Am I the only one who had no problems with controls in RDR2? Edit: If you don’t like the default controls, you can always change them in the settings menu.
Red dead redemption 2 was tear inducing. Some people talk about how violent video games just corrupt people, but sometimes, the people your playing as in these games, are more than a bunch of murderers. This game has one of my personal favorite protagonists in all of video gaming, as does the original game. Criminals or not, these people are human, and I cared about them in the end.
Witcher 3 is my personal game of the generation, with a tie between god of war and rdr2 taking second place. Minded, this generation isnt over yet, buts its gonna be hard to beat these.
It's likely to come actually. People discovered Mexico with a Glitch, so that makes the entire map of Red Dead Redemption in RDR2. Adding some lines to fit better with RDR2 and it's even more perfect.
Oh Yeah Yeah just because your friend said it is bad doesn’t mean you can join him by saying it considering you haven’t even played it go back to fortnite
The better game imo, rd2 was more a simulator, while graphically beautiful, I just felt it was eminently less playable, a chore if u will. Just my opinion of course.
Took me 4 days to complete the main story just an opinion it doesnt compare to other games yet because still waiting for online to see if whats gonna improve im am done with it already tho and it isnt the best thing ive ever played you must be kidding its a nice world but just feels wierd especially in the gun fights. the game looks good n amazing but lacks creativity and your own gameplay is made to feel restricted and was dissapointed with the actual gameplay not the game its self the story was shite after burning dwn braithwate manor it seemed to get more boring after st denis chapter didnt like the ending realy killed it . im not 1 for shooting animals just didnt excite. If there was a couple or a few packs of screaming indians with throwing axes or a hoard of mexican hats to shoot of id give this game all the credit it deserves but it has none of dat because the time period . not 1 bossfight in the game . Its just not what i expected from rockstar when there games use to get harder like warriors and manhunt 1 this game got too easy as soon as i got the automatic shotgun . just deleted blackout get bfv tomorrow red dead is nice just realy frustrated with the little things the little things that count in any game plus having lots of fun on new spyro so fuk you n sore buthole you been riding arthurs cock way too much.
How lazy are we getting sitting down complaining about having to tap a button cmon it aint that hard besides u can change it in the settings to "Toggle To Run"
Which game are you talking about? Either way I definetly do not blame you for either one of them. Both of the games are both incredibly emotional. Imo.
oohhh mmyyy.. did I cry..... I was really moved, And the anatagonist relationship between Arthur and Micah, with Marston family in between was just so clever and touching
I found American venom more cry inducing. When you go up the mountain and the song starts playing... Micah's gang : Just you left huh? John : Yea, just me!
Just on chapter 3, but can’t wait to see what the endings all about. My boyfriend cried at the end and the sad part is that he never cries😂 although i got a little spoiled by some degenerates about Arthur, but yeah ill try to avoid comment sections for now
I like John's better it was one of the first games I ever played in 2012 or so I was about 7 or 8 and I got it and loved it. It will always be special to me for that reason.
GTA 4 blew my mind when I first played it.the story is so good it can be made into a movie.and the physics and driving are simply the best.Its been a decade and I'm yet to find a game with better physics and driving mechanics than GTA 4.
I personally still prefer the first one. The second one looks phenomenal but it's just so slow in everything it does. I find myself sometimes just not wanting to play anymore because doing everything takes so much time.
Exactly. The gameplay coupled with the pacing is just nah. I got it and Monster Hunter World around the same time during 2018...guess which has been collecting dust while the other has 1.5k hours played? Yeah, RDR2 felt way too clunky for me (sad cause I loved 1 and was excited for 2) while MHW has been one of the most satisfying games combat wise of this gen
Josh Harris he was literally talking about a guy called Irish with Irish sterotypes from RDR1, and couldnt get that Sean is a real Irish character.. 🙄 *SARCASM AHEAD FOR YOU IDIOTS* As a person with Irish descent, Im offended he mistook him for Scottish 😂
EvilSlayer398 u shouldn’t be Irish descent doesn’t make u Irish be born and reared there and then get offended I am Irish and I’m happy there loads of us in the game
Michael Afc um yeah? Im Irish descent, not Irish born? I think you need puntuation somewhere in there kid. And, I was obviously joking on the last part. You see the emoji? Damn kid, take a hint 🙄
Was annoying me. The character said he was from Donegal which is about an hour drive away from me crossing the border from northern Ireland to Ireland. I can actually see it from my town across the water. But then again to an American I can see how the two accents sound similar.
@King Swirl 👑 no where did I say I was true Irish. I said I had Irish descent.. learn to read. And if you read my comments, you could obviously tell I was joking around. So stop being an offended asshat
@Yoshimitsu First of all it is nothing like doing that with star wars. Second is that we already know what happens to john so we don't care. We cared about Author cause hes knew and wanted to focus on him. I honestly don't care enough to get in a TH-cam argument about it so if you disagree then you disagree
@@kdavis91624 rdr1's music and atmosphere is better, there really isnt a debate. i think mainly cause both of those kind of intertwined. You walk on a desolate hill in the middle of the desert with the sun setting, and you hear the ominous, intimidating violin
I also think story wise RDR2 stands a bit higher because how you play Arthur changes the entire story and overarching theme If you start dishonorable and then switch to honorable it really is a story of redemption If you start as honorable and go into dishonorable it’s a case of being just as harsh as the world as the world as been to Arthur If you start as dishonorable and stay dishonorable then it’s being a case of being dealt the wrong set of cards and being who you felt you were all along because you don’t think there’s salvation And if you start honorable and stay honorable the theme more so stays along the lines of being a good man stuck in a bad situation and trying to look out for the people you love And I think that’s so interesting. With RDR1 John has a very clear mission and you know who he is. There’s not a whole lot of room for personalizing gameplay yknow
As much criticisms I give RDR2 that was an amazing point. RDR2 you get to write your own within a narrative story which to me no game I’ve played had that feeling or depth
@@270eman I agree I don't like that all these mission givers are in one place, kinda too easy and it doesn't feel like the wild west with all these people settling down in one place
Commonwealth Realm Both games are amazing in they’re own right, I haven’t seen the whole vid yet, But I played both of these games, I played the original 8 years ago, and recently I finished the new one, Rockstar really outdid themselves, they had to combine all of they’re studios just to make this, compared to last game where it was simply Rockstar San Diego, I think we have Rockstars second important franchise behind GTA.
What the heck are you talking about in the controls battle? You keep showing Arthur’s character climbing up a steep hill and slipping down because that’s obviously what would happen in real life, yet that’s somehow a control issue? The controls in RDR2 are a lot more smooth in MANY ways. In RDR1 your character is very stiff in movement. Just face it. RDR2 won in every aspect giving you more than you could ask for.
You are doing it wrong, release the left trigger and the horse will avoid the trees. The rider does not need to see shit, al that matters is can the horse see, now that's a raid!
the controls in RDR2 are "rage inducing". Lets not be hyperbolic just for the sake of having a talking point in your video. That's a little bit out there.
Yeah, the controls can be irritating at times. But never have they been rage inducing. And after you get used to the flow of everything, it gets so much easier. Plus tweaking the sensitivity a bit helps a lot
The first thing i noticed when i shot those O'Driscolls at Adler ranch was that the aiming controls was shit compared to RDR1. if i got on RDR1 now i could aim perfectly fine.
Personally, I prefer RDR 1 over 2. I found the story of 2 boring until I was halfway in Chapter 4. Because there seemed no point, no end goal, just outlaws being outlaws, and that doesn't really apeal to me. In RDR1 your goal is clear from the get go, Find the remaining member of your old gang, and get your family back. Sure in RDR2 there was a goal from the start, but thats just any goal that any outlaw would have. So again, basicly it was just Outlaws being Outlaws. And the missions bored me alot. Every mission was that they make a plan, execute the plan, plan goes wrong, and you kill everyone. I was hoping that atleast once the plan would go as planned. This is especially frustrating when you have a stealth mission, and you are not allowed to kill anyone. And then when you reach where you needed to sneak to, a cutscene plays, and in that cutscene something goes wrong, and then you kill everyone, if I could just shoot everyone while comming in that would be great, but no you have to sneak around for what feels like forever only to kill everyone later anyway. Other then that I did enjoy the game alot.
I agree generally, and in many ways specifically, with what you've said. I think the problem with cross-generational comparative reviews like this one is that the person conducting the analysis was either a) too young to remember or properly consume the impact or innovation of the older game when it was released, or b) is simply playing the older game retroactively, and having to work hard to overcome a natural bias toward favoring technological advancements of the newer game. I bought RDR I the day it was released; I was 31 years old. I am now 40 years old. I remember both very clearly, and RDR I was the better game at release. It was IMMEDIATELY engaging, and did not drown the player in survival/simulation mechanics that would be better suited for a "survival mode" second playthrough. I could go on and on, but in the end, RDR II is an absolutely fantastic game, but it does not do enough to overcome its predecessor.
Wilbert Beltman same red dead 2 to me when I first played it was the best game ever made until I played it again and realized how stiff and forced it was with its missions. To me what made me prefer rdr1 was the shooting and western sunset that felt like a scene from a film where as RDR2 most of the environments look foggy and lack that western vibe even when in New Austin, it does saddens me to see people bandwagon the game and attack anyone who doesn’t give it a 10/10
In defense of RDR1’s wacky characters, they’ve got desert fever (like cabin fever, but in the desert) Edit: the rest of the wacky characters that aren’t in the desert just have cabin fever. Or some variation of fever of the mind.
GTA IV was the start of the whole new engine called euphoria, which gave them the physics engine you see in all there games. The story telling and the attention to detail was complained for being too real for gamers, sound familiar to you? If Gta IV became a flop, then we wouldn't have red dead redemption 1 and 2. we would of got stuck with good old blocky GTA SA or goofy Saints row physics.
This guy is a Joke, GTA IV is easily the best GTA considered by many fans, only those who casually play games would go for SA or V, It was years ahead of its time and as you said it paved the way for our amazing games of later generations, and I don't even want to go into detail about storyline which was a genius class
@@amirmaroof9216 GTA IV's storyline was essentially a critique of the American Dream, though the quality of that story was watered down by GTA's usual wackiness and the game being too long, with major events being separated too far apart by filler missions. The same storyline was done much better in Mafia 2.
@@MrDueltube How can you even possibly compare IV's storyline to the Shaggy too rushed plot of Mafia 2?!!! I remember everyone was basically pissing on Mafia 2 for engaging players in sheer pointless missions like selling cigarettes to emphasize on domestic illegal business within a crime organisation, IV was the perfect parody of Modern society while telling an extremely serious story making player sympathize with a soviet killer all through the game, Side characters are just another example of perfection done by Rockstar IV, years after playing it I still remember missions with Roman, Lil Jacob, Vlad, Playboy, packie etc. As if it's still 2008!
"Characters stick around longer in 2" I felt the opposite. Sure, theyre still around, but it felt like the majority of the characters had like 1-2 missions with you. In 1, youd have multiple missions with the characters in whatever chapter they were in. Also, not sure why nigel would be down in Mexico with John, wouldnt actually add anything for them to be a part of every chapter.
