point.
ARMA is a simulator. It was marketeked has a simulator. Sold to people who wanted a simulator. And developed with the intention of being a simulator by people with real experience in it's particular area.

Red Dead Redemption 2 is none of things. It's a GTA clone (that is an Action Sandbox) with a Wild West paint job, and it was sold as such. It's supposed to be a Cowboy themed playground not a ''muh emotional engaging'' chore fest with walking and horse balls simulations.
But alas it's seems nowadays it's to much to ask that even the creators of a particular type of game, have any kind of knowledge regarding said "genre".

Also even ARMA 3 is more fun than RDR2, since ARMA actually has fucking challenge and the gameplay doesn't consist of doing menial tasks.

 

[Sentinel]

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route

But you can rob people on your way to the objective. Just like in Vice City all you could do was run over people.

You enountered hundreds of folk down one street on your way to a mission in Vice City. In RDR2 I can ride for 10min from point A to point B and encounter no-one.

Obvious hyperbole aside, that's the wild west for you.

That's why games need to stay grounded in fantasy and not reality. Reality is often boring & why we play games in the first place.

A couple million people disagree

ARMA is not a good example to prove your point.
ARMA is a simulator. It was marketeked has a simulator. Sold to people who wanted a simulator. And developed with the intention of being a simulator by people with real experience in it's particular area.

Red Dead Redemption 2 is none of things. It's a GTA clone (that is an Action Sandbox) with a Wild West paint job, and it was sold as such. It's supposed to be a Cowboy themed playground not a ''muh emotional engaging'' chore fest with walking and horse balls simulations.
But alas it's seems nowadays it's to much to ask that even the creators of a particular type of game, have any kind of knowledge regarding said "genre".

Also even ARMA 3 is more fun than RDR2, since ARMA actually has fucking challenge and the gameplay doesn't consist of doing menial tasks.

Sorry but I don't bother reading posts of people who talk about games they haven't played for more than 3 hours.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

Sorry but I don't bother reading posts of people who talk about games they haven't played for more than 3 hours.

Good for you man.
Enjoy your bowl of shit.

 

[sullynathan]

It's supposed to be a Cowboy themed playground not a ''muh emotional engaging'' chore fest with walking and horse balls simulations

I disagree with this. Neither Red Dead Redemption nor Red Dead Redemption 2 struck me as a playground nor were they advertised as such.

R* has always advertised both these games as more serious, less over the top and grounded than GTA.

So far, the execution of RDR2 isn't too my liking, but these are games where main missions required you to capture, break and ride horses back to their owners because that's what farmers do.

The first game has many of the same mechanics as this one, this game just takes things to the next level.
They were never meant to be just like GTA

 

[ColonelTeacup]

So I decided to give it one last go last night. Put it on, started a mission, set off on my horse to the mission location......on my horse on the way to the mission.......still on my horse on the way to the mission.........5 min later still on my horse on the way to the mission............

Fuck this shit, games are meant to be stimulating & fun, be it either intellectually via tactical interaction, or by getting the adrenals going with some great action. RDR2 is another game in a long line of ones which hype up chores as "fun".

Awful game, truly awful.

What's wrong with being required to travel to the destination target? Travel time has always been a staple in rpgs. Just look at new vegas, or fallout 2.

It aint what's being done, it's how it's being done & how often.

Much like the Witcher 3, the treks to the destinations are absolutely boring as fuck. Unlike TW3 at least sometimes there's some dialogue, but even that just sends me to sleep because all you're doing is tapping X and not interacting with anything.

Compare that to say Vicy City where you can be pulling all kinds of stunts off on route, or an action RPG like Divinity 2 where you discover all types of treasures, side-quests & enemies.

It's poor, poor, dull game design and I'm amazed folk enjoy it. The player may as well not even be there. At times I'd leave my girlfriend playing it to get me to the mission whilst I got a brew or went for a piss it was so dull & pointless.

Have you considered listening to a podcast whilst in-transit? Also, considering your examples of finding lost treasure on the wayside, or "performing sick stunts on the way there", perhaps games with a slower burn or travel exploration are not your thing, and something like the new black ops with instant gratification would be more to your liking?

 

[sullynathan]

ColonelTeacup Me thinks the point is that the game is really slow and it doesn't have to be. There's an animation for just about everything (from the 3 hours I played) and the game requires you suffer it all.

