Red Dead Redemption 2 - now available on PC

[Durandal]

 

[Wunderbar]

geez, this took forever to load. Use gifv please.

 

[Ezekiel]

If you're not running out of cover and doing bullet dives everywhere, you're doing it wrong. You can totally play this like Max Payne.

No, you can't. Having to activate run each time and the unresponsive aiming make that impossible in my experience. Plenty of other players are having issues with it, it looks like.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/9rnbta/red_dead_redemption_2s_aim_controls_are_quite_bad/

Don't know why Rockstar thinks making a game feel authentic requires making it as unresponsive as possible. Idiots.

 

[Modron]

geez, this took forever to load. Use the gifv webm code to directly embed .mp4 please.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Played it for a couple of hours. The gameworld is truly beautiful, incredibly detailed. The next generation of open worlds. Nothing else comes close. The mechanics are the opposite ('what was good for our forefathers is good enough for us' seems to be the driving principle), the controls are painful (clearly nobody bothered to check what the competition is up to), the storytelling is suffocating and occasionally unbearable. It's like playing Minesweeper while being constantly interrupted by cutscenes showing agonizing decisions and a backstory you don't care about. Speaking of agonizing decisions, so far the only decision you're allowed to make is whether or not to kill some poor bastard in a cutscene. The quests aren't there to let you make your own choices and define your character, but to take you on westerny rides.

One of the early missions insists that I talk to my 'friend' in a local saloon. He's talking to some prostitutes. A cutscene takes over, you watch your character saying things without any input from you, and eventually someone starts a fight so we get to enjoy an authentic, westerny saloon brawl. Poor man's Westworld. Eventually I have a fist fight with some brute. If I lose the fight or shoot him, it's game over mission failed.

Another mission tells me to protect two women from our camp, who went to a nearby town to do some robbing of their own, cause we're a gang, see. We drive them there in a westerny cart because that's what people did in the olden days and the game insists that we get to do it all. Predictably, the women fail and it's up to me to save the day. If I shoot the guy harassing one of them, it's 'mission failed' again. I have to tell him to get lost instead because it's a very westerny thing to do and the only way to complete the quest.

Eventually, I become a bounty hunter, thinking that it might be fun. Big mistake. I find the evil-doer and confront him. No, I can't kill him, that would be too easy. A cutscene takes over. He almost falls off a cliff so I have to save him by tapping X. Are we done now? Can I go back? Not yet, son. He jumps off a cliff into a fast-moving river and I have to follow him on a horse. At a scripted point, I have to use a lasso. If he escapes or drowns - 'mission failed'.

Next mission - one of the idiots I was saddled up with got arrested and I have to break him out of jail. Sounds like fun, but first I have to take another guy to a local saloon and have a drink with him, which turned into a 5 min cutscene of two guys drinking and doing stupid things. My only input there was pressing R2 to drink (doesn't matter whether I press it or not, my character still gets drunk, but I guess pressing it is supposed to make me feel like I'm there?) and yelling my buddy's name when he runs upstairs.

The last Rockstar game I played was Vice City, but it was a lot more fun.

 

[sullynathan]

You absolutely have no taste in games. The shootouts are the highlights of the first Mafia.

The mechanics are shit because it's a story focused game in an open world like you complained about in your paragraphs.

Max Payne 1 & 2 exist, so how about no.

You were babbling about cover systems, better to play a shooter with a good cover system.

I watched an LP of Last of Us and ended up leaving it exactly because I was bored with the frequency and pointlessness of combat encounters which brought nothing new but only served as padding

That's what happens when you watch games instead of playing them.

 

[AwesomeButton]

stuff he did

I watched all that, and honestly watching it may have been more fun, because I didn't even have to hold a controller and press buttons. The reactivity is indeed next to none, and I say "next to" because there is a chance that the big "good vs bad" meter's position may play a role in the future... However, imgining how much a single bit of reactivity must cost in a game with those production values, probably all that changes will be lines spoken by NPCs. On a sidenote, a mechanic such as the good vs bad meter must itself look very funny to RPG players nowadays. We are so far past the simple "good vs evil" meter of Arcanum. But, like I said an expensive game can't afford much reactivity anyway.

That's what happens when you watch games instead of playing them.

