• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Red Dead Redemption 2 (Fall 2017, PS4/XB1, Trailer 10/20 @ 11 AM EST) announced

What will ultimately anger people the most about this game?

Results are only viewable after voting.
Lime said:
I'm just tired of fucking white male characters everywhere in video games, it's so uncreative and uninspiring. It's like 90% of the rest of the world population doesn't exist in video games.

And now you have 7 characters and all of them are guys
Click to expand...

Just to remind us it's 2016 and we can't get excited about a video game without the obligatory discussion on white male privilege and lack of diversity In character casts.
 
Vitacat said:
Just because they announced console versions doesn't necessarily mean a PC version won't happen. All the GTA's went to PC.
Click to expand...
Yes, but 100% of Read Dead games have been console exclusive. :(

Granted there are only two in the series, with only one that people actually care about.
 
Vitacat said:
Just because they announced console versions doesn't necessarily mean a PC version won't happen. All the GTA's went to PC.
Click to expand...

Not true.

Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories, Vice City Stories and Chinatown Wars never did.

I'm just going to get it on a console and not worry about it.
 
darthkarki said:
"Zero excuse"... So you're saying that someone creating a piece of art literally doesn't have the right to deliver their own vision? Obviously you're not referring to any actual legal requirements as there are none, so you must be saying there is some kind of universal moral imperative that any creator must obey regardless of what they actually feel like making?

I cannot stand this kind of entitled attitude. "How dare anyone create something that doesn't prescribe to my particular sensibilities!" Here's the thing: you can absolutely be disappointed if it's not what you wanted. Everyone has preferences, and you should absolutely tell a company that you are interested in (your preferred experience here). They might even do that at some point. But there is a difference between saying "I'm super disappointed this doesn't have a female protagonist! I would have really liked that" and "Fuck you dev you slimy racist bastards how dare you make the game you want and not the one I want!". That's the problem. The complaint is always that it's wrong that they didn't make what you wanted, which is the definition of entitlement.

This angers me because I want to have the freedom to make what I want to make. I don't want to be yelled at because I told a story that was on my heart, but it wasn't exactly what someone else would have created. The greatest works of art come from creators expressing their visions, because it's a story they have to tell, a picture they have to paint, music they have to write.

There is a TON of media that doesn't interest me. Things like the Saw movies disgust me. I think the world would probably be better off without that, so should I campaign to have those banned? Should I form an oversight committee to govern the direction of a sequel so that it's something I want? Or should I leave the creative direction to the people who actually wanted that to begin with?

Rockstar committed a grave sin here by releasing a picture that only has men in it, which means this is clearly going to be a horrible sexist game, right? So I'm curious. Would you go back in time and complain about Seven Samurai because the leads are men? I mean, that's seven lead characters and they are all men. That's bad, right? And yet, for some reason, as summarized by Wikipedia:



It almost seems like it might have actually been a good movie with a good story despite starring only men. How about The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings? Some of the greatest, most influential works of fiction in history, and they predominantly star men. Do you know why? Because these are the stories and the characters that the creators wanted to create.

Here's the truth: there are a lot of video games, that feature all manner of characters. Are there not as many representing what you are looking for? Here's an idea. Don't demand a creator change their vision to match yours. Instead of bitching about it, go make the game you want. That's what I'm doing. I will enjoy what media I enjoy, and will add what I think is missing.
Click to expand...
Thank you for saying what a lot of people reading this thread are thinking. Great post.
 
Thing that gets me excited is hopefully both the pro and Scorpio versions will have clean looking grass, trees and foliage and they go crazy with the weather effects etc.
 
opie211 said:
The game is set in the old American west. What are you expecting?

As far as other races, you had the Asians working the rail roads.

Most women were not gun slingers but worked the brothels in these type stories.

Depending on the year, I suppose there could be free black citizens and they could be a side kick. Some Mexican representation would also work here depending on the year the game is set in.

Seriously, what do you want from Rockstar? This is a period piece. White men ruled the world back then in the American west.

Asking for minority's to be at the center of the story of an American Old West Story is like a developer making a game set in 1970's Harlem and making the main character a white guy. It wouldn't make a lot of sense.

Game developers are free to tell the story they want to without the PC crowd forcing them to include every variation of race/gender as a leading role.
Click to expand...

No. They. Did. Not.

White men ruled cinema in the 50's that's where your misconception comes from.
 
