Red Dead Redemption 2

Penn · 18-10-2016 3:28pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Agree with the assumption it will be set before RDR but they have called it RDR2 which I find strange.

Prequels are often called '2'. It's also to show it's part of the same storyline as RDR1 and not a separate story like Red Dead Revolver.

Lukker- · 18-10-2016 3:29pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Agree with the assumption it will be set before RDR but they have called it RDR2 which I find strange, could be just until the reveal on thursday I guess.

If it is a sequel that'll kind of bug me too.

Sephiroth_dude · 18-10-2016 3:30pm

I guess they want too make sure they do a proper job on the PC port and not repeat the mistake they made with the pc version of GTA 4, then again The first red dead didn't come too PC either

.

Lukker- · 18-10-2016 3:33pm

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

I guess they want too make sure they do a proper job on the PC port and not repeat the mistake they made with the pc version of GTA 4, then again The first red dead didn't come too PC either .

It's standard unfortunately, they have never launched a game on PC and probably won't announce anything for 6 months. They will probably even deny that they will ever even make one. But I'm confident they will. Red Dead Online will likely feature loads of micro transactions. Losing 5-10m potential market for that is just bad business.

They want that double dip money.

Beefy78 · 18-10-2016 3:37pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Rockstar are famous for double dipping, releasing games first on consoles and then getting people to buy them.

No one is better at parting people from their money than Rockstar are.

I've bought GTA San Andreas five times

Penn · 18-10-2016 3:43pm

Beefy78 wrote: »

No one is better at parting people from their money than Rockstar are.

I've bought GTA San Andreas five times

I bought RDR three times because I didn't like it the first two times. Only got about an hour or two in on previous tries, gave up, traded it in. Finally persevered on the third try and it was so so worth it.

Mickeroo · 18-10-2016 3:44pm

Penn wrote: »

Prequels are often called '2'. It's also to show it's part of the same storyline as RDR1 and not a separate story like Red Dead Revolver.

Can you name one? Not being a smart ass but I can't think of any. I'm wondering is the title temporary until they release more details.

johnny_ultimate · 18-10-2016 3:47pm

iLikeWaffles wrote: »

the west is the west as far as rdr fans are concerned.

Different eras of 'the west' could have quite significant impacts on the way the game is designed - everything from the technology to the politics would have to be considered depending on when exactly the game was set.

Most significantly though IMO is that Redemption's themes and atmosphere were heavily influenced by it being set in the dying days of the Wild West, which lent a sort of persistent melancholy and transience to proceedings. Indeed, that factors heavily into the narrative from the off. If we presume this is set somewhat earlier, it would follow that a different sort of tone and approach would be on the cards.

johnny_ultimate · 18-10-2016 3:53pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Can you name one? Not being a smart ass but I can't think of any. I'm wondering is the title temporary until they release more details.

MGS3/5 and DMC3 are prequels, not quite '2' but '3' is one higher innit :pac:

In film, Infernal Affairs 2 is a prequel, and a really underwhelming one at that!

wandatowell · 18-10-2016 3:54pm

I'm hoping for some Blood Meridian style nastyness.

Penn · 18-10-2016 3:55pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Can you name one? Not being a smart ass but I can't think of any. I'm wondering is the title temporary until they release more details.

I suppose in hindsight saying prequels are often called '2' is probably wrong, but more so numbered games aren't always chronological

Tenchu 2
Devil May Cry 3
Metal Gear Solid 3 (and 5)
Dead to Rights 2
Fear Effect 2

Admittedly, I had to google for some of those answers, so fair enough, I retract my comment. Prequels do tend to do without a number and go for a sub-title instead.

Clarebelly · 18-10-2016 3:57pm

Penn wrote: »

I suppose in hindsight saying prequels are often called '2' is probably wrong, but more so numbered games aren't always chronological

Tenchu 2
Devil May Cry 3
Metal Gear Solid 3 (and 5)
Dead to Rights 2
Fear Effect 2

Admittedly, I had to google for some of those answers, so fair enough, I retract my comment.

Back to the future 3, shur they even went back to the wild west....... :pac:

johnny_ultimate · 18-10-2016 3:59pm

wandatowell wrote: »

I'm hoping for some Blood Meridian style nastyness.

If only. Even the most radical cinematic post-westerns haven't reached that level of horrifying misery, so would be truly unprecedented for a mainstream video game to capture anything near the level of unrelenting joylessness.

Even if - feasibly - the game is more critical of the treatment of Native Americans or attempts to deconstruct the cowboy myth, I can really not imagine it being anywhere on the level of Blood Meridian.

marcbrophy · 18-10-2016 4:03pm

Don't be silly lads, if it was a prequel, it'd be called Red Dead Predemption

Generic Dreadhead · 18-10-2016 4:05pm

I hope it has nothing to do with John Marston. His story has been told.

