Red Dead Redemption 2 being teased next week - Sensationalist Headlines

[media]https://twitter.com/RockstarGames/status/911228595644837888[/media] [quote]What could be it? Ideally, it'll be a solid launch date (right now RDR2 is set for the loosely-defined second quarter of 2018), a new trailer, and confirmation that a PC version is on the way. But I'd be willing to settle for just one of those things. I'll let you guess which one.[/quote] [url]http://www.pcgamer.com/rockstar-teases-a-red-dead-redemption-2-thing-for-next-week/[/url]

PC Confirmation would be cool, but I have severe doubts. I'd shit myself if they announced it for Switch before PC.

After the mess that was GTA V, I'm really not interested in this. The fact it's even called RDR2 and not anything more inventive is to me already a telling sign that Rockstar isn't going to be nearly as creative and daring with this as they were with its predecessor.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52711949]After the mess that was GTA V, I'm really not interested in this. The fact it's even called RDR2 and not anything more inventive is to me already a telling sign that Rockstar isn't going to be nearly as creative and daring with this as they were with its predecessor.[/QUOTE] Pretty literally judging a book by its cover there.

[QUOTE=TurtleeyFP;52711959]Pretty literally judging a book by its cover there.[/QUOTE] Yeah as much as I don't like how they handled the life of Gta V after release, I don't have any bad criticism for the skills of their development team. I doubt their skills got worse because some higher ups made some shitty decisions with how they handled microtransactions on a separate series.

[t]https://i.imgur.com/eEk9nSM.png[/t] GTA V is still in the top 10 steam games, I swear to fuck if pc doesn't get it or they've been fucked by some console exclusive shit, I'm going to be VERY VERY sad. granted GTAV does have a lot of multiplayer/mods

[QUOTE=Lollipoopdeck;52711972][t]https://i.imgur.com/eEk9nSM.png[/t] GTA V is still in the top 10 steam games, I swear to fuck if pc doesn't get it or they've been fucked by some console exclusive shit, I'm going to be VERY VERY sad. granted GTAV does have a lot of multiplayer/mods[/QUOTE] Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if it still gets the same treatment as gtav. That figure actually shows them that they can delay a pc port and release the game earlier and only for consoles, knowing pc players will wait to buy it.

So how many explosive sniper shots will it take to kill an albino armor plated buffalo? What will the wild west equivalent be to shark cards?

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52711949]After the mess that was GTA V, I'm really not interested in this. The fact it's even called RDR2 and not anything more inventive is to me already a telling sign that Rockstar isn't going to be nearly as creative and daring with this as they were with its predecessor.[/QUOTE] I'd rather it be called something simple like RDR2 instead of Red Dead Redemption: Revelations or something stupid like that.

[QUOTE=Keychain;52712127]I'd rather it be called something simple like RDR2 instead of Red Dead Redemption: Revelations or something stupid like that.[/QUOTE] Red Dead Revenge?

i mean unless the publisher wants to shove all the stuff theyve done with GTA V into RDR2 and decides to hand the game off to rockstar north instead of keeping rockstar san diego as the developer i dont see any reason to doubt the quality of the game [editline]23rd September 2017[/editline] also yeah, itd be stupid for them to not have a PC version at some point. apparently the first game was a broken mess of code all around and it was a miracle it worked at all on consoles. asking for a PC version after that would take some serious work, and they werent sure at all it would be a well selling game since theres not many open world western games out there (and have been successful)

[QUOTE=Keychain;52712127]I'd rather it be called something simple like RDR2 instead of Red Dead Redemption: Revelations or something stupid like that.[/QUOTE] It would've been neat if they'd kept up the naming convention for the last two games in the franchise and called it "Red Dead Word-That-Starts-With-R" Red Dead Redemption 2 is understandable for brand recognition, but it's kinda sorta like if Bethesda called the next TES game "Skyrim 2"

[QUOTE=Simplemac3;52712237] but it's kinda sorta like if Bethesda called the next TES game "Skyrim 2"[/QUOTE] the funny thing is that i wouldn't put it past them

Red Dead Redemption 2: Redder and Deader.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52711949]After the mess that was GTA V, I'm really not interested in this. The fact it's even called RDR2 and not anything more inventive is to me already a telling sign that Rockstar isn't going to be nearly as creative and daring with this as they were with its predecessor.[/QUOTE] GTA V is excellent, though? It's just the multiplayer part that sucks ass

All I remember from the first Red Dead is horse riding and shooting someone after cutscenes. Playing RDR on PS Now really made me re-think what I originally had in my mind for the game. It was good for it's time just like GTA IV but it's aged poorly.

