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

    1. GTANet.com

    1. GTA Online

      1. Los Santos Tuners
      2. Updates
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Blood Money
      2. Frontier Pursuits
      3. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      4. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    2. GTA VI

    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

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

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

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

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

      1. GTANet 20th Anniversary
    2. Support

    3. Suggestions

Red Dead Redemption 3 Thread


Drimes
 Share

Recommended Posts

They could definitely squeeze out a rdr 3 I'd love to see the old west in it's" prime" like maybe we're a civil war vet heading west for a new beginning. I also agree that we should focus on a new cast with Dutch's gang only being mentioned or in cameos.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

gucciflipflops

maybe the stories of the famous gunslingers: landon ricketts, black belle and jim boy calloway.

Edited by gucciflipflops
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 6/15/2021 at 10:25 AM, HCM-FIVE-0 said:

RDR 3 should be GTA 1 filled with 1910s cars

seriously though, play Mafia I.

Basically, since Take2 owns both R* as 2K/Hangar 13, they literally have a monopoly on openworld crime games set in the last 150 years in the US. 
1850s-1920s = Red Dead
1920s-1970s = Mafia / LA Noire (to an extent)
1970s-2020s = GTA 

I wouldn't be surprised if we see these crossover in the future, honestly, that would be a very smart move from a business perspective. 

Anyway OT:
I think we will see a Red Dead (Redemption) collection before RDRIII. That would be a smart and easy move from R* and easy money for Red Dead Online.
It would be dope if they would expand the map of RDRI/II in RDRIII. Preferably by upscaling each state and adding more regions, towns, cities and new interesting areas throughout the map. 
Storywise I would like a new story set parallel to the story of RDRII, where you hear about the events unfolding, but not really intervening with them. Perhaps you could meet Arthur or Sadie or John somewhere along the line, but as minor characters. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tracker
On 6/29/2021 at 12:22 PM, ivarblaauw said:

seriously though, play Mafia I.

Basically, since Take2 owns both R* as 2K/Hangar 13, they literally have a monopoly on openworld crime games set in the last 150 years in the US. 
1850s-1920s = Red Dead
1920s-1970s = Mafia / LA Noire (to an extent)
1970s-2020s = GTA 

I wouldn't be surprised if we see these crossover in the future, honestly, that would be a very smart move from a business perspective. 

Anyway OT:
I think we will see a Red Dead (Redemption) collection before RDRIII. That would be a smart and easy move from R* and easy money for Red Dead Online.
It would be dope if they would expand the map of RDRI/II in RDRIII. Preferably by upscaling each state and adding more regions, towns, cities and new interesting areas throughout the map. 
Storywise I would like a new story set parallel to the story of RDRII, where you hear about the events unfolding, but not really intervening with them. Perhaps you could meet Arthur or Sadie or John somewhere along the line, but as minor characters. 

 

Sadly the Mafia franchise are small games in comparison to what Rockstar's provide, it never mets its full potential as Take Two doesn't want it to evolve, always rushing every release at last minute before the devs can even polish them completely, they don't want to start an internal competition between it and GTA resulting in their games having way less content. Mafia 2, 3 and even first game's remake were supossed to be. We could have fresh 20th century period piece open world games, in a similar scale to RDR2, but instead we got entertaining, yet hollow open worlds.

Edited by The Tracker
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/8/2021 at 11:05 PM, Thomas Cavendish said:

One thing I don't wanna see in 3 is the Van Der Linde Gang.
It's over. It's gone.
That story was perfectly told. Need no more.
Let's move on.

 

I disagree with this. Theres still a lot of the gangs story yet to be explored - I personally would like a younger Dutch as the protagonist. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

FRIDA_KAHLO

Getting away from the gang huh there's an idear, maybe "West Dickens Wagon".

 

I must state that anything called "Redemption 3" would sure be a shame I think, and RDR2 was a mistake to not have its own unique title like Revolver and Redemption had. But anyway, so yeah after West Dickens assumes control of the gang and starts hawking tonics bigtime.....  RED DEAD REMEDY

 

That's the way it goes 🤠🔮

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want some dlc like Undead NIghtmare...