Lukker- · 18-10-2016 4:11pm

Cormac... wrote: »

I hope it has nothing to do with John Marston. His story has been told.

I'd agree but I think the fact that it is called Red Dead Redemption 2 and not Red Dead Retribution or something is indicitating that it is the same story ark.

Rockstar generally like to create new story lines rather than go back over the same one so my guess is it'll have different characters altogether.

Riesen_Meal · 18-10-2016 4:11pm

Cormac... wrote: »

I hope it has nothing to do with John Marston. His story has been told.

I'd say it's to do with what a previous poster put spoiler tags on, I doubt it's a prequel but you never know....

Beefy78 · 18-10-2016 4:11pm

I don't think it will be Marston. That isn't Rockstar's thing at all. That said they left so much open in terms of his backstory that they definitely have the opportunity to explore his history with Dutch, Bill and the gang.

EDIT - the other thing making me wonder if they will pick up Marston's story again though is that he is, IMO, by far their best protagonist. They struck gold with the character and the performance.

wandatowell · 18-10-2016 4:12pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

If only. Even the most radical cinematic post-westerns haven't reached that level of horrifying misery, so would be truly unprecedented for a mainstream video game to capture anything near the level of unrelenting joylessness.

Even if - feasibly - the game is more critical of the treatment of Native Americans or attempts to deconstruct the cowboy myth, I can really not imagine it being anywhere on the level of Blood Meridian.

You said it better than I ever could. Excellent post.

Lukker- · 18-10-2016 4:15pm

Fieldog wrote: »

I'd say it's to do with what a previous poster put spoiler tags on, I doubt it's a prequel but you never know....

I don't think so, he wasn't exactly a popular character

Riesen_Meal · 18-10-2016 4:18pm

Beefy78 wrote: »

I don't think it will be Marston. That isn't Rockstar's thing at all. That said they left so much open in terms of his backstory that they definitely have the opportunity to explore his history with Dutch, Bill and the gang.

EDIT - the other thing making me wonder if they will pick up Marston's story again though is that he is, IMO, by far their best protagonist. They struck gold with the character and the performance.

http://www.polygon.com/features/2013/6/19/4406600/small-town-man-John-Marston

The voice actor got pissed off with the whole industry and retired to do a "normal job"

Interesting read that, and the accompanying video - the guy seems to be like John in real life, going back home to provide for the family etc...

18-10-2016 4:20pm

As an aside... how much would I need to pony up for a pc that would make gaming with games like this and gta5 a better experience than playing on a ps4

Generic Dreadhead · 18-10-2016 4:23pm

Deleted User wrote: »

As an aside... how much would I need to pony up for a pc that would make gaming with games like this and gta5 a better experience than playing on a ps4

€700

ricero · 18-10-2016 4:30pm

Would love for the game to be set during the american civil war. Could bring about some interesting scenarios

Jelle1880 · 18-10-2016 4:31pm

Depends, if you're comfortable building your own then you can probably get one for €500 or so. If you want to buy a pre-built one then probably around €700 yeah.

EagererBeaver · 18-10-2016 4:35pm

iLikeWaffles wrote: »

Its hardly going to be historically accurate the west is the west as far as rdr fans are concerned. I wasn't been serious there btw thought the :eek::D would have given that away.

Well, no. Revolver and Redemption were at clearly different time periods. Half the genius of Redemption was that it was say at a time when new technology was changing the Old West.

L'prof · 18-10-2016 4:35pm

Cormac... wrote: »

€700

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Depends, if you're comfortable building your own then you can probably get one for €500 or so. If you want to buy a pre-built one then probably around €700 yeah.

Personally I'm too OCD to ever build my own PC for gaming. I know for a fact that I'd be upgrading parts left right and centre and it would just end up costing me an absolute fortune. I'll happily play this on the PS4

Lukker- · 18-10-2016 4:44pm

L'prof wrote: »

Personally I'm too OCD to ever build my own PC for gaming. I know for a fact that I'd be upgrading parts left right and centre and it would just end up costing me an absolute fortune. I'll happily play this on the PS4

You get good at resisting the urge! Beats buying a PS4.5 or Xbox Scorpio every 2 years!

If you start with a good base, it'd only really be the GPU you'd be updating every 2 years(I paid €250 for my R9 290 3 years ago and it still runs all brand new games at over 60FPS on Ultra settings at 1080p).

CPU, motherboards and RAM tend to iterate slower and have almost been stagnant now for a while. An i5 2500k CPU still can play most games at 60 FPS and it came out 5 years ago!

super_furry · 18-10-2016 4:44pm

ricero wrote: »

Would love for the game to be set during the american civil war. Could bring about some interesting scenarios

Couldn't agree more. I watched the Free State of Jones at the weekend as was left thinking that there should be more games set in that era.

wotzgoingon · 18-10-2016 4:48pm

Lukker- wrote: »

You get good at resisting the urge! Beats buying a PS4.5 or Xbox Scorpio every 2 years!

