[Megathread] Red Dead Redemption 2

[Tech614]

I'm not defending them, in fact I think MTs in Single player games generally have no justification. Multiplayer is a different story if the developer is providing free multiplayer content updates.

If you want to fund content updates for MP through MTs fine...

But don't do it through random chance.

Don't do it from making the game grindy.

Just offer cosmetics people want, and sell them to them straight up.

And yea, definitely keep that shit out of SP unless you plan on giving the ACO season pass content for free(which they definitely don't).

Problem is there are very few publishers who are genuine with this, they might say that's the case but the way to make the MTs is actually done with the intent to make more money then content expansions of old made them.

[draykorinee]

They were never "necessary" though, they were always optional.
@draykorinee no, Red Dead Redemption 2 is not the game you're referring to, that was Assassin's Creed Odyssey (the one with MTs) which is still an amazing game. The controversial MT was a permanent 50% experience boost, which while very helpful in reducing the number of side objectives you needed to do in order to level up, was not at all required. I understand the vitriol about it, but to say that it's "required" is a horrible overstatement, there's PLENTY of stuff to do in game to get you to max level and beyond.

That's what I meant by wasnt that the game, wasnt talking about rdr2 yeah I specifically said made better rather than required.

- - - Updated - - -

Haven't played AC:O, but apparently Ubisoft released a patch after people complained that basically rendered the MTs unnecessary.

I didn't follow up much after, this would be good.

[Katchii]

I've seen plenty of reviews that said the game felt grindy the further you got into it. Which seems fishy considering the MTs.

Which is a fair criticism, but there was still a grind even with that perk bought using the MT, just far less of one. But it was still not required for you to level and finish the game.

I'm not defending them, I think it's shitty what they did, but it's completely disingenuous to state that the perk was a requirement to play and enjoy the game.

[Tech614]

Which is a fair criticism, but there was still a grind even with that perk bought using the MT, just far less of one. But it was still not required for you to level and finish the game.

I'm not defending them, I think it's shitty what they did, but it's completely disingenuous to state that the perk was a requirement to play and enjoy the game.

Literally no one said that.

That is literally the excuse you guys come with any time your game of choice gets shat on for scummy tactics. But... no one said it was required.

"I'm not defending them, but I will make up some straw man argument to... defend them". LOL sure thing bro.

They actually can't make them "required" literally or they would be sued for their game being uncompletable without additional purchases without explicitly saying so. They tune the grind to be just enough to try to entice you to buy MTs while trying to keep PR backlash to a minimum. If you don't understand this idk what to tell you, it's becoming a common thing in the industry.

[yasiru]

If you want to fund content updates for MP through MTs fine...

But don't do it through random chance.

Don't do it from making the game grindy.

Just offer cosmetics people want, and sell them to them straight up.

And yea, definitely keep that shit out of SP unless you plan on giving the ACO season pass content for free(which they definitely don't).

Problem is there are very few publishers who are genuine with this, they might say that's the case but the way to make the MTs is actually done with the intent to make more money then content expansions of old made them.

I'm actually on the other side of the fence and actually find it kind of funny that more people don't agree. Put all the MTs you want in a single player game, it only affects the one person playing the game, period and I do not need to buy any of them to enjoy the game. But put MTs in a multiplayer, online game and now those MTs give the people who are willing to spend money an advantage, which RDRO kind of does. The MTs in the online game are not simply cosmetics, they are ways to get better gear quicker. It's eventually going to be the person who buys more gold bars with real $ that gets better weapons, more health tonics, etc. Seems worse to me..

- - - Updated - - -

needing to have ps+ for simple patch updates would be some bethesda/EA/activision level shit.

Shit better not mention it too much, the gaming gods will get wind of it and get ideas.

In my opinion though, having to pay for a psn membership for cloud game saves that are limited in size also isn't much better. This is something Live does not do; cloud saves are free without membership and there's unlimited space... Don't take that as me knocking on PS though; I own both systems and play/pay for both online services

[Katchii]

Literally no one said that.

That is literally the excuse you guys come with any time your game of choice gets shat on for scummy tactics. But... no one said it was required.

"I'm not defending them, but I will make up some straw man argument to... defend them". LOL sure thing bro.