But this time fighting with humanoid aliens, that replace wild fauna with dinosaurs by time travel portal .

Van de Linde gang gets offer to to be free by getting rid of this intergalactic and interdimensional problems.

Getting dinosaur instead horse can be one of possibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cutter De Blanc

It would be cool if in the next one you were a lawman pursuing the Van Der Linde gang in their heyday

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Christian889
Posted (edited)

Hey guys! 

i also thought a lot of how the next Red Dead game could look like. Let me share some ideas with you.

 

First of all I think the Van Der Linde story is over and we should go back in time - back to the golden age of the wild west, and get some new characters.

I think it would be cool if Red dead 3 had the same character switch system like we had in GTA 5.

I imagine something like we have in the movie The good, the bad and the ugly:

So we would have a bad guy - a real outlaw, then a "good" guy - maybe someone working for the government, and someone in between - not really bad, not really good, like Eastwoods character in the movie.

 

The first chapter would be a tutorial again but this time it would be set at the end of the civil war in early 1865. Let's say we first play the Eastwood character in that chapter. The map here won't be part of the huge open world that we will explore later. It could be a small part in Lemoyne, where we fight battles, learn how to fight, learn how to hunt, etc, all the tutorial stuff. The other two characters will be part of that chapter as well but wont be controllable yet. But they already get to know each other here. The "good" one could be something a lieutenant and the bad guy could be just another soldier. 

After that chapter the war is over and and our three character go separate ways. 

The game will continue 2 years later in 1867 and in the next mission we will be part of a settler trail (something like the Oregon trail). We are still playing the Eastwood character and we will escort settlers from east to the west. What would be a wild west experience without being part of such a journey once! :D

It would be a long and adventuresome journey from east to the west coast. I will explain the map and the whole setting that i have in mind later. 

So in that mission (it could be also a small chapter itself) you will stay with the settlers, protect them from gangs, wild animals and hostile native american warriors, you go hunting for food supply, you explore the map etc. After you reached the west coast a new chapter begins and from now on the other two characters will be playable as well.

The "good" guy is still working for the government and maybe fighting in the indian wars and the bad guy became meanwhile an outlaw and is robbing banks and trains.

 

At this point i have to explain the map and the setting i have in mind:

So the map would be really huge so that three playable characters make even more sense.

Lets go from the east to the west:

The eastern border would be the Missouri river. To get a better imagination of what i am talking about, you can have a look at this picture:

 

d8e7300393059700ae082c55d55b07bc.jpg

 

That would be the eastern part of my map - everything left of the Missouri river. And it's also the northern border here. So we would have here southern Montana, Wyoming, northern Colorado (or should i say northern Ambarino ;) ) and in the east the plains of Kansas and Nebraska. Northern-east we would have something like the Black Hills and a part of the Badlands in South Dakota.

 

The central part of the map would from north to south Idaho, Utah, Nevada, Arizona and the small part of Mexico. And the western part would be ofc California and southern part of Oregon and also a small part of Mexico. Every state, city, river, mountain etc would be of course renamed. You see that i have a huge map in mind and I don't know in what scale the whole thing is realizable. But it should be for sure a few times bigger than RDR2 and i guess on the new hardware it should be manageable.

Here is what I think of the middle and western part of the map. The black lines are the borders i think of.

 

https://ibb.co/YfQcMHQ

 

Just to make it clear: It's just a rough idea of the map and I don't want to have all these states exactly copied 1 to 1. Thats only the inspirations for the different landscapes and cities we might have here. I really like the idea of having the wide open plains in the east with cattle towns like dodge city or something like Denver in north Ambarino, then we have the Rockies, followed by the amazing landscape of Idaho/Utah/Arizona, followed by the Sierra Nevada Mountain range and finally we have California/Oregon at the west coast. And we also have the border with Mexico and some parts of Mexico in the south. So for every taste we should have a fitting landscape. :D

 

And on that map our "good" guy could be involved in the indian wars in the Wyoming/Montana area, our bad guy will robb and kill in the southern California/Arizona/Mexico area and our Eastwood character will be almost involved everywhere.

