Red Dead Redemption 2: Good or shit?

[Roguey]

It kind of boggles my mind when people say that GTA V or RDR 2 has tightly written plots or characters.

In both games you are dragged around by a bunch of hyper-violent retards making constant pop culture references, and then the game kind of just ends.

In RDR 2 you have been indoctrinated in a cult and are finally starting to break out of it, so Arthur's actions suit his role.

V was an excuse plot, but the dialogue is funny so. They tried to do serious drama with 4 and face-planted so it was better for them to take a step back.

 

[BruceVC]

It kind of boggles my mind when people say that GTA V or RDR 2 has tightly written plots or characters.

In both games you are dragged around by a bunch of hyper-violent retards making constant pop culture references, and then the game kind of just ends.

In RDR 2 you have been indoctrinated in a cult and are finally starting to break out of it, so Arthur's actions suit his role.

V was an excuse plot, but the dialogue is funny so. They tried to do serious drama with 4 and face-planted so it was better for them to take a step back.

I have always felt the characterization of Dutchs people as a cult as unfair, it was more a criminal gang not a cult? Women and children were part of the gang for survival, those were hard times and they depended on Dutch to ensure they had food, shelter and protection form the likes of the Pinkertons. And normally people cant just come and go in a cult. As far as I remember no one was forced to follow Dutch but you had to contribute if you stayed in the gang which is what I would have expected

 

[Roguey]

I have always felt the characterization of Dutchs people as a cult as unfair, it was more a criminal gang not a cult? Women and children were part of the gang for survival, those were hard times and they depended on Dutch to ensure they had food, shelter and protection form the likes of the Pinkertons. And normally people cant just come and go in a cult. As far as I remember no one was forced to follow Dutch but you had to contribute if you stayed in the gang which is what I would have expected

Dutch had an ethos and his people looked up to him as a father figure.

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

If you like GTAV you'll likely like RDR2, as it's a similar but better game.

This game is a weird little animal because there's a lot of interesting things going on in it, but there's a lot of fucking shit and really stupid design choices that were made. Almost every mission related thing, the bounty hunting stuff, it's basically all shit because of the extreme degree of railroading that goes on. But it can be a fun game to just fuck around in.

The shooting could be better, and the hand-to-hand combat sucks. Game is in desperate need of letting the player go prone. While playing it, RDR2 was a game that really made me wish it played like MGS5. Maybe play MGS5 instead if you haven't already, and it does the action game and stealth game RDR2 wants to do a million times better.

Not at all.

GTA V is like an over-the-top 80's action movie. And more importantly it's fun to play. You don't spend 80% of the game crawling along at a snail's pace listening to characters you don't give a shit about venting their spleen and not being able to skip anything. GTA V is much more free roaming, RDR 2 has a hand-holding/tutorial section that rivals Final Fantasy 13. The game is almost over by the time you get to actually fuck around Rockstar style.

GTA V and RDR 1 are a lot more similar.

I fucking wish GTAV was anything like an over-the-top '80 action movie. GTAV missions are just about as hand-holdie and ridged as RDR2. Shootouts however are more fun in RDR2, so I'd give the edge to RDR2. But, RDR2 is just better than GTAV when it comes to just fucking around, thshit you can do that isn't related to any of the missions. Of everything Rockstars has done since GTAIV, GTAV probably has the worst shooting of the bunch, which makes it the least fun of the bunch once you're in those shootout missions.

RDR1 is vastly more free than either GTAV or RDR2, I wouldn't really say that game is like either of those two.

 

[Theodora]

Dutch had an ethos and his people looked up to him as a father figure.

That is the whole 'debate' to the story, [...]

(Spoilers for RDR2 and RDR.)

Spoiler

[...] whether Dutch was always fucked in the head, whether it was mental illness intensified by the stresses they all went through, or a combination of both. Ultimately as you said, he still did a lot for them; helped a bunch of runaways, whores, and vagabonds find -- for a time -- family, safety, and meaning.

At the very least Hosea's death fucked Dutch up big time. He lost not just a lifelong friend, but a corrective, 'moral' compass. And he lost him to a bloodthirsty ass's self-righteous sense of justice.


