Red Dead Redemption 2 - now available on PC

[Danikas]

I mean Witcher 3, for example, is a very story heavy, cinematics heavy game, but once the cinematic is over, you get to play, to fucking play, until the next one. Here, you feel like a poodle being led around hoops.

At least there is some gameplay in cutscenes in Witcher 3 you get to choose dialouge options and make decisions in Rdr 2 you just watch the cutscene play itself.

 

[Drakron]

Rockstar been doing cinematographic centerpieces for years, I will never forget The Puerto Rican Connection in GTA:IV that because its a homage to The French Connection (really imaginative here Rockstar) you have to follow the script exactly, you cannot simply go ahead and wait at the stations because that would not be just like the movie scene and thus the player must fail the mission until he does exactly as told.

How bad Rockstar does it depends, they seem to be more "hand holding" as time goes on and in a open world game, this is kinda bad as remove player options by forcing then into a linear path making the whole "open world" more of a "interactive map" were you just move to the next scripted mission.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

I think Rockstar peaked during the period between San Andreas and GTA IV (with RDR1 in between). The gameplay in those games wasn't anything to write home about either, but at least it was gameplay, and it seemed like they were trying to improve things (Stealth attempts or gang management in SA, improved driving physics and melee in GTA IV).

The current generation, GTA V and RDR2, they threw all of that out the window, and just went full retard gameplaywise. Everything is on-rails to the nth degree and cinematics driven. Even the controls retardation in RDR2 reinforces this, not only are the controls needlessly complex, but they literally change from situation to situation, in this case R does this, in that case holding F does that, so like a good dog, you must constantly follow the prompts instead of actually mastering consistent gameplay systems.

Coincidentally, that's also they went full retard with storytelling. Early GTA games were simple affairs, rise up to the top of the mob, but it worked, for the same reason decent mob movies are fun to watch. GTA IV was the best in this regard, with a cool story about both mob and immigration and so on. Since then, they had these meandering over-written, rather pointless stories in GTA V and RDR2.

But yeah, this kind of thing with gameplay in open-worlds is just killer. The whole point of open world games is to provide you with the freedom to tackle in-game challenges and situations that linear games do not have. All the great open-world games take advantage of that, from the early Gothics to the more recent excellent Breath of the Wild or something like Operation Flashpoint. If you take that away, you just end up with shitty linear gameplay but with tons of empty space in between, to pad it with filler. Sounds familiar?

 

[AwesomeButton]

RDR2 offers more possibilities for open ended make-your-own fun type of gameplay than most other games out there, and certainly the most of any Rockstar game.

The important thing about this game, which should be written on the box as a disclaimer is - this is a western, and in a western you have to take your time, get into the atmosphere. I've gotten real roleplaying in RDR2, much more than in many "RPGs".

Edit - yes, the missions are obviously on rails, but did you also notice there is an open world there. I've spent my first 30 hours just playing trapper - kill animals, collect plants, sell skins at the shop, drink the money away and at poker. That was a fun 30 hours. Just watching how I get progressively covered in mud and dust, and turning into a bearded dirty hobo was adding to the immersion so much.

 

[someone else]

Edit - yes, the missions are obviously on rails, but did you also notice there is an open world there. I've spent my first 30 hours just playing trapper - kill animals, collect plants, sell skins at the shop, drink the money away and at poker. That was a fun 30 hours. Just watching how I get progressively covered in mud and dust, and turning into a bearded dirty hobo was adding to the immersion so much.

Is hunting animals fun? Is it too easy to get money in this game making it unrewarding?

 

[DalekFlay]

Rockstar been doing cinematographic centerpieces for years, I will never forget The Puerto Rican Connection in GTA:IV that because its a homage to The French Connection (really imaginative here Rockstar) you have to follow the script exactly, you cannot simply go ahead and wait at the stations because that would not be just like the movie scene and thus the player must fail the mission until he does exactly as told.

How bad Rockstar does it depends, they seem to be more "hand holding" as time goes on and in a open world game, this is kinda bad as remove player options by forcing then into a linear path making the whole "open world" more of a "interactive map" were you just move to the next scripted mission.

