The absolute peak of Rockstar...

The absolute peak of Rockstar. After they mastered physics and right before Benzies got fired and their games became an extension of their own satire towards shallow culture.

Attached: red dead.png (1525x1887, 719.76K)

I also liked Bully, GTA IV and Max Payne 3

only brainlet retard like rdr but dislike rdr2

>like rdr but dislike rdr2
based

Based esl retard

I wish they just did a fucking pc port, I've been craving for another run for years but my shitbox is dead. I'd even be willing to pay full price for it, this game was a blast.

it's just one letter missing yo

Just get a cheap Series S. That's what I did. Worth it 100%.

RDR1 is immersive but also fun.

RDR2 is just Rockstar fellating themselves to their massive development budgets with animations and dialogue for everything possible. It's an impressive project from a technical perspective but as a game, it's a failure. The gameplay elements are contradicting and the narrative undermines the mystery and myth of RDR1.

Attached: rdrjohn.webm (600x648, 1.96M)

>RDR2
isnt a western game, or a wild west game, or a cowboy game, or an outlaw game.
its a simulation of being in a religious cult - the Cult of Dutch.
>we're a cult that goes from town to town, butchering the entire population, looting and then moving on to another town to do the same thing, while the cult leader - Dutch, keeps telling us about his SUPER SECRET PLAN OF SALVATION

I swear at the end i was expecting Dutch to say he needed all the money to buy expensive cyanide pills, that the whole gang has to take in a mass suicide ritual in order to be taken by some interdimentional aliens into paradise.

And it wouldnt feel out of place.
THATS HOW RETARDED this fucking game is.

RDR 1 awesome, RDR2 can go fuck itself.

Attached: 07u823hvslkjy30u.jpg (960x918, 79.43K)

Remember how RDR1 builds the mystery of Dutch being an actual shrewd leader who taught the gang members to think for themselves?

And then RDR2 drops and the dude is a literal IQ 50 schizophreniac doing insane suicide runs with his lap dog Arthur defending his shit. It's amazing just how hard they blew the narrative in RDR2. And the fact that Arthur even existed when they don't even mention him even once in RDR1.

Attached: Rdr_set_free.jpg (1280x720, 460.26K)

you're too retarded for words

cowboys out of time is such a cool aesthetic i love rdr

Attached: 1637882159542.jpg (505x479, 39.87K)

Attached: 098hjio3wjkj.jpg (320x320, 43.98K)

Cope. Arthur is a cuck

Attached: 1659499962430176.jpg (1024x1018, 103.13K)

Missed your argument buddy

>Dutch watches Arthur getting killed, while rubbing his hands, totally wanting him to die
>Arthur is saved by the indian lad
>damn Dutch, that was totally uncool, bro

in a non-retarded game, Arthur would shoot Dutch in the fucking face and the gang would clap.

That game had so many retarded moments, all I could do was eventually just try to turn off my brain to contain my anger. Despite being more humoristic and satirical, the narrative in RDR1 was so much easier to digest as a geniune narrative than 2.

Every time Sadie fucked up a mission because she was a blood hungry bitch only for Arthur to down-play her fucking up. And then shitting his pants whenever Micah did something similar. It's obvious to me that Houser brothers became too self-aware and insecure due to shifting cultural climate. They really wanted something to prove themselves as "le mature story tellers" but then ended up making even greater fools of themselves.

reminds me of the last season of game of thrones.
writers smelling their own farts, not realizing its all so retarded, it cant even be described in words.

>"le mature story tellers"
can such a feat exist in video games?

John didn't mention Arthur because he was ashamed he could never match up to him after Arthur sacrificed his life for him

John didn't mention Arthur because Arthur didn't even exist in the RDR1 narrative. Plain and simple. If you played the good guy Arthur, there was literally no way John would just forget his existence.

I said he didn't forget him, he just didn't mention because again he was ashamed.

There were no such hints in RDR1. It's called a "retcon".

There is no retcon when the reason why makes complete sense. You just seem to not want to understand John's character.

and why is this such a big problem, or is it just you coping for not having real arguments against rdr2.

There is absolutely a retcon in the form that Arthur does not exist in the RDR1 script whatsoever. It was an RDR2 addition which the writers then tried to bullshit their way into the original story. The same thing with Dutch now having schizophrenia and half the "gang" being women.

It's a problem because it paints RDR1 as missing a core part of the narrative in isolation. Rockstar tried to develop and enrichen the RDR1 narrative. What they did was instead just undermine it completely by adding vital characters missing completely in 1, never even mentioned. 2 is a failure of a prequel. It contradicts 1 too much.

>bruh why are all these characters and themes fleshed out now, what happened to my incel brainlet dreams of the dutch gang?

Nice counter argument.
>I don't have any counter argument so maybe if I call them retard I seem smarter.

They're not fleshed out though. They're only undermined. RDR1 is a brilliant story of how a student rises above his master and becomes his own self-made man. But now considering 2, John was actually just a spoiled whiny brat all along and it was due to good ol' Arthur everything good happened to him.

Yes, my favourite Rockstar game
>Max Payne 3
That shit was kino too. Max Payne 4 when?

nice microshill

And the script of RDR1 doesn't say that Ross was a part of the Pinkertons but it makes logical sense that they were absorbed into the government. Again you just seem to not want to understand that your initial reading of the game and John was shallow until RDR2 filled in the details. It makes sense why John would stupidly go along with the government. It makes sense why John would backstab his old friends. It makes sense why John was conned by everybody in New Austin and Mexico now. You just seem to have some sort of teenage crush John

die in fire cock of dog

If you have a good PC, you can run the game on Xenia.

I doubt that criminal gang who kills people would be full of kind hearted greatest people on the planet who have no moral flaws expect rdr1 bad guys.

You make the perfect example of what I'm saying. The only way RDR2 narrative works is by undermining and mocking 1's story. This is why RDR2 doesn't really enrichen 1. It just undermines and swallows it wholly instead. You can keep your retconned soap opera. For me, there will always only be Redemption. I'd prefer my characters not to be spoiled babies and IQ 40 schizophreniacs.

Attached: rdr2c.jpg (1349x901, 359.47K)

but arthur wasn't that important to the narrative of rdr1. it doesn't ruin anything, it makes you see why everyone was crazy about the gang and in the end why they were disillusioned, and does it in a most elegant way. Arthur is dead, John hunts down the rest of the gang. Javier and Bill weren't even characters in rdr1, they were just plotpoints you get to in order to develop the narrative of rdr1.