Has RDR ruined the 'fresh' experience of V?

[kid23455]

RDR=Texas, and some kind of random Northeastern area

GTAV=California, Nevada

 

Hmm, yeah, when I think about it deserts look exactly the same as woodlands.

[theworldfamous]

Well if you took such a long time to play RDR, then you need to wake up if you call yourself a gamer. Most gamers have indeed already played RDR, especially those who also like GTA, I'd say 97 % of them.

really now? I think you game too much, else you don't make such a ridiculous statement. This kinda attitude is why I'm glad I don't have to call myself 'a gamer'.

 

On topic: of course it hasn't. I was surprised how it didn't constantly remind me of GTA cause I really expected that: grand theft horsey.

The whole vibe of that game was different, slower and more serious and that's how I play it. It's more than GTA with a western twist and more than good enough to stand on it's own next to GTA. GTA only barely wins in my book purely on style.

[Chukkles]

When IV was released, I couldn't believe how great the graphics were. So fresh and life like. One of my first thoughts was - imagine what a re-vamped San Andreas would look like in these current gen graphics, with detailed countryside and deserts and so on. Then came the V trailer which completely blew me away with how amazing it all looked.

 

I just started playing RDR a few months back and fell in love with it. The landscapes were beautiful with great views spanning over the vast desert and woodland.

 

Now I'm kinda regretting not waiting till after finishing V to start with RDR as the whole RAGE countryside/desert won't feel so new now. Obviously the map/layout will be different, but I'm just talking about the overall feel.

 

Does anybody else feel this way?

Nah man, I played RDR about 1 an a half years ago, V will be different in many ways.

V will be Fresh...

[jamieleng]

I remember thinking "would be cool to bomb across this terrain on a Sanchez" while playing RDR.

[Shoumaker]

I guess the desert experience wont be ruined as im a pc gamer, Ive never played RDR. But tbh Id rather play that game than keeping the experience fresh in V

[theworldfamous]

I guess the desert experience wont be ruined as im a pc gamer, Ive never played RDR. But tbh Id rather play that game than keeping the experience fresh in V

yeah it's a damn shame they didn't port it...should be eyepoppingly gorgeous in the full 1920x1080 @ 60 fps and it's more of a PC game than GTA is. Definitely a mark against rockstar for that

[Official General]

 

@OfficialGeneral

 

I'm not really a huge gamer, I just love GTA. Of course I remember all the publicity surrouding the release of RDR, but the whole 'wild west' genre wasn't really my thing (something that has now changed thanks to RDR), so I didn't so much as batter an eyelid.

 

It was only after browsing these forums and reading how positive people would speak of RDR that I decided to buy it, and found the whole thing nothing but pure brilliance.

@ niko bellic half brother

 

Now that you have told me this, it makes a little more sense now. Some people are not really heavily into gaming, they will just buy handful of games they like in particular and focus mainly on playing them only - I do understand that, I have a friend like you who only plays a few games that he really likes.

 

I myself was not interested that much in RDR in it's early stages, but not because I don't like the Wild West-themed stuff, because I do, I love that kind of thing. I played GUN, which was a brilliant game on the PS2, and it was just like RDR, but less advanced and much smaller. So there was nothing about RDR that really wowed me at first, but when I read more about it and saw the later screenshots, my interest shot up by 150 per cent. I was particularly interested in the fact that it had wildlife and dangerous animals and huge wilderness environments. The critical acclaim from it's reviewers sealed the deal for me.

 

Putting our general difference of views aside, it's good to hear that you gave Red Redemption a chance, even though it was not initially your kind of game. Now you have had the honour of playing one of the greatest, most stunning-looking and memorable games ever made. I've heard some gamers say that the Wild West theme is not "really their thing", and for that reason they won't play RDR or give it a chance. People like that have missed out big time, only if they knew.

 

But RDR will feel nothing like GTA V, two different eras, two different themes, and two very different landscapes in many ways than they are similar.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Official General

[SmoothGetaway]

If you think playing RDR might spoil some of the magic of GTAV I wonder how you'd feel if you were a resident of SoCal, specifically LA and the surrounding area!! All joking aside, nah man enjoy RDR to the fullest, I wish I could be on my first play through (I still play it though ).

 

Also I've traveled pretty extensively in the American southwest...don't worry there is plenty of variety for R* to draw from.