Talk about Marston's Son makes little sense to me. I wouldn't want this to be a sequel. Setting the game in the 20th century and after WWI would be pushing it. Cooler guns though.
 
SomedayTheFire said:
Don't ignore More_Badass's posts then.
Click to expand...

I wasn't ignoring it - it actually required me to do some reading. Yours, however, lacked any substance I could better my opinion with.

Crossing Eden said:
If they cared about realism or "historical accuracy" in a non historical game about cowboys, there'd be many more black characters than the whitewashed version of reality that media would have you believe. Since a full third of the outlaw population were black. It's pretty insane how little people know about the setting besides what they've been spoon fed by whitewashed media.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking so much about "historical accuracy". I'm talking about them telling the story they want to tell, and a female protagonist potentially flying in the face of that.

Hero_of_the_Day said:
Yeah, everyone knows it's hard to fit a woman into a story. They are just plotline killers. I mean, what the fuck are you supposed to do with a lady? Did they even exist way back then?
Click to expand...

I'm not married to my opinion, but if you want to convince me that my opinion is wrong I genuinely need more than strawman arguments.
 
dNxfoED.jpg
Click to expand...

.
 
So if the leaked map is real and includes the area from RDR, and the game focuses on Dutch's gang, what if all or most of the scenes in Redemption 1 are in the end of Redemption 2? And we basically have a new game that flows into a remaster telling one seamless narrative...
 
Lime said:
I'm just tired of fucking white male characters everywhere in video games, it's so uncreative and uninspiring. It's like 90% of the rest of the world population doesn't exist in video games.

And now you have 7 characters and all of them are guys
Click to expand...
But you assume all 7 are white a couple of them look like they could easily be hispanic's or indians.

We know 0 about this game and you are already complaining.
 
opie211 said:
Asking for minority's to be at the center of the story of an American Old West Story is like a developer making a game set in 1970's Harlem and making the main character a white guy. It wouldn't make a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

You don't have to tell a period piece story about the ones in power. Django Unchained doesn't exist, as far as American West stories?
 
ekim said:
Platforms so far:
Mk7rMnK.png
Click to expand...

Well that's completely killed my interest.

I mean, I know it's Rockstar, but it's also 2016. I genuinely didn't even remotely consider the lack of a PC version a possibility. I do own a PS4, but I rarely use it for games. IQ and framerate really do matter a lot to me.
 
OrbitalBeard said:
You should check out The Hateful Eight.
Click to expand...

Tangent, but what a terrible fucking movie. Just dreadful, can't believe how a director I like doing a genre I love ended so badly for me.






But yeah, can't wait for the trailer Thursday. Also I really hope that release date is fairly accurate!
 
darthkarki said:
"Zero excuse"... So you're saying that someone creating a piece of art literally doesn't have the right to deliver their own vision? Obviously you're not referring to any actual legal requirements as there are none, so you must be saying there is some kind of universal moral imperative that any creator must obey regardless of what they actually feel like making?

I cannot stand this kind of entitled attitude. "How dare anyone create something that doesn't prescribe to my particular sensibilities!" Here's the thing: you can absolutely be disappointed if it's not what you wanted. Everyone has preferences, and you should absolutely tell a company that you are interested in (your preferred experience here). They might even do that at some point. But there is a difference between saying "I'm super disappointed this doesn't have a female protagonist! I would have really liked that" and "Fuck you dev you slimy racist bastards how dare you make the game you want and not the one I want!". That's the problem. The complaint is always that it's wrong that they didn't make what you wanted, which is the definition of entitlement.

This angers me because I want to have the freedom to make what I want to make. I don't want to be yelled at because I told a story that was on my heart, but it wasn't exactly what someone else would have created. The greatest works of art come from creators expressing their visions, because it's a story they have to tell, a picture they have to paint, music they have to write.

There is a TON of media that doesn't interest me. Things like the Saw movies disgust me. I think the world would probably be better off without that, so should I campaign to have those banned? Should I form an oversight committee to govern the direction of a sequel so that it's something I want? Or should I leave the creative direction to the people who actually wanted that to begin with?

Rockstar committed a grave sin here by releasing a picture that only has men in it, which means this is clearly going to be a horrible sexist game, right? So I'm curious. Would you go back in time and complain about Seven Samurai because the leads are men? I mean, that's seven lead characters and they are all men. That's bad, right? And yet, for some reason, as summarized by Wikipedia:



It almost seems like it might have actually been a good movie with a good story despite starring only men. How about The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings? Some of the greatest, most influential works of fiction in history, and they predominantly star men. Do you know why? Because these are the stories and the characters that the creators wanted to create.

