Does Rockstar have some sort of an "A team" and "B team" like Fromsoft? I swear these two feel so different to the other R* games
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Does Rockstar have some sort of an "A team" and "B team" like Fromsoft?
A decade has passed in between these games being released, anon. A lot of things have changed.
He's saying RDR2 and GTA IV feel similar.
Both of these games are basically Houser passion projects. GTA V was neutered by attempting to pander to the people who didn’t like IV.
>Houser passion projects
>both play like shit with atrocious heavy controls and are boring as frick
And yet, still better than your favorite game
i just dont get how you can find gta 4 and rdr2 boring. gameplay alone, theyre fun as hell. just fricking around with the physics in those games is entertaining
homosexual didn't want to be a cowboy I guess
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uZyqvbxhuFs
People that call out Red Dead 2 for having "heavy controls" must literally not play any of their games. Arthur controls better than the protags do in GTA V, literally just launch both games now and compare them, I promise you, you will quickly realize how wrong you are.
The movement in RDR2 is factually superior to GTA V
And that's exactly why V is soulless overrated trash.
By far the worst of any GTA post-3
i agree. gta 5 feels more like rdr1, SA, and vice city, while red dead 2 feels like a continuation of the design philosophy of gta 4.
Nah, it's just more effort goes into certain R* games, there's no coincidence both GTA IV and RDR2 were the first "next gen" titles respectively (GTA IV marked the shift from PS2>PS3, RDR2 marked the shift from PS3>PS4), so they went full schizoid with details/SOVL.
It's also funny because on release (only on Ganker mind you) GTA IV was despised for going "too far" with the realism/physics and now I see more people jerking it off than vice versa. Same story with RDR1>RDR2. More weighty gameplay 100% improves certain types of games. San Andreas is easier to play, but the gunfights felt pitiful compared to GTA IV and that's just the trade off in realism.
/thread
More effort simply went into them and they weren't scared of taking traditionally "bad" design philosophies to follow through on their vision. I mean, take the slow paced movement, the autistic level to detail and put it down on paper.
>your character is slow as frick
>you go through a canned animation for virtually everything your character does
These are design choice sins in gaming, but somehow they work to perfection in GTA IV and RDR2. Turns out gritty games focused on crime/outlaws/gangs benefits from realistic gameplay choices because it adds the needed weightiness to match the tone of the games.
Too bad R*s mission design is fricking dogshit because everything else is 11/10 kino
>spoiler
R* mission design used to be good. It was only from onwards GTAV that it became heavily scripted garbage.
>used to be good
It's literally never changed barring a few missions which is also true for GTA V and RDR2. Take off your nostalgia goggles bucko. Rockstar has always been linear as frick with the best case scenario offering you a choice or two on your approach
R* games prior to V never failed you for getting in the wrong car or for taking an alternate route to your location, or for killing a mission target before you’re supposed to. Watch some GTA III and VC speedruns and compare them to GTA V speedruns. It becomes incredibly obvious how little freedom V gives you by comparison.
>load up save
>drive all the way to the shitty mission marker
>get in wrong car
>Mission failed
>need to load the entire save and drive all the way back
Gee, I wonder why lmfao, mission structure was still linear as frick. Compare three leaf clover mission in GTA IV to the RDR2 or GTA V heists and tell me "rockstar only became linear recently"
>FOLLOW THE DAMN TRAIN CJ
>don't follow the train
>Mission failed
Sure thing virgin speedrun watcher
>San Andreas is easier to play, but the gunfights felt pitiful compared to GTA IV
IV was still clunky as frick and you could basically pull headshots from any distance with the 9mm making different guns useless
in san andreas every gun was unique and had its purpose
it's just contrarianism. GTA4 was popular when it was new, therefore Ganker hated it. Now it's considered kind of a black sheep or just ignored in favor of 5 or the cringelord nostaltards that prefer SA, so the contrarian take is that 4 is "kino". RDR2 will also be seen as a masterpiece once it phases out of popularity and all the tourists die off and stop making GAME BAD, CHARACTERS ARE NOT STEREOTYPES HELP ME HITLERMAN threads
>Hitlerman
Say Black personman. Prove you're not a tourist yourself
GTAIV Was mostly Rockstar NYC and North.
GTAV and Red Dead were literally EVERY Rockstar Studio cramming all their shit into one garbage game.
Rockstar leeds has pretty much been the only competent studio since GTAIV.
>GTAV and Red Dead were literally EVERY Rockstar Studio cramming all their shit into one garbage game.
BASED.
I consider GTA IV, RDR1 and Max Payne 3 as "Melancholia trilogy", which feats since all three games have similar themes, beaten down tragic characters with a death wish.
RDR2 is strangely hopeful despite the ending and faith of Arthur and more like a big epiligue, GTA V is rather a parody of that melancholia.
>beaten down tragic characters with a death wish
probably the case for GTA IV and MP3, but the whole point of RDR1 was that John wanted to settle down and *live* with his family, not die
he knew what would have happened after he was done with dutch and them
the movement of GTAIV is really not that slow. Gameplay wise, it still feels more similar to the other GTAs than it does to RDR2
It just has weight. And the driving is sim-lite which makes the npc casuals seethe.
>are Rockstar’s two best games
curious
I wonder how the remaining writes will deal with the new rules of S&P.
sure
If you had finer understanding of game design, you'd realize that the real pairing is GTA IV + RDR1 vs GTA V + RDR2. This is the true "before and after" of Rockstar game dev quality. Yes, RDR2 is pretty, but it is just as shallow and meaningless as GTA V. On the flip side, RDR1 is as fun to play and has the replay value that GTA IV has, where they are timeless classics that do things out of the box and put gameplay above all else.
>shallow and meaningless
It has more depth than every Rockstar game combined, unironically. But go ahead and explain how i'm wrong
It's all trite shit that the game doesn't need, and only acts to make it seem more complex or involved than it really is. RDR1 is just raw gameplay, only the essentials. It doesn't try to be some moronic cowboy sim, it's just fun.
>trite
It can be unoriginal and still have more depth than every other R* game before it, that's not an argument.
> RDR1 is just raw gameplay,
This is schizo garbage, RDR1 has even less choices, less content on every metric and so on and so forth. You're not presenting an argument, you're just attempting to discredit objective fact out of schizo Ganker mindset, only thing "trite" are you generic arguing tactics.
>Like???
Survival mechanics, hunting that's more than "x2 wolf pelts based!" and you know, essentially everything RDR1 had but more fleshed out.
I never argued it was better, that's subjective but by every metric (reviews/GoTYs/Sales) RDR2 is at the very least, better received, but what I did argue was that it had more depth, which it objectively does.
> but when they are better than the main game we have a problem.
Black person, have you played literally every open world game ever made?
That is applicable to virtually every open world game or RPG, look at the Witcher 3, Morrowind etc etc. The side content is literally what makes those games good
Like??? A billion food items that are useless? There are fun side activities but when they are better than the main game we have a problem.
dumb
RDR>GTA SA>VC>RDR 2>GTA 4>GTA 3
Out of the ones I've played, a game being lower on the list doesn't make it bad.
I'm replaying IV as we speak. Taking my time, roleplaying, enjoying the city and the activities with your friends. What a game. I forgot how much I liked the weighty driving and gunplay/ragdolls
that game perfectly captured the feeling of living in a city. I love the social life elements the game included as well, which everyone else seemed to hate. I guess that’s why GTA V ended up being a watered down experience as a result