If you start with a good base, it'd only really be the GPU you'd be updating every 2 years(I paid €250 for my R9 290 3 years ago and it still runs all brand new games at over 60FPS on Ultra settings at 1080p).

CPU, motherboards and RAM tend to iterate slower and have almost been stagnant now for a while. An i5 2500k CPU still can play most games at 60 FPS and it came out 5 years ago!

I'm gaming at above 60Hz @1080P on a 7 year old processor.

ShaneU · 18-10-2016 5:02pm

I'm guessing you'll play as his son from where the last game left off

Saipanne · 18-10-2016 5:04pm

ShaneU wrote: »

I'm guessing you'll play as his son from where the last game left off

That would be disappointing, plus it's at least 1914 at that stage.

wotzgoingon · 18-10-2016 5:05pm

ShaneU wrote: »

I'm guessing you'll play as his son from where the last game left off

I doubt it tbh. I'd say it is based on John Marstons life before redemption.

L'prof · 18-10-2016 5:10pm

Lukker- wrote: »

You get good at resisting the urge! Beats buying a PS4.5 or Xbox Scorpio every 2 years!

If you start with a good base, it'd only really be the GPU you'd be updating every 2 years(I paid €250 for my R9 290 3 years ago and it still runs all brand new games at over 60FPS on Ultra settings at 1080p).

CPU, motherboards and RAM tend to iterate slower and have almost been stagnant now for a while. An i5 2500k CPU still can play most games at 60 FPS and it came out 5 years ago!

I went from PS3 to PS4, doubt I'll bother with this 4.5 moneyspinner. Even though I have a 4K tv, I'm happy with the performance I'm currently getting. I'll have the PS4 for much longer than 2 years. I just know I'd end up burning through money if I was a PC gamer

On topic, really looking forward to RDR2. I didn't finish the last one but definitely will this time round

Kal El · 18-10-2016 5:22pm

I never really played this game, bought it got a few hours into it. Then had to go somewhere came back and my brother was finishing the main story line :mad:

Sephiroth_dude · 18-10-2016 5:22pm

At least the release isn't 3 years away anyway :pac:

Venom · 18-10-2016 5:27pm

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

At least the release isn't 3 years away anyway :pac:

PC version is 3 years away :pac:

super_furry · 18-10-2016 5:37pm

This from SuperDataResearch.com's twitter account might give an insight as to why PC isn't important for Rockstar. GTA Online has taken on a life of it's own on console and they'll be looking for more of the same with RDR2.

Beefy78 · 18-10-2016 5:57pm

Online is definitely the way Rockstar is going. GTA Online is a technological wonder and Rockstar are pouring so much into it in terms of updates. They make a fortune from those who want to pay and yet I'm sure that most of us have never paid a penny since the purchase of the game.

It was the natural evolution of the online versions they brought in in GTA IV and then almost perfected in RDR. RDR's online was fantastic and the Wild West setting fitted the open lobby in a way that GTA doesn't.

That said they know that single player is their bread and butter. I trust Rockstar not to turn their games into Call of Duty or the like. There's a huge market still for the single player games and if any developer can keep both sides happy I trust Rockstar to do it.

Beefy78 · 18-10-2016 5:57pm

Online is definitely the way Rockstar is going. GTA Online is a technological wonder and Rockstar are pouring so much into it in terms of updates. They make a fortune from those who want to pay and yet I'm sure that most of us have never paid a penny since the purchase of the game.

It was the natural evolution of the online versions they brought in in GTA IV and then almost perfected in RDR. RDR's online was fantastic and the Wild West setting fitted the open lobby in a way that GTA doesn't.

That said they know that single player is their bread and butter. I trust Rockstar not to turn their games into Call of Duty or the like. There's a huge market still for the single player games and if any developer can keep both sides happy I trust Rockstar to do it.

jayo26 · 18-10-2016 6:08pm

Beefy78 wrote: »

Online is definitely the way Rockstar is going. GTA Online is a technological wonder and Rockstar are pouring so much into it in terms of updates. They make a fortune from those who want to pay and yet I'm sure that most of us have never paid a penny since the purchase of the game.

It was the natural evolution of the online versions they brought in in GTA IV and then almost perfected in RDR. RDR's online was fantastic and the Wild West setting fitted the open lobby in a way that GTA doesn't.

That said they know that single player is their bread and butter. I trust Rockstar not to turn their games into Call of Duty or the like. There's a huge market still for the single player games and if any developer can keep both sides happy I trust Rockstar to do it.