Our people will also meet again in some missions. I don't now the bigger main story that includes all three of our protagonists yet but it could develop that way that will we have an epic Mexican standoff in the end (like in the movie the good, the bad and the ugly) and one of our guys has to die. A bit similar to the GTA 5 final, the player has to decide which character wont survive that epic final duel.

What do you guys think about that? Is it cool or too much copied from that movie? 

It would be also awesome to have the "one guy is hanging - the other guy is saving him" scenario from that movie with the switchable character game mechanic. :D 

 

Some additional thoughts to the setting:

The time span of the story would be 10 years, from 1867-1876. The map will change over the years. Cities and roads will develop, more and more farms/ranches will be built over time (so the wild become tamed step by step). The railroad will be expanded. The idea is that in 1867/68 you will still see some settlers on that same trail we took in our mission in the beginning, but after 1869 the railroad will connect east and west and settlers wont take the trail anymore.

It would be awesome to see the map in different seasons over the years.

Also some other real life events happen over the years:

Some big cities are damaged by a big flood or a big fire.

Several gold rushes should happen and we should be part of it - Colorado gold rush, Montana gold rush, silver rush in Nevada, Black Hills gold rush including a town inspired by Deadwood.

Gold rushes don't necessarily have to be part of the main story. You can join, but you don't have to. But even if you are on the other side of the map you should read about the latest gold rush in the newspaper, in the saloons people should talk about it and you can see on the whole map gold miners on their way to their next destination. Mining towns will be built - and will be abandoned afterwards.

Maybe we have some territories in the beginning that become states over the the years. For example when we start we will have the Ambarino territory that will become in 1976 the state of Ambarino.

We will meet some of the legendary gunslingers from the RDR2 card set like the Jack Hall Gang or Oetis Miller.

We should have some more side activities for example being a gold miner and being able to search for gold in the mountains.

It should be possible to work on a ranch and just be a cowboy. Doing some chores at the ranch, escorting cattle from point A to B, protect the cattle from thieves.

It would be also nice if we could be some kind of ranger that protects the southern border to Mexico from gangs or wild animals.

Also the honor system should have more impact. For example if you gained max. honor you should be able to become the sheriff of a small town. You should need some negative honor to recruit some other NPC outlaws to do some heists like robbing banks or trains. But if you have zero honor even the other outlaws wont trust you and you can't recruit anyone. And with min. honor you couldn't work on a ranch because of your reputation.

You can be hired by railroad and oil companies and drive people away from their land. Or you choose to help those people and fight against those companies.

And of course we would have all of the already existing activities like bounty hunting, gambling, robbing stagecoaches, hunting, fishing, etc.

You see in the end it would be a massive game. And the huge world would leaves so much space for DLCs... Maybe for the next three protagonists and then we would go on with the years 1877-1886. So many possibilities.

 

Okay my post got a little bit long.^^ I hope you could follow me and my thoughts and everything is understandable so far.

 

Have a nice day! :)  

 

Edited by Christian889
Link to post
Share on other sites

RDR 3 = Jack Marston's revenge with the help of Sadie. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

One massive problem with continuing the current story is that it forces R* to stick with the current geography. The story of the Van der Linde gang involves New Hanover and Lemoyne and Ambarino and the Dakota River and Flat Iron Lake and so on. The geography of the map works for RDR2 but in a decade’s time this map will feel woefully small. 
 

But there’s no easy way to add more territories to the map. Most of the USA in terms of bio environment has already been done and slotted into RDR2’s map.
 

That’s an advantage to creating a new story. If they create an entirely new story then that means they can start afresh with a whole new map too. They don’t need to try to fix the problems with the Lannheechee river for example. They can bin the current geography, with all its issues and strangenesses, and create a whole new geography. 
 