General Dritz slightly repetive? It HUGELY REPETITIVE as i am only 17 years old so i didn’t play when the game came but i played it two years ago and it was pain in the ass and finally i found a guy who agrees with me ( the youtuber)
@@thatguyjohnmarston3480 I've played it twice, the story is decent definitley not better than 4s, gameplay is garbage since there's nothing to do after the story, physics were downgraded and gun fights are extra boring especially since everyone dies to 1 shot in the foot and everytime you shoot someone they end up doing the same fedal position animation which takes me out of the immersion. Only good thing about gta v is the graphics and realistic scenery but the people feel less realistic compared to iv since standing 20 feet away from someone triggers them to run away or fight you
RDR2 is better in every technical way you can compare, but I find the story of 1 better. The entire Mexico chapter and the ending of the game were a giant kick in the balls, but epic for it.
Personally didn’t like the story telling in either, but rdr2 pulls some really nice stuff out there that’s awesome, like how Arthur gets sick, when he talks about how he wants to die and all that. Also the character development in RDR2 is amazing. However, there is Guarma...
scarface 5021 ah it’s difficult to explain I think cause it’s an open world game, it can be difficult to understand the story 100% since the game isn’t linear at all. I think the story is decent, and I love a lot of the characters, but it’s nothing special story wise to me. It’s good to be a triple a game that doesn’t really need to rely on a good story though.
That's understandable, RDR 1 is 8 years old. It would be a fucking embarassment if the second one wasn't better when it comes to graphics and mechanics.
Currently replaying through RDR1 on PS3 and it's still without a doubt one of my favourite titles to date.. The music, atmosphere, characters, gameplay and of course the story are all awesome. Haven't managed to get my hands on RDR2 yet unfortunately!
I agree man, not only the story of RDR1 is better but the characters are much more memorable and charismatic too, and their faces fit more with the voice acting too, and the most important thing, RDR1 is a real western game you see the wild west there, RDR2 is on the east, green all around and big cities, you never cross the fucking desert in the main story of RDR2, even the characters of RDR2 keep saying that they should be in the west
In my opinion red dead 1 was one of the best games I have ever played in my 31 years of life. Red dead 1 story was probably thee best story i ever saw. All the characters and voice actors where absolutely phenomenal. The music is absolutely incredible. The game play, horse riding and shooting is all so damn fluid and such a joy to do. Im playing this game probably for the 1000 time right now sept 2020 and I still get this damn excited feeling I got when I played it in 2010! My life has literally drastically changed since red dead 1 I was 21 without a care in the world 10 years later im 31 with a 5 year old in kindergarten.....red dead 1 will forever be on my top 5 and hold a very very special place in my heart. Red dead 2 on the other hand was extremely boring and stupid. I literally only beat that game one time and I have absolutely zero desire to ever beat it again!
Red Dead 2 is something for hardcore enjoyers who want to explore the detailed and vivid world. It isn’t for people like you who want to have a fast story and don’t care much about exploring. And if you cared about exploring, you would like RDR2 much more because it has much more to explore than RDR1. The characters in RDR2 are also more interesting and likable. RDR1 just has funnier characters. RDR2 made Dutch and John so well. And the way how realistic, complex and interesting Dutch’s personality in RDR2 is makes him to one of the best antagonists that exist. You also see some story details you didn’t notice in the first time (I am taking about the story, not about Easter eggs). It literally makes you see everything much more clearly
For me 2’s ending was infinitely more impacting. I was horrified by the ending for John in 1, but I straight up cried for a good 15 minutes when the end rolled up in 2.
You really enraged me when you said GTA IV didn’t live up to GTA SA. GTA IV has the best engine of any game every made. Period. The story is amazing as well. It is far better than GTA SA and GTA V
-KIMG- no it isn’t the story and graphics and better but that’s it once you beat the game there is nothing to do but mod it and play blowing with romeman when sa had fair few things to do it be a trucker or do a extremely hard run bike ride and swim or just do some good old cheats like flying cars flying boats cars that drive on water and more go to the gym go to car school plane school boat school
This was a very fair video. As an old-school RDR player, I do wonder if I will play RDR2 as many times as I played through the original and DLC. Overall, it did give me some closure on my fandom of the original, and perhaps I will drift on with my life to other things now. Time will tell. ( I subscribed! )
This man complained about tapping the X or A button to run.... even though tapping the X button to run is in literally every single open world Rockstar game. Like why give hate to RDR for tapping a button to run when literally every game rockstar makes includes the tap to run feature lol?
Matty86 •M86• it could get annoying but nothing big. In assassins creed you just hold the right trigger and he keeps running it’d be better if the horses and running was like this in red dead but no biggie like I said
@@hawkmanwalter4250 besides the story, red dead redemption 2 isn't good, it's the complete opposite of the first game. Rockstar sucks at making sequels.
The story is better in Red Dead Redemption 2? I highly disagree. I prefer the first game’s story way better because halfway throughout RDR2, Arthur with the Dutch gang are stranded and captured on an island and are force to go at war with some soldiers almost like it’s a different game like Tomb Raider or Uncharted. Doesn’t feel like Red Dead at all. With that said, I believe the first game’s storyline is way more memorable for me.
Story wise definitely but gameplay wise hell no. If a gta game had the gameplay of gta San Andrea's mixed with the story of gta4 it would be better. The ballad of gay Tony has really fun missions similar to GTA San Andrea's though but it's only a DLC so it's over kind of soon.
Basically. I got bored really fast of 2, whereas I loved playing 1. Maybe I just grew out of liking these types of games (I prefer melee action games, "Soulslike")
Rdr2 should have more fun too the gameplay id better than rdr1 i played rdr1 dont get me wrong but i didnt like the controls in it but i liked rdr2 controls and the gameplay . but anyway I'll respect your opinion
I initially had the same problem with RDR II. I did not have this problem with RDR I; I couldn't put that one down until the bitter end. I believe the problem is that RDR II starts with less focus, less engaging dialogue (relative to RDR I), and drowns the player in survival/simulation mechanics that should have been part of a "survival/realism" mode better suited for a second playthrough.
JPIII I hope if RDR2 gets re released on next gen consoles that it will have more missions with your camp companions and have a bonding level similar to gta iv that in returns they give you items. It disappointed me because I wanted to hang out with Javier and Bill before the events of rdr1
Personally I really liked the stereotypes in red dead 1. In my opinion I love over the top characters but in the sense of realism I can understand why people wouldn't like them.
@@themadtitan7603 Yeah I think the satire is gone in 2, all they have is alcohol humor... woohoo! it is funny but lame relative to the wonderful satire that rockstar is good at.
@@jpegjake RDR2 went full revisionist western and wasn't interest AS MUCH (it's still there) in satirezing much of anything in favor of just telling a compelling story about a bunch characters.
Story was better in RDR1 to me. It had a lot more impact to me and made me care a lot more about the character and the world. Sure, RDR2 fleshes out characters more as you are spending more time around them, but more isn't always better. I wanted Marston to be successful and happy. I was emotionally invested in RDR1. I just don't care so much about this gang or character in 2. Emotional investment is what makes great games IMO.
i agree with the part about the world..i cared for the world in rdr 1...in rdr 2 i just didnt give a damn...not a single place was memorable for me...it all looked the same with excessive green
You're comparing your experiences as yourself now and your younger self, that's not fair at all. What you need to do is play both games again, and compare them in an organized manner. Otherwise, when you say rdr1 story is better, it's just your nostalgia talking
Chase Umeh you need to get off your high horse and realize that other people’s opinions are valid and there is no criteria for an “acceptable opinion”. Otherwise, using your own logic against you, I could jus as easily argue that you are blinded by hype and that’s the reason you like RDR2 over the first one. But that wouldn’t be any more credible an argument than yours. People like what they like so stfu.
Even with characters that you end up caring about more like Javier, he ends up betraying you and siding with Dutch anyways and it feels like that was out of convenience because he's a villain in the first Red Dead Redemption game.
Just because Arthur is an outlaw with a good heart doesn’t mean you should play as a criminal because he’s looking for a way out of the gang life besides read the title the key word is Redemption
Yeah, SA is lame for a 6th generation game tho we still have games from PS2 era that stands the test of their time like GOW 2 ans Resident Evil 4, Just like GTA IV is an ultimate classic and still amazing to play
Ok so everyone keeps complaining about the controls... my question is why? Is part of the realistic experience, people just want the easiest things and all they want is arcade feel movement, let me just do this anatomy, Arcade racers Vs realistic racers, arcade racers are just for the fun of playing with the driving controls, realistic racers might not always go your way since it's trying to perfect the realism of the physics as much as it can
The controls aren't clunky like everyone complaints about it, people are just retarted, tapping X/A like freaks, almost killing the horse stamina, doesn't pay attention to the fucking game and hit a tree "Horse, what the fuck are you doing?" Like dude, you're controlling the freaking animal, how the fuck is this his fault! The people who usually complaints about RDR2 controls are usually casual players, people who streams or impatience ones. Other night I was watching a stream and the guy streaming was complaining about "How RDR2 game pace is too slow for his taste, that it didn't have any type of fast travel in the game" or whatever, it makes me sad to see how impatience people grew to be, even playing a master piece like RDR2 is. Instead of just sit back and relax, play the game and enjoy it, people are going for the trill of killing and causing mayhem throughout the world, thinking that it is GTA 5 Western and getting frustrated when they're wrong.
@@comtebonfim I think it's easy to say that some of this streamers/ TH-camrs have a concept in their mind of what a game is supposed to be, a fun thing to pick up and play, most are used to casual games, sadly call of Duty and fortnite are still topping the charts and as you can see its because it fits to the majority of casuals, but when they see that a beast such as RDR2 was comming and it for sure was going to make their views go up, they play the game, the game is topping the charts because of it being one of the best because of the pure ambition, but that means that it's going to be the popular game all the casuals are moving over to play it, sadly streamers are usually the ones that hop into the game expecting some fortnite, arcade game feel experience, and what they get its just too much for them to keep up with, like you said the fact that they can't even keep up with the system of the Horse stamina really unsettles me, and worst yet those who didn't bother to understand the skill of this master piece instead of praising it for challenging their casual skills instead they do the opposite and call it a bad game, solely based on their experience having to deal with a game that is not casual enough for them.
Some people just want more comfortable controls, and some of these "casuals" are the most die hard rockstar and rdr fans ever. You saying all of this nonsense just makes it seem like you can't handle other people's criticisms and opinion, because their control schemes are a valid point whichever way you attempt to spin your argument.
Are you just going to say that the clunky aiming system is just realism? Because it's not, all of the casuals are even praising the game as one of the best of our century so most of your points are redundant.
@@Walamonga1313 i played rdr1 its a really good game and the nostalgia thing is the truth people like you are the people that decide things by nostalgia and i prefer rdr2 not becouse of the story but becouse of the gameplay its so real unlike rdr1
Playing RDR1 and I'm reading the newspaper in armadillo when all of a sudden I find an article that says: Wonder Tonic And guess what......it cures lumbago.
The second battle of “controls” was very stupid, i hate to break it to you, but if you keep running into trees with your horse, it’s your damn fault! And if you’re often “frustrated” with the controls, it honestly just means you suck at the game. Sure, the controls aren’t amazing, but they’re perfectly fine if you’re even remotely good at the game
Horses auto guide away from tree, so if you hit left while your too close, it will use rng to decide weather to go left or right. It always seems to choose away. Run up to a tree, and dont touch. It SHOULD, go around it
Kinda wish that the bounty missions were infinite in Red Dead Redemption 2 like they were in Red Dead Redemption 1. They're really fun to do and they helped you gain honor and lowered the bounty price on your head. Hopefully they make them unlimited in a future update.