Here's the truth: there are a lot of video games, that feature all manner of characters. Are there not as many representing what you are looking for? Here's an idea. Don't demand a creator change their vision to match yours. Instead of bitching about it, go make the game you want. That's what I'm doing. I will enjoy what media I enjoy, and will add what I think is missing.
Click to expand...

nodding_clint_eastwood.gif
 
No simultaneous PC release? Feelsbad.gif

Anyway, I'm glad we're finally getting a sequel! RDR was among my favorite games that gen.
 
truly101 said:
I think most gamers, even those that are not super hardcore would have an idea of what to expect if the game contains the Red Dead prefix. In fact it could be problematic if Redemption 2 does not tie into the previous game in some way since thats what the average person expects. Nobody wants a Halloween III: Season of the Witch story continuity out the window fuckery. I think if that was the case, they would have picked a different 3rd word.

We'll find out soon
Click to expand...
How problematic was GTA 3, 4 and 5?

It's a non issue, the story doesn't need to be related just because it has 2.
 
now THAT'S what i call a Great news to wake up to, RDR was one of those games that when i played it for the first hours i though to myself "this may be the best game i have ever played"

i don't care about the single player, it was boring to me( animal hunting is an exception)

the MP was a masterpiece with how simple yet amazing and addictive it is

i hope they don't ruin the MP like they did in GTA 5, they tried to go bigger but made it boring, unlike GTA 4's

console exclusive ?? even much better news, this is why most people play on consoles, amazing exclusives, in about a month consoles will get what could be 2016's goty, FFXV, and next year we without any doubts will get 2017's goty
 
SomedayTheFire said:
No. They. Did. Not.

White men ruled cinema in the 50's that's where your misconception comes from.
Click to expand...

While you're right that there's a severely inaccurate picture that was painted by hollywood you are also in 100% denial if you don't think it was the white man's world back then. That's just fact.

Anyways lmao at the pattern of Rockstar threads ending up being long debates about race representation in the media. Every announcement. Not belittling it or anything but it's pretty crazy how much it happens
 
Alienous said:
I'm not talking so much about "historical accuracy". I'm talking about them telling the story they want to tell, and a female protagonist potentially flying in the face of that.
Click to expand...

And that is exactly how the patriarchy sustains itself. Creators who grew up on white washed male centric stories perpetuate the mythical history they grew up believing with new media then claim artist privileged when pressed why they didn't include minorities or women.
 
The Artisan said:
they're not sequels of one another, their spiritual successors/predecessors, if you mean revolver and redemption. redemption 2 looks like a direct sequel to the second game, but even then i'd prefer a new R word because this series doesn't get a lot of installments. could've added a new title to remember, just like redemption.
i don't care much if the main character is white or not, what rockstar is doing is for telling the best story they could - doesn't mean it'll be a well received story by everyone and doesn't mean they couldn't also tell a story just as good if not better with a native american protagonist.
Click to expand...

They could do anything with the story, but they're telling the story they want to tell with the characters they want to write. The quality can range from a dumpster fire to fantastic, the quality isn't the point.
 
opie211 said:
The game is set in the old American west. What are you expecting?

As far as other races, you had the Asians working the rail roads.

Most women were not gun slingers but worked the brothels in these type stories.

Depending on the year, I suppose there could be free black citizens and they could be a side kick. Some Mexican representation would also work here depending on the year the game is set in.

Seriously, what do you want from Rockstar? This is a period piece. White men ruled the world back then in the American west.

Asking for minority's to be at the center of the story of an American Old West Story is like a developer making a game set in 1970's Harlem and making the main character a white guy. It wouldn't make a lot of sense.

Game developers are free to tell the story they want to without the PC crowd forcing them to include every variation of race/gender as a leading role.
Click to expand...

This post is 100% bullshit. There are plenty of examples of Wild West-era stories in media where the women weren't all prostitutes and the minorities weren't all railroad workers and slaves. I can't wait for this game, but I also have no problem with calls for more diversity in games, because it absolutely is an issue.
 
Alienous said:
I wasn't ignoring it - it actually required me to do some reading. Yours, however, lacked any substance I could better my opinion with.



I'm not talking so much about "historical accuracy". I'm talking about them telling the story they want to tell, and a female protagonist potentially flying in the face of that.
Click to expand...

