Mapping Red Dead Redemption 2! Landmark Analysis Thread

[rogerer]

We have a list of locations including postcards (official R* website). Why New Austin and Mexico  are not included in this list?

[Bleep%]

The only thing that throws doubt about the remake is that it has been stated from around the time of RDR1's release onward that RDR1 code is so spaghetti a remake won't happen.

 

Thought dump:

 

- Code too spaghetti to remake.

- Map from a Skeletal part of code but not entire game. 

- Old Map added as DLC with new storyline as prequel of events on the Old Map.

- Old Map in Game day 1. 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Bleep%

[AzBat360]

28 minutes ago, Punkd said:

who says this post from the ex-employee isnt a fake? its likely 99% fake imo

 

Yeah just like leaked map released 2 years ago. Oh wait...

[RedBed]

I wonder how many minutes is the day/night cycle ?

[rogerer]

in my opinion it will be just leaked map....maybe bigger - upscaled, so goin from north to south can be longer than it seems....

Armadillo and desert could be just missions like north yankton...

[Nutduster]

17 minutes ago, rogerer said:

We have a list of locations including postcards (official R* website). Why New Austin and Mexico  are not included in this list?

 

Because they're keeping it something of a surprise? We already have seen glimpses of Blackwater, Armadillo (in a new cut scene), and New Austin desert areas. Mexico is less certain but at this point it's just stubbornness to think New Austin won't be in the game.

 

9 minutes ago, Bleep% said:

The only thing that throws doubt about the remake is that it has been stated from around the time of RDR1's release onward that RDR1 code is so spaghetti a remake won't happen.

 

Thought dump:

 

- Code too spaghetti to remake.

- Map from a Skeletal part of code but not entire game. 

- Old Map added as DLC with new storyline as prequel of events on the Old Map.

- Old Map in Game day 1. 

 

That spaghetti code thing doesn't have a source as far as I know. More extrapolation and rumor than anything. Anyway, if they do this it will be the game remade in the current engine - recycling the script and most of the audio, maybe some of the mo-cap, but the rest will be handled by the new engine or built from scratch. I'm pretty confident about that. Spaghetti code or no, they won't be using most of it.

 

To me this rumor makes a lot of sense. Include the map at launch, then release a remake of RDR for $30-40. The interesting question is whether John will be able to travel to the new map and if there'll be anything to do there... I also have a suspicion this could mean Mexico would be there but inaccessible for Arthur. Possibly. They could save it as a playable location for the DLC.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Nutduster

[Nyfyr]

Are people still believing these 4chan rumours? lol feel free, I guess.

[UnderWeb]

14 minutes ago, RedBed said:

I wonder how many minutes is the day/night cycle ?

3DJuegos guy said he thinks its longer than in gtav

Edited October 16, 2018 by UnderWeb

[INFERNO E100]

3mins/hour

[Seanonimo1SA]

16 minutes ago, rogerer said:

in my opinion it will be just leaked map....maybe bigger - upscaled, so goin from north to south can be longer than it seems....

Armadillo and desert could be just missions like north yankton...

and why they say that is the biggest map then?? Nah.. Armadillo is in the game

Edited October 16, 2018 by Seanonimo1SA

[rogerer]

we do not know the scale..... you can go from St. Denis to Valentine 15minutes or you can go 30 minutes? I dont know.

Believe me, I also want Armadillo and Mexico in the game

Edited October 16, 2018 by rogerer

[Nutduster]

24 minutes ago, Nyfyr said:

Are people still believing these 4chan rumours? lol feel free, I guess.

 

"Believing" is a strong word.  I just think this rumor makes a lot of sense.  It's easily the most logical reason to bring back the old map in full, as they seem to be doing.  I don't know whether this "ex-employee" really is any such thing, but at minimum I agree with the thought process behind it.

 

19 minutes ago, UnderWeb said:

3DJuegos guy said he thinks its longer than in gtav

 

I'd be fine with them doubling it.  They're pushing for more realism and making it so Arthur has to sleep periodically... makes sense to lengthen the days substantially.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Nutduster

[Jason]

RDR1 being a paid expansion has been hinted at before that 4chan rumour. By more, uh, "reliable" people too.

 

That said, 4chan rumours these days have become legendary for being full of sh*t. Rocksteady rumours come out from there every 6 months and if they were all true they'd be making a Superman game, a Batman game and a Justice League game all at the same time.

[HockeyMike24]

7 minutes ago, Nutduster said:

 

"Believing" is a strong word.  I just think this rumor makes a lot of sense.  It's easily the most logical reason to bring back the old map in full, as they seem to be doing.  I don't know whether this "ex-employee" really is any such thing, but at minimum I agree with the thought process behind it.

