Support NeoGAF

[Last Hearth]

Ok, so I recently bought this game due to a Steam sale, and I'm now about 60-70% through the campaign.

I can completely understand the polarity of opinions about this game. If you buy it wanting to play a shooter with a western setting, you are probably going to hate this game because the pacing is too slow with not enough shooting. This game is not a shooter at all, my best description of it is that it's a life of an outlaw cowboy in the old west simulator, with a heavily story driven campaign that plays like a TV series set in the west like Deadwood.

If the simulation is what you're looking for, this is a great game, I don't think I've ever played a game with this level of detail in so many aspects of the immersive experience. I haven't played the Kingdom Come series at all but I suspect that series is modeled also after this level of experience. If you enjoys western based TV and movies, it's also a very good experience.

The story itself is just ok, the characters are good, but knowing where everything is headed (this being a prequel to RDR) takes away some of the impact because you already know what will happen (that none of Dutch's scheme's will work out, that everyone not in RDR will probably die, with the rest scattered to the wind).

Overall, I am having a good time with it, although I play maybe an hour a day to do some side stuff, than a few story missions to move the plot along (like watching an episode of a show). But I also completely understand if someone is looking just for shooter action this game will seem like it's slow as molasses.

 

[semiconscious]

well said. love the game, but prefer revisiting my save to actually going through the entire story again...

 

[DeepEnigma]

One of the GOATs.

 

[HallowedFeast]

People who just wanted another shooter already have a plethora of uninspired titles to choose from. RDR2's controls may be clunky, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't supposed to appeal to that sort of gamer in the first place.

Reminds me of the Okami tweet.

 

[Raven117]

RDR1 had a better story.

But RDR2 is still excellent

 

[StoopKidz]

I'm actually replaying it on PC now after first playing it on PS4 back in 2018. When the game first came out I was not super impressed with the "game" aspects, and dropped it after beating the main six chapters. I decided to give it another go at the start of January and am so glad I did. I have about 40hrs into the game and am just starting Chapter 6. Not sure why it is clicking so much more this time around. There are still times I am frustrated with the experience (e.g. walking in camp, fast travel situation) but it is super high quality. I now agree with people that this is one of the GOATs, despite some rough edges.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

When it came out, I was working a full time job, so I took two weeks off just to play it. I have not done that for any other game. No regrets.

A true video game masterpiece.

 

[nemiroff]

My only challenge was to wade through the slow prologue. And the annoying mission failure mechanics.. Other than that, it's one of the greats.

Just sitting at the back of a train observing the simulated world is a wonder to me.

 

[Hugare]

People who just wanted another shooter already have a plethora of uninspired titles to choose from. RDR2's controls may be clunky, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't supposed to appeal to that sort of gamer in the first place.

Reminds me of the Okami tweet.

lol

Weird post when 90% of the missions in the game involve shooting. Game literally starts with you shooting some bandits.

It works for Okami, but not at all with RDR 2

If you ignore the whole story and sidequests and only pick flowers or go fishing, yeah, I guess.

Always weird when people treat RDR 2 as some contemplative simulator. As I said, it can be, if you ignore all the missions. The same way Assasins Creed can be a parkour simulator if you ignore all the killing.

 

[KyoZz]

One of my favorite game of all time

 

[GudOlRub]

I haven't played the Kingdom Come series at all but I suspect that series is modeled also after this level of experience.

KCD goes more in depth with hardcore survival and roleplay mechanics. RDR2 is not that, its survival mechanics are pretty much completely ignorable unless you mod the game on PC.
RDR2 is more about exploration and detail, like you can follow an animal and actually see it live its life hunting, playing, drinking, sleeping, it's insane. Kingdom Come is not nearly as detailed and immersive in that sense.

They're different games basically but both are some of the most immersive games ever made imo, for different reasons.

 

[HallowedFeast]

lol

Weird post when 90% of the missions in the game involve shooting. Game literally starts with you shooting some bandits.

It works for Okami, but not at all with RDR 2

If you ignore the whole story and sidequests and only pick flowers or go fishing, yeah, I guess.

