Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. DLC
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
      7. The Diamond Casino Heist
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Gunboat138

Single player New Austin

Recommended Posts

Jabalous
10 minutes ago, Nutduster said:

 

An atrocity? Calm down.

 

Also, Rockstar never said directly it was their biggest map yet (and even with NA it still isn't bigger than GTA V).  Time to put that myth to bed finally.  They didn't market it that way because it was never their biggest map.  Some media outlet said it and others picked it up from there, it seems.  It's their richest map (at least the non-NA parts), but not their biggest.

Has it actually been concluded that the map isn't larger than V? To me, it seems larger, but I don't know if there's an analysis out there based on measurements. 

Edited by Jabalous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oCrapaCreeper
9 minutes ago, Jabalous said:

Has it actually been concluded that the map isn't larger than V? To me, it seems larger, but I don't know if there's an analysis out there based on measurements. 

The general consensus from the mapping thread is that it's slightly smaller if not the same size as GTAV.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xboxeddy
15 minutes ago, paddymcg said:

I don't get the argument that 4 years wasn't enough time for Tumbleweed to become a ghost town, Armadillo to be rid of Cholera, McFarlanes ranch to build a barn and a few shops and Thieves Landing to open a few shops.

 

All of those changes are due to the railroad moving to Blackwater, that was the turning point in the years between the end of RDR2 and beginning of RDR1. The trains then bypassed Tumbleweed, Armadillo became the new Tumbleweed, McFarlanes Ranch would have had a lot more traffic and so expanded because of it and Thieves Landing was cleaned up a bit because of its proximity to Blackwater. 

I'm referring more to the state of decay in tubleweed and then the buildings in thieves landing that are only meant to be a few years old, take the barn at the ranch compared to the general store at the ranch in the first game (they are not there in rdr2) they should have the same state of decay however the general store looks as if  it were 15 years older than the barn, also the state of tumbleweed in rdr vs the state of it in rdr2. 

As a side note I would have liked them to use names of places from GTA when they said going to new York I wouldn't have

loked to here liberty city etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HockeyMike24
56 minutes ago, tonko said:

For me personally it's about Spaghetti western feeling. I'm a huge Dollar trilogy fan and in RDR 1 Mexico captures perfectly that atmosphere. Sand, hot sun, dirt.

I hear you and you can't have a western without it really, but I would still prefer new territory. If you look at New Austin you can see the borders of the map standing in the middle of the desert because of the render distance we have now, making it seem a lot smaller. I just think R* are capable of making a really good map expansion from scratch and it would turn out much nicer then remaking something from another game on last gen.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThroatSlasher2
59 minutes ago, Nutduster said:

 

An atrocity? Calm down.

 

Also, Rockstar never said directly it was their biggest map yet (and even with NA it still isn't bigger than GTA V).  Time to put that myth to bed finally.  They didn't market it that way because it was never their biggest map.  Some media outlet said it and others picked it up from there, it seems.  It's their richest map (at least the non-NA parts), but not their biggest.

It is an atrocity for me.

 

If the entire RDR1 map had the content of New Austin in the sequel, the game would have been forgotten in an instant. Thankfully the rest of the map is absolutely exquisite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DentureDynamite
1 hour ago, Nutduster said:

An atrocity? Calm down.

 

Also, Rockstar never said directly it was their biggest map yet (and even with NA it still isn't bigger than GTA V).  Time to put that myth to bed finally.  They didn't market it that way because it was never their biggest map.  Some media outlet said it and others picked it up from there, it seems.  It's their richest map (at least the non-NA parts), but not their biggest.

Not their biggest map? I must admit it feels huge--but that may well be because I can't drive or fly at top speeds. If I had to walk or ride a horse around Los Santos and Blaine County, it would probably also feel way bigger than it does now.

 

That said, I'd be very surprised (and disappointed for the long-term future of the game) if RDR Online's map isn't expanded via DLCs. The potential is huge for new adjoining areas like Mexico; whereas with GTA V, the map is already a land-locked island...

Edited by DentureDynamite
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lock n' Stock
58 minutes ago, Jabalous said:

Has it actually been concluded that the map isn't larger than V? To me, it seems larger, but I don't know if there's an analysis out there based on measurements. 

It does feel bigger, but I think that's more to do with the fact that you have slower means of travel, whereas in GTA V you can just fly a plane from one side to another within a few minutes.

 

If you count New Austin, it's probably about the same size, or even a little smaller or bigger.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paddymcg
28 minutes ago, Xboxeddy said:

I'm referring more to the state of decay in tubleweed and then the buildings in thieves landing that are only meant to be a few years old, take the barn at the ranch compared to the general store at the ranch in the first game (they are not there in rdr2) they should have the same state of decay however the general store looks as if  it were 15 years older than the barn, also the state of tumbleweed in rdr vs the state of it in rdr2. 

As a side note I would have liked them to use names of places from GTA when they said going to new York I wouldn't have

loked to here liberty city etc..