On a bigger picture level, beyond RDR2's focus on the encroachment of civilisation, the series is about the futility of revenge. Arthur sacrifices himself to try to give John a chance at a better life. John in turn throws that away for revenge, and ends up trying to do the same for his son. Turns out as you'd expect for him too.

 

[BruceVC]

Dutch had an ethos and his people looked up to him as a father figure.

That is the whole 'debate' to the story, [...]

(Spoilers for RDR2 and RDR.)

Spoiler

[...] whether Dutch was always fucked in the head, whether it was mental illness intensified by the stresses they all went through, or a combination of both. Ultimately as you said, he still did a lot for them; helped a bunch of runaways, whores, and vagabonds find -- for a time -- family, safety, and meaning.

At the very least Hosea's death fucked Dutch up big time. He lost not just a lifelong friend, but a corrective, 'moral' compass. And he lost him to a bloodthirsty ass's self-righteous sense of justice.


On a bigger picture level, beyond RDR2's focus on the encroachment of civilisation, the series is about the futility of revenge. Arthur sacrifices himself to try to give John a chance at a better life. John in turn throws that away for revenge, and ends up trying to do the same for his son. Turns out as you'd expect for him too.

Despite really enjoying RDR2 and spending so much time playing it I never researched the narrative from Rockstar. After reading your interesting post I found this link and their are so many things I never knew about RDR2 ....it almost makes me think I should play it again

https://www.thegamer.com/red-dead-redemption-2-arthur-morgan-trivia-backstory/

 

[Theodora]

Despite really enjoying RDR2 and spending so much time playing it I never researched the narrative from Rockstar. After reading your interesting post I found this link and their are so many things I never knew about RDR2 ....it almost makes me think I should play it again

https://www.thegamer.com/red-dead-redemption-2-arthur-morgan-trivia-backstory/

Haha, yes it’s the kinda game you can play countless times and still discover new details every time.

It’s that narrative depth that really pulled me in — and I had no experience with the original RDR until emulating it through RPCS3 after playing it’s sequel-prequel. There’s only even one substantial (and even then arguable) continuity error in the storytelling, which is kinda nuts given just how much of an “interactive movie” it is seen as.

Sucks that Rockstar has no interest in expansions anymore, if any game deserved it, it was RDR2 to make proper use of New Austin. It was probably some mix of cut content, engine testing, and a change in narrative (there’s one chapter in RDR2 I won’t mention for spoilers, but it stands out very blatantly and it’s been argued that that was supposed to be set in New Austin instead).

Alas instead all we get lost launch beyond a few little improvements is the outsourced garbage that is Red Dead Online. Thanks Take-Two.

 

[SlamDunk]

If you like GTA V you will like RDR2.

I like GTA V and Red Dead Redemption 2 is now on sale via the Rockstar store for 19.99, so: game bought.

Let's see if your statement holds true...

Well, after 303 hours of playtime and with total completion at 98.5%, it's rather safe to say that your statement held true.

The game was an incredible experience and highly addicting.

The good:

- World
- Atmosphere
- Exploration
- Emergent gameplay
- Voice acting
- Graphics, sound, physics, animation
- Almost no pop-up/pop-in (at Ultra settings)
- Really high production values with extreme attention to details
- So many things to do and to discover

The bad:

- Story
- Story missions (repetitive and mostly unimaginative)
- Handholding
- Literally on-the-rails gameplay in story missions and, at times, during "regular" game
- Graphics (low texture resolution and bad lighting, in some cases)
- Crashed to desktop many, many times
- Anti-racism propaganda

 

[Wulfric Pinewood]

Yeah its very good game, i finished it once it was released on Xbob X One years ago. Game is almost perfect becouse its too perfect in few areas.

 

[BruceVC]

If you like GTA V you will like RDR2.

I like GTA V and Red Dead Redemption 2 is now on sale via the Rockstar store for 19.99, so: game bought.

Let's see if your statement holds true...

Well, after 303 hours of playtime and with total completion at 98.5%, it's rather safe to say that your statement held true.

The game was an incredible experience and highly addicting.