You have a mission where you have to ride a wagon to your new camp, and 10 seconds into doing so your wheel falls off and the game then asks you to pick it up and fix it in a qte scene, then another cutscene pops up, then you drive the wagon to your camp. Did we need to do this? no. In other places, your character moves really slow in snow, kinda like you would in real life but so far it doesn't really do much in the game except just making you slow. Assassin's Creed 3 had this too, and I didn't like it, but at least there you cna climb trees and shit.

The trick here is that this part of the game and all the journeys are being used to develop characters without being a cutscene but doesn't have the luxury of allowing you to skip it like the cutscenes. Instead, you'll be in the wagon with the old doc in cinematic mode holding x (becuase the game has a built in mechanic that allows the horses to automatically follow paths to their destination).

It's boring and a bit painful to listen or watch the dialogue while holding x for a good 5 - 10 minutes.

Perhaps if I cared that much for Immersion I would appreciate these parts, but right now it is a slog and is being used for every mission. To the games credit, it genuinely has great voice actors, great graphics, and great animation so they sell the illusion very well.

I guess in hindsight it does show that mainstream audience will very much buy, play and enjoy slow meandering games, even if it fits in an unpopular genre (Western) as long as it comes from a really popular developer.

 

[ColonelTeacup]

ColonelTeacup Me thinks the point is that the game is really slow and it doesn't have to be. There's an animation for just about everything (from the 3 hours I played) and the game requires you suffer it all.

You have a mission where you have to ride a wagon to your new camp, and 10 seconds into doing so your wheel falls off and the game then asks you to pick it up and fix it in a qte scene, then another cutscene pops up, then you drive the wagon to your camp. Did we need to do this? no. In other places, your character moves really slow in snow, kinda like you would in real life but so far it doesn't really do much in the game except just making you slow. Assassin's Creed 3 had this too, and I didn't like it, but at least there you cna climb trees and shit.

The trick here is that this part of the game and all the journeys are being used to develop characters without being a cutscene but doesn't have the luxury of allowing you to skip it like the cutscenes. Instead, you'll be in the wagon with the old doc in cinematic mode holding x (becuase the game has a built in mechanic that allows the horses to automatically follow paths to their destination).

It's boring and a bit painful to listen or watch the dialogue while holding x for a good 5 - 10 minutes.

Perhaps if I cared that much for Immersion I would appreciate these parts, but right now it is a slog and is being used for every mission. To the games credit, it genuinely has great voice actors, great graphics, and great animation so they sell the illusion very well.

I guess in hindsight it does show that mainstream audience will very much buy, play and enjoy slow meandering games, even if it fits in an unpopular genre (Western) as long as it comes from a really popular developer.

Whether it needs to be or not is entirely subjective. For you personally, the animations and slower, more grounded pacing of the game might feel unnecessary, but i enjoy it quite a bit. The first was fairly grounded and tended towards realism as well, and rockstars decision to expand on these effects has been well received, considering the games popularity, success and rating. The fact you cannot enjoy the slower pacing is not a detriment to the game but rather a sign that it is not suited to your preferred tastes.

 

[Zep Zepo]

I agree(?) they went overboard on the animations.

Show me the animation 3, maybe 4 times then just stop/skip them or a toggle in settings.

Annoying things:
Cooking/crafting (animations)
Setup/tear down camp (animations)
Skinning (animations)
Riding/exiting the coach (animations)
Caring for your horse (animations)

See the trend here? I probably missed a few others, beat the game a while back.

Zep--

 

[sullynathan]

Whether it needs to be or not is entirely subjective. For you personally, the animations and slower, more grounded pacing of the game might feel unnecessary, but i enjoy it quite a bit. The first was fairly grounded and tended towards realism as well, and rockstars decision to expand on these effects has been well received, considering the games popularity, success and rating. The fact you cannot enjoy the slower pacing is not a detriment to the game but rather a sign that it is not suited to your preferred tastes.

It is a detriment to the game because it puts me off from playing it. I am a person who bought and beat Red Dead Redemption twice on the Xbawks 360 & PS3. I liked the game enough for it to be one of my favorites, but this game has an inherent slowness in just about everything to force the player. Lots of animations on your character & inherent input lag to make every movement slow, an animation for picking up every single item and looting, etc.

You don't know how ridiculous it is to get into a firefight against 10 - 20 enemies and trying to loot many of them while Dutch is constantly yelling at the player to come on, even though he just asked us to look for loot.

All of these leads to boredom and extra time being wasted and many times, not actually playing the game.

Another game that had many looting animations in it, Far Cry 4, allows you to turn off all looting animation. it's something simple R* could add in their game that would benefit their vision and that of others that don't want it, but they won't do so.