What are your opinions about it?

Comfy, great graphics, terrible gameplay
The most fun I had in the entire game was assaulting the bandit camps lategame, mostly because the game actually ALLOWED YOU TO PLAY IT YOUR WAY
It didn't give me game over for going 5 meters off the path or killing guys in the wrong order

>killing guys in the wrong order
I don't remember anything like that. When do you have to kill guys in a specific order?

i liked it. the fishing and hunting for the legendary animals and the treasure maps was the right amount of collectathon. didn't bother with the dino bones, collecting 100 bird asses, etc. ones. i really liked finding all the stranger stuff on my own.

it just needed something more for all those needs meters to have a purpose. It's almost like GTA5 where you thought that bank robberies could be dynamic and replayable when they're actually just scripted story quests. The same goes here where everything that could have done better with a dynamic approach, e.g. the part where you get captured by the O'Driscols and have to escape, there's just too much hand-holding and it just loses a lot of its potential immersivenes for the "cinematic" experience.

In one of the shootout missions, I got a game over because I ran around to flank the enemy from behind
RDR 2 is the most insanely linear game I've played

That's not really the same thing, but you have a point. The missions can be restrictively linear at times.

Agreed. It sacrificed gameplay for the sake of cinematics and "realism". I'm all for realism but when it hampers the gameplay then you have a problem.

Beautiful, confident world design, horrendous missions, good, simplistic writing

I wouldn't play it again the way I would GTA V, though, I don't know why. Maybe because the zoomer parody in GTA V is snarky and timeless enough.

>the nutty professor who tries to invent the electric chair and fails horribly
>the artists who painted naked paintings of people and then invited all his subjects to his gallery to get into a huge fight
>the guy who made a robot 'son'
>the family of circus performers
>that zookeper who painted dogs and donkeys as "exotic animals" but actually had a legit big cat that ate his "lion" and tore through a ranch full of people
>pitiful drunk guy who ended being a slave trader
strangers was the best part. well except for the go fetch me a bunch of shit ones.

Even though RDR 1 is probably my favourite game of all time, I just couldn't get into this one at all.

Was burnt out on it very quick because everything felt so slow and needlessly complicated. Simple stuff like walking around, getting on your horse, upgrading your camp, hunting animals, ... All of it was just needlessly slow, making everything feel like a slog. I don't mind slow-burn gameplay normally, as said RDR 1 is one of my favourite games ever, but things just felt off in this one.

Add to that the common complaint that you are railroaded from beginning to end on a certain path and you can barely make any decisions yourself.

Was bored after about 5 hours and never touched it again. What a shame, I really wanted to like it.

That's the last one, then there's the epilogue which is absolute kino.

What are you talking about, RDR1 isn't slow in any way.

Played for 50 hours stopped and now back into it.
Only 53% done. ||Just killed a certain Italiano||

absolutely terrible

Attached: 2020-03-02.jpg (3840x2160, 750.75K)

Had fun, and Yas Forums has a hateboner for it, so it goes from 8/10 to 10/10, like MGSV and Doom Eternal.

as a technical achievement it's an incredible success

as a video game...not so much, rockstar really need to leave some of the mechanics they lean on so much in the past. In fact, some of the mechanics needed to be dead and buried like, ten years in the past

If you had those sorts of issues with the core system then i hate to break it to you but you're casual af

RDR 1 is definitely quicker than 2, you're right. But 1 still has tons of slow escort missions, herding, horse breaking, ... and I would say it's still a slower pace than most other games in the genre.

Like what?

Controls have lag

>RDR 2 is the most insanely linear game I've played

wow you must not play a lot of games

beat it once but didn't really enjoy it

>some people say that the open world form of Rockstar is obsolete
>when 95% of games use the absolute garbage Ubisoft formula of pretending filling the map with pointless collectables is content

My opinion is that I want to pirate it but it's not cracked yet. Please get your shit together scene groups.

