Do you think RDR2 is a single player focus?

[StrafeFTW]

What do you think?

[GinsengElixir]

Yes, absolutely. R* created a hugely ambitious game for the single player. I don't feel they skimped at all, and don't think anyone could accuse them of doing so.

 

I've put well over 100hrs into the SP and have not touched online(I never do).

[StrafeFTW]

10 minutes ago, GinsengElixir said:

Yes, absolutely. R* created a hugely ambitious game for the single player. I don't feel they skimped at all, and don't think anyone could accuse them of doing so.

 

I've put well over 100hrs into the SP and have not touched online(I never do).

I felt like rockstar games is  much better without Leslie benzies, I bet GTA V was huge focus on multiplayer because of Leslie Benzies, I have a feeling the storyline in GTA VI will be incredible..

[LorshZontek]

Not after online released 

[Jabalous]

Yes, it's the most ambitious single-player game of the decade. 

[PapasHota]

No, they half assed the epilogue and now its all about them golden shark bars in online.

[Deadman2112]

1 hour ago, GinsengElixir said:

I've put well over 100hrs into the SP and have not touched online(I never do).

 

I'm not knocking anyone's choice to "not" play online. However, I would like to point out that if the overall progression of this game is anything like GTA V. Then by not participating in online, you may just deny yourself the conclusion of this story.

 

...or at the very least the answers to many of the Mysteries.

 

Edited June 21, 2019 by Deadman2112

[Cutter De Blanc]

45 minutes ago, Deadman2112 said:

 

...or at the very least the answers to many of the Mysteries.

 

The answers are usually "because rockstar wants to gouge the playerbase for as much money as possible"

[GinsengElixir]

2 hours ago, Deadman2112 said:

 

I'm not knocking anyone's choice to "not" play online. However, I would like to point out that if the overall progression of this game is anything like GTA V. Then by not participating in online, you may just deny yourself the conclusion of this story.

 

...or at the very least the answers to many of the Mysteries.

 

Conclusion to what story?

 

My SP story was done as far as I can see. I'm never interested in online just because I can't be bothered with it, but would be interested to know more about what wasn't concluded..

[Mas u Sees]

3 hours ago, PapasHota said:

No, they half assed the epilogue and now its all about them golden shark bars in online.

What do you mean "half assed".

Please don't get into John Marstons hair again, jesus christ.

Red Dead Redemption II, is by definition a SINGLEPLAYER FOCUSED TITLE.

Anyone claiming anything different is simply not telling the truth.

 

Though the focus AFTER release obviously shifted to Online, as it was to be expected.

[Darealbandicoot]

Yes absolutely. Everything about the game SCREAMS "made for single player". That being said, Red Dead Online is definitely the focus now and single player is literally rotting with bugs they refuse to fix. 

[Jason]

Single player is like 95% of the content of the game. Given how unprepared RDO was for launch I wouldn't be surprised if Rockstar weren't even all that interested in making RDO as is, but had to due to Take-Two.

[Ironside]

18 minutes ago, Darealbandicoot said:

Yes absolutely. Everything about the game SCREAMS "made for single player". That being said, Red Dead Online is definitely the focus now and single player is literally rotting with bugs they refuse to fix. 

This is absolutely the most correct description of the status of the game. There are so much potential to make a great single player experience into an even greater experience that may be lost because of the very badly implemented online gameplay. 

 

I have nothing against online gaming at all but RDR2 really do not show the best side of the game in the online iteration. The map, the things to do in this game really screams pure single player magic, sadly that magic is interrupted and perhaps even destroyed by a subpar online version. 

[Mas u Sees]

4 minutes ago, Ironside said:

This is absolutely the most correct description of the status of the game. There are so much potential to make a great single player experience into an even greater experience that may be lost because of the very badly implemented online gameplay. 

 

I have nothing against online gaming at all but RDR2 really do not show the best side of the game in the online iteration. The map, the things to do in this game really screams pure single player magic, sadly that magic is interrupted and perhaps even destroyed by a subpar online version. 

I don't get how the Online experience affects the Singleplayer in anyway, you can just choose to ignore it.

[Ironside]

9 minutes ago, Mas u Sees said:

I don't get how the Online experience affects the Singleplayer in anyway, you can just choose to ignore it.