I’ve seen so many people compare the content of RDR1 to RDR2 and I just wanted to explain why these features wouldn’t have worked. Mexico: It wouldn’t make sense to have Mexico in RDR2. The entire plot of the game is the Van der Linde gang attempting to escape incoming society which threatens their way of life. So having a portion of the map where things are more lawless and free wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense as it would make the entire story feel pointless. More Diverse Mounts: As is mentioned in this video, R* was going for a more realistic tone for RDR2. Therefore, riding around on Buffalos, Demon Horses, and other such things wouldn’t really fit. Fame and Duels: R* actually gives a reason for both of these in “The Noblest of Men, and a Woman”. When asked about how Arthur feels about fame and glory he says that he isn’t interested in fame which makes sense considering he’s on the run. He also says that he doesn’t do much gunslinging since anyone he sees needs killing he prefers to shoot in the back. It wouldn’t work for John Marston either since he is also trying to lie low in the Epilogue. Bigger Weapons Wheel: RDR1 did have a bigger weapons wheel. It allowed you to access any of your guns at any time. This wouldn’t have worked in RDR2 because, again, realism. You can’t carry several long guns at once. More to do in New Austin: You can’t do much in New Austin during the main story because of the fact that you’re wanted in West Elizabeth. You can’t really complain about that because that detail was a thing all the way back in RDR1 with the Blackwater Ferry Heist. Later on in the Epilogue there still isn’t a lot there. That makes sense. Most of the encounters that people enjoyed in the main story were things like shootouts with rival gangs and whatnot. The thing is that by the Epilogue those gangs aren’t around anymore, or at least they aren’t as prominent. You’ll still run into Del Lobos in New Austin but they won’t be as common because of the time in which the Epilogue takes place. I hope I have cleared some things up for people. If you think of any more I’ll edit them into the comment.
DauntingKitty that’s the opposite of what they want you to feel, it’s the Era of the Wild West dying down, they should equally make you feel like a badass cowboy, just the era in you play in RDR1 is the time of pretty much the last gunslinger, and in RDR2 it’s got plenty more of the Wild West features and more old western things due to the fact of it being older.
RDR1 was an extremely bleak and cynical story where it has the message of how you can never make up for the bad things you've done and your only hope of redemption is to die. Whereas RDR2's story was so refreshingly optimistic and hopeful as it takes the opposite message; you can change and make up for the bad things you've done by helping others and make amends with the people you've wronged.
Sure you here is the Scottish guy but what ever have you even studied the difference between a Scottish accent and an a Irish accent he literally says he’s from donegal how did you not know that?
The only issue with the controls on RDR2 is that there is so much you can do. For a new player it might be easy to hit the wrong button because there’s so many things you can do with the combinations of the controls. Also this game is more slow paced. This game is set up to take you on a real journey. Sometimes this game can be like fishing…you have to have patience. Especially when it comes to completing the challenges. I’m not saying this is a hard game. But it is a game that uses the controls to immerse you into the experience. The realism in this game forces you to take things slow and steady sometimes. You have to watch your step, you have to be careful, and when you don’t you suffer a consequence. Much like real life. This is meant to put you into the game. I feel like RDR2 does a great job at making you FEEL like Arthur Morgan. There are moments in the game where you FEEL Arthur’s adrenaline rushing in a gun fight. The screen even shakes a bit. When you get attacked by a bear the way the game makes you feel the fear as the camera shakes and you have to mash tf out of a button to fight for your life. You are more than a killer in this game. This game allows you to connect and grow with Arthur. You even have to take care of him all the way down to his hygiene. You have to clean his weapons. You have to donate, upgrade, feed, shelter, and protect your gang. There’s so much to do so for a new player the controls can come off as a little stiff. But it’s done like that on purpose. You are on a journey. This game has so much life and adventure built into it. The developers knew that this game was going to be a work of art. So they made the controls the way they did so the player can really take in the story.
Rdr2 feels like a completely different game and I don't know why. Maybe because you are a part of a gang? Its much better but feels like a different franchise
Really? I felt the exact opposite. Like RDR2 was the perfect sequel to the first game in every way. Especially with the Epilogue, like holy shit. I’d honestly rather look at RDR1&2 as one big game rather than two separate ones.
@@overdrive6687 i would too but thats just not how I saw it. John was on his own most of the time in the first and rarely saw the gang. Red dead 2 was bigger in everyway. You would spend time just because with the gang and do everything with them. It had a different feel to it where in the first John was just shooting up everything and in the eecond where you were a part of a family and tried to make it out of tough decisions
Nah I hated the controls in RDR1! Mostly when I had to climb up cliffs. I like RDR2 controls better but I hate it when I'm on a mission riding my horse and I bump into some stupid tree trunk.
David Nottle Yep. But just because a game wins game of the year doesn't mean it is clearly better than all other games that year. Looking at you Witcher 3.
@@TheGreatHotDogConsumer My mistake. I actually messed up that last comment. It is fixed now. And yea. I can imagine a "lot" of games, before and after The Witcher 3 released, that can be argued to be superior as far as actual game design goes and not personal bias. I would say for it's time even the original Red Dead Redemption is technically better than The Witcher 3 overall despite it's age. The Witcher 3 is an above average good game but not much else when you consider everything it tries to do and how much it actually get's wrong. There are good games, there are great games, and there are genuine masterpieces. The Witcher 3 just barely makes it as a good game overall. Those kinds of games are a dime a dozen honestly. It may have some good points and some may even be considered quite special but when you add it all together it isn't that amazing.
@calitroit45 Replay value also does not necessarily equate into a more superior game overall though. Good above average game, certainly but it has a lot of problems especially when you consider that it came out in 2015.
For anyone complaining about spamming X, or A to run, go into your settings, go to controls, third person controls, and switch that to Standard FPS. It switches the crouch button with the run button, so now all you need to do to full sprint is just click in the left stick. This doesn't effect the horse riding.
I honestly think it's somewhat impossible to compare and say which story is better since both games told the best story they could with the approach they went with. In the first game, the world takes center stage and John is simply a victim of it. It's a full-on satire that manages its political themes very well (watch Wisecrack's video on it). On the second game however, it's a much more character focused game while the world is just in the background and obviously, because of this, it manages to make its main character more relatable. I would say I like the first game's story a little more because I prefer its themes and setpieces.
Yeah the 1st game felt like the true western caricature. The music and everything. Felt like all the spaghetti westerns I watched growing up. I think the game was a little more dark in its themes sometimes to. The undead nightmare dlc was amazing.
One problem no one talks about is that rdr2 felt nothing like a western game. It felt like a present day game with horses. Rdr1 takes place after rdr2, and feels more like an old timey western, than Rdr2. At first I thought it was just the map, but u realised in the epilogue that it just doesn't feel like a western game. It seems that rdr2 characters even use words that I'm pretty sure weren't even said back then.
You have to remember the west was essentially dead at this point in both games. The west was dying and the fact one feels more like a western is the fact it's set in Mexico and new Austin not new hanover and new Austin. As new hanover is not a typical western setting as it's civilized and filled with the law with modern towns like saint Denis. You got to remember the whole premise of red dead 2 is that by moving out east Dutch doomed the gang , what's left of the west is back in new Austin the classic west with very little civilization. And the epilogue shouldn't feel like a western as again the worlds changing and the west way of living has died in places like new hanover, it's no longer lawless and sparsely populated like new Austin is.
@@cole8340 I kind of agree with you, but I was still wanting some little twangy type song to play every now and then, like what happened in rdr1. Like just have a little western type noise every now and then. And even in rdr2, the epilogue still doesn't give that same feeling. Maybe the music could have just changed wherever you are, like of you are in saint Denis, you hear the city type music (which you do) but back by small towns like valentine or strawberry, it was more of the country type music you hear, and in new Austin, I wild have been fine with the same old music as rdr 1
@@h8full575 yeah I do agree, I miss the music from red dead 1 it was perfect. Seeing how we played as John in the epilogue it would've been perfect for red dead 1s soundtrack to be used. The music makes me wish for a read dead 1 remaster so much more as it was the perfect western soundtrack imo.
@@cole8340 ik. The music was so nostalgic. The whole map if new Austin in rdr2 was just bland. Which I guess makes sense since it takes place a little bit before rdr1, but idk, it just felt way too dead. Even in the epilogue I was in rdr2s map
@@h8full575 That's why we got to have faith that they built new Austin up for a expansion of sorts with the most realistic being a remaster of 1. Although I don't know it just feels so weird and almost unfinished riding though new Austin like it's how it should be but still I pray it's because they are planning on remastering 1 or atleast adding more single player content involving new Austin. So much hints towards this though as the nostalgic trumpets that play on rdr 1 in Mexico can be heard in certain spots on the border of new Austin. And same the only time I was forced to go to new Austin was during the obligatory mission or two with Sadie at pikes basin and secondly for the legendary cougar. Other than that there's no real point for new Austin other than fan service maybe?
Did anyone else just turn off their phone and take a breath when he said sean was Scottish even though Sean talked about being from Donegal and has the thickest irish accent
Gotta love how Common Realm completely neglects to mention the horrendous amount of tedious linearity in this game that's way to punishing to the player if he or she has the audacity of trying to play in a way that isn't the very specific way that the game wants you to play it. At times, it legitimately felt like I was holding my TV remote and holding down a very specific button on it in order to keep a movie on playing. This becomes the most apparent at the beginning of chapter 5 that is honestly the worst part of a video game that I've ever played. It came out of left field and broke what immersion that I had with the game up until that point and it was ruined when I was suddenly thrown out of the setting that Red Dead Redemption 2 had established up until that point. In the first game, this kind of thing never happened and although it was linear at some points, it was no where near as bad or punishing to the player. Everything in Red Dead Redemption felt connected, made sense, and had a purpose to it with zero broken ass mechanics that are either complete dog shit or makes no fucking sense at all. The first game also didn't force you to do a two hour long prologue to teach you shit that you'll most likely never use as it was intended, such as hunting that you can do much more efficiently by just chasing game on your horse and shooting them with your bow. The first game also didn't have a failed Chekhov's gun with the constant mentioning of the money your gang failed to get in Blackwater, but it is apparently still there to be collected, which there is never a conclusion to this and it turns out to be a massive fucking waste of potential. The story to Red Dead Redemption 1 is far better to Red Dead Redemption 2 as the first game was a complete mystery to what will happen and was very unpredictable to what will happen, the second game on the other hand we already knew from the get go as to what will become of the gang and Author Morgan as a result of the first game. This video clearly doesn't understand that and apparently it prefers predictable storytelling over unpredictable storytelling that leaves you wondering as to what will happen next. TH-camrs like NakeyJakey and AKindAleWar explained it best on their channels and I highly recommend watching their videos on Red Dead Redemption 2, also if you can go back to play the first game you can see how much better it is compared to the second game in terms of being an actual fucking video game!
but that isnt the real west! yea there were deserts in the west but there were mainly lush green biomes full of life too! red dead redemption 1 is heavily fabricated. the real west was a deserted waste land which is potrayed in red dead redemption 2. and accuracy is always better.
Both 1 and 2 have equally great stories. Yes 1 has some comedic characters, but they aren’t 1 dimensional stereotypes and just as memorable and have just as many missions and John isn’t just an errand boy.