And that's what makes it such a good rumor. This is something that could be possible and most of us have even thought about. Though I highly doubt this leak is real.

[Nutduster]

7 minutes ago, HockeyMike24 said:

And that's what makes it such a good rumor. This is something that could be possible and most of us have even thought about. Though I highly doubt this leak is real.

 

Yeah - I don't trust 4chan as a source as far as I can throw them.  It could be real, but it way more likely is someone making stuff up.  But even if that's what it is I still think it's plausible for Rockstar to do it.  It makes the most sense out of their apparent choice to link the old map to the new one, which they've never done before; if this game was made along the same lines as San Andreas, for instance, we'd see Blackwater on one isolated mission and then spend the rest of the game in the new map.  I've thought all along it was really strange that they seemed to be incorporating the old map in its entirety, but if they intend to remake RDR as pseudo-DLC, then it suddenly makes a lot of sense.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Nutduster

[bakerach]

30 minutes ago, Jason said:

RDR1 being a paid expansion has been hinted at before that 4chan rumour. By more, uh, "reliable" people too.

 

That said, 4chan rumours these days have become legendary for being full of sh*t. Rocksteady rumours come out from there every 6 months and if they were all true they'd be making a Superman game, a Batman game and a Justice League game all at the same time.

The most accurate leaks (the ones that have released accurate details long before they were confirmed by R*) have mentioned nothing about paid DLC.  They have described

Spoiler

a "game plus" mode where you play as John at the end of the game, as well as Armadillo being a location in the game world that you can discover-- implying it's not a one-off that you don't have access to, like North Yankton.

  No mention of paid expansions by any credible sources that I've seen.

Edited October 16, 2018 by bakerach
spoiler tag

[philley]

I am curious regarding the statement during a preview hands on session from a mag, where R* said to the guy, that he can surpass the mountains he sees on the horizon.

 

As the mountains are on the north-western part of the current guessed map from you guys, there should be someting behind them, right (north to the New Austin/north-west to The Grizzlies/Tall Trees)?

[The Nefarious]

54 minutes ago, Nutduster said:

 

Because they're keeping it something of a surprise? We already have seen glimpses of Blackwater, Armadillo (in a new cut scene), and New Austin desert areas. Mexico is less certain but at this point it's just stubbornness to think New Austin won't be in the game.

 

To me this rumor makes a lot of sense. Include the map at launch, then release a remake of RDR for $30-40. The interesting question is whether John will be able to travel to the new map and if there'll be anything to do there... I also have a suspicion this could mean Mexico would be there but inaccessible for Arthur. Possibly. They could save it as a playable location for the DLC.

Surely it'd be Jack that'd go to the new map, no?

Edited October 16, 2018 by Money Over Bullshit

[Nutduster]

3 minutes ago, Money Over Bullsh*t said:

Surely it'd be Jack that'd go to the new map, no?

 

Maybe? Really no idea.  They could place some random encounters around the new map without too much trouble, but obviously none of the original missions would take John OR Jack there, unless they revised some things in a pretty big way.

[horns]

10 minutes ago, philley said:

I am curious regarding the statement during a preview hands on session from a mag, where R* said to the guy, that he can surpass the mountains he sees on the horizon.

 

As the mountains are on the north-western part of the current guessed map from you guys, there should be someting behind them, right (north to the New Austin/north-west to The Grizzlies/Tall Trees)?

This is my previous guess to what they're talking about.  They showed this scene in gameplay trailer #2.  It's believed to be in the Grizzles above Downers Ranch (see Bret's marked up image below).  Behind Author appears to be some green area behind the mountains.  Somewhere near Addlers Ranch.  That is what I have been assuming they were referring to but I may be wrong.  

 

 

Edited October 16, 2018 by horns

[Jason]

22 minutes ago, bakerach said:

The most accurate leaks (the ones that have released accurate details long before they were confirmed by R*) have mentioned nothing about paid DLC.  They have described

  Reveal hidden contents

a "game plus" mode where you play as John at the end of the game, as well as Armadillo being a location in the game world that you can discover-- implying it's not a one-off that you don't have access to, like North Yankton.

  No mention of paid expansions by any credible sources that I've seen.

The hint (not leak) I'm referring to was closer to home. In this very thread.

[Nutduster]

2 minutes ago, Jason said:

The hint (not leak) I'm referring to was closer to home. In this very thread.

 

Frantically starts scrolling through... oh sh*t, 242 pages?? Dammit!

[Jason]

The reason I don't wanna be specific is cause I'm not entirely sure the person who said it is absolutely 100% reliable my self lol.

 

I just wanted to point out that 4chan isn't the first place I'd heard of the rumour.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Jason

[morkobork]

39 minutes ago, Jason said:

The reason I don't wanna be specific is cause I'm not entirely sure the person who said it is absolutely 100% reliable my self lol.

