What didn't you like about RDR2?

[Buddy Hightower]

3 hours ago, Agent Edward said:

The mask protecting your honor makes no f*cking sense.

I agree, just because you get away with a crime doesn't mean you didn't do something dishonorable. 

[IndianaLiam1]

7 hours ago, Agent Edward said:

The mask protecting your honor makes no f*cking sense.

 

hey, i'm not saying it does. what SHOULD happen is that it not affect your bounty, like every single story mission. 

 

it shoulda f*cked with your honor, but not touched your bounty one iota.

[Agent Edward]

22 minutes ago, IndianaLiam1 said:

 

hey, i'm not saying it does. what SHOULD happen is that it not affect your bounty, like every single story mission. 

 

it shoulda f*cked with your honor, but not touched your bounty one iota.

I think I misunderstood what you meant, but story missions do increase our bounty, the increase is always a fixed amount though, an example is the mission "Blessed are The Meek", it always increase our bounty by 85 dollars. The mask still does a fine job protecting our identity from witnesses.

 

3 hours ago, Buddy Hightower said:

I agree, just because you get away with a crime doesn't mean you didn't do something dishonorable. 

Exactly.

Edited October 20, 2023 by Agent Edward

[IndianaLiam1]

27 minutes ago, Agent Edward said:

I think I misunderstood what you meant, but story missions do increase our bounty, the increase is always a fixed amount though, an example is the mission "Blessed are The Meek", it always increase our bounty by 85 dollars. The mask still does a fine job protecting our identity from witnesses.

 

Exactly.

 

 

I think my problem with the game relies on the wanted system being the same awful tripe as gta v's. if you told me it intentionally had witnesses spawn out of nowhere or that they intentionally coded self-defense as murder, i'd believe you. or that somehow in 1899 train drivers have silent alarms that instantly alert every lawman in Lemoyne that some dude in ambarino is robbing a train.

 

(oh, and in classic nu rockstar fashion, they also just let ambarino and literally everything west of blackwater rot to do f*cking nothing.)

[Agent Edward]

7 minutes ago, IndianaLiam1 said:

 

 

I think my problem with the game relies on the wanted system being the same awful tripe as gta v's. if you told me it intentionally had witnesses spawn out of nowhere or that they intentionally coded self-defense as murder, i'd believe you. or that somehow in 1899 train drivers have silent alarms that instantly alert every lawman in Lemoyne that some dude in ambarino is robbing a train.

 

(oh, and in classic nu rockstar fashion, they also just let ambarino and literally everything west of blackwater rot to do f*cking nothing.)

All of those problems have nothing to do with the mask itself though, it serves its purpose perfectly imo.

[VigMarston]

What I didn't like abt RDR 2? 
Cheesy, but I hate the fact that it ended.

[Sneaky Queeky]

On 10/21/2023 at 6:55 PM, VigMarston said:

What I didn't like abt RDR 2? 
Cheesy, but I hate the fact that it ended.

4 weeks after the last playthrough and I want to go back to Butcher Crick. 

[Corndawg93]

I'm not a fan of how you have to manually cock the gun yourself

[knucklebuster]

Things I disliked about RDR2's gameplay

 

1. Mission design is far too linear for what's supposed to be an open-world game. At times things are so bad to the point where I think it would of been better if they just made this game a more linear, level-based type of game instead of what we've got instead. Think of it as each chapter being a level with small breaks in-between; kind of like TLOU1, I guess.

 

2. Reticle sway, bloom & spread. I want my guns to shoot straight without having to rely too much on dead-eye. I don't mind recoil, though.

 

3. Controlling your horse while shooting is disorienting for me at times.

 

4. Most of the time, RDR2 forcefully changes your loadout when you're in a mission, which not only takes even more control away from the player but is also very annoying if you already had a different loadout on you.

 

5. The controls are very outdated: Hold this to do that, mash this to do that and some controls use the same buttons which while they can be reconfigured it's unacceptable for standard controls.

 

6. The crappy, stick-to-the-walls cover system still exists and it's worse than before thanks to how slow the player character is.