Indeed. Though I think for some reason the Western setting and more serious tone in RDR2 make all the flaws of this more obvious. In GTA4 I was more or less happy to experience it as a linear as fuck parody of America, but in a more serious Western story it just bores me to tears.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Edit - yes, the missions are obviously on rails, but did you also notice there is an open world there. I've spent my first 30 hours just playing trapper - kill animals, collect plants, sell skins at the shop, drink the money away and at poker. That was a fun 30 hours. Just watching how I get progressively covered in mud and dust, and turning into a bearded dirty hobo was adding to the immersion so much.

Is hunting animals fun? Is it too easy to get money in this game making it unrewarding?

It's not particularly rewarding on average. It's difficult to say definitively - you may be very lucky and turn in a good number of three-star animals per hour, then it's lucrative. But in the majority of cases you won't be that effective. But if you are approaching it with this mentality, it becomes a job, and you're supposed to be playing.

Most cost effective way to gather money in sigle player is to just kill and rob people while being careful about witnesses. It's not difficult to gather a big amount of money by just being a hobo, entering people's houses and stealing stuff.

 

[Manjuice Nutella]

BTW, I'm lvl 50 in RDR Online, I kind of ran out of interesting stuff to do, and I have no posse. My colleagues who hooked me on starting RDR both played up to the end of the tutorial and then started coming up with excuses, pansies. No one to roleplay a bandit with.

If you're a level 50 you just unlocked Carcano Rifle, for me that's where any kind of PVP had only started (and with appropriate Ability Cards on at least level 2).

Don't rush it, the game is still rolling out and has relatively little content compared to GTA Online, but the latter was struggling a lot more during the first 2 or 3 years (or so I'm told). Since you level up fast in RDO there is still a lot of content you probably didn't do, like 5 star legendary bounties or Moonshiner. The new update is around the corner too. Free Roam events are also fun, especially if you can handle the game at 60+fps.

Right now there are some unique Showdown modes, which I will defend is great (pvp, not any smaller update). Remember that this is the game on Max Payne 3 engine after all.

Also play on Free Aim servers to avoid people with controllers and their sticky targeting allowed with it (yes that is a thing) and hackers, if they still break lobbies with trainers.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Don't rush it, the game is still rolling out and has relatively little content compared to GTA Online, but the latter was struggling a lot more during the first 2 or 3 years (or so I'm told). Since you level up fast in RDO there is still a lot of content you probably didn't do, like 5 star legendary bounties or Moonshiner. The new update is around the corner too. Free Roam events are also fun, especially if you can handle the game at 60+fps.

I haven't been too interested in PvP so far because I was usually being brutally beaten there. I got to lvl 20 trader and I think lvl 10 moonshiner. The other two careers I haven't really touched beyond 1-2 missions. I entered when the Wheeler & Rawson pass was going on, spent my gold on it and then played for maximum efficiency in order to reach lvl100 there, so that I could get my gold back. Actually I found playing poker kind of fun, although the RoI on the invested time is pretty low.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Have any of you actually played to the end? Oh my god, this game has the most retarded ending part ever.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Have any of you actually played to the end? Oh my god, this game has the most retarded ending part ever.

I found the open world too fun and my time is limited so I didn't progress the story missions that much. I know how the story ends, and I guess in the final act there is some heavy scriptwriter violence exacted upon the characters.

 

[Sentinel]

Have any of you actually played to the end? Oh my god, this game has the most retarded ending part ever.

What's the retarded part?

 

[sullynathan]

Have any of you actually played to the end? Oh my god, this game has the most retarded ending part ever.

Explain, now.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Ok, heavy spoilers in there obviously.

Spoiler

With any kind of story, whether in movies, literature, or video games, there are certain conventions that most of them follow, things like plot/character arcs, resolutions, climaxes. RDR2 shits all over that in the most asinine and obnoxious way.

The main story arc with Arthur ends with him fighting Micah Bell (who is sort of the main villain) on a mountain top. Obviously, this being RDR2, the fight is entirely scripted with various button press prompts, but they also make it a fist fight, and don't give you any way to actually defeat him. The best you can do, in between getting beat the shit out of, is crawl toward your gun, at which point Dutch (who can be argued to be the real villain) steps in, giving the now helpless Arthur a chance to beg and whimper some more, before the two villains walk away, leaving him to die alone. Zero resolution, zero satisfaction, zero closure. You die like a dog and leave everything unresolved.

