Discuss in a civil manor

RDR2 didn't win GOTY at the VGAs, but BOTW did. Try again, sweatie.

Are they both, you can go to that mountain over there? Is it worth it? In Oblivion, it definitely wasn't.

>Discuss in a civil manor.
Learn to fucking spell.

I unironically had more fun with the ass creed game that released in the same year as botw

more like red dead retarded

>he doesn't want to discuss video game in a nice building
fuck off

Didn't played both games. I'll give what I think based on my research and watched gameplay videos.

BOTW:
- Great exploration
- Physics, which I adore
- Graphics are actually good with the performance given. If we're talking artsyle, it's very nice to look at it.
- World huge than Skyrim, and rest of the Zelda games, giving a sense of adventure
-I dunno about story.
- Freedom, aproach how you want a combat. Like MGSV's for example.

RDR2:
- Linear experience
- Hand-holding, difficulty is easy
- Ragdoll physics are the best, giving a sense of arcadey but at the same time a realistic approach
- Graphics are the best I've seen in a game
- Not really strong exploration, only just to look at scenery instead of unlockables
- Story is maybe good, I've watched a few cutscenes and enjoyed but stopped so I wouldn't spoil myself
- Max Payne 3 weapon inventory system which is fucking great.

By the way, the upper image makes Link appear small with a huge map, giving a sense of adventure and many locations to discover. That's why people say BOTW's exploration is one of the best from the Zelda series.

Down image, the protagonist (I don't know his name) and the map have same size, not really giving of exploration, but it's good to explore just to look at graphics.

Attached: DjZotxnUYAAG6yG.jpg (720x720, 63K)

both games suck and are boring trash

Animated movie quality vs live action quality is hardly a debate

They’re both good at different things

>By the way, the upper image makes Link appear small with a huge map, giving a sense of adventure and many locations to discover. That's why people say BOTW's exploration is one of the best from the Zelda series.
no, people say BOTW's exploration is the best in the series because you can literally climb every single surface in the game and then practically fly between them. Not that your point is wrong, but it's not /the/ reason.

I've only just started getting into RDR2 and I played the tutorial area of BOTW. I find the world in RDR2 to be more engaging, as it feels alive and not some weird postapocalyptic society. The Random Encounters feel so "real" so far, with characters talking about the world and even appearing later to thank you for saving them. It's nice.

I know there are people in BOTW, but, I dunno, I just can't get into the whole thing. Maybe because its such a departure, while RDR2 feels like RDR but with more stuff?

everything you said was wrong retard

Top image:
>at least 5 interest areas in view, probably a lot more if you pay attention
Bottom image
>literally nothing but pretty graphics

RDR2 exploration is actually very good with many detail in the environments and little story and secrets to find, People just find it tedious because of the realistic approach. Things like having to wait for your horse when you call for it.

You're both right. One of the standout elements of the BotW experience is climbing on top of a tower or another high point and looking out in every direction to find and mark points of interest in the distance. It's the reason why they prioritized environmental draw distance over everything else.

photo realisim is a piece of shit.

everything looks the same

>video game sandbox
>cinematic immersive experience
besides having large maps to wander around and basic survival mechanics, they're barely comparable, and then both excel at what they set out to do

What is there to discuss? Some folks have different tastes

game with good repetitive gaemplay with an empty world versus a boring "muh realism" game with good gunplay and the most boring story missions ever with an equally empty world but with less action

BotW has way more lasting value, but RDR2 gave me a more memorable and better first experience. I like them both, but love neither.

AC: Odyssey is better than both of them combined.

Not him but the thing about BotW's exploration for me was that almost every single landmark you arrive at serves as a vantage point for you to see other things. The game establishes rules very early on, like Blue = completed and Orange = Uncompleted. When you reach the top of a shrine or a mountain you can clearly see these landmarks in the distance, and it's your job to mark them and decide which one to go to. The game is obviously crafted in a way that leads you from landmark to landmark, with geography being natural but also funneling the player to interesting locations. The game gives you tools to explore everything and you're supposed to use them, the rules don't change and that means that the only thing standing between you and where you want to go is your ability to use the tools you've had since starting. I was at least a hundred hours into the game before I had to stop and think "huh, what do I do next".
The world presents itself and feels like you're cutting a rugged path across the landscape but once you're done it's obvious that the world was crafted to always give the player something new to do, however big or small. It still FEELS like a more or less linear experience even though you're tackling it in your own order.

RDR2 has infinitely better gameplay but it was always painfully obvious that I was being routed along an (albeit well crafted) story route, and I had to grasp the exploration aspects by the balls because I was never sure if there's something to do here or not. BotW's combat sucks in comparison.