Oh, I'm sure the actual experience of going over the same combat encounter 40+ times has been a thrilling one. Please rate yourself dumb.

 

[Vault Dweller]

stuff he did

I watched all that, and honestly watching it may have been more fun, because I didn't even have to hold a controller and press buttons. The reactivity is indeed next to none...

It's not even reactivity that I'm after but some basic 'play the game the way you want' choices. Right now the game is an interactive movie, so whether you like it or not depends on whether or not you like the movie not the mechanics and gameplay. You can tell that they spent an insane amount of money and effort on simulating every aspect of life in the wild west, which ranges from awesome (watching your character dealing cards while playing poker) to dumb (watching your character taking a piss outside while drunk), so people who like this sort of things will be thrilled but there's very little gameplay there.

 

[Oracsbox]

Played it for a couple of hours. The gameworld is truly beautiful, incredibly detailed. The next generation of open worlds. Nothing else comes close. The mechanics are the opposite ('what was good for our forefathers is good enough for us' seems to be the driving principle), the controls are painful (clearly nobody bothered to check what the competition is up to), the storytelling is suffocating and occasionally unbearable. It's like playing Minesweeper while being constantly interrupted by cutscenes showing agonizing decisions and a backstory you don't care about. Speaking of agonizing decisions, so far the only decision you're allowed to make is whether or not to kill some poor bastard in a cutscene. The quests aren't there to let you make your own choices and define your character, but to take you on westerny rides.

One of the early missions insists that I talk to my 'friend' in a local saloon. He's talking to some prostitutes. A cutscene takes over, you watch your character saying things without any input from you, and eventually someone starts a fight so we get to enjoy an authentic, westerny saloon brawl. Poor man's Westworld. Eventually I have a fist fight with some brute. If I lose the fight or shoot him, it's game over mission failed.

Another mission tells me to protect two women from our camp, who went to a nearby town to do some robbing of their own, cause we're a gang, see. We drive them there in a westerny cart because that's what people did in the olden days and the game insists that we get to do it all. Predictably, the women fail and it's up to me to save the day. If I shoot the guy harassing one of them, it's 'mission failed' again. I have to tell him to get lost instead because it's a very westerny thing to do and the only way to complete the quest.

Eventually, I become a bounty hunter, thinking that it might be fun. Big mistake. I find the evil-doer and confront him. No, I can't kill him, that would be too easy. A cutscene takes over. He almost falls off a cliff so I have to save him by tapping X. Are we done now? Can I go back? Not yet, son. He jumps off a cliff into a fast-moving river and I have to follow him on a horse. At a scripted point, I have to use a lasso. If he escapes or drowns - 'mission failed'.

Next mission - one of the idiots I was saddled up with got arrested and I have to break him out of jail. Sounds like fun, but first I have to take another guy to a local saloon and have a drink with him, which turned into a 5 min cutscene of two guys drinking and doing stupid things. My only input there was pressing R2 to drink (doesn't matter whether I press it or not, my character still gets drunk, but I guess pressing it is supposed to make me feel like I'm there?) and yelling my buddy's name when he runs upstairs.

The last Rockstar game I played was Vice City, but it was a lot more fun.

Yep spot on observation exactly my experince with the game.It's a great looking game just not a great one to play it feels old mechanically it also feels too often like an interactive movie which to be honest I did expect.
I also don't appreciate the mission over if you do anything outside the box.
It's just an updated version of RDR nice to play once and that's it.The gaming press calling this game of the decade is genuinely retarded.

 

[sullynathan]

stuff he did

I watched all that, and honestly watching it may have been more fun, because I didn't even have to hold a controller and press buttons. The reactivity is indeed next to none...

It's not even reactivity that I'm after but some basic 'play the game the way you want' choices. Right now the game is an interactive movie, so whether you like it or not depends on whether or not you like the movie not the mechanics and gameplay. You can tell that they spent an insane amount of money and effort on simulating every aspect of life in the wild west, which ranges from awesome (watching your character dealing cards while playing poker) to dumb (watching your character taking a piss outside while drunk), so people who like this sort of things will be thrilled but there's very little gameplay there.

That's modern R* since GTA4, must come as a surprise if you haven't played their games since vice city

 

[AwesomeButton]

Right now the game is an interactive movie, so whether you like it or not depends on whether or not you like the movie not the mechanics and gameplay.