So we're teasing teasers now? Aren't teasers supposed to be a game dev announcing "HEY GUYS, WERE WORKING ON A NEW GAME! TAKE A GUESS AT WHAT WE'RE MAKING!" not, you know announcing a game, then showing off a tiny bit of cinematics? I like things being left to interpenetration, not just flat out HERE YA GO YA FILTHY MONGREL

[QUOTE=Keychain;52712127]I'd rather it be called something simple like RDR2 instead of Red Dead Redemption: Revelations or something stupid like that.[/QUOTE] Its the Red Dead franchise, not Red Dead Redemption franchise. Red Dead Revolver was the original. I suppose you could look at it as a Metal Gear -> Metal Gear Solid situation because of the gameplay changes but the title was also reflective of the plot so who knows.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52711949]After the mess that was GTA V, I'm really not interested in this. The fact it's even called RDR2 and not anything more inventive is to me already a telling sign that Rockstar isn't going to be nearly as creative and daring with this as they were with its predecessor.[/QUOTE] Say what you want about GTA Online, the singleplayer was pretty fucking good. I honestly had a blast playing it, plus Los Santos is really really great to explore. And RDR1 is one of the best games of all time. If the world they make is even half as good as it was there I'll be happy.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;52712324]Its the Red Dead franchise, not Red Dead Redemption franchise. Red Dead Revolver was the original. I suppose you could look at it as a Metal Gear -> Metal Gear Solid situation because of the gameplay changes but the title was also reflective of the plot so who knows.[/QUOTE] yea that was a pretty weird thing for me to say. i never actually played any rd game since i didn't own the consoles they were on, i had forgotten it was just "red dead" [editline]24th September 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;52712344]Say what you want about GTA Online, the singleplayer was pretty fucking good.[/QUOTE] the singleplayer is so criminally underrated. it's basically the CoD syndrome where a ton of people are only interested in the multiplayer for some reason and completely ignore the singleplayer

I hardly played the multiplayer of GTA V if at all because even in the game's early months it was already a clusterfuck of grinding that only got worse with time, each new update adding more expensive shit to try and convince the player to spend more money on it. When I said the game was a mess I wasn't talking about Online. The Single Player is a schizophrenic experience that doesn't know what to do with itself. The story is a humongous step back from GTA IV. It's a series of events which appears to mostly just be a checklist of stupid and wacky things the writer came up with. The technical aspect of the game is an upgrade in terms of raw visual fidelity but a downgrade in many other ways, with dozens of smaller details and aspects of its predecessor that many people considered fun to be gone for no real purpose. The characters have potential but are never developed. It just doesn't know what it's trying to do besides vaguely spoof heist films. Its multiple endings are an utter joke since the supposed "death wish" ending is an absurd cakewalk - in fact most of the missions are just absurd cakewalks. Generally speaking it's obvious the game is trying to hit the same notes but refuses to invest the same kind of emotional baggage that GTA IV created around its own characters. When Niko Bellic cares about what little family he has and the story becomes about how poorly he protects them and the consequences of his actions, it feels genuine because they spent this much time building character. When Michael gets sad his family leaves him it's just a mess because it happens so fast, his family's a bunch of dislikable pissants to everyone including Michael and themselves, and Michael's relationship with them stops at "married a whore, betrayed gang for her". And this last point, in itself, [I]is already[/I] a rehash of RDR. And comes down to it, that's my problem with the game: it's a safe rehash of Rockstar's past successes, without understanding what made them good or why the risks taken at the time paid off the way they did. RDR had a compelling story because you had time to develop a connection to a character from literally nothing to some of the most poignant moments in gaming history, and it was a legitimate risk to make a game this huge with only a horse to go around. GTA IV's success was very much caused by the same factors: a compelling story that takes its time with a daring, risky change in scenery and tone. You can even look at Max Payne 3 for that matter: it was a game with its issues but it's also legitimately one of the most odd and outstanding third person shooting experiences of its time, and the story taking such a massive turn from the grimy streets of new york to South America was as controversial as it was well-written. They could have gone for a rehash of Max Payne 2 without as drastic a turn in terms of design and story but they took the bumpy road forward instead and the end product was better as a result. GTA V is a game which encompasses Rockstar's, both North and its subsidiaries, incapability to one-up themselves after years of one-upping themselves. And in light of this complete clusterfuck of a story, this schizophrenic cacophony of design decisions, this [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWVtZJo-HqI]technically confused[/url] half-cooked dish that takes as many steps backwards as it took forward, I'm not going to pretend I'm excited for a game whose first impressions it gave me was that it was so creatively bankrupt they could not even figure out a way to go on with the series' established naming convention, or that they were so unwilling to take risks they did not want people to possibly confuse this as not part of the same series, despite Red Dead Redemption taking up the name of a game that most people barely even knew existed.