This is not strictly true. I as a single player fan first and only occasionally a online player in RDR2 can obviously see that the focus from the developers on the online part actually hurts the single player experience. 

 

People has already mentioned that bugs in the single player goes untouched or even becomes worse after online patches. And it is quite obvious that weapons like the LeMat would and should have been included in the single player if it was not for R* strategy to try to make people play the online section of the game by withholding weapons, clothes etc from the single player version. 

 

So yes, the single player is suffering because of the focus on the online. I would love to have the LeMat in the single player and there is no real reason to not add it to the single player except to try to lure in players to the online and with that make people buy the gold bars. 

[Mas u Sees]

Just now, Ironside said:

This is not strictly true. I as a single player fan first and only occasionally a online player in RDR2 can obviously see that the focus from the developers on the online part actually hurts the single player experience. 

 

People has already mentioned that bugs in the single player goes untouched or even becomes worse after online patches. And it is quite obvious that weapons like the LeMat would and should have been included in the single player if it was not for R* strategy to try to make people play the online section of the game by withholding weapons, clothes etc from the single player version. 

 

So yes, the single player is suffering because of the focus on the online. I would love to have the LeMat in the single player and there is no real reason to not add it to the single player except to try to lure in players to the online and with that make people buy the gold bars. 

Uhm that's a fallacy.
The LeMat Revolver was developed specifically for Online, after Singleplayer released.

 

The Singleplayer wouldn't have magically content appear, the reason Online has content added to it, is because Online brings in the revenue -> i.e If there wouldn't be Online, there wouldn't be any new content in the first place, unless of course R* would monetise the Singleplayer(which noone would want)

 

Also, every Online patch indeed fixes some Singleplayer Bugs as well, without Online, there WOULD BE NO PATCHES, meaning that Singleplayer bugs would remain completely untouched.

I haven't seen an example of Online Updates making Singleplayer Bugs even worse.

[Ironside]

Just now, Mas u Sees said:

Uhm that's a fallacy.
The LeMat Revolver was developed specifically for Online, after Singleplayer released.

 

The Singleplayer wouldn't have magically content appear, the reason Online has content added to it, is because Online brings in the revenue -> i.e If there wouldn't be Online, there wouldn't be any new content in the first place, unless of course R* would monetise the Singleplayer(which noone would want)

 

Also, every Online patch indeed fixes some Singleplayer Bugs as well, without Online, there WOULD BE NO PATCHES, meaning that Singleplayer bugs would remain completely untouched.

I haven't seen an example of Online Updates making Singleplayer Bugs even worse.

And how would you even know that the LeMat was made especially and uniquely for the online part!? The rest of your text is just bs as many pure single player games patch and updates the game to take away bugs without having an online part of the game. 

[Mas u Sees]

Just now, Ironside said:

And how would you even know that the LeMat was made especially and uniquely for the online part!? The rest of your text is just bs as many pure single player games patch and updates the game to take away bugs without having an online part of the game. 

Give me a single example of a Rockstar Game receiving Updates more than 3 months after launch.

Rockstar just doesn't that type of stuff, they didn't do it with IV, they didn't do it with MP3, and they certainly wouldn't have done it with Red Dead.

 

And regarding your first point, it's the other way around: You need to prove that the LeMat was made for the Singleplayer experience in the first place and THEN cut out, which it clearly wasn't, there is no indication of that whatsoever.

Rockstar released it as an Online Item, implying it was made specifically for Online, if you want to claim otherwise, you need proof.

[Darealbandicoot]

1 minute ago, Mas u Sees said:

Give me a single example of a Rockstar Game receiving Updates more than 3 months after launch.

Rockstar just doesn't that type of stuff, they didn't do it with IV, they didn't do it with MP3, and they certainly wouldn't have done it with Red Dead.

 

And regarding your first point, it's the other way around: You need to prove that the LeMat was made for the Singleplayer experience in the first place and THEN cut out, which it clearly wasn't, there is no indication of that whatsoever.

Rockstar released it as an Online Item, implying it was made specifically for Online, if you want to claim otherwise, you need proof.

There's a Wheeler Rawson and co advertisement for the Lemat Revolver in the Blackwater police station with the exact same stats and icon as the Red Dead Online Lemat Revolver. 