They can still call it ‘Red Dead Redemption’ because they own the name and they can call it whatever they like. ‘Red Dead Redemption III’ will likely sell more games than ‘Red Dead Redelivery’ or whatever, so they’ll call it RDR3. 
 

But I doubt it will be about the VDL gang and I doubt it will be set in New Hanover and Adjoining States.

 

Personally I am happy with this. I have enjoyed the games but I have no desire to hear VDL spout off about yet more of his plans. It’s OK to leave Blackwater as a mystery. 
 

I have always enjoyed slightly supernatural Westerns like Pale Rider etc and IMO I would like a game that had a supernatural element baked in. I think they should drop the idea of trying to sim the whole of the United States within a twenty square mile area and instead create a really detailed and utterly huge map of just one area, like New Mexico perhaps. And have a simpler story.

 

Start again from scratch really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 7/5/2021 at 11:06 PM, Jutland said:

-

The best they can do for the current map is to 'upscale' each state. Not per se adding more regions, but just make each of the regions much larger. 

Make the great plains... great, and not something you can run across in 3 minutes, it is about 900 meters from west to east. Upscaling the environment but keeping the towns the same size, would tremendously add that 'wilderness' feeling to the map. Your horse is killed by bandits in the middle of nowhere. Damn... the closest town is 20 minutes away instead of 5. 

 

Just for your information; to make Red Dead's states the same scale as those of the GTA (or Mafia) counterpart, it would have to be upscaled by at least 3x. Making each region effectively 9x as large. 
That seems like a lot, and it is, but it would give each region the size and detail it deserves, plus there would be much more room to add additional towns, fortresses, camps, hideouts etc.

 

Honestly, look at the game: The Hunter, Call of the Wild. Each of these has regions/states which are roughly 8x8 km. These are some images from that game. Look at those immense forests and plains; imagine that in Red Dead. (added in spoiler to not break the page)

Spoiler

?imw=1024&imh=500&ima=fit&impolicy=Lettess_e0966f10d819de68e92a74ee4ce58ef67ab39thehunter-tm-call-of-the-wild-priroda-leRbJ2cZxftJYFBgyVWgoVPT.jpg1602659278_ss_53e92ceca5f3b4da8dbfe2e74bzH49kCT3TWm6roQYtTqZFewi.jpg

58ae0c42-84cc-4c98-b25a-9d29ae2801ef.png3840909-rancho_del_arroyo_hd_screenshot_

thehunter-call-of-the-wild-yukon-valley-ca4tnoob56831.jpg?width=3840&format=pjpg

 

Yup it would be a chore to ride from A to B or C, but that's the reason why there are trains... At the moment using the train is barely necessary. Also they could create fast travel posts/carts to each of the small towns and hamlets to make sure the player can travel across the map quickly.

If each state in Red Dead would be upscaled by either 2x (4x total current size) or 3x (9x current size), the game would effectively be the ultimate western game.


I think we can all agree that the Bayou area and the Great plains are way too small, whereas the heartlands could surely benefit a larger size if they add some small hamlets and towns.

Random camps could even serve as points where you can rest and sell some small items to the campers there, instead of them shooting you on sight because you are too close to them -> happened a bit too often for my taste

 

Yes I know it will not happen (soon), but a man can dream. :)

 

 

Edited by ivarblaauw
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Christian889
On 7/8/2021 at 11:18 AM, ivarblaauw said:

The best they can do for the current map is to 'upscale' each state. Not per se adding more regions, but just make each of the regions much larger. 

Make the great plains... great, and not something you can run across in 3 minutes, it is about 900 meters from west to east. Upscaling the environment but keeping the towns the same size, would tremendously add that 'wilderness' feeling to the map. Your horse is killed by bandits in the middle of nowhere. Damn... the closest town is 20 minutes away instead of 5. 

 

Just for your information; to make Red Dead's states the same scale as those of the GTA (or Mafia) counterpart, it would have to be upscaled by at least 3x. Making each region effectively 9x as large. 
That seems like a lot, and it is, but it would give each region the size and detail it deserves, plus there would be much more room to add additional towns, fortresses, camps, hideouts etc.