I finished BotW.
I didn't finish RDR2.
Gameplay>Graphics

"realistic" does not immediately mean better than "cartoonish" style
That being said, RDR2's textures appear to have more attention to detail in its environment than Zelda's does. But since RDR2 is set in a "real" world setting, the expectations for how the world looks and feels are going to be higher than that of an entirely fictional setting

Attached: 1546906214972.jpg (622x620, 87K)

Two different game designs with two different controls and two different ways to explore the world.

Fuck off

Dragon Age: Inquisition won GOTY too.

I really really really really really fucking hate how fucking stiff RDR2 is

Unless your riding a fucking horse, your not going anywhere with that cement factory that is your body

One was a Sandbox with no story that was great fun to run around in and gave you options to approach every situation

The other was a Sandbox with a great story, fun to run around in but you just point your camera at things and make them go away.

>mfw overly long animations in RDR2

Attached: batman_that was horrible alfred.jpg (470x259, 25K)

LMFAO weebs are going to use ANYTHING in order to make their beloved company look good.

>I-i-it looks like shit b-but it's supposed to look like shit, obviously!

This is what you actually said to any non-fanboy.

what? I'm saying botw does look like shit and they could have done a better job and I wish they did, it looks like ass when you're climbing up mountains and shit

Why would i do that when I can post some random shitpost thread, go play a game and read retards at each others throats when I'm waiting for another match or something to load in a game?

Artstyle will always win in the long run over the graphics at the time. It's just inevitable that you'll look at games like RDR2 20 years later and think it aged like milk.

He’s not here to actually intelligently discuss the two games. Ignore and move on with your life.

BotW is simply a far better video game than RDR2. And even more impressive when you consider it was made on far weaker hardware.

Attached: 1551730250177.jpg (534x712, 56K)

Come on in everyone!

Attached: adare-manor-front-exterior.jpg (550x367, 44K)

RDR2 had 20 times the budget and manpower Botw had.

This.

>8 years in development
> $800 budget
>100gb
>40000000 gorliian teraflops depicting the sunrise glistening realistically off heaving horse testicals

>can't compete with a 13gb title running on a device not much bigger than a smart phone

Lol as if that means anything. Some NRS trash won best fightan game in a year that saw Tekken 7 and GGXR2. GGxr2 wasnt even a nominee.

Top was underwhelming in a lot of way but was generally fun for the 20 hours it took to complete.
Bottom wasn't even worth picking up.

Fuck your civil manor

Attached: boa_doggo_1.webm (320x240, 252K)

Why do people never learn.

Attached: 590452.jpg (936x1436, 211K)

edgy

Stylism>Realism, though both are mostly irrelevant compared to ganeplay in which case BotW also wins. Strip back the graphics and RDR just isn't very innovative, which Rockstar games haven't been for years now

shut the fuck up ESL
god damn

RDR2 won

Sakurai called it a standard Japan now has to deliver because it's currently the quality standard consumers expect. The end.

>Bait Image
>Civil
We both know that's not what you want.

Attached: brainlet5.png (558x614, 24K)

>Different games.
>Different gameplay.
>Different tone.
>Different design.
>Different art style.
>Different audience.
There's nothing else to discuss.

>can't compete with a 13gb title running on a device not much bigger than a smart phone
>blows the fuck out of it in terms of sales and score
>can't compete

>a dead fatman's "opinion" matters

BOTW is still being discussed to this day, while RDR2 is just brought up to make unwarranted comparisons

what do you mean cant compete?
it looks much better
it runs better
it already outsold botw by several million

Zelda fun. Makes me wish I looked like a girl like Link. Red Dead 2 I avoided because I don’t want a cowboy game to lecture me about how to be a good person and why white people need to be extinct.

BotW is so fucking ugly how can Nintendofags even stand looking at it?

RDR2 is more relevant kiddo. Deal with it. A lot more relevant actually.

cope

>blows the fuck out of it in terms of sales and score
>it looks much better
>it runs better
>it already outsold botw by several million

LMAO hey guys, it sold more so that makes my enjoyment of the game better LMAO!

Meanwhile BotW continues to be considered the Game Of The Generation.

Attached: 1555967554017.png (1485x900, 320K)

>RDR2 is more relevant kiddo. Deal with it. A lot more relevant actually.

LOL

Top: soul
Bottom: soulless

Kikestar will always be shit

If RDR didn't have the artificial un-fun it could have been as good or better. As it is it is a chore and not even a fun one.

>game journalists said botw is better!

Rockstar will keep making pc and console games for the foreseeable future, Nintendo will be cell phone dev becasue they can't sell or push units like rockstar. RIP

>Meanwhile BotW continues to be considered the Game Of The Generation
By whom? I've seen the same thing said about RDR2, GoW, Mario, Bloodborne or literally any other game from this gen. It's almost like this is a matter of personal opinions.

Everyone said its better dude. You'll just have to live with that.

