This is really the only game made so far with writing quality on the level of a great film or television series...

*your

it couldnt even beat gta5 in anything, now fuck off with your soulless gibberish

I agree. This game has the bested character development I've ever seen and adds so much weight to john's motivation in the first game. The also some of the side-quests are surprisingly wholesome. They really dived into the psychology behind these characters.

>gang member chimps out and faces impending doom under point of overwhelming odds
>Arthur casually waltzes in with a balloon, wipes out the prison garrison with some feminist ratio character, walks away with the 2nd protagonist
Yes it is you fucking aspie.

don't worry it's bound to make it to PC in some capacity

it's those damn postmodernists tryin ta redefine errythin I tells ya

Max Payne 1 shits all over it in storytelling AND gameplay.

Characters solving their own problems is not a deus ex machina. Your issue is trying to apply realistic standards to an action game's environment and gameplay.

>solving their own problems
John didn't solve his own problem you fucking sperg, he is the 2nd protagonist of the game and he gets a get out of jail for free card TWO DAYS before he gets the rope. If you think this is not a cheap deus ex machina you are a fucking zoomer sperg that needs to pick up a book.

My biggest gripe with the game is there's like 8 bounties in the campaign woulda been cook if they were radiant

It really doesnt. It lasts 5 seconds max. How bad is your ADHD?

that reflects really poorly on tv and film, more than it makes me interested in rdr2

because tv and film are shit a good 80% of the time

more emotional investmwnt in devil may cry than in anything I've ever seen in a movie

"No!"

deep breaths user

Watch more movies, if you see ads for it everywhere it's probably going to be bad

remedy is peasant tier garbage

pff

Milton is a complete fuck you law and order faggot

You don't know what a "deus ex machina" is you fucking pleb. Stop using phrases that you heard people with a higher IQ than you say, you'll never be intelligent.

What is Planescape Torment

genreshit

An old ass forgotten game?

This is a 6.5/10 game with an 8/10 story

sit down

Attached: silent-hill-2-cover-box-art-usa.jpg (1200x1501, 600K)

RDR 1 had a significantly better story and drastically better characters.

Attached: E567B5E5-8F85-4173-8D86-966188E921AC.jpg (612x960, 109K)

no it didn't

Attached: 2019-01-04_11-59-57_AM-eb42lcol.jpg (3840x2160, 1.74M)

Deus ex machina (Latin: [ˈdeʊs ɛks ˈmaː.kʰJ.naː]: /ˈdeJ.əs ɛks ˈmɑːkiːnə/ or /ˈdiːəs ɛks ˈmækJnə/;[1] plural: dei ex machina; English ‘god from the machine’) is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem in a story is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected and seemingly unlikely occurrence, typically so much as to seem contrived.[2][3] Its function can be to resolve an otherwise irresolvable plot situation, to surprise the audience, to bring the tale to a happy ending, or act as a comedic device

Sorry, sperg. But all the instances I list are cheap dei ex machina. Educate yourself you unintelligent mongoloid, consider reading books, they are available digitally if you hate touching them so much

WE WUZ COWBOYZ N SHEEEIT

It absolutely did. No retarded justification of petty and felonious crimes, no diverse Burger King Kid’s Club being shoehorned as moral paragons, the Mary Sueisms and Duex Ex Machinimas weren’t nearly as prevalent. Plus the premise wasn’t only less back asswards stupid, but more engaging. Inarguably better story and characters, arguably slightly better worse gameplay

Attached: DE400F68-716A-4BC4-B6D2-1A17F74151DC.jpg (554x554, 50K)

>jewpedia
sure is summer in here

Attached: 1561924089325.png (680x447, 41K)

Like every single Rockstar game, RDR2 is a over-produced garbage made by people who would much rather make movies, but can't make the cut in holywood or take the risk of indie scene.
It's not well written. The story is not remarkable in any way. Both are as generic and brain-dead as the wost, most lazy holywood production. They just have an ABSURD amount of money thrown in to make mask the utter lack of substance. And none of this would be inherently bad if the fucking gameplay did not suffer for it. But it did. Everything but the gameplay is insanely bloated and over-produced, while even the most basic gameplay loops are garbage.

You want games pushing the boundaries for narrative?
Fucking Papers, Please, Bastion, Pathologic 1/2, The Void, Cryostasis, Silent Hill 2, hell even fucking Witcher or Veitcong has achieved far more than anything Rockstar has ever done.

Is there any semblance of an argument in this post? Impressive saying so little with so many words.

Dead franchise bitch

but from your own post a little up the chain
>John didn't solve his own problem you fucking sperg
???

Its not a game script, its a script

I accept your admission of defeat, you fucking primeval ape.
It's a fucking shocker on it's own that a witless moron like yourself can even write.
Stop samefagging.

>but can't make the cut in holywood
The Houser's Flex and all Directors and producers in Hollywood with their company (Rockstar) though

>OH MY GOD THIS R* GAME HAS UNRELAISTIC PLOT ELEMENTS BUT THE GAMEPLAY IS SO IMMERSIVE WTFFFFFFFFFF

It's completely unnecessary and detracts from the experience. Stuff like that should be streamlined.

There is nothing good about the storytelling in this game. I honestly don't know how low your standards are if you think this game has good writing. Each chapter is just one wacky adventure to the next and they totally jump the shark with Guarma.

if i wanted a well written script i'd go watch a movie. The stories that complement gameplay are the ones i much prefer for games

Okay cock globbler, what’s better about RDR2’s story and characters than that of 1?

Sure kid

Attached: 1560800375412.jpg (882x863, 235K)

This is the best explanation for the problems I've had with RDR2 that I've yet come across

dude you literally btfo yourself by your own shitposting, take a break maybe.

false, it adds to the immersion and is balanced around the value you get out of the item. You aren't supposed to feel the need to loot every body you come across.

I've read fanfiction with better writing than film and television that's not really much of an accomplishment

Its yet another version of the "reluctant anti hero with a heart of gold" story yet more obnoxiously sentimental than ever. Don't you ever get tired of games that want you to understand Mr. Bad Man and see he really has a good heart on the inside, regardless of how shitty he acts? Arthur Morgan is the blandest character they could have chose to focus a story on.

Detroit Become Human has better writing than this tripe

Maturity and craft.

I shit on you, you uncultured swine.
Pick up a book, I urge you, but read it instead of eating the paper like a brain damaged damascus goat.

>So many fags that hate the game because they think it makes them an interesting individuals when it's actually the opposite

So is the life of nerd fantasy virgins

way to dismiss actual criticisms you actual infant

Bounties aren't that big of a deal. If you get arrested there's a chance some of your fellow gang members will bust you out with no real consequences on your part. At worst you have to avoid or fight bounty hunters every so often and you can't use trains or stage coaches.

>"You only hate this game bcuz ur contrarian"

Attached: 2-COv6HNx3MqE_7yrjbsLbrqzQZuY5Ex5BkWkqH8gs4.png (535x329, 56K)

I've probably read more than you, squirt

Attached: 1546648245249.jpg (2448x3264, 287K)

Games a work of art. Just need it on my $1,500 pc now

Attached: 1562273898716.jpg (1920x1072, 221K)

>frogshit
I don't know what you guys are bickering about but I can tell that you're a retarded subhuman

Seriously, I have never seen someone actually explain what makes this story actually good. They just state it as a fact and say we must accept it. When I played the game I just thought it was one dumb chapter after the next.

well written characters and realized setting

there was one good aspect/arc of the story; Arthur gets TB and has a redemption arc, everything else was steaming shit. Also, Arthur dies.
It's rare to see a protagonist in a not-well off position, and it's rarer to see them die.

This literally happened in the first Red Dead

>everything else was steaming shit.
No it wasn't. It gave us a lengthy and detailed life of how this gang lived before democracy took over

RDR2 does it better

>they sit around in a tent
>dutch screams occasionally
>they rob people
>there's a spic, a nigger, a mutt and a fat bitch injected into it
I can't believe myself this story is so good

>RDR2
twitter.com/Redvedev/status/1132335864548405248?s=09

It didn't. We didn't know John was going to be killed at the end of RDR1. It came as a total surprise.
That Arthur has no mention in RDR1 means that we know he's going to be killed at the end of RDR2 before we even buy the game because it's a prequel. There is no shock, and as a result while you can sympathize with the character you're never connected to him because you know he's doomed and his death is just something to expect.
The way the killed him off was interesting enough. The TB bit was unsuspected. But him dying had no impact, whereas John's did.

Stop sidestepping discussion so you can feel aloof and moral at the same time.

wow the polfags must be seething

Yes it did especially from a gameplay perspective

>The OST FINALLY comes out in a few days

Will also go down as one of the GOATS

Attached: 2e7d44d0c8ba4658d54d6411b8163efe2011ec0d.jpg (1440x1440, 2.13M)

How? Because Arthur starts coughing and doesn't stop until you get annoyed enough that you rush to finish the main story just so you can play as John and not have him hacking in your ear?

is he aware trannies are offing nearly half of themselves?

i do. this isnt a result of not watching many movies. its a problem with movies just not bejng able to provide the emotional connection thats from directly interacting with the story

>Dutch's descent into madness
>the collapse of the gang
>Arthur's character development and redemption arc
>the growth of civilization and ending of the "wild west" era
>the themes of revenge, the cycle of violence, and redemption

all these elements tie together and add up to make the story good and compelling. try paying attention next time pleb.

lol did you even play the game?

rent free

40% lol

Attached: 1560856201801.jpg (1024x768, 47K)

HuRr DiD yOu EvEn PlAy ThE GaMe BrO?
No seriously. What impact does Arthur's death have on the gameplay?

stop shaming us. listen to your white man god arthur morgan and STOP SHAMING US

So no lol should've figured.

