Red Dead Redemption General Chat

[otachi]

 

I recently rewatched the entire gameplay series for Red Dead Redemption ... it's so great. Just when I thought I was done with PS3 I need to get back in, I might boot up RDR today and start the game from the beginning. One of the best gaming experiences I had to date - played this game for well over 400 hours and it still doesn't get old. The physics, animations, characters, dialogue, horses!, random events, the map, the story, the music! ... everything about this game is simply amazing, if a game comes close to perfection, this it is. This game left me surprised a few times during my first playthrough - just when you think the story is over it gets even more emotional and does something unlike any other videogame story before. One has to love the 3/3 of the story.

 

I can resonate with you. I scored 500+ hours and it was a combination of two story playthroughs and enough of Gang Shootout/Hold Your Own/Grab The Bag/Horse Racing/Co-op in multiplayer. It was an experience that left me with the teenage emotions of 2004, the year in which I was fascinated by San Andreas. No wonder that RDR was the only game that I bothered to achieve 100% status in single player and complete all multiplayer challenges, and yes, it definitely includes exploring the map to pick flowers, which someone might argue that it is pointless to do so, but it is not when you are immersed in a beautifully created environment that is very charming.

 

Is multiplayer still working for rdr???

[Niobium]

i hope rockstar won't add bullsh*t like "Red Dead Online"

[theGTAking101]

i hope rockstar won't add bullsh*t like "Red Dead Online"

As much as I hate to say it, it's almost inevitable.

[Rockstar Vienna]

"Red Dead Online"

 

Well i guess then we'll see a new Red Dead, followed by a new GTA, followed by a new Red Dead, followed by a new GTA et cetera.

[ryanhunter_rfc]

I don't think Rockstar will make a RD Online simply because the amount of resources GTA O has used so far. That's why the company has bottlenecked and we have had a new game from them in years.

[alex3]

They should just name it Red Dead 3

[Jabalous]

How about Table Tennis: Online?

 

That would be dope.

[Original Light]

 

i hope rockstar won't add bullsh*t like "Red Dead Online"

As much as I hate to say it, it's almost inevitable.

 

It's possible, but it looks like Rockstar is losing the battle with hackers. I think they may go back to a simplified, more basic multiplayer mode for future GTA games and Red Dead games ( similar to GTA IV/EFLC MP). Yes, they're making money from it, but the amount of hackers on every platform is ridiculous and it's getting to the point where a lot of people don't enjoy the mode. They wouldn't want to risk ruining their name and reputation.

Edited March 24, 2016 by Original Light

[dudclub55]

 

 

i hope rockstar won't add bullsh*t like "Red Dead Online"

As much as I hate to say it, it's almost inevitable.

 

It's possible, but it looks like Rockstar is losing the battle with hackers. I think they may go back to a simplified, more basic multiplayer mode for future GTA games and Red Dead games ( similar to GTA IV/EFLC MP). Yes, they're making money from it, but the amount of hackers on every platform is ridiculous and it's getting to the point where a lot of people don't enjoy the mode. They wouldn't want to risk ruining their name and reputation.

 

 

That's not going to happen. People are letting R* get away with filthy crude murder, you have devs putting in the same money milking model on other games and people are bashing them for it but not R* (think of the req system in Halo 5).

They've done more than enough of what would spur a cult against other devs, yet they're still releasing low quality cash cow DLC for a buggy game and people love them for it.

[Original Light]

 

 

 

i hope rockstar won't add bullsh*t like "Red Dead Online"

As much as I hate to say it, it's almost inevitable.

 

It's possible, but it looks like Rockstar is losing the battle with hackers. I think they may go back to a simplified, more basic multiplayer mode for future GTA games and Red Dead games ( similar to GTA IV/EFLC MP). Yes, they're making money from it, but the amount of hackers on every platform is ridiculous and it's getting to the point where a lot of people don't enjoy the mode. They wouldn't want to risk ruining their name and reputation.

 

 

That's not going to happen. People are letting R* get away with filthy crude murder, you have devs putting in the same money milking model on other games and people are bashing them for it but not R* (think of the req system in Halo 5).