*By who

>I've seen the same thing said about RDR2, GoW, Mario, Bloodborne

Where?

youtu.be/GxWhfhmh4PY

As a Nintendo fan, it's been hard to accept RDR2 being the bigger and more relevant game. But with each day, it gets better and I cope more.

Attached: Red Dead Souls.png (882x863, 339K)

>whatculture
Good god, what has this place become in recent years?

Both are shit because open world games are shit.

>Artistic game that looks beautiful, plays amazingly well, with some of the best puzzle solving and exploration in a video game.

>Realistic game that looks realistic, comes with literally zero level design and terrible gameplay.

BINGBINGWAHHOOOO NINTENDOLER KEEP SEETHING!

>discuss in a civil manor
waahhwaaah peeepee pooopooo cope
muh company your company muh games waaaaaghhhhh uuuuuuugg cope cope cope cope cope cope muh wojak edit
look at these scores in this page muh sales waaaahhhh waaaggggggggg cope cope cope
seething
>have sex
dilate
drink soilent

Behold the actual smallest brain on Yea Forums

Its ok my false-flagging friend. As someone who has actually played both games I understand completely why people say BotW is the better game.

Because it is.

Two years and its still fawned over while barely anyone talks about RDR2 just a few months after release. The fact that OP makes these threads everyday just shows how much BotW weighs on his mind and he can't accept it.

Attached: 1541530566590.jpg (585x305, 39K)

You DISGUST me!

N64 area has long been over. Rockstar is more appreciated and liked in the industry. Nintendo will be cell phone dev in a decade

Attached: Cyberpunk 2077 - Possible release.png (1203x677, 124K)

>retard thinks sales = quality

Pathetic and cringe. You'll never recover will you?

One still has daily threads, both of complete admiration and denial, refusing to accept it blew the whole industry's mind

One is completely forgotten even though it was called the greatest game of all time for several weeks straight

Nintendo games at their best are subquality compared to Soneegger and Xbone games. Nintendo literally made a low quality game that looks like it is an early x360 title. The only credit i'll give nintendo is that dispite their games being half baked they tend to put in tons of subtle content like weather effecting climbing, lightning striking your metal weapons, fire generating lift cause hot air, and other stuff. If you want a game that is lacking but fun, go with nintendo. If you want a game that is literally art and story go with Sony, if you just want to play games to numb your mind and chill play some xbox shit.

One of the worst Zeldas compared to the best Rockstar game.

have sex

Never played rdr2 or any red dead game but it seems kind of shit. I did however play botw and I can confidently say its far worse than rdr2 seems.

still waiting on the Yea Forums mansion

Top: soulless
Bottom: soulless
The fact that either of these games got above a 70 on metacritic proves once and for all that gaming journalists have no idea what makes a game good and just jump on the bandwagon of giving a game good reviews because they feel like they "should". It's like the emperor's new clothes. No journalist wants to be the one to give a critically acclaimed game a bad review and appear to have bad taste. But in reality they all have bad taste and are just sniffing each other's farts like a bunch of morons pretending that both of these games aren't both soulless modern open world garbage.

this. Nobody will recognise the bottom game in a year and Yea Forums will still be whining about the top

GOTY vs uh...what?
Nintendo always win, Sony isn't even trying anymore

that dude also talks about quality in that paragraph fag and how they're making sure their game match its quality. No one is interested in matching botw

>people still fall for this ancient rotting pasta

>No one is interested in matching botw

Because noone will.

>multiplat
>sony

>RDR2
>Sony
inb4 merely pretending to be retarded

>Botw , great exploration

End your miserable life nintentard

BOTW is linear as hell because EVERYTHING else in the game is pointless except the fucking retarded Shrines which you have to complete FUCKING 120.

WW had better art style than BOTW.

Link is a character with 0 development he could be any shit from a simple character creator, he doesn't have emotions, doesn't talk doesn't feel anything is just a fucking speechless faggot and hey this thing was "cool " 20-30 years ago when old consoles barely could archive voice sound but right now is just plain retarded and boring.

In RDR2 cannot speak for it because after 100 hours still with 40% of the game and everywhere i go something happens.

RDR2 isn't even a Sony game, it's published by Take-Two and it's on Xbox

Don't even know why they're often compared, BotW is more about being creative with the tools given to you in order to solve problems than it is about doing quests and collecting stuff, RDR2 is another GTA game by Rockstar. The only real thing they have in common is that both use an open world format and having horses as the primary means of long-distance transportation.
At least when people compared Skyrim with Witcher 3 there was a lot more being shared between those two games to actually argue over.

Both are decent but lackluster for similar and different reasons.
Both also got high scores because they're Nintendo/Rockstar.

RDR2 should have had more open quest structure, and BotW should have better filler content than Koroks and Shrines.
RDR2's gunplay was pretty basic and BotW's combat had many options but no incentive to do anything other than flurry rush.

