Red Dead Redemption 2 - now available on PC

[Gerrard]

Get your eyes checked if you think that wallpaper or that wood is a high resolution texture.

In most shots you can't see it's shit thanks to the photo mode DOF garbage.

 

[Sentinel]

That isn't a PC screenshot lol.

 

[Gerrard]

Cope.

 

[User was nabbed fit]

RPGCodex: graphics mean nothing!
Also RPGCodex:

 

[JBro]

RPGCodex: graphics mean nothing!
Also RPGCodex:

Nonfaggots:
Faggots: [Reddit meme]

 

[J_C]

Get your eyes checked if you think that wallpaper or that wood is a high resolution texture.

In most shots you can't see it's shit thanks to the photo mode DOF garbage.

LOL!

That is not a PC screenshot. Compare the face of the character to the faces on these screenthots:
https://www.pcgamer.com/check-out-these-gorgeous-4k-screenshots-of-red-dead-redemption-2-on-pc/

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Character rendering in this game isn't its strongpoint visually btw. Looking back I don't think it's ever been R* strongpoint.

 

[DalekFlay]

Hm. No mention of any gameplay changes. Worrying indeed.

It's gonna be the same game of course, what did you expect? GTA5's PC version was pretty great though, I wouldn't worry about that aspect.

 

[Gerrard]

12 years later, console games still can't match the texture quality of an Uktrainian PC game.

LOL!

That is not a PC screenshot. Compare the face of the character to the faces on these screenthots:
https://www.pcgamer.com/check-out-these-gorgeous-4k-screenshots-of-red-dead-redemption-2-on-pc/

Oh yeah, sorry I forgot that the list of improvements had "Remade all the environment textures so they don't look like shit"

• Increased draw distance
• "Higher quality" global illumination and ambient occlusion
• "Improved" snow trails
• "Improved" reflections and higher resolution shadows
• Tessellated tree textures
• "Improved" grass and fur textures
• HDR support
• Unlocked resolution (4K and higher)
• Ultrawide aspect ratio and multi-monitor support
• Unlocked framerate

Oh wait it doesn't. It specifically mentions only "grass and fur" textures. Cope harder consoletard.

 

[J_C]

12 years later, console games still can't match the texture quality of an Uktrainian PC game.

LOL!

That is not a PC screenshot. Compare the face of the character to the faces on these screenthots:
https://www.pcgamer.com/check-out-these-gorgeous-4k-screenshots-of-red-dead-redemption-2-on-pc/

Oh yeah, sorry I forgot that the list of improvements had "Remade all the environment textures so they don't look like shit"

• Increased draw distance
• "Higher quality" global illumination and ambient occlusion
• "Improved" snow trails
• "Improved" reflections and higher resolution shadows
• Tessellated tree textures
• "Improved" grass and fur textures
• HDR support
• Unlocked resolution (4K and higher)
• Ultrawide aspect ratio and multi-monitor support
• Unlocked framerate

Oh wait it doesn't. It specifically mentions only "grass and fur" textures. Cope harder consoletard.

I don't even have a console you asshat. But I can clearly see that on the PC screenshots the textures do not look like shit, like you claim.

 

[Sentinel]

Hm. No mention of any gameplay changes. Worrying indeed.

It's gonna be the same game of course, what did you expect? GTA5's PC version was pretty great though, I wouldn't worry about that aspect.

GTA5 was already pretty solid, it really didn't need any urgent changes. Or maybe I wasn't invested enough in GTA to care about whatever glaring flaws it supposedly has. RDR2 is very close to being perfect and seeing them squander an opportunity to fix its issues is a shame.

 

[Kem0sabe]

 

[Manjuice Nutella]

LOL!

That is not a PC screenshot. Compare the face of the character to the faces on these screenthots:
https://www.pcgamer.com/check-out-these-gorgeous-4k-screenshots-of-red-dead-redemption-2-on-pc/

Screenthots gonna thot.

