Red Dead Redemption turns 10 years old - share your highlights

Tomous wrote:RDR2 suffers from what I find a lot of open world games suffer now, the map is too big unless you have hours and hours to get stuck into it.

RDR1's map was the perfect size in my opinion. Big enough to explore but not too big that you don't get use to finding your way around it.

I don't think the map is too big, it's just really boring to be in. I won't waste my breath comparing it to Breath of the Wild, but by about the time I got to the 5th or 6th town or inhabited area in RDR2 I realised that aside from the window dressing they're all the same and there's strawberry float all to do in any of them.

I really enjoyed Red Dead Redemption. Looked great, had excellent atmosphere, and for the most part was fun to play. There were some frustrations, but it was mostly a memorable experience.
Coincidentally I've just begun playing Undead Nightmare for the first time, and I'm not enjoying it so much (see here: t:currently-playing-in-2020?p=4626657#p4626657) but it did make me wonder whether I'd be better just re-playing the original, but I know I enjoyed.

Captain Kinopio wrote:

Tomous wrote:RDR2 suffers from what I find a lot of open world games suffer now, the map is too big unless you have hours and hours to get stuck into it.

RDR1's map was the perfect size in my opinion. Big enough to explore but not too big that you don't get use to finding your way around it.

I don't think the map is too big, it's just really boring to be in. I won't waste my breath comparing it to Breath of the Wild, but by about the time I got to the 5th or 6th town or inhabited area in RDR2 I realised that aside from the window dressing they're all the same and there's strawberry float all to do in any of them.

I enjoyed the world in RDR2, but, like you said, a lot of it was just window dressing that you had to ride through on your horse to get to the next mission or side quest. It was really nice window dressing, and atmospheric, capturing the time period really well, but let face it, 90% of the world map was just stuff you were riding through. The destination was the important thing.

Whereas in BOTW, it was the journey that was important. Basically every single journey I made in BOTW ended up with me getting distracted by something on the horizon, or wandering off completely in another direction and getting sidetracked.

In RDR the world was what you went through to get to the game. In BOTW the world was the game.

Paints RDR2 in a negative light when I'm being a bit harsh - I really enjoyed my time in the game - but the content I was doing was mainly the main story and (abundant) side quests. If you didn't engage in the hunting and crafting (why would you, their effect on the game and gameplay was negligible) there was precious little else to engage you in the open world stuff.

Loved it. Oddly I have fond memories of the hunter challenges, I think you had to kill 6 bears with a knife, that was quite enjoyable.

Best bit for me was crossing into Mexico, getting the Poncho and just acting like Clint Eastwood.

captain red dog wrote:Best bit for me was crossing into Mexico, getting the Poncho and just acting like Clint Eastwood.

Oh yes, I did exactly the same.

o/