>white man god
why would you bother mention he's white
whites are fucknig disgusting, especially the cuckold ones and the ones that pluck off the hairs on their assholes and walk around wearing dresses with distinguishable beard stubble and obvious hair wigs. It's no wonder they commit suicide in droves.

I just really don't understand you fucks, where you come from and what your problem is. Not every game has to have a purists standpoint when it comes to gameplay development. Meaning it doesn't have devote itself to constant platforming, deep RPG mechanics, new enemies in a linear hallway environment, RTS mechanics etc..

I can enjoy all of those things and also enjoy what Rockstar supplies in their game. Which is an action-adventure open world. Its freedom of choice and I'm glad that they don't subject themselves to thinking another developers rules on game
play means they have to follow them. When you throw this "gameplay" critiques out there, it seems like you're really just grasping at straws and hate the game because you have some deep-rooted vendetta against Rockstar because they don't bend the knees to your purist standpoint to gameplay development. The only area they could really improve on in future games is better mission structure.

This is the problem so many of you mouthbreathing halfwits on the board have. You spout complete nonsense and when someone asks you to clarify a point you panic and resort to meme garbage instead of trying to make an argument because you know you can't defend the bullshit you just causally say when you rush headfirst into a discussion you have no place in participating in.

game is literally made to appeal to brainlets who have surface level knowledge of anything

What? I wasn't the one saying it impacted gameplay. Someone else did. My point was that Arthur's death in RDR2 wasnot as impactful as Johns in RDR1 because it did not come as a surprise. The other user countered by saying that Arthur's death and how he died impacted the mechanics of the game, which it didn't, and I asked him to clarify.

You are everything wrong with this shit.

pretty much.

it's obvious if you've played the game bro

But it was as impactful, just not as surprising. One of the ways they achieved this was through how it affect gameplay

Is this Dan "Movie director" Houser?

My question is how his death affected the gameplay. Either I'm forgetting something or there was no gameplay impact apart from Arthur coughing, and then you eventually playing as John, which is just a callback to when you play as Jack in RDR1.

yeah you're forgetting an entire chapter apparently.

he moves even slower and coughs a bit. i think at one point they throw a shitty instagram filter on top to make it look "distorted" too. no actual impact on gameplay, just more surface level shit to make brainlets think somethings happening -- just like the "weight" and "heat" systems. they actually don't mean anything and can be completely ignored, but the meters make retards think the game's complex.

At that point no matter how much you ate you couldn't gain weight which affected health and speed other than that nothing aside from coughing when he smokes

>game is literally made to appeal to brainlets who have surface level knowledge of anything
>I play Fromsoft, Japanese games, indies and games unique to PC and think I'm an "inserting gamer" and not a fucking boring fat ass casual

Attached: 1561734746774.jpg (1024x576, 27K)

who are you quoting? i haven't played a fromsoft game since demon souls

RDR2 isn't any more casual than anything you play

>This is really the only game made so far with writing quality on the level of a great film or television series

Kojima in shambles

it isn't written any better either

the writing is really not exceptional the presentation is fantastic in many parts.

It's based on a real gang, its everything but unreal.

You're actully the autistic one.

>tfw Andrew Milton is a homunculus.

Attached: AAF1F5B6-6862-4EE6-8DE2-E37A33F9933E.png (462x505, 294K)

>wanting video games to be like movies

You faggots are why video games are shit these days
Get some taste and play a real game, not one of these hand-holding forced story snoozefests

No he isn’t you fucking homo

>You faggots are why video games are shit these days
>Get some taste and play a real game, not one of these hand-holding forced story snoozefests
There's no game out there that feels, plays and presents itself like RDR2 or a Rockstar game in general. So you're wrong

bing bang boing

Red Harlow lives though

>8 years in development and only a 5 minutes trailer video with handpicked scripted scenes one(1) week before release
whatever you say boss...

How can I tell OP has never seen an actual good film / television series in his life, nor has he ever played more than 3 video games in his entire existence
When will this timeline end where 98% of Yea Forums is 10-20 year old zoomzooms?

Attached: 1524640485244.jpg (710x508, 73K)

WHEN THE FUCK IS THE SUMMER UPDATE COMING OUT? AND IT BETTER HAVE LEWD CLOTHES I WANT NATIVE AMERICAN LEATHER HIGH HEELS I WANT STRING BIKINIS AND LEATHER THONGS JUST LET ME LOOK LEWD WHILE GRINDING ROCKSTAR!!!!

>When will this timeline end where 98% of Yea Forums is 10-20 year old zoomzooms?
makes no sense, RDR2 's pace and mechanics don't bold well with them

>pretty sure this part was even addressed in the game by Dutch, not sure if it was repeated in RDR2 but it was definitely in the ending of RDR1 - the idea that these federal agents fight on the right side of history for the glory, they seek to justify their wages by finding and killing every gang member so that they could eventually rake in the prestige and honor and all benefits that come with it, you can decide whether or not to see him as someone fighting for his own gain or if his fight is still morally righteous
>there are actual consequences, emotional and physical, for every single member of the gang as the game goes on, they don't just kill everyone on their path and all end up rich and famous.
>tell me which one of these sounds more satisfying to experience in the game - you go free Micah from prison, you blow the walls of the jail and you shoot your way out of a town to eventually escape and continue with the story and wonder what consequences this leads to OR you go free Micah, you blow the walls of the jail, the police see you, shoot you in the head and you die instantly. One is obviously much more likely to happen and by your standards the one you should choose as to avoid creating a Gary Stu-type character. You seem to have forgotten that almost the entirety of the gang end up dead and that the actions of the gang catch up with them and they pay for it. This is a retarded criticism - not wanting any dramatic action in a video game just for the sake of realism.
>they have to write the characters, these characters are not simulated in real time, what they do and how they act has to be prewritten and you can't possibly develop a character that is absolutely neutral, every character in this game has personality and it's largely because they have a clear line of thinking based on who they are.

It reminded me of Against the Day tbf

Attached: oo-vaping-pepe-2741611.png (500x548, 62K)

all they need to do is make Sadie's butt bigger

Attached: 4cf.png (152x254, 40K)

I'm a 30 year old house wife and RDR2 is my favorite game of all time.

>makes no sense, RDR2 's pace and mechanics don't bold well with them
But the brand recognition and marketing does. Fuck, it really does not matter what the actual gameplay is like to anyone. Slap the right name and more importantly, shove enough adds and glowing paid promotion into their faces and they'll eat it. That has always been a Rockstar strategy and it always works.
Fuck, even Yea Forums was full of people fellating Max Payne 3 despite it being pretty much everything they claimed to hate about modern games: brand awareness, production values and marketing is literally all you need to turn people into gibbering idiots, regardless of their generation.

It's all about graphics and presentation with zoomers
even if they did get bored in the first 8 hours of gameplay, playing the game for 1 hour in a month's timespan, they've gotten their moneys worth of this "technological marvel" of a game, they can tell all their friends how fucking realistic, immersive, beautiful and cinematic the game is and how the game's writing is so fucking amazing based on the first tutorial mission they do in the snowstorm

I've heard this conversation all too many times with other games. When skyrim was hot shit, I was in a group of normies talking about the game, I was the only one who had completed the game at least once and done nearly all sidequessts, almost everyone had quit after reaching whiterun and wondering off to the woods and stopping when they lacked a goal, yet they boasted first 10 minutes of how awesome and cool the game is, it got really awkward when I started to "talk like a nerd" about the game and people were just nodding

That's not surprising. Now post ass and/or feminine penis

fat

games zoomers will never understand

Attached: 65d.png (434x327, 32K)

god dammit max payne 3 made me so fucking mad, and they ported the trash shooting mechanics straight to GTA5
Sure, Euphoria makes animations look realistic and natural but also making everything fucking janky and slow to control
Also having cutscenes every 30 seconds and having them during shootings too

Attached: 1553973209615.gif (187x220, 607K)

Red Dead Redemption was more memorable than RDR2

so Fromsoft's miyazaki and Nintendo are zoomer shits?

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

Yes

Because Souls is trash

Attached: The Legend of Zelda_ Breath of the Wild Sequel Staff Inspired By Red Dead.png (730x776, 531K)

No, but they sure as fuck would like a piece of that incredibly easily exploited demographics.

ok now we've reached a new lvl of contrarians you old bitter fuck

rdr1 characterts were stereotypical garbage and ruined the immersion

Who the fuck even saves these

Attached: jU570fSTMucYUKyohxNC1g.png (676x676, 57K)

>but they sure as fuck would like a piece of that incredibly easily exploited demographics.
lol they could never make a game like RDR2 with it's rage engine tech and euphoria physics attached to everything

I thought it was boring but I loved the first game. Might just be my changing tastes as I get older. I was only 20 when RDR1 came out.

who the fuck hates R* to this level of unreasonable degrees?

>Might just be my changing tastes as I get older. I was only 20 when RDR1 came out
Most certainly is becasue their games aren't any worse than they ever have been. What new games since 2010's RDR release have excited you user? Just curious .