It will be interesting to see what the absence of Leslie Benzies would do to the game. [editline]24th September 2017[/editline] Who for some reason looks like Paul Rodgers of Bad Company

[QUOTE=TurtleeyFP;52711959]Pretty literally judging a book by its cover there.[/QUOTE] 2k is just far too scummy of a company not to do that Rockstar is fine. 2k is fucked.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;52712324]Its the Red Dead franchise, not Red Dead Redemption franchise. Red Dead Revolver was the original. I suppose you could look at it as a Metal Gear -> Metal Gear Solid situation because of the gameplay changes but the title was also reflective of the plot so who knows.[/QUOTE] I'd argue Metal Gear's naming convention are mostly because of gameplay, not plot. Metal Gear is 2D stealth, Metal Gear Solid is 3D stealth, Metal Gear Ac!d is card games, Metal Gear Rising is a cuhrayzee. Even the new spinoff\cashgrab has its own name, Metal Gear Survive. Ghost Babel and Portable OPS are not really canon but they're still part of Metal Gear and Metal Gear Solid respectively, because they're still 2D and 3D stealth, even if on portable consoles.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;52712410]i dont think the game being called rdr2 is indicative at all of its possible quality the facts are, red dead redemption is the most popular of the two games by a long, long, long shot, calling it redemption 2 is a good business move any way you slice it[/QUOTE] the name thing I don't care about, pretty much totally meaningless to me the publisher itself is a scumfuck cunt on the other hand. Multiplayer will 100% be ruined because of them.

What if RDR2 will have shark cards replaced by snake oil :v:

RDR PC version as well? Pretty please?

[QUOTE=Annoyed Grunt;52712444]I'd argue Metal Gear's naming convention are mostly because of gameplay, not plot. Metal Gear is 2D stealth, Metal Gear Solid is 3D stealth, Metal Gear Ac!d is card games, Metal Gear Rising is a cuhrayzee. Even the new spinoff\cashgrab has its own name, Metal Gear Survive. Ghost Babel and Portable OPS are not really canon but they're still part of Metal Gear and Metal Gear Solid respectively, because they're still 2D and 3D stealth, even if on portable consoles.[/QUOTE] I meant RDR when i said plot, i'm aware Metal Gear differentiates its genres and dimensions by title.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;52712324]Its the Red Dead franchise, not Red Dead Redemption franchise. Red Dead Revolver was the original. I suppose you could look at it as a Metal Gear -> Metal Gear Solid situation because of the gameplay changes but the title was also reflective of the plot so who knows.[/QUOTE] Except that in this case, it's seeming more like this is now the Red Dead Redemption franchise. Red Dead Revolver had zero in common with Redemption, while this is seeming like it's going to be prequel to Redemption. Also, naming it Red Dead *insert R word* would be kinda dumb at this point because if someone were to say "RDR", there wouldn't really be any clear way to tell which one you're talking about. That wasn't a problem before because there wasn't really any reason for anyone to be talking about Red Dead Revolver but it would be a problem now and people would probably still end up referring to this new one as "RDR2".

[QUOTE=Sunday_Roast;52712446]What if RDR2 will have shark cards replaced by snake oil :v:[/QUOTE] Shark oil