I've got the same impression from what I've seen - interactive movie. And like I said, for someone who is alright with watching an interactive movie - it's great. I just don't envy the people who expect much gameplay. The game-like elements are few and the game-like challenges and problems are elementary.

There could have been more "game" to it, but I guess this would have turned out even more expensive than what the interactive movie cost, if they wanted to maintain the level of production values consistent.

I agree some unscripted NPC interactions felt so much like Westworld with 1st generation droids, that I almost expected everything to pause and Anthony Hopkins to emerge from somewhere.

 

[Zarniwoop]

Yeah it's not like the first game was open world and completely un movie-like

 

[Vault Dweller]

There could have been more "game" to it, but I guess this would have turned out even more expensive than what the interactive movie cost, if they wanted to maintain the level of production values consistent.

I don't think it's a budget issue as I'm comparing it not to Fallout but to Witcher 3 and Horizon Zero Dawn. The Witcher 3 has a similar setup: huge, very detailed open world, horse riding, flavor activities, hunting using senses, tons of NPCs with unique dialogues, etc but Red Dead 2 has 25% of the Witcher 3's gameplay, if that.

https://venturebeat.com/2018/10/26/the-deanbeat-how-much-did-red-dead-redemption-2-cost-to-make/
^ some budget estimates

 

[TheHeroOfTime]

This a GTA in the wild west after all. So do not expect much about the "choices" inside of missions. Don't get cheated by that honor/dishonor system and the random choices (Which probably will only affect to certain main and secondary events, and probably the game's ending). This is not an RPG in any way. Also I do think that calling this an interactive movie is just to much. There's gameplay here, despite this is not Red dead revolver or GUN. Just one that you don't like.

-----------------

btw

 

[Vault Dweller]

Another thing: guns are locked so even if you have money to buy a better revolver than the one you start the game with, you can't. You have to do some missions to unlock it, I assume. Not that I really need a better gun since so far I don't have any problems killing bandits and such, but it would be nice to have that choice.

 

[DeepOcean]

This a GTA V in the wild west after all.

Yeah and that is why it sucks, GTA V gameplay was really lacking and boring, here is no different, pick any other open world popamole game on the market and plays better than this. After GTA 4, Rockstar started believing they are great storytellers and video games are for dorks so now we got interactive movies with "gameplay" to pad things out between the real purpose of the game, to watch the cinematic oscar winning cutscenes. Seen a review of some dude saying RDR 2 was his best game ever and he wasted 30 mins saying how he was amazed by how the horse animations on the snow were amazing and he called that gameplay... that summarize Rockstar audience perfectly.

 

[Sranchammer]

From Reddit

I’m ten hours in and I just find the whole game a chore. It’s wonderful if you want to get into the depressing life of an outlaw but I think if they’d taken some liberties and aimed for slightly more fun it would’ve done wonders for the game. Everything is slow, everything is clunky, everything must be monitored, it’s a chore. A beautiful, staggering, landmark chore. I’d review it as a 9/10 but it’s not for me.

I hope people have a wonderful time with this game and it scratches their cowboy itch. Some people will love this and for a few weeks at launch be vocally angry at others who don’t. In the long run I suspect it will find its audience and they’ll learn that others simply don’t have the same taste as them, this is not a game as definable and easy to push as Mario Odyssey, this is something different and it won’t sit well with some people, ‘go back to fortnite idiot!’ Well sure, I mean I’ve never played that game and I’m not sure why my opinion hurts your enjoyment of your game but sure.

For context my favourite games of all time are Breath of the Wild, FFVII, Bloodborne, Tomb Raider PS1, Chrono Trigger and Forza 3.

I’m a lifelong gamer and a former print magazine reviewer. I love games and I’m proud of the gamer community and I’m not finding Read Dead Redemption 2 particularly gripping. I’m sorry.

 

[Alienman]

There could have been more "game" to it, but I guess this would have turned out even more expensive than what the interactive movie cost, if they wanted to maintain the level of production values consistent.

