I'm not gonna go Debbie Downer on it yet, but their explicit mention of online MP makes me sad-ish. GTA:O was ok for a little while, but I much prefer the singleplayer DLC they used to do. Undead Nightmare was so rad, and I really hoped for something similar in GTAV. Ah well! They could still release SP stuff for RDR2, and it will still have a big ol' SP campaign anyways so I can't complain.
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
0
Options
SteevLWhat can I do for you?Registered Userregular
I'm not gonna go Debbie Downer on it yet, but their explicit mention of online MP makes me sad-ish. GTA:O was ok for a little while, but I much prefer the singleplayer DLC they used to do. Undead Nightmare was so rad, and I really hoped for something similar in GTAV. Ah well! They could still release SP stuff for RDR2, and it will still have a big ol' SP campaign anyways so I can't complain.
Yeah, as much as times are a-changin' Rockstar hasn't skimped on single player yet.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
+1
Options
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
Rockstar has revealed the title of the newest game in the Red Dead series - Red Dead Redemption 2, which will be released in Fall 2017. A trailer will be released on Thursday.
On Rockstar's Newswire website, Rockstar only lists Xbox One and PS4 as the intended formats, which suggests a similar release model to Grand Theft Auto V, where a PC version was released several months later.
The Newswire post says he game will be, "an epic tale of life in America’s unforgiving heartland, the game's vast and atmospheric world will also provide the foundation for a brand new online multiplayer experience."
That multiplayer experience will most likely be Red Dead Online, the name of which appeared to leak this morning.
The announcement fleshes out yesterday's teaser image, adding more detail to the faces and clothes of the characters included - let the speculation commence!
Red Dead Redemption 2's first trailer will arrive this Thursday, October 20, at 8am PT / 11am ET / 4pm UK (that's 1am AEST on October 21). You can be sure we'll have all the info, rumours and good ol' fashioned gabbin' about that here on IGN.
Yeah, it probably won't be a simultaneous release, but I can't imagine RDR2 not releasing on PC. The reward for the longer wait is that sweet sweet mod support. I can see it now, revolvers that fire horses and riding mountain lions.
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
+5
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
The first RDR still hasn't had a PC release, right? :P
Oh brilliant
+1
Options
KoopahTroopahThe koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered Userregular
Meh, I'm in. I don't have anything to look forward to on my PS4 besides FFXV and Horizons anyway.
The first RDR still hasn't had a PC release, right? :P
but GTA5 has which gives some hope going forward. and if Rockstar are using the Online components as an additional revenue stream between releases then it would make sense to release on as many platforms as possible.
+1
Options
SteevLWhat can I do for you?Registered Userregular
The first RDR still hasn't had a PC release, right? :P
but GTA5 has which gives some hope going forward. and if Rockstar are using the Online components as an additional revenue stream between releases then it would make sense to release on as many platforms as possible.
On the other other hand, GTAIV got a PC release a couple months later, 2 years before RDR came out. So it seems like they just skipped it, not that PC wasn't a factor back then.
Oh brilliant
+1
Options
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
I heard a while back that the reason RDR never came to PC is because they weren't able to convert it from the console hardware architecture to PC architecture. The metaphor I heard is that RDR is basically being held together by duct-tape and chicken wire, and trying to move it to a different platform results in the game just falling apart and not working at all.
RDR was pretty much completely overhauled before release, IIRC. It's pretty much held together by bits of sticky tape coding and the cracks often times show in the bugs. (not that it's ever come across any tbh).
The first RDR still hasn't had a PC release, right? :P
but GTA5 has which gives some hope going forward. and if Rockstar are using the Online components as an additional revenue stream between releases then it would make sense to release on as many platforms as possible.
On the other other hand, GTAIV got a PC release a couple months later, 2 years before RDR came out. So it seems like they just skipped it, not that PC wasn't a factor back then.
ah, wasn't 100% sure on 4 and was leaning to it not being on PC. anyway, i'd still expect them to have started RDR2's development with an eye to releasing on PC at some point.