At any rate, I really don't give a fuck, all I want is a nicely optimized game. My laptop is only i5-8300 and GTX 1050, I can play without any shadows for all I care.

 

[Shackleton]

Moving away from the graphics sperging for a moment; if I found GTA5 an absolute pile of boring 'style over substance', but I love the western setting, is it worth getting this? I found GTA5's core loop of 'follow gps, shoot, watch cutscene' totally dull after 13 hours or so, is this more of the same but on a horse? I've not played a decent western since Call of Juarez: Gunslinger and this is soooo tempting...

 

[Steezus]

Moving away from the graphics sperging for a moment; if I found GTA5 an absolute pile of boring 'style over substance', but I love the western setting, is it worth getting this? I found GTA5's core loop of 'follow gps, shoot, watch cutscene' totally dull after 13 hours or so, is this more of the same but on a horse? I've not played a decent western since Call of Juarez: Gunslinger and this is soooo tempting...

It's pretty much the same.

RDR2 is much much slower tho. At times it feels almost meditative and the level of detail, i.e. immersive animations will get on your nerves, if you don't have the patience for something like that. The story is much more engaging compared to GTA5's blehfest and I think Arthur is one of the better video game protagonists, so it's easier to get invested. But at its core it's the same old Rockstar open world design like you descirbed.

 

[Manjuice Nutella]

Moving away from the graphics sperging for a moment; if I found GTA5 an absolute pile of boring 'style over substance', but I love the western setting, is it worth getting this? I found GTA5's core loop of 'follow gps, shoot, watch cutscene' totally dull after 13 hours or so, is this more of the same but on a horse? I've not played a decent western since Call of Juarez: Gunslinger and this is soooo tempting...

The main missions follow a similar pattern in general, BUT, UNLIKE IN GTA, there is also a shitton of other activities, random & set encounters Fallout style, ambushes, bounties, landmarks, animals to hunt for crafting, treasure maps, achievements and fun challenges.

Once again, unlike GTA in general, where all you could do was main quest, 3 side quests and 100 hidden packages were all there was to do.

I'd borrow a PS for a couple of hours and try out the normal gameplay, tbh. You may find it either extremely soothing and pleasant, or boring and LARPy.

In general I found GTA V to be boring and devoid of side content outside of ?s and those fucking hundreds of collectibles, and RDR2 the opposite, to be fun and the world is smaller per square km, but packed in content and things to encounter.

Shit, even the collectibles are fun to find and check out; because you can inspect them like letters or photos in 1st person mode. And most of all, they are in sensible places and not under random rocks or trees like in GTA.

An example: in Lemoyne (post-Confederate state based on Louisiana) I stumbled on some church ruined in civil war, which happened to be full of "Lemoyne Raiders", that is hostile redneck gang members. What happened then was an ambush from both sides because I walked in carelessly (died the first time), but I could also approach them with stealth I think, shooting them quietly with a bow. It was like clearing out a cave in Morrowind, and after that I found a cigarette card, some upgrades for either PC or a horse, and some other loot hidden in a chest not visible at the first glance. Went east in the direction of the fields, which prompted Arthur to inspect it, draw the landscape in a journal, providing extra lore etc.

Now you'll never find something like that in GTA.

I've not played a decent western since Call of Juarez: Gunslinger and this is soooo tempting...

Play F:NV with New Vegas Bounties.

 

[Cyberarmy]

but I love the western setting, is it worth getting this?

Sadly yes, if you played all other games there is.

 

[Shackleton]

but I love the western setting, is it worth getting this?

Sadly yes, if you played all other games there is.

Sadly I am coming to that conclusion. Manjuice Nutella has given me hope that it might be more entertaining that GTA though. When I posted about GTAV being shit, all I got was retards telling me to play tennis or yoga or some bollocks. The thing is, all of those felt completely pointless. At least Manjuice has intimated there is a worthwhile reward for doing the side activities in this game.