 

Things I disliked about RDR2's story

 

1. Sadie Adler is very underdeveloped and would've worked great had the game spent the time building her character instead of rushing her from a distraught, deeply traumatized widow (Chapter 2) to a gunslinger seeking revenge (Chapter 3). I like the idea that someone on reddit suggested where she'd be someone who would fall for Dutch's charisma just like Javier and Bill did and would be loyal to him at all times, and then turning her into a kind of martyr by the end. The game also contradicts itself by allowing her to avenge her husband, due to the fact that the game keeps arguing that revenge only causes more pain for those involved and that it's "a fool's game". RDR2 really wants you to like her, too. Unfortunately for this game, I like well-written characters or atleast characters that are actually kind of cool. Sadie ain't that for me.

 

2. Chapter 5 is not only very boring but also is the dumbest chapter in the entire game. Like, how the f*ck didn't Arthur drown?? The gang was in the middle of the damn ocean!

 

3. "Visiting Hours" (which is a mission from Chapter 6) is such a stupid mission if you think about it for more than a second; two outlaws make their way into a high security prison and then they somehow, through sheer bruteforce, manage to breakout their missing gang member. Why didn't the guards just shoot Sadie & Arthur on sight? Why didn't the guards just keep shooting the small, creaky, old wooden boat that the 3 left on? Just more great writing, I guess.

 

4. Micah and Arthur are clearly capable of taking down an entire town, as shown in the Chapter 2 mission "Blessed Are The Meek". Why didn't Dutch just send Micah, Arthur, John and Sadie into Blackwater to collect the stashed money? They're pretty much the most skilled gunslingers and sharpshooters that the gang has... just give them a bunch of miracle tonics and let Blackwater have it

 

5. This game prides itself in realism yet it has missions like "Blessed Are The Meek", "The Sheep and The Goats", "Visiting Hours", "Banking, The Old American Art" and basically all of the big bombastic missions where you take on what feels like (and sometimes is) an entire army. I would've excused this if perhaps there were more members (or "soldiers") during missions like these to make things feel more balanced (kinda like in the Chapter 6 mission "My Last Boy"), alongside making Arthur less of a one man army and more of a Clint Eastwood "Man With No Name" type where he'd have to outsmart his enemies or be faster than them atleast, or just make these combat encounters smaller on a scale and slower-paced.

 

Nitpicks

 

1. There are not enough color options for clothes.

 

2. Can't open/close jackets.

 

3. Not enough clothing items in general, tbh.

 

I wrote this post kinda just to rant a bit, haha. Please excuse me if I made any mistakes.

[Jisoo]

34 minutes ago, knucklebuster said:

 

 

1. Mission design is far too linear for what's supposed to be an open-world game. At times things are so bad to the point where I think it would of been better if they just made this game a more linear, level-based type of game instead of what we've got instead. Think of it as each chapter being a level with small breaks in-between; kind of like TLOU1, I guess.

 

 

I agree with this for the most part, but IMO the most memorable and "best" missions are the very scripted ones. Assault on Braitwaith manor, the oilfield, the final two missions with Arthur, killing Micah, all bank robbery missions etc are very on-rails but theyre so carefully made that I dont mind that mission design for some missions. Obviously I wish more missions were a bit more open-ended too but I think they can co-exist

 

Some mission are quite relaxed when it comes to the fail conditions too. Its highlighted mostly in speedruns and the methods used arent as obvious, like when you break into the oilfactory for Eagle Flies and you can just break the window by the office and ignore everything else. And you can skip the second half of the graverobbery mission with John and just jump over the wall and return to Bronte after getting the stash. That annoying kid who steals your money in Saint Denis you can stop by igniting the wagon he sits on and it wont fail you. 

 

But for sure theres a very mixed bag when it comes to mission design. Eastward Bound (end of chapter 1) wouldve worked better as a cutscene for example

 

Good post btw, lot of those things I find kind of annoying too

Edited February 12, 2024 by Jisoo

[Platface]

What I don't like about RDR2 is losing honor like some events you think you do good but lost honor.

 

Killer prostitute event for example. I helped her, lost honor.

 

Or that bounty hunter event where we catch a dad, then saving him against hanging for his boy, lost honor.

