Red Dead Redemption
New Rockstar game
Reply
According the The Joying of Stiq

Quote:
Take Two advised its shareholders of two big delays that will impact their earnings for the rest of the financial year. The upcoming Mafia II and Red Dead Redemption have both been delayed "to allow additional development time for the titles and to maximize their full potential in terms of the quality of the player experience and market performance." In other words, the development teams needed a bit more time.

The two titles are now planned for the first half of fiscal 2010, which spans November 2009 to April 2010. This means either of these games can still make the all-important holiday shopping season. However, even without Mafia and Red Dead Redemption, Take Two still has a relatively strong lineup with BioShock 2, The Ballad of Gay Tony, and Borderlands.


I remain optimistic about RDR, despite GTAIV being cacky pants. Oi loike westerns, y'see.
Damn. Why can't the two good games stay on time, while the two gash ones (GTAIV: The Unbearable Realism of This Game and BioShock 2: Worse Than Even Your Nightmares Thought It Could Be) slip or better yet fuck off?

Especially with the El Spanglo RDR trailer that just went live on, er, Live.

At least Borderlands is still coming. Though it has the noticeable risk of being made by Gearbox.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/red-d ... on-preview

I don't usually read Eurogamer's previews, but this one is actually really well written so don't just skim it over - give it a proper read. It's GTA in the Wild West*, and it looks fuckin' awesome!

*Obvious conclusion to draw.
OH, cunty mints.
Cheers flower!
Dimrill wrote:
I remain optimistic about RDR, despite GTAIV being cacky pants. Oi loike westerns, y'see.

Why would it have anything to do with GTA? The GTA games are developed by Rockstar North. Rockstar San Diego did RDR (and the Midnight Club games too).
Because it's an open world game made by Rockstar Games. I can draw a line in crayon between those two points.
I've just noticed that despite me using a topic icon on this thread, it doesn't appear on the forum index. This is cacky pants.
Read Dead Revolver was nothing like GTA. It was an ok shooter, but nothing special.

Rockstar Games is the publisher. It's like saying that Call of Duty is a plastic peripheral-based action rhythm game because they also publish Guitar Hero.
But this isn't going to be like RDR. Eurogamer preview says stuff!
How confusing is it that the acronyms are both the same? Ok, I'll concede I haven't read it (EG is blocked at work).
Or the GamesTIM(!) preview feature. Or the other previews I've read.
myp wrote:
How confusing is it that the acronyms are both the same? Ok, I'll concede I haven't read it (EG is blocked at work).


Here. Highlights.

ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
Red Dead Revolver, Rockstar's first foray into the genre, was competent and occasionally brilliant, but, picked up half-completed from Capcom, it was something of a development mongrel. With the sequel, however, the House of Liberty has a chance to build the title from scratch.

Rockstar's playing the Western genre straight, then, and building on it much the way you'd expect it to, with the open range transformed into an open world split across three massive areas, divided into Frontiers, Plains, and Mexico. The result is a plot of land which, taken as a whole, is significantly bigger than GTAIV's Liberty City.

Frontier is a vast expanse of dunes and bluffs, golden mountains rising on the horizon, and tumbleweeds rolling through the foreground. With a huge draw-distance and a creepy soundtrack in place, there's a palpable sense of isolation, but Redemption's world is far from empty, the wilderness between towns alive with creeping wildlife (for the first time in an open-world title, Rockstar's pouring critters into the sandbox, with an elaborate ecology that fights and feeds all by itself) and packed full of entirely unpredictable encounters with the locals.

And while we've only been given a quick glance at a gigantic title, it's more than enough to remind fans of Revolver what a perfect match Rockstar's found in the Wild West. With a setting that offers a handy means of exploring the company's fascination with brutal morality, while simultaneously providing a neat framework of cinematic references to hang the whole thing on, Red Dead Redemption sees Rockstar shooting from the hip - and, so far, it's hitting most of its targets.
The unabridged version.

ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
Look at a map of North America and you're staring into the last four hundred years of the country's history, the layout of the states revealing hints of a westward expansion that was first fiddly and hard-won, then swift and careless. On the eastern side of the continent, the shapes are strange and irregular, each kink in a border as likely to be the result of a land dispute as it is a river or mountain range that had to be worked around. Look west, however, and someone's ditched the niceties and broken out a ruler, carving the territory up in straight lines as much as possible, dividing the wilderness sight-unseen. As time passed, this unexplored chessboard of empty deserts and dusty canyons became home to a hesitant scattering of frontier-posts and shantytowns, populated by hopeless cases and gun-toting weirdoes. The lost and damned, in other words: a promising landscape for videogames, and a perfect setting for one developer in particular.