0
Options
SteevLWhat can I do for you?Registered Userregular
When Red Dead Redemption was in production, the Housers were in charge. Benzies had no role in its making until, he says, things started to fall apart
Benzies alleges that Sam Houser sent him the following email message. "PLEASE help me/us get [Read Dead Redemption] into shape. I am a jabbering wreck right now. I need The Benz!" The way he tells it, 'the Benz' stepped in and saved the day.
As an aside, I'm not only amused that this old thread was revived, but that the OP no longer even posts on the forums.
Kind of surprised at the title. The original title really tied into that game's themes, so maybe they're doing something similar here. The Magnificent 7/7 Samurai were, in a lot of ways, about trained killers trying to do something good with their bloody skills, and the reference in that shot is unmistakable, although I'm skeptical we'll actually get 7 playable characters unless its done as a chapter-by-chapter thing.
I really hope they keep the Honor system from the first game, or at least allow you to play as a semi-good guy. One of the reasons I found GTA5 unpleasant to play was because all the PCs were just unapologetically awful people. That's sort of expected with GTA, but RDR had a more mature and cinematic style of storytelling, and being able to choose how you treated other people through small and large interactions (stuff like rescuing or ignoring people who needed your help, and even stuff like tipping your hat and greeting people, or shoving them if you were a bad guy) made it feel like you had a lot more control over your character than we usually see in these kinds of sandbox games. I've often thought RDR (and Bully) are much better role-playing games than many "RPGs", because they let you have control over those small moments.
But, yeah. Awesome. Can't wait for the trailer. I'll be especially interested to see exactly when this is set, and if it's before or after the original game. I'm personally hoping for more or less the same time frame, because the Edwardian/Gilded Age setting was just such a fascinating period in history, and doesn't have a lot of representation in gaming, much less sandboxes. But they may go earlier for a more "traditional" western feel.
+2
Options
BeezelThere was no agreement little morsel..Registered Userregular
Considering the original RDR was purposely set at the veeeeeeeeery end of the days of the Old West, I'd prepare for disappointment.
the game can be set in an earlier time period without being an actual prequel. if it focuses on entirely new characters then i think they can get around the prequel issue.
I already know where the story ends up! The ruins the fun of the journey.
I mean, MGS3 was a prequel but that was one of the better games inthe series. We know where the Journey ends with Marston but we don't get to see the things he got up to with the gang.
Considering the original RDR was purposely set at the veeeeeeeeery end of the days of the Old West, I'd prepare for disappointment.
Possibly. But on the other hand, you could make a Red Dead game set in a lot of different eras. "Western" is as much a stylistic and tonal choice as it is a chronological setting.
One of my pipe dreams has always been that they would make a "Red Dead" game set in the gangsters-and-G-men era of the depression, with the old-school automobiles and what have you. Or they could even go full-blown modern a la Cormac McCarthy/No Country For Old Men. Not that I think they're doing that with this release, but it's an interesting hypothetical.
Duffel on
0
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
I already know where the story ends up! The ruins the fun of the journey.
I mean, MGS3 was a prequel but that was one of the better games inthe series. We know where the Journey ends with Marston but we don't get to see the things he got up to with the gang.
Well you were also playing from the perspective of a different character in that.
But it also would have been an even better experience (for me) if I had gotten to see that side of the story chronologically so being a prequel still lessened the game.
I already know where the story ends up! The ruins the fun of the journey.
I mean, MGS3 was a prequel but that was one of the better games inthe series. We know where the Journey ends with Marston but we don't get to see the things he got up to with the gang.
MGS3 still holds the title for best ladder climbing sequence.
I'm not as annoyed about the teaser stuff now as it is a Fall 2017 release that will only be delayed several times into 2018 instead of of a 2018 one. With an actual trailer... but will it contain gameplay/scenes in-game?
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
I already know where the story ends up! The ruins the fun of the journey.
I mean, MGS3 was a prequel but that was one of the better games inthe series. We know where the Journey ends with Marston but we don't get to see the things he got up to with the gang.