 

Self defense against law and other civillians who attacks to me, lose honor.

 

2nd thing is grinding split point rounds one by one. Ik it's supposed to be realistic but tired of watching Arthur/John carve bullets again and again without failing to carve same bullet.

 

Maybe the 3rd thing is there's no "point of no return" alert before going to a mission.

[Pashaforever]

-Too many retcons.

-John's personality. He should've been0 violent and scary while he's a pushover and a joke in RDR2.

-Micah should've been a red herring. It would've been more fitting if Abigail or someone close to Arthur and John was the rat. Hell, it could've been Arthur and John finally cutting a deal with the Pinkertons.

-Inconsistencies in the story. 

-The quality of life and some of the gameplay elements could've been better.

 

Other than that, great f*cking game. One of the best 250 hours I spent on my laptop.

[dontgett]

1. Ambient music is a lot worse than in RDR1, but it's also not very good by itself because it doesn't convey the mood or themes of the game most of the time, but it's just generic country music, just some country tunes without much character. Roanoke had the best ambient probably.
2. The way John Marston is portrayed and written, especially in epilogue.
3. Lack of choice in design of missions.
4. Too much racial and feminist themes thrown right in your face, even though i get it that it's south and it's somewhat time accurate, but it's exhausting to see or hear that in this day and age.
5. Ragdoll and enemy reacions to gunshots. in RDR1 enemy would sit on his knees or crawl away if you shoot both his legs, none of that is in RDR2 for some reason.
6. Often lack of feeling of being a gang instead of being a family, which is on one hand is good, but on the other hand it's completely not what you've imagined the gang would be while playing RDR1, and also when you play RDR1 now you clearly can't imagine that the gang John was in was like this. Some of it is due to small number of missions where a good number of gang members are all together, and when they do that, it's the best missions.
7. I'm not a big fan of Guarma since the game is barely a western as it is, and with a whole chapter in jungles it's even less so, but it's whatever.

There are more things but that's the main stuff i guess

10 hours ago, knucklebuster said:

Things I disliked about RDR2's gameplay

 

1. Mission design is far too linear for what's supposed to be an open-world game. At times things are so bad to the point where I think it would of been better if they just made this game a more linear, level-based type of game instead of what we've got instead. Think of it as each chapter being a level with small breaks in-between; kind of like TLOU1, I guess.

 

2. Reticle sway, bloom & spread. I want my guns to shoot straight without having to rely too much on dead-eye. I don't mind recoil, though.

 

3. Controlling your horse while shooting is disorienting for me at times.

 

4. Most of the time, RDR2 forcefully changes your loadout when you're in a mission, which not only takes even more control away from the player but is also very annoying if you already had a different loadout on you.

 

5. The controls are very outdated: Hold this to do that, mash this to do that and some controls use the same buttons which while they can be reconfigured it's unacceptable for standard controls.

 

6. The crappy, stick-to-the-walls cover system still exists and it's worse than before thanks to how slow the player character is.

 

Things I disliked about RDR2's story

 

1. Sadie Adler is very underdeveloped and would've worked great had the game spent the time building her character instead of rushing her from a distraught, deeply traumatized widow (Chapter 2) to a gunslinger seeking revenge (Chapter 3). I like the idea that someone on reddit suggested where she'd be someone who would fall for Dutch's charisma just like Javier and Bill did and would be loyal to him at all times, and then turning her into a kind of martyr by the end. The game also contradicts itself by allowing her to avenge her husband, due to the fact that the game keeps arguing that revenge only causes more pain for those involved and that it's "a fool's game". RDR2 really wants you to like her, too. Unfortunately for this game, I like well-written characters or atleast characters that are actually kind of cool. Sadie ain't that for me.

 

2. Chapter 5 is not only very boring but also is the dumbest chapter in the entire game. Like, how the f*ck didn't Arthur drown?? The gang was in the middle of the damn ocean!

 

3. "Visiting Hours" (which is a mission from Chapter 6) is such a stupid mission if you think about it for more than a second; two outlaws make their way into a high security prison and then they somehow, through sheer bruteforce, manage to breakout their missing gang member. Why didn't the guards just shoot Sadie & Arthur on sight? Why didn't the guards just keep shooting the small, creaky, old wooden boat that the 3 left on? Just more great writing, I guess.

