RDR1 vs RDR2

[Thunderchild]

RDR 1 was more fun to play, RDR 2 was superior in all other aspects.

 

[Morning Star]

They're both 10/10 games for me so I don't prefer one over the other. I played RDR again before playing 2 and it was an awesome experience, still holds up. RDR 2 had much more to do and deeper systems, which is great but I don't have the time for that kind of commitment anymore. I will say the horse in RDR2 could have been improved, I fell of that damn thing so many times from hitting trees and rocks. Both sucked at online.

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

I think I like them both equally. RDR was such a good experience with a brutal ending. The 2nd game just expands on the first with more to do. Technically, the 2nd game is better and by the end, I ended up liking Arthur more than John. Still, RDR was unique and fresh at the time while RDR2 is just more of the same and building off the first game.

Both are absolutely worth playing though and I'd imagine you'll see a PC announcement for both this year.

 

[Slick_36]

Yeah, I stand by my assertion. You're a whiner. That's it.

I don't even know what you're talking about with the weapon wheel. It's fine. Missions keeping you on a path? Oh', this is just so egregious! No other game in history has done this!

You just look for little things to bitch at, and ignore EVERYTHING else. That's all you do. Do you seriously enjoy any game at all?

Take all you're your little bitch fits, and contrast them with the overwhelming amount of things the game does right, and they're completely insignificant.

I mean, I'm not the only one who recognizes this trait you have. Perhaps just take a step back and think "Maybe it's me? Maybe I'm just miserable and hate everything?"

As much fun as it is to butt heads with you over politics, I love it when we agree on something. Good post.

 

[Slick_36]

It's hard for me to compare, they both feel so different despite having the same soul.
RDR1 was a lot more arcadey in hindsight, was a video game set in the wild west. I loved the characters and it felt very fun in a schlocky B movie way.

I only got half way in RDR2 before online dropped and I sunk way too much time in to that before getting pulled in to other games. I enjoyed the first story more but from what I hear I am going to really enjoy the later half and may end up being torn on the better story.

The biggest difference to me is 2 feels a lot more cinematic compared to the first game. It's less fun to play at times, but it's presentation is a lot more serious and ambitious. Both games are 10's to me though they have their flaws, they're certainly different but not necessarily better than the other.

 

[Wingslaught]

RDR1 and its not close. RDR1 is one of my top 10 games of all time. RDR2 is a chore to play and arguably my most disappointing game of all time

What was so different between them?

 

[El Che]

Both are great but I prefer RDR2. As much as I loved John I think I got more attached to Arthur by the end of 2. It's just a bigger better game imo, seems I might be in the minority. I only got like 60-70% in the first and a 1/3 of the hours I put in the second where I got over 90% completion.

I never played RDR1 until right before 2 came out, so I played them for the first time literally back to back.

 

[Hitman81]

What was so different between them?

RDR2 was full of systems that were boring, broken, repetitive, and/or completely pointless. They were so focused on making an immersive experience they forgot to make a game that was fun to play.

 

[rob mafia]

As much fun as it is to butt heads with you over politics, I love it when we agree on something. Good post.

...you're agreeing with someone who admitted he barely played it.

I only got half way in RDR2 before online dropped and I sunk way too much time in to that before getting pulled in to other games.

....oh. nevermind, carry on.

lolz @ most of the positive rdr2 posts coming from people that barely played it.

 

[Slick_36]

...you're agreeing with someone who admitted he barely played it.



....oh. nevermind, carry on.

lolz @ most of the positive rdr2 posts coming from people that barely played it.

Dude I put an embarrassing amount of time in multiplayer, like hundreds of hours. I fucking loved that game. The narrative was what I found weakest and that's only because I was in the calm before the storm of the story.

 

[Slick_36]

Both are great but I prefer RDR2. As much as I loved John I think I got more attached to Arthur by the end of 2. It's just a bigger better game imo, seems I might be in the minority. I only got like 60-70% in the first and a 1/3 of the hours I put in the second where I got over 90% completion.

I never played RDR1 until right before 2 came out, so I played them for the first time literally back to back.

The first didn't seem to take itself so seriously, the arcadey gameplay fit the tone well. I think that really raises the expectations for 2 for a lot of people.

 

[HereticBD]

The first didn't seem to take itself so seriously, the arcadey gameplay fit the tone well. I think that really raises the expectations for 2 for a lot of people.

I don't know if I'd say the first had "arcadey" gameplay. I think they were trying to do the same things, but the tech just wasn't there yet, so all of the open world gameplay felt a little shallow in comparison. RDR1 really isn't all that different than RDR2 from a core gameplay standpoint. The difference I recognize is the depth to everything in RDR2, compared to the original. In the original, hunting for instance, never really served a purpose outside of selling skins for money and checking boxes to get a special outfit or whatever. In RDR2, they give it far more purpose thanks to the whole camp dynamic, whether it's for food supplies, or decorating the camp, or crafting items. That goes for almost all of the side activities. There is always some meta game that is driving it forward and making it all worthwhile. There are all these little RPG touches, that make every little activity serve some kind of purpose.

That said, and I think where some would complain, is that all the side stuff is still completely optional, and you can just blow through the game without doing any of it. So there is an artificiality to it all, because someone who doesn't do any of the side stuff and just lets their camp fall to pieces, is still going to get the same basic story as someone who did. However, I think if you are just rushing through the campaign, you're kind of missing the point of the game. I think they delivered a true immersive world, with the campaign being more set dressing, and a mere means to an end. Whereas in RDR1, the main campaign was the draw, with the open world activities being more of an amusing distraction than anything else.

In short:

RDR1 = The story of John Marsden, with some open world activities thrown in there.

RDR2 = Old West life simulator, with the story of Arthur Morgan thrown in there.

I can see people appreciating one over the other, but for me RDR2 just nailed the true open world experience games have been striving for ever since we first played GTA3.

 

[lweiberg]

Played through RDR on Xbox One X right before RDR2 came out. Happy to say that RDR still holds up, an awesome experience.

Now, am almost through RDR2. Also an awesome experience. Arthur ended up winning me over.



Could be my favorite protagonist in the Rockstar universe.

Going to finish the RDR2 story soon and then replay RDR1. Then maybe replay RDR 2

 

[jlagman]

I didn't sink as much time into RDR2 as I did the first one; perhaps that has to do with being in university at the time of the first game's release. While I still ultimately liked the second game, I didn't find it as "revolutionary" as critics and reviewers made it out to be; it was just more of the same, which isn't bad per se, just wasn't as big a deal as I thought it would be.

 

[vcmmafan]

As someone who loves RDR1 the RDR2 mission "Jim Milton rides, Again?" in the epilogue was fucking epic. What a fucking throw back for the old fans.

SPOILERS BELOW

1. They use the original RDR1 John Marston theme song remastered

2. They use several sound effects such as dead eye are the exact same as the original game.

3. The mission name is in reference to the RDR1 mission "Landon Ricketts Rides, Again"

4. John Marston does his iconic pose with the sawed off shotgun on the cover of the original

5. They use the same type of mission build up as the old game typically did before the shootout



And they bring it back once more in "American Venom"

Joe: "Just you left, is it?"

John Marston: "Yeah...just me."