Tumbleweed looks fine in my opinion it's a derelict town in the desert that suffered years of sandstorms without maintenance, not to mention it's demise would have been accelerated by the Del Lobos gang trashing the place no doubt. 

 

As far as the barn in McFarlanes ranch looking too dated in RDR1 that's a bit too far down the pedantry rabbit hole for me.

 

It's an 8 year old game and at the time I imagine Rockstar were far more concerned about the first game selling well than they were about a sequel so timelines and story probably wouldn't have been fleshed out all that well.

 

At the end of the day I'm happy that New Austin is in RDR2 even if it is at the sacrifice of some canon.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DentureDynamite

The obvious upsides of RDR2 vs. GTA V include just how incredibly detailed and rich in texture both landscapes and buildings are--not to mention NPC interaction/variety.

Edited by DentureDynamite
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lock n' Stock

As far as map size comparison to GTA V is concerned, there is this I found on Reddit.

 

mKeODER.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Penicuikscotland2010

I actually never thought about RDR online New Austin. My guess is it will be the exact same but Armadillo will be Cholera free if before 1907. I guess it will depend on what year it's set in but i reckon 1907.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nutduster
17 minutes ago, DentureDynamite said:

Not their biggest map? I must admit it feels huge--but that may well be because I can't drive or fly at top speeds. If I had to walk or ride a horse around Los Santos and Blaine County, it would probably also feel way bigger than it does now.

 

 

That's exactly why.  Also, the RDR2 map - at least the non-New Austin part of it - is very detailed compared to GTA V's map, which also contributes to it feeling bigger.  Overall it is somewhat smaller than GTA V, which was basically known before the game even came out - but reports from a couple media outlets led to rampant speculation that there were new areas added on (other than the leaked map + the old RDR map), or that they had "upscaled" things we thought to be a certain size. In the end, things are the same size we thought based on the size of the original RDR map, which wasn't upscaled at all, and not much new was added either except for a little bit of Ambarino.

 

I have no problem with it, mind you.  The map is vast for the purposes of a western game with no cars and jets and whatnot.  It FEELS bigger than GTA V to me even though it's not.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lock n' Stock

I was thinking about something. Some have pointed out that John visits New Austin (in particular Pike's Basin) in RDR2 despite saying otherwise in RDR1. Personally, I feel this retcon can be justified with the suggestion that John doesn't remember the place well enough, considering he'd only gone with Sadie to capture one bounty. Other than that, everything else that you do in New Austin as part of free roam is non-canon as far as I'm concerned.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cutter De Blanc

I like how they meticulously craft this brilliant story and then are just like "lol huge retcon oh well" at the end

 

The real solution would have been to let us play as anybody but John Marston at the end of the game

 

Edited by Cutter De Blanc
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FunGaming

Maybe its as the rumors go right now that they are going to reimagine RDR1 within 2 as a DLC kinda like they sometimes reboot entire film franchises maybe Rockstar is indeed going to do the same with RDR1 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gunboat138
13 hours ago, Nutduster said:

 

 

 

That's actually not terribly unrealistic for the frontier.  Towns sprang up from nothing in weeks because of a trade route, railroad line or gold rush; they would just as quickly dry up and blow away if there was no gold left, no more trade or the railroad stopped running through (clashes with Indians also, on occasion, given how small the populations of most of those towns were).  The whole trope of a western ghost town came about because of all these quickly-abandoned frontier towns just sitting out there in the territories.

I hear you, I more so meant that those buildings look wayyy to run down for 4 years of dereliction.

 

I think these "which map is bigger" arguments arw incredibly moot.  Take away New Austin, this is still the best map they've ever made.  It's like having a dick measuring contest with yourself, when you should be admiring how pretty your dick is.

 

 

I really don't want an RDR remaster.  Its a masterpiece, leave it alone and have them focus on new content.

Edited by Gunboat138
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ottovanbeefsteak

MacFarlane's Ranch should at LEAST have the barn. Skip to the 5:00 mark of RDR1 mission 'New Friends, Old Problems' during Bonnie's tour of the MacFarlane Ranch. And I quote:

"That's the barn over there. Pa built it himself when I was just a little girl"

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pepperjack
24 minutes ago, ottovanbeefsteak said:

MacFarlane's Ranch should at LEAST have the barn. Skip to the 5:00 mark of RDR1 mission 'New Friends, Old Problems' during Bonnie's tour of the MacFarlane Ranch. And I quote:

"That's the barn over there. Pa built it himself when I was just a little girl"

 

 

 

Rockstar dun f*cked it up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GroveStGTAV
2 hours ago, ottovanbeefsteak said:

MacFarlane's Ranch should at LEAST have the barn. Skip to the 5:00 mark of RDR1 mission 'New Friends, Old Problems' during Bonnie's tour of the MacFarlane Ranch. And I quote:

"That's the barn over there. Pa built it himself when I was just a little girl"

 

 

 

Also she saying train station finally finished

 

But its in the RDR2 in 1907

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jabalous

Interesting that the script writers missed these little and yet important details in the development of the world. It seems that they haven't done their homework properly in regard to maintaining canon and historical authenticity in rebuilding New Austin. We could simply ignore it and assume that New Austin's existence is non canon in Redemption 2, but I'd not go that far.

