Red Dead Redemption 2

jones · 01-08-2019 01:07PM

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I wasn't even particularly fond of the open world in RDR2. Sure it looked gorgeous but it was just filled with systems and details for the sake of them. The majority of them added nothing to the game. I think Breath of the Wild really shone a light on how bad the open world is. Every system in that game feeds into the game and just games it so much fun to play around and experiment in it's little playground. I'd rather have the fire propagation, wind, temperature, food and physics of BotW which really added to the experience rather than shrinking horse testicles and piercing arrows that penetrate wood more than normal arrows.

It's just a lesson in hubris, where a developer flush with cash and believing in their own hype added stuff into the game because they could without thinking why it needed to be in the game and what it added. What we ended up with was a very pretty simulation that wasn't much fun to explore.

I do agree rockstar might have gone a bit up their asses with the development but i thought it was stunning game world and any issue i had with the game had nothing to do with the world built. I never played BOTW so i'll give that a bash. Just finished days gone last night.

The Nal · 01-08-2019 01:24PM

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I wasn't even particularly fond of the open world in RDR2. Sure it looked gorgeous but it was just filled with systems and details for the sake of them. The majority of them added nothing to the game. I think Breath of the Wild really shone a light on how bad the open world is. Every system in that game feeds into the game and just games it so much fun to play around and experiment in it's little playground. I'd rather have the fire propagation, wind, temperature, food and physics of BotW which really added to the experience rather than shrinking horse testicles and piercing arrows that penetrate wood more than normal arrows.

It's just a lesson in hubris, where a developer flush with cash and believing in their own hype added stuff into the game because they could without thinking why it needed to be in the game and what it added. What we ended up with was a very pretty simulation that wasn't much fun to explore.

Nintendo have always made better games. Particularly in the Zelda series. Maybe not as easy and funny but much more immersive and rewarding.

A lot of of the stuff they say you have to do in RDR2, you do not. Eating, giving money to the camp etc. Don't bother your hole.

Retr0gamer · 01-08-2019 01:58PM

Nintendo really knocked it out of the park though with BotW and it was their first ever open world game. It's not perfect, enemy variety is quite small and the end game relies on damage sponge enemies that sap a bit of the fun.

I think the fact that there's so much in RDR2 you don't have to do or not bother with because its superfluous and/or not fun kind of speaks volumes to the issues with its design.

The Phantom Pain · 01-08-2019 03:08PM

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

The problem with the realism in RDR2 is that it’s still full of all sorts of nonsense video game logic. Things like the ‘cores’ are just bizarre, half-realised comprises. You still have magically reappearing horses after missions; a capacity to take dozens of bullets; a massive inventory; a debilitating illness that has few gameplay consequences beyond making the cores lose energy slightly faster etc etc. There are mechanics aimed at making these seem more ‘realistic’, but they don’t commit fully. Many of them - like browsing catalogues in shops - are just slower versions of what you get in other games rather than properly immersive details. So you’re left in a weird purgatory where there are all these chunky, slow mechanics in aid of ‘realism’ married to incredibly unrealistic and fantastical pieces of pure video game nonsense (not that there’s anything wrong with video game nonsense... it just sits badly here).

I’m playing Pathologic 2 at the moment, and that’s a super demanding game with infuriating survival mechanics. It’s very much ‘not fun’. But - and this is key - it’s impeccably, determinedly designed to be ‘not fun’. It’s full of abrasive, irritating mechanics but all in favour of always making the player feel unsafe and on edge. It’s a game with a clear, unapologetic goal and commits fully to it. While I’m not a big fan of some of the choices they’ve made (****ing hunger gauges) it is a game with a consistent and unique vision that everything is designed around. RDR2, in contrast, is just a bit of a mess that never decides what it really wants to be.

I think the problem with RDR2 is that it's realistic but it's not believable, and these are not the same things. The way Arthur picks things out of a drawer is very realistic, motion wise, however it's not believable because no one who is frantically searching for something would ever pick things one by one like that...
Destiny 2 is not remotely realistic but its world is more believable because it's consistent in all aspects and has good world building. The more realistic you try to make your video game the more immersion breaking it becomes because video games are inherently unrealistic...

This is why people (not me as I like TD) had such an issue with The Division where headshots don't instantly kill an enemy yet accept it with a game like Destiny 2.