 

[Sentinel]

Eh, I'd strongly disagree with that. The reward for the side activities are the activities themselves, because 90% of the time you'll get money and some consumables (there is no "activity complete - here's your reward" pop up like in tons of other games). One of the big problems of RDR2 is that money becomes useless rather quickly.
Hell, one of the hardest puzzles in the game involves statues in a cave, and your grand reward is... 1 gold bar, which in itself isn't worth much, but it's money given in a time when you already wiped out store stocks.

 

[Ezekiel]

I got a 2 TB Hard Drive and a 445 GB SSD and I thought that'd be enough for most games. But now games are coming out with hundreds of gigabytes in size and they only work well on SSDs. I've been doing more shuffling round than a Remainer trying to explain the EU Army but maybe I need to just bite the bullet and get a larger SSD.

Or maybe devs can learn to fucking compress their shit properly? An impossible task for the same company who likes to send thugs round to people's houses to intimidate modders but mayhaps Rockstar can deign us with this small blessing of FUCKING COMPRESSION!

I wonder how much storage GTA VI is gonna take up on PC with the 100 GB discs on consoles. 200 GB? 250 GB? Yeah, these developers are really irresponsible.

 

[DalekFlay]

I wonder how much storage GTA VI is gonna take up on PC with the 100 GB discs on consoles. 200 GB? 250 GB? Yeah, these developers are really irresponsible.

They know it doesn't really matter because SSDs are cheap now and most people don't install 20 games at once.

 

[Ezekiel]

I wonder how much storage GTA VI is gonna take up on PC with the 100 GB discs on consoles. 200 GB? 250 GB? Yeah, these developers are really irresponsible.

They know it doesn't really matter because SSDs are cheap now and most people don't install 20 games at once.

It does matter when I have to wait much longer to play my game and assets take longer to load while playing. I like how I can play my Switch games within a minute. Besides, most Americans still have data caps, throttling and fees for going over. I have Comcast, who imposes 1TB per month.

Cheap? For the cost of a 2 TB Samsung SSD I could buy two 6 TB WD Blues.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

most people don't install 20 games at once.

I've got 22 on c drive and another 20 on d drive.

 

[BlackGoat]

Last time I fired this up on the ps4, I just sat down and played poker somewhere and fell asleep on the couch, periodically waking up to check or raise before drifting off again. It was a very dreamlike experience.

Time before last, I rode my horse to where some quest started and by the time I got there I was already exhausted so I just saved and quit

 

[DalekFlay]

It does matter when I have to wait much longer to play my game and assets take longer to load while playing. I like how I can play my Switch games within a minute. Besides, most Americans still have data caps, throttling and fees for going over. I have Comcast, who imposes 1TB per month.

Cheap? For the cost of a 2 TB Samsung SSD I could buy two 6 TB WD Blues.

Most Americans geographically maybe, but most population wise? I've been in the US 38 of my 40 years and never had a cap, ever. I have always lived near cities though. If Americans were worried about caps and download speeds then digital and streaming wouldn't be taking off like the rockets they are. I'm guessing PC gamers who have internet issues are just written off by companies as collateral damage.

Also "quick access" is only a thing if you're bouncing around between more than a dozen games all the time, which is ridiculous and probably not a thing most people do. Again I'm talking about the majority here, not the "HARDCOREZ" on this website. Companies always cater to the mainstream, who probably install something like RDR2 and barely play anything else for a month or more.

 

[Ezekiel]

If Americans were worried about caps and download speeds then digital and streaming wouldn't be taking off like the rockets they are.

Well, their streamed movies are very compressed. Netflix only recommends 5 mbps for HD video.

https://help.netflix.com/en/node/306

Blu-ray quality is typically like 25 mbps, while UHD quality can be around 80 mbps. Netflix and other streaming services have these low requirements because most Americans have crappy internet. So yeah, watching hours of Netflix isn't that bad, but downloading two or three next gen games in a month could use up a ton of data that needs to be shared with other members of the household and rationed between other hobbies. Comcast has 27.6 million broadband customers. I think all of them have data caps. That's just one major provider.