Always weird when people treat RDR 2 as some contemplative simulator. As I said, it can be, if you ignore all the missions. The same way Assasins Creed can be a parkour simulator if you ignore all the killing.

I think you're kind of talking past what people mean by 'contemplative'. No one's denying that RDR2 has a lot of shooting or that the main missions are largely built around it. That's true. But the feel of the game isn't defined only by its mission objectives. It's defined by pacing, tone, systems, and how much space the game gives you between moments of violence.

RDR2 deliberately slows you down: long rides with dialogue, animations that take time, survival mechanics, camp life, NPC routines, ambient events that aren't combat-driven and more. Even many missions are less about action and more about build-up, character interaction, or aftermath. The shooting is often brief compared to the lead-up and consequences.

That's different from something like Assassin's Creed, where traversal and killing are the core verbs the game constantly pushes you towards. In RDR2, the game is comfortable with quiet stretches, downtime, and observation, and that's a design choice, not something you only get by 'ignoring the game'. Calling it 'just a shooter unless you ignore the missions' misses why people experience it as contemplative in the first place. The violence is part of the story, not the entire texture of the experience.

Gun and Ball gamers out of their depth, like I alluded to.

 

[MrRibeye]

knowing where everything is headed [...] takes away some of the impact because you already know what will happen

I totally agree, Oppenheimer building an atomic bomb really took away the impact that movie could've had, because people already knew what was going to happen. That's 3 hours of my life I'm never getting back.

 

[Last Hearth]

I think you're kind of talking past what people mean by 'contemplative'. No one's denying that RDR2 has a lot of shooting or that the main missions are largely built around it. That's true. But the feel of the game isn't defined only by its mission objectives. It's defined by pacing, tone, systems, and how much space the game gives you between moments of violence.

RDR2 deliberately slows you down: long rides with dialogue, animations that take time, survival mechanics, camp life, NPC routines, ambient events that aren't combat-driven and more. Even many missions are less about action and more about build-up, character interaction, or aftermath. The shooting is often brief compared to the lead-up and consequences.

That's different from something like Assassin's Creed, where traversal and killing are the core verbs the game constantly pushes you towards. In RDR2, the game is comfortable with quiet stretches, downtime, and observation, and that's a design choice, not something you only get by 'ignoring the game'. Calling it 'just a shooter unless you ignore the missions' misses why people experience it as contemplative in the first place. The violence is part of the story, not the entire texture of the experience.

Gun and Ball gamers out of their depth, like I alluded to.

Agreed, which is why I also referenced a western tv show. There are shooting elements in the game, but they are like the actions scenes in a movie/show, that are exciting but relatively brief compared to the overall time spent in the game. Like maybe every hour I play, I shoot maybe 5-10 minutes, with the other times spent doing other stuff such as riding, cut-scenes, hunting, etc.

 

[vodka-bull]

Best open world game ever created, period.

But I get that it's too slow for todays ADHD kids who constantly need something happening in overdrive mode on their screen whenever they got 50 seconds off their tiktok feed.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Best open world game ever created, period.

But I get that it's too slow for todays ADHD kids who constantly need something happening in overdrive mode on their screen whenever they got 50 seconds off their tiktok feed.

Approaching 100m (over 80m so far) in sales gives me hope that there's people out there still that want this type of immersive experience that RDR2 offers.

 

[Hugare]

I think you're kind of talking past what people mean by 'contemplative'. No one's denying that RDR2 has a lot of shooting or that the main missions are largely built around it. That's true. But the feel of the game isn't defined only by its mission objectives. It's defined by pacing, tone, systems, and how much space the game gives you between moments of violence.

RDR2 deliberately slows you down: long rides with dialogue, animations that take time, survival mechanics, camp life, NPC routines, ambient events that aren't combat-driven and more. Even many missions are less about action and more about build-up, character interaction, or aftermath. The shooting is often brief compared to the lead-up and consequences.

