Red Dead Redemption 2

Arthur is gonna sleep good tonight with a belly full of warm stew laying next to the fire

like other developers, R* has been hard at work taking beloved video game franchises and turning them into less and less interactive movies

I didn't hate it, but the dedication to immersion made the game a lot less fun than I'd like. It really sucks to be hunting for furs and have to either have a train of horses or frequent trips to and from the trapper for big game. Still some pretty comfy atmosphere though.

/thread

>nothing supernatural in the entire game aside from the ghost train and the lady in the swamp
Huge missed opportunity, they even heavily teased at some stuff with Butcher Creek and the murfrees and neither of those went anywhere

Nincels bro. Game is 10/10

You mean realism, not immersion. It takes you OUT of a game when the controls are unresponsive for example

>18 horse breeds
>only like 4 are worth a shit and none of them can be found wild except the one arabian that has worse stats than the ones you can buy

What does it mean?

Attached: LT3YoPZ.jpg (3640x2048, 372K)

Probably nothing, just like the pentagram and the panoramic map you find on the frozen settlers

that game was Kino as fuck and Arthur was the best protagonist Rockstar has made in a while. Hope it comes out on PC because the worst part about that game is that I had to play it on a console.

because Yea Forums are contrarian faggots

Yea Forums was sucking this game's dick nonstop when it came out. You couldn't even criticize it without 40 retards jumping down your throat about how it was an unrivaled masterpiece

What do you gain by lying? The only threads that weren't full of contrarian faggots shitting all over it were dutchposting threads

Is the game actually good?

Yes, it's zoomer filter and Arthur is the best protagonist ever in a video game

You're the one lying shithead, I was personally in those threads calling this game shit while every one else was hailing this as the breakthrough game that would change gaming forever. You can't just make up whatever you want you fucking retard

Yes and no. It will depend on your personal tolerance and patience for slow/somewhat clunky gameplay, a story that feels like it started at the halfway mark, and a epilogue that kind of fails in ever regard.

Arthur is great but only because the performance, va, motion capture is so on point. As the player it becomes harder and harder to fully believe his actions as there was little exploration of character bonds before the game starts. Probably saving that for RDR3 I guess.

>a epilogue that kind of fails in ever regard.
It was too long, but it far from failed in every regard

7/10. Try it out.

You're full of fucking shit, nearly every single thread since the game came out has been full of spastics like you crying because the game doesn't zoom fast enough

Painfully slow and cinematic. It's been near a decade since I played the first but I don't remember it being that way. I played one session of 2 and I'd had enough for a lifetime. One of the only games in recent memory that was literally putting me to sleep.

I shouldn't expect terminally retarded people like you to remember anything that happened more than 2 weeks ago but those threads were absolutely filled with rockstar apologists (and you're proving they still are)

This is just where the honeymoon phase is over and everyone has come to terms with it, but you can't deny that Yea Forums LOVED this game when it was new, i remember clearly getting piled on in any thread where i dared to point out that the controls were bad and the horse management was stupid

Because it's boring. Trust me, I get the appeal. RDR1 was my favorite game of last gen along with New Vegas but after playing every Rockstar game baring GTA 3, i'm just burnt out from the formula.

The gameplay is just sickeningly restrictive.

>Bounty system makes me think i'm playing in North Korea, literally no fun allowed
>mission structure is mind numbingly linear

Those two things pretty much killed the game for me and trust me, I get its appeal and respect people who love it. It's an absolute kino Western game which is a criminally underepresented genre in video games so it fills that niche nicely, but for me? I hated it.

Getting off my horse and having my weapons auto equip to what Rockstar want me to have. Not being able to go too far ahead of characters in gun fights which results in them insta dying. Being forced to walk around in certain areas (the fucking camp). I'm 24 years old, I ain't got time for this kind of immersion that frankly, isn't fun

It also really felt like they half assed every major mechanic in the game

>urgh, Witcher 3 was pretty successful with its choices, let's have a handful thrown in randomly
>stealth is pretty hip these days in open world games, let's sprinkle a broken stealth system in there

Bottom line is I just didn't have fun. I loved the story, loved Arthur and loved the customization (being able to cosplay Angel Eyes was 10/10), hated the game.