The good:

- World
- Atmosphere
- Exploration
- Emergent gameplay
- Voice acting
- Graphics, sound, physics, animation
- Almost no pop-up/pop-in (at Ultra settings)
- Really high production values with extreme attention to details
- So many things to do and to discover

The bad:

- Story
- Story missions (repetitive and mostly unimaginative)
- Handholding
- Literally on-the-rails gameplay in story missions and, at times, during "regular" game
- Graphics (low texture resolution and bad lighting, in some cases)
- Crashed to desktop many, many times
- Anti-racism propaganda

Great feedback, I spent about 300 hours on the single player and then I have clocked 48 days on the online game and maxed all the online roles, the roles are good fun

I loved the game and Rockstar creates such believable worlds with so much to see and do, Im playing some John Marston now and just messing around again and doing some random quests before I play Oblivion

 

[True Ukrainian]

The game is good for what it is, but I got burned out in the epilogue and never completed it. Like some people have said, the design is very restrictive.

 

[BruceVC]

The game is good for what it is, but I got burned out in the epilogue and never completed it. Like some people have said, the design is very restrictive.

Restrictive? Thats one word I never thought would be used to describe Rockstar games, what do you mean by that ?

 

[True Ukrainian]

The game is good for what it is, but I got burned out in the epilogue and never completed it. Like some people have said, the design is very restrictive.

Restrictive? Thats one word I never thought would be used to describe Rockstar games, what do you mean by that ?

The story missions are very heavily scripted to the point you have to follow a preset path.

 

[BruceVC]

The game is good for what it is, but I got burned out in the epilogue and never completed it. Like some people have said, the design is very restrictive.

Restrictive? Thats one word I never thought would be used to describe Rockstar games, what do you mean by that ?

The story missions are very heavily scripted to the point you have to follow a preset path.

Yes, absolutely but missions in these types of games by design normally require a singular outcome and I cant see that changing Rockstar games ?

 

[True Ukrainian]

The game is good for what it is, but I got burned out in the epilogue and never completed it. Like some people have said, the design is very restrictive.

Restrictive? Thats one word I never thought would be used to describe Rockstar games, what do you mean by that ?

The story missions are very heavily scripted to the point you have to follow a preset path.

Yes, absolutely but missions in these types of games by design normally require a singular outcome and I cant see that changing Rockstar games ?

You can have a singular outcome but leave the method of how that outcome is achieved to the player. There's an open world for the player to interact with. You don't need to send a companion to guide the player's every move.

Even worse, there's very little reason to engage with the open world. It just gets you a few minor bonuses like expanded inventory space.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

RDR2 feels like a game that was designed by two completely different teams which never communicated and one of them was vastly more skilled/competent than the other.
A lot of the design just feels jarring. Most of the stuff involving the main quest is completely railroaded, but when you do something like play blackjack it feels like they sunk incredible amounts of manhours just into making it feel as atmospheric and immersive and other buzzwords as possible.

The one mission where you can optionally stay after and go fishing with the boys was great. One of the few I actually remember, tbh.

 

[BruceVC]

RDR2 feels like a game that was designed by two completely different teams which never communicated and one of them was vastly more skilled/competent than the other.
A lot of the design just feels jarring. Most of the stuff involving the main quest is completely railroaded, but when you do something like play blackjack it feels like they sunk incredible amounts of manhours just into making it feel as atmospheric and immersive and other buzzwords as possible.

The one mission where you can optionally stay after and go fishing with the boys was great. One of the few I actually remember, tbh.

I remember that fishing mission, it was endearing and nice to see Arthur being a father figure

 

[rusty_shackleford]

RDR2 feels like a game that was designed by two completely different teams which never communicated and one of them was vastly more skilled/competent than the other.
A lot of the design just feels jarring. Most of the stuff involving the main quest is completely railroaded, but when you do something like play blackjack it feels like they sunk incredible amounts of manhours just into making it feel as atmospheric and immersive and other buzzwords as possible.

The one mission where you can optionally stay after and go fishing with the boys was great. One of the few I actually remember, tbh.

I remember that fishing mission, it was endearing and nice to see Arthur being a father figure

Different one.
You DID go fishing with the boys, right? You didn't just leave them hanging...?

 

[BruceVC]

RDR2 feels like a game that was designed by two completely different teams which never communicated and one of them was vastly more skilled/competent than the other.
A lot of the design just feels jarring. Most of the stuff involving the main quest is completely railroaded, but when you do something like play blackjack it feels like they sunk incredible amounts of manhours just into making it feel as atmospheric and immersive and other buzzwords as possible.