They actually can't make them "required" literally or they would be sued for their game being uncompletable without additional purchases without explicitly saying so. They tune the grind to be just enough to try to entice you to buy MTs while trying to keep PR backlash to a minimum. If you don't understand this idk what to tell you, it's becoming a common thing in the industry.

The post I originally responded to said a patch came out which rendered the MT's "unnecessary" which would mean that before the patch they were considered "necessary." Just responding to the quote. Calm the fuck down.

[yasiru]

Literally no one said that.

That is literally the excuse you guys come with any time your game of choice gets shat on for scummy tactics. But... no one said it was required.

"I'm not defending them, but I will make up some straw man argument to... defend them". LOL sure thing bro.

They actually can't make them "required" literally or they would be sued for their game being uncompletable without additional purchases without explicitly saying so. They tune the grind to be just enough to try to entice you to buy MTs while trying to keep PR backlash to a minimum. If you don't understand this idk what to tell you, it's becoming a common thing in the industry.

You do realize they could also face a class action suit if they publicly declare that the game wasn't tuned around the MTs when in fact it was. Which IS what happened! They publicly stated the game was not tuned around the MTs. But good grief let's not continue the rage fest that was the AC Odyssey thread in this thread about RDR2.

[Proskill]

is read dead redemption 2 online a separate game? is it paid? or is it enough to only have ps plus subscription? i own rdr2 on ps4

also is rdr1 compatibile with ps4? is it ever gonna be? it is on xbox one
id like to play through the first game as the second one is a masterpiece

at the time of rdr1 i didnt own a console as im a pc player, but games like this make it justified to buy one

[Gutler]

is read dead redemption 2 online a separate game? is it paid? or is it enough to only have ps plus subscription? i own rdr2 on ps4

also is rdr1 compatibile with ps4? is it ever gonna be? it is on xbox one
id like to play through the first game as the second one is a masterpiece

at the time of rdr1 i didnt own a console as im a pc player, but games like this make it justified to buy one

Its technically a separate game but only requires you have RDR2 and PS+ and you can play RDR1 on PS4 but you need a PSnow sub and the game doesn't look anywhere near as good as it does on the Xbone X.

[Deleted]

I guess it was answered already but just to confirm, the cash grab greed of RD:O has no impact on the RDR2 experience, right? The same way GTA V was insulated from GTA:O?

Also, in that same vein of interest, are there any further news about RDR2 coming to PC, or is the datamine still the only scraps of intel on this?

[PACOX]

I guess it was answered already but just to confirm, the cash grab greed of RD:O has no impact on the RDR2 experience, right? The same way GTA V was insulated from GTA:O?

Also, in that same vein of interest, are there any further news about RDR2 coming to PC, or is the datamine still the only scraps of intel on this?

Yeah, its just like GTAV (I called it people said no PACOX, they won't do RDR2 like GTAV). The RDO shennigans have no impact on SP. A decent amount of people beat SP and called it their GOTY/gen before we even knew when the MP was going to come out if that helps.

PC? Probably but I'm actually surprised that it even came out on the Xbox...but if its on the Xbox then a PC port shouldnt be that hard.

[Jtbrig7390]

I'm actually on the other side of the fence and actually find it kind of funny that more people don't agree. Put all the MTs you want in a single player game, it only affects the one person playing the game, period

Actually that isn't true and AC:O is proof of that.

If you gut the games experience and make it a grind it effects everyone who decides to play the game. Some won't care about the grind and will do it anyway but others will. Just because its a SP MTX doesn't mean it only effects the one person playing. That one person sitting in there home isn't the only one effected, It effects everyone playing the game.

It effects the full experience of the game period.

[RobertoCarlos]

People still trying to pick the bones of that MT horse.

You know what, if games offered the same high quality singler player experience as RDR2 then I wish all games moved to that model of online MT's while providing game of the year type SP experience also.

Watching people try pick holes at RDR2 is like watching someone with a straight face tell me how its a wonderful life is a bad film

[Tech614]

People still trying to pick the bones of that MT horse.

You know what, if games offered the same high quality singler player experience as RDR2 then I wish all games moved to that model of online MT's while providing game of the year type SP experience also.

