So what is the final verdict?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
bad game with a good story
Amazing and one of the best stories in vidya.
Had fun free roaming and hunting but the story was a bore and I don't like games that play themselves
it's fair to say you didn't like it but can you really call it bad?
it's totally reasonable that some people didn't like certain aspects of the gameplay, but those things are 100% by design
can you really name a single 'flaw' in this game?
can't bang hookers
One of the best games ever made.
WHO DO I BELIEVE?
greatest game of all time
Excellent, 10/10 in my opinion. Some things were a hassle like my fucking gun being put back in the horse holster and whatnot, but damn, great game.
One of the best games ever made unironically. Top 3 story, the sandbox simulation is full of holes but if you just follow the game and what it tells you to do, it's one of the best experiences you'll have.
But yeah, the gameplay aspects of it aren't as well thought-out as the story, desu.
It's not as bad as I remembered though, I'm doing my second playthrough and it's still extremely engaging. From time to time I get bored but the moments of genuine immersion where everything comes together and you just feel into it makes it all worth it.
It's one of the biggest technical achievements I've ever seen in vidya as well.
Rockstar did it again bros
it would be a 10/10, but because of the multiplayer it fell to 7/10
it was okay.
Playing it right now and loving it
Just finished the main story last night, and allow me to be a reddit-tier mouth-gaping soiboi but I'm still feeling for Arthur and that ending. Unironically woke up with "May I? Stand Unshaken" in my head.
So I'm biased right now, but fuck it it's 10/10 best game ever made
Is the Prologue even worth it? I just want Arthur
One of the best games i have played this gen. Best Rockstar game too.
Great, only hated by stains who have a bias and agenda against Rockstar
It had an amazing 9/10 story that almost had me in tears. Gameplay is pretty good despite some flaws. I would say 8/10 gameplay. It gets a 9/10 from me.
gameplay was beyond terrible, production/art(muh graffix) were beautiful, story was "okay" but good for a video game, arthur was no more than a pathetic mule.
>online pvp
>auto aim
choose one and only one Shit Star..
What are the chances of a third one bros? Apparently RDR2 sold much more than Rockstar was expecting.
Easily could have been better than 1 but actually has slow cinematic experience moments along with some really afwul design choices like having to go to your horse to change your weapons (some of which will get changed according to missions if the story needs it).
I could not give a single shit about the story but the gameplay has been comepletely ruined for me and will only turn for the worse if Take Two and R* wont get their shit to gethor(they wont).
Its decent, great at times but the intentionally clunky design choices drag it down even during those moments.
>believing someone on Yea Forums
Rockstar's best game and one of the greatest stories in games, if not the best.
I agree with this man
What's your favorite game that you're playing atm?
Rockstar's best yet, many interesting new mechanics that have a lot of potential but not utilized fully. It's still great fun and worth a play. The story is amazing too, although certain missions become a drag and closer to "how much shenanigans can we put in", like using a hot air balloon to break John out of a prison island or all of fucking chapter 5. However I think the process is interesting and it really does get me excited for GTA 6 next generation, the fact that R* can still push limitations so late is fantastic. Map is miles better than GTA 5's, less filler and more amazing landscapes to explore. Physics are at their best so far too.
I agree with this handsome gentleman.
what would happen if I'd go down a street today greeting everyone that comes across saying the same greet lines as arthur does when you go through towns?
A great game and a great movie that are at odds with each other, both being occasionally misguided.
>hot air balloon
Lmao for real? Amazing
HEY THERE MIST.... I MEAN MA'AM.
/thread
Could not put it better and more succinctly
This is now a King Arthur thread.
I miss him so much, lads
Well said, probably the best description of it I've on Yea Forums
In a small town it would probably be welcomed and appreciated, in a city you'd be seen as a weird autistic dude
The previous game, Red Dead Redemption, is my favorite game, as in all time favorite. I would say it still is too, as it there's a certain charm it has that just pushes it a little above 2 for me. That aside, RDR2 is incredible and has become one of my favorites, I would put it in my top 10. The story is by far the best I've ever experienced in a game, the visuals are some of the greatest we've had to date, the music was fantastic, the gameplay and activities were right up my alley. I wasn't expecting this game to be so similar to Kingdom Come Deliverance, another recent game I really loved. I honestly couldn't be happier with how the game turned out, it's really shaped up into a 10/10 for me.
The multiplayer is utter shit. But I knew and expected that going in.
There are many flaws, yes, but none of the flaws ever came close to ruining the experience for me. The game was never particularly buggy for me, I wasn't constantly breaking the law so I wasn't constantly dealing with the bad wanted system, the horse inventory issue while annoying never really pissed me off too much. Even with Guarma I had fun. It was filler, yes, but it didn't take away from the game for me.
He didn't accurately describe that part. You scout the prison for John using the hot air balloon. You rescue him at later mission with no hot air balloon.
dude what the fuck
i was literally just about to post this a second before you, motherfucker
Map is the best map Rockstar has ever put out. It's amazing that it's 2/3 of RDR plus even more shit. I loved Lemoyne too.
there was this dumb video back when asscreed was still a big thing where this guy dressed up like an assassin and went through a crowd touching and pushing everyone near him like your character does in the game
it would be nice if someone did the same thing only with rdr2 greeting or even put in some greet>greet>antagonize>defuse>antagonize bits
youtube.com
>you did your worst, you tried you best
>now it's time for you to rest
more like great hbo miniseries
>sadie casually gets that dude killed and doesn’t even show any remorse over it
What a cunt. It was weird how arthur gets pissy at micah for shooting up places but barely reacts to sadie sperging out
Can I finally stop pretending I’m having fun?
>have to hold buttons for every single action
>bland characters without any depth to them
>same old go here, shoot here, go back there missions
>cutscene loading screens for no reason randomly
>39 seconds for a skinning animal animation that cannot be skipped
>9 seconds to stow an animal on the horse that can’t be skipped
>the worst menu and item wheel implementation in existence
I gave you all I had, Dutch
best Rockstar game since SA. and even though I didn't love the side-characters much Arthur himself has to be one of the best protagonists in vidya history.
> that image
You have my keks
the last 4 things are pure exaggeration and you know it
stop acting like a little baby bitch lol
It's really cool that they expanded on almost everything from the first game. Even more legendary animals, even more challenges, made the outfits more customizable, etc. Pretty much all the small things I really enjoyed have been greatly expanded except for duels, of which sadly there isn't much of. Poker also feels much worse for some reason.
I agree. I just wish they brought back Liar's Dice and had more duels.
at the very least you can use the duel mechanic at any time
I really miss Liar's Dice. It was my favorite game from RDR. My little brother and I loved it so much that he bought an actual physical set and we would play it together with our youngest brother sometimes.
Post a game with good characters
i fucking love liar's dice, i would always play it and poker online
if that rdr1 remake is really happening they better bring it back
Shit gameplay, predictable story that was drawn out
>muh we need to get more money
>plan goes wrong (again)
Like if it was an actual movie critics would have torn it apart
>it's totally reasonable that some people didn't like certain aspects of the gameplay, but those things are 100% by design
just because its by design doesn't make it good. tons of games have bad design that was made so on purpose
Did they patch out gun spinning when you holster your pistol? Or does tb arthur not have it in him anymore
>is the prologue worth it
Fuck yes, especially if you're a RDR1 fan, its basically another 6-8 hours of fan service for RDR1
where did i mention characters in my concerns?