I'm not sure I can give you a good answer as a lot of games I liked a few years ago I dislike now when I went to replay them recently such as Assassins Creed 2. But this year I liked Resident Evil 2 remake and Devil May Cry 5

Nobody hates rockstar, it's just that their games are lazy
a studio with so much resources and potential wastes it for bravado instead of compelling gameplay

>Unreasonable
I don't think anything's unreasonable after GTA V

I wish Miyazaki was in charge of red dead online

>Dutch leaves Arthur to die in a warehouse
>Arthur comes outside to see Dutch surrounded by Charles and Sadie with no pro-Dutch witnesses
>Arthur yells at him that he left him for dead instead of just shooting him in the head
>Lets Dutch casually fuck off afterwards even though he knows he's a lunatic that wants him and John dead
And later on:
>Arthur confronts Micah over being the traitor while surrounded by Micah's goons and Micah sympathizers
>Micah proceeds to pull a "no u r" and shoots whatshername in the gut
>Dutch doesn't even bat an eye
>Pinkertons show up, causing everyone to scatter
>Game doesn't let you shoot Micah or Dutch as they scurry away
And later on:
>Pinkertons are swarming the place
>Arthur is alone on top of a mountain dying
>Micah and Dutch show up out of nowhere just to have a fist fight with him
The last few missions didn't make any fucking sense.

Attached: 1556043577240.jpg (512x418, 42K)

What if Milton was stranded on Guarma?

What I don’t understand is also Micah talking shit, high and migthy and accusing Arthur of being rat and Arthur being okay with it, instead of shooting that little asshole to death.

>Game: "Micah wasn't a snitch until after Guarma."
>Me: "Oh, so Molly really was a rat after all."
>Game: "No, Molly was actually never a rat. She just said that for shits and giggles."
>MFW

Attached: 1552987267839.png (394x523, 204K)

>Nobody hates rockstar, it's just that their games are lazy
Actually, I do hate them. There are very few studios out there with such an open, clear contempt of their medium of choice, and of their actual audiences. Rockstar is and has been for many, many years, one of the most arrogant and condescending studios in the world. In some ways, they are worse than Bethesda or EA.

But I will admit that I hate them even more for what they represent, then I despise them for what they are. They are cynical cunts without a doubt. But it's the fact that they get away with it, that they are even celebrated for it, is what really, really fucking grinds my gears.

>Nobody hates rockstar, it's just that their games are lazy
>lazy
Are you serious right now? Are you? Becasue I think you're fucking joking. The attention to detail, physics and presentation they pull of with the least amount bugs they have at launch are astounding. You give Fromsoft, even CDPR, Ubishit, Nintendo EPD, Sony Santa Monica or Capcom the rights to these games are there's going to be some massive downgrades when it comes these things overall immersion.

youtu.be/ArlISS6C0Zs
youtu.be/MrUJJgppMn4

Before you bitch about "gameplay" it's just fine. It's an action-adventure open world gameplay driven. Not every game has to have a purists standpoint when it comes to gameplay development. Meaning it doesn't have devote itself to constant platforming, deep RPG mechanics, character creation, or new enemies in a linear hallway environment, and RTS mechanics etc.. to be good

Attached: RDR2 storm.jpg (3840x2160, 328K)

Don't forget about how he goes on a monologue about how he's a survivor and surviving is the only thing he cares about as he goes out of his way to climb a mountain infested with Pinkertons just so he could beat up a guy that had an hour left to live.

A game has to be remakable for something, other than for production values. Ideally, it should be fun. If not, then at least present something note worthy in it's narration.
Rockstar games are neither. They are lazy. They know retards like you will fucking eat the worst shit as long as they can throw enough money into meaningless but marketable shit.

What is the fucking POINT of the polish in Rockstar games when the game is neither fun to play, nor actually telling anything of any value? I'll take hundred massively flawed games over one perfectly polished, but not fucking worth playing.

The reason why other studios make sacrifices in polish, in physics or graphical fidelity, is because they have something else, in in case of studios such as CDPR something actually more worth it, to focus on.

Rockstar's "polish" is to hide that the game itself is absolute fucking garbage.

>There are very few studios out there with such an open, clear contempt of their medium of choice

So basically you hate them for not exactly pandering to what you want?

I got no problem with that, but Micah now knowing his place and Dutch and Arthur are okay with Micah talking shit and being to Arthur (second-in-command of the gang) that is something I had a problem with.

So besides "plot armor", is there any reason why Arthur didn't shoot Dutch and Micah before he died?

Attached: 1551130780663.png (298x300, 39K)

>What is the fucking POINT of the polish in Rockstar games when the game is neither fun to play, nor actually telling anything of any value?
RDR2's and GTAV's success, and constant threads/discussions on Yea Forums proves this to be false. GTAV is yet again, after 5 years on steam, a top seller for the Steam summer sale. People are seeking their games for entertainment and fun. That'a fact.

Dutch left Arthur alone in a warehouse waiting for him to get stabbed to death by a soldier. I don't think he cares about Arthur getting shit talked any more.

go back to bing bing wahoo faggot

There are some folks who bought the special/ultimate Edition and played the Rhodes bank robbery mission for only a handful couple of dollars

>There are some folks who bought the special/ultimate Edition and played the Rhodes bank robbery mission for only a handful couple of dollars
There's also going to be a shitton of people double dip and by the game on PC. So what?

Yeah but what about Arthur being okay getting cursed, disrespected and commanded by Micah? Arthur could have killed that sociopathic asshole a long time ago or created an accident for Micah

It's also actually a game outside of the movie simulator

Are you 12?
What kind of fucking argument is that? What the FUCK made you think that is a worth-while reaction?

No, and nothing that I said would even remotely indicate anything like that. What the FUCK is wrong with you?

By that logic, COD and Halo are the pinacle of the fucking medium, you cock-sucker. Jesus, again: how old are you? How do you not fucking cringe typing that shit?

>Halo
Halo 5 sold like shit

Even at the end Arthur obviously still has some slight semblance of misplaced loyalty to Dutch, you know, the man who raised him and taught him everything he knew.

>5 seconds to loot one body,
What in everloving fuck?

I remember how confused I was at Arthur actually freeing Micah from jail when he thought he was an insane scumbag, and I was even more confused when he didn't shoot him in the back of the head after slaughtering half a town of civvies just for some shitty guns. There are so many moments in the game where Arthur should've killed Micah or Dutch but didn't. Dutch I'm willing to accept because it's his surrogate father, but I cannot fathom why Micah didn't get a bullet by the third ambush he led Arthur into.

Attached: 1553669273509.jpg (1600x1036, 872K)

>so what?
I just found it funny people buying the special/ultimate edition and getting only average content you alread can get by playing the game

He pulled a gun on him and left him for dead not even a day before that.

Attached: 1539850924361.jpg (500x388, 43K)

What does all the little detail shit matter if the game is fundamentally boring as fuck?
Me and my friend geeked out with all the cool details GTA5 had "cool, your character sweats when he runs" "oh shit, do you hear the ticking sound of engine cooling?" "oh man the view sure is nice" "oh shit, we can do tricks with bikes" "I love the customization options this game has for both your character AND your rides"
and after that realized how fucking hollow the game is and how little there is to do

Well actually Halo5 is the best MP FPS of the gen

I think he's got a fair argument. Why can't you admit that? GTAV is so old now that if it didn't have any redeeming factors it would be dead and no discussion would be had. I still see plenty of Red Dead Redemption 2 single-player discussions on every image board and site I go to. People are still heavily anticipating a PC announcement at any moment. Gamers would not be seeking them for entertainment over other games that are supposedly "more fun" if they were legitimately fundamentally flawed. This just sounds like you're refusing to accept the game has quality and people are enjoying it.

The only legitimate criticism I have for rockstar right now is they don't supply us with as many games as they used to. But no company really does anymore.

So was I. Why didn’t Arthur just let Micah rot in jail and watching him hang or shoot Micah when they are alone? Plenty of times and opportunities to get rid of Micah and go away with it, without to many questions asked.

Why did the game pull out the "nobody was the snitch until Guarma" plot twist? It makes no fucking sense.

Attached: 1547371614858.png (696x537, 336K)

>People are still heavily anticipating a PC announcement at any moment.
Why? It won't happen.

I miss Guarma, it could have a little bit longer and showing more of the island. Also, what if Milton and Ross were stranded on the island, would they make it alive?

RDR2 Online still absolute shit?

No, he does not. It's called argument ad populum, and it's actually a well fucking renown logical fallacy. "Other people think so, so it must be right."
It's not how basic reasoning goes. People buy into an insane amount of fucking garbage all the fucking time. We have seen ALL TOO MANY FUCKING TIMES over the last few decades how fucking easy is to manipulate people into believing and buying ANY kind of shit, provided you have the right media leverage. People did not fucking LOVE Twilight or Fifty Shades of Grey because those were good books or movies you spastic dipshit, there is absolutely no fucking reason why to assume RDR2 is liked for being a good game either. And this is an incredibly pathetic line of reasoning.

Seriously, did NOBODY EVER fucking teach you about the fallacy of ad populum? How? How do you fucking live above the age of 12 without knowing it?
The fuck? What kind of fucking universe do you deluded cretins live in?

>Don't get to see Reverend quit drugs and clean up his act
>Don't get to see whatshername turn into an alcoholic
>Don't get to say goodbye to almost anyone when they run away
>You don't get a single moment where you admit you have tuberculosis
>Strauss gets killed after getting tortured by Pinkertons and this is completely glossed over
God I love having everything happen off-screen while I'm busy with Guarma and Dutch giving "we live in a society" speeches.

Attached: 1538307017168.png (540x540, 374K)

RDR2 and GTA5 are all bravado and no substance
These are games people buy, play for 15 hours and never touch again, the only saving grace of GTA5 is its online counterparts which has at least some value to it, but what kills the buzz is the 15 minute loading times at start of each 5 minute minigame
RDR2's online is long dead because it's just as fucking boring as the base game, GTA5's SP is boring as fuck but Online has replayability and can be fun at times, the sheer quantity of activities keeps people playing for couple of hundreds of hours, but no more than that, because it all loses its glow very quickly.