[36Chambers]

If you guys want to get a good idea of what the RAGE engine will look like on GTA V, I recommend you play Max Payne 3. If GTA V looks anywhere near as good as that game bricks will be shat.

 

OT: The countryside we saw in the GTA V trailer looks similar but better than the Red Dead countryside. Having beaten Red Dead, I dont think the experience will be anywhere near the same in GTA. If you were too take a Super GT and drive across the Red Deas map on full throttle, it'd be quite different than riding on horse back.

 

 

EDIT: Red Dead*

Edited August 15, 2012 by 36Chambers

[saintsrow]

 

Does anybody else feel this way?

Yes, I realized as I played RDR and experienced that beautiful desert, plains, forest and mountains, that if Rockstar would remake GTA San Andreas in the HD era, it would be the most mind-blowing event of the decade. Then along came the GTAV Trailer and the words "Los Santos and the surrounding countryside" and indeed my mind was blown.

 

I also only play Rockstar games (GTA's, LA Noire and RDR) and I have never finished a non-Rockstar game.

 

So, as the months have dragged on, here on the forum with no new GTAV info, I took TBOGT out of the xbox 360 and inserted RDR, and I have been playing through RDR missions and just exploring it, as a substitute for GTAV.

 

So it's not so much as RDR took away the freshness, but rather RDR is giving me a fair substitute for the GTAV countryside during the long lean years until GTAV or at least another trailer or some decent screenshots.

 

I had an RDR desert landscape screeenshot on my PC wallpaper for many months before the game came out, and it greatly helped my happiness and anticipation waiting for RDR.

[Magic_Al]

GTA V will probably be twice as improved over GTA IV as RDR was. RDR will be the halfway point of improvement. If you played Bully between GTA SA and GTA IV you were less surprised by some "new" features in IV but it doesn't take away from the experience of each game. If anything you appreciate them more.

[Gtaghost22]

No, it didn't, at least for me.

It made me even more excited for GTA V seeing how improved it was over IV, i'm pretty sure V will be improved even further.

 

I don't think planes and vehicles were present in RDR, so that's another thing to look forward to, well be fun driving around in the desert in GTA V

[Algonquin Assassin]

I can guarantee GTA V wont feel like a modern RDR in the wilderness. RDR still blows my mind, but if R* can someway blend the awesome urban environment seen in GTA IV and the vast/beautiful landscape of RDR I'll be very pleased indeed.

[Durden]

Considering I just began playing RDR today, no, it has not ruined the fresh experience of V and I highly doubt it will.

[Thezez]

No more so than GTA IV ruined the fresh feeling of RDR

[MikeyBelic]

RDR is set in 1911 and 1914 so it's way different than GTA V. RDR is more about the old west with small towns and a big countryside. GTA V is set in 2008 and is going be more set in Los Santos than the countryside.

Isn't GTA V supposed to be set in 2012?..

[junkpile]

When IV was released, I couldn't believe how great the graphics were. So fresh and life like. One of my first thoughts was - imagine what a re-vamped San Andreas would look like in these current gen graphics, with detailed countryside and deserts and so on. Then came the V trailer which completely blew me away with how amazing it all looked.

 

I just started playing RDR a few months back and fell in love with it. The landscapes were beautiful with great views spanning over the vast desert and woodland.

 

Now I'm kinda regretting not waiting till after finishing V to start with RDR as the whole RAGE countryside/desert won't feel so new now. Obviously the map/layout will be different, but I'm just talking about the overall feel.

 

Does anybody else feel this way?

To me, RDR hasn't ruined the anticipation for GTA V in any way.

Undead Nightmare ruined RDR for me. "Ruined" has a too strong meaning on this one, no, I'm glad Undead Nightmare is only a dlc.

 

But come to think of it, GTA IV somehow ruined one aspect of MAX PAYNE 3.

The human organ dealers.

 

In GTA IV, you bring the bodies of Manny and Jay to the organ-dealer-doctor. This mission is so short and has many funny lines by Niko Bellic, after the trunk opens and Niko puts the bodies back in.

 

 

 

Also, afterwards you can call Roman where both, Niko and Roman make jokes about the human organ trade.

 

So in Max Payne 3, I wasn't really shocked even though this moment was supposed to be shocking.

 

I guess I'll move this post into MP3.

 

On topic:

No, RDR hasn't and won't ruin any anticipation for GTA V.

[Official General]

Undead Nightmare ruined RDR for me. "Ruined" has a too strong meaning on this one, no, I'm glad Undead Nightmare is only a dlc.