I don't think it's a budget issue as I'm comparing it not to Fallout but to Witcher 3 and Horizon Zero Dawn. The Witcher 3 has a similar setup: huge, very detailed open world, horse riding, flavor activities, hunting using senses, tons of NPCs with unique dialogues, etc but Red Dead 2 has 25% of the Witcher 3's gameplay, if that.

https://venturebeat.com/2018/10/26/the-deanbeat-how-much-did-red-dead-redemption-2-cost-to-make/
^ some budget estimates

What gameplay is that exactly? The fact that you can wander off for hours and hunt etc is much more than you can do in Witcher 3. Witcher 3 is nothing outside of talking, doing missions and playing Gwent.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Another thing: guns are locked so even if you have money to buy a better revolver than the one you start the game with, you can't. You have to do some missions to unlock it, I assume. Not that I really need a better gun since so far I don't have any problems killing bandits and such, but it would be nice to have that choice.

Yeah, I noticed that too. Most of the upgrades of weapons and items seem to be really superficial, just added for the sake of there being some illusion of progression in a system which was never designed to need progression. Egg on the sheeple with a cheap gamification trick. "Points/Badges/Leaderboards" for a singleplayer game - "Weapon Mods/Upgrades/Customization"

From Reddit

[some bullshit]

So, this isn't this guy's game, big deal. This brings me to another rant I've been repeating lately - why do people feel absolutely obligated to like every new game that comes along? It's always "I, me, me-me-me!" As if every game is made with the purpose to be enjoyed exactly by "you". Sometimes I like a given game, other times I feel too lazy to even start it and walk to an NPC to get his quest. This doesn't mean that in one instance it's a good game, in another it's a bad one. Sometimes I don't feel like watching a movie or reading a book I really like, but this doesn't make it a bad movie or book. Everybody is such a drama queen, either hunting for others' drama or generating his own.

 

[Makabb]

And the gunplay is also better than twitcher button rolling

 

[sullynathan]

Another thing: guns are locked so even if you have money to buy a better revolver than the one you start the game with, you can't. You have to do some missions to unlock it, I assume. Not that I really need a better gun since so far I don't have any problems killing bandits and such, but it would be nice to have that choice.

Are all guns in the game in the store from the beginning and just locked till a specific story mission unlocks them? That's a GTA thing since GTA 3. You couldn't buy higher level weapons until you progressed through the story but you could loot it from cops, gang members, etc.

I'm comparing it not to Fallout but to Witcher 3 and Horizon Zero Dawn.

those games advertise themselves as "action rpg". Red dead is an action game in the vein of GTA.

 

[AwesomeButton]

What gameplay is that exactly? The fact that you can wander off for hours and hunt etc is much more than you can do in Witcher 3. Witcher 3 is nothing outside of talking, doing missions and playing Gwent.

Doing missions in turn consists of riding, talking (with incidental reactivity and C&C), witcher senses, combat (armed or unarmed), exploration (finding a way to the next spot you need to be at). None of these is especially complex on its own, and gets boring quckly if left on its on, but when they each take turns, the mission doesn't feel like a boring activity.

I like this better than the rockstar approach where a mission usually involves cutscenes and combat. So far in RDR2 I haven't seen a mission which uses more than riding and shooting. I haven't seen one mission so far that would even make use of the stealth mechanics in a free manner, i.e. not have a scripted path you need to take while "in sneaking mode". That's quite a loss.

Imagine an RDR2 mission done in Witcher 3 style - you have to ride up to a place, talk with somebody (and your answers in the two-option dialogue system matter), then you have to win a card game (but if you lose it's not mission failed, you just get different conversation), then you have to use some melee, then some riding, some more conversation, some shooting, and finish up by brewing coffee for example. That would have been much better than shooting galleries interrupted by cutscenes (or if you prefer - the other way around). All these minigames they have can be utilized to make the "quests"/"missions" more engaging.

 

[DeepOcean]

Without mentioning that different enemies had different behaviors and different skills so you don't kill the same gun men with slightly different skins for the entire game.

 

[Alienman]

AwesomeButton I do agree when we are talking about missions, but I mean the open world outside of missions. There is actually stuff to do in Red Dead compared to Witcher 3. I'm really enjoying the free roam aspect currently, hunting, sneaking about and stealing stuff.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Without mentioning that different enemies had different behaviors and different skills so you don't kill the same gun men with slightly different skins for the entire game.

Yeah, witcher 3 requires some variance in player tactics, but for me the combat was never a very attractive part of the game.