People can play free games like Warframe, Path of Exile etc for thousands if not tens of thousands of hours, yet it's only possible to squeeze out maybe 100 hours from a full priced title made by a triple A studio. All that budget goes to nothing but polish, but on the side they forget to make the games compelling.

>These are games people buy, play for 15 hours and never touch again
like most games

holy cope

Attached: sdf.jpg (3840x2160, 1.4M)

Everybody knows it will, it's the only way they can save the online community of the game, because on consoles, online is a fucking wasteland
People really want to see how the game looks like in native 4k, 60fps and graphics cranked up the ass. It'll be a sight to behold but I doubt it saves the boring ass gameplay.

What if Milton was a member of Dutch van der Linden’s gang?

>The fuck? What kind of fucking universe do you deluded cretins live in?
Ask yourself that right now nigger, because you're acting like an autistic deluded man child over people liking rockstars games

>"bro, dude, dude, what if we like, dude, made a game that'd be fun to play and it would bring people always back wanting more?"
>"Nah, let's just make a polished turd and have people buy it for 60 bucks, play it for ten hours and never touch again"

Attached: 124r14r1.png (564x279, 79K)

>dude for a game to be good it's gotta have rts and indie elements

Gaming purists are GARBAGE. NO reason you can't like these games and R* games

Funny how you ignore the actual argument I made, kid. You now KNOW that your entire, sole argument is literally a fucking logical fallacy. How do you cope with that? Does that not seem like a fucking problem to you?

It's the SECOND time, by the way, you have made a provably fucking false argument in a row. And each time the idiocy of your reasoning has been proven to you, you completely ignore it, and act like nothing has happened.

Do you have no self-awareness? Do those words even mean anything to you?

it's OKAY at best. I don't think it will ever be great. TakeTwo forced multiplayer in a single player driven experience

You can use trains, just not stagecoaches.

This has nothing to do with gameplay purism you retard, no matter how many times you keep screeching those words.

Why are people no allowed to enjoy rockstar's games?

I'd bust a nut if they made an Undead Nightmare DLC where you play as Micah as he continues "being a survivor".

Attached: 1561158601039.png (391x435, 169K)

Unironically this

Why don't they rework RDR1? It'd basically be free cash for them. All they'd have to do is make Mexico and some new models for the RDR1 characters they don't have models for.

Attached: 1561483318079.jpg (480x360, 18K)

>Dota2

Attached: 1506200763307.jpg (250x174, 5K)

You can see Karen's progression to an alcoholic throughout the game. Arthur tells Charles about his TB.

>Arthur should've killed Micah or Dutch
Confirmed retard. Dutch was Arthur's longest time friend and closest he had to a father. Micah was not a popular guy in the gang but as long as he did what he was told, Dutch tolerated him and as Dutch was the leader the gang had to suck it up. Are basic human relationships so hard to understand?

Again completely ignoring the key argument. But if you want an answer: because bad precedent usually leads to bad things happening over and over, unless acknowledged. Rockstar is no less exploitative and harmful to the industry and the medium than the likes of EA. People ignoring the profound fucked-up-ness of their work, design and business practices will just lead to more companies adopting them, resulting in the standards of the industry lowering even beneath what they are now.

>Dota 2
Haha great example you pc shitstain. You'll never EVER have RDR2.

The game is not on pc or switch ergo sour grapes.

>all they have to do is
You don't know jack shit about videogame development clearly.

>Arthur tells Charles about his TB
He never actually tells anyone besides Milton that he has TB. The most he ever said was "I'm sick, and it's gonna get worse". Saying you're sick and your condition is gonna get worse is different than flat out saying "hey, I have a terrible incurable disease that is slowly killing me".
>Are basic human relationships so hard to understand?
I guess they are since I cannot understand him not immediately putting a bullet in Micah or Dutch as everyone is running away when the Pinkertons showed up. They both just pulled guns on him and were gonna kill him.

>Have models for almost all the characters
>Have a current-gen map of almost all of the original map
>Have access to almost all of the VAs in case they need to re-record lines
>Can easily reuse the voice lines from the original
It would be absolutely brainless to remake RDR1 compared to how hard it was to make RDR2.

Attached: 1545021121479.png (430x426, 299K)

>Someone criticizes anything about RDR2

GO BACK TO FORTNITE!!! ZOOM ZOOM FORTNITE FORTNITE FORTNITE!!!!

Without fail every single time. Why are RDR2tards so obsessed with Fortnite?

My god you are actually genuinely autistic. The way he says what he says and how the others react pretty explicitly say that he's not going to have a lot of time left. Micah heckles him a bunch with the blacklung comments and you can see Dutch react in a bad way too to Arthur.

>put a bullet in Dutch
Dutch has to live to Red Dead Redemption 1, Micah made for a great ''loose end'' for John to tie up in the epilogue. The story might not have played out how you wanted maybe, but it was serviceable enough.

It amazes me that people can simultaneously defend this game killing off characters with pointless deaths because "it's realistic" while also defending them not killing off characters that should've died with "because it makes for great drama" and "it's realistic".

>NO MOM IT'S CALLED INTERNET CRITICISM

Attached: 13b.gif (931x682, 426K)

What point are you even trying to make here

Game sux lol sry bro

When you try to explore Guarma, you get inst killed by an invicible sniper

>This is really the only game made so far with writing quality on the level of a great film or television series

That's bullshit. Even Mafia was filmworthy back in 2002.The only thing RDR2 pushed the bar for was it's gigantic map considering the graphical fidelity. I was blown away when I realized all of 1's map was in the game (except Mexico which technically isn't rendered but is there). The story is great though, don't get me wrong. Arthur is probably one of the best vidya protags of all time. Roger Clark is very talented.

Attached: jessie james.jpg (2700x1800, 623K)

>still no undead nightmare type of dlc for 2

Attached: 1560719866187.jpg (453x439, 85K)

>killing off characters with pointless deaths

A lot of the deaths / bad ends had to happen to justify the Van Der Linde Gang coming to an end, no?

Sean's death in chapter 3 basically sets the tone to a more grim one. The gang's first real casualty since the intro other than hearing second hand about Mac's death. Chapter 2 and 3 had been cozy fucking around conning cowboys and rednecks but with Sean's death the mood of the gang went down a considerable notch. Kieran dying was reminding that the O'Driscolls are still a threat. Hosea and Lenny were a big loss for the gang that got Arthur seriously question Dutch as well as removing the one person besides Arthur Dutch would listen to. Then there aren't really any deaths until the final standoff where Susan gets shot.

I'd prefer a Cowboy vs Aliens type DLC, not a rehash.

As a big MP fanboy I can tell you this is absolutely false

If it does happen it'll be online exclusive. Damn shame

Cowboys and aliens sounds really gay and overly wacky whereas Undead Nightmare stuff at least would be reinforced by the spooky weathers and locations of the base game.

I want to see this. Also a sequence where Sadie gets captured by zombie Colm O' Driscoll and hanged on a gallows. But after she's done kicking in the noose and gone cold she actually grabs zombie Colm with her thighs and snaps his neck because she's actually a vampire.

I played all those hours during the beta and release, and very much enjoyed my time
I don't see why people hate the game so much

Molly was just a red herring that showed up so people wouldn't think Micah has been betraying people throughout the game but it turned out he only started being a turncoat at the end of chapter 5, so I don't really know what the point of her pretending she was the traitor was for. Kieran in general was nothing but wasted potential. He would've been the perfect sounding board to show Arthur's progression from being a total douchebag to being a kind man looking for redemption. But instead he's treated like shit by Arthur throughout the entire story (even when Arthur is hanging out with him) and he is given the most over-the-top and brutal death in the entire series. It felt like one of the writers actually hated him considering how shitty he was treated the entire game. I've given up on saying Lenny's death was pointless since his death is a magnet for "it's realistic" rebuttals, and Susan's death felt like something that was added last-second because a writer forgot to make her run away and had to kill her off.

Which gang was that? Curious.

There's a girl on DA that creates a ton of high quality fanart of Milton and her own self insert OC that's his wife. It's really cute even if I think that Milton's a cunt.

How many bodies have you looted, user?

Attached: 8).png (540x549, 357K)

Fuck you NakeyJakey and fuck your autist fan base.

don't bring jakey into this

Attached: god dammit valve.gif (600x338, 3.92M)

>It's really cute even if I think that Milton's a cunt
Was he though? I'd say he was insanely generous for giving everyone the chance to run away while they still had the chance, and the fact that he let Molly go after interrogating her showed that he wasn't after anyone besides the big fish (like Dutch and Arthur). Pearson, Reverend, and all the minor members even manage to get away and start over and he doesn't even bother going after them. If it wasn't for the retarded Strauss death that makes no sense I'd unironically say he dindu nuffin.

Molly's story is basically one of Dutch neglecting her throughtout the entire game and not taking her seriously which ends up having dire consequences. Kieran is first genuinely abused by the gang but it evolves into playful fucking around and especially Bill takes a big liking to Kieran, maybe even a romantic one. So Kieran is absolutely not underused, his character just a lot of the time interacts with others like Bill most notably.

He shot Hosea in cold blood just to show Dutch that he could. Hosea was captured and unarmed, it was literally a murder.

Another is taking Abigail and trying to have her hanged for a murder she most likely didn't commit. Besides those two things he was doing things by the book.

>He shot Hosea in cold blood just to show Dutch that he could
I count that as one of his out of character cartoon villain moments that make no sense. That and him giving a "we live in a society" speech while having a firing squad shoot at a shack full of women and children felt really out of character for him since he was always going on about doing things by the book. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if Abigail was actually a murderer. I'm pretty sure everyone in the gang was.