You should of numbered your posts I'm not sure which one was a prequel or a sequel.

Zero-Cool · 18-10-2016 6:09pm

Can...not....wait for this. RDR Online has huge potential. GTA Online became too much of a grief fest with jets, tanks etc that hopefully can't exist in RDR. I really enjoyed the Redemption multiplayer especially in the posse mode which I'm sure now will make great use of the R* Crew system.

I see people already freaking out on other forums about the lack of female lead characters...

Trailer on Thursday should be epic.

Venom · 18-10-2016 6:29pm

Pre order page up

https://www.rockstarwarehouse.com/store/tk2rstar/en_IE/pd/productID.5078231900

PC not listed.

J Mysterio · 18-10-2016 6:47pm

Lukker- · 18-10-2016 6:54pm

super_furry wrote: »

This from SuperDataResearch.com's twitter account might give an insight as to why PC isn't important for Rockstar. GTA Online has taken on a life of it's own on console and they'll be looking for more of the same with RDR2.

Isn't that slightly augmented by the fact that they are graphing 4 systems against 1?

It doesn't surprise me that there are less micro-transactions on PC, but that is surely offset from the fact 75% of sales for PC were digital, resulting in much bigger chunk going to the devs/publishers. Steam only take 30% from a game sold on it's market, when you compare that to a sale of a console game ina bricks in mortar shop the eventual cut for the studio can be as low as 1.5%.

On top of that digitally Rockstar have their own download service which enables them to retain 100% of sales.

gizmo · 18-10-2016 7:17pm

Lukker- wrote: »

Isn't that slightly augmented by the fact that they are graphing 4 systems against 1?

It doesn't surprise me that there are less micro-transactions on PC, but that is surely offset from the fact 75% of sales for PC were digital, resulting in much bigger chunk going to the devs/publishers. Steam only take 30% from a game sold on it's market, when you compare that to a sale of a console game ina bricks in mortar shop the eventual cut for the studio can be as low as 1.5%.

On top of that digitally Rockstar have their own download service which enables them to retain 100% of sales.

Yet by the time the PC version of the game sold an estimated 2m copies, console sales sat at approximately 45m. Steamspy now figures the number of PC owners to be at the 5m mark but total copies sold for the game now sits at over 65m. While digital PC sales will indeed allow for larger profit margins over brick and mortar stores, nevermind on console where the platform holders have to get their 20% too, the raw sales are still incomparable.

As for that 1.5% figure, external studios will rarely get a cut of the profits from games sold from launch. If any kind of deal was to be done based on sales, it'd be more likely that they would receive royalty payments once a game has hit a certain sales figure. Publishers, on the other hand, will get their cut from the get go and that will be far higher than 1.5%.

I'd be interested to see how many sales were made through Rockstar Warehouse alright but I'd wager it's a drop in the ocean compared to sales on Steam or other digital outlets.

Lukker- · 18-10-2016 7:34pm

gizmo wrote: »

Yet by the time the PC version of the game sold an estimated 2m copies, console sales sat at approximately 45m. Steamspy now figures the number of PC owners to be at the 5m mark but total copies sold for the game now sits at over 65m. While digital PC sales will indeed allow for larger profit margins over brick and mortar stores, nevermind on console where the platform holders have to get their 20% too, the raw sales are still incomparable.

As for that 1.5% figure, external studios will rarely get a cut of the profits from games sold from launch. If any kind of deal was to be done based on sales, it'd be more likely that they would receive royalty payments once a game has hit a certain sales figure. Publishers, on the other hand, will get their cut from the get go and that will be far higher than 1.5%.

I'd be interested to see how many sales were made through Rockstar Warehouse alright but I'd wager it's a drop in the ocean compared to sales on Steam or other digital outlets.

5.5M on Steam. I'd wager they probably shipped close to the same number from their own in house downloader considering it was much cheaper there than steam at launch.

Again you are diluting the figures against 4 other systems instead of the 1. It'd be much more comparable to compare PC sales to XB1 etc

Jordan 199 · 18-10-2016 8:12pm

Penn wrote: »

Yeah, RDR had Fast Travel, so I can't see them going for switching characters as a way to traverse the map.

I'd have no objection to character switching, gameplay-wise I thought it worked well in GTAV (though it became somewhat of a cheat to switch to another character when you're low on health). But I'd rather RDR2 be more about one person's story than GTAV was.

I feel the same way too.

wotzgoingon · 18-10-2016 8:32pm

I liked the way there was 3 main characters in GTA V and I would have no problem with it in RDR2, but I doubt there will be 7 main characters.

HairySalmon · 18-10-2016 8:35pm

I'd hate for there to be more than one playable character. That worked fine for GTA but red dead is another beast and it's what made RDR so intimate in the first place

Red Dead Redemption 2

Comments