But that's just the start of it. Instead of the game ending here, they then end it with not one, but two freaking epilogues, in which you control John Marston instead of Arthur, a few years after the events of the main story. Well, you might think ok, this is where you get closure (if perhaps in a really weird way), but the two epilogues add up to a ridiculous amount of missions, something like 21 even if you ignore all the side stuff, most of which are spent doing the most boring, disgusting stuff possible. You work as a farm hand, slinging cow shit and milking them, build fences, one button prompt at a time, drive a wagon across half the now empty map, build a house, go fishing with your son, and on romantic trips with your wife. This goes on and on and on for 5-10 hours, before you finally get to the final mission of the second epilogue, which is the closing revenge mission, for you take out Micah Bell.

So the plot arc goes from the main hero dying on a mountain top to another guy milking cows for hours. How could this even pass QA?

And the final mission is yet again retarded and once again bereft of closure and satisfaction. You corner Micah on another mountain top, and a wild Dutch appears, giving John yet another chance to beg and whimper before his pseudo-daddy, at which point Dutch shoots Micah and walks away again.

I don't even ...

 

[Sentinel]

Ok, heavy spoilers in there obviously.

Spoiler

With any kind of story, whether in movies, literature, or video games, there are certain conventions that most of them follow, things like plot/character arcs, resolutions, climaxes. RDR2 shits all over that in the most asinine and obnoxious way.
I don't even ...

All of those are present.

Spoiler

Arthur goes through a very introspective character arc, he's a very changed man at the end of the game from what he was at the start.
Idk what you mean by resolution, but the whole focus is him making sure John gets the life and family he never had. He achieves this successfully.
His arc achieves multiple climaxes. In terms of his actual character, the climax is achieved when he comes back from the doctor and starts helping the people he fucked over in the first half of the game. The player sees a changed Arthur, a kinder Arthur, trying to find his own redemption while questioning what awaits him on the other side. In terms of the "gameplay", I guess you can consider the confrontation with the gang (when Grimshaw shoots Molly) and Micah at the top of the mountain a climax.

John goes through the same. At the end of the game, he's no longer the juvenile irresponsible boy he was at the start. He decides to face the fact that he has a family, and gets his act together to take care of them. Arthur helped John change. That's his arc.
John's climax is obviously the American Venom mission, going up the mountain to avenge Arthur.

I loved John's missions, they were a very nice change of pace from the rest of the game. House building is a personal highlight.

Neither John or Arthur beg or whimper before Dutch, they just both believe that somewhere inside Dutch still lies the man that raised them and taught them to read and all they know of the world. That's why both, particularly Arthur, who was closer to Dutch, are always trying to make him see reason. Arthur was in denial the entire game about Dutch's true character. His loyalty is his biggest character flaw.

 

[Belegarsson]

Spoiler

Arthur should NEVER be able to win that fight because he's on the verge of death already due to sickness. The point of the fist fight, his death, his final revelation towards Dutch is to show that Arthur went from a blind loyal dog to a person who were willing to sacrifice himself for other people who deserve much better life than him. That's his "redemption". You were allowed to fight the last fight against Micah, the point of which is to show that even near death's door, Arthur still doesn't give up and managed to maintain his righteousness. The last words came from his mouth wasn't "tell Mary I love her" or something like that, it was a warning about Micah, a loose end to everything he suffered through that will come back and bite the lives he saved later. He fulfilled his promises not only to John and his family, but also to himself. It's just that his loyalty was put in the wrong place, and at the end he still didn't realize it.

The epilogue exists to show that the loose end did come back and harm the Marstons. Death leads to vengeance leads to death, rinse and repeat, which depicted the harsh reality of these outlaws who were trying to break the circle. The world doesn't need them, no matter how hard they try to blend into normal society, a simple motivation is enough to flush them away. The fact that the epilogue is so long and develops so many things it feels like a seperate game helps that very final moment immensively, John was so close to give his family a better life, but the act of avenging the person who sacrificed himself to give them that life just to have it broken is painfully tragic and devastating.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Wow, this just goes to show you that no matter how retarded something is, it will always have its defenders. People will seek out the most ridiculous rationale for why something isn't the shit it so obviously is.

Spoiler

RDR2 is not some sort of highly philosophical work of art. It is a fairly mindless action adventure game, where you spend most of your time riding a horse, and killing an exorberant amount of people. Within that context, it is asinine to have the main character stumble around coughing himself to death for the second half of the game, only to end it all by not even giving him the satisfaction of taking out either of the game's two villains, and just dying to save some guy you as the player might or might not have any connection to.