I will say so, I love RDR the whole series, come on, I only had a tendency to play in 2, however, I didn't hear anything about this game and probably few people heard about RdrR and Rdr1 when 2 came in, anyway everyone got crazy on point 2 and Revolver or 1? By the way Arthur is one of the best protagonists in all the games I played, it disappointed me how he died but John Marston is also good and I have a great desire to play Rdr1
All in all, RDR2 has everything that makes a game almost perfect. The characters, the location, the missions, just everything. But there is one thing that I appreciated more on RDR1, and that was the stronger feeling that it was a WESTERN, western in terms of the western we know from movies. Desert, dust, gangs, vicious bandits...
well red dead redemption 2 is a real potrayal of the west. and the more accurate is the better. red dead redemption 1s atmosphere felt fabricated. the real west was deserted waste land.
@@says101 not really lmao. I have a feeling you never played the first one because it definitely felt like deserted wasteland compared to the beautiful but unrealistic atmosphere of red dead 2.
“It’s a period rarely touched upon in cinema.” Are you kidding? Some of the best westerns are the ones about the death of the west. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence Once Upon a Time in the West Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid The Wild Bunch These are just to name a few.
Well, here's my review. I think this video of yours is a fair assessment, it's a decent review, but when comparing 1 to 2, people need to talk about what made RDR great. Listen, any game with good graphics will capture attention, but any more these days, everyone comes to expect a great open world with stellar graphics. Far Cry, Horizon zero dawn and many other games have set the standard. When it comes to 3rd person games, MOST people play them for the storyline and once you're done (typically within a month or so), you're done with the game it collects dust or gets traded in. Now think back to RDR. Did you only play it for the storyline then quit? Because what I know of RDR is multiplayer kicked ass. THAT is what made RDR great. Many people I knew played that game for about 2 years and would have played it longer had Sony and RDR not been hacked. Now compare RDR to RDR2 in that regard. Rockstar did not build off of RDR when they made RDR2. They modeled after GTAV. It's as if Rockstar is telling everyone GTA is their signature series and gameplay in GTA is going to be the norm going forward. I mean, Rockstar completely dismissed everything that allowed RDR to be popular for as long as it was: Stronghold, Coop, bag matches, hold your own, shootouts, private sessions, leaderboards. The game was so popular that players I knew practiced in private sessions to master the game, then they'd try to win shootouts; they wanted to get 50 kills within 10 minutes to see their name in lights and climb the leaderboards. RDR2 has nothing of the sort. In fact, RDR2 is not even out of Beta yet and many people are no longer playing the game. That's a sad testament to a game that spent 8 years trying to be better than its predecessor. You rate RDR2 95 out of 100? I think a large part of your rating is based on the graphics, realism, characters, and storyline, but to me RDR2 is more like 30 out of 100, because I don't even care to play it anymore. Like most games, RDR2 is a game built around its storyline, not multiplayer, and when the euphoria of realism and graphics wears off, all you've got is e-commerce and hunting. I didn't buy RDR2 to become a hunter. So when you say game play in RDR2 is better than RDR1, I think you're way wrong. Game play is what made RDR great. If you search youtube for "red dead sucks", you'll see not only a growing number of videos, but a lot of views and likes. The haters of RDR2 are growing. Rockstar blew it IMO. But if their plan was to tell everyone GTA is their signature series, well, they accomplished that, but much of the RDR loyalists are gone. Rockstar did not think about clans in RDR2 at all, and that's going to be their major fail with this game, because there were a lot of clans like Unborn Killaz, Royal Legends, Seven Deadly Sins, Vigilantes, DreamTeam, Orphans, Deadwoodz, and many more that were so prevalent in RDR1, but are non-existent in RDR2. RDR was the first game I played online so most the friends on my friends list are from RDR, and any more these days, I might see 1 or 2 people playing RDR2. Back when RDR was popular, I'd expect all my friends to be playing every time I got home, and it went on like that into 2013. Many clans created websites back in 2011-12, and now all that's dead. Many were hoping for a revival with RDR2, but there's just a world of disappointment now. The only way Rockstar can redeem themselves is remastering RDR for PS4 - remastering the graphics as well; that's all any of my friends care about is being able to go back and do shootouts, stronghold, clan wars. Regards, VIE_JesseJames (creator of The Vigilantes clan with VIE_BelleStarr and VIE_ClydeBarrow)
Am I the only one who had no problems with controls in RDR2?
Edit: If you don’t like the default controls, you can always change them in the settings menu.
I don't either
Nope, just fine...
Fishing for likes huh
Nope same for me
Rem how is that fishing for likes? Saying something like, “👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆🖕👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆 like if you found the middle finger” is fishing for likes
Red dead redemption 2 was tear inducing. Some people talk about how violent video games just corrupt people, but sometimes, the people your playing as in these games, are more than a bunch of murderers. This game has one of my personal favorite protagonists in all of video gaming, as does the original game. Criminals or not, these people are human, and I cared about them in the end.
HeavyDonkeyKong except Micah fuck him 🖕🏼😂
Arthur is on another level of characterization, he is like an actual person
don't forget John Marston
HeavyDonkeyKong you wouldn’t like them in that time of you lived back then, you’d be begging for your life. And most likely they’d kill you any way.
except for Micah
Red dead 2 isn't game of the year it's game of the century and should be in rockstars hall of fame of games with GTA SA
Any game rockstar makes induces an orgasam
If it’s rockstar it’s game of the year
Edit: Not for this year
leon zandbergen it’s only 2018
Witcher 3 is my personal game of the generation, with a tie between god of war and rdr2 taking second place. Minded, this generation isnt over yet, buts its gonna be hard to beat these.
Gta san andreas rdr1 rdr2
I want a remaster of red dead redemption
Its in 4K on xbox, thats all we got for now
It's likely to come actually.
People discovered Mexico with a Glitch, so that makes the entire map of Red Dead Redemption in RDR2.
Adding some lines to fit better with RDR2 and it's even more perfect.
Game Detective what if they add it as a expansion of the story where you play red death redemption 2 then it continues with red dead redemption
@@sebastienbricout7790
Won't happen.
It's Rockstar/Take-Two.
They want more money from singleplayer people, lol.
Im thinking a separate mexico dlc, maybe not undead nightmare but a spinoff dlc in mexico
Can we all just agree that these 2 games together tell one of, if not the most, incredible stories gaming has ever seen?
Agree :)
I agree, but I have to admit that RDR1 still reigns superior for me over RDR2...
Oh Yeah Yeah just because your friend said it is bad doesn’t mean you can join him by saying it considering you haven’t even played it go back to fortnite
@@emperorducky4951 I agree with you, but damn, you don't need to be such an ass lol.
Disagree but there are a lot of other sheep out there to agree with you ;)
Rdr 1 is still a masterpiece
The better game imo, rd2 was more a simulator, while graphically beautiful, I just felt it was eminently less playable, a chore if u will. Just my opinion of course.
@@theydontlikeitupem.4725 to that i will add that rdr2 online is really boring, rdr1 multiplayer was far better.
@@HeadshooterGTAS I'll Double add to that!! The Undead Knightmare DLC is one of the best expansions ever made and rdr2 has nothing similar!
@@theydontlikeitupem.4725 yeah rd1 really felt like a Clint Eastwood movie really love the story
@@theydontlikeitupem.4725The crazy part about it is recently I've discovered the best version of Red Dead 1 is on the switch lmao.
Undoubtedly one of my favourite video games of all time, and is 100% game of the year for me.
For me it's between this, Spiderman, and God of War. But if smash lives up to the hype then I can easily picture that taking it instead.
HeavyDonkeyKong yeah I don’t think so
HeavyDonkeyKong, Spider man or God of War against RDR2? Nah, I’m sorry but i don’t think so
@@heavydonkeykong5190 rdr2 is WAY better than spiderman but God of War could try but I doubt it
Well fortnite won feels baf
RDR2 is better than GTA IV
Change my mind
That's not a very controversial statement...
I think everyone agrees with you
Make me!
No
ive found more enjoyment in both red deads than i’ve had in any gta game
I want RDR1 with RDR2 grapichs
So a remaster
To much time & effort
@@yamayeet8486 I would pay €40 for it most people would. They just carry over what they can from rdr1 then remake the rest.
I dont
Same
The only bad thing with the controls I have experienced so far that has bothered me is how useless scoped weapons are
@Mÿ Pï Dë The sensitivity is my problem
@Mÿ Pï Dë Thanks
these chips are good wtf
Rdr2 is my fav game of all time
Same
Man hunt 1 red dead 1 was way better than this even red dead revolver was better than this this is shocking more like hunting simulator
If it weren’t for the controls I would think it very well may be untoppable but it’s still my favorite game of all time as well
@@Mr999888777666000 Guess you ain't played it yet
Took me 4 days to complete the main story just an opinion it doesnt compare to other games yet because still waiting for online to see if whats gonna improve im am done with it already tho and it isnt the best thing ive ever played you must be kidding its a nice world but just feels wierd especially in the gun fights. the game looks good n amazing but lacks creativity and your own gameplay is made to feel restricted and was dissapointed with the actual gameplay not the game its self the story was shite after burning dwn braithwate manor it seemed to get more boring after st denis chapter didnt like the ending realy killed it . im not 1 for shooting animals just didnt excite. If there was a couple or a few packs of screaming indians with throwing axes or a hoard of mexican hats to shoot of id give this game all the credit it deserves but it has none of dat because the time period . not 1 bossfight in the game . Its just not what i expected from rockstar when there games use to get harder like warriors and manhunt 1 this game got too easy as soon as i got the automatic shotgun . just deleted blackout get bfv tomorrow red dead is nice just realy frustrated with the little things the little things that count in any game plus having lots of fun on new spyro so fuk you n sore buthole you been riding arthurs cock way too much.
RDR2's controls are perfectly functional. They are just as functional as in the first game.
Ryan's Channel stop lying to yourself
@@gonzogorriliaz3460 I'm not. I have no issues with the way RDR2 controls.
Ryan's Channel I’m joking man relax I might not Agree with you but it’s your opinion that’s fine
@@gonzogorriliaz3460 Ok. Well sorry for getting all defensive. I just didn't like it when you said "Stop lying to myself."
Ryan's Channel I guess it’s hard to have a playful tone online sorry
I really want a DLC where they remaster RDR1 but the story begins at the end of RDR2
there won't be a dlc, story mode is dead to rockstar
It’s called the epilogue lmao
@@nindo-4270 You sound stupid as hell
I really want rdr2 undead nightmare or maybe rdr2 dlc where it takes place during the ferry job in Blackwater
How lazy are we getting sitting down complaining about having to tap a button cmon it aint that hard besides u can change it in the settings to "Toggle To Run"
Lol rdr2 fanboys ....
If you are playing for multiple hours each day it can actually cause quite a lot of pain
@@SonGoku-ep4wj idk who u talkin to but not to me
@@misterconor1434 I haven't had that issue?
The toggle only works on foot. It's no good for a long journy.
I actually like the button mash to run. It feels tiring, as it should.
Same, without it i feel like I'm not actually playing
And if you don't like it you can change in the settings
Am I the only one who literally, truly cried from the main ending?
Which game are you talking about? Either way I definetly do not blame you for either one of them. Both of the games are both incredibly emotional. Imo.
oohhh mmyyy.. did I cry..... I was really moved, And the anatagonist relationship between Arthur and Micah, with Marston family in between was just so clever and touching
I found American venom more cry inducing. When you go up the mountain and the song starts playing...
Micah's gang : Just you left huh?
John : Yea, just me!