I'm personally less disappointed in RDR2 because it wasn't as hyped here, and I had no expectations, while BotW was hyped as the game of the generation but delivered as much as Far Cry 4.

They're similar in the sense that both are praised for the open world interactivity and immersion yet both have trash combat mechanics.

>Bamco's french PR team

Attached: frogsouls.png (302x449, 95K)

I don't even know what the other game is, BoTW is recognized everywhere, the other game on the other side is... oh well, better luck next time sweetie

B A S E D
BOTW is a boring, empty, soulless game. Literally the only impressive about it is the physics engine. They should have just sold the engine a la Unity so that someone can actually try to make a good game in it.

played both. BotW because
>fast travel
>no unnecessarily long animations
>more interesting areas

Breath of the Wild is a video game

Red Dead is a wannabe walking simulator with jank shit GTA controls

GTA and Bully are both better than Red Dead because at least they don't try to be "profound" or "dramatic" since Rockstar can't write for shit.

> BOTW warping
> Fast
Unless you count the PS1-tier loading times

Attached: 1514941201451s.jpg (248x189, 9K)

Both games are shit, but user told me you might be able to mod Breath of the Wild and make Link naked so it might be worth to play in a half dozen years.

To be fair before release a lot of sonyfags were acting like it was a ps4 exclusive.

it doesn't count because.... uhhh.... fuck off! They're french!

>Both games are shit
Based user. I see you, too, can see that the emperor has no clothes

Whomst've considered the possibility that the twixt electronical videyo gamaymes belong to differing genres and theretofore shant't be judged on equal merits of visual presentation, hmm?

Attached: felt-top-hat.jpg (1000x1200, 346K)

Warping from one end to the other of the map would still faster with warp even if the loading times were 10 times longer.

Cope.

based pretending to be a not retard pretending to be a retard retard

>"BOTW will become the textbook example for open world games in the coming years"
>years pass and nothing happens
>"BOTW is too good, nobody will attempt to copy it because they know they can't surpass it"

Attached: 53970629_p0.jpg (328x474, 100K)

sorry, no. Maybe in a military hovel

Still annoying as hell. Loading times in this game were legitimately awful. Just one of many glaring flaws BOTW fanboys ignore to pretend their game is the perfect masterpiece

>implying implications
are you ok honey?

as opposed to
>it counts because.... uhhh.... fuck off! They're french!

Assassin's Creed literally took a lot of shit from botw and was highly praised for it lmao

Loved nearly every aspect and second of Breath of The Wild. Could not even finish Red Dead, bored the hell out of me

BOTW is a textbook example of how not to do an open world game and why Zelda should go back to the Ocarina of Time formula

No, nigger, you were defending the graphical differences based on "well, it's supposed to be like this so accept this" in this specific manner.

What exactly do you want us to discuss here? I played both, I think they're both overrated in their own ways. Botw feels like a nice toolbox, but too little objectives to meaningfully play with them. The size of the world also feels too big for what's going on in it. I'm not one of those people saying that there is nothing in the world, since there's a lot of shit, but travel time between those places feels too fucking long. Maybe a way of faster traversal would've been nice, because even on horseback it feels too fucking slow.

RDR2 has also a problem of long travel time, but what ultimately drags the game down is the fucking realism shit. At first I enjoyed hunting and shit like that, but jesus christ it feels so fucking tedious to do anything in this game. Even moving your character feels like he's under water.

Sums up Yea Forums, didn't play any of the games and is wrong about fucking everything.

>Assassin's Creed literally took a lot of shit from botw
Holy shit it's actually the other way around you lying shit. Nintendo jumped to open world because their old formula wasn't selling. They saw the numbers Rockstar and Ubishit were pulling in and wanted in.

Sounds like you don't have any manors

>BOTW:
>- Great exploration

Attached: 1460076583732.png (453x610, 265K)

samefagging hard i see. no one would agree with someone that thinks he HAS to do all 120 shrines, it takes 40 if you're a mediocre player to finish the game, the rest you do because you are actually having fun instead of trying to
"sketch" useless areas

>BOTW is a textbook example of how not to do an open world game

LMAO BotW made nearly every other open world game seem redundant and dated overnight.

of course everyone will look down onto it with spite because of how many awards it won and how critically acclaimed it was. always the same contrarian bullshit lmao. cope more

>marvel poster
>shit opinion
why am i even on this site again. fat americans that want nothing but realism in their games, if you didnt realized the world is the most real thing there is. go play outside

>civil
you know perfectly well that's not gonna happend

Tekken 7 was one of the biggest disappointment of this gen while IJ2 was better in every way compared to the first game.

with or without moat?

Attached: 1920px-IGHTHAM_MOTE_The_east_and_north_fronts.jpg (1920x1284, 681K)

>look at me I'm so retarded
>haha yes epic troll
imagine being you