 

4. Micah and Arthur are clearly capable of taking down an entire town, as shown in the Chapter 2 mission "Blessed Are The Meek". Why didn't Dutch just send Micah, Arthur, John and Sadie into Blackwater to collect the stashed money? They're pretty much the most skilled gunslingers and sharpshooters that the gang has... just give them a bunch of miracle tonics and let Blackwater have it

 

5. This game prides itself in realism yet it has missions like "Blessed Are The Meek", "The Sheep and The Goats", "Visiting Hours", "Banking, The Old American Art" and basically all of the big bombastic missions where you take on what feels like (and sometimes is) an entire army. I would've excused this if perhaps there were more members (or "soldiers") during missions like these to make things feel more balanced (kinda like in the Chapter 6 mission "My Last Boy"), alongside making Arthur less of a one man army and more of a Clint Eastwood "Man With No Name" type where he'd have to outsmart his enemies or be faster than them atleast, or just make these combat encounters smaller on a scale and slower-paced.

 

Nitpicks

 

1. There are not enough color options for clothes.

 

2. Can't open/close jackets.

 

3. Not enough clothing items in general, tbh.

 

I wrote this post kinda just to rant a bit, haha. Please excuse me if I made any mistakes.

The Sadie thing i agree with and i just don't like how she just got away with everything, with revenge, and also with being a bounty hunter and that no one chases her for being a part of the gang. And the fact that she is the "man" of John's epilogue missions, making John even more stale even than he was in RDR2, especially in epilogue. 

[dontgett]

3 hours ago, Platface said:

What I don't like about RDR2 is losing honor like some events you think you do good but lost honor.

 

Killer prostitute event for example. I helped her, lost honor.

 

Or that bounty hunter event where we catch a dad, then saving him against hanging for his boy, lost honor.

 

Self defense against law and other civillians who attacks to me, lose honor.

 

2nd thing is grinding split point rounds one by one. Ik it's supposed to be realistic but tired of watching Arthur/John carve bullets again and again without failing to carve same bullet.

 

Maybe the 3rd thing is there's no "point of no return" alert before going to a mission.

Well if you help a killer prostitute (who as we hear in Valentine have been killing dudes a lot, not just because of being threatened), then it seems like a logical thing that you lose honor for helping her. And the dad was an outlaw and a killer, so.  

[Platface]

3 hours ago, dontgett said:

Well if you help a killer prostitute (who as we hear in Valentine have been killing dudes a lot, not just because of being threatened), then it seems like a logical thing that you lose honor for helping her. And the dad was an outlaw and a killer, so.  

John's diary:

 

"I helped to her because she reminds Abigail to me"

 

Not logical imo, didn't law can track her down like us ?

Edited February 12, 2024 by Platface

[TryingMyBestFor5Years]

Apart from the fact it retconned a lot of stuff from RDR1, John's Epilogue model, and Arthur not being allowed in New Austin: the fact that Rockstar broke the story mode with each update it put out.

And the stuff they have broken with the patches is very serious stuff, for example: the latest update, 1.32, just broke the progression of the Castor's Ridge random event, now its 3rd encounter can't be done and the farmstead cannot be seen with its contruction completed. This is NOT a minor thing, it's literally removing content from a game post-release. If it wasn't Rockstar, no other respectable company would be forgiven for taking away features after a game's release.
I like the game overall, but it's a fact that Rockstar ruined the story mode with the patches, pretty completely destroyed it.

Edited July 8, 2024 by TryingMyBestFor5Years

[Lemoyne outlaw]

3 hours ago, TryingMyBestFor5Years said:

And the stuff they have broken with the patches is very serious stuff, for example: the latest update, 1.32, just broke the progression of the Castor's Ridge random event, now its 3rd encounter can't be done and the farmstead cannot be seen with its contruction completed. This is NOT a minor thing, it's literally removing content from a game post-release. If it wasn't Rockstar, no other respectable company would be forgiven for taking away features after a game's release.
I like the game overall, but it's a fact that Rockstar ruined the story mode with the patches, pretty completely destroyed it.

if you're talking about the encounter with the father and sons. it can still be completed. i was able to do all stages of it on my last playthrough which was a month ago. 