I did 🙋
Just on chapter 3, but can’t wait to see what the endings all about. My boyfriend cried at the end and the sad part is that he never cries😂 although i got a little spoiled by some degenerates about Arthur, but yeah ill try to avoid comment sections for now
John’s story is good for his game and Arthur’s story is good for his game.
But the ending should of ended with end credits and then the epilogue.
@Self Reliance you really wanted to PAY for that? C'mon
@Self Reliance Please no... no one wants to buy a paid DLC in order to complete the story.
I like John's better it was one of the first games I ever played in 2012 or so I was about 7 or 8 and I got it and loved it. It will always be special to me for that reason.
@Self Reliance nope
@@ninetoedlizard6650 Same, my dad got it for me on my xbox 360, it was a blast.
GTA 4 blew my mind when I first played it.the story is so good it can be made into a movie.and the physics and driving are simply the best.Its been a decade and I'm yet to find a game with better physics and driving mechanics than GTA 4.
Lol
You drunk?
@@gonzoindigenousone8939 yeah bro
driving?
Let me ask again *DRIVING?*
Hahahah
I personally still prefer the first one. The second one looks phenomenal but it's just so slow in everything it does. I find myself sometimes just not wanting to play anymore because doing everything takes so much time.
Same
Exactly. The gameplay coupled with the pacing is just nah. I got it and Monster Hunter World around the same time during 2018...guess which has been collecting dust while the other has 1.5k hours played? Yeah, RDR2 felt way too clunky for me (sad cause I loved 1 and was excited for 2) while MHW has been one of the most satisfying games combat wise of this gen
RDR2 had a way bigger world with more things to do but still ended up feeling emptier than RDR1
Me too
do you have servere adhd?
you know what happens in David and Goliath right? that reference makes no sense. David defeats overwhelming odds by not fighting as expected
I was thinking that aswell 😂
Christian boii
Rdr1 has a better style than 2 despite the odds
“That Scottish guy” you mean Irish?
Josh Harris he was literally talking about a guy called Irish with Irish sterotypes from RDR1, and couldnt get that Sean is a real Irish character.. 🙄
*SARCASM AHEAD FOR YOU IDIOTS*
As a person with Irish descent, Im offended he mistook him for Scottish 😂
EvilSlayer398 u shouldn’t be Irish descent doesn’t make u Irish be born and reared there and then get offended I am Irish and I’m happy there loads of us in the game
Michael Afc um yeah? Im Irish descent, not Irish born? I think you need puntuation somewhere in there kid.
And, I was obviously joking on the last part. You see the emoji? Damn kid, take a hint 🙄
Was annoying me. The character said he was from Donegal which is about an hour drive away from me crossing the border from northern Ireland to Ireland. I can actually see it from my town across the water.
But then again to an American I can see how the two accents sound similar.
@King Swirl 👑 no where did I say I was true Irish. I said I had Irish descent.. learn to read. And if you read my comments, you could obviously tell I was joking around. So stop being an offended asshat
The end is lacking the umph. are you joking. the epiloge is the prologe to rdr 1. the ending was so moving
Zanda thank you!!!!p
I feel the credits should have gone before the epilogue, then it would have been better.
@Yoshimitsu First of all it is nothing like doing that with star wars. Second is that we already know what happens to john so we don't care. We cared about Author cause hes knew and wanted to focus on him. I honestly don't care enough to get in a TH-cam argument about it so if you disagree then you disagree
I agree that the ending to Red Dead 2 was awesome. It was essentially a love letter to Red Dead 1.
He meant the ending to Authors tale and not the epilogue.
Atmosphere: RDR1
Envoirment: RDR2
Gameplay: RDR2
Graphics: RDR2
Soundtrack: RDR1
Story: RDR1
100% right
No bitch rdr2 for all of them
Story draw
@@kdavis91624 rdr1's music and atmosphere is better, there really isnt a debate. i think mainly cause both of those kind of intertwined. You walk on a desolate hill in the middle of the desert with the sun setting, and you hear the ominous, intimidating violin
Gameplay RDR2? The fuck?
I also think story wise RDR2 stands a bit higher because how you play Arthur changes the entire story and overarching theme
If you start dishonorable and then switch to honorable it really is a story of redemption
If you start as honorable and go into dishonorable it’s a case of being just as harsh as the world as the world as been to Arthur
If you start as dishonorable and stay dishonorable then it’s being a case of being dealt the wrong set of cards and being who you felt you were all along because you don’t think there’s salvation
And if you start honorable and stay honorable the theme more so stays along the lines of being a good man stuck in a bad situation and trying to look out for the people you love
And I think that’s so interesting. With RDR1 John has a very clear mission and you know who he is. There’s not a whole lot of room for personalizing gameplay yknow
Kye Owlery
Well said
(7/3/19)
As much criticisms I give RDR2 that was an amazing point. RDR2 you get to write your own within a narrative story which to me no game I’ve played had that feeling or depth
Sorry but the whole camp thing ruined it for me. Supposed to be a gang of hardened criminals. Not whatever the fuck that camp is.
that is truly a pro over 1, but without the satire it's a little dry of a story no matter how you play it.
@@270eman I agree I don't like that all these mission givers are in one place, kinda too easy and it doesn't feel like the wild west with all these people settling down in one place
Stereotype characters in a Rockstar game? No. Never happened. Lol
Uploaded again because of TH-cam view glitch. Hate those.
YT is so broken! It freezes a lot too
Commonwealth Realm Both games are amazing in they’re own right, I haven’t seen the whole vid yet, But I played both of these games, I played the original 8 years ago, and recently I finished the new one, Rockstar really outdid themselves, they had to combine all of they’re studios just to make this, compared to last game where it was simply Rockstar San Diego, I think we have Rockstars second important franchise behind GTA.
Whats that glitch?
What the heck are you talking about in the controls battle?
You keep showing Arthur’s character climbing up a steep hill and slipping down because that’s obviously what would happen in real life, yet that’s somehow a control issue?
The controls in RDR2 are a lot more smooth in MANY ways. In RDR1 your character is very stiff in movement.
Just face it. RDR2 won in every aspect giving you more than you could ask for.
You are doing it wrong, release the left trigger and the horse will avoid the trees. The rider does not need to see shit, al that matters is can the horse see, now that's a raid!
the controls in RDR2 are "rage inducing". Lets not be hyperbolic just for the sake of having a talking point in your video. That's a little bit out there.
If you know when to switch between 1st person and 3rd (or even cinematic mode) it plays like a dream
Yeah, the controls can be irritating at times. But never have they been rage inducing. And after you get used to the flow of everything, it gets so much easier. Plus tweaking the sensitivity a bit helps a lot
You can change the controls just wanted to let u know that
The controls are trash dude. Straight up. Solid game, but the controls are trash. From the layouts to default response... they are just bad.
@@MikeBrown-go1pc did you play gtav? They are essentially the same, weighty, controls.
I just don’t understand everyone’s problem with the controls like literally they are not even bad at all I play just fine with them
I'll never understand it either.
Same
The first thing i noticed when i shot those O'Driscolls at Adler ranch was that the aiming controls was shit compared to RDR1. if i got on RDR1 now i could aim perfectly fine.
I thought so too, then I played God of War and went back to RDR2 and it felt awful
I actually find them better than other games
Personally, I prefer RDR 1 over 2. I found the story of 2 boring until I was halfway in Chapter 4. Because there seemed no point, no end goal, just outlaws being outlaws, and that doesn't really apeal to me. In RDR1 your goal is clear from the get go, Find the remaining member of your old gang, and get your family back. Sure in RDR2 there was a goal from the start, but thats just any goal that any outlaw would have. So again, basicly it was just Outlaws being Outlaws. And the missions bored me alot. Every mission was that they make a plan, execute the plan, plan goes wrong, and you kill everyone. I was hoping that atleast once the plan would go as planned. This is especially frustrating when you have a stealth mission, and you are not allowed to kill anyone. And then when you reach where you needed to sneak to, a cutscene plays, and in that cutscene something goes wrong, and then you kill everyone, if I could just shoot everyone while comming in that would be great, but no you have to sneak around for what feels like forever only to kill everyone later anyway. Other then that I did enjoy the game alot.
I agree generally, and in many ways specifically, with what you've said. I think the problem with cross-generational comparative reviews like this one is that the person conducting the analysis was either a) too young to remember or properly consume the impact or innovation of the older game when it was released, or b) is simply playing the older game retroactively, and having to work hard to overcome a natural bias toward favoring technological advancements of the newer game. I bought RDR I the day it was released; I was 31 years old. I am now 40 years old. I remember both very clearly, and RDR I was the better game at release. It was IMMEDIATELY engaging, and did not drown the player in survival/simulation mechanics that would be better suited for a "survival mode" second playthrough. I could go on and on, but in the end, RDR II is an absolutely fantastic game, but it does not do enough to overcome its predecessor.
John depressing story is boring
No
Exactly
Wilbert Beltman same red dead 2 to me when I first played it was the best game ever made until I played it again and realized how stiff and forced it was with its missions. To me what made me prefer rdr1 was the shooting and western sunset that felt like a scene from a film where as RDR2 most of the environments look foggy and lack that western vibe even when in New Austin, it does saddens me to see people bandwagon the game and attack anyone who doesn’t give it a 10/10
“Be the criminal”
Me on the other hand having the highest honor in both games not robbing or killing anyone...
Sees a robbery mission oh hell no
Imagine playing a rockstar and not being randomly violent when the games are literally designed for rampages
In defense of RDR1’s wacky characters, they’ve got desert fever (like cabin fever, but in the desert)
Edit: the rest of the wacky characters that aren’t in the desert just have cabin fever. Or some variation of fever of the mind.
Four words to describe rdr2 story "we need more money"
"Have some goddamn faith"
"I have a plan."
Also I don't care if this is a late reply
GTA IV was the start of the whole new engine called euphoria, which gave them the physics engine you see in all there games. The story telling and the attention to detail was complained for being too real for gamers, sound familiar to you? If Gta IV became a flop, then we wouldn't have red dead redemption 1 and 2. we would of got stuck with good old blocky GTA SA or goofy Saints row physics.
I mean, SA is the best GTA, sooooo......yeah. and Saints Row 2 is better than GTA 4 🤷♂️
People loved IV it got an 8.3 green when it came out , if heard so many games so how good the sorry is online
This guy is a Joke, GTA IV is easily the best GTA considered by many fans, only those who casually play games would go for SA or V, It was years ahead of its time and as you said it paved the way for our amazing games of later generations, and I don't even want to go into detail about storyline which was a genius class
@@amirmaroof9216 GTA IV's storyline was essentially a critique of the American Dream, though the quality of that story was watered down by GTA's usual wackiness and the game being too long, with major events being separated too far apart by filler missions. The same storyline was done much better in Mafia 2.
@@MrDueltube How can you even possibly compare IV's storyline to the Shaggy too rushed plot of Mafia 2?!!! I remember everyone was basically pissing on Mafia 2 for engaging players in sheer pointless missions like selling cigarettes to emphasize on domestic illegal business within a crime organisation, IV was the perfect parody of Modern society while telling an extremely serious story making player sympathize with a soviet killer all through the game, Side characters are just another example of perfection done by Rockstar IV, years after playing it I still remember missions with Roman, Lil Jacob, Vlad, Playboy, packie etc. As if it's still 2008!
"Characters stick around longer in 2" I felt the opposite. Sure, theyre still around, but it felt like the majority of the characters had like 1-2 missions with you. In 1, youd have multiple missions with the characters in whatever chapter they were in. Also, not sure why nigel would be down in Mexico with John, wouldnt actually add anything for them to be a part of every chapter.