RDR to is objectively not impressive.
At least from a story telling point of view.
If you like the story thats fine, they'res nothing wrong with like it.
They'res just nothing impressive about the story itself.
Out laws fighting a rival gang, moving around the country side untill one of them contracts a disease and decides how to spend his last days?
Might make for some decent play
Might even be a "good" story
But they'res nothing fucking revolutionary about it.
Either to gaming or to storytelling as a whole.
While im sure its been said in this thread enough to excite a masochistic horse , silent hill and heavy rain already broke those barriers into gaming decades ago.
Oh and dont forget the fucking ham handed historical memes that get thrust into the game
>slaverybad.exe
>racismbad.exe.
>confederacybad.exe
All in all its a slightly above average tripple A release with decent story, more enjoyable game play then we're use to and somewhat revolutionary graphics.
If game developers actually want to create some meaningful and unquestionable artistically revoluionary games they are going to have to actually engage with the human condition and step outside the politically correct established path in order to tell a story that will move people other then the odd beauty starved nihilistic rick and morty fan who stopped reading books after highschool and stopped watching tv when he discovered porn.

Attached: ron swanson with drink.png (767x431, 366K)

>I'm pretty sure everyone in the gang was
The women aside from Karen and Susan probably weren't desu.

But I would sorta agree that Milton did give the gang a bunch of chances and took a huge personal risk coming into the gang's camp alone with Ross to offer his deal.

Theres no discussing this game because the people who dont like it and the people who pretend to like it for retarded reasons for replies outnumber everyone who might have gotten enjoyment out of it.

>The women aside from Karen and Susan probably weren't
Tilly was in a former gang and killed at least a couple people, Molly has most likely killed, and the fact that nobody questioned Abigail when she said she could gun down some officers to help rescue John implies that she can kill. I'd say Pearson's fat ass is less likely to be a killer than Molly or Abigail are.

You watch shitty superhero movies don't you. Jeez summer already.

More bounties would've been cool and more female bounties and hanging scenes for them would be cool too. Actually would've been neat to occasionally being able to witness random hangings in towns. Not necessarily like every day but something like every two weeks or so in-game seeing a guy or a girl get hanged would be neat. The instances of enemy gangs vs lawmen or such would be cool too, sort of show the player isn't the only target. Having sex with prostitutes?

Attached: Lk9WwvutCTM4LLqIKS8BNn1n1bK-fa1WL4fw2OAgoj4.jpg (1280x720, 96K)

Tilly might have killed but no confirmation. Ditto for Molly, there is no real indication that she would've killed. Karen goes on actual robberies so she probably has killed people. Abigail might have killed abusive customers when she was a hooker but not sure.

To get general statements out of the way: One, RDR2 is not the only game made so far with writing quality on the level of a great film or television series. Two, equating video game writing to that of a film or television series is fucking retarded and you sound like people who compare film to books in terms of writing.

I also want to preface this dumb long post with the information that I did not finish RDR2. I only played the story up until about the midway point of chapter 4 before becoming bored with the game and moving onto something else. This is not to say that I did not put a lot of time into the game. I had something like 60 hours in the game because I liked parts of the game a lot, but the main story was not very engaging. I've been thoroughly spoiled at this point, but I cannot comment on the quality of the story past chapter 4 because I haven't experienced it.

RDR2's main story is bad. For a while, I went back and forth between "bad" and "okay". It would be retarded hyperbole to say the whole game is bad or that the writing in general is bad, because there's a lot of really good stuff, but I'm talking about the story as it is presented in the mandatory missions. It was bad (so far in as chapter 4).

The main narrative thrust that I saw in the story missions is that Dutch is losing his touch, if he ever had it to begin with, and the gang are only starting to see through his incredibly charismatic facade, but because they're family, with all the underpinnings and nuances that come with it, they're willing to ignore or rationalize it. My biggest issue with this as the main story is that this is never set up properly. We get an en media res for the beginning of the game where the gang has just fled into the mountains during a snowstorm to outrun the law after a job gone horribly wrong.

I guess I should just continue in the next post since this one is running way too long.

Attached: 46104243_2180848082235552_8585426967988273152_o.jpg (2048x1152, 117K)

>Tilly might have killed but no confirmation
I'm pretty sure there's a substory where her old gang hunts her down for killing the gang leader's brother.

Oh yeah you're right she did.

>game is literally groundbreaking

Attached: Red Dead Redemption 2_20181111002129.png (1920x1080, 3.17M)

>rockstar
>good writing
What?

The Marston prison-break was absolutely retarded, and killed the entire game.

Who's better in the industry?

That's not what I said. I said
>rocktar
>good writing
They are bad writers that polluted Max Payne with their cliche horseshit

Best in the video game industry doesn't mean good

It was kinda retarded but cool enough that I wasn't too bothered. Also more time to hang out with Sadie.

>This is really the only game made so far with writing quality on the level of a great film or television series

You are a fucking retard. The writing is so decompressed it would be torn to shreds if it were a tv series or video game. Motherfuckers take five minutes for every random character present to remark on the situation every time something happens.

It actually isn't.

Remedy already ruined Max Payne before they smartly handed it to their publisher. Control is going to be horrendous ass everybody at Rockstar will laugh at.

It does because we're talking about games here. HOLLYWOOD and the movie industry worldwide is in shambles. The only good high production value director out there is Denis Villeneuve

It made absolutely no sense. No way in any reality would they release a convict in exchange for one guard. They would've been sniped then and there. For a game so obsessed with muh realism, that and the balloon bit were nonsensical. I could even give Arthur finding Dutch on the island after 2 minutes a pass due to complete coincidence.

Attached: Red Dead Redemption 2_20181111002237.png (1920x1080, 2.32M)

The thing about in media res is that it's usually used to drop the audience into an interested or exciting part of a story to immediately hook them. It's a pretty good technique for video games because an exciting or interesting part is usually some cool gameplay section that the player can get dropped into.

RDR2, bafflingly, drops the player into an incredibly boring part of the story. Not just with regards to the story, but for gameplay. The player is treated to like 5 ride-and-talk segments (which make up way too much of the game's story missions) in a row with nothing much else to do. And in the story, we're past the excitement of the gang being at their height, we're past seeing Dutch at his most confident, we're past seeing Dutch performing the inciting incident for most of the other characters questioning him or slowly turning on him where he shoots a girl in cold blood, and we're past seeing the consequences of any of these actions where a few people in the gang die.

What we do get is a scene where someone says that the unseen person under a cloth has passed away and then Dutch looks small and awkward speaking to a group of huddled and scared people that everything is going to be alright because, well, he doesn't know or really have a plan, but they'll pull through as they always have. It manages to give the player the wrong impression of the character that will basically be the focus of the entire story (more on that later) and then tries to a do a lot of heavy lifting with massive amounts of story backfilling. We've just started in the wrong spot of the story for a ton of reasons.

From here on out, the player's impression of Dutch as this blustering nonce only serves to be incredibly frustrating as every single character insists that nothing's wrong and they all have faith in the guy, directly contradicting in-game experiences with the character.

There's nothing inherently wrong with dramatic irony, but this is wrong for a video game.

Attached: 45436597_2177372752583085_8187438195781140480_o.jpg (2048x1152, 63K)

>It does because we're talking about games here.
no we aren't, read literally the first sentence of the thread, peanut brain

>Remedy already ruined Max Payne

Attached: 1555721853607.gif (200x150, 2.11M)

>someone posts a reply of a game with better writing
>replies are mostly things like "uhh no" and "lmao dead game"
RDR2fags are worse than BOTWfags.

Silent Hill is trash and unplayable in current year

>Remedy ruined Max Payne
God I wish I could kill you right now

>muh realism
Red Dead Redemption was always about movie realism really. Remember in Redemption 1 when Marston goes up to Fort Mercer alone demanding Bill's surrender?

Wife got this for me for my birthday the other day, and while the story and cinematics so far are great, this game is TERRIBLE at being a game
It doesn't teach you anything about how to play it, it seems to think tutorials can be replaced by "press x to win" hud popups, and I still can't figure out how they expect saving to work. Sometimes it loads exactly how I left, sometimes it's in the middle of fucking nowhere. And I've never seen a game with such a big open world that tries to keep you from playing in it. I've never been enjoying and hating a game so much at the same time.

That was just to showcase John's stupidity. Has nothing to do with realism. 1 is also a Spaghetti Western while 2 is a Revisionist Western that wants to be a realistic game. Don't go defending that horseshit jailbreak when the rest of the game is great.

Especially a super long video game. If we spent a story's first act with everyone thinking that Dutch is super awesome and then we spend the second act exploring all the characters finding out he's not actually that awesome, in just about any other medium that is much snappier at moving the story along, it'd be perfectly fine.

But we're playing a video game. An open-world video game where the story is only dispensed in small dollops between large chunks of unrelated activities. Again, I only played up until chapter 4, but the gang still mostly had faith in Dutch up until that point. That's four chapters out of a game that I hear is 6 chapters long with a lengthy epilogue dedicated to what would normally be considered the first act. And this first act was incredibly frustrating because I, as the player, already had a completely different opinion of Dutch than all the characters because of where we started. I wanted to keep my comments isolated to just this game as though it were in a vacuum, but it's a whole other can of worms that this is Red Dead Redemption 2.

There's an entire other game where the player basically already lived out a hyper condensed version of RDR2's Dutch story where you hear about John's past exploits with Dutch and how the man used to be, but then you finally see him and he's this dirty and disheveled guy barely getting by after shacking up with Native Americans. If you played that game, you go into this game knowing the true end of Dutch's story and it's even more frustrating how long it takes for the process to start for him to unravel because you know it's inevitable.