>Morning Mister
>Hey
>Hey there ma’am
>ignored
>afternoon mister
>cracka
>>bland characters without any depth to them
lol you were so retarded and determined to make exaggerated non-criticisms you literally forgot one of them
still playing it. Love the game. Stop projecting your shitty life on this masterpiece, you have to be a mouthbreather not to enjoy the game.
>bland characters without any depth to them
Never had this happen to me. I greet people and they say hellow back. what shitty play do you live in
Best game I've played to date.
Flawed mission design with amazing world, atmosphere and level of detail.
that's not something you do automatically, you doubletap the holster button to do it
That wasn’t me.
The auto lock system takes a lot more skill to get good at than click on head fast.
then why did you reply to a post that wasn't replying to you, retard
Shit I meant epilogue sorry I'm a retard.
But okay, I'll give it a go after the weekend, I'm still reeling over Arthur my dude
this game need more bounties
they are better than the story
RDR2 is an amazing game that has pushed Rockstar's typical game design to its absolute limit. Their mission design and structure can't go any further and they've stretched it about as far as they can. They really need to make some changes next game.
this
I know, but now even if I double tap he doesn’t spin, I really miss it
What are some games that you like?
American venom is kino
i complained about the game, i didnt respond saying where did i mention characters
just wait until jim milton rides again and the final mission of the epilogues, you're gonna have a nostalgia boner and smile on your face so huge you won't be able to play the game
Best vidya protag ever in Arthur
Great story
Arguably the best open world ever made
I started fishing and going camping because of this game
I never greet people.
I think you might be a legitimate retard, so I'll just suggest you go back and look at the reply chain and look back at what you first replied to and clear up your own self-induced confusion you utter monkeybrained moron
Let the game’s completion rate tell you.
If the story was actually good, and the main appeal of the game, people would want to finish the game through to the end. Yet less than 1 in 4 players actually finishes the game. But I’m willing to be a whole lot more than 25% of people are happy with their experience.
The game simply has a bad story.
THE MAAAANY MIIIILES WE WAAAALKED
I posted and , you're literally going off on a tangent about another shitpsoter.
God damn it.
Why don't you answer his original question then?
Dont get put off from the start, cause they literally have you shoveling horse shit for the first hour or so but it is all worth it by the end
The missions are incredibly varied though and the skinning is supposed to take time...
Also the menu design is basically perfect
I never knew you could do this and I just tried, he does it for me. Playing right now while I shitpost
The completion stat is actually absurdly high for such a long game. Do you realize how few people actually finish games?
No it's just long
in read dead's case though, what are we talking about? I've read people complain about the long horse rides, sim elements, clunky gunplay etc. And I totally understand why that wouldn't be someone's cup of tea but i myself loved that shit.
its weird because its a massively hyped aaa game and yet i feel certain elements of it are actually fairly niche
would you like to back this up with any statistics or actual arguments
if the story doesn't hook you then this is one of the most mediocore and bland games you'll ever play
bare bones mechanics and a inconsistent/half-hearted emphasis on realism leave the game feeling sluggish and tedious moment to moment without the overall immersion and verisimilitude which a realistic approach can bring out of a game. at any moment the game can pick and choose what arbitrary rules to apply:
>hunting a deer? you have to carry the carcass all the way to a butcher/camp/trapper, but you have like a dozen rifles available from your horse at any time.
>you can't set up a camp if you've caused a disturbance in an area, but you can set one up if its raining/gale force winds.
>robbing a store? the clerk will pull out a gun, unless you activate the script telling him you want to rob 10x as much from his back room that you heard about, then he'll happily comply
this would be fine in another game because it's just a game but rdr2 feels like it's trying not to be "just a game"
i also can't believe how shallow the open world stuff is, you can't go into a pub and start a bar brawl, unless you're on a mission where a scripted bar brawl plays itself out. whats the point in games like this? i can't believe rockstar games are still like this, playing san andreas as a kid was fun but the dream was to play an open world game that was so dynamic that the actual open world sections would have as much spectacle as the missions but instead we've still got the same shallow open world combined with brittle as fuck scripted ass missions where all the cool stuff happens
Yeah I think it might just be my controller
you know someone's an autistic freak when they unironically say "verisimilitude"
Fucking persona 5 has a better completion rate and that game is about 100 hours long
this
didnt see people actually finish it
>bland characters without any depth
Completely untrue, random Yea Forumsniggers need to stop pretending they're literature critics and that nitpicking is a replacement for criticism. The characters have more depth to them than any game I can think of.
>>same old go here, shoot here, go back there missions
Fair, the mission design is completely linear and cinematic. There is no real depth to it.
Everything else is a nitpick.
its an useful world in general and it's extremely useful for explaining why rdr2 is a shit game
>tfw that's the way it is
it's objectively not bad though
fag lol
1 in 4 is pretty high especially for a long game. The average completion rate for a game is typically low, usually less than 50% I'd bet. Remember you're taking into account all the people who open it once and never really play it.
>last mission coming up
>Dutch just left John to die
>Abigail is about to be killed
>Sadie, at this point your only friend, goes to help you rescue her
>your whole world is falling apart and everything is going to shit
>you're about to fucking die
>mission title comes in
>Red Dead Redemption
>yfw
unironically got hype as fuck
yikes
that just further tells you how retarded your metric is
>HURDUR TROPHIES DONT EXIST
you know someone's an autistic freak when they unironically say "objectively"
>Arthur laughing
Is there a better sound?
Why is the multiplayer somehow worse than gta online when the single player shits all over gta5s completely garbage one
I've been playing this game literally every day for hours since the very hour it came out, doing stuff to plat the game
I'd say send help, but somehow I still fucking enjoy and love it, even to this day I can still spend an hour or two just simply hunting and camping around the map, still seeing new shit and hear new dialogues, I don't think there was ever a single player game that sucked me in this bad, I played the shit out of rdr1 but this is something else
if they'd release a story dlc I'd literally have no life because of the SP part of a rockstar game, wtf
good story, great graphics and some impressive systems, pretty mediocre gameplay. definitely worth $60- most AAA games in this era deliver much worse. in the end i think people will look back on this era and consider GTA V to be the superior game
If the story was good, why aren’t people interested in finishing it?
yer a good boyah
Spoiler tags, negro. OP hasn't even played it yet and you're giving away the best parts
trophies show the completion rate being pretty decent for a long game, especially AAA
would you like to present any actual arguments or data?
literally norway. people in helsinki were shocked when i said hello on the train
Persona 5 is in general a little unusual. Probably because it has a pretty niche audience relatively speaking.
>1 in 4 is pretty high especially for a long game.
not for a rockstar game
>trophies show barely above 20% of people complete the game
Excellent completion, god tier. Find a single lower game
Yea I love the game but the previews were complete horseshit and trying to pretend that stuff happenin in carefully scripted one time encounters was something that just happened dynamically with A.I adjusting to situations, almost life sim level which got me expecting something truly revolutionary. Which is dumb because the game is fine as it is but the pre-release hype was totally billing it as if said events could happen dynamically. I love the game though.
ah yes i forgot how easy it was for autistic, lonely, friendless Yea Forums virgins with empty lives to call projects with thousands of people and millions and millions of dollars behind them shit with a few criticisms as shallow as their personality
read a book sometime user
Was it just me or was that mission darker than usual? And by darker I mean the contrast
If so that's a pretty cool detail since Arthur is on borrowed time and dies literally minutes later
the completion for the epilogue trophy is 30% lol
the main story, 34
you're pretty bad at this
>tfw I feel like the perfect life for me would be to settle on a farm with my gf and go fishing with my son when I have some free time now
I don't care how faggy it sounds, I just want some calm and chill already with my loved ones
Exploring the open-world is great. The missions are trash. Missions are bad mainly because they focus entirely on shooting and RDR2's combat simply isn't good. I would go as far as to say the combat is even worse than RDR1. Everyone also goes on about how the story is the greatest thing ever but honestly I just don't see it. It was way too drawn out and yet somehow none of the many characters got enough to time to shine for me to care about any of them. The only great character is Arthur. The games story really only starts to pick up in like chapter 3 and then it starts to go back downhill again from then on out. Its just such a mixed bag.