That's different from something like Assassin's Creed, where traversal and killing are the core verbs the game constantly pushes you towards. In RDR2, the game is comfortable with quiet stretches, downtime, and observation, and that's a design choice, not something you only get by 'ignoring the game'. Calling it 'just a shooter unless you ignore the missions' misses why people experience it as contemplative in the first place. The violence is part of the story, not the entire texture of the experience.

Gun and Ball gamers out of their depth, like I alluded to.

I disagree, man.

"The shooting is often brief compared to the lead-up and consequences.". I really dont think this is the case in most missions. Not saying all, but most. The mission pacing is exactly like GTA V most of the time, but instead of driving, you have a horse, and the amount of shooting is just as much if not more.

But the game gives you freedom enough outside of said missions where you can play it as chill as you want it to due to its many gameplay systems, and that's cool.

Anyway, agree to disagree

 

[CowboyLou]

I think you're kind of talking past what people mean by 'contemplative'. No one's denying that RDR2 has a lot of shooting or that the main missions are largely built around it. That's true. But the feel of the game isn't defined only by its mission objectives. It's defined by pacing, tone, systems, and how much space the game gives you between moments of violence.

RDR2 deliberately slows you down: long rides with dialogue, animations that take time, survival mechanics, camp life, NPC routines, ambient events that aren't combat-driven and more. Even many missions are less about action and more about build-up, character interaction, or aftermath. The shooting is often brief compared to the lead-up and consequences.

That's different from something like Assassin's Creed, where traversal and killing are the core verbs the game constantly pushes you towards. In RDR2, the game is comfortable with quiet stretches, downtime, and observation, and that's a design choice, not something you only get by 'ignoring the game'. Calling it 'just a shooter unless you ignore the missions' misses why people experience it as contemplative in the first place. The violence is part of the story, not the entire texture of the experience.

Gun and Ball gamers out of their depth, like I alluded to.

Stealing "Gun and Ball gamers", thanks.

 

[subzero83]

Man the world and graphics were so damn amazing, but the gameplay is just down right terrible. never do you feel the gunplay as actually being fun.

 

[Bert Big Balls]

I'm actually replaying it on PC now after first playing it on PS4 back in 2018. When the game first came out I was not super impressed with the "game" aspects, and dropped it after beating the main six chapters. I decided to give it another go at the start of January and am so glad I did. I have about 40hrs into the game and am just starting Chapter 6. Not sure why it is clicking so much more this time around. There are still times I am frustrated with the experience (e.g. walking in camp, fast travel situation) but it is super high quality. I now agree with people that this is one of the GOATs, despite some rough edges.

Pretty much same story. First time through, dropped it pretty quick. Second time I completed it and absolutely loved it. Game is so much better if you actually act like a cowboy and get immersed.

 

[ClanOfNone]

Amazing game. While I enjoyed the arcadey action in RDR, I found myself enjoying the "cowboy simulator" a whole lot more.

Arthur Morgan >>> John Marston. I liked Marston just fine, but the old man in me connected with Morgan almost immediately.

Was waiting for a next gen version, but I'm bout ready to fire this up again.

 

[RayBoy]

Arthur Morgan always in my team

 

[cinnamonandgravy]

RDR1 had a better story.

But RDR2 is still excellent

RDR1 was more fun. a lot more fun IMO.

but RDR2 is a milestone, an achievement.

 

[Chuck Berry]

RDR1 is like the Leone Man With No Name trilogy, Outlaw Josey Wales, and Wild Bunch. The gunfights feel just as over the top and exaggerated. They're sloppy and it's great.

RDR2 is like the Once Upon A Time In The West, Assassination of Jesse James and The Revenant. Two completely different tones. Practically two different subgenres of Westerns. A true slow burn, but when shit pops off it's meaningful and sticks with you.

That's my EverydayBeast post of the day

 

[GudOlRub]

Approaching 100m (over 80m so far) in sales gives me hope that there's people out there still that want this type of immersive experience that RDR2 offers.

It's one of the best selling console games of all time and it reached its peak steam CCU just last year and the average daily CCU is slowly increasing.
And if the leaks are correct Rockstar will be doubling down on GTA 6 with limited weapon carrying, weight mechanics and thelikes.

