I usually finish games that come this far, but honestly

I've been on a kick watching videos on the old west and it got me to reinstall this the other day. I didn't want to play through the stoory again, so I tried the online mode. Terrible mistake. What a slow, grindy tedious, slog that is.
Looks like I'm playing the story again.

There is a lot of story left, and it ties in nicely with the first game, if you played that. But yeah, I agree. Kind of a bummer.

I look forward to playing it again as I really enjoyed it and the first game which I recommend too. Like semmern says there's quite a bit more going on yet. Its not been three years yet since finishing so I think I need to wait a bit for to feel somewhat fresh again. I sill hope they bring the first to pc because I would really, really like to see it at a higher resolution and 60fps.

In the end i decided to start over. I still have the save from the first run so I can pick that back up should I choose to. But this is such a great game, one of the best I've ever played, that experiencing it all again (and perhaps things I missed) is the way to go.

About online.... I've given it a miss so far. I've played a lot of GTAO, which has its issues, but so far I've not felt compelled to play RDRO aside from a brief look early on.

I may give RDR 2 a shot some day. I love RPG"s but I admit that the "Old West" setting put me off.

There's no accounting for taste, as the setting is one of the best things about the game for me. Very authentic.

I can only encourage you to make this your next game, but I understand not everyone thinks like me

Yeah, one of the best PC games ever, I think

You know what, it's not just one of the best games ever. It is the best PC game I have played. And that's a mighty long list. I'm jealous of anyone who still has a chance to experience it for the first time.

So yeah, RDR 2 has officially supplanted Witcher 3 as what I think is the best PC game. It's a masterpiece of story and gameplay.

I would really enjoy the Wild West setting if someone could convince me this was a true open world simulator such as we find in games such as Ultima Underworld, Prey or lesser so like the Fallout games--or even Morrowind.

I get the impression it is mostly GTA in the Wild West with mission after mission and no interaction with the environment such as able to pick up cups and silverware and take flour and bake bread or enter every building. Not that I'd waste time baking bread--I like having that level of immersion in my "immersive sims."


I like to get lost in a game world, explore at my own pace, maybe dabble at the story here or there when I feel like it, but spend most of my time doing my own thing and figuring out my own solution to problems, knowing that there are many different ways to get into an area or figure something out.

It IS GTA in the west, structurally. Works in a very similar manner, especially missions. But I can think of few games that are better for getting lost in the gameworld, exploring at your pace and dabbling in missions. This is exactly what RDR 2 is. I think you'd love it, but I also know you have very specific criteria for your games. Missions are necessary to move it all forward and to get the best kit and abilities, but you dictate the pace, after the prologue. But there's no reason you couldn't put these off indefinitely and just explore, hunt, fish and whatever you want until you are ready for the next one. The pacing is excellent in RDR 2. Completely under your control

I don't know how I could convince you so won't try, but it seems to fit your bill.

All of the RPG's I've played so far let me do the main story missions whenever I wanted to. If I wanted to put them off and just go exploring on my own and do my own thing I could do so.

And while I tend to heavily favor a sci-fi setting for my RPG's, I have occasionally branched off and tried different ones like the Witcher series which I greatly enjoyed.

The thing with the Western/Wild West setting is that it's a genre that has never really "done it" for me at an emotional level.

If you haven't bought it yet there's probably little chance you will, but I do want to know what you think if you ever do. No way to divine if another player will connect on an emotional level. Just because I think it is so good, there's no guarantee the next man will. There are probably a few people out there who think it sucks

On the other hand, if I am saying it is the best PC game I've played then I can only recommend it to others.

I guess the difference is that in the "immersive simulator" genre such as Prey, Arx Fatalis, Ultima Underworld, System Shock, etc., is there are no missions. You can literally ignore any quests and still beat the game without completing missions, nor are you exactly directed to complete any. Within the world exists a problem to solve and your ultimate goal is to figure out what the problem is and solve it, without any handholding or being tasked or told what to do.

The games are free to give hints, though, such as what System Shock 1 and 2 did. Ultima Underworld was simpler in that you were thrown into the abyss and tasked with rescuing the kidnapped king's daughter. Beyond that, you were on your own. Prey was basically figure out wtf was happening and good luck. Arx is another masterpiece where you wake up with no idea who you are, where you are at, or what you need to do, and the story unfolds as you explore.

I would argue that the Western genre has never really been addressed adequately as far as games go.