Attached: 1563534130270.webm (240x240, 2.91M)

Name a single other game where you get a game over screen for going 5 meters off a set path

hold X

Yes, I unironically think it's one of the best games to come out of this generation. All the people posting memes about slow controls or simple quests are simply ADHD autists who need their Modern Warfare fix.

There is only 1 legitimate criticism of this game and that's you can't pursue the legendary hunts / fishing / etc until you have finished the game as Arthur. That's fucking bullshit to dangle a great reward infront of you that you can't actually get until 80 hours later.

Attached: 1563500665642.jpg (1024x833, 67.21K)

It's the first R* open world game with shooting that can stand on its own. People bitch on the "linear" missions when it's done just to give you something cinematic to do and forget how satisfying free roam is where you can givve yourself a bounty and deal with random patrolling gangs in the wilderness.

What the fuck is that

Attached: IMG_20190706_123828.jpg (781x248, 213.56K)

It's got a good skeleton of a story and world, but it blows everything on scope instead of quality. The map is huge, but there's not a lot of interactivity outside of towns, and the story forces the group to blow their cover and move I think six times? And each time is the same - they've got a foolproof plan that falls apart and they never stop to recover.

There's an entire part of the map that is completely barren, and there are locations that would have been amazing to explore for the sake of exploration instead of having the story lead you there by the ear.

The world should have been smaller, with more to do, and the storyline should have been aware of when it had made it's point, and moved to the gang's fallout like 2 - 3 chapters earlier than it did.

I really liked Arthur, Arthur's horse, and John.

name a single other game with an open world as detailed and big, like just run around with a bounty, dummy

So, my DS4's cross decided that the left button won't work anymore, is this game any good with mouse and keyboard?
Or is there any way of fixing a button that has died randomly and for no reason at all overnight?

I just wish the PC version wasn't so buggy

Attached: 2020-03-02 (1).jpg (3840x2160, 1.4M)

I loved it when I played through it, never bothered to play it since though. Also Sadie is my wife.

Online was slow and comfy
Once you unlock the fishing rod ya just head to a secluded river, away from player killers, and just relax

sorry, but she's already been claimed by me

Attached: 2020-02-26 (17).jpg (3840x2160, 1.56M)

been playing this on pc for over 100 hours now and the only issue i have really noticed is it takes forever to pet a dog and for some reason my weapons get switched around/unequipped for no reason like max payne 3 did.

It's either my system or engine limitations, what settings are you running at?

Attached: 10-23-2019_10-23-17_PM-1d4103vb.jpg (3840x2160, 2.53M)

>open world game
>can't use the open world in the story missions
Honestly is there any bigger fucking failure for these kinds of games? Sure, throw some sidekicks in so you have to cover your allies, but punishing a player for tactics or whatever just makes it seem like the devs can't make an actual open game.

Rockstar got famous for GTA3, and not the missions but the sandbox and the creativity that came with the police chases. Yet they never thought that they should apply that to their story missions, adding some new thing to the sandbox and letting you tackle it you way. They've always stuck with "follow X" or "shoot your way through this path" missions, and they ALWAYS get mentioned in reviews - even the casuals kno the gameplay o the missions sucks in Rockstar games.

Theu could have done - a bank robbery gone wrong, the whole town aggros, and you have to meet the gang at a set rendezvous as the gang scatters with limited inventory. Shooting and hiding through Saint Denis with two pistols while the police spawns are altered would be great.
They could have done - you're on a hill for a meeting, and chaos breaks out, and you can snipe, rush, or grab your friends and bail, with the AI reacting differently each way
They could have done - partner activities where you take the cast to do something and depending on who you take to do what certain things happen (like racists attacking Lenny at a bar or Hosea cheating at cards and getting you chased out of a town)
They could have done - shoot-outs where you can divide gangs, kite the AI, target a leader to scatter the forces, draw fire and then flee while telling your friends to hide so that a large majority of the fighters chase you and you can set traps or whatever.

I liked this game, a fair amount too, but fuck me if the mission design of R* games doesn't miss the entire design philosophy of their own work.