 

 

I would have felt the same way as you on that, except that I did not even bother to play RDR Undead Nightmare. RDR was a game of sheer excellence completely based on the real-life Wild West and I thought it done it's job of re-creating this to near-perfection. I thought the whole zombie/monster theme in Undead would have spoiled that experience for me, because I love Wild West themes and mixing that up with unrealistic stuff like zombies/monsters just don't make sense to me. To keep my great great memories of RDR intact, I just simply decided not to play that Undead sh*t - and I'm glad I did not play it.

 

I like zombies and aliens an all that in video games, but just not in games that they are normally not suited to be in. I'm just not into all these unrealistic add-on modes that seems to be the craze these days (why I don't know).

[Simon_V]

I think only the countryside will feel like Red Dead Redemption, but in GTA style... other than that, V will be a whole new experience.

 

RDR is my 2nd favorite Open-World Game, sou I don't give a sh*t.

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

Undead Nightmare ruined RDR for me. "Ruined" has a too strong meaning on this one, no, I'm glad Undead Nightmare is only a dlc.

 

 

I would have felt the same way as you on that, except that I did not even bother to play RDR Undead Nightmare. RDR was a game of sheer excellence completely based on the real-life Wild West and I thought it done it's job of re-creating this to near-perfection. I thought the whole zombie/monster theme in Undead would have spoiled that experience for me, because I love Wild West themes and mixing that up with unrealistic stuff like zombies/monsters just don't make sense to me. To keep my great great memories of RDR intact, I just simply decided not to play that Undead sh*t - and I'm glad I did not play it.

 

I like zombies and aliens an all that in video games, but just not in games that they are normally not suited to be in. I'm just not into all these unrealistic add-on modes that seems to be the craze these days (why I don't know).

You should give it a go General. Since it's a spin off it has no bearing on the main story. The mood and atmosphere it generates is brilliant. It's a lot different to most zombie games and it's because of the setting.

 

I don't feel it dampered the main game at all, but I suppose that's your choice. It's not nearly as bad as you think though.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Miamivicecity

[Official General]

Undead Nightmare ruined RDR for me. "Ruined" has a too strong meaning on this one, no, I'm glad Undead Nightmare is only a dlc.

 

 

I would have felt the same way as you on that, except that I did not even bother to play RDR Undead Nightmare. RDR was a game of sheer excellence completely based on the real-life Wild West and I thought it done it's job of re-creating this to near-perfection. I thought the whole zombie/monster theme in Undead would have spoiled that experience for me, because I love Wild West themes and mixing that up with unrealistic stuff like zombies/monsters just don't make sense to me. To keep my great great memories of RDR intact, I just simply decided not to play that Undead sh*t - and I'm glad I did not play it.

 

I like zombies and aliens an all that in video games, but just not in games that they are normally not suited to be in. I'm just not into all these unrealistic add-on modes that seems to be the craze these days (why I don't know).

You should give it a go General. Since it's a spin off it has no bearing on the main story. The mood and atmosphere it generates is brilliant.

 

I don't feel it dampered the main game at all, but I suppose that's your choice. It's not nearly as bad as you think though.

@ Miami

 

I hear you on that, and I do believe you when you say it quite good. But whether Undead Nightmare was good or not, did not really make a difference to me. I just don't wanna play a realism-based game like RDR with zombies in it, even as a spin-off DLC - I just know I won't enjoy it because it is two extreme opposite themes of real and unreal mixed in a game. No matter how fun or good the game is, that kinda thing would always spoil it for me.

 

When I want zombies, I'll play Resident Evil or Left 4 Dead, if I want aliens I will play Mass Effect, I'm that kind of a gamer - I'm not into unnecessary spin-offs. I like the original RDR too much for me to ruin my memories of it with that stupid zombie sh*t.

[mulder84]

Perhaps, but then again not so much. We wouldn't know now and I'm just guessing here, but I think GTA V will have more of the San Andreas feel to it instead, and while RDR did have better graphics and countryside than GTA SA, it always gives me a more Texan, Old West feel, small towns and lonely rides through the countryside, whereas GTA V would have busy highways, truck stops, motels, bigger modern towns, generally more traffic through the countryside, very much like in GTA SA.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Fair enough. Personally I never felt as if it ruined RDR. If anything it felt like a different game. It was a nice change of pace compared to Left 4 Dead and Dead Rising.