 

I just wanted to point out that 4chan isn't the first place I'd heard of the rumour.

Do you mean that Scottish guy, who talks in riddles all the time, ;-)? I think, he said something similar to "they gonna make you pay twice"... .

 

 

Edited October 16, 2018 by morkobork
Quote

[bcsimms04]

1 hour ago, rogerer said:

We have a list of locations including postcards (official R* website). Why New Austin and Mexico  are not included in this list?

Most of the locations in the new map aren't there either.

[Chinese Takeout]

1 hour ago, bakerach said:

The most accurate leaks (the ones that have released accurate details long before they were confirmed by R*) have mentioned nothing about paid DLC.  They have described

  Reveal hidden contents

a "game plus" mode where you play as John at the end of the game, as well as Armadillo being a location in the game world that you can discover-- implying it's not a one-off that you don't have access to, like North Yankton.

  No mention of paid expansions by any credible sources that I've seen.

 

44 minutes ago, Jason said:

The hint (not leak) I'm referring to was closer to home. In this very thread.

There will be plenty of paid DLC for RDR2 and RDRO, but maps won't be among them. Any map expansions (if any) will be free DLC. Paid Map expansions fracture your player base and Triple A developers stopped charging for map expansions halfway through this generation. EA/Dice & Battlefront 2 is a prime example of this. R* struck gold with the model for GTAO...they want as many players as possible to be roaming the lands of RDR2/O whether they buy the game today or (counts on fingers...) 8 years from now.

 

Personally, I don't think there will be any map expansions...I think R*'s current M.O. is: take as long as it f*cking takes, spend as much money as it f*cking takes to make the game PERFECT...then release that sh*t, assign a new team to monitor the product over its lifespan (developing new PAID DLC <and occasionally free>), while all of the major development teams around the world start to ramp up work on the already-5-years-plus-in-development GTA6 and the beginnings of RDR3.

[bakerach]

6 minutes ago, Chinese Takeout said:

 

There will be plenty of paid DLC for RDR2 and RDRO, but maps won't be among them. Any map expansions (if any) will be free DLC. Paid Map expansions fracture your player base and Triple A developers stopped charging for map expansions halfway through this generation. EA/Dice & Battlefront 2 is a prime example of this. R* struck gold with the model for GTAO...they want as many players as possible to be roaming the lands of RDR2/O whether they buy the game today or (counts on fingers...) 8 years from now.

 

Personally, I don't think there will be any map expansions...I think R*'s current M.O. is: take as long as it f*cking takes, spend as much money as it f*cking takes to make the game PERFECT...then release that sh*t, assign a new team to monitor the product over its lifespan (developing new PAID DLC <and occasionally free>), while all of the major development teams around the world start to ramp up work on the already-5-years-plus-in-development GTA6 and the beginnings of RDR3.

Exactly.  Rockstar themselves have said that they're shying away from paid DLC after it fractured the player base with GTA IV and RDR, and a huge thing like a large addition to the map doesn't seem like something they'd just give out for free.  Could be wrong though, and that would be awesome either way.

[Dougie Jones]

11 minutes ago, bakerach said:

Exactly.  Rockstar themselves have said that they're shying away from paid DLC after it fractured the player base with GTA IV and RDR, and a huge thing like a large addition to the map doesn't seem like something they'd just give out for free.  Could be wrong though, and that would be awesome either way.

They only said that in regards to GTA IV. There was very little chance to "fracture the player base" with RDR, as Undead Nightmare only brought one multiplayer mode. And, if I remember correctly, the other modes that were added post-launch were free to play for everyone.

[bakerach]

5 minutes ago, Dougie Jones said:

They only said that in regards to GTA IV. There was very little chance to "fracture the player base" with RDR, as Undead Nightmare only brought one multiplayer mode. And, if I remember correctly, the other modes that were added post-launch were free to play for everyone.

With both GTA IV and Red Dead Redemption, we sold DLC and unfortunately both times, it fractured the audience and helped to kill the games much faster than they deserved.
Read more at https://www.gamerevolution.com/news/352761-rockstar-microtransaction-controversy-sold-dlc-fractured-audience#xfVHipSezYCdTAix.99

[Dougie Jones]

1 minute ago, bakerach said:

With both GTA IV and Red Dead Redemption, we sold DLC and unfortunately both times, it fractured the audience and helped to kill the games much faster than they deserved.
Read more at https://www.gamerevolution.com/news/352761-rockstar-microtransaction-controversy-sold-dlc-fractured-audience#xfVHipSezYCdTAix.99

Not sure what they could possibly be referring to, then. GTA IV died pretty fast but RDR was kicking and kicking well for a good while.