Game of the gen for me.
how many people actually finished the john marston arc?
i wouldnt be surprised if people stopped playing when it started
Post your Arthurs Boys
Because they're taking their time
I haven't finished it, but I sure as fuck plan too.
as soon as I can stop being addicted to lootfest games
>missions are bad because they focus entirely on shooting
Terrible taste. The shooting is actually good. What, you want more of those awful QTEs where you don't even have to be quick or accurate?
Mission Design was the absolute worst Rockstar has ever done.
Completely linear and fail conditions lurk around every deviation from the game's "intended" way of being played.
You can tell a story while allowing players the freedom to use gameplay mechanics the developers provided, MGSV has a linear story with singular objectives, but players have the freedom to tackle objectives how they want.
The controls themselves are very latent, Arthur/John isn't as responsive as he should be and the control scheme leaves the opportunity to do an unintended action wide open.
Horses have a mind of their own when not on paths. They have a pathfinding "assist" AI that will override player control and run you right into a tree or rock. It's accurate to say horses should be an autonomous animal, but it's an entirely different thing to have them smack into everything. Anyone who spent a great deal of time hunting should know the feeling.
I think that's all my complaints, I sunk 400 hours between the initial and 100% playthrough.
It's probably a 7/10 game, everything outside the main missions was pretty enjoyable.
I just wish there was more to do once you finish the main stories
Some of the stranger missions are fun, but a lot of them just seem so lame and boring
I'm playing this game to be a cool cowboy gunslinger, not to help someone take nature photographs or attend an art gallery
>the shooting is actually good
It's alright, I appreciate the game giving players a tired excuse to have a shootout, but what this game needed so desperately were ways of avoiding shootouts occasionally.
It's repetitive to a fault.
>red dead redemption 2 had a good story
Very good. Could've been excellent but there's a laundry list of little gripes and issues holding it back
>I'm playing this game to be a cool cowboy gunslinger
unironically, rdr2 is not that kind of game, rdr and rdrevolver fit that niche more
>What, you want more of those awful QTEs where you don't even have to be quick or accurate?
Yeah Deadeye really demands a lot of quickness and accuracy from the player. Being able to have nearly an infinite supply of items that let you replenish it on the spot also makes combat really tense and strategic. The braindead AI that you fight against also really adds to the amazing combat.
>I sunk 400 hours
>It's probably a 7/10
something about this seems very grim
Yes, it did.
Micah needed more depth, he was the most 2D of all the characters.
Stories are better developed when the antagonist and protagonist have the same goals, and drift further apart as the protagonist's character grows.
Micah was immediately introduced as the bad guy, rather than a guy we grew to resent.
Sunken cost, most of that time was spent hunting which I enjoyed very much.
Except hunting robins.
don't use deadeye lmao
i barely used it my whole playthrough and as a consequence the stat/wheel for it was complete garbage. if you turn the auto aim off there's more than enough fun to be had from testing your accuracy.
You can heavily enjoy a game and still notice its flaws you retard. There are many people who love the original Nier to death but they'll be the first to admit that the game has many flaws.
I heard a lot of people picking up the game because of the hype and because it was the new rockstar game, people who never even heard about RDR1
if the numbers show that the majority of players didn't finish the story completely it's totally understandable imo
I mean, why would they even give a fuck about the marston family? you don't spend too much time around them if you just focus on the story missions, and I'm sure for most people that is the case
imagine what it is like to players who don't know the previous games, you grow to love arthur and the end of his journey breaks your fucking soul, then like literally a few seconds later you're playing as one of the side characters, you're not allowed to do outlaw shit, you're milking cows and picking up their crap and listen to the other meaningless side character bitch about everything, I seriously 100% understand if that is a complete turn off for those people
for the fans of the first game the epilogues have some of the best moments of the entire game if you ask me
I ended up liking arthur even more than john, but when jim milton rides again starts and at american venom it felt fantastic, seeing john becoming the man we used to love like we love arthur now, I fucking love the epilogues desu
i did this too, but i had to use dead eye whenever riding and trying to shoot other people on horses. without a special mounted sensitivity setting or something it just seemed so impossible
The epilogue was excellent fan service.
The inability for Arthur to get to new Austin was puzzling because there's all kinds of side content locked there except through glitching.
Cheap Chinese food. The presentation seems great, but the closer you look the more you question the quality of the ingredients. Sure, you’re getting chicken and steak, but the portions are underwhelming and the vegetable Lomein and rice you’re getting on the side is just a cheap filler. Doubt sets in as the grand buffet with big plates you ordered off of doesn’t seem as nice as the orange chicken the person sitting next to you ordered off of the dedicated menu. You’re going to leave feeling like you ate something but will ultimately feel unsatisfied and hungry again 30 minutes later.
What are you talking about the game implemented tons of ways to sneak out of things without doing shootouts in the open world it just also has some shootout setpiece moments also, you're whining about nothing.
I finished Chapter 5 in RDR2 and I kept thinking to myself... why? It made no sense to the narrative, it added nothing in regards to gameplay variation, the amount of combat was disproportionally high, the pacing was rushed and you couldn't even explore the island. RDR2 is one of the worst games I've ever played
the epilogue has some of the best moments of the game for me, as rdr1 is my fav game ever. when american venom started playing i fuckin lost my shit
Deadeye is on a limited timer and it takes time to use the health items in game where you can still get hit and on the other hand combat is balanced around being able to throw lots of enemies at you at once, just saying the AI is braindead isn't much of an argument.
>food analogy
lmao cope
>tons of ways to avoid shootouts
youtube.com
This mission, the Indian relics mission, and the one where you have to steal medicine are the only ones that spring to mind.
There is no avoiding a shootout for 90%+ of the missions.
Did you play the game?
I know this gets memed a lot around here, but this is one of the most forced food analogies I've ever seen.
People who call the game "bad" or "shit" are stupid and disingenuous cocksuckers. Fuck 'em/
literally one of the best games I've ever played.
Chapter 5 was really weak, I rushed through it both times and the 100% playthrough I just glitched back to Guarma to finish the animals.
you dont need the guarma animals for 100%
>just don't use it!
This has never been, nor will it ever be an argument. Deadeye is this games ONLY fucking unique gameplay mechanic that separates it from other shooters. I love how you Rockstarfags main defense of RDR2's combat in every thread is
>just don't use auto-aim!
>just don't use deadeye!
How about I just play a better fucking game? Even when not using this shit (Which I did for the most part) it just plays like a generic TPS except with shitty controls and braindead difficulty. Fucking Uncharted of all franchises feels about 10x better to play than this garbage. Funnily enough despite being a linear moviegame Uncharted has more options in combat than this "open-world" game. You can actually stealth some sections in Uncharted if you want to, whereas in RDR2 every fucking missions is just a massive shootout with no variation on how you can approach it.