[Emmi]

Why they changed John's appearence in the games' epilogue(s) and post-game. I will never get it. It was such a dumb decision. Chapter 1-6 John was perfect, why make him look like someone completely different afterwards???

[Lemoyne outlaw]

1 hour ago, Emmi said:

Why they changed John's appearence in the games' epilogue(s) and post-game. I will never get it. It was such a dumb decision. Chapter 1-6 John was perfect, why make him look like someone completely different afterwards???

yea it really makes you wonder what they were thinking when they decided that the model for john in the epilogue is good enough to ship with the game. it's so weird considering how everything else in the game is done perfectly. but yet they can't even make our protagonist in the epilogue look like his 1899 version? that's one of the reasons why i don't play the epilogue very much. it's hard to take it seriously. usually when i do play epilogue i give john a beard just to cover up his ugly face. which sucks because i like the way john looks in 1899 and 1911. i wish they could have fixed it in a patch at least.

[propanecocaine71]

53 minutes ago, Lemoyne outlaw said:

yea it really makes you wonder what they were thinking when they decided that the model for john in the epilogue is good enough to ship with the game. it's so weird considering how everything else in the game is done perfectly. but yet they can't even make our protagonist in the epilogue look like his 1899 version? that's one of the reasons why i don't play the epilogue very much. it's hard to take it seriously. usually when i do play epilogue i give john a beard just to cover up his ugly face. which sucks because i like the way john looks in 1899 and 1911. i wish they could have fixed it in a patch at least.

I like the epilogue but yeah they could've done johns model better. He even had his own animations that were cut I believe. Honestly the epilogue needed more time and resources. 

[NightmanCometh96]

Yeah, whether it was due to a lack of time/resources or some other reason; R* dropping the ball with John's Epilogue model was very odd, especially since there's a ton of attention to detail in just about every other area of the game. I know it's nitpicking at the end of the day, but it's just so distracting to see him essentially morph into Arthur with darker hair and plastic surgery. I'd be willing to ignore it if we had the option to at least have his original hair, but alas.

 

If you're on PC, luckily there are mods which address this. JMRP and John Marston Restored and Enhanced are the main two that come to mind; the latter is more up-to-date, but seems to have a few glitches at the moment (e.g. John's arm and hand textures are borked when in first person). EDIT: His RDR1 hair (right parted level 4, IIRC. Levels 5-7 are his RDR2 NPC hair) also behaves strangely in first person: the only way I can describe it is that it doesn't stay attached to John's head and instead tries to "follow" him while moving, meaning that you can see it in first person even though you're not supposed to. Looking at your reflection in the mirror is the best way to see the issue in motion. There's also the occasional clipping issue depending on John's hair length and clothing, but I still prefer playing with JMRE over stock Epilogue John.

Edited July 19, 2024 by NightmanCometh96
Found more bugs with the JMRE mod

[Emmi]

This is something a next-gen version MUST address and I'd be so happy. It ruined the post-game for me even if I loved the epilogue(s) ... but I can't take this version of John, no.

[nealmac]

Biggest one for me is the lack of fast travel points. Definitely could have done with some more, especially in the Amberino / Big Valley areas. Also, not being able to fast travel to old campsites (other than Colter) kinda sucked. A few more points in New Austin wouldn't go amiss either. In RDR1 we could fast travel directly to a waypoint, which was awesome. I get why they disabled that in RDR2 (something about wanting people to explore the map) but when you've put hundreds, maybe thousands of hours into the game, it gets a bit repetitive. I mean hunting a cougar requires fast travelling to Strawberry, and then a lengthy trek to the cougar spawn point.

 

EDIT: Something else I just thought of. Not having access to New Austin or the southern part of West Elizabeth as Arthur kinda sucked. I mean they created an entire massive area, almost the same size as the initial playable map (granted, they already had it made for RDR1 so they only had to refine it) and it only becomes available in the epilogue? Something is not quite right there. And not only that, the story portion of the epilogue only covers a small fraction of New Austin.