Edited by Jabalous
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
feckyerlife
On 11/15/2018 at 1:02 AM, Gtaman_92 said:

They should of just left New Austin out of the game entirely. The region serves no purpose at all and was only put in to please fans.

It actually ruins a lot. Some of the gear i want to get from the trapper for Arthur to wear, i Can't because they require the Legendary Animal Parts from New Austin

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
feckyerlife
On 11/15/2018 at 10:58 AM, Jabalous said:

Has it actually been concluded that the map isn't larger than V? To me, it seems larger, but I don't know if there's an analysis out there based on measurements. 

Your on Horse back it will feel bigger, but its a lot smaller imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
feckyerlife
23 hours ago, paddymcg said:

Tumbleweed looks fine in my opinion it's a derelict town in the desert that suffered years of sandstorms without maintenance, not to mention it's demise would have been accelerated by the Del Lobos gang trashing the place no doubt. 

 

As far as the barn in McFarlanes ranch looking too dated in RDR1 that's a bit too far down the pedantry rabbit hole for me.

 

It's an 8 year old game and at the time I imagine Rockstar were far more concerned about the first game selling well than they were about a sequel so timelines and story probably wouldn't have been fleshed out all that well.

 

At the end of the day I'm happy that New Austin is in RDR2 even if it is at the sacrifice of some canon.

If you read Dan Housers interview, he said he went straight to writing RDR2 right after the first one came out,  so the whole 8yr thing is just BS, this game was in their minds the whole time, at least his. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheatz/Trickz

Can’t expect a prequel to not create a few discrepancies, it’s one enough that Arthur is never mentioned in RDR1, but that’s obvious. That said, I don’t think anything clearly states that the gang left John in 1906 or even that the ferry heist took place then. The 1906 thing is about Dutch’s gang’s last sighting, and we know he led another gang after the RDR2 gang broke up. John tells Landon Rickets he left the gang after being shot in a robbery. At the time of RDR1’s writing, he was probably referring to the ferry heist, but because he doesn’t go into details Rockstar were able to retcon it and still have it work. Instead, John escaped the ferry and the robbery he tells Rickets about becomes the train robbery that he gets shot during. 

 

About New Austin, I don’t think John ever says he’s never set foot there (correct me), just that the gang spoke about it but never actually made it down there, so the mission

in Pike’s Basin isn’t contradictory. He is unfamiliar with the state though, so everything you do in there afterwards is non-canon free roam. John also clearly assures Abigail that it’s over. 

Edited by Cheatz/Trickz
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jabalous

Cholera reference in Redemption

 

QLyfi3S.png

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bish0p2004
On 11/15/2018 at 12:20 PM, Lock n' Stock said:

Other than that, everything else that you do in New Austin as part of free roam is non-canon as far as I'm concerned.

 

I wish Rockstar would have went with this mindset throughout the game.  I mean, I understand lore is important, but not at the expense of removing things due to story...especially when you've already decided to break it in some ways.

 

On 11/15/2018 at 1:02 AM, Gtaman_92 said:

They should of just left New Austin out of the game entirely. The region serves no purpose at all and was only put in to please fans.

Agreed.  They probably could have added more interiors to loot and just make the map feel even more immersive.  But as others have been saying, it's probably due to RDR Online....god I hate multiplayer.

Edited by bish0p2004
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadowfennekin

When you see the leaked map from all those years ago, it becomes quite obvious that New Austin wasn't originally planned. Hence why only that canyon you ride into with Sheriff from RDR is used and no other location from New Austin.

 

I think they added it not just for Online but for potential SP DLC, especially if Mexico gets added. I mean.... New Austin is pretty much necessary to prevent Mexico from being land locked. The two are connected.

I don't know about most of you but my Online character's staying in the RDR 2 map and Blackwater. Not wasting my time going to New Austin, takes far too long to get from Tumbleweed to another city without fast travel

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jabalous
22 minutes ago, Shadowfennekin said:

When you see the leaked map from all those years ago, it becomes quite obvious that New Austin wasn't originally planned. Hence why only that canyon you ride into with Sheriff from RDR is used and no other location from New Austin.

 

I think they added it not just for Online but for potential SP DLC, especially if Mexico gets added. I mean.... New Austin is pretty much necessary to prevent Mexico from being land locked. The two are connected.

I don't know about most of you but my Online character's staying in the RDR 2 map and Blackwater. Not wasting my time going to New Austin, takes far too long to get from Tumbleweed to another city without fast travel

I don't think the leaked map can be used as an evidence that the original plan was not to include New Austin. It can be a guess, but nothing is concrete. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oCrapaCreeper
1 minute ago, Jabalous said:

I don't think the leaked map can be used as an evidence that the original plan was not to include New Austin. It can be a guess, but nothing is concrete. 

Especially since the leaked map showed West Elizabeth, not sure have they would have landlocked New Austin and stop you from getting there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.