[Ironside]

Just now, Mas u Sees said:

Give me a single example of a Rockstar Game receiving Updates more than 3 months after launch.

Rockstar just doesn't that type of stuff, they didn't do it with IV, they didn't do it with MP3, and they certainly wouldn't have done it with Red Dead.

 

And regarding your first point, it's the other way around: You need to prove that the LeMat was made for the Singleplayer experience in the first place and THEN cut out, which it clearly wasn't, there is no indication of that whatsoever.

Rockstar released it as an Online Item, implying it was made specifically for Online, if you want to claim otherwise, you need proof.

But you just prove my point, without the focus on online the weapons, clothes etc would have been included in the single player as R* knows how popular the LeMat is among players. 

 

And that R* do not want to fix bugs if there are no online or whatever, do not make the situation any better but quite the opposite. Most developers patches and updates their games if there are bugs no matter if there is an online part or not. 

[Mas u Sees]

1 minute ago, Darealbandicoot said:

There's a Wheeler Rawson and co advertisement for the Lemat Revolver in the Blackwater police station with the exact same stats and icon as the Red Dead Online Lemat Revolver. 

Was that advertisement there before the LeMat released for Online?

If so, then you're correct there.

But then again, Singleplayer has more than enough content, to not feel like anything has been cut out.

[Darealbandicoot]

1 minute ago, Mas u Sees said:

Was that advertisement there before the LeMat released for Online?

If so, then you're correct there.

But then again, Singleplayer has more than enough content, to not feel like anything has been cut out.

Yes. This is from the unpatched version 1.00 

 

[Ironside]

3 minutes ago, Mas u Sees said:

Was that advertisement there before the LeMat released for Online?

If so, then you're correct there.

But then again, Singleplayer has more than enough content, to not feel like anything has been cut out.

The advertisement where there since day one. And debating about whether the game has “enough” content or not is not what we are discussing here and it comes down to a very personal opinion of what is enough, we are saying that content was intentionally cut from single player and put into online instead. 

Edited June 21, 2019 by Ironside

[DarksunDaFirst]

This poll suffers from a problem that a duality exists, when in truth it is much more complicated.  

To answer the first part: Yes and No.

To answer the second part: RDR2 for SP, GTAO for MP

To explain it better. You can do more stuff in single player and interact with more things in Redemption 2 than you can GTA V.  You can actually do a bit of RP, and you interact overall more with the world in single player than you do in multiplayer.  This is easy to understand because your character actually talks in single player, there are more realistic limits in single player (no ability cards and your satchel is smaller...still unrealistic, but it's not like MP where you can shove 10 each of every kind of small and medium fish in there along with 20 bottles of gin, 34 bottles of brandy, and 18 healing tonics, etc etc).  The sustenance and rest system actually have an effect on your character in SP (in MP you never need to rest, but as a game mechanic this makes sense because you can't skip time in MP).  

However, this is because of the state of the game right now.   GTAO was actually inferior to it's single player for months until they REALLY started opening it up about a year after release.  RDO is starting to get there as well as more things are becoming available, since we've come out of beta at the end of...April?  I'm not a fan of their competitive lobby setup, but at least most of the games are fun (I really wish I could just pick a "TDM" playlist sometimes...helps turn the brain off).  Next year RDO might surpass it's single player because like GTA:V, R* will ignore updating the single player past a certain point and add no real new content to the game and just focus on RDO.  Here's hoping they actually do expand the single player...(MEXICO campaign, anyone?!?)

Overall, single player in RDR2 is naturally better than GTA:V because the former is 5 years younger than the latter, the former came out on the 8th gen console where as the latter started on the 7th gen consoles (maybe we'll see a 9th gen version - but thankfully iirc Sony has already said that 8th gen and 9th gen will be able to play together).  Online - GTAO is better simply because R* has been constantly working on it for 5 years.

I fear that as time moves on, single player will just be not good enough because as far as R* games go - once you're done with the story driven content (and the extras), there is nothing left to do and you can't really do anything else.  It's not like a Bethesda game where the content is much more vast (or Fallout 4 where you can keep building new settlements and mod your game).  

Single player is very complete for it's launch - but it could always use more content.