To be fair, I hate most open world games. Only ones I enjoyed these past 10 years are:

>Witcher 3
>BoTW
>RDR1
>New Vegas

RDR2
>pros
Story and characters
>cons
Clunky and unresponsive controls
Railroad and linear mission design makes it feel like you're playing a point and click adventure and not a shooter
Gameplay is outdated and the crime and law systems are barely updated or refreshed
Under designed stealth

You're either lying or delusional, either way you're a fucking dipshit

so my posts were full of my own experiences of threads while the game was brand new and at its peak popularity, while your posts are full of

>WAAAH WAAAH, NO YOU'RE LYING AND STUPID FUCK YOU I'M RIGHT WAAAAHH

I think it's clear who the dipshit is here, dipshit

RDR2 is gamings equivalent to 2001: A Space Odyssey.

It's a richly detailed, slow-paced story that's both loved and criticized for the fact that it takes a long time to say anything. But it's the pace that lets you steep yourself in the world and appreciate the talent and time that went into crafting the surroundings.

I think RDR2 will largely be overlooked (as much as any R* game can be overlooked) this generation because of the trend of hyperactive shooters and streamtainment games. But it's a masterpiece in its own right and I'm incredibly happy that a AAA studio took the risk on making it.

Apathy is not hatred.

People love the game.

The people that don't
>1. follow influencer opinions and don't develop their own opinions
>2. played the game on poor-consoles like base PS4 and base Xbone
>3. didn't play the game at all (fucking shocking right)

C O P E
O
P
E

You saw a handful of obvious shills defending the game and your delusional fucking brain expanded them into entire threads full of rockstar acolytes singing its praises uncontested for months, yeah you're a fucking dipshit

Generic journo dick-sucking text.

Cope with what

Arthur is fucking great, better than John ever was.

RDR2 really just needed to not have bloom on the guns, that single change would have made it more enjoyable by an unfathomable amount. Needing to wait for a circle to shrink to accurately shoot is boring as fuck, and it really killed duel wielding pistols for me. If/When it comes to PC that would be the only mod I would require.

>i-i-it's a good game, y-y-you probably just have a shitty console, or m-maybe you're a shill probably, or also you didn't play it i bet (i'm always right btw)

coping with the insane insecurity you have towards a game you have nothing do do with

I mean I don't care what other people think, I have enough money for every console and game I want. I just know it's bullshit if someone thinks RDR2 is a bad game. They probably play shit like DMC and fighting games.

go to settings and make deazone slider all the way down, and acceleration all the way up. Vertical and horizontal sensitivity to your liking but generally higher than default is better.

Doesn't completely fix the problem, but it helps.

There's a shit lot of great stuff in the game, but there's also a good amount of flaws. I absolutely enjoyed the overall experience, but I can totally understand why someone wouldn't.
Like, the game is actually way too long. But at the same time, I don't think that the best scenes would be as impactful as they are if the game wasn't that long.
I won't defend the general gameplay, since there isn't much to defend anyway.

Attached: 1549798952797.gif (404x250, 2.37M)

thanks confirming your insecurity by making those weird non-sequitur statements about completely unrelated games and how much money you make

nigga go back and play GTA 3. It's dated in many aspects now, but it's still fun. Personally ranks 3rd in my R* rankings.

>lifeless
Can you name another open world that feels more alive than RDR2? Calling it lifeless is pretty dumb

Can’t play on Switch, Yea Forumsintendo central’s chosen platform

its popular and not from nipland.
you also have unrealistic fucks like
that think every single square inch of a game world has to be interactive. because they dont go outside much let alone outside a city/suburbs

DMC and fighting games are games made for people who think games are only dumb entertainment like Cards Against Humanity.
AKA people who hate RDR2

Attached: Killed by a lightning strike.webm (1280x720, 1.54M)

I get the time complaint, I also work a tiring job, but I don't write effortposts either. You're clearing spending way too much time on this forum (one of the worst non-mainstream ones that exist). Grow up laddy

I fucking loved the gameplay of RDR 2. The ending, boring epilogue, cheats disabling saving, and no new game +, deflated my excitement faster than Gabe sitting on a whoopie cushion though.

Attached: 1556286621614.gif (640x360, 2.24M)

The story was pretty shitty but the world was fun to play around in.

>look how realistic our game is, even horses balls shrink!!!
>still using the same shitty ragdoll physics and euforia engine or whatever was it called, making every movement like a chinese theatre

how the fuck they expect me to take the game seriously and "realistic" when everyone looks like is full of hellium?

by not being autistic about games.