They've done more than enough of what would spur a cult against other devs, yet they're still releasing low quality cash cow DLC for a buggy game and people love them for it.

 

 

There definitely has been some anger, maybe not a lot on here, but I've seen it on other sites. I'm personally disgusted, and I believe R* isn't the company they used to be. I miss the high quality, above the industry standard DLC they were known for. I believe GTA Online DLC's have been nothing but garbage intended to encourage more grinding for money and purchasing of cash cards.

 

Either way, the only hope is that hackers continue to ruin the mode to the point where R* may give up and focus on single player again... it's kind of a negative-positive impact. Yes this is highly unlikely, but nothing is impossible.

Edited March 24, 2016 by Original Light

[InfernoV]

Any updates??

[Mokrie Dela]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i hope rockstar won't add bullsh*t like "Red Dead Online"

As much as I hate to say it, it's almost inevitable.

 

It's possible, but it looks like Rockstar is losing the battle with hackers. I think they may go back to a simplified, more basic multiplayer mode for future GTA games and Red Dead games ( similar to GTA IV/EFLC MP). Yes, they're making money from it, but the amount of hackers on every platform is ridiculous and it's getting to the point where a lot of people don't enjoy the mode. They wouldn't want to risk ruining their name and reputation.

 

 

 

That's not going to happen. People are letting R* get away with filthy crude murder, you have devs putting in the same money milking model on other games and people are bashing them for it but not R* (think of the req system in Halo 5).

They've done more than enough of what would spur a cult against other devs, yet they're still releasing low quality cash cow DLC for a buggy game and people love them for it.

 

There definitely has been some anger, maybe not a lot on here, but I've seen it on other sites. I'm personally disgusted, and I believe R* isn't the company they used to be. I miss the high quality, above the industry standard DLC they were known for. I believe GTA Online DLC's have been nothing but garbage intended to encourage more grinding for money and purchasing of cash cards.

 

Either way, the only hope is that hackers continue to ruin the mode to the point where R* may give up and focus on single player again... it's kind of a negative-positive impact. Yes this is highly unlikely, but nothing is impossible.

 

For me it's the single player neglect, more notably the story which wasn't great. Iv was in my eyes the pinnacle of what rockstar can do in terms of narrative and characters and I could go on for hours about the technical side of that. Red dead redemption was also a great standard of game and the story, while not groundbreaking or amazing, was good, the characters were all very strong and believable. Most of all you can lose yourself in the game for hours just doing nothing, something true with me with gta iv but not as much with v - a lengthy session gets boring quick and if I stick to missions it'd be over soon.

 

My point is, as long winded as most of my points are, digressions and circumlocution and all that, that if a new red dead is coming, I hope it builds on the solid base that is redemption, and adds, not what v did and merely switch some things out for others. A good story, good characters (gta v has very few of the latter) combined with solid mechanics and a detailed and rich game world is a winning combination

I still feel v could have ticked all the boxes but they copped out, perhaps due to social club stats saying most people never completed gta iv (as is true with literally any game; I know people who never completed San Andreas)

 

As for online, I welcome it if it's handled well. Not neglecting the single player side, and of course better control over hackers (which is sadly an inevitability), I think they can create a game that sits well on every level

They certainly have the resources, just a case of it they can be bothered in my eyes

[John The Grudge]

I wouldn't be surprised if the next Red Dead game had no single player. Rockstar have said it themselves, most people don't complete their games. Combine that fact with the success of Shark Cards and there's a pretty convincing case for them to forgo single player. Another factor is that online is easy money compared to single player wich is no doubt much more expensive to develop. Even if there is a single player element it'll probably be spartan compared to online. We've already seen that to a degree with GTA V. At the end of the day the only purpose of GTA V is to ultimately get people onto online where they'll hopefully fund purchases with Shark Cards.

Edited April 1, 2016 by John The Grudge

[Jabalous]

Be it Red Dead or any other game from Rockstar, it will definitely have a complete single player package. A large fanbase will be lost if they got the idea of migrating from SP to be Multiplayer-only. Make no mistake, MP will become a core experience in their future games given the success of GTA Online, and you could argue how much the SP part of their games will suffer from this new approach.