Well you were also playing from the perspective of a different character in that.
But it also would have been an even better experience (for me) if I had gotten to see that side of the story chronologically so being a prequel still lessened the game.[/quote]
Yeah I realised that as soon as I wrote that post but was like "fuck it, I've written it now :P
That said, I still think there's enough scope to flesh out the life of Marston prior to the events of RDR1.
Considering the original RDR was purposely set at the veeeeeeeeery end of the days of the Old West, I'd prepare for disappointment.
Possibly. But on the other hand, you could make a Red Dead game set in a lot of different eras. "Western" is as much a stylistic and tonal choice as it is a chronological setting.
One of my pipe dreams has always been that they would make a "Red Dead" game set in the gangsters-and-G-men era of the depression, with the old-school automobiles and what have you. Or they could even go full-blown modern a la Cormac McCarthy/No Country For Old Men. Not that I think they're doing that with this release, but it's an interesting hypothetical.
i'd much prefer that they keep the series in the Old West, if only because there's a complete lack of games set in that time period. RDR was set towards the end of the era, but there's still a lot of ground they could cover in the setting.
Considering the original RDR was purposely set at the veeeeeeeeery end of the days of the Old West, I'd prepare for disappointment.
the game can be set in an earlier time period without being an actual prequel. if it focuses on entirely new characters then i think they can get around the prequel issue.
What's the name of the old Cowboy Marston meets in Mexico?
When I was playing I actually thought a sequel focused on his earlier days would be cool.
Also sounds like Duffel is looking for a game more along the lines of Last Man Standing, the Bruce Willis classic wherein we see just how awesome the Colt 1911 (with +impact kinetic rounds and bottomless mags) would be vs revolvers.
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
Considering the original RDR was purposely set at the veeeeeeeeery end of the days of the Old West, I'd prepare for disappointment.
the game can be set in an earlier time period without being an actual prequel. if it focuses on entirely new characters then i think they can get around the prequel issue.
What's the name of the old Cowboy Marston meets in Mexico?
When I was playing I actually thought a sequel focused on his earlier days would be cool.
hell, you could play as the guy who ran Marston's gang prior to Marston joining. get a better idea of who he was, have the game end with you meeting a young John Marston. of course, as i said i think i'd prefer something completely new, with perhaps a few nods to it being the same world. but there are certainly options for a prequel other than just playing as a younger John Marston.
Posts
I'm not gonna go Debbie Downer on it yet, but their explicit mention of online MP makes me sad-ish. GTA:O was ok for a little while, but I much prefer the singleplayer DLC they used to do. Undead Nightmare was so rad, and I really hoped for something similar in GTAV. Ah well! They could still release SP stuff for RDR2, and it will still have a big ol' SP campaign anyways so I can't complain.
This is true for me as well, but I fully expect a PC release eventually. Probably just not at the same time as the console release.
My Backloggery
Yeah, as much as times are a-changin' Rockstar hasn't skimped on single player yet.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
but GTA5 has which gives some hope going forward. and if Rockstar are using the Online components as an additional revenue stream between releases then it would make sense to release on as many platforms as possible.
And it might never get one, based on the reports on how the game barely made it out the door on consoles due to its troubled development.
My Backloggery
Yeah, games are getting bigger and buggier, and PC development is more of a pain in the ass than ever before.
Not to say it absolutely won't happen, but I wouldn't hold your breath.
On the other other hand, GTAIV got a PC release a couple months later, 2 years before RDR came out. So it seems like they just skipped it, not that PC wasn't a factor back then.
ten bucks if RDR2 comes to PC we'll get a choice of picking a bundle with the first RDR game on it as well.
Yup. Supposedly took six years and was horribly mismanaged.
https://www.engadget.com/2010/01/12/sources-red-dead-redemption-development-in-trouble/
ah, wasn't 100% sure on 4 and was leaning to it not being on PC. anyway, i'd still expect them to have started RDR2's development with an eye to releasing on PC at some point.