It's funny

he's not wrong though

Most of Yea Forums that played it,loved it.
Sadly nowadays the discussions are full of BOTW fanatics and salty pcbros who are still waiting for a port annpuncement.

It's not a game but for wild west / RDR fans it was a huge treat.

Attached: 1548277028931.jpg (1920x1080, 376K)

>lovingly model horse balls that bounce and swing as you ride and shrink up in the cold
>model horse assholes that fart and shit every five minutes
>female horses are smoothed over like barbie dolls where their pussies should be

You shouldn't project so hard. the animations look like shit, and they can make every detail as realistic as they want, but it doesn't save how fucking lazy they are for something that you see happening each 5 minutes.

Those are the same animations from gta4, you can grab a piece of shit and paint it pink, but it will be still a piece of shit.

It's just bland and boring

the desperate need for attention

>something that you see happening each 5 minutes.
I've got like 300 hours in the game and I've never been struck by lightning

If the game gets a pc release maybe we can have mods like being able to fuck hookers, random people being hanged in towns every now and then and maybe horse vaginas for the zoophiliacs.

Attached: 1548277688990.jpg (1920x1080, 326K)

because of degens like you

I'm talking about the shitty ragdoll animations you cock gobbler.

They already have horse balls, dicks, and assholes, why not vaginas too

Attached: NPC kills himself.webm (1920x1080, 860K)

Yeah I almost never fall or see anyone go flying, you're complaining about nothing

because bronies get off on trying to fuck horses.

putting balls on a horse is just more r* low-brow humor. like truck nuts.

What about the dicks and assholes then, for that matter how come the horses never piss but they shit constantly

>I want game that
>has 90+ hours of game play
>a huge map that dwarfs most vidya maps
>huge cast of well acted characters
>great graphics with lighting to match
>every inch of the maps needs to have something to interact with
>the animations need to be 100% realistic

>but i want it NOW and refuse to pay over 59.99+tax(adjust for your market)

you have unrealistic standards for games. it would be like someone in 1996 bitching Chrono Trigger not being fully 3d and voiced.

Because most people here have too much time on their hands & are over critical. They can't just enjoy something for what it is & they think it's cool to hate popular things

>Most of Yea Forums that played it,loved it.
How could you tell for /v? Do you have statistics? Where did you get those? I didn`t play any of Zelda series games.
I finished RDR2 literally yesterday and I would gave it 7/10. RDR 1 was better.

Best parts of the game for me:
- quite good world design
- some fun stranger missions
- hunt
- main plot is ok, in the end quite interesting

Bad parts:
- railed boring same missions, no choice at all
- "realism"
- fucked up moral and law system
- mandatory walking

If Rockstar wants "cinematic" © ® expirience it would be better if RDR 2 wasn`t open world game. If game is open world it should have more free choices to main missions and content to do aside from it.

Attached: 2c0.jpg (601x500, 29K)

because male sexual organs have been low brow humor forever.

female sexual organs have always been seen as sexual things or baby makers. there is a reason "MUH VAGIN" humor never catches on.

Because it's not on the PC or Switch.

This board is filled with pc and nintentards with shit taste. Why do you expect.

My guess?
Too white for Yea Forums. This place is for indians and 56%ers

Hell, only 25% of players on ps4 finished the game. About 35% made it to half of the game. How could this be masterpiece like NPCs and journos pretending?

Wait, cheats in Rockstar games don't just give you a warning and mark the file as a cheated save, they just outright stop you from progressing? What a bunch of bullshit

Maybe you should look up achievements in most games. Steam would be a good place to start.
Report back with your findings

>no choice at all
A bunch of missions had choices.

>moral and law system
It was fine. Not perfect but still very good. Needed more incentive to play bad guy Arthur though.

Attached: 1547416214145.jpg (1920x1080, 374K)

>Needed more incentive to play bad guy Arthur though.
The incentive for me was getting way, way more gunfights since bounty hunters come after you every 5-10 minutes

Yeah but would've been cool if there were like an outfit or two locked behind bad honor. Or just something tangible for being a baddie compared to being an honorfaggot.

Attached: 1544559385033.png (771x1035, 832K)

The game was decent. Yea Forums is just edgy virgins who hate EVERYTHING.