I wanted to spend as much time away as possible from the main story (and I did by spending hours and hours hunting, exploring, and fishing) because I was already annoyed by the driving narrative force. And I haven't even talked about how the actual plot serves to exacerbate these issues.

Attached: 45617347_2177372762583084_6489299549616603136_o.jpg (2048x1152, 58K)

they should've made the jailbreak more stealth focused - making it a shootout was stupid

Remedy had one good idea with the original games matrix style gun play. 2 quickly wore its welcome out. Remedy is
absurd trash now. It's not a coincidence when people talk about Max Payne nowadays they mainly only talk about 3.

Agreed.

This is also really the only game I ever dropped because of the controls.
What a piece of shit. I can deal with poor design decisions but games should at least not be a chore to play.

>2 quickly wore its welcome out
How to spot a pleb on Yea Forums
>It's not a coincidence when people talk about Max Payne nowadays they mainly only talk about 3
3 only had one thing going for it: the gameplay. Clunky, but fun. But it is NOT a Max Payne game.

I enjoyed RDR2, but only did one 100% playthrough whereas I raped RDR multiple times. The atmosphere, the classic spaghetti western characters, Mexico, the OST. Mostly the fact that it doesn't take itself so serious. The conflict between Dutch, Micah and Arthur dragged on for way too long. It forgot itself and became too preachy. RDR will always be the superior game to me

Attached: RDR.jpg (1334x750, 87K)

lol ok hi redd*t

Get the fuck off my board you piece of shit

Attached: SH2PC Title 3_4_2019 10_17_42 PM.jpg (3840x2160, 1.25M)

>But it is NOT a Max Payne game
Guess that's what saved it from being irrelevant like the first two

>bafflingly
yeah well you type like a retard so I can see how that could trip you up

It's not "your board" reddit. OH LE END SCENE IN THE AIRPORT WITH THE STUPID VOICE FUZZ MUSIC SO LE EPIC

>Max Payne 1 & 2
>irrelevant
Ok kid

Honestly don't understand why people compare both of them. I mean I guess if you want to compare certain gameplay aspects I can see it. But the story is one continuous long story. I envy the person that has never played one or two and can start the second game and then go directly into the first game. It becomes one long epic because they're companion piece.

oh shit I meant to reply to
lol

Attached: SH2PC Title 3_4_2019 10_19_58 PM.jpg (3840x2160, 1.26M)

>I simplified things to their most basic element golly gee look at how huge my cock is
You're an intolerable cunt that finds joy in nothing. I pity those close to you, if there are any left.

Attached: 1516735661020.png (1000x869, 1.17M)

My copy will be arriving in a few more days. How is it on a regular gaystation?

awful
should've gotten a PRO

RDR2 and RDR1 are damn near perfect played close to each other. Imagine playing RDR2 first and then in RDR1 having John sort of talk kinda wistfully about his old gang and not feeling good about having to hunt 'em down. Scenes like killing Javier and having John wipe a tear from his eye or meeting crazy ass old Dutch would be so powerful.

The plot, and I do want to differentiate between "plot" and "story" because I think there are elements of the story separate from the plot that are actually very good, is really fucking stupid. I don't think you need this series of posts that you're not reading anyway to break down why it's annoying that the plot for three chapters straight is the gang, hounded by the law, moves to a new location where they set up and try to make some money, at Dutch's behest, so they can move out West and be truly free, but a job goes wrong and they have to move again. This happens for chapter 2, 3, and 4 and is the basis of all those meme threads with JUST GOTTA HAVE FAITH and I HAVE A PLAN. Dutch parrots these things endlessly and the gang barely questions it. I think a couple character brings up that they think Dutch is acting a little different and then Arthur or whoever he's talking to (because I think Arthur might have actually brought it up when talking to Hosea at one point) handwaves it and says no, everything's alright.

I have lots of problems with the game because you need to complete arbitrary story missions during these chapters to be allowed to purchase the equipment you want. Nothing says immersion like walking into a gunshop, flipping through a menu they've painstakingly designed to look like an actual catalog, selecting the gun you want and can afford, but having "You do not have access to this weapon yet," without the shopkeep saying anything about it, but that gripe isn't really about the story.

I think the mission where I figured I could tune out the plot is where Arthur and a few other gang members rob the bank in Valentine. It goes off almost entirely without a hitch and the gang pockets like $10,000 in the group savings and each person gets like $2,500 apiece. And yet, this is never brought up in the story where Dutch constantly tells everyone the need more money. Hell, after they rob the bank, Arthur immediately rides off to collect a debt.

I have an xbox x and an s and I honestly have no preference between one or the other, the game just looks great.

Attached: 4-7-2019_11-20-37_AM-ithwepta.png (1920x1080, 1.82M)

The first game is better by a country mile, anybody who disagrees is a philistine with no concept of quality.

lol okay

Attached: afsafs.png (300x168, 100K)

>Honestly don't understand why people compare both of them
Because it is the prequel, contains the main character of RDR and is titled RDR2? You even say yourself that it should be regarded as one long epic, but two games separated by 8 years between them so comparisons is only natural regardless of what you play first. Someone who starts with RDR2 will most likely also notice the difference in theme and tone and make comparisons

>old good
>new bad

this

It's perfectly fine.

>you guys

Attached: 1545272935075.jpg (600x559, 25K)

I dont get why everyone loves it so much because it just repeated the "death of the west" theme from the first game. I even think RDR1 did it better in the final blackwater chapter anyway. RDR2 felt like a boring retread with nothing new to say. Sometimes I feel like I played something different than anyone else, because I was expecting something a lot more exceptional and new.

I also think the ending was extremely disappointing. I remember before release, everyone was speculating on what the ending would be. Everyone thought there would be a really interesting ending; would you keep playing as Arthur? Would Arthur die, and you play as someone else? Who, and how? I think a lot of us were expecting something really dramatic. Instead it was just...Arthur's last action is to help John get to safety, then you play as John several years later. Oh...Is that not the most boring, safest ending they could have possibly done? I found it very anti climactic, I was expecting some shocking reason why you don't play as Arthur and why he wasn't mentioned in the first game. Instead it feels like they did nothing surprising or interesting. It was a lot less compelling than the transition from John to Jack

>I was expecting something a lot more exceptional and new.
but that's what we got, Arthur's an entirely new character with an exceptional arc in vidya

Why are RDR2fags so fucking obnoxious?

All the frustration with characters being willfully ignorant and never questioning Dutch's plan were only highlighted by the fact that in-game, Arthur was rich as fuck and I basically had to burn the money to get through it all. I had bought every single piece of clothes in just about every shop I found and still had some leftover to fuck around with fully customized guns. Now, I'm not one to harp on about "ludonarrative dissonance" in a video game, but this contradiction between having tons of money in-game by doing the things assigned to me during story missions and yet this is the driving force for the story for what was 3 chapters of the story was incredibly annoying.

One thing I do want to bring up though is that I've heard there are different endings depending on honor levels and there are mechanics dedicated to honor gain or loss, but there is a pivotal story moment where you have zero control over whether Arthur acts honorably or not. The story mission where you need to beat up the poor, sick farmer for debt money and he splashes the tuberculosis-infected blood on Arthur's face, is fucking awful in execution. There's nothing wrong with this as a plot moment, I actually do think that Arthur dying to a slow, withering disease after doing a morally wrong thing rather than violent death he seems to gleefully throw himself at his entire life is a good idea, but it's just poorly done.

This goes back to my issue with comparing video game writing to movie writing or book writing. As it played out in my game, since I was playing as a high honor Arthur, was that I was super reluctant to beat up this sickly old man who was desperately farming at night to try and raise money to pay the gang back. The game doesn't do it all in a cutscene, but has Arthur throw him to the ground and then you get to threaten him or beat him. I didn't actually beat him at all, but the game cut to a cutscene where he was bloodied and beaten, crawling up the fence.

Attached: 45506199_2177372789249748_9192951835764195328_o.jpg (2048x1152, 183K)

>From here on out, the player's impression of Dutch as this blustering nonce only serves to be incredibly frustrating as every single character insists that nothing's wrong and they all have faith in the guy, directly contradicting in-game experiences with the character.
I agree with you. This is by far the game's dumbest aspect. Its impossible to relate to the characters because it's like you are always way ahead of them in terms of how they should think.

Well thats your opinion. I think we got a game with basically the same theme and the safest possible ending I could imagine. If this ending was leaked before the game came out, I think people would find it disappointing.

i wish the romance option was still in I wanted to make Mary-Beth happy... why they cut it bros?

Attached: Loving Mary-Beth.png (1280x1536, 1.21M)

ROCKSTAR

There is nothing special about Arthur, he is yet another reluctant anti-hero that we've so many times even from this same company.

Dutch should have been the main character. Problem with this story is that Arthur has no real motivational force or goal until he gets sick, so everything before feels aimless.

it's the ending to a prequel in the middle of a series, they weren't trying to bust out the world shattering plot twists and instead doubled down on the world building to great effect imo.

Attached: 2019-07-01_4-13-57_PM-w1o41mj2.jpg (3840x2160, 1.53M)

>Massive production that needed to be coordinated through nearly ten studios worldwide consisting of over 1000 people as opposed to the singular oversight of one studio of the first game to create a more principled and cohesive artistic direction
>Different designer, art director. writers etc.
>Development hell and cut content out the asshole
From a meta standpoint it was never going to be as good, regardless of the content of the game itself

it would have good writing if it wasn't for the fucking retarded zany side characters. Every single stranger mission in RDR2 can and should be skipped.