The RDR series is by FAR as the best of the bunch, but it still lacks something of a true Western spirit in both the realistic and the cinema sense.

What DBond says.

I love to just dress up like a trapper, head out into the wilderness on a hunt, and play this song in the background

That's the way to do it. Matter of fact I think I talked about it a couple years ago earlier in this thread, about how if I played it again I would take more time in chapters 2 and 3 to do more off the beaten path. I did a heck of a lot of it even then, but in the end it was only about half of what I could have done, according to completion percentages.

I think a player that wants to ignore the R* direction, and just exist in the gameworld need only to reach Horseshoe Overlook and then do whatever he wants for as long as he wants. This player would have yet to obtain certain abilities, but if this is the way you want to play I don't think it would make much difference. I think the game works best by striking a balance between both of these things, but there is nothing mechanically to prevent a player from going off grid, as I think Johann had said before. And the game really shines doing exactly this.

So that's the plan, to take more time this run through the game, to do more of the side stuff. For example in my first run through the game I didn't pay much attention to rock carvings, card sets and some others. Even the legendary animals and fish, which I did pay attention to, only resulted in taking about half of them. Of course I was eager to see the story, and that propelled me through. Now that I've been through most of it, I plan to go easy and spend more time off the grid, roleplaying more and advancing less quickly.

But even then, so far, I've done mostly nothing but missions, as you need to do some of this to acquire some abilities such as being able to set up a camp, crafting and cooking at a campfire. I've reached chapter 2 and Horseshoe Overlook. So I'd say that a player that wants to mostly ignore the R* direction will still need to play along for about 8-10 hours or so at the start, to get the basics granted by the early missions. I want to get Dead Eye to level 2 then can set off on my own for a spell. Head up in to the mountains and do some hunting and some fishing. Pay more attention to the botany. Maybe set up a bit of a side hustle selling game meat and pelts, find a nice spot to make a camp and roleplay a bit. I want to also trigger the fish taxidermist dude (call me Fish Mail), but I forget yet where he is, or how to get that going. All in good time. Maybe do a bit of bounty hunting. There's that pace thing again.

I'm surprised again to see that my Steam purchase still is recognized as a pre-order, even though I pre-ordered it on Epic. So I get the free Ardennes war horse again which was nice and saved me the money on a horse at the start, and so I could afford to outfit him with some good kit including the top stirrups, which in turn increases his speed and acceleration, essentially offsetting the drawbacks of a war horse. I named him Max A Million.

And once again I want to praise the poker in RDR 2. I love it. I sat down to play a few hands as part of the Reverend mission and ended up playing for an hour. Up 75 cents! Cleaned up haha. What a great game.

Like Crane Hunter said RDR series is overall the best of a Western themed game. I agree with him to that RDR is still not truly authentic in its world or American West history. Its more akin to Hollywood Westerns. However, RDR has the absolute best horse riding including the original. The way they are animated having multiple gates and Rockstar does a stellar job of creating an organic feeling, nature-based atmosphere. They are very relaxing games to get lost in. I used to just ride in RDR listening to my own cowboy/western albums after work to unwind. RDR2 goes even further with how well the environment is realized and render. The game is not perfect but it is excellent. Its definitely a game to be experienced and to enjoy a great big story with many interesting, mostly superbly voice acted characters. Like DBond mentioned I wish that I could play it all over for the first time again. There was nothing like being dropped in a world area unfamiliar and non-existent in the first game, intentionally not looking at the map as much as possible so as to explore it for myself until you start getting the lay of the land. Another joy is spending time in camp and talking to anyone you can. Its amazing the sheer amount of ancillary dialogue there is in the game. I hope to play it on PC some day because the aiming controls would be much, much better with a mouse and keyboard. On console you really have to rely on dead eye a lot which by the way is still a very cool mechanic. Take a look at the old screenshot thread on here for a lot of discussion about the game if you like. There's also quite a bit of random encounters in the game not related to the story. Plus there's a few places in the game where you can go with this or that person for some different story elements. I was so keen on seeing John Marston again when I played I rode with him. Next time I'll make it a point to go with Hosea so I can get time and dialogue with him that I missed. Then there's all the great poignant moments that happen throughout the game.

My main irritation was how wonky the weapon inventory system was to where it basically was broken at times, not allowing for the customization or control they seemed to advertise. I also wish they would have slowed down the day/night cycle by just a little. It feels a little too fast at times.