>hear some random chatter at a train station or shop in game
>they talk about other people's secrets and stuff, guess it's just there to make the world feel more alive
>a few days later videos on youtube pop up about players actually finding those secrects and treasures
damn this game makes me feel like I'm never gonna see everything it has
I'm aware, it bothered me.
how is slowdown a unique mechanic lol
zoomer detected
south park shilled it so i hated it
You won't.
There are all kinds of unique, random events between characters at the camp that are specific to each chapter that you'll never see outside of youtube.
>it just also has some shootout setpiece moments also,
wow did you even read the rest of my post?
This is kind of a dumb ramble but do you remember that leaked map from around 2015-2016 that was confirmed to be real later on through trailers and locations matching? There was a place in it called New Bordeaux, and Rockstar had to change it to Lemoyne because of Mafia 3 having the same location, and they also had to rerecord every single line of dialogue mentioning it. Curiously though, one of Uncle's many songs he sings in the game have it left over as a lyric. Shows their game is too big even for their own good.
You know what? I agree, its not that unique of a mechanic. So even with deadeye, it doesn't have anything unique separating it from other shooters, other than it feels like complete shit to control.
>OOOH AAAH doing the same thing I've done the whole game but with flashy graphics going on around
You're easily amused aren't you?
That's just wrong. The biggest distinguishing aspect of the shooting gameplay for me is how it has you pull the trigger to cock your gun, pure sex. But also no other shooter has been paired with a world as detailed, vibrant and mechanically interesting to explore before also not a lot of musket shooters in general
They went all in on realism and the game suffered for it
RDR1 was superior.
it is called VIDEO games...
New Bordeaux got changed to Saint Denis, not Lemoyne.
Not really. RDR2 has vastly superior gameplay and instead of having RDR's half-assed atmosphere it actually went the extra mile.
Whoops, you're right, misremembered.
It sucks they had to rework so much just because some piece of shit game like Mafia 3 thought of a name first.
comfy
>The biggest distinguishing aspect of the shooting gameplay for me is how it has you pull the trigger to cock your gun
Just wow.
Goty 2018
rdr1 literally does nothing better than rdr2 except for the general western aesthetic and multiplayer
everything else, rdr2 is better in every conceivable way
And the reason they didn't change Uncle's song was because the voice actor died midway through development, and they didn't want to have Uncle singing with a different voice when 3 seconds later you could be hearing him talk in a completely different one.
>it doesn't count because reasons
lol don't you have some glue to sniff or something?
The combat is ....................................fun........................................
that is a really big difference to pretty much every other shooter out there though, and it's incredible enjoyable in rdr2
I can agree with this.
It tries to show that ditches idea of a tropical paradise is flawed. It's supposed to convey Dutch is full of shit
imagine being so desperate to hate a game that you discredit any argument just because it makes you seethe
Fuck you Mason's encounters are heartwarming and awesome
I don't know, I dropped it.
>They have a pathfinding "assist" AI that will override player control and run you right into a tree or rock. It's accurate to say horses should be an autonomous animal, but it's an entirely different thing to have them smack into everything.
they don't, the horses naturally avoid obstacles, but because the player is often trying to override the horse's direction and pulling him in the opposite direction the horse crashes. Just hold or tap X, or, God forbid, slow down, and the horse will stay away from obstacles.
This game was dreadfully boring. Every time I boot it, I just get so bored after five minutes and turn it off. The gunplay sucks. The simulation aspects are disjointed as fuck and really only serves to annoy you. The mission design is too restrictive to give replay value. The world is massive but I feel no desire to linger in it since the overlaying gameplay systems are so lame and counterintuitive. At times, playing the game feels like watching a series of animations play out. Just wandering in the camp, you do nothing but observe animations with voice acting. It treats the player too much like a passive force that can't be trusted with agency.
This is the one game I wanted to love since I really liked the first game but it's going down as a brutal disappointment. Kojima was upset that MGSV would never be as big as GTAV but in truth it is Rockstar that should've learned from MGSV's gameplay and emergent design.
Yeah, outside of VR, I think the push for realism has reached the point where it's detrimental to the experience. So many actions could be expedited because they're boring to watch.
Selecting a command prompt to pick up a can of peas is such a drawn out process. The animation to pick it up and place it in Arthur's satches is long as it is, but it's that much longer when you realize that there's often only one specific spot that the animation can play. So pressing the prompt doesn't immediately play the animation and complete the action, it first has to activate a pathfinding AI that guides the Player Character(PC) to the animation start point, which can be more lengthy than the action.
More problems arise when Arthur gets stuck on something while finding his way to the animation start point, the action will fail and the PC will just stand there unresponsive for a moment or two and the player's intended action will not complete.
Sometimes even if the PC doesn't get stuck on something, the animation will still fail to play.
RDR2 is a fairly fast paced game where the player's priority could change quickly. Being stuck in a long animation(skinning a bull for example) while some cow owner is blasting away at you with the help of the law incoming feels like it takes an eternity.
>wtf I crashed because I steered into the direction of an obsticle this game sucks
lol
>he animation to pick it up and place it in Arthur's satches is long as it is, but it's that much longer when you realize that there's often only one specific spot that the animation can play. So pressing the prompt doesn't immediately play the animation and complete the action, it first has to activate a pathfinding AI that guides the Player Character(PC) to the animation start point, which can be more lengthy than the action.
It adds to the game's challange in that you need to orient yourself properly for the maximal reward, don't see the issue here.
i want this game on pc desperately because the mods for it would be incredible
I'm not saying it doesn't count. Its just a little detail, though. Its barely a fucking mechanic.
How the hell does it make that big of a difference?
imagine being so desperate to defend a game that you think that pulling the trigger to cock your gun is some kind of huge distinguishing mechanic from other shooters
This is just a great example of how disjointed RDR2's gameplay design is. There are aspects that are simulation with long drawn-out animations. And then there is you laying waste to 100s of ODriscolls with your Dead Eye mechanic that instantly headshots them. What's it going to be, Rockstar? Is this a simulator or an arcade shooter? You can't be both at the same time.
did you quote the wrong person
The lock on mechanic makes gunfights QTE events.
you DID stand unshaken, right Yea Forums?
marston was one of the best shot in the gang, he could handle the situation, and you still had some talking to do with dutch and micah
Set pieces don't conjur images of video games so much as movies.
Video games to me are interactive, so the player interaction must take primacy over most everything else. Adding flashy content doesn't add to the player interactions with the game in a meaningful manner. To me, the setpiece shootouts didn't feel anymore impactful than fighting a small camp of O'Driscoll's, just way more drawn out than it needed to be.
>How the hell does it make that big of a difference?
for people who like guns it makes a pretty huge difference to feel like you actually have to control the gun. i fucking love authentic gun handling in games, so i really enjoyed that aspect of rdr2.
Literally every story mission past chapter 3 ends with something going wrong and you in a shootout with 50 lawman / gang members, it gets extremely predictable.
It was kind of cool at first, but it's retarded how they make double action revolvers arbitrarily less damaging. Even though double actions are more costly, it's just a downgrade
>well just don't use them!
Obviously.
Also can we talk about how the game keeps you from buying guns until so late in the story? I have 3 thousand dollars in old west money and no one will sell me a shotgun until i do some random ass story mission? Fuck off rockstar
>There are aspects that are simulation with long drawn-out animations. And then there is you laying waste to 100s of ODriscolls with your Dead Eye mechanic that instantly headshots them. What's it going to be, Rockstar? Is this a simulator or an arcade shooter? You can't be both at the same time.