[Complex Synthesis]

I can guarantee GTA V wont feel like a modern RDR in the wilderness. RDR still blows my mind, but if R* can someway blend the awesome urban environment seen in GTA IV and the vast/beautiful landscape of RDR I'll be very pleased indeed.

Just what I wanted to say

[Official General]

Fair enough. Personally I never felt as if it ruined RDR. If anything it felt like a different game. It was a nice change of pace compared to Left 4 Dead and Dead Rising.

Maybe if I was younger all that stuff would not matter back then, but as a mature gamer, that is the way I feel about it now.

 

I just don't feel the need to play Undead Nightmare - I'm just happy playing RDR after completing by just free-roaming, doing the little extra side missions and activities, hunting, multiplayer or just simply playing the game all over again.

[junkpile]

 

I hear you on that, and I do believe you when you say it quite good. But whether Undead Nightmare was good or not, did not really make a difference to me. I just don't wanna play a realism-based game like RDR with zombies in it, even as a spin-off DLC - I just know I won't enjoy it because it is two extreme opposite themes of real and unreal mixed in a game. No matter how fun or good the game is, that kinda thing would always spoil it for me.

 

When I want zombies, I'll play Resident Evil or Left 4 Dead, if I want aliens I will play Mass Effect, I'm that kind of a gamer - I'm not into unnecessary spin-offs. I like the original RDR too much for me to ruin my memories of it with that stupid zombie sh*t.

I'm adapting this. Feeling similar about RDR.

I don't have problems with different genres, I enjoy Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Mass Effect, GTA and games like Assassin's Creed 2, where is a bit of a science fiction mix up with the whole animus thing. Hell, I was a dedicated Resident Evil (1-3) player back in the days.

 

But RDR is an amazing game as it is. The zombie thing is original in its own way, never seen a zombie-open-world-shooter set in the wild west, but still, I wasn't keen on playing it and I didn't and probably won't ever play it.

 

Call me ignorant on this one, but Red Dead Redemption didn't need this. Like I said, I'm gald it's just a spin-off.

 

But this topic is easily misleading, back on topic:

 

RED DEAD hasn't and won't ruin GTA V for me.

 

[Perrinzki]

RDR is set in 1911 and 1914 so it's way different than GTA V. RDR is more about the old west with small towns and a big countryside. GTA V is set in 2008 and is going be more set in Los Santos than the countryside.

I actually think the countryside is going to be quite bigger than Los Santos, and I think the game is going to be set the day it comes out (present day), not 2008.

[gtav nut]

RDR is set in 1911 and 1914 so it's way different than GTA V. RDR is more about the old west with small towns and a big countryside. GTA V is set in 2008 and is going be more set in Los Santos than the countryside.

I actually think the countryside is going to be quite bigger than Los Santos, and I think the game is going to be set the day it comes out (present day), not 2008.

He means the city will be like it was in 2008, storyline and stuff will be present day!

[Perrinzki]

RDR is set in 1911 and 1914 so it's way different than GTA V. RDR is more about the old west with small towns and a big countryside. GTA V is set in 2008 and is going be more set in Los Santos than the countryside.

I actually think the countryside is going to be quite bigger than Los Santos, and I think the game is going to be set the day it comes out (present day), not 2008.

He means the city will be like it was in 2008, storyline and stuff will be present day!

Oh, ok (not a big deal). What about the countryside? This guy says Los Santos will be like the main-focus instead of the countryside like RDR was (my interpretation of his point), do you agree? Because I think both Los Santos and the countryside will be equally as "pampered" by Rockstar.

[gtav nut]

RDR is set in 1911 and 1914 so it's way different than GTA V. RDR is more about the old west with small towns and a big countryside. GTA V is set in 2008 and is going be more set in Los Santos than the countryside.

I actually think the countryside is going to be quite bigger than Los Santos, and I think the game is going to be set the day it comes out (present day), not 2008.

He means the city will be like it was in 2008, storyline and stuff will be present day!

Oh, ok (not a big deal). What about the countryside? This guy says Los Santos will be like the main-focus instead of the countryside like RDR was (my interpretation of his point), do you agree? Because I think both Los Santos and the countryside will be equally as "pampered" by Rockstar.

If that was the case, they wouldnt even put the CS in, it is R* at the end of the day, professional perfectionists.

 

Both will look immense believe me, never doubt R*.