Additionally, more came out about that when Leslie Benzies initiated a lawsuit against his former employer.
As an aside, I'm not only amused that this old thread was revived, but that the OP no longer even posts on the forums.
My Backloggery
"...only mights and maybes."
I really hope they keep the Honor system from the first game, or at least allow you to play as a semi-good guy. One of the reasons I found GTA5 unpleasant to play was because all the PCs were just unapologetically awful people. That's sort of expected with GTA, but RDR had a more mature and cinematic style of storytelling, and being able to choose how you treated other people through small and large interactions (stuff like rescuing or ignoring people who needed your help, and even stuff like tipping your hat and greeting people, or shoving them if you were a bad guy) made it feel like you had a lot more control over your character than we usually see in these kinds of sandbox games. I've often thought RDR (and Bully) are much better role-playing games than many "RPGs", because they let you have control over those small moments.
But, yeah. Awesome. Can't wait for the trailer. I'll be especially interested to see exactly when this is set, and if it's before or after the original game. I'm personally hoping for more or less the same time frame, because the Edwardian/Gilded Age setting was just such a fascinating period in history, and doesn't have a lot of representation in gaming, much less sandboxes. But they may go earlier for a more "traditional" western feel.
"...only mights and maybes."
I'm still excite bike about this though
Hell I'll take John's awful, inferior son to a prequel.
"...only mights and maybes."
Considering the original RDR was purposely set at the veeeeeeeeery end of the days of the Old West, I'd prepare for disappointment.
I already know where the story ends up! The ruins the fun of the journey.
the game can be set in an earlier time period without being an actual prequel. if it focuses on entirely new characters then i think they can get around the prequel issue.
I mean, MGS3 was a prequel but that was one of the better games inthe series. We know where the Journey ends with Marston but we don't get to see the things he got up to with the gang.
Possibly. But on the other hand, you could make a Red Dead game set in a lot of different eras. "Western" is as much a stylistic and tonal choice as it is a chronological setting.
One of my pipe dreams has always been that they would make a "Red Dead" game set in the gangsters-and-G-men era of the depression, with the old-school automobiles and what have you. Or they could even go full-blown modern a la Cormac McCarthy/No Country For Old Men. Not that I think they're doing that with this release, but it's an interesting hypothetical.
Well you were also playing from the perspective of a different character in that.
But it also would have been an even better experience (for me) if I had gotten to see that side of the story chronologically so being a prequel still lessened the game.
MGS3 still holds the title for best ladder climbing sequence.
I'm not as annoyed about the teaser stuff now as it is a Fall 2017 release that will only be delayed several times into 2018 instead of of a 2018 one. With an actual trailer... but will it contain gameplay/scenes in-game?
Well you were also playing from the perspective of a different character in that.
But it also would have been an even better experience (for me) if I had gotten to see that side of the story chronologically so being a prequel still lessened the game.[/quote]
Yeah I realised that as soon as I wrote that post but was like "fuck it, I've written it now :P
That said, I still think there's enough scope to flesh out the life of Marston prior to the events of RDR1.
i'd much prefer that they keep the series in the Old West, if only because there's a complete lack of games set in that time period. RDR was set towards the end of the era, but there's still a lot of ground they could cover in the setting.
When a prequel is just retconned into existence as an excuse for more content, then I agree, they usually aren't great.
What's the name of the old Cowboy Marston meets in Mexico?
When I was playing I actually thought a sequel focused on his earlier days would be cool.
Also sounds like Duffel is looking for a game more along the lines of Last Man Standing, the Bruce Willis classic wherein we see just how awesome the Colt 1911 (with +impact kinetic rounds and bottomless mags) would be vs revolvers.
hell, you could play as the guy who ran Marston's gang prior to Marston joining. get a better idea of who he was, have the game end with you meeting a young John Marston. of course, as i said i think i'd prefer something completely new, with perhaps a few nods to it being the same world. but there are certainly options for a prequel other than just playing as a younger John Marston.
An unrelated story doesn't really count as a prequel.
What's the story of Red Dead Redemption 2