 

Honestly, look at the game: The Hunter, Call of the Wild. Each of these has regions/states which are roughly 8x8 km. These are some images from that game. Look at those immense forests and plains; imagine that in Red Dead. (added in spoiler to not break the page)

  Hide contents

?imw=1024&imh=500&ima=fit&impolicy=Lettess_e0966f10d819de68e92a74ee4ce58ef67ab39thehunter-tm-call-of-the-wild-priroda-leRbJ2cZxftJYFBgyVWgoVPT.jpg1602659278_ss_53e92ceca5f3b4da8dbfe2e74bzH49kCT3TWm6roQYtTqZFewi.jpg

58ae0c42-84cc-4c98-b25a-9d29ae2801ef.png3840909-rancho_del_arroyo_hd_screenshot_

thehunter-call-of-the-wild-yukon-valley-ca4tnoob56831.jpg?width=3840&format=pjpg

 

Yup it would be a chore to ride from A to B or C, but that's the reason why there are trains... At the moment using the train is barely necessary. Also they could create fast travel posts/carts to each of the small towns and hamlets to make sure the player can travel across the map quickly.

If each state in Red Dead would be upscaled by either 2x (4x total current size) or 3x (9x current size), the game would effectively be the ultimate western game.


I think we can all agree that the Bayou area and the Great plains are way too small, whereas the heartlands could surely benefit a larger size if they add some small hamlets and towns.

Random camps could even serve as points where you can rest and sell some small items to the campers there, instead of them shooting you on sight because you are too close to them -> happened a bit too often for my taste

 

Yes I know it will not happen (soon), but a man can dream. :)

 

 

 

Thats a possibility that i also thought about, to upscale the existing map. There would be a lot of potential and yes, I want something like in your pictures! :D That is looking awesome!

It would be so cool to have more wilderness and less roads and towns so close together.

 

But i don't really get your calculation. If they scale every state for example up two times then in the end the complete map would be also scaled up two times and not four times, right?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 7/8/2021 at 1:26 PM, Christian889 said:

 

Thats a possibility that i also thought about, to upscale the existing map. There would be a lot of potential and yes, I want something like in your pictures! :D That is looking awesome!

It would be so cool to have more wilderness and less roads and towns so close together.

 

But i don't really get your calculation. If they scale every state for example up two times then in the end the complete map would be also scaled up two times and not four times, right?

 

 

Hi there Christian,
Upscaling the map by 2x, would mean 2x in width and 2x in height; a total of 4x the map size.
Upscaling the map by 3x, would mean 3x in width and 3x in height, a total of 9x the map size

So for example a region which was 1 km by 1,5 km, would be 2 km by 3 km with an upscale of 2x. With an upscale of 3x, this would be 3 km by 4,5 km.

This is why an upscale of 2x would be unbelievably huge, an upscale of 3x would be mindboggling immense. And only with an upscale of 3x, would the scale be on par with that of GTA V's states. 

 

Lets say the map is roughly 48 square km for red dead 2 (for easy calculations I have placed New Austin exactly below the new regions in RDR2); 6x8 km. In truth it is more, but I had to round it up to make it easier. About the size of one reserve of the Hunter. 
With a 1.5x upscale, this would be 9 x 12 km = 108 square km roughly the size of GTA V. 
With a 2x upscale this would be 12 x 16 km = 192 square km -> give or take 2x the size of GTA V's landmass -> 4 reserves of the hunter along side each other

With 3x upscale this would be 18 x 24 km = 432 square km -> GTA V would fit into this over 4x -> keep in mind that Red Dead features 5 states, so each state will STILL be smaller than Southern San Andreas in GTA V. -> 9 reserves of the Hunter along side each other. -> this is the same size as the game: Ghost Recon Wildlands

 

To take that in comparison, the map of The Crew (2) is 90 x 60 km = 5400 square km.

 

To me I think that 2x would be golden, it would surely be big enough, 3x would literally reach the max for a game like this. New cities, towns and loads of new regions in each state should be added to keep this interesting. 