Zero-Cool · 10-08-2019 10:31PM

Arthur having the craic at Dublin comic con today.

https://twitter.com/rclark98/status/1160291354422992897?s=19

10-08-2019 11:10PM

Ha so cool. The wee mans outfit is brillo.

iLikeWaffles · 12-08-2019 11:46PM

Re-posting this to save anyone else time on looking through the thread...

https://rdr2map.com/

letsgo2018 · 14-08-2019 10:29PM

I bought this game on release and can't get into it. Ive barely scratched the surface of it . Does anybody think its a bit overrated. Its no witcher 3 that's for sure

goon_magee · 14-08-2019 11:05PM

letsgo2018 wrote: »

I bought this game on release and can't get into it. Ive barely scratched the surface of it . Does anybody think its a bit overrated. Its no witcher 3 that's for sure

Massively overrated. It's a technical masterpiece but ultimately fails at being a video game. In trying to make the game as realistic as possible they turned it into a laborious slog and an absolute chore to interact with.

Jumping back into Assassins Creed Odyssey after this was like a breath of fresh air, because whilst it's not perfect by any means, it respects your time as a player and prioritises convenience and fun over realism.

Just my opinion of course, plenty on here love it and I can appreciate why depending on what you want out of it. Just wasn't for me though and a massive disappointment for me as a huge fan of the first game.

RedRochey · 15-08-2019 08:33AM

letsgo2018 wrote: »

I bought this game on release and can't get into it. Ive barely scratched the surface of it . Does anybody think its a bit overrated. Its no witcher 3 that's for sure

Don't think it's fair to call it overrated when you barely scratched the surface, I remember I couldn't get into the witcher at the start either, stopped playing it and came back later and loved it

I agree it's not the masterpiece people expected but it only starts getting laborious towards the end

Captainsatnav · 15-08-2019 11:56AM

Holy crap!! -

The stowaway sequence after Hosea and Lenny are killed - the shipwreck...whole new environment!

.Then I had to go to bed as it was after 12...looking forwarding to picking up again tonight.

iLikeWaffles · 15-08-2019 02:44PM

Trying to complete Exoctics is laborious AF.

me: One down, okay another one, how many more is there...
*checks internet
me: FUCK!

Penn · 15-08-2019 03:15PM

Captainsatnav wrote: »

Holy crap!! -
The stowaway sequence after Hosea and Lenny are killed - the shipwreck...whole new environment!
.Then I had to go to bed as it was after 12...looking forwarding to picking up again tonight.

For all RDR2 gets wrong, it gets some fantastic things right, including some great story beats and missions.

DeadHand · 15-08-2019 05:13PM

I’ve played through maybe 60% of the story and have completed most of the challenges.

Does anyone else find this far, far too easy?

The gun fighting element is far too forgiving. I’ve never died on a mission and I’ve only died twice in free roam when I was still new to the game- getting cornered by the max number of bounty hunters or to a pack of wolves while I fiddled with the menu.

I never use or need to use health cures or miracle tonics, so I have a huge stash of each. Even outside of gunplay, your hand really gets held on missions.

I don’t think auto aim (which I know can be adjusted) or even dead eye (though it is overpowered) is the main issue- I think Arthur can take far too much punishment and survive. For example, I tried to rob a stranger who promptly took out a pump action shotgun and blasted me from inches away. Not wanting to kill him (I could easily) I was able to turn and canter to safety casually with minor damage when I should have been dead.

It removes a lot of the tension and immersion when Arthur is basically a superhero in terms of resilience. I feel it would be better if you could die more easily (instantly to head shots and point blank shotgun blasts, after just a few body shots, weapon dependent) and if enemies were fewer to balance out this vulnerability. Arthur should only be slightly more durable than his enemies. This along with a small nerf to auto aim and a bigger nerf to deadeye. It would make gun fights more tactical, nerve racking and satisfying when you do win.

The sounds and feel of gun battles are already great and the enemy AI seems up to task, if only they were a bit more challenging.

As it is, it’s not that hard to stand out in the open and despatch 20+ enemies without breaking a sweat with deadeye and your ability to absorb bullets.

Don’t get me wrong, the game is gorgeous and the story is compelling. I have sank entire evenings into just wandering the map exploring and hunting. It’s still a great game and well worth the asking price. I also understand that the focus of the game is to be a narrative rather than a mind melting challenge.

But missions are getting very boring and I never feel any sense of danger or dread. It’s the one aspect that keeps this game from perfection, for me.

Penn · 15-08-2019 05:28PM

Most of my failed missions/deaths came down to not getting into cover right, as Arthur's mobility can be extremely f*cky at the best of times. But yeah it was the same as GTAV; the auto-aim and a little nudge up on the stick meant you'd hit headshots about 8/10 times. Add in Dead-Eye and most of the time there was little real danger of being killed.