Edited July 11, 2024 by nealmac

[Lemoyne outlaw]

5 hours ago, nealmac said:

EDIT: Something else I just thought of. Not having access to New Austin or the southern part of West Elizabeth as Arthur kinda sucked. I mean they created an entire massive area, almost the same size as the initial playable map (granted, they already had it made for RDR1 so they only had to refine it) and it only becomes available in the epilogue? Something is not quite right there. And not only that, the story portion of the epilogue only covers a small fraction of New Austin.

i agree and disagree at the same time. while i do agree that it's a shame that new austin is underused. i feel like having new austin open for arthur would feel like a rehash of rdr1. i think rockstar wanted to focus on their new locations. if it were up to me i think rockstar should have scrapped new austin. and use those resources to add towns and locations for the less used parts of the map. I'm mostly talking about ambarino (and to a lesser extent cumberland forest and big valley.) how is it that ambarino is one of the 5 states. but there isn't one single town?

 

and the sad thing is ambarino has such a beautiful scenery but it's just wasted. i think they could have kept all of west elizabeth. but cut the map off at the lower montana river. they should have let arthur go to blackwater. since he wasn't part of the robbery. and we could have been able to piece together more about the robbery. and it would be nice to have an extra town to explore as arthur. they could have also opened the manzanita post store and allow that to be a nice little rest stop for us. 

[sam41a]

On 7/11/2024 at 2:08 PM, nealmac said:

EDIT: Something else I just thought of. Not having access to New Austin or the southern part of West Elizabeth as Arthur kinda sucked. I mean they created an entire massive area, almost the same size as the initial playable map (granted, they already had it made for RDR1 so they only had to refine it) and it only becomes available in the epilogue? Something is not quite right there. And not only that, the story portion of the epilogue only covers a small fraction of New Austin.

This hits home for me, maybe because as you said, they 'took it' from RDR1? That's the only thing i can think of. If they had to design it from scratch i feel like it would've been available sooner

[olivier8472]

The Guarma we got knowing what it was supposed to be in its initial project…

[billiejoearmstrong8]

On 7/11/2024 at 1:08 PM, nealmac said:

Biggest one for me is the lack of fast travel points. Definitely could have done with some more, especially in the Amberino / Big Valley areas. Also, not being able to fast travel to old campsites (other than Colter) kinda sucked. A few more points in New Austin wouldn't go amiss either. In RDR1 we could fast travel directly to a waypoint, which was awesome. I get why they disabled that in RDR2 (something about wanting people to explore the map) but when you've put hundreds, maybe thousands of hours into the game, it gets a bit repetitive. I mean hunting a cougar requires fast travelling to Strawberry, and then a lengthy trek to the cougar spawn point.

 

EDIT: Something else I just thought of. Not having access to New Austin or the southern part of West Elizabeth as Arthur kinda sucked. I mean they created an entire massive area, almost the same size as the initial playable map (granted, they already had it made for RDR1 so they only had to refine it) and it only becomes available in the epilogue? Something is not quite right there. And not only that, the story portion of the epilogue only covers a small fraction of New Austin.

The fact that there's only one place you can fast travel to (by any means including camping, train and stagecoach) in the whole of Grizzlies West and again only one in Grizzlies East and none in Cumberland Forest is absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't even add to exploration in fact it has the opposite effect because you constantly come and go from the same few locations instead of being able to quickly go anywhere and explore.

[Jisoo]

I find it a bit tedious the lack of fast travel too, but in the first couple playthroughs I didnt really mind it. When I go back to the game now I sometimes end up skipping going to the most remote places since getting back gets a bit stale after riding on a certain road for probably the 300th time

[VOXMarley]

My biggest gripes were always about the weapon loadout system, forced default loadouts, and inability to sell/discard weapons!

[Emmi]

6 hours ago, VOXMarley said:

My biggest gripes were always about the weapon loadout system, forced default loadouts, and inability to sell/discard weapons!

Ye, that is simply stupid and immersion breaking as hell if all of a sudden you go off the horse and two rifles magically appear on Arthur's back.