What the hell do you mean at 2:12?!
GTA IV was a masterpiece
General Dritz slightly repetive? It HUGELY REPETITIVE as i am only 17 years old so i didn’t play when the game came but i played it two years ago and it was pain in the ass and finally i found a guy who agrees with me ( the youtuber)
@@teukka623 gta 4 sucks gta v and san Andreas are wayyy better .
@@thatguyjohnmarston3480 no gta v definitely is not better
@@ant2901 play 5 then come back to me k 🤗
@@thatguyjohnmarston3480 I've played it twice, the story is decent definitley not better than 4s, gameplay is garbage since there's nothing to do after the story, physics were downgraded and gun fights are extra boring especially since everyone dies to 1 shot in the foot and everytime you shoot someone they end up doing the same fedal position animation which takes me out of the immersion. Only good thing about gta v is the graphics and realistic scenery but the people feel less realistic compared to iv since standing 20 feet away from someone triggers them to run away or fight you
RDR2 is better in every technical way you can compare, but I find the story of 1 better. The entire Mexico chapter and the ending of the game were a giant kick in the balls, but epic for it.
Personally didn’t like the story telling in either, but rdr2 pulls some really nice stuff out there that’s awesome, like how Arthur gets sick, when he talks about how he wants to die and all that. Also the character development in RDR2 is amazing. However, there is Guarma...
@@Aldoz i really want to know how you didnt like rdr2's story? For me this is the best singleplayer game i have ever played
scarface 5021 ah it’s difficult to explain I think cause it’s an open world game, it can be difficult to understand the story 100% since the game isn’t linear at all. I think the story is decent, and I love a lot of the characters, but it’s nothing special story wise to me. It’s good to be a triple a game that doesn’t really need to rely on a good story though.
That's understandable, RDR 1 is 8 years old. It would be a fucking embarassment if the second one wasn't better when it comes to graphics and mechanics.
Snake Enjoying a Sandwich I wonder why you hate Mexico I think that the best part of the game actually
Rd2 and Rd1 are probably the best story mode games of all time
Currently replaying through RDR1 on PS3 and it's still without a doubt one of my favourite titles to date.. The music, atmosphere, characters, gameplay and of course the story are all awesome. Haven't managed to get my hands on RDR2 yet unfortunately!
RDR2 is very good and beautiful.....RDR1 is a personal fav
2 is trash..... 1 was a classic
Am I the only one prefers RDR1 HUD and UI like damage filters?
I felt a better atmosphere in read dead 1
I think the same, RDR1 feels like a real western with the deserts, instead of RDR2 with all green all the time and big cities
True
Frank West same.
Green Geko just the overall setting.
Green Geko no I think rdr2 is the far better game and I enjoy it a lot more. The only concept I like more about the first game is its old west feel.
Unpopular opinion here, Red Dead Redemption 1 has a better story
I agree man, not only the story of RDR1 is better but the characters are much more memorable and charismatic too, and their faces fit more with the voice acting too, and the most important thing, RDR1 is a real western game you see the wild west there, RDR2 is on the east, green all around and big cities, you never cross the fucking desert in the main story of RDR2, even the characters of RDR2 keep saying that they should be in the west
I disagree, but, I don't think rdr2 has a better story either. I see them as the same story.
@@gabszz That was the thing i was annoyed at. No desert except for 1 mission. Im buying RDR1 soon and I think I'll enjoy it
@@etdrwho8328 yeah youre right
@@gabszz yeah i miss the desert
In my opinion red dead 1 was one of the best games I have ever played in my 31 years of life. Red dead 1 story was probably thee best story i ever saw. All the characters and voice actors where absolutely phenomenal. The music is absolutely incredible. The game play, horse riding and shooting is all so damn fluid and such a joy to do. Im playing this game probably for the 1000 time right now sept 2020 and I still get this damn excited feeling I got when I played it in 2010! My life has literally drastically changed since red dead 1 I was 21 without a care in the world 10 years later im 31 with a 5 year old in kindergarten.....red dead 1 will forever be on my top 5 and hold a very very special place in my heart. Red dead 2 on the other hand was extremely boring and stupid. I literally only beat that game one time and I have absolutely zero desire to ever beat it again!
Red Dead 2 is something for hardcore enjoyers who want to explore the detailed and vivid world. It isn’t for people like you who want to have a fast story and don’t care much about exploring. And if you cared about exploring, you would like RDR2 much more because it has much more to explore than RDR1.
The characters in RDR2 are also more interesting and likable. RDR1 just has funnier characters. RDR2 made Dutch and John so well. And the way how realistic, complex and interesting Dutch’s personality in RDR2 is makes him to one of the best antagonists that exist. You also see some story details you didn’t notice in the first time (I am taking about the story, not about Easter eggs). It literally makes you see everything much more clearly
GTA5 is actually the most boring game of the series as well
For me 2’s ending was infinitely more impacting.
I was horrified by the ending for John in 1, but I straight up cried for a good 15 minutes when the end rolled up in 2.
You really enraged me when you said GTA IV didn’t live up to GTA SA. GTA IV has the best engine of any game every made. Period. The story is amazing as well. It is far better than GTA SA and GTA V
-KIMG- no it isn’t the story and graphics and better but that’s it once you beat the game there is nothing to do but mod it and play blowing with romeman when sa had fair few things to do it be a trucker or do a extremely hard run bike ride and swim or just do some good old cheats like flying cars flying boats cars that drive on water and more go to the gym go to car school plane school boat school
You just drive around the city 3/4 time of the game.
This was a very fair video. As an old-school RDR player, I do wonder if I will play RDR2 as many times as I played through the original and DLC. Overall, it did give me some closure on my fandom of the original, and perhaps I will drift on with my life to other things now. Time will tell. ( I subscribed! )
This man complained about tapping the X or A button to run.... even though tapping the X button to run is in literally every single open world Rockstar game. Like why give hate to RDR for tapping a button to run when literally every game rockstar makes includes the tap to run feature lol?
Matty86 •M86• it could get annoying but nothing big. In assassins creed you just hold the right trigger and he keeps running it’d be better if the horses and running was like this in red dead but no biggie like I said
There is a setting to have run as a toggle leaving tapping X for sprinting.
Was it worth the 8 year wait? HELL YES!
@@davidf2676 go play fortnite if you dont like it
@@hawkmanwalter4250 besides the story, red dead redemption 2 isn't good, it's the complete opposite of the first game. Rockstar sucks at making sequels.
Flooded area3261 dude, it is a prequel. Also it is very good
@@exodus4550 I meant trying to make games better, red dead redemption 2 as a game is a sequel to the first one. The game is too realistic.
Flooded area3261 I found it fine
The story is better in Red Dead Redemption 2? I highly disagree. I prefer the first game’s story way better because halfway throughout RDR2, Arthur with the Dutch gang are stranded and captured on an island and are force to go at war with some soldiers almost like it’s a different game like Tomb Raider or Uncharted. Doesn’t feel like Red Dead at all. With that said, I believe the first game’s storyline is way more memorable for me.
GTA4 was leaps and bounds above SA in my opinion jesus I dont get the hate.
Story wise definitely but gameplay wise hell no. If a gta game had the gameplay of gta San Andrea's mixed with the story of gta4 it would be better. The ballad of gay Tony has really fun missions similar to GTA San Andrea's though but it's only a DLC so it's over kind of soon.
I tried San Andreas and OH MY GOD! When will the plot actually start??
@@ryanhowe6543 it started since the begining...
And nothing happens for 10+ missions
@@ryanhowe6543 first 10 missions are to teach you the rules and make you familiar with Los Santos and It's gangs.
How about the PS2 games that started the spark of desire for old west games?
Red Dead Revolver vs. Gun
Red dead redemption 1 had amazing graphics for 2010. I still love it for it's gritty feel
I remember seeing the commercials for it on tv when I was in 5th grade and I had to beg my mom to let me have an M rated game, never regretted since.
I’ve never played the first one. Just bought the game of the year addition for my Xbox one x
Red dead redemption 2: more detail
Red dead redemption: more fun
Basically. I got bored really fast of 2, whereas I loved playing 1. Maybe I just grew out of liking these types of games (I prefer melee action games, "Soulslike")
Rdr2 should have more fun too the gameplay id better than rdr1 i played rdr1 dont get me wrong but i didnt like the controls in it but i liked rdr2 controls and the gameplay . but anyway I'll respect your opinion
I got both but I prefer Red Dead Redemption 1 more I’m playing on switch I love it I can’t believe how nice this game on switch and it runs so well
I just bought the game a couple of weeks ago, for some reason I can't explain I'm having a problem getting into this game.
I initially had the same problem with RDR II. I did not have this problem with RDR I; I couldn't put that one down until the bitter end. I believe the problem is that RDR II starts with less focus, less engaging dialogue (relative to RDR I), and drowns the player in survival/simulation mechanics that should have been part of a "survival/realism" mode better suited for a second playthrough.
JPIII I hope if RDR2 gets re released on next gen consoles that it will have more missions with your camp companions and have a bonding level similar to gta iv that in returns they give you items. It disappointed me because I wanted to hang out with Javier and Bill before the events of rdr1
Personally I really liked the stereotypes in red dead 1. In my opinion I love over the top characters but in the sense of realism I can understand why people wouldn't like them.
SubnormalSnow27 but werent they real, yeah they were crazy and kinda abnormal but they were real
People don't get that RDR1 is supposed to be a satire of old spaghetti western films, of course it has stereotypes and caricatures of characters.
@@themadtitan7603 Yeah I think the satire is gone in 2, all they have is alcohol humor... woohoo! it is funny but lame relative to the wonderful satire that rockstar is good at.
@@jpegjake RDR2 went full revisionist western and wasn't interest AS MUCH (it's still there) in satirezing much of anything in favor of just telling a compelling story about a bunch characters.
Story was better in RDR1 to me. It had a lot more impact to me and made me care a lot more about the character and the world. Sure, RDR2 fleshes out characters more as you are spending more time around them, but more isn't always better. I wanted Marston to be successful and happy. I was emotionally invested in RDR1. I just don't care so much about this gang or character in 2. Emotional investment is what makes great games IMO.
i agree with the part about the world..i cared for the world in rdr 1...in rdr 2 i just didnt give a damn...not a single place was memorable for me...it all looked the same with excessive green
You're comparing your experiences as yourself now and your younger self, that's not fair at all. What you need to do is play both games again, and compare them in an organized manner. Otherwise, when you say rdr1 story is better, it's just your nostalgia talking
Chase Umeh you need to get off your high horse and realize that other people’s opinions are valid and there is no criteria for an “acceptable opinion”. Otherwise, using your own logic against you, I could jus as easily argue that you are blinded by hype and that’s the reason you like RDR2 over the first one. But that wouldn’t be any more credible an argument than yours. People like what they like so stfu.
@@wolverineiscool7161 in that case rdr 1 looked the same with that excessive pale desert.
Even with characters that you end up caring about more like Javier, he ends up betraying you and siding with Dutch anyways and it feels like that was out of convenience because he's a villain in the first Red Dead Redemption game.
Just because Arthur is an outlaw with a good heart doesn’t mean you should play as a criminal because he’s looking for a way out of the gang life besides read the title the key word is Redemption
Half the reason people play rockstar games is to be the psycho they can’t be in real life you flaming idiot lmao
Who said that GTA 4 was nothing in comparison to San Andreas. It has the second highest rating on metacritic after ocarina of time .