DeadHand · 15-08-2019 05:44PM

I think hand holding and cakewalk single player modes seem to be the trend in current console gaming, not that I game extensively or even as much as I used to.

As someone who grew up screaming in frustration at the early Tomb Raiders and Resident Evils it leaves me hollow.

Multiplayer seems to be the only place any kind of challenge is at.

Potential-Monke · 15-08-2019 08:27PM

DeadHand wrote: »

I think hand holding and cakewalk single player modes seem to be the trend in current console gaming, not that I game extensively or even as much as I used to.

As someone who grew up screaming in frustration at the early Tomb Raiders and Resident Evils it leaves me hollow.

Multiplayer seems to be the only place any kind of challenge is at.

I will agree that a good few mainstream games have become easier, but there are still the bastard hard ones out there, which I personally don't find enjoyable:

Dark Souls Series
Bloodborne
Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice
Hollow Knight
Celeste
Cuphead

Greyfox · 16-08-2019 01:42PM

DeadHand wrote: »

I think hand holding and cakewalk single player modes seem to be the trend in current console gaming, not that I game extensively or even as much as I used to.

As someone who grew up screaming in frustration at the early Tomb Raiders and Resident Evils it leaves me hollow.

That's why all games should have difficullty setings. The early Tomb Raiders and Resident Evils were amazing but people tried for longer with these as they had less games back then. I'm glad red dead 2 is not difficult as if it was the flaws this pretty good game has would be more evident

Riddle101 · 28-08-2019 04:11AM

Only just saw this. Roger Clark in Sligo. From around the time he was at the Dublin comic con.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6WJEVqQCeU

rizzodun · 28-08-2019 02:59PM

Riddle101 wrote: »

Only just saw this. Roger Clark in Sligo. From around the time he was at the Dublin comic con.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6WJEVqQCeU

Went to school on Ballisodare, in the same year as my sister.

iLikeWaffles · 31-08-2019 02:02PM

Iv'e been playing this a few hours a night for past 2 weeks or so trying to get 100%. Christ it's the grind of all grinds. The hunting requests: have them done but still have to do stuff. On the individual challenges atm, herbalist example: find and pick every plant :eek: Almost certain I've done that already with previous challenges / missions.

It's great that I'm getting value for money out of the game but way more than I bargained for!

RedRochey · 01-09-2019 02:32PM

iLikeWaffles wrote: »

Iv'e been playing this a few hours a night for past 2 weeks or so trying to get 100%. Christ it's the grind of all grinds. The hunting requests: have them done but still have to do stuff. On the individual challenges atm, herbalist example: find and pick every plant :eek: Almost certain I've done that already with previous challenges / missions.

It's great that I'm getting value for money out of the game but way more than I bargained for!

Like I don't mind picking all plants or ones like that, fairly obvious challenges, but surely it should count plants already picked before the challenged started

Riddle101 · 01-09-2019 08:18PM

I've seen a similar video of Arthur antagonizing the camp, but this has more in it. Pretty funny stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff6uS5whIBM

iLikeWaffles · 02-09-2019 12:56AM

StockTwat29 wrote: »

Like I don't mind picking all plants or ones like that, fairly obvious challenges, but surely it should count plants already picked before the challenged started

Someone at rockstar:

256-2563821_troll-troll-face-lol-xd-troll-face-meme.png

iLikeWaffles · 10-09-2019 02:40AM

Finally 100%, Fu**ing nightmare to do!

weiland79 · 11-09-2019 09:51AM

Does anybody play online?

Captainsatnav · 11-09-2019 10:04AM

weiland79 wrote: »

Does anybody play online?

I will after I finish the story I reckon...which could be a while yet. My OCD is preventing me from actually doing missions. I'm just back from Guarma...almost a year after the game released.

jones · 11-09-2019 01:42PM

StockTwat29 wrote: »

Like I don't mind picking all plants or ones like that, fairly obvious challenges, but surely it should count plants already picked before the challenged started

THIS really bugged me

Dr. Bre · 11-09-2019 01:46PM

Having to go back to Guam for collectibles was the final straw for me. Gave up. I really enjoy going for 100% in rockstar games but not this one.

Varik · 11-09-2019 02:33PM

Dr. Bre wrote: »

Having to go back to Guam for collectibles was the final straw for me. Gave up. I really enjoy going for 100% in rockstar games but not this one.

You don't need to go back to Guam for the 100%, the stuff that is need that's from guam is also on a few other places around.

Red Dead Redemption 2

Comments