These types of singleplayer games are going nowhere imo. It's Rockstar's bread and butter.
Even GTA Online, although faster paced and sillier it's still quite involved in some of its mechanics. And we also know FiveM is popular enough to justify Rockstar buying it so...

 

[bender]

Have you met Buell yet?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Man the world and graphics were so damn amazing, but the gameplay is just down right terrible. never do you feel the gunplay as actually being fun.

I have fun with it. Once you master it, it becomes second nature.

 

[bender]

I have fun with it. Once you master it, it becomes second nature.

Plus you are an old man dying of tuberculosis and not Max Payne hopped up on the pain killers and the rage of your murdered wife and child.

 

[subzero83]

I have fun with it. Once you master it, it becomes second nature.

You on PC or console? cause turning off auto aim made it impossible for me. That was my problem with auto aim on it was basically doing the job for you, wish it had a bit of get gud in the gameplay.

 

[vodka-bull]

Stealing "Gun and Ball gamers", thanks.

It's from this one


Also this one hits different if you just finished RDR2:




Btw OP, I also got spoiled massively regarding the ending, and still I cried my eyes out when it finally happened after spending 400hrs in it. Of course you know what ultimately happens to Arthur, but there's a few scenes at the end that'll turn your eyes wet like crazy.

 

[DeepEnigma]

You on PC or console? cause turning off auto aim made it impossible for me. That was my problem with auto aim on it was basically doing the job for you, wish it had a bit of get gud in the gameplay.

Both. Started on the console with over 1500 hours into it. Now on PC for the modded goodness and framerates/graphics.

 

[bender]

Both. Started on the console with over 1500 hours into it. Now on PC for the modded goodness and framerates/graphics.

Damn. How many times have you met Buell?

 

[lughnasadh123]

I think it's the kind of game that's best experienced with the mindset of wanting to be immersed in the world and game systems involved - Returnal it is not. But as a cowboy sim/rpg? It's perfection.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Damn. How many times have you met Buell?

Yes!

 

[Raven117]

RDR1 was more fun. a lot more fun IMO.

but RDR2 is a milestone, an achievement.

Totally agree

 

[DavidGzz]

I beat it recently and thought overall it is amazing but I preferred moment to moment actual gunplay and fun factor goes to an old game by the name of Gun, if anyone remembers that. I hope that GTA 6 feels better to play.

 

[Trilobit]

Absolutely amazing game. When I think back to the moments when I had a few glasses of whiskey irl and also bought some bottles to Arthur and stumbled around picking fights, camping or playing cards, I just can't believe how magical it was. For RDR3 I hope it continues in the same vein with slow animations and great interactivity. But I also hope that there are seasonal changes and that snowy environments have cold mechanics and require winter clothes. I just want even more immersion. And a straight white male main character.

 

[Kenneth Haight]

Literally the most beautiful and atmospheric game I have ever played. Still better looking than most games these days.

 

[Bondo]

A true masterpiece.

 

[calistan]

This game is not a shooter at all

I spent a lot of time in this game perpetrating massacres, so it was very much a shooter for me. I resented paying off the bounty, so I was plagued by bounty hunters everywhere. Once they even appeared in a cutscene, pointing guns at Arthur while he was reading a letter out loud. (They waited until he'd finished, then got shot to pieces like all the rest as soon as the game started up again.)

When you can play the game like that, it makes the story a bit ridiculous. I mean, my version of Arthur was a one-man apocalypse. No way could anyone have got the drop on him.

But there were actual story missions that were equally out of keeping with the tone of the plot. The one where you set up a Gatling gun and mow down 100 Pinkertons - it makes no sense that shortly afterwards you're running from them again. They're all dead!

 

[HRK69]

It only gets me more excited for GTA 6.

When you look at the level of detail and world design in Red Dead Redemption 2, you can't help but imagine how far Rockstar will push things with GTA 6. After all, why make a new game if it doesn't aim to surpass your previous masterpiece?