The one mission where you can optionally stay after and go fishing with the boys was great. One of the few I actually remember, tbh.

I remember that fishing mission, it was endearing and nice to see Arthur being a father figure

Different one.
You DID go fishing with the boys, right? You didn't just leave them hanging...?

Oh, I think I did leave then hanging...Im bad

 

[Roguey]

Yes, absolutely but missions in these types of games by design normally require a singular outcome and I cant see that changing Rockstar games ?

GTA 3 and Vice City gave the most freedom when it came to how you could resolve a mission and since then they've been putting more and more rails. RDR2 gets so restrictive with the rails that you'll get a "mission failed" screen if you step out of bounds of where the game wants you to be.

 

[BruceVC]

Yes, absolutely but missions in these types of games by design normally require a singular outcome and I cant see that changing Rockstar games ?

GTA 3 and Vice City gave the most freedom when it came to how you could resolve a mission and since then they've been putting more and more rails. RDR2 gets so restrictive with the rails that you'll get a "mission failed" screen if you step out of bounds of where the game wants you to be.

Yes thats true about RDR2 yet I have never considered it an issue despite what you say sounds like a bad design. And I think its because didnt GTA4&5 have a similar mission design? I never played RDR1 and when I first played RDR2 the mission mechanics seemed " normal " and I didnt think of it as restrictive yet as you and Davey mentioned its seems exactly like that

 

[agentorange]

It's funny how games like Deus Ex or System Shock are known as games that don't fit into a clear mould and don't necessarily do any one thing particularly well, they don't have the deepest rpg systems, nor are they great first person shooters, etc., but end up being more than the sum of their parts due to their underlying systems and design. GTA/RDR games also don't fit into a clear mould and don't manage to do any one thing particularly well, but they also don't add up to be more than the sum of their parts, they are just boring shit, and yet people absolutely love them and can't get enough. Just a little thought I had. I think someone made a post before about how GTA games are close to Ultima.

 

[BruceVC]

While Im having a few days break from RPG I am playing some sp RDR2 but this time I decided to mod the game and I should have done this ages ago. Once you finish the main quest you can continue indefinitely as John Marston and even though its fun the game world is empty

But with mods you can add contract killings, dozens of new bounty hunter jobs and other activities that keep the sp experience enthralling

And there are these zombie apocalypse mods that add undead towns and undead to the Western theme....great fun and highly recommenced

 

[jackofshadows]

Somewhere in between. I'd say RDR2 is also an embodiment of wasted potential. With this level of production values if only they'd make the actual game design right...

Why the fuck the story chain has exactly zero interactivity and what's even more baffling why is it barely connected with the free-roam "part"? The camp, the honor, the gear, nothing matters. All for the people who intend to play story mode only. Well, maybe you should've made an actual story mode then or something?

I got the doesn't matter part from that YT guy because dropped the game somewhere around 40% or a bit more even though I suspected as much.

It's very cool to fuck around as with cowboy/bandit simulator for awhile but it's even ironic that there's almost zero incentive to do so from the game point. So bizarre.

Voice acting - Morgan and Dutch firstly is top-notch indeed but they'd really be better off shooting a TV show with this kind of approach.

Someone brought up KCD as an "opposite" game - I don't get it, same insanely huge disconnect between free-roam activities and the main branch if you ask me (still liked KCD a lot more personally).

On top of all in the same context of wasted potential this is also a product of its time i.e. woke. A woke western game - sounds like a bad joke and yet here we are.

Beautiful but ultimately pointless and boring game.

 

[BruceVC]

I nearly had a crisis with my RDR2 modded sp game

I have a mod that allows me to sell any weapons to unique vendors and I accidently sold my hunting knife. And do you know by design you cannot Skin any animal without your hunting knife and you cant buy another hunting knife at any vendor and to make things worse I couldnt find a way to spawn a hunting knife using any trainer mod

Which meant I could no longer get animal fat which is a unique ingredient required in certain ammunition and throwable weapons

So I accepted I could no longer participate in an important RP part of the game which is living off the land

But then I killed some greedy Bounty Hunters tracking me and guess what ....one of them dropped a hunting knife !!! Crisis solved