This might surprise you, but no game is full simulation and no game is full arcade. Literally every game has elements of both. Even ARMA or shit like Gary's War In The East.. So you're completely wrong, you can be both, you'll just veer more to one side.
>video games don't have setpieces
uh wrong
>Adding flashy content doesn't add to the player interactions with the game in a meaningful manner.
Okay that's fine, the game still has one of the most fleshed out interaction systems in an open world game already though, so...
>the setpiece shootouts didn't feel anymore impactful than fighting a small camp of O'Driscoll's
So you're telling me storming the Braithwate mansion or American Venom was as impactful as a random encounter? sure alright.
Threading a horse between two trees only to have it strip player control and run right into one of them is the most frustrating thing.
Let me control the horse, I know what I am doing and without the game's "assistance" I would have been fine.
Don't fucking hold my hand.
>You can't be both
Why not? Because one autist projects arbitrary restrictions onto a game in his head?
this, even though I only have a shitty laptop, this game alone would make it worth to buy a decent pc
ARMA is both. But it is not as blatantly hypocritical about it. RDR2 is two extremes playing together whereas Arma is more of a compromise between arcade and sim. I honestly don't see how I can be immersed in several minutes skinning animals in the same game where you can instantly headshot a dozen bad guys with one button.
Says who? It's a video game.
RDR2 is the perfect example that it doesn't matter how much manpower, time, polish you throw at a game if the gameplay is boring. It's one of the biggest, most expensive games ever and I'd rather play Tetris 99
Because those design principles stand in polar opposite and when presented in the same game, comes off as trivial.
>switchfag coping with his lack of games
Missions suck, open world is revolutionary. Dutch is the best meme video game character since Tingle. Soundtrack is good as fuck. 8/10
How the hell did Micah lose his eye? He had both in my game.
in one of the endings Arthur knifes it out of him
No one cares what you think is "trivial" you pedantic little fannyboy. Most games have hypocritical design, especially when it comes to comparing gameplay design to story design. It doesn't matter.
>video games don't have set pieces
Yes that's clearly what I said.
When you're done beating the strawman you can address the actual argument, which is:
Video game's mechanics and gameplay interactions are the only meaningful metric for evaluating them.
Having flashy content in tandum with the same underwhelming gameplay and mechanics, that we use everywhere in the game, does not make it better.
Even worse is forcing players into those situations at every turn.
>RDR1
>John is a hard ass family man that dont take no shit from any one
>RDR2
>John is a whiney fuck boi who doesn't care about his kid and regularly gets bullied
I would have liked it more if they didn't feel the need to shit on John's character just to make the new guy look cool. Its pretty shallow writing. Like a super villain who killls his own henchmen to prove how super evil he is.
I just let go of the left stick and the horse will weave through shit all by itself.
Only you seem to believe this and you have yet to present a convincing argument as to why a person should believe it.
exactly, that's what I said. if the horse AI thinks it's in danger it will struggle with the player just like any horse would. just stop trying to give it directions, calm it down and hold X and it'll avoid obstacles automatically
>Yes that's clearly what I said.
Yeah and you're wrong. You can have gameplay mechanics in a setpiece lmao your argument makes no sense.
>armchair developer autist thinks his opinion has any bearing on what is or isn't acceptable in a game
Priceless.
The point is that John evolves into the John in RDR1. Why would he be the exact same character? Also, John does come off pretty cool in this game. I fail to see how he's "shit on", everyone in the gang loves him and he's Arthur's favorite. If anyone should get mad about a character being shit on, it's Bill fanboys, if those even exist.
and yes, having polished content does indeed make the game better and no the player is never forced into a story mission...
retard
john explicitly says multiple times in rdr1 that he was a bad man and bad father and that he wants to make up for it and has been trying to
You sure it's the right gun? Only spins the right-hand gun, left hand he just kinda flips it in his hand and pushes it in slightly fancily.
Here's my argument:
Why should I immerse myself in the game's simlike aspects of nurturing Arthur and watching 5 second long animations of skinning animals, in the same game where you also partake in arcade shootouts laying waste to hundreds with ease? Why does the game think I care about how hungry Arthur is in the same game where he basically turns into Terminator during missions?
But really, the problem with RDR2's simlike aspects is that they rarely add anything of note to make the gameplay richer. And maybe that's not the fault of the sim features but how flawed the actual gameplay and movement is. Maybe the sim features don't even matter in a game where it takes a second to just initiate a movement and aiming is cumbersome? On that note, why is this game that relies so heavily on simulation also making auto aim the default aim option? And manual aim being completely busted?
Sorry I guess I was trying to provide another example for you against the others you were arguing with.
What a low IQ post. He's not even that whiny, nor portrayed that badly, just flawed and immature, which is exactly what he described himself as in RDR1. He always said that he wasn't the best father he could've been to Jack and they show that well in this game. And despite his shortcomings, Arthur is really the only one that dislikes him, and that's only for a short period of time since John grows into the good man we know him as over the course of the game.
something about these new games are better than ever when you play them, but forgettable twice as quickly
To add to this he also won't do it if you're dual wielding
I'm not a developer. All I can do is play RDR2 and compare it to other open-world games. I can compare it to RDR1 or MGSV and say how the two latter games are infinitely superior in gameplay.
its because you aren't 12 anymore
rdr2 is objectively better than rdr1 in every conceivable way though
>I can compare it to RDR1 or MGSV and say how the two latter games are infinitely superior in gameplay.
lol
not a bill fanboy, but he actually didn't deserve all the shit he got from the gang, no one ever talks about how well his robbery went down, they make fun of his mental illness and loyality etc.
sure, he's not a character who would be easy to like or get close to, but he had his demons and really couldn't have turned out too much better knowing his background, considering all this shit he's still a decent feller even if he's a fag, but that just makes his personality even deeper imo
To each their own I guess. I enjoy the snappier RDR1 more, with a more functional free aim and superior ragdoll physics. Also better free roaming music.
My argument is that unless set pieces are affecting the player's interactions with the game in a meaningful way, then you might as well not use them in an evaluation of whether a mission is good or not.
Red Dead 2 is chock full of shooting and yet it all feels the same from one mission to the next, why use emotional attachment to video game characters and story(which sucks for the most part) as a method of evaluating a mission when you could discuss the mechanics that belie them in a more objective fashion.
You have no core principle or axiom by which you judge a video game's content. I do, it's based on whether the gameplay is good, in other words, whether or not the player character, an avatar for the player themselves, is able to affect change within the video game world in a satisfying manner.
Video games are played for their interactions, not some fucking story, that's superfluous bullshit, if it's good, fine, but game mechanics and gameplay are the backbone.
If anything I was expecting people to be upset that John was too much of a Mary Sue in this game. Goes to show that there's no way you can give enough fanservice to a diehard I guess.
>Arthur is really the only one that dislikes him
He doesn't even really dislike him. Arthur feigns dislike for John because he loves him and felt personally betrayed when John left. He reveals as much to Charles
"Well its just, he was family, you know? And he left for a whole year. I guess I still haven't really forgiven him for that."
There is not one thing in RDR1 that's better over 2.