Yeah, SA is lame for a 6th generation game tho we still have games from PS2 era that stands the test of their time like GOW 2 ans Resident Evil 4, Just like GTA IV is an ultimate classic and still amazing to play
@@amirmaroof9216 SA was lame? It won GOTY 2004, was critically acclaimed, and ended up being the best selling PS2 game of all time
@@amirmaroof9216 how was SA lame? It's content and even details still put some games to shame.
Ok so everyone keeps complaining about the controls... my question is why? Is part of the realistic experience, people just want the easiest things and all they want is arcade feel movement, let me just do this anatomy, Arcade racers Vs realistic racers, arcade racers are just for the fun of playing with the driving controls, realistic racers might not always go your way since it's trying to perfect the realism of the physics as much as it can
An example is CDNTHE3RD, he kept giving the game shit even though it's a master piece, just because he is used to casual games like H1Z1 and Fortnite
The controls aren't clunky like everyone complaints about it, people are just retarted, tapping X/A like freaks, almost killing the horse stamina, doesn't pay attention to the fucking game and hit a tree "Horse, what the fuck are you doing?" Like dude, you're controlling the freaking animal, how the fuck is this his fault! The people who usually complaints about RDR2 controls are usually casual players, people who streams or impatience ones. Other night I was watching a stream and the guy streaming was complaining about "How RDR2 game pace is too slow for his taste, that it didn't have any type of fast travel in the game" or whatever, it makes me sad to see how impatience people grew to be, even playing a master piece like RDR2 is. Instead of just sit back and relax, play the game and enjoy it, people are going for the trill of killing and causing mayhem throughout the world, thinking that it is GTA 5 Western and getting frustrated when they're wrong.
@@comtebonfim I think it's easy to say that some of this streamers/ TH-camrs have a concept in their mind of what a game is supposed to be, a fun thing to pick up and play, most are used to casual games, sadly call of Duty and fortnite are still topping the charts and as you can see its because it fits to the majority of casuals, but when they see that a beast such as RDR2 was comming and it for sure was going to make their views go up, they play the game, the game is topping the charts because of it being one of the best because of the pure ambition, but that means that it's going to be the popular game all the casuals are moving over to play it, sadly streamers are usually the ones that hop into the game expecting some fortnite, arcade game feel experience, and what they get its just too much for them to keep up with, like you said the fact that they can't even keep up with the system of the Horse stamina really unsettles me, and worst yet those who didn't bother to understand the skill of this master piece instead of praising it for challenging their casual skills instead they do the opposite and call it a bad game, solely based on their experience having to deal with a game that is not casual enough for them.
Some people just want more comfortable controls, and some of these "casuals" are the most die hard rockstar and rdr fans ever. You saying all of this nonsense just makes it seem like you can't handle other people's criticisms and opinion, because their control schemes are a valid point whichever way you attempt to spin your argument.
Are you just going to say that the clunky aiming system is just realism? Because it's not, all of the casuals are even praising the game as one of the best of our century so most of your points are redundant.
In a week RDR2 sold double of what RDR1 sold in 8 years. All I'm going to say is 50% of those people bought the game on bandwagon hype alone.
And now they fanboy over it because they never even played 1 and attack people who still prefer 1 because "nostalgia glasses"
@@Walamonga1313 i played rdr1 its a really good game and the nostalgia thing is the truth people like you are the people that decide things by nostalgia and i prefer rdr2 not becouse of the story but becouse of the gameplay its so real unlike rdr1
not going to lie, ive never ran into a tree once
@Prized Toco online we should form are own gang "dodging wood" :D
martin ricketts liars
@@seanmulholland7597 I hit one the day after i posted
martin ricketts lmfao I thought it would never happen to me either
martin ricketts lucky.
Playing RDR1 and I'm reading the newspaper in armadillo when all of a sudden I find an article that says: Wonder Tonic
And guess what......it cures lumbago.
Lol
The second battle of “controls” was very stupid, i hate to break it to you, but if you keep running into trees with your horse, it’s your damn fault! And if you’re often “frustrated” with the controls, it honestly just means you suck at the game. Sure, the controls aren’t amazing, but they’re perfectly fine if you’re even remotely good at the game
Horses auto guide away from tree, so if you hit left while your too close, it will use rng to decide weather to go left or right. It always seems to choose away. Run up to a tree, and dont touch. It SHOULD, go around it
Not really horses will hit trees on there own many people experience this your a real fanboy.
Kinda wish that the bounty missions were infinite in Red Dead Redemption 2 like they were in Red Dead Redemption 1. They're really fun to do and they helped you gain honor and lowered the bounty price on your head. Hopefully they make them unlimited in a future update.
I’ve seen so many people compare the content of RDR1 to RDR2 and I just wanted to explain why these features wouldn’t have worked.
Mexico: It wouldn’t make sense to have Mexico in RDR2. The entire plot of the game is the Van der Linde gang attempting to escape incoming society which threatens their way of life. So having a portion of the map where things are more lawless and free wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense as it would make the entire story feel pointless.
More Diverse Mounts: As is mentioned in this video, R* was going for a more realistic tone for RDR2. Therefore, riding around on Buffalos, Demon Horses, and other such things wouldn’t really fit.
Fame and Duels: R* actually gives a reason for both of these in “The Noblest of Men, and a Woman”. When asked about how Arthur feels about fame and glory he says that he isn’t interested in fame which makes sense considering he’s on the run. He also says that he doesn’t do much gunslinging since anyone he sees needs killing he prefers to shoot in the back. It wouldn’t work for John Marston either since he is also trying to lie low in the Epilogue.
Bigger Weapons Wheel: RDR1 did have a bigger weapons wheel. It allowed you to access any of your guns at any time. This wouldn’t have worked in RDR2 because, again, realism. You can’t carry several long guns at once.
More to do in New Austin: You can’t do much in New Austin during the main story because of the fact that you’re wanted in West Elizabeth. You can’t really complain about that because that detail was a thing all the way back in RDR1 with the Blackwater Ferry Heist. Later on in the Epilogue there still isn’t a lot there. That makes sense. Most of the encounters that people enjoyed in the main story were things like shootouts with rival gangs and whatnot. The thing is that by the Epilogue those gangs aren’t around anymore, or at least they aren’t as prominent. You’ll still run into Del Lobos in New Austin but they won’t be as common because of the time in which the Epilogue takes place.
I hope I have cleared some things up for people. If you think of any more I’ll edit them into the comment.
My question is why would you upgrade the camp if Arthur is just gonna die and you have to play as John while the whole gang just splits up??
Just gonna stop you half way through, 1 is better than 2 in every fucking way. 2 looks nice but that's it
GTA: San Andreas vs GTA V
Commented again because of TH-cam view glitch...
Gta sa, because of one word... childhood.
@@kjone5086 and not only that...it's just a better game overall!
Oof, I'm not sure honestly. San Andreas definetly set the bar, but something about GTA V is just... So freaking fun imo. Lol.
@@heavydonkeykong5190 probably the online
RDR1 made me feel like a cowboy in the wild west more that RDR2 did tbh
DauntingKitty that’s the opposite of what they want you to feel, it’s the Era of the Wild West dying down, they should equally make you feel like a badass cowboy, just the era in you play in RDR1 is the time of pretty much the last gunslinger, and in RDR2 it’s got plenty more of the Wild West features and more old western things due to the fact of it being older.
I would personally like red dead 1s story and soundtrack to be better but he didn’t mention the soundtrack
I'm not saying the first game was bad but 2 was way better
It was so good that I finished it twice
@@owenmagill4622 i beat it about 8 times now
RDR1 was an extremely bleak and cynical story where it has the message of how you can never make up for the bad things you've done and your only hope of redemption is to die.
Whereas RDR2's story was so refreshingly optimistic and hopeful as it takes the opposite message; you can change and make up for the bad things you've done by helping others and make amends with the people you've wronged.
Sure you here is the Scottish guy but what ever have you even studied the difference between a Scottish accent and an a Irish accent he literally says he’s from donegal how did you not know that?
Ik and he’s legit called commonwealth gaming, you’d think he’d have some awareness
I like both but I think I just love rdr 1 more because of the nostalgia.Everytime I hear the music that plays in the background I almost tear up.
The only issue with the controls on RDR2 is that there is so much you can do. For a new player it might be easy to hit the wrong button because there’s so many things you can do with the combinations of the controls. Also this game is more slow paced. This game is set up to take you on a real journey. Sometimes this game can be like fishing…you have to have patience. Especially when it comes to completing the challenges. I’m not saying this is a hard game. But it is a game that uses the controls to immerse you into the experience. The realism in this game forces you to take things slow and steady sometimes. You have to watch your step, you have to be careful, and when you don’t you suffer a consequence. Much like real life. This is meant to put you into the game. I feel like RDR2 does a great job at making you FEEL like Arthur Morgan. There are moments in the game where you FEEL Arthur’s adrenaline rushing in a gun fight. The screen even shakes a bit. When you get attacked by a bear the way the game makes you feel the fear as the camera shakes and you have to mash tf out of a button to fight for your life. You are more than a killer in this game. This game allows you to connect and grow with Arthur. You even have to take care of him all the way down to his hygiene. You have to clean his weapons. You have to donate, upgrade, feed, shelter, and protect your gang. There’s so much to do so for a new player the controls can come off as a little stiff. But it’s done like that on purpose. You are on a journey. This game has so much life and adventure built into it. The developers knew that this game was going to be a work of art. So they made the controls the way they did so the player can really take in the story.
Rdr2 feels like a completely different game and I don't know why. Maybe because you are a part of a gang? Its much better but feels like a different franchise
Really? I felt the exact opposite. Like RDR2 was the perfect sequel to the first game in every way.
Especially with the Epilogue, like holy shit.
I’d honestly rather look at RDR1&2 as one big game rather than two separate ones.
@@overdrive6687 i would too but thats just not how I saw it. John was on his own most of the time in the first and rarely saw the gang. Red dead 2 was bigger in everyway. You would spend time just because with the gang and do everything with them. It had a different feel to it where in the first John was just shooting up everything and in the eecond where you were a part of a family and tried to make it out of tough decisions
Nah I hated the controls in RDR1! Mostly when I had to climb up cliffs. I like RDR2 controls better but I hate it when I'm on a mission riding my horse and I bump into some stupid tree trunk.
RDR2 is a very slow game
Red dead revolver 3 anyone get it. You better.
I like red dead redemption because of its story
I like red dead redemption 2 because of its gameplay
I think Red Dead Redemption 2 should have won game of the year
David Nottle
Yep. But just because a game wins game of the year doesn't mean it is clearly better than all other games that year. Looking at you Witcher 3.
Gamer Singer RDR2 is better than the Witcher 3 imo
@@TheGreatHotDogConsumer
My mistake. I actually messed up that last comment. It is fixed now. And yea. I can imagine a "lot" of games, before and after The Witcher 3 released, that can be argued to be superior as far as actual game design goes and not personal bias. I would say for it's time even the original Red Dead Redemption is technically better than The Witcher 3 overall despite it's age. The Witcher 3 is an above average good game but not much else when you consider everything it tries to do and how much it actually get's wrong. There are good games, there are great games, and there are genuine masterpieces. The Witcher 3 just barely makes it as a good game overall. Those kinds of games are a dime a dozen honestly. It may have some good points and some may even be considered quite special but when you add it all together it isn't that amazing.
calitroit45 that’s why i said imo. You think the Witcher 3 is better? That’s fine, I won’t deny it’s a great game, but personally, I like RDR2 more.
