Red Thread Redemption

Discussion in 'General Gaming and Hardware Forum' started by AureliusofPhoenix, May 23, 2019.

  1. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    It’s ya boi “no redeeming qualities but roguish looks” for another episode of Rants and Raves With Aure.

    I fucking love Red Dead 2. More than love it. I adore it. It might be my favorite game of all time, don’t gaf about hype, or whether or not it’s “cool” to hate it, it’s just fun to play. The controls are sexy, the graphics are beautiful, the mechanics are polished, and the story is Shakespearean (maybe not that good but damn good).

    The point I’m making is that Red Dead Redemption 2 is easily better than the first game and quite possibly beats Fallout 1 and Total War Attila out as my favorite game ever. Every member of the Van Der Linde gang is fleshed out and human, and when they die it’s an actual “oh FUCK” moment. Beyond the characters, the story itself is an awesome work of Western fiction, with Arthur slowly coming to realize that Dutch really doesn’t have a plan and everyone has died for nothing. It’s a nihilistic romp and with plenty of shootouts and robberies along the way. The message of the story is also beautiful, in its dark way. The whole clash between a dying “free west” and the new rise of civilization illuminated both the good and bad of both systems, giving the old one a mythical tint without glorifying it like so many other stories in the genre do. At the end of the day, both the “Old West” and the new, current system that replaced it are shit. And that’s a message the game delivers loud and clear, without forcing it down your throat.

    To someone who’s not paying attention, the Van Der Linde gang is just a group of Robin Hoods, holdovers from a “better time”. But if you believe that then you don’t understand the game you’ve played. For all the gang’s reminiscing and ruminating on the cost of freedom, Red Dead 2 makes it VERY clear that the Old West was a brutal, violent time in which murdering a girl on a ferry (a recurring question the protagonist raises about an incident with Dutch) is seen as an “acceptable loss”, showing the gang’s double standard in a stark light.

    That being said, “civilization” isn’t much better. The Pinkertons and the “Law” very clearly step on the backs of the common man, and the system they usher in is already rife with corruption and perfect for abuse. At the end of the day, Red Dead 2 is a scathing commentary on 2 systems that destroy just as many lives as each other, with its mode of delivery (the life of Arthur Morgan) being just as compelling as the messages therein.

    All in all, Red Dead Redemption 2 is a wonderful story, a wonderful game, and is worth at least checking out if you’re even a minor fan of the Western genre. It’s cool to hate it because it was the big thing, and doubtless there’ll be comments like “no the game is shit” but I urge you to make that decision for yourself. Saddle up, and decide what YOU think. A decision someone was free to make in the older system, for all its flaws.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  2. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    Redemption 2 is the 3rd red dead game.
    Haven't played redemption 2 yet but I find it hard to believe it beats red dead revolver.

    Red dead redemption 2 is one of those games I'll get around to. Yknow "at some point"
     
  3. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    Revolver?

    Oh, you mean the overrated first one. Yeah, I suppose it’s the third if you count that hipster magnet, but I wasn’t counting the Red Dead series as a whole.
     
  4. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    Honestly, I still give Red Dead Redemption the original game the gold star. I feel like Red Dead Redemption 2 suffers from its status as a prequel and Arthur just isn't as awesome as John.

    Its still an amazing and pretty game.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  5. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    See I prefer Arthur to John.
     
  6. Sublime

    Sublime It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Jun 5, 2018
    Yes, but the online Is shit and Rockstar ain't delivering single player DLCs anytime soon
     
  7. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    So lemme get this straight. There’s a stellar 100+ hour single player campaign with fleshed out, lovable characters and great gameplay, and you’re complaining about the multiplayer, and the fact that they didn’t add MORE?

    Like, I get where you’re coming from, but at the same time... R* gave us probably their best game yet, and a completed product (which is more than some companies can say) and you’re asking for even more? It seems... nitpicky.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  8. Sublime

    Sublime It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Jun 5, 2018
    Uuuuuh...yes? Honestly it's kind of clear that they wanted to reproduce the success of GTA V with the online mod, but they failed big. Oh and of course they wanted to cashgrab. Something they can't do with singleplayer DLCs
     
  9. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    Great. I’m gonna word this in a way even you can understand.

    Who gives a fuck about the multiplayer? That’s not the focus of the game. They can put microtransactions in all they want, the vast majority of players don’t play Red Dead Redemption for the fucking online. It was obviously tacked on, following the GTA Online formula. Again, who gives a flying fuck? That’s literally not why the game exists. The single player is, and the single player is amazing.
     
  10. BigGuyCIA

    BigGuyCIA Water Chip? Been There, Done That

    Oct 26, 2016
    I'm assuming this is spoiler free.

    I don't really like RDR2. It's fun for an hour but after that, knowing the aftermath and how it all ends, I lose any willpower I had left to continue. It's bogged down mechanically by systems that don't contribute to anything meaningful. Pointless animations for skinning, taking a bath, brewing ointments one at a time, crafting arrows one at a time, and others.