The writing in 2 is vastly superior. The gunplay is vastly superior. The atmosphere and general slow roleplay-esque aspects of RDR1 have been vastly expanded upon and improved instead of being half-assed. The visuals are obviously superior. The music is more varied and better. The map is a lot bigger and even includes RDR's and is by far Rockstar's best. The hunting is by far the best out of any game that wasn't a hunting game first and foremost.
Real the only thing I can think of that RDR1 has over it is Liar's Dice.
couldnt get past the first 20 minutes
boring as hell
Yikes
overhyped garbage
Ah guess
>He didnt play enough to know what slippery bastard is
this post is legitimately embarrassing
you know you're arguing from a defeated and utterly retarded place when you unironically try to say rdr is better than rdr2
Bill does unfairly take a lot of flack from the gang but unfortunately he's just low IQ and naturally gravitated to the low IQ position. Arthur does congratulate him on the bank job but Bill is also a retard who got Sean killed through his idiocy.
you just have OCD famalamadingdong
I replayed RDR1 half a dozen times. I can't even bother finishing RDR2 twice. Maybe I just got older, I don't know.
Just because the shooting mechanics don't change from mission to mission doesn't mean the missions are samey also you're constantly unlocking new weapon types all the time.
>You have no core principle or axiom by which you judge a video game's content. I do, it's based on whether the gameplay is good
Woah big brain over here, I like RDR2 myself because I think the gameplay is indeed good and you have yet to present anything resembling a coherent argument as to why this isn't so.
I don't think he is though all of the successful heists have Bill in them. He's just gay
rdr1 is my #1 favorite game and while I can't say rdr2 passes it (but only for nostalgia reasons), you're definitely full of shit
rdr2 is objectively better, it just is.
It just isn't. Not with that embarrassing ass input lag and terrible manual aim.
those aren't flaws, you're just bad at controlling the game.
the manual aim is dogshit on default settings I agree but I have my settings adjusted perfecetly
no problem with input lag
Bill got a pretty fair treatment in RDR2, he comes off as the most potent yet most circumstantial villain of the first game. He more or less turns into bargain bin Dutch in New Austin, I'd say he did pretty well for himself all things considered.
The input lag is an objective truth you can't deny no matter how hard you spin that shit.
I forgot to criticize the wanted/bounty system.
It actually feels like the wanted system was outsourced to a small development team and then brought in house. It's comically bad the things that you get wanted for while NPCs are often immune to reprocutions.
You can be shot to death inside a police station without a bounty, in front of the chief/sheriff, and he won't fucking do anything unless he gets hit.
All the more frustrating is that most of the time the NPC that's shooting your guts out was the one that not only began shooting, but instigated and elevated the situation.
To top it all off on this shit sundae, if you return fire at a guy who is shooting you, YOU WILL GET A BOUNTY.
6/10 game, final answer.
there's only a lag when you first start moving your character, not for the entire game
sorry you suck lol
>all of the successful heists have Bill
John's train heist was a success, no Bill.
Scam mission with Hosea was a success, no Bill.
Burning the Gray's fields was a success, no Bill.
Those above become increasingly liberal with the term "heist" as you tick through them but still. You can tell Bill is low IQ by how he talks and acts. Bill is imo the dumbest member of the gang with Hosea being the smartest.
not really, the delay when just walking is intentional to differentiate from doing it automatically if you start tapping A. Not every game needs to control like fortnite :)
And apparently also not like RDR1.
So I finished main mission and just started the epilogue. Can I watch all the different endings now or will I get spoiled? Also, I left a couple sidequests unfinished and am sad I will not be able to finish em. Or will I?
>cruising the mountains with a native american
>damn this view is beautiful
>suddenly arthur goes "dude i had a son once but he died lmao"
Where the fuck did that come from?
another R* game where retards whine about mechanics because they don't understand how they work and instead end up begging for them to make the game worse under the guise of making it better lol
I mean no one in the gang respects him, he doesn't seem competent at all, and he's an idiot. It's tough because canonically from RDR he's supposed to be dumb but still, he doesn't even seem dangerous in RDR2. Compare him to Javier who comes across much better.
Finish the epilogue first.
I love how the Native just interrupts his sob story with OH THIS IS THE FLOWER
sure
>Native american comes upon some buffalo hunters
>BLOWS THEM IN HALF WITH A FUCKING SHOT GUN OUT OF NO WHERE
>over some damn cows
The wanted system is pretty bad and its amazing how terrible R* is at innovating the wanted system in general. It's shit in all of their games.
Well unlike you evidently I don't use the autoaim. 100 percent freeaim.
>superior ragdoll physics
I'm going through the story missions to get those fucking gold medals, and I'm actually not sure about this desu
at first I felt the same way, like they made it more realistic and less over the top to fit the vibe of the game, but I've seen some pretty hilarious shit in shootouts lately, I don't mean like glitchy stuff, but enemies spinning around from repeater blasts like crazy, it's very satisfying, I also see more enemies almost intentionally stumble toward ledges and fences when being shot, like they did in the first game
is the online any better?
RDR2 is the most detailed and comprehensive dimension of virtual reality ever made. Compared to other games it is like entering The Matrix
To someone who has (>) room temperature IQ, it's pretty clear what I'm suggesting.
Graphics and stories are completely meaningless to video games, they don't make me enjoy a game any more or less as long as the gameplay is satisfying. It's all about how it controls, the mechanics, and how the world reacts to player interactions.
There were a lot of things RDR2 had correct and many that it has wrong. Even hunting, which I enjoyed the most, had problems with the way animals spawn maning it very challenging at times to find certain critters without knowing an exact spawn area. Makes hunting feel very inorganic that there are very specific spots within a biome that spawn particular animals and only a certain amout per day, at certain times, and certain weather conditions.
>ride into valentine
>see two guys beating someone
>what about it bitch you gon step up?
>yeah no since magic bounty
>ride into valentine later
>guy shoots other guy
>challenges me
>welp guess that's okay then
>kill him and get bounty on my head
How pissed Charles got and Arthur's reaction to it was amazing.
>"Come on. Let's follow them"
>"....okay."
>"There's their camp."
>"Just uh, let me know what you want to do Charles."
>Graphics and stories are completely meaningless to video games
wrong
Propbably because the only people that bought that shit are desperate weebs that had no life and needed to live through a videogame.
>hunting is bad because some animals spawn less frequently
Don't think I'm the brainlet here lmao
I've been thinking, I love the story and all the characters, but some of the characters really are kinda boring. Think about Charles and Lenny for a sec. They don't really have any flaws, they're just presented as cool nice guys that you're meant to like from the very start. Meanwhile everyone else is portrayed as flawed in some way, which gives them more depth and makes them more interesting and relatable. I still like Lenny and Charles a lot, it's just something I've thought about. Even Sadie, to an extent, doesn't really get much to her character until way later on.
100% correct
As long as the game works in a 3D space and can accurately represent interactable objects so players can intuitively make sense of objectives or creat their own, then it doesn't matter how the graphics look.
I don't have to even grace the idea of stories in videogames being important, they're absolutely not.
For you maybe
You've set more of these up than I can count lad. Keep going, the next one will definitely support your non existent counter-argument.
7/10.
Great story, great characters, faulty game design and clunky controls.
It's not like you even said anything with that post other than that. Sure you can prioritize gameplay all you like but RDR2 still controlled well and has lots of fun mechanics and most detailed interaction in an open world lol
This is just your interpration of what is important in a game and you're acting like its objective fact. If a videogame is understand as an artpiece that incorporates music, visuals, story/narrative, and interactivity then all components matter.