>There's nothing wrong with this as a plot moment, I actually do think that Arthur dying to a slow, withering disease after doing a morally wrong thing rather than violent death he seems to gleefully throw himself at his entire life is a good idea, but it's just poorly done.
you only think this because you were spoiled and didn't play the game thoroughly all the way through. I've had a hard time taking your long-winded critique of the game serious because you simply haven't played the game from start to finish. And haven't played it the way the director and writers wanted it to be played. Yet here you sit critiquing the ever-living hell out of it like you did. sound like you don't bring up some valid points because you do every now and then. But knowing that you were spoiled heavily and you didn't thoroughly play the game makes me not want to take you seriously sorry.

yeah except he's well written

Good god you sound like an obnoxious RDR1 fart huffer.

>I was expecting something a lot more exceptional and new
Then you're retard because they told us ell in advance that the thematic was the dying west although compared to RDR1 where the old west is buried already, in RDR2 it's basically just the beginning of the end. The viewpoint is also different as you're a government lapdog in RDR1 whileas in RDR2 you fight against the government.

No problem mate

Attached: 15246548646747.gif (480x360, 2.46M)

Explain why

Reminder that Dutch leaked RDR remake.

They could have written it anyway they wanted, you talk as if the boring ending was already in place.

"Arthur helps John escape, and then you play as John several years later" is the absolute most boring, safe ending they could have possibly gone with. I was blown away they decided to go with something so terrible.

play the game

>They could have written it anyway they wanted
uh no they couldn't it still had to tie into the first game...

"John getting his life together" was kino

Nice try, rockstar

The ending could have been wildly different while still tying into the first game. People were speculating tons of endings before the game came out.

If the game wanted to railroad that interaction as a major pivotal moment, then it should have just been a cutscene. Instead, it gave me control of the situation only to wrest it away because I wasn't doing it exactly the way they wanted, even though they gave me other options that I chose from.

The reason I stopped a little bit into chapter 4 is because chapter 3 was really bad in terms of plot, I already had my fill of the characters being blockheads, and I felt like I had already enjoyed the game's other systems for long enough that I could end there.

Chapter 3 is a clusterfuck of writing: Every character seems to be retarded and there are random plot moments that don't seem to do anything other than reinforce frustration with everyone being retarded.

The premise of chapter 3 is basically Yojimbo/Fistful of Dollars, but stupider. Dutch and Hosea think they're criminal masterminds (again, the player has experienced nothing but them being kind of bumbling dolts pretending to be smarter than they are) and try to play two families off each other. This manifests in the game by the player just doing missions for both sides without having to put on a disguise or anything. I really thought that it would lean into the gang using the not!Romeo and Juliet kids to leverage the houses into doing what they wanted, but that just turns into a weirdly out of place feminist rally mission. I think I should also bring up the random diversion where the rival gang from chapter 2 kidnaps Arthur in an obvious setup, Dutch basically leaves him for dead until Arthur frees himself, and it's not really talked about again.

And in the end, for seemingly no reason, one family kidnaps Jack, for reasons Dutch can only speculate on at the beginning of the next mission, so there can be an admittedly great shootout scene. It's a shame such a cool scene was soured a bit by the context surrounding it being pure contrived bullshit, but it was a good scene.

Attached: 45589470_2177372769249750_3583011449473073152_o.jpg (2048x1152, 123K)

or don't play game of the generation, I don't care

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 14K)

agreed, the ending could have been different

Explain why I should

>game of the generation

Attached: 1557123363419.jpg (395x450, 69K)

>old bad
>new good

Attached: F7CC0558-C0D7-4F87-9928-CFD0E9F0AD9B.jpg (346x366, 41K)

The best storytelling in the game is through the camp interactions and journal. The cutscenes themselves are a lot shittier.

RDR was terribly made, so yes.

Why?

Attached: 4D79EDDC-48F1-4D5F-A6A6-07D06528E120.jpg (579x444, 42K)

It's still a retread of a game from 8 years previous though. And RDR2 doesn't even geographically take place in the west.

Because it was made by a single half-assed team.

didn't those dumbasses fuck up or lose the code or some shit

pajeetech

They're basically the same fucking shit. 2 is just far more polished because it was a global effort.
Anyone who claims the first game is better made is talking out of their ass.

I agree with the wall of text poster. My essential problem is that you know before you do most of the things in the game, that doing them is dumb and unnecessary, but you have to do them anyway because the game demands it. In RDR1, you knew it was all about getting John's family back, so there was never any of this dissonance. In 2, you know you're just stupidly going along with Dutch for 6 chapters against your better judgement. A thought I had before most missions was "why are we even doing this at all"? It's like Rockstar is forcing you to be dumb. I would have set the game earlier when the gang was more in full swing and more successful.

>RDR2
>"Play for 10 hours and never touch again"
>Campaign alone takes about 40-60 hours

>for no reason one family kidnaps Jack
I mean it's fairly explicitly stated even that they wanted leverage to use against the gang. Spend more time actually researching what you're talking about.

No, because the first game is a bit more rapid and doesn't feel as shitty to control. It's atmosphere is also way better

2019... I am forgotten.

I agree, but I still don't get the big deal about The Last of Us, MGS was way better and specially for its fucking time.

Play it again user, you were a kid back then. I also had fond memories but after replaying it the game is cringey as fuck.

I want to clarify that I don't know whether or not the overarching story of him dying to a withering disease is bad or not, only that specific inciting event where he first contracts the disease is poorly written and executed. Sorry for the confusion.

Chapter 4 starts with the gang again moving even further east and settling in to raise money because Dutch has a plan to get them out west. At this point, I was so tired of being beaten over the head with "Dutch is not as competent as he and the gang think he is" and waiting for a single other character to call him out. I thought it was about to happen when Dutch, Hosea, and Arthur go to a fancy party and Arthur keeps saying, "What are we doing Dutch?" because he hates it and suspects Dutch just likes living it up with high society, but I got a few missions in and this didn't really happen, so I just stopped playing and moved on to another game.

At the end of these posts that nobody read, I do want to outline some of those story elements that I think were good. For one, I think it's awesome how much you can get to know people in the gang if you put in the effort to help around camp and talk to them. Some of these conversations can be weird (Arthur sullenly confessing that he's been killing random animals when I hadn't done anything of the sort), but it was really nice. Also, it was nice that you can inspect the seams in the story by finding books in Dutch's room about moral degradation and freedom that he essentially quotes during speeches to the gang in other parts of the game. You can find Molly's sad poetry where she feels neglected and betrayed by Dutch. That kind of stuff was good for the overall story and I loved it.

It's a shame the story is so slow and misguided that I couldn't get engaged in it enough to get to chapter 6, where everyone says the story is good. I just don't think a story can be redeemed by the last 20% of it being good when the other 80% is a boring slog.

Attached: 45510329_2177372779249749_1997556192351617024_o.jpg (2048x1152, 270K)

Unpopular opinion but I think the first game had better dialogue. It felt like the characters talked about more things than just the immediate situation. Like in Mexico, most of the conversations were about politics and the war. In Blackwater they talk about politics and the future. In RDR2, it feels like the characters always just talk about the immediate mission, and what they are doing. I wish 2 had more conversations about the world itself, and not just what immediately related to the missions

>they wanted leverage against the gang that they insult in the same sentence by saying they're a bunch of murdering scum
>they didn't think that it would result in the gang turning to murder to get the kid back

Sorry, I misspoke. It was a really retarded reason that made no sense.

I read your posts and I want you to know I totally agree with what you are saying
>At this point, I was so tired of being beaten over the head with "Dutch is not as competent as he and the gang think he is" and waiting for a single other character to call him out.
I relate to this so hard. We are subjected to this way too long before anyone does anything about it

The first game is plenty fucking clunky too, what're you on about? They both have input delay, and 2's is only slightly worse. Both games control fine during gunfights though.

>atmosphere
So you just prefer Spaghetti aesthetic over Revisionist aesthetics, that's subjective.

>more rapid
Yeah, I loved Mexico dragging on for far too long. So good.

Attached: 1562420145764.webm (640x360, 2.83M)

The main loop of the story is so fucking stupid.
Why the fuck did Dutch ever trust Micah when he bought the gang nothing but failure? I swear to God by the time chapter 4 rolled around I was going insane by Arthur going along with Dutch and his inane stupid bullshit.
Anyone who thinks these are good characters is low IQ. There's one great scene with the nun and stellar acting across the board but the game's story as a whole is a massive pile of shit.

Because Dutch is a fucking idiot

I was really hoping that someone would even let it slip during one of the drunken party scenes that they doubted Dutch, but what you actually get during the Jack rescue party is Bill doubling down on why he would never ever doubt Dutch. Are they implying that Bill does have doubts and he's just reaffirming his own beliefs? That's like two levels deep of implication that I think can just be ruled out as convoluted.

The opinion is probably unpopular because the others actually listened to the dialogue of both games and understand that for the gang their survival and matters directly related to the survival matter the most. And there are fuck tons of campfire conversations about politics, gang's personal stories, even philosophy and so on.

In RDR1 you don't for the most part have any characters that are present throughtout the whole game, when you go to Mexico the cast gets pretty much entirely swapped to the mexican army and the rebels.

I'm not going to argue every point in your big dumb essay but I will say one thing you keep bringing up about everyone in the gang being oblivious to Dutch's increasingly bad decisions and leadership is clearly wrong. From the start Hosea, John, Arthur, and a few others are questioning Dutch. Especially Hosea and John who seem to fully realize early on he's going off the rails, with Hosea trying to steer him right and John just being his conflicted dumb self not sure what to do. There's tons of dialogue from practically the start of the game, both during cutscene/missions and in random camp interactions that illustrate members of the gang losing faith in Dutch.

