• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Read Dead Redemption 2 exposes how weak of a story RDR1 was!

Gamer79

Predicts the worst decade for Sony starting 2022
Major spoilers ahead.....You have been warned....



Ok the whole simple plot of the original Read Dead Redemption is the Law is holding John's family hostage and to get them back he has to hunt down some of his own former gang members. I do not have a real problem with that part of the story. The major problem I have is WHO John has to hunt down. The issue I have is John's Mission is to hunt down some of the weakest members of the Van Der Linde gang. Lets take a look at the main characters John has to hunt. Also keep in mind this game takes place 12-13 years after RDR2. Dutch and majority of the gang are old as shit by now. Hell back in the early 20th century if you were in your mid 40's you were an old man.

1. Bill Williamson: He was the fuck up of the Van Der Linde gang. Dutch use to talk down to him like his bitch and wasn't really respected. On some of the most important missions they chose to leave Bill on the Sideline. He's a loud mouth and pretty stupid. It's ridiculous how long it took in the origianl game to kill this idiot.

2. Javier Escuela - While a capable guy was just a minor character in RDR2. I think I remember maybe 1 or 2 missions where he was a focus. Again he wasn't really a bad ass and was just kind of story filler. Strong Silent Type but to be honest I never seen anything in RDR2 to say Javier was some great figher or anyting.

3. Dutch Van Der Linde: Lets not forget that Dutch was losing his shit near the end of Red Dead Redemption 2. He also old by the time Read Dead Redemption pops around. (late 50's) Anyone who plays sports will tell you the body starts to fall apart in your mid 30's and sometimes earlier. So now Dutch is this crazed old Fanatic that becomes the main villian of RDR.

To Sum it up: John has to go hunt 2 old men and not really bright and Javier who is just kinda a mid level figher. Breaking it down, John's main mission is to Hunt men who are far from their prime and 2 out of the 3 werent' really skilled. I remember I posted a poll who people thought were tougher either Arthur or John and naturally Arthur won. In further reflection, John isn't half the man Arthur is. Arthur had many more accomplishments, many more battles, and was just a better overall character. The simple fact is the orignal game breaks down to an old gunslinger who is hunting old imcompetent men. When you consider the gang's past and look who John had to hunt it's kinda pathetic.
 

Imtjnotu

Member
Season 4 Episode 3 GIF by The Office
 

a'la mode

Member
readeader reddeademption is bad game for lame people and not for cool people and john marston more like john suckston because he sucks so much
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
This is my story canon for rdr2 tbh, especially part 2



BedBananas needs to make new videos. I very rarely can watch a 45 minute video on YT, but his videos, I can watch to completion and crack up the entire time.

The 'Rust' ones had me in tears.

Reminded me of the other guy's (can't remember his name) Second Life videos back in the day.
 
Last edited:

GymWolf

Member
BedBananas needs to make new videos. I very rarely can watch a 45 minute video on YT, but his videos, I can watch to completion and crack up the entire time.

The 'Rust' ones had me in tears.

Reminded me of the Second Life videos back in the day.
Yeah, i watched these 2 videos multiple times, the second one is a vivid dream masterpiece.
 

Gamer79

Predicts the worst decade for Sony starting 2022
bro do you have parkinsons
Any professional Athlete's career typically starts to diminish in their early 30's. This isn't debate it's fact. Go look at the average age of an NFL or NBA player. Remember Michael Jordan trying to play again in his 40's with the wizards? ugh

My point is you get slower and the body gets slower. It's border line elder abuse.
 
Last edited:
I can't agree or disagree because after many many many attempts to get into RDR2, I had to quit after about 4 hours because it was incredibly boring. Gorgeous, yes, but my God, it was boring and slow. The controls did not help anything either.
 
Last edited:

rm082e

Member
I'm playing RDR2 for the first time right now. I played RDR way back when it was newish. I don't remember anything from RDR other than the Mexico stuff seemed like complete filler when they decided they needed to pad out the hour count. I thought it was okay, but I really don't get why people still act like Rockstar does groundbreaking work.

RDR2 seems fine, but I don't feel like there's been any real progression in the story over the 20+ hours I've put into it so far. It's a fun sandbox, but it's not like "playing a great movie".
 

Gamer79

Predicts the worst decade for Sony starting 2022
I'm playing RDR2 for the first time right now. I played RDR way back when it was newish. I don't remember anything from RDR other than the Mexico stuff seemed like complete filler when they decided they needed to pad out the hour count. I thought it was okay, but I really don't get why people still act like Rockstar does groundbreaking work.

RDR2 seems fine, but I don't feel like there's been any real progression in the story over the 20+ hours I've put into it so far. It's a fun sandbox, but it's not like "playing a great movie".
There is a ton of story and just like life there are slow moments. Trust me there are plenty of action packed sequences. Especially in the late game.
 
For people saying Red Dead was better, The people just like in the Election has spoken

Metacritic:

Red Dead Meta score; 83 critics, 75 USER score https://www.metacritic.com/game/red-dead-redemption-featuring-undead-nightmare/
Read Dead 2 Meta Score: 97 critic score and 89 USER SCORE https://www.metacritic.com/game/red-dead-redemption-2/

tumblr_ppjyrmMrT11u4gq67o1_500.gif
well, that certainly settles that. i mean, fuck my own personal tastes, eh? i'll just let metacritic guide me from now on...
 

elhav

Member
The two games have different styles of writing. RDR's story, while taking itself seriously at some important times, was more often than not cynical and goofy, akin to GTA games. More of a satire.

RDR2 is written like a long crime drama, with comic relief and goofy bits here and there. The characters feel more real, and less like a parody of Spaghetti westerns characters.

I greatly prefer RDR2's style, but it's hard to compare the two, writing wise
 

Gamer79

Predicts the worst decade for Sony starting 2022
The two games have different styles of writing. RDR's story, while taking itself seriously at some important times, was more often than not cynical and goofy, akin to GTA games. More of a satire.

RDR2 is written like a long crime drama, with comic relief and goofy bits here and there. The characters feel more real, and less like a parody of Spaghetti westerns characters.

I greatly prefer RDR2's style, but it's hard to compare the two, writing wise
No doubt that RDR2 is a much more of an epic story and much more "realistic" at least to reference of Spaghetti westerns. I am looking at the scale of watch each character had to go through. Hell in RDR2, Arthur had to save John's life twice. Some prefer that overly goofy satire type of angle. It is preference. I think just in every way that RDR2 is a much better game. Some could argue RDR2 is even better than GTA5.
 

elhav

Member
No doubt that RDR2 is a much more of an epic story and much more "realistic" at least to reference of Spaghetti westerns. I am looking at the scale of watch each character had to go through. Hell in RDR2, Arthur had to save John's life twice. Some prefer that overly goofy satire type of angle. It is preference. I think just in every way that RDR2 is a much better game. Some could argue RDR2 is even better than GTA5.
I would argue that, but I assume we're talking strictly story and writing here, not gameplay or fun factor.

Because I think RDR had more enjoyable gameplay and pace (so did GTA5). RDR2 is slow and sometimes feels on rails. It's like Rockstar wanted to make a big realistic TV show and decided the game part should be sidelined, because it kinda plays itself. I personally like the world and writing (for the most part), but I don't think it exposes RDR's story as weak, but rather contrasts it with a whole new direction that I liked (apparently unlike a majority of folks in this thread).
the only thing RDR2 exposes is how dated R* gameplay is
Basically this
 
Top Bottom