If this was followed immediately by American Venom (with some sort of intro video showing how John made the most of being saved by Arthur), this wouldn't be too terrible, although still disappointing, but they then go on this hours long detour to show you how John supposedly becomes a family man, which is as pointless as anything else in this game. I mean to become the family man, he is literally involved in massive shootours every other mission, so he could well die at any moment after American Venom, so what is the point of any of this? He has not changed in any way at all, he still routinely engages in deadly stuff every other second, in between the milking. No more than Arthur has really changed, I mean yeah some missions he is less of an asshole toward the end, but then the very next mission he will literally shoot down about 90 people who are just doing their job. And still try to appeal to Dutch, who by this point is 150% revealed as a psychopath. To go from the climactic events of the end of Arthur's story to this cow milking and shit moving for hours, it is the very definition of retardation.

 

[DalekFlay]

All this dramatic debate about the storyline and meanwhile the gameplay is shit.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Oh, I agree that the gameplay is utter shit, as I described in detail before, but my additional points is that this supposedly mature and wonderful story is also shit. Quite frankly, everything about this game other than the glorious engine is shit. Most overhyped, overrated pos game I recall in my time, which given the massive decline between early 2000s and mid-2010s, is quite an achievement.

 

[DalekFlay]

Yet you finished it, which takes a pretty long time.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Not much else to play right now.

 

[Sentinel]

Wow, this just goes to show you that no matter how retarded something is, it will always have its defenders. People will seek out the most ridiculous rationale for why something isn't the shit it so obviously is.

Spoiler

RDR2 is not some sort of highly philosophical work of art. It is a fairly mindless action adventure game, where you spend most of your time riding a horse, and killing an exorberant amount of people. Within that context, it is asinine to have the main character stumble around coughing himself to death for the second half of the game, only to end it all by not even giving him the satisfaction of taking out either of the game's two villains, and just dying to save some guy you as the player might or might not have any connection to.

If this was followed immediately by American Venom (with some sort of intro video showing how John made the most of being saved by Arthur), this wouldn't be too terrible, although still disappointing, but they then go on this hours long detour to show you how John supposedly becomes a family man, which is as pointless as anything else in this game. I mean to become the family man, he is literally involved in massive shootours every other mission, so he could well die at any moment after American Venom, so what is the point of any of this? He has not changed in any way at all, he still routinely engages in deadly stuff every other second, in between the milking. No more than Arthur has really changed, I mean yeah some missions he is less of an asshole toward the end, but then the very next mission he will literally shoot down about 90 people who are just doing their job. And still try to appeal to Dutch, who by this point is 150% revealed as a psychopath. To go from the climactic events of the end of Arthur's story to this cow milking and shit moving for hours, it is the very definition of retardation.

Honestly sounds to me like you just have legitimate autism or already hated the game before you even started playing it.
By the way, in case you haven't noticed, RDR2 is a prequel to RDR1. Might help you understand why people liked John Marston.

 

[cvv]

Muh gameplay, the thread.

RDR2 is brilliant.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Honestly sounds to me like you just have legitimate autism or already hated the game before you even started playing it.

No, I started hating the game once I started playing it. Most heavily scripted, you cannot walk 2 steps off the prescribed path, dumbed down game I've ever played. With a completly overrated boring as death story about some sociopath fooling a bunch of gullible morons into doing the same stupid shit over and over and over again. And you play the gullible morons. Once you look past the pretty graphics and physics, this game is absolute horseshit.

By the way, in case you haven't noticed, RDR2 is a prequel to RDR1. Might help you understand why people liked John Marston.

So what? This was Arthur Morgan's story, not John Marston's. They completely marginalized their own protagonist.

 

[Sentinel]

So what? This was Arthur Morgan's story, not John Marston's. They completely marginalized their own protagonist.

How? Arthur's story and character surpasses that of John's. Even John's epilogue arc revolves around Arthur's actions. If anything, Marston got marginalized in the epilogue, not Arthur. Hell, even in RDR1 you could say that Marston got retroactively marginalized, since when Dutch is face to face with him, he gives him the same speech he gave Arthur/the cops on that cliff, revealing that even at that moment Dutch was thinking of Arthur, instead of actually talking to John.