Lenny and Charles DO have a flaw, and it's a major one.
They're black.
I'll set a scarecow up for you too.
lol is this acfag?
understood*
PC PORT WHEN
>As long as the game works in a 3D space and can accurately represent interactable objects so players can intuitively make sense of objectives or creat their own, then it doesn't matter how the graphics look.
So, by your own admission, graphics are, in fact, important to video games.
>tfw HOSEA AND LENNY DIED FOR FUCKING NOTHING
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
You dont have to use dead eye all the time i just used it for situations when i was overun you are just a moaning shit cunt kill yourself faglord
To certain extent, it's not necessary though to meticulously detail anything beyond a basic representation.
That doesn't make it irrelevant
soon I hope
GOTY 2018
t. salty pcfag
Dont worry bro it will come out for pc soon
MGSV was complete shit btw and Kojima is a hack.
yeah it is acfag lol
Overrated Garbage, just like the rest of "modern" R*.
YNNEL
My only complaint is that I missed Arthur for the last hours.
One of the best player characters ever.
Isnt there a mission where Lenny messes up because he's naive?
Hosea I can understand but what did lenny ever offer to the gang?
This whole "a character must have a noticeable obvious flaw to be REAL" idea is kind of a fucking meme dude. It's like a rough tip for newbie writers so they don't make shit Mary Sues, but in reality a character doesn't need to have one obvious glaring flaw, that in itself is unrealistic. For one thing, there are cool nice guys in real life, and for another thing, the value of a character isn't in its ability to have a one-to-one match-up with an authentic person.
Also, what's Hosea's flaw? Javier's?
Gun to my head if I had to pick flaws for Lenny and Charles I would say that Lenny is too naive and and that Charles is overly serious and grim. Think about how Charles handles the buffalo hunting situation, its obvious he loses control.
In much the same way that IQ stops correlating with successful life outcomes after the 110~ mark, so to do graphics stop meaning much for a good game beyond basic competency in demonstrating representations of understandable objects in a 3D space.
He was Arthur's son figure.
nah. also,
>to
oof
I made several spelling mistakes and mistypes in previous posts, go back and find them too.
>I've never had a black son, but if I did I want him to be just like you
Too on rails for cinematic purposes, Controls are sluggish and the online is filled with auto aim babies with barely anything to do you cant do in singleplayer. Story is great though and Arthur is one of the best characters I've ever played as.
also that graph doesn't seem to support the statement that the correlation ends at 110 so you may just be stupid.
Based
>Greet
>Howdy Mister!
>Rob
>Actually, I'm robbing you. Give me all your money, now!
>Dismiss
>Nevermind, you're small fry anyway, I'm gonna go find someone richer
Fucking love the dialogue when you mix it up
most of the side quests you started you can continue as john, and surprisingly he actually mentions arthur's passing before getting on with the mission and the dialogue changes accordingly which is pretty impressive
Not him, but Hosea cooks up his own poorly thought out dumb schemes like Dutch does and Javier can't think for himself.
Do you literally have no aesthetic sense whatsoever? Your opinion on what a game should be comes off autistic, and I mean that in the literal sense rather than the meme one.
A game should prioritize interactivity over superficial elements. What's not to understand?
RDR2 needed some serious work on several major mechanics, but it didn't recieve it.
Hosea's schemes actually work though, that's the thing. It isn't a flaw, its a strength. The problem with the plans aren't that they're too complex and ambitious, it's that Dutch's are hyper-violent and take a shitload of risk. Hosea's plans minimize said risk and don't rely on violence. Arthur probably describes him best when he simply says to Charles that he's "a conman, born and bred".
>A game should prioritize interactivity over superficial elements.
"Prioritize" is very different from "the interactive elements are all that matters". You're shifting the goalposts, trying to use sophisticated language to come off as intelligent while in reality your argument is incredibly weak and relies on fallacy and tone.
yeah worked so well it got him killed lmao. Just because they're more competent doesn't mean they're flawless.
look, I really don't want to change your mind about the game, I just want to say that even though the bounty system IS pretty much broken, I've had several encounters where the law were at my side
the last one I remember was at rhodes, where a lemoyne raider started to talk shit, I antagonized him but didn't draw my weapon or hit him, but he still started to shoot at me and since I didn't want any trouble or bounty on my head I started running to the sheriff's office and he shot the lemoyne raider
it actually turned out to be a pretty huge shootout between the npcs because a few more lemoyne raiders turned up and started to shoot at the sheriff and other lawmen, I had to take cover but after a while they didn't even shot at me, I watched the whole thing going down on the streets, it was actually pretty cool, they didn't even acted as retarted as they like to do againts the player for some reason
maybe it has something to do with your honor or they don't defend you if you already have some bounty on you, I don't know but this is how it was, something similar happened at valentine with some o'driscolls too
that's acfag for you.
He's a better schemer than Dutch sure but he still failed to consider all possibilities with the Braithwaites and then again with the Pinkertons, which led to his death.
Pretty bad
>buy console to play it because "this is the best game ever made"
>have to buy a keyboard and mouse adaptor because controllers are cancer
>Start playing, getting hype because the game actually has good music and I love comfy snow missions
>THEN THE SNOW GOES AWAY
>Game gets progressively worse and worse
>Only good missions after SNOW were the bar fight and being a shekel lord
>Story is predictable as hell
>Guns are all 1 shot to the head so weapon progression is pointless, the base pistol is just as good as the last pistol the only thing that changes is reload speed
>Get to the feminist march
>Been on edge of quitting before this shit
>Drop the game halfway through the carriage ride
3/10 looks nice and has good music, but not near as good as consolebabs claim it is
Graphics 10/10
It is one of the most gorgeous games I have played, mainly due to the natural landscapes which are also explorable, not just for ornamental purposes.
Story 8/10
Too long, at first I was very intrigued in how everything was going to end up, but I lost interest after Guarma and even more after the native american missions. I did not care about Micah until Arthur's last mission. I finished the epilogue just to achieve the 100% story.
Gameplay 8/10
It is the best open world in any videogame. It was sursprising how I prefered to travel by horse instead of fast travel because of the explorable lore in every area of the map, also to encounter scripted events to increase the protagonist's honor. However, the controls feel very slow and unintuitive. In more than one ocassion I ended up robbing pedestrians instead of getting on my horse, dealing with the police and paying my bounty because bounty hunters interrupt every scripted event such as legendary animal or treasure hunting.
>>Story is predictable as hell
lol okay
What? That was Dutch's plan, not Hosea's lol. Hosea was against the robbery in the first place.
how do you intuitively get off your horse while having the left trigger pulled down?
Hosea was the one who discovered there was no gold in the first place. The failure with the Braithwaithes was again Dutch's retarded schemes.
Good experience ruined by being a bad videogame.
He thought there was gold as well though. Either way not everybody needs to be as incompetent as everybody else, that's just dumb.
Just got to the island and I'm honestly not sure if I feel like playing more. I've had some fun with it but I feel like the game holds my hand too much and I've played long enough.
excellent movie
In PS4, triangle is for rob nearby pedestrians or get on a horse.
this isnt a linear ND quipfest though
>lets go to these town to get some fish
>OMG ITS THE ODRISCOLLS, SHOOT EM ARTHUR
rinse and repeat
it only robs if you have them targeted
babys first western story
yeah except not really
the only good missions were the bounties, the banks and the mansion
the rest were mediocre, also micah ruined the whole story
...