 

Edited June 21, 2019 by DarksunDaFirst

[DarksunDaFirst]

1 hour ago, Mas u Sees said:

Give me a single example of a Rockstar Game receiving Updates more than 3 months after launch.

Rockstar just doesn't that type of stuff, they didn't do it with IV, they didn't do it with MP3, and they certainly wouldn't have done it with Red Dead.

They did do it with IV - they had DLC's for more story content, which is what Single Player is all about.  It added extra bikes (a lot of them actually) - many of which showed up in GTA V and GTAO in different updates (Slamvan was originally a LatD vehicle that came in Heists update, same with the Nightblade came in the Bikers update, and the Innovation was part of the LTS update).

Hell, GTA V's single player HAD CHARACTERS FROM THE GTA IV DLC (Johnny - who gets his head stomped in by Trevor).

Let's not forget that in the first Redemption (NOT THE FIRST RED DEAD!) they had DLC's that added weapons to both single and multiplayer - but as well they had a wholly different storyline in Undead Nightmare (which might be their most popular expansion to date).

Now granted these expansions did cost money - but that's the thing: they should offer that up if people are willing to pay for it.  For how long have we heard about people BEGGING R* to do single player expansion for GTA V - most willing to pay for said expansion?!?  It worked for them in their major titles in the past with GTA IV and RDRedemption.  It can work again if that's what they're worried about.

All I know is - I don't pay a f*cking dime for the content they release on GTAO or RDO because I can grind that sh*t.  Thanks for the free content.  Now actually release something I might be willing to pay for and guess what....I'LL BUY IT!  And so will many others.

Edited June 21, 2019 by DarksunDaFirst

[~INDIO~]

I think Take Two is the problem here, rather than Rockstar

[Mas u Sees]

9 minutes ago, DarksunDaFirst said:

They did do it with IV - they had DLC's for more story content, which is what Single Player is all about.  It added extra bikes (a lot of them actually) - many of which showed up in GTA V and GTAO in different updates (Slamvan was originally a LatD vehicle that came in Heists update, same with the Nightblade came in the Bikers update, and the Innovation was part of the LTS update).

Hell, GTA V's single player HAD CHARACTERS FROM THE GTA IV DLC (Johnny - who gets his head stomped in by Trevor).

That's not an Update, those were paid expansions.

And R* stopped doing them, because they simply didn't sell well.

[DarksunDaFirst]

11 minutes ago, Mas u Sees said:

That's not an Update, those were paid expansions.
And R* stopped doing them, because they simply didn't sell well.

Redemption expansions sold very well for the playerbase - GTA IV did not sell well because they delayed their release for over a year (19 months iirc from XBL release to PSN release) on PlayStation and it snubbed more than half their fanbase - Of course they weren't going to sell well.  R* learned that lesson and haven't done a timed release of expansion or content since (until Redemption 2...but it's all free content).  R* learned their lesson on that.

Undead Nightmare is one of the most successful expansions of all time - selling to almost 25% of their playerbase (about 2.5 million copies vs 12-13 million copies of base game).  The only games that sell more expansions are games like Call of Duty, whose "expansion" packs are a pure f*ck-you-over-the-barrel-for-almost-nothing content.

Edited June 21, 2019 by DarksunDaFirst

[Cutter De Blanc]

3 hours ago, Mas u Sees said:

Give me a single example of a Rockstar Game receiving Updates more than 3 months after launch.

Red Dead Redemption 1

GTA IV

[Kumieee]

I think so, yes. Rockstar could’ve easily made this another GTA V with a fairly good but shallow story and immediately start milking the online mode but no, the singleplayer is rich and full of life. If it weren’t for the painfully linear missions, the story mode would probably be a perfect 10/10 for me.

The online mode doesn’t feel like Rockstar wanted to make a GTA Online 2.0 to me, it feels more like they wanted to take cues from what made GTA Online unique in that it has MMORPG elements and its own story and tried to apply that to Red Dead Online to make it more fun and worthwhile. It had a rocky start but it seems to be settling in a bit. I personally want more Van der Linde gang members and RDR1 characters (like West Dickens or Irish) to make an appearance, but I also want at least one type of singleplayer DLC, like another goofy, supernatural/horror-based one.