Good post Coot.

Irritation? For me it is Dutch. He is the leader and a father-figure for Arthur, but I can't buy in, and it's a big deal. His schemes rarely come off, he makes poor decisions, rarely sticks to the plan, stubborn, hard-headed. Arthur may feel loyalty, or a sense of family, but I do not. So much so that I do not want to follow this man, but of course that's the only choice from a narrative point of view.

I compare it to GTA. As much as I like GTA's story mode, I didn't care much for the characters. Michael is supposed to be a master thief, but he's just an idiot with anger issues, and Trevor is a sick dude. I liked Franklin, who's head is on straight, but of course he is the one R* focused on the least. But when it came time to do the heists it was professional, and they came off if you did your job. Gettin' paid.

Dutch's schemes rarely do. As I played through the first time this sense of disconnect crept in, and by the time the camp had moved down south to that plantation-style house, I resented him. Each time I would return to camp, loaded down with game and pelts for the community good, Dutch would be standing up on the balcony saying 'come up here Arthur', and I'd just ignore him. Whatever he had to say would surely mean trouble, so I avoided him. And besides this, he is the one who, when the gang arrives at Horseshoe Overlook, says that it is time for everyone to earn their keep, and then he goes on to spend the rest of the game earning nothing. The nerve!

Exhibit A. Here's my horse Ricochet loaded down with a panther, a raccoon and maybe some other stuff at this same camp. Doin' my part



Matter of fact, to alter my point slightly, I grew to resent most of the other gang members, who complain about my lounging about while they do nothing at all. You can see who has contributed what to the community till, and I've dropped in a few hundred while others might have dropped a 40-cent feather weeks ago. I grew to see them as freeloaders and malcontents, and the camp distinctly lacked the sense that all hands were to the pump. There are a few exceptions, Lenny, Hosea, Javier, but others I would avoid in camp if I saw them approaching.

This is all perfectly plausible, the notion that I might not see eye to eye with everyone I'm in with, but at the same time I think, well, why am I in with this lot? Seems as if I'd be better off striking out on my own, or a splinter group. So I wish that Dutch had been written in a way that I did indeed feel a sense of loyalty, that he was a leader who made smart, logical decisions, and whose leadership made life better for those following.

All of which makes spending more time off-grid, as I am using that term, more appealing. I won't wake up to him and his old lady arguing again at least

Funnily enough coming from having played the first game twice, early on in RDR2 Dutch had moments of likability or even endearment...to a degree but alas as you point out the narrative follows the total breakdown of his character. When he shows up in the first game he's just a terrible, unacceptably violent drunk. I wish they would have modeled a cattle herding mini game into the end game. It would have been great to be able to save up money doing various things then get Uncle and Jack to go with you to Hennigan Stead to buy cattle and drive them back to Beacher's hope and then take care of them. I guess that would sort of conflict with the first game though where there is a mission where you do go buy cattle and drive them back and it seems as though this was the first time Marston was able to do this.


I would like to see a sequel that really goes back to the Old West days where maybe you play as a young Arthur and whoever his dad was. Then maybe it ends up where he's taken under Dutch and Hosea's wings. Make the world even bigger and wilder.

I also always thought that it would be quite the cool convergence of worlds if in a L.A. Noir sequel, have your police or federal agent character be assigned to drive out into the rural ranch land areas for a crime investigation. The period would still be the 1940s or even 50s. When your character goes out there he has to interview witnesses, one of whom happens to be an old rancher. Eventually the player comes to find out that they have been talking with none other than Jack Marston who is now an old man. He's the last of the generation that saw the very, very last of the tail end of anything remotely related to the old days and now is and elderly, small scale rancher in 1950s L.A. Noir world. Then they can bring both game worlds together. Maybe Jack Marston becomes a surrogate father or mentor to the agent and they even participate together in some level of gun fighting and interaction with organized crime. Then have a episode where Jack Marston does some noble deed that costs him his life. He himself to a degree and those he descended from lived by the gun and now he goes to meet eternity by the same means. As the agent holds a dying Jack Marston, perhaps jack admonishes the agent character not to hold anger and unforgiveness in his heart as it will just breed treachery and lead to disaster. Then the finale of the game's story is your police agent character having a "Red Dead Redemption" moment where he avenges Jack Marston and thus the cycle of tit for tat continues. I would love to see something like that done.