    It tries to give the ending that people wished for in RDR1 - playing as John and not his son. It stumbles because Arthur turned out to be a more relatable, interesting character than John. We're fed a rehash of the first game and walk into the sunset as someone we haven't spent any time with or as. I'm pretty adamant that if you insist on the main, playable character dying in your game that you end it at the credits. The south-western part of the map is completely wasted for the bulk of the game, and you only reach it after the three hour epilogue where you milk cows, repair fences, and shooty-shooty-bang-bang some bounties and loose ends.

    Regarding the game's formula... NakeyJakey said it best in his summary. The game sets up this cowboy simulator but is too afraid to take off the training wheels for players. You're constantly bound to doing things the way Rockstar wants you to do them, even though they established it in an open-world game.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  11. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    @BigGuyCIA I’ll accept that. Imo the animations and more annoying mechanics never really got to me, certainly not enough to make me stop playing.

    You’re right about one thing though; Arthur was a far better protagonist than John, and the unfortunate result of that is ending the game with a character you’re actually less invested in, as you say.

    In some ways I wish Arthur’s TB is what took him, rather than that cuntbag Micah. If I have any complaint at all with the story, it’s how Arthur dies.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  12. BigGuyCIA

    BigGuyCIA Water Chip? Been There, Done That

    Oct 26, 2016
    I would have liked to have seen Arthur just escape west with Sadie and fade into obscurity after helping John establish his farm. I know a lot of people mention the fact he's not mentioned in RDR1 as proof he needs to die, but neither are Sadie, Pearson, Tilly, Mary-Beth, Charles, Swanson, Karen, etc. All these characters survived and arguably had some impact in John's development in the gang.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  13. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    I would more’n argue that they all absolutely impacted the development of John, Jack, Abigail, and Arthur.

    Take Molly O’Shea for example; her betrayal is a wake up call in a lot of ways, and it’s heartwrenching to know why she did it (hell hath no fury and all that). The thing I like about RDR2 is that each member of the gang arguably has an impact on the protagonists; no one is useless padding.
     
  14. Sublime

    Sublime It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Jun 5, 2018
    I'm going to phrase It in a way even you can understand. What I meant was exactly that they're going to ignore singleplayer content for that shitty multiplayer.
     
  15. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    @Sublime I knew what you meant. If you mean R*, then my answer stands; who gives a fuck? We got a whole story out of RDR2, extra DLC isn’t necessary. Let them fuck with their shitty multiplayer, that’s not the main draw. And if you mean the players play it for the multiplayer, then you obviously have no clue how a game like this is even supposed to work. The 10 year olds will play it for the multi, yes, but the vast majority of players go into RDR for the story. The complete story.

    The story that doesn’t require extra DLC because it’s fucking complete.

    EDIT: it’s clear that what I said flew over your fucking head because you were too busy focusing on the insult to notice what I was saying. I do not care if they forgo single player DLC for shitty multiplayer DLC, because the single player campaign requires no DLC; it stands on its own.

    Furthermore, why the fuck do YOU care if they’re not releasing DLC for the story? Is that a prerequisite of a good game? To have single player DLC? The multiplayer impacts you only if you let it. If you don’t like it, fucking ignore it. Done. Most people DO ignore it, hence why the game’s focus is on single player.
     
  16. Big No

    Big No Watch as I open and close this door

    Oct 28, 2014
    I gotta agree with @Sublime on this. I've played about a month of GTAO according to my Social Club stats so I know what GTAO is all about and from my point of view RDO is following in GTAO's footsteps. They're going to milk it to death the same way, just look at it's gold bar currency. They're going to break the balance at some point and somehow, someway, it'll effect the SP portion. It happened with GTA V, every new update resulted in lower resolution (something that's apparently already beginning to happen with RDR2) and glitches (Ammo clips disappear in cutscenes now in GTA V). You can't really "ignore" stuff like this.

    As for DLC, I could give or take. But Rockstar dropped the ball when they didn't release DLC for GTA V since it needed post-story DLC badly. I wouldn't want this "release SP game, ignore it after launch for multiplayer" attitude to dominate Rockstar.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  17. AureliusofPhoenix

    AureliusofPhoenix King of Wessex

    Jun 25, 2018
    @Big No that’s fair enough, but honestly I don’t understand why RDO is even a thought in most people’s minds. Who cares if they milk it? It’s not the single player campaign. It’s not what the game is about.

    And as for GTA V... yeah. Those endings sucked.
     
  18. Norzan

    Norzan Vault Senior Citizen

    Apr 7, 2017
    The dev time could have easily gone for more DLC for the single player but instead the dev time is clearly now going for the multiplayer. GTA V didn't get a single DLC story for single player and all the post launch work went into the online.

    And the multiplayer seems to be manipulative as shit by being super grindy, basically forcing the players to waste real money on it. I think the "who cares for it" is the wrong mindset to have, even if you don't play it. This type of crap shouldn't exist in the first place.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 2
  19. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    Because GTAV cashing in on multiplayer with GTA online meant we got no single player dlc. At all. And that's gay considering how great the ballad of gay Tony and the lost and the damned were. GTAV could have really used some dlc too with how many gaps there are in it's story. Point is redemption 2 will probably follow the same path and that's gay.
     
  20. BigGuyCIA

    BigGuyCIA Water Chip? Been There, Done That

    Oct 26, 2016
    Idk if a cow boy simulator is really going to resonate with the intended market: 12 year zoomers with earpods blasting Tekashi Sixnine.