 

 

 

 

[Mokrie Dela]

Significantly IMO

 

SP will be there but it'll be second fiddle to multiplayer

That's evident in gta; sub par story, length, depth and characters - even side activities. Online will be the focus, so I'm not holding my breath for a long, deep single player campaign like redemption or gta IV. Instead expect more like gta v. For some that'll do thoigh

[Jabalous]

I don't think that GTA V can be used as an indicator of the future and I don't agree with the overly exaggerated drama about how Rockstar is going to copy and paste V's model to whatever they're working on. You have to look at GTA V as a product of its own regardless of your stance about it. For a wiser stance on the future, you have to look forward to their next big title before you place a final judgement.

 

 

[Jonesizzle]

They haven't dropped a game since V, so what they are doing is working financially, so why would they stray away from that? Rockstar is in the business of money, and their scheme has worked tremendously, no reason for them to change now.

 

It sucks, and most of us won't agree, but I'm pretty sure I don't speak for myself when I say, I'll f*ck around and buy it anyways...

[Mokrie Dela]

They haven't dropped a game since V, so what they are doing is working financially, so why would they stray away from that? Rockstar is in the business of money, and their scheme has worked tremendously, no reason for them to change now.

 

It sucks, and most of us won't agree, but I'm pretty sure I don't speak for myself when I say, I'll f*ck around and buy it anyways...

Pretty much this.

 

It's a model that would be foolish - fiscally speaking - to abandon. Shark cards have paid for these free DLCs, which is nice, even if they don't interest me at all.

 

However, rather naively, I feel it is possible to use this model and give the single player the attention it deserves. V could have had that, but rockstar chose not to (due, apparently, to social club stats reporting that a high percentage of gamers never finished GTA IV's story - an unfair stat, because I know people who haven't finished GTA V...)

 

RDR is different to GTA, granted, but with the popularity of multiplayer in the gaming industry, I can't see R* turning their back on the "V" model. Most people play online. So why bother with a deep single player, right?

 

But, prove me wrong, rockstar. I'd be very happy to eat these admittedly cynical words.

 

But GTA V has left such a bittersweet taste in my mouth that I honestly might not buy it on release, and instead get it second hand or something.

[Zello]

However, rather naively, I feel it is possible to use this model and give the single player the attention it deserves. V could have had that, but rockstar chose not to (due, apparently, to social club stats reporting that a high percentage of gamers never finished GTA IV's story - an unfair stat, because I know people who haven't finished GTA V...)

I don't really trust the social club stats on IV that game came out during a time where games didn't require an "always online" connection like the games we have today and not many people had Xbox live or connected their consoles to the internet like today. Back then you could play a game offline with no problems now your console must be connected to the internet at all times in order for some games to function properly.

 

I was on 360 last gen. In order to connect to the internet you needed to either buy a wireless network adapter or mess around with a bunch of cables I think later models came with it built in not sure. I didn't want to mess with all of that and I wasn't much of an online gamer anyway so I stuck it out offline. PS3 owners were a bit luckier PS3's came with a built in wifi. So already now you got a couple of players playing offline so their stats aren't reported. I have a PS4 now it came with built in wifi most games today require an internet connection or it locks you out of certain features.

Edited April 2, 2016 by Zello

[Mokrie Dela]

That's a good point and I agree; as I said about having friends who never finished gta v, it's not a survey is rely on. Instead they should make the game to the best of their ability on every aspect, and they didn't with v's story. It's a feeble excuse, blaming people not finishing gta iv. Some people just don't, are not bothered about story, so catering a game to that isn't wise in my eyes, either.

 

I think v had so much potential (and in trying to fulfill that with City of lies 2), but it got too much wrong and not for the first time, rockstar blame the gamers.

 

I hope rdr will return to form - a long, deep, involving story with great characters like I feel gta iv and rdredemption did

[Jonesizzle]

..or instead of going off of their broken stats, maybe they should've judged it off of the sale of the game itself. I know a handful of people who beat IV and didn't touch the multiplayer aspect of it. I, unfortunately, think games are trending down this heavily multiplayer focus way of things.