Had an overall great story with some small flaws in the gameplay, but still one of the best games this generation.
Pacing isn't for everyone, myself included. Single player was alright but the online is garbage.
Good game and story. Exploring the world was actually fun.
Imagine being so retarded that instead of defending your opinion you say "Some other people didn't finish it and that proves my point even though most people don't finish games"
based
>He thought there was gold as well though.
Yes initially he did but his plan was to work through the situation through conman methods (i.e. lying and talking his way to obtaining information) to verify it. This all makes perfect sense, its how you logically try and investigate what could be a real opportunity without taking stupid risk. When the gang is riding to the Manor Hosea says
>there is no gold, I've turned over about every stone
Meanwhile Dutch's plan was just to assume there was gold and then to pull retarded antics trying to get the two families to kill each other. Cue a bunch of idiot shit that ends up getting a member of the gang killed, Jack stolen, and their entire cover blown and results in a ton of violence and further risk. All of this is Dutch. Hosea meanwhile returns the stolen booze in order to get an in and starts cozying up to the Braithwaites to obtain leads.
> Either way not everybody needs to be as incompetent as everybody else, that's just dumb.
I agree, just making the case that Hosea is competent/intelligent.
Competent gameplay if a little old given how it removes a ton of player choice and some might find the overemphases on "muh realism" detrimental which I can sympathize with. Story is fantastic, though I feel as though it was unneeded. RDR1 was a game about Dutch's gang after it fell apart. We really didn't need to see WHY it fell apart. We got told why in RDR1. Still, story's great, characters are great, VA is great, music might just be the best damn thing out of the whole deal. Overall, 8/10. It also gave us Dutchposting, which I loved.
The epilogue was one of the best parts of the game. I'm not the first to say this, but they made a mission where you just press X occasionally one of the funnest experiences in the game, thanks to the story and music
also
>that bluejay
Did we get told why it fell apart in RDR1? I don't remember really getting told much. I also wouldn't say RDR1 was a game about "Dutch's gang after it fell apart". Javier appears 1 time, Bill appears only a couple more, and Dutch appears in like 4 missions. RDR1 is a game about John Marston, not really a game about Dutch or Dutch's gang.
Name five things that are better. Cause it sure as shit ain't the band motorcycle horses, the exact same point and click shooting as RDR 2, the mostly empty open-world, the nonexistant hunting mechanics, the lifeless towns, the side missions that never give you a satisfying conclusion. Have you played recently?
I'll always love that game but it was always the story that pushed it to greatness
To add to this, the one mission you do that is Hosea's operation from the ground up (Emerald Ranch mission) goes smooth as butter and no one even fires a shot.
so is this shit worth 47$ ? is on sale now, i watch some youtube videos about RDR2, look good, but maybe i will get bored if is just a lot of walking
One of the best narratives in vidya and the game itself lends to that. It also is hands down the most immersive open world that I've ever seen with actually changing pieces through time and characters who remember you and your deeds making you feel like you had a small part in changing it. The gameplay is clunky at times and while most ADHD autists on this board cant function with flashing bright lights constantly, I can see why the decision to slow down certain segments was implemented as a way of realistically portraying a outlaw living off the land in the late 1800s. The voice acting and soundtrack are top tier as well. And though by the end you will probably be a little burnt out there is a decent amount of content to keep you interested in the world.
That being said. Once you do finish the game. It does tend to drag its feet giving you anything worthwhile to do. Not many bounties. Challenges that become almost a bore to complete. Lots of potential for gameplay mechanics that werent fully realized. The online is very bland and kinda messy once you realize its full of retards just killing everybody like in GTA. The slower mechanics do not lend well to the faster paced online play. All in all one of the most memorable gaming experiences in recent memory and raised the bar for fine polished large scale games. 9/10
I let go of the analog stick once right after Guarma when that song was playing on the way back to the plantation. Top atmosphere. Five seconds later the horse veered 90 degrees right into a fence by the road. That was the last time I let go of the analog stick.
It's fun
Also the dynamite thing could have very well been Arthurs fault. He even says as much to Lenny. He was the one who wired it
It was about John dealing with his past; chiefly, his past in the gang. We learned plenty about the gang. Dutch was an idealist who went mad after a robbery gone wrong and leaving John for dead. The other members, sure. I guess we learned in RDR 1 that Williamson was a stupid fucker and Javier was also an idealist who took Dutch's death hard but we see them for like five minutes. Just enough for Bill to say "Implores"
I agree with the points on challenges and bounties. No idea why there are so little bounties when RDR1 had so many and the challenges are so unimaginative. I liked how Master Hunter had a unique challenge at the end of it, it felt like it really capitalized that you are a "master hunter" by performing a unique feat like taking down this specific animal. Why couldn't they have carried it over to other challenges? Bandit in particular was begging for this. Why wasn't the last challenge a unique mission where Arthur robs a bank by himself?
I'm like 99% sure it was arthur's fault, I'm don't know shit about detonating and putting together explosives/wiring, and it might not be that crazy detailed, but I could imagine if you do that part in fps or move the camera to see what arthur does you'd be able to see he's doing it wrong
That actually confused me desu. Arthur followed Bill's instructions to the letter and they were pretty simple.
Another confusing train robbery thing: John's plan for his own train robbery was to cover the tracks in oil and ignite them to get the driver to stop. However, the gang doesn't actually do this. They just park the oil wagon on the tracks and don't ignite shit. If that was the case, why not use any old wagon? Why did it have to be an oil wagon?
Also Arthur stands on it to "make sure they stop". Why would that make any difference? If anything it just tips the driver off that a robbery is happening. I honestly am convinced that Arthur was just low key suicidal.
>It was about John dealing with his past; chiefly, his past in the gang.
Sure, but that doesn't translate to the story being "about the gang".
> Dutch was an idealist who went mad after a robbery gone wrong and leaving John for dead.
Any dialogue to support that Dutch's transition idea? From what I remember it was ambiguous but I haven't played it in a while. I don't recall John saying that he went mad because of the robbery.
Also, even so dude this isn't a ton of information at all, this is like a few scraps. You yourself seem to acknowledge that. It's definitely not enough to justify a statement like "this game is about Dutch's gang". No it isn't.
No he wasn't. He was the one who had the idea in the first place. During Bronte's party. He was against killing Bronte
had too much filler
Scraps I admit, but enough to get an idea of what the whole meal would have looked like.
single player is okay but has no replay value. multiplayer is filled michatransactions and the community has died down since launch. ill wait for it to be on pc.
Well for the oil robbery. 1!: It was a reference to The Assassination of Jesse James and 2: A wagon can get crashed through but an oil wagon would have blown the train the fuck up 3: He says he was always looking to die in his journal
has the best characters and overall plot of the generation. has the best graphics and immaculate sound design. pretty much everything about the open world gameplay is extremely bland to me, but this goes for most AAA open world games.
regardless, the game is worth experiencing for its plot and characters alone if you are the least bit interested in the van der line gang. but I couldn't help but feel the game would've had the same impact on me had it been a high budget HBO series.
>Single Player has no replay value
lol wrong.
>wait for it to be on pc.
Oh, that explains it
Flawed masterpiece, 9/10 due to some small nitpicks. Gameplay is fun, music is excellent, blends the best of western movies into the video game world without becoming a giant cutscene fest like MGS4, great writing, characters, locations, and story.
Got about an hour in and still didn't get to play at all so I returned it to gamefly for RE2