Current Events > is red dead 1 worth going back to after 2?

(+) Yeah! (+)

i played red dead 1 years ago on ps3 and bounced off of it pretty early. i dont even remember exactly why or honestly much about the game period, but i was probably less than 10 hours in when i did

this year i grabbed red dead 2 for free off of psn and im having a blast. i love the light sim elements, the beautiful world and all the weird shit you stumble into while exploring. once i'm finished with it, is red dead 1 worth giving a try again in your opinion or will it feel like im running into too big of a downgrade? im trying to avoid spoilers for 2 so im afraid to try and look up any comparisons

If anything I personally still think red dead 1 is better.

Sure, red dead 2 has more, but it's so much more... bloated? Slow? It's so detailed that it ironically makes it worse as a video game.

DarkBuster22904 posted...

If anything I personally still think red dead 1 is better.

Sure, red dead 2 has more, but it's so much more... bloated? Slow? It's so detailed that it ironically makes it worse as a video game.

honestly the slowness and the overfulness is part of why im enjoying it. it gives me witcher 3 vibes where i can just get lost doing random unimportant shit for hours on end.

is red dead 1 closer to a more traditional rockstar game like gta where theres mostly just story missions and a handful of side content?

2 is awful. One of the worst controlling high budget games Ive ever played.

1 is a much better game, even if it is more basic, because it at least gets the basics right.

DarkBuster22904 posted...

If anything I personally still think red dead 1 is better.

Sure, red dead 2 has more, but it's so much more... bloated? Slow? It's so detailed that it ironically makes it worse as a video game.

You dont deserve to be a moderator on www.gamefaqs.gamespot.com

I personally think RDR1 feels like it wants to be RDR2 and just doesn't have the tech at the time. Never have I experienced a game in a series that made so many jumps in just one generation. I think 1 does absolutely nothing better. I too enjoy the slow pace that compliments the game being super interesting and pretty to look at.

People wouldn't be ragging on RDR2's slowness at all if they only allowed you to run around in the camp.

Lost_All_Senses posted...

I personally think RDR1 feels like it wants to be RDR2 and just doesn't have the tech at the time. Never have I experienced a game in a series that made so many jumps in just one generation. I think 1 does absolutely nothing better. I too enjoy the slow pace that compliments the game being super interesting and pretty to look at.

Honestly this. The bones of the larger narrative and bigger world are there. The problem is that each section of the game feels detached from the rest. Every mission begins with John riding up and screaming at someone and threatening to kill them if they don't help him do whatever thing he's doing to advance his mission of getting his family back. It's not that it's a bad game, it's very good, just that huge parts of it feel empty. Especially the Mexico portion where it's like 10 minutes of riding through bland and empty space to get anywhere.

What I'd like is them to remake the first game using the second as a template. Everything minus the Mexico section is already in the game.

Sometimes in a man's life, he just needs to hear the comforting, sonorous tones of "work, ya damn nag!!"

That's a flower!

ScazarMeltex posted...

What I'd like is them to remake the first game using the second as a template. Everything minus the Mexico section is already in the game.

I been saying this for awhile too lol

RDR1 is much more silly and arcadey, also much more empty.

But it's still a good game

ultimate_reaver posted...

is red dead 1 closer to a more traditional rockstar game like gta where theres mostly just story missions and a handful of side content?

RDR1 and 2 are like the only R* games I've played for any notable amount of time but yeah, RDR1 is a lot more focused than RDR2.

RDR2 felt more like it wanted to be an experience, whether good or bad.

Whereas RDR1 still feels like its a video game at heart.

I played RDR1 (360 BC on XboneX) in January of this year and I had fun, but many of the mechanics have shown their age or are demonstrating the limitations of the time.

Still haven't finished Undead Nightmare lol.

Favorite small detail is the reuse of some of the horse sounds from 1 to 2.

wackyteen posted...

RDR1 and 2 are like the only R* games I've played for any notable amount of time but yeah, RDR1 is a lot more focused than RDR2.

RDR2 felt more like it wanted to be an experience, whether good or bad.

Whereas RDR1 still feels like its a video game at heart.

I played RDR1 (360 BC on XboneX) in January of this year and I had fun, but many of the mechanics have shown their age or are demonstrating the limitations of the time.

Still haven't finished Undead Nightmare lol.

Favorite small detail is the reuse of some of the horse sounds from 1 to 2.

Agreed fully. Wonder why they never made something like Undead Nightmare for RDR2--I was hoping for it...

indica posted...

Agreed fully. Wonder why they never made something like Undead Nightmare for RDR2--I was hoping for it...

I'd say because they were too busy working on RDO but uh... About that...

wackyteen posted...

I'd say because they were too busy working on RDO but uh... About that...

I never did check that out...they just added the last update to it. Is it any fun?

indica posted...

I never did check that out...they just added the last update to it. Is it any fun?

Idk, never checked it out either.

Glob posted...

2 is awful. One of the worst controlling high budget games Ive ever played.

1 is a much better game, even if it is more basic, because it at least gets the basics right.

This ^^^

Rockstar has had issues making controls for shooters for a LONG time. RD1 controls are far superior.

thanks for the answers. im sort of burnt out on the straightforward gta formula so i wont make rdr1 a priority after 2, but ill probably give it another chance at some point

I played it for the first time a year or two ago. I wasn't blown away by it, but it was a good time.

DarkBuster22904 posted...

Sure, red dead 2 has more, but it's so much more... bloated? Slow? It's so detailed that it ironically makes it worse as a video game.

Lost_All_Senses posted...

I personally think RDR1 feels like it wants to be RDR2 and just doesn't have the tech at the time.

Both of these are true though. While it lacks a lot of the more tedious aspects of RDR2, it has its own little bits of it. The story is also just far less interesting.