 

I'd like to see R* have at least one single-player focused game. Whether it's a new RDR, Manhunt, Max Payne, LA Noire or a new IP.

Edited April 2, 2016 by DOOM!

[BUT THE BENZ]

I have a feeling that we, unfortunately, are a very small minority, asking for a decent FULL experience delivered by a single player campaign. times where online was just a tacked-on-feature of choice might simply be "over". I am 30 now, got a wife and baby girl, a demanding job. Gaming, my favorit from of art, has taken a huge step back for legitimate reasons, but at night when I have time for my own (which I SHOULD use to sleep) I just wanna dive back in there and forget everything else, to be for my own. still at times I can digg a multiplayer session, but I don't want to spend most of my time online when playing a game just to feel like like I'm not missing out on all the aspects the game has to offer.

 

from my heart I hope that R* goes back to their roots with the next Red Dead title, they have been ALL about single-player-campaigns, but then again, times change and so does the business and if you wanna compete and survive and make money you gotta go with the change. R* is still doding great games, hell, they're still one of if not THE best developer group out there, at least in my book. But I hate to think that with the next Red Dead game they cut content like clothing and guns and vehicles and even map pieces just to have it all in the ONLINE world.

 

I somewhat accepted this change in gaming though...still,I hope with the next Red Dead they just give single-player-campaign enthusiast what they want, while they still can milk all those who digg the online aspect. I whole-heartedly believe it is possible to please both crowds.

 

Do it R*, please! do it, do it, do it!

[The N. Bellic Man]

If singleplayer is as dead as some of you suggest, then why did Fallout 4 sell so well? Not saying that gaming haven't changed, but there is still hope. In my opinion FO4 showed that singleplayers can still get high sales when developer puts enough quality content in the game. And imagine that all of this happened even if FO4 was somewhat lacking on the technical department.

[Mokrie Dela]

Fallout was successful due to series hype

It was much sought after.

 

I'm certainly not saying single player is dead, but no one can deny that gta v certainly put it on the back seat. Bethesda aren't making red dead 3 so mentioning them is irrelevant (though I applaud their no multiplayer stance)

 

My point (that I might not be making well) is that I believe they can do BOTH. With the money they got from gta v, certainly I see no reason for them not to.

 

As said, red dead 3 might prove me wrong. Gta 6 might prove me wrong. But multiplayer can not be ignored and gta v did do multiplayer well (the problem lies in the dickwads that play it). I can hope, as I think most of us with a brain (by which jokingly I mean those that want to enjoy a good story not just good mindless action) do

 

Rockstar are certainly capable of it. And I do wonder if The Benz' departure might be a sign of things to come

[Rockstar Vienna]

After GTA Online i'm a little bit afraid about future GTA's. As for Red Dead, i'm not worried at all tbh. Sure, Red Dead 3 will probably have a huge multiplayer component (maybe Red Dead Online, who knows) but i expect another masterpiece of a singleplayer campaign.

[Original Light]

A while back, Zelnick stated that they wont change their formula - since their formula is successful. Basically, he's saying single player isn't going anywhere. I can't find the article anymore, but I believe it was an interview of some sort.

 

I'm almost positive the next RDR will have a single player mode. Otherwise, they risk losing a large fan base, and a tried and proven formula of a game split between SP/MP.

[BUT THE BENZ]

I'm almost positive the next RDR will have a single player mode.

no sh*t sure lock?!

[Richard Power Colt]

I hope they'll go full Tarantino with the next game when it comes to the violence, it should be gory as f*ck.

[Crystal3lf]

I hope they'll go full Tarantino with the next game when it comes to the violence, it should be gory as f*ck.

I think they did a fantastic job with this. I wanna play so bad after watching again, I just wish it could come to PC for glorious 60FPS 1080p.

 

 

Edited April 4, 2016 by Crystal3lf

[dudclub55]

RDR needs to improve fighting. I want to be able to do rear naked chokes on people's horses and be able to do more to chicken and dogs than just kick them.