@calitroit45
Replay value also does not necessarily equate into a more superior game overall though. Good above average game, certainly but it has a lot of problems especially when you consider that it came out in 2015.
FYI, The horse will steer around trees without your input.
For anyone complaining about spamming X, or A to run, go into your settings, go to controls, third person controls, and switch that to Standard FPS. It switches the crouch button with the run button, so now all you need to do to full sprint is just click in the left stick. This doesn't effect the horse riding.
Common:
As relistic as possible is what rdr2 is meant to be
Me:
Wait the saint denis vampire is real?
And the aliens 😂
I honestly think it's somewhat impossible to compare and say which story is better since both games told the best story they could with the approach they went with.
In the first game, the world takes center stage and John is simply a victim of it. It's a full-on satire that manages its political themes very well (watch Wisecrack's video on it).
On the second game however, it's a much more character focused game while the world is just in the background and obviously, because of this, it manages to make its main character more relatable.
I would say I like the first game's story a little more because I prefer its themes and setpieces.
Yeah the 1st game felt like the true western caricature. The music and everything. Felt like all the spaghetti westerns I watched growing up. I think the game was a little more dark in its themes sometimes to. The undead nightmare dlc was amazing.
One problem no one talks about is that rdr2 felt nothing like a western game. It felt like a present day game with horses. Rdr1 takes place after rdr2, and feels more like an old timey western, than Rdr2. At first I thought it was just the map, but u realised in the epilogue that it just doesn't feel like a western game. It seems that rdr2 characters even use words that I'm pretty sure weren't even said back then.
You have to remember the west was essentially dead at this point in both games. The west was dying and the fact one feels more like a western is the fact it's set in Mexico and new Austin not new hanover and new Austin. As new hanover is not a typical western setting as it's civilized and filled with the law with modern towns like saint Denis. You got to remember the whole premise of red dead 2 is that by moving out east Dutch doomed the gang , what's left of the west is back in new Austin the classic west with very little civilization. And the epilogue shouldn't feel like a western as again the worlds changing and the west way of living has died in places like new hanover, it's no longer lawless and sparsely populated like new Austin is.
@@cole8340 I kind of agree with you, but I was still wanting some little twangy type song to play every now and then, like what happened in rdr1. Like just have a little western type noise every now and then. And even in rdr2, the epilogue still doesn't give that same feeling. Maybe the music could have just changed wherever you are, like of you are in saint Denis, you hear the city type music (which you do) but back by small towns like valentine or strawberry, it was more of the country type music you hear, and in new Austin, I wild have been fine with the same old music as rdr 1
@@h8full575 yeah I do agree, I miss the music from red dead 1 it was perfect. Seeing how we played as John in the epilogue it would've been perfect for red dead 1s soundtrack to be used. The music makes me wish for a read dead 1 remaster so much more as it was the perfect western soundtrack imo.
@@cole8340 ik. The music was so nostalgic. The whole map if new Austin in rdr2 was just bland. Which I guess makes sense since it takes place a little bit before rdr1, but idk, it just felt way too dead. Even in the epilogue I was in rdr2s map
@@h8full575 That's why we got to have faith that they built new Austin up for a expansion of sorts with the most realistic being a remaster of 1. Although I don't know it just feels so weird and almost unfinished riding though new Austin like it's how it should be but still I pray it's because they are planning on remastering 1 or atleast adding more single player content involving new Austin. So much hints towards this though as the nostalgic trumpets that play on rdr 1 in Mexico can be heard in certain spots on the border of new Austin. And same the only time I was forced to go to new Austin was during the obligatory mission or two with Sadie at pikes basin and secondly for the legendary cougar. Other than that there's no real point for new Austin other than fan service maybe?
Did anyone else just turn off their phone and take a breath when he said sean was Scottish even though Sean talked about being from Donegal and has the thickest irish accent
Gotta love how Common Realm completely neglects to mention the horrendous amount of tedious linearity in this game that's way to punishing to the player if he or she has the audacity of trying to play in a way that isn't the very specific way that the game wants you to play it. At times, it legitimately felt like I was holding my TV remote and holding down a very specific button on it in order to keep a movie on playing. This becomes the most apparent at the beginning of chapter 5 that is honestly the worst part of a video game that I've ever played. It came out of left field and broke what immersion that I had with the game up until that point and it was ruined when I was suddenly thrown out of the setting that Red Dead Redemption 2 had established up until that point. In the first game, this kind of thing never happened and although it was linear at some points, it was no where near as bad or punishing to the player. Everything in Red Dead Redemption felt connected, made sense, and had a purpose to it with zero broken ass mechanics that are either complete dog shit or makes no fucking sense at all. The first game also didn't force you to do a two hour long prologue to teach you shit that you'll most likely never use as it was intended, such as hunting that you can do much more efficiently by just chasing game on your horse and shooting them with your bow. The first game also didn't have a failed Chekhov's gun with the constant mentioning of the money your gang failed to get in Blackwater, but it is apparently still there to be collected, which there is never a conclusion to this and it turns out to be a massive fucking waste of potential. The story to Red Dead Redemption 1 is far better to Red Dead Redemption 2 as the first game was a complete mystery to what will happen and was very unpredictable to what will happen, the second game on the other hand we already knew from the get go as to what will become of the gang and Author Morgan as a result of the first game. This video clearly doesn't understand that and apparently it prefers predictable storytelling over unpredictable storytelling that leaves you wondering as to what will happen next. TH-camrs like NakeyJakey and AKindAleWar explained it best on their channels and I highly recommend watching their videos on Red Dead Redemption 2, also if you can go back to play the first game you can see how much better it is compared to the second game in terms of being an actual fucking video game!
@13:21 “Sure, there is still this Scottish guy...”
Shows video of Irish character who won’t shut up about being Irish until he’s dead.
I loved the setting in the first red dead more. The desert and cactus where a western should take place
Southfloridadude armadillo is the best town
but that isnt the real west! yea there were deserts in the west but there were mainly lush green biomes full of life too! red dead redemption 1 is heavily fabricated. the real west was a deserted waste land which is potrayed in red dead redemption 2. and accuracy is always better.
Rdr2 had an unfair advantage in story because it had rdr1 story to build off of
Both 1 and 2 have equally great stories.
Yes 1 has some comedic characters, but they aren’t 1 dimensional stereotypes and just as memorable and have just as many missions and John isn’t just an errand boy.
I like tapping a and x to run
Lol but red dead 1 was lifeeeee I have so mnay good memories playing it! I still vote for #1
Your old as fuck
I will say so, I love RDR the whole series, come on, I only had a tendency to play in 2, however, I didn't hear anything about this game and probably few people heard about RdrR and Rdr1 when 2 came in, anyway everyone got crazy on point 2 and Revolver or 1? By the way Arthur is one of the best protagonists in all the games I played, it disappointed me how he died but John Marston is also good and I have a great desire to play Rdr1
All in all, RDR2 has everything that makes a game almost perfect. The characters, the location, the missions, just everything. But there is one thing that I appreciated more on RDR1, and that was the stronger feeling that it was a WESTERN, western in terms of the western we know from movies. Desert, dust, gangs, vicious bandits...
well red dead redemption 2 is a real potrayal of the west. and the more accurate is the better. red dead redemption 1s atmosphere felt fabricated. the real west was deserted waste land.
@@says101 not really lmao. I have a feeling you never played the first one because it definitely felt like deserted wasteland compared to the beautiful but unrealistic atmosphere of red dead 2.
@@prestieger Rdr1 is more like a stereotypical western environment, while rdr2 is more realistic
"And who can forget...table tennis" I said Grand Theft Auto loud and laughed my pants of when you said table tennis
“It’s a period rarely touched upon in cinema.”
Are you kidding? Some of the best westerns are the ones about the death of the west.
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence
Once Upon a Time in the West
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
The Wild Bunch
These are just to name a few.
Anybody here from the original before he reuploaded?
Me :) 😄
Me
Still haven't Beaten this game
Me too but I’m playing Red Dead Redemption 1 on my switch I love it
I feel like the only thing rdr2 needs is traps for trapping animals, and a way to get back to guarma without having to go out of the map
Well, here's my review.
I think this video of yours is a fair assessment, it's a decent review, but when comparing 1 to 2, people need to talk about what made RDR great. Listen, any game with good graphics will capture attention, but any more these days, everyone comes to expect a great open world with stellar graphics. Far Cry, Horizon zero dawn and many other games have set the standard. When it comes to 3rd person games, MOST people play them for the storyline and once you're done (typically within a month or so), you're done with the game it collects dust or gets traded in.
Now think back to RDR. Did you only play it for the storyline then quit? Because what I know of RDR is multiplayer kicked ass. THAT is what made RDR great. Many people I knew played that game for about 2 years and would have played it longer had Sony and RDR not been hacked. Now compare RDR to RDR2 in that regard. Rockstar did not build off of RDR when they made RDR2. They modeled after GTAV. It's as if Rockstar is telling everyone GTA is their signature series and gameplay in GTA is going to be the norm going forward. I mean, Rockstar completely dismissed everything that allowed RDR to be popular for as long as it was: Stronghold, Coop, bag matches, hold your own, shootouts, private sessions, leaderboards. The game was so popular that players I knew practiced in private sessions to master the game, then they'd try to win shootouts; they wanted to get 50 kills within 10 minutes to see their name in lights and climb the leaderboards. RDR2 has nothing of the sort. In fact, RDR2 is not even out of Beta yet and many people are no longer playing the game. That's a sad testament to a game that spent 8 years trying to be better than its predecessor.
You rate RDR2 95 out of 100? I think a large part of your rating is based on the graphics, realism, characters, and storyline, but to me RDR2 is more like 30 out of 100, because I don't even care to play it anymore. Like most games, RDR2 is a game built around its storyline, not multiplayer, and when the euphoria of realism and graphics wears off, all you've got is e-commerce and hunting. I didn't buy RDR2 to become a hunter. So when you say game play in RDR2 is better than RDR1, I think you're way wrong. Game play is what made RDR great.
If you search youtube for "red dead sucks", you'll see not only a growing number of videos, but a lot of views and likes. The haters of RDR2 are growing.
Rockstar blew it IMO. But if their plan was to tell everyone GTA is their signature series, well, they accomplished that, but much of the RDR loyalists are gone. Rockstar did not think about clans in RDR2 at all, and that's going to be their major fail with this game, because there were a lot of clans like Unborn Killaz, Royal Legends, Seven Deadly Sins, Vigilantes, DreamTeam, Orphans, Deadwoodz, and many more that were so prevalent in RDR1, but are non-existent in RDR2. RDR was the first game I played online so most the friends on my friends list are from RDR, and any more these days, I might see 1 or 2 people playing RDR2. Back when RDR was popular, I'd expect all my friends to be playing every time I got home, and it went on like that into 2013. Many clans created websites back in 2011-12, and now all that's dead. Many were hoping for a revival with RDR2, but there's just a world of disappointment now. The only way Rockstar can redeem themselves is remastering RDR for PS4 - remastering the graphics as well; that's all any of my friends care about is being able to go back and do shootouts, stronghold, clan wars.
Regards,
VIE_JesseJames (creator of The Vigilantes clan with VIE_BelleStarr and VIE_ClydeBarrow)