Add in some unadded regions such as Northern Grizzlies, Northern Roanoke, Southern Plains, Mexico and the Eastern Tall Trees and this game would be 5x the size of a the hunter map. This would be MORE than enough for a game like this. 

 

Edited by ivarblaauw
Link to post
Share on other sites

Christian889
On 7/8/2021 at 1:54 PM, ivarblaauw said:

 

Hi there Christian,
Upscaling the map by 2x, would mean 2x in width and 2x in height; a total of 4x the map size.
Upscaling the map by 3x, would mean 3x in width and 3x in height, a total of 9x the map size

So for example a region which was 1 km by 1,5 km, would be 2 km by 3 km with an upscale of 2x. With an upscale of 3x, this would be 3 km by 4,5 km.

This is why an upscale of 2x would be unbelievably huge, an upscale of 3x would be mindboggling immense. And only with an upscale of 3x, would the scale be on par with that of GTA V's states. 

 

Lets say the map is roughly 48 square km for red dead 2 (for easy calculations I have placed New Austin exactly below the new regions in RDR2); 6x8 km. In truth it is more, but I had to round it up to make it easier. About the size of one reserve of the Hunter. 
With a 1.5x upscale, this would be 9 x 12 km = 108 square km roughly the size of GTA V. 
With a 2x upscale this would be 12 x 16 km = 192 square km -> give or take 2x the size of GTA V's landmass -> 4 reserves of the hunter along side each other

With 3x upscale this would be 18 x 24 km = 432 square km -> GTA V would fit into this over 4x -> keep in mind that Red Dead features 5 states, so each state will STILL be smaller than Southern San Andreas in GTA V. -> 9 reserves of the Hunter along side each other. -> this is the same size as the game: Ghost Recon Wildlands

 

To take that in comparison, the map of The Crew (2) is 90 x 60 km = 5400 square km.

 

To me I think that 2x would be golden, it would surely be big enough, 3x would literally reach the max for a game like this. New cities, towns and loads of new regions in each state should be added to keep this interesting. 

Add in some unadded regions such as Northern Grizzlies, Northern Roanoke, Southern Plains, Mexico and the Eastern Tall Trees and this game would be 5x the size of a the hunter map. This would be MORE than enough for a game like this. 

 

 

Ah okay, now i know how you meant it. Thanks for your respond. :)

 

Yes even with an upscaling of 2x it would be huge .. and I would love it! 

But unfortunately I don't think that we ever will see something like that ...

 

I would be already happy if they add Mexico and make Tempest Rim accessible for the PS5 version. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/18/2021 at 2:02 PM, fuzzyballs01 said:

real cartidges weren't really widepread until what, 1850-ish?

that still gives them 50 years of timeframe, and I always preferred the older guns, the Remington 1858 New Army for instance is my favourite, especially with a brass frame

and the Henry rifle 1860 is already in the game

 

you can't really go back past 1850's since people still mainly used blackpowder weapons at that point (like the Colt Dragoon) unless you want your character to have a hard time finding bullets

I'd like the idea of slower reloads, somewhat forcing you to pick up dropped guns, so you fire 3 more rounds from that dropped blackpowder revolver and automatically drop it again?

:) Pre 1990 was fine for a RDR3 :)

 

first Cartridges for Revolvers by S&W in the 1857 , only was very uneffective small Calibers ...the first widespread of Cartridge Revolvers(all blackpowder) became up tp 1875 ,the first 44er revolver with Cartridges was the S&W 1869 American, Colt Conversions follows and the Open Top 1872.after 1875 you fuond Ammunition in each small Town ,before its was luck to find a Store with Metall cartridges, so many like Wild Bill Hickock us her Percussions Weapons.

 

The Remington 1858 (was not correct , the Remington Army comes 1863 to the Market, and 1858 was the Patentdate of the Remington Beals Army Revolver ) has never a Brass Frame , thats a Thing of the modern Replicas, Brass in this early Times was not a good Solution for the Heavy Black Powder Power in this Time ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • 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.