Are you fucking retarded?

Attached: photo_2019-05-12_02-52-48.jpg (1280x959, 325K)

are you?
unlike you i know most people never finish the games they buy

Are you fucking retarded? №2

Attached: photo_2019-05-12_02-52-48 (2).jpg (1280x959, 272K)

I dropped it after 4-5 hours or so. the slow-as-fuck clunky movement was the biggest issue with me. you feel like you're walking through waist-deep water at all times and it's agonizing.

the amount of pseudo cutscenes where you're just following some npc on horseback while he twitters at you is unreal. I play a video game for gameplay, and there was a sore lack of it in rdr3.

I also didn't like how the game holds your hand and babies you, which is a problem with a lot of modern games. it is maddeningly boring having the game tell you where to go by putting an objective marker on the map instead of forcing you to figure it out yourself. I learned that you can turn off objective markers in the settings, so I did so, and within 10 minutes I reached a part where dutch said, "arthur, go check out that building over there." he gave no real indication of which building he meant (there were very many), so there was no way I could find it without turning objective markers back on. and that's what I'm talking about. even if you turn them off, the game is still designed with the expectation that you have it on, so they give you no actual means of doing things yourself.

also, one time in a town I was assaulted quite out of nowhere. I defended myself by killing my assailants, then was arrested for it by law enforcement. I was appalled. it seriously felt like assassin's creed 1 where if you bump into a guard they'll attack you.

>Yea Forums is known to hate popular things
>popular thing comes out

>Yea Forums is known to be nintendork central
>popular game comes out that is available for every platform except Nintendo's

Attached: 1557232049093.jpg (300x240, 9K)

>A bunch of missions had choices.
Choice in the end of mission that would give you extra two lines of dialogue or different letter?

Cheats disabling saves pisses me off the most. I can't even enjoy doing another playthrough without cheats and most of the cheat codes are locked behind newspapers you can only get by progressing through the story, who the fuck at Rockstar okay'ed this fucking shit.

Attached: 1557540490567.jpg (981x981, 75K)

Not him but yes you can't do a playthrough of the game with cheats because they won't fucking let you for reason. I swear cheats in Rockstar games are becoming worse after GTAV which that game had horrible cheats.

Attached: 1555243362711.jpg (500x500, 59K)

bump

wot
reception was overwhelmingly positive from people who actually got through the game
hell, game still gets fucking threads 6 months after release.

no, i probably can't. that doesn't make RDR2 good; it makes open world games universally trash

Why do you play open world games if you think they're trash?

because i have bad taste and spare money.

very based

>open world games add enormous mountains, cliffs, and water features to increase travel time and give the illusion that the world is bigger than it really is because you have to keep walking around shit in your path.

just like real life

No, there are not obstacles every 60 feet when I go outside. Even if I go out my backdoor into the wood and prairie area, I would never need to step more than 2 feet to the side to avoid an obstacle if I walked for 20 miles.

Because it btfo of their weebshit in sales, reception, technical mastery and FUN

this game should've ended when Arthur died

I hate RDR2 and I've never played Cards against Humanity, love some Scythe though

It's unironically worse than BotW
I played BotW only after finishing RDR2, and only because I was extremely disappointed with the latter. Never was a Nintendo fan and it was my first Zelda game
I love openworld games for exploration and it was simply much more fun on BotW. RDR2, despite being pretty big, feels so small and boring, because you barely can interact with it. It's not even a movie, it's like an interactive painting, you can walk around it but don't you dare to touch or try to change anything. This is an outdated, embarrassing and lazy game design

Attached: 1504570299840.jpg (960x960, 127K)

>why dont they have a map that is a 100% one for one remake of a real state with realistic travel times?

Tbf I've been playing it since release and I only just got to the epiloge. I wish the game would track how many hours I spent, but I've got to at least be over 400. I spent a shit load of time in chapter 2 just exploring the map. This is coming from someone who played like 300+ hours of skyrim vanilla at launch thinking how immersive the world was, which I now realize is bullshit.

I've been genuinely impressed with this game. Part of which may be because I had lowered expectations. I figured that it would be like gtav where the sp was an afterthought because mp made a billion dollars alone. But holy shit was I floored by all the subtleties. I even kept a journal like Arthur.

Attached: DSC_2388.jpg (3840x2160, 2.4M)