If anyone believes that the writing of 2 is better than the writing 1 is lying to themselves and I will shill RDR2 as GOTY 2018 my entire life. Writing RDR (a soft reboot) they weren't positive the reception of the game so they went all out plot wise not really expecting to get a sequel out of it. Thus they wrote one of the most compelling and emotional narratives in gaming but ultimately wrote themselves into a corner. For RDR2 they could have looked to the future with Jack but one of the main themes of RDR was the dying west and going any futher into the 19th century would be totally lacking any wild west influence. Now not saying that the writing staff couldn't have taken this in stride and made a compelling Red Dead game not solely based around the wild west but it would most likely be too far a departure for a IP that so greatly established itself in the western setting. They took what they could with a prequel but attempting to write drama and tension between characters is hard when you already know the outcome of these characters. Beginning RDR2 you knew John wasn't going to die, you knew something happened to Arthur, you knew about Dutch's betrayal, you knew about the Pinkerton involvement. The writers had to work in very clearly predefined margins which is even more difficult to write something compelling out of rather than writing something wholly original and due to these predetermined plot points they knew they'd have to kill of Arthur in order to totally not fuck up the plot continuity. Honestly while Arthur's illness is tragic I wouldn't particularly call it good writing, it's a trope as old as time and while John's death in RDR1 was revolutionary plot wise for games it almost felt like a demented form of fan service in RDR2. While I get thematically you could argue Arthur needed to die but I think there's a lot that could have been done writing wise to give us a game where Arthur dose survive.

Hosea second guesses Dutch right from the start. John starts laying on the doubt around chapter 3. To say that nobody questions Dutch is absurd.

you know Bill's gay, right?

And another point, looking at the games as one large story. You could argue that the message of RDR is made that much more poignant by the events and character building in RDR2. You could argue that John's life with Abigail and jack, his struggles across New Austin and Mexico, and his ultimate demise make the sacrifice of Arthur Morgan that much more tragic. However this doesn't work both ways. Knowing John dies regardless of the decision made in RDR2 means that Arthurs death practically has no meaningful impact in the grand scheme of things. If we had gotten the story of RDR2 before RDR then perhaps there could be more of an argument.

But as it stands RDR still has superior writing.

>I think a couple character brings up that they think Dutch is acting a little different and then Arthur or whoever he's talking to (because I think Arthur might have actually brought it up when talking to Hosea at one point) handwaves it and says no, everything's alright.

It's not that it's never brought up, because it is, but the capacity in which it's brought up is so small that it's ridiculous in the context off Dutch's leadership being THE driving force of the story. There maybe four or five dissident conversations about Dutch's leadership, in furtive isolated conversations away from the group, where another character then says, no, no, it's fine. He'll pull through like he always does.

But Dutch being an idiot and leading the gang into worse and worse situations is the entire plot for 4 chapters.

bruh it's called dramatic irony dood

Why didn't Dutch take the gold back after strangling the old woman on Guarma?

One of the main threads of the game is people becoming progressively more unsure of Dutch like dude over half the camp leaves in ch6

But for RDR1 this worked well as John is going on a vast mission spanning multiple territories. It's cool as hell arriving in Mexico (So far so far away) and having to begin anew, the only constant throughout the game is John's resolution to get his family back.

>doesn't feel as shitty to control
It feels ten times shittier, the horses behave like cars and John walks and runs like he's got a mop handle shoved up his ass

True, but the gunplay is top tier and makes up for it.

Chapter 6 is when people say the game's story gets good. Probably because it was cathartic for the other characters to finally voice what the player has been thinking for 5 chapters.

But like I said multiple times, I didn't get that far because the 4 chapters I did play were exercises in frustration and tedium. Storywise, anyway. I enjoyed fucking around in the game's world a lot and that was fun.

Which is why my entire long rant was framed by the fact that comparing video game writing to movie or book writing is dumb, especially the writing for an open world game where the story gets stretched out to tens of hours long.

I don't really know what that has to do with what I said. I guess you're implying that it makes sense for Bill to never doubt Dutch as he might be in love with him, much like Molly was, but my point was that Bill's story was the only drunken slip anyone has in the game when I thought it would be nice if some of the other characters talked about it.

Characters being drunk is fertile ground for drama. It would have been easy to have a character let slip something about Dutch's leadership, to his face, while they were all drinking and then something dramatic come of it.

is arthur the most handsome character ever?

Attached: 1546724689544.jpg (540x294, 37K)

lmao it's literally ripped off from old western movies and it's not even half as good, That's writing in rockstar games in general - extremely shitty version of some old movie.

>John's resolution to get his family back
Which is pretty hollow when the player has not even the slightest connection to said family not having seen them even once during the game. It's jarring as fuck to finally ''go home to your wife and son'' when you don't know what your house, your son or your wife looks like.

In RDR2 you are constantly bonding with your gang members so it's easier to start caring.

zoom zoom

>the 4 chapters I did play were exercises in frustration and tedium
no accounting for taste as they say

No, Bill loves Kieran

>Characters being drunk is fertile ground for drama. It would have been easy to have a character let slip something about Dutch's leadership, to his face, while they were all drinking and then something dramatic come of it.
lol

the story was okay, little to no replay values, but knowing that all character will be gone, one way or another, was the thing that pushed me forward
arthur's dead was kind of a let down tho

I just wanted to build a little house together in online, go fishing and hunting, searching for treasures and occasionally rob a train
instead we get all this PvP shit, I hoped rockstar kept this kind of bullshit with GTA and finally gave us a true western RPG

Jack Marston is such a brat in both game's epilogues.
Remember what Dutch said about Abigail in RDR1
>We all had her
He has brown hair, Arthur's bastard son

The air balloon part is fucking stupid sure, but that’s not what a deus ex machina is man

its not unsolvable. Arthur waltzed his ass up in there and shot everyone.
A deus ex machina would be like if john had the rope around his neck and arthur took a pot shot from 10 miles away that ends up hitting a tnt barrel and killing everyone but john.

a bad television series, like the walking dead, maybe. Most of RDR2 is filler.

Wouldn't the fact that the balloon didn't get popped be an example of it? That's the only thing that really bugs me.

Attached: 2019-03-03_12-33-17_PM-r2joir0x.jpg (3840x2160, 602K)

>air balloon part was stupid
Yes, stupid fun.

air balloons dont really pop like you'd think, they could probably take quite a few small caliber shots before getting shredded

But there had to be snipers everywhere

Attached: afgs.jpg (3840x1636, 1.44M)

You just contradicted yourself, Arthur is also a protagonist, so how is it a deus ex machina if a protagonist solves a problem on their own

yeah they usually burst into flames because they're propelled by hydrogen.

Yeah it absolutely is, but since it’s a video game they had to keep it magically afloat to keep the action going.
And that’s the reason why video game writing will never be taken seriously

For me, I prefer the high honor ending. It seems canon to me and fits Arthur nicely.

It's called suspension of disbelief

He's handsome she's pretty

Attached: Daring Mary-Beth.jpg (540x540, 53K)

The name of fanfiction you read?

Yes

I don't think you understand how genetic work. hair will often get darker as someone ages. john and abigail could have both had light brown hair as a child and it became darker as they aged. I'm such an example. my parents both had dark dark brown hair but I had blonde hair when I was born, it's now dark, almost black.
it's white people shit.

I came away from that mission with the impression that they did it mostly to show off their neato cloud tech in that first little bit of it. Everything after that was a convenient excuse to shoot people from a balloon

Everyone underrates the warning shot ability. It’s useful in many ways. It’s the best way to get into conflict in a town

Attached: 7212975E-401B-4D4D-898A-187C2D48936A.jpg (1920x1080, 1.19M)

and arthur controls like a 90 year old man dipped in molasses. im sorry but there is just no argument that 2 feels better to control. it feels like slow dogshit in comparison to 1, which felt adequate.

also, the horses behaving like cars doesnt mean they were bad to control.

My main impression from this thread, is that this game should have never been a prequel, but instead something totally new. it feels like a lot of the posts in this thread are just "well the game is a prequel, so the story had to be like this, the theme had to be similar." So maybe it shouldn't have been a prequel? Maybe it should have been a totally new story?

the writing in that game was aids what are you on about

>They both have input delay, and 2's is only slightly worse
RDR2 fans are so fucking delusional. "slightly worse"? Jesus christ. It's fucking outrageously worse.

I literally don't know how to do it on ps4 without chokeholding ten old women and killing my horse or something

I felt that way when the game was announced way back when. Thought it was kinda redundant considering RDR1 pretty much told us everything we really needed to know about how Dutch's gang fell apart, but I ended up really liking what they did with it in 2.

They definitely need to move on to something completely different and unrelated in whatever RDR3 ends up being though.

The only well written video games are ones that actually use the mechanics of the game to tell a story and not just a load of cutscenes.

shut the fuck up already

Make me bitch

>Yeah, I loved Mexico dragging on for far too long. So good.
I dont understand how you can be so retarded, that you think a few too many Mexico missions means the game feels as slow as RDR2, where virtually every action takes way longer than it should. Even just fucking walking to your room in a safehouse takes too long.

Sometimes I feel like you guys either never played 1, or played it so long ago you forgot how much better it actually feels to play.

the absolute state of Yea Forums in {{current year}}
this is some real depressing shit

based and epic

Mafia 3 has better story, characters, and acting

God of War is a better movie game

the story is as boring as the game
if a movie came out as boring and shallow as rdr2, it would be a joke that even the most pretentious critics would say is shit. it does nothing new or interesting story wise. just one more job arthur, and we're set x100

"Just you left, is it?"

"Yeah...
Just me."

K I N O
I
N
O

Attached: JustMe.png (867x562, 364K)