I mean the substance was you're wrong. and I ask you "what?" in that I did not understand how you came to the conclusion of your post. Do you mean to say there is only two ways to write a woman? that's ridiculous. You say "honestly" it would have to be sexist, this clearly points out you have no idea what the actual historical source would be.

More_Badass posted multiple times before you did, pointing out the historical context, but your post ignored that.
 
Rodney McKay said:
Yes, but 100% of Read Dead games have been console exclusive. :(

Granted there are only two in the series, with only one that people actually care about.
Click to expand...

rockstar go where the money is. the first game was pretty much unknown. damn some people still think Red Dead Redemption is the first game in the series. Nobody was interested in Red Dead until Redemption became a success so I wouldn't be surprised if Rockstar didn't want to risk doing a PC version. They wouldn't have known how successful redemption would become. Now it has been 6 years and loads of PC players want to play a Red Dead game. The thing is that PC doesn't bring in anywhere near the amount of money that consoles do so unfortunately it's not a priority for them. They will release the console versions to get all that money and also force people to double dip then they will announce the PC version.
 
opie211 said:
The game is set in the old American west. What are you expecting?

As far as other races, you had the Asians working the rail roads.

Most women were not gun slingers but worked the brothels in these type stories.

Depending on the year, I suppose there could be free black citizens and they could be a side kick. Some Mexican representation would also work here depending on the year the game is set in.

Seriously, what do you want from Rockstar? This is a period piece. White men ruled the world back then in the American west.

Asking for minority's to be at the center of the story of an American Old West Story is like a developer making a game set in 1970's Harlem and making the main character a white guy. It wouldn't make a lot of sense.

Game developers are free to tell the story they want to without the PC crowd forcing them to include every variation of race/gender as a leading role.
Click to expand...
White men ruled the media, not the world. And evidently it's incredibly effective, did you know that more than a 3rd of the active cowboy population were black before reading about it in this post? I think not. But no no guys keep going i'm really close to a bingo, just need an unironic use of the term sjw.
 
So I take it, if this isn't a prequel, we're going to be playing as Marston's son. Really would have liked to see them do a game set before RDR where we play as James while he's still with his possie. That image sure looks like it would be something like that, plus RDR takes place during the very end of the Wild West before the transition to more modern times.

Either way this is a dream come true. Just need a PC version and this could be the real GOAT!
 
xamidoxhua said:
Just to remind us it's 2016 and we can't get excited about a video game without the obligatory discussion on white male privilege and lack of diversity In character casts.
Click to expand...

That's not nearly as bad as the people that sound like they'd like to shut down the discussion entirely. Those people are awful. Not you though. Nope, not you.
 
Discotheque said:
While you're right that there's a severely inaccurate picture that was painted by hollywood you are also in 100% denial if you don't think it was the white man's world back then. That's just fact.
Click to expand...

Did white men have an advantage in power? Sure, they still do in a lot of cases. Did they "rule" the american frontier to the point a black or mexican character is absurd? No. That's what I was trying to say.
 
Alienous said:
I'll need more than that if I'm going to change my opinion.



I'm skim reading biographies and I'm seeing a lot that would suggest a supporting role for a character based on either of these two, rather than a protagonist. Any particulars to these two people that go against that idea?
Click to expand...

Belle Starr maybe?

'Belle always harbored a strong sense of style, which would feed into her later legend. A crack shot, she used to ride sidesaddle while dressed in a black velvet riding habit and a plumed hat, carrying two pistols, with cartridge belts across her hips.

In 1880 she did marry a Cherokee man named Sam Starr and settled with the Starr family in the Indian Territory. There, she learned ways of organizing, planning and fencing for the rustlers, horse thieves and bootleggers, as well as harboring them from the law. Belle's illegal enterprises proved lucrative enough for her to employ bribery to free her cohorts from the law whenever they were caught.'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LTTP: Red Dead Redemption 2
41
385
_Ex_ replied
Red Dead Redemption 2 is Getting a Pokémon Mod
Trailer Indie 
5
28
Gonzito replied
The next-gen version of Red Dead Redemption 2 won't come until late 2027
Rumor Platform 
5
139
MatrixReloaded101 replied
  • Locked
Red Dead Redemption 2 Enhanced Edition
News Rumor  2 3
111
2K
Mr Hyde replied
[IGN] Red Dead Redemption 2 Comparison Videos Are Lying to You
Opinion Analysis 
27
629
Karim replied
Top Bottom