Watching people try pick holes at RDR2 is like watching someone with a straight face tell me how its a wonderful life is a bad film

They're too busy being caught with egg on their face. After the success of GTAO Rockstar would never prioritize SP again! Rockstar proceeds to make a SP campaign bigger then RDR1 and GTAV combined, with no MTs and the online mode(which will make them a lot of money yes) is treated as some left over after thought.

It's almost like they still care about making a quality game first, and then some shit online mode to make them money second. Almost like they're the complete opposite of most of the western AAA market. How is it possible?!

[RobertoCarlos]

Decided to just start a new game rather than find everything post game.

So much secret content. And a lot of side missions you have to do at certain parts of the game which is very hard to know first playthrough.

I dont think i'll ever fully know everything in this game.

But gonna do the legendary hunting A LOT sooner. And focus more on camp chores so I can get more side content through the gang which only happens when you meet the right markers and some of their items are required for 100%

- - - Updated - - -

Also does anyone know where to find missouri fox trotters in the wild outside of the saint denise spawn glitch which got patched out

[Tenjen]

RDR2 is how it should be done. They didn't put the cart before the horse by creating a game from the ground up prioritizing how to incorperate and incentivise usage of MTs in every aspect of the game from adding a store to modifying combat, gameplay and progression.

They built a solid game first.

the current business practicess that tip the scales far too much towards MT's over the gameplay experience during development, like many companies are doing, stagnates the creative process. When your work priorities are on the inclusion of MT's, a lot of necessary activities and thought processes towards story and gameplay creation do not reach fruition. Short development times to pump out as many games as possible each year leave little time for depth filled stories (unless you grind your developers into paste and that can at best be done with 1 or 2 games until they burn out) and addressing software infrastructure issues to create a ready game on release. There is just enough "fun" left in the game to pull people in but it gets boring quick.

The business model churns out bland games that people are increasingly less willing to keep shelling out for, especially if you have 10 other companies releasing bland games screaming for your money. How much can you saturate the market with MT's and poor quality product (or flash in the pan at best) until something gives?

The difference with RDR2 is that they know when enough is enough and to not get carried away

[RobertoCarlos]

RDR2 is how it should be done. Snip

Even the deluxe/special pre-order content was handled better than I thought it would be.

Gotta admit I was a bit worried pre release when all the different deluxe versions started coming out. But you couldnt use those bonuses at the start of the game, you had to progress etc.

And one could easily argue there should be no pre-order bonuses etc which is fair enough. I liked that even that was handled with restraint in the actual game experience though

[RobertoCarlos]

"I have a plan Arthur! I just need you to have a little faith!"

Starting over playing a good guy with way more knowledge of the game was the best decision.

Amazing how much more content there is in the game when you actually do chores in camp to build relationships and dont rush through the main story missions

Plus once you're in chapter 2 you can pretty much access everything except a super OP horse. Which finding in the wild post saint denise glitch is super hard. Easier to just buy an arabian, missouri fox trotter, turkaman by advancing the chapters.

Also upgrade your camp early holy shit the ammo/medicine etc is insane fully max

And theres 6 gold bars quite easy to find early that is more than enough to cover the cost of camp upgrades

[Enjeh]

Red Dead Redemption 2 Coming to PC November 5th

https://www.rockstargames.com/newswi...C-November-5th

[Buliwyf the Omen]

Red Dead Redemption 2 Coming to PC November 5th

https://www.rockstargames.com/newswi...C-November-5th

Saw this aswell just now.

I got mixxed feelings about this tbh, RDR2 really didnt live up to his hype for me, but the first one wasnt that good to begin with except Undead Nightmare.

The sole reason I got a ps4 pro was for Bloodborne, MHW and RDR2, and so far its been only worth for the first two Games.

RDR2 story was unintresting if you already had played the first game and know what happens with everyone and the overall Gameplay was just your usual GTA experience with more QoL features and Horses. Far from GOTY material in my opinion.

To be fair, my main interest in it was for the Multiplayer, hoping it to be a big hit like GTA Online just to be terribly disappointed.

Screw you Rockstar for being the money hungry cunts you are. Doing the same shit with RDR than you did before with GTA, and all the mindless sheep re-buy it most likely again.

More and more companies just sicken me the past years...