this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
30 points (85.7% liked)
games
20457 readers
2 users here now
Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.
-
3rd International Volunteer Brigade (Hexbear gaming discord)
Rules
- No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, or transphobia. Don't care if it's ironic don't post comments or content like that here.
- Mark spoilers
- No bad mouthing sonic games here :no-copyright:
- No gamers allowed :soviet-huff:
- No squabbling or petty arguments here. Remember to disengage and respect others choice to do so when an argument gets too much
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm like the opposite kind of rdr2 hater, I loved all the boring shit but the unfocused story and the shooting gallery gameplay ruined it.
The ideal cowboy game would lean into the simmy stuff, stylized graphics instead of realism, have you drive some cattle across the landscape with a character-driven story, have quiet chats with them during the night watch. And now since we are commercially unviable anyway, make it take place in like the Eurasian steppe or anywhere else that is not a settler fantasy. Also, make the cowboys gay. Thanks.
I must be a weird kind of defender because i love all the boring shit, and while i like the story i have critiscism of it and i think theres plenty of room for it.
I do agree that the gun play was by far the least intetesting part, and getting into so many massive gunfights is really at odds with the best part of the game - the "boring" cowboy sim stuff that feels grounded and is such a joy. Making coffee at your campsite, going fishing, grooming your horse. Finally skinnning enough snakes to get that beautiful saddle.
I haven't dared to start playing RDR2 yet, but how much of a simulation is it actually? The thing that frustrates me about Rockstar games is that for all the insane level of attention they put into the most minute of details, the simulation elements just kind of awkwardly float on top of incredibly loose arcadey gameplay and can safely be ignored because the games need to be able to be completed by dads who only ever buy like 3 games for their consoles
In a just world Rockstar's budget and resources would be redistributed to like the Stalker devs to create the most lavish Slavjank game in existence
Its not a deep sim in the slightest. A lot of the things i enjoy and love in the game can be completely ignored. The mechanics they do have toward that end are fairly shallow. With the money they have it'd be amazing if they made a real sim. I think what's fun is just that its a gorgeous world to camp and make some coffee in the morning - not because theres a mechanical reason, but just because you want to.
Its been a while since I've played, but i don't think Arthur really needs to sleep, or at least not often. I would set up a tent at night not because i mechanically needed to, but because it was dark lol. I'd cook the fish i caught that day and have a meal. Not because Arthur needs to eat that much that often, but because i wanted to, and i enjoyed it.
I love games that really match mechanics to these things. But, i still enjoyed just being in the world without that component.
That's what's always made the focus on realism in Rockstar's post-San Andreas output feel hollow to me. All of these cool things exist but they're just there for you to amuse yourself with. Maybe one day I'll try some of those ultrarealism mods for GTAIV
I really wish that someday someone could marry the surface level "realism" and polish Rockstar is capable of with some real mechanical depth to make it feel substantial.
try outside lol
I love outside, but i can't always take a weeks long camping trip whenever i want. And i don't have a horse lol.
I can't shoot clan members consequence-free outside