And yet there are surprisingly few good games about the Old West. Certainly, the 8-bit anticlassic Custer's Revenge got things off to a shaky start, but to this date, the decent titles - the phenomenal Stranger's Wrath, and the largely serviceable Gun, for example - can be counted on the fingers of one hand, even if you happen to have lost a few digits whittlin'. Red Dead Revolver, Rockstar's first foray into the genre, was competent and occasionally brilliant, but, picked up half-completed from Capcom, it was something of a development mongrel. With the sequel, however, the House of Liberty has a chance to build the title from scratch, and hopefully, in the process, provide a cowboy game that captures the atmosphere you want when you head out west - the tension, the shootouts, and the brooding, dusty menace - in a way that so far, bizarrely, only Oddworld has been truly able to do.

If Revolver was a Spaghetti Western, Redemption is a grim-faced Butch Cassidy, moving the clock forward to the turn of the 20th Century, and exploring the nasty derailing that ensued when the frontier culture collided head-on with the modern world. It's a tantalising agenda, and one that colours every aspect of the game, as protagonist John Marston, once a bandit, now trying to get by as an honest man, finds himself roped into helping the Bureau, the government agency created to tame the west, when they give him what Rockstar's coyly referring to as a "terrifying ultimatum".

Hopefully, that ultimatum's a little more involving than, "Either the beard goes or I do." But, however the mystery eventually unfolds, Rockstar's already created another of its signature leads: a brutal victim, trapped between their own wishes and the plans of others, or, if you prefer, caught within the promise of the sandbox environment, and the quiet tyranny of the missions layered on top.

Rockstar's playing the Western genre straight, then, and building on it much the way you'd expect it to, with the open range transformed into an open world split across three massive areas, divided into Frontiers, Plains, and Mexico. The result is a plot of land which, taken as a whole, is significantly bigger than GTAIV's Liberty City. But while the developer is keen to underline the size of Redemption's stomping grounds, it's the wildness of it that is initially most startling, and the first indication comes with the lead character. Marston, all gun-belts, Stetson, and itchy trigger fingers, is a peculiarly haunted presence, his eyes darting back and forth whenever idling, as if he's nervous and perhaps slightly paranoid about the space into which he's been dumped.

And, flung into the game for a quick developer playthough, he has every reason to be. Frontier is a vast expanse of dunes and bluffs, golden mountains rising on the horizon, and tumbleweeds rolling through the foreground. With a huge draw-distance and a creepy soundtrack in place, there's a palpable sense of isolation, but Redemption's world is far from empty, the wilderness between towns alive with creeping wildlife (for the first time in an open-world title, Rockstar's pouring critters into the sandbox, with an elaborate ecology that fights and feeds all by itself) and packed full of entirely unpredictable encounters with the locals.

You can choose to ignore most of the distractions the game flings at you as you trot through the desert, but they still offer glimpses of a stark and ungovernable environment, as the next rise reveals a rotting corpse tangled in amongst the scrub, or a strange plume on the horizon, which may emanate from drunken good ol' boys gathered round a campfire, or the dust flung up by a group of desperadoes dragging a local farmer behind them. Frontier doesn't just seem dangerous, then - it feels promisingly unhinged.

Transport around such a huge space is as volatile as the rest of the wildlife. Powered by Euphoria's real-time animation system, which allows for an unending parade of saggy, staggering deaths, each horse Marston finds, whether he steals it from a town or tames it from the wild, has a different set of traits, ranging from speed and toughness, to general orneriness, all of which reveal themselves in wilful handling. His rides are easily spooked, too, with snakes, gunshots, and even reckless over-spurring causing them to throw him if he doesn't treat them right, suggesting horse management may add a fascinating wildcard to many of the game's missions.

With the wilderness drawn with such surprising force, it's harder to gauge what kind of order Rockstar is seeking to impose on such a convincingly lawless world, and while the three brief missions we're shown focus heavily on combat, they reveal little in the way of story or overall structure. The first, a tense hostage exchange in an sun-bleached ghost town - this being Rockstar, it's a trap, of course - throws Marston straight into the middle of a dusty shootout, with a nice range of cover options (players can hide behind rocks, fences, and even horse carcases if they're really desperate), and a handful of Dead-Eye special moves for when the odds stack up. The first of these is a standard slow-mo, while the second allows Marston to line up as many shots as possible on multiple enemies before unleashing them all in a single deadly volley, adding a deft tactical dynamic to the 360-degree staging.

Two subsequent missions give a taste of other, equally traditional scenarios, the first riding shotgun on a fleeing stagecoach, the second on horseback, protecting a battered steam train from bandits. The stagecoach offering has a pleasant hint of shooting gallery to it, with blindfire to exploit and a range of guns at Marston's disposal, from the thuggish close-up blast of a sawn-off, to a carbine useful for picking people off in the distance. Meanwhile, shooting desperadoes looks just as satisfying on horseback, which turns out to be a lot more interesting than blasting away at someone out of the window of a Blista Compact. Marston's both more manoeuvrable and more vulnerable than Liberty City's motorists, a few well-placed volleys taking his nag's legs out from under him and dumping him into the sand, on foot and at a significant disadvantage.

An ambush and two escort runs, then, but while the missions we're shown may be fairly conservative, there's an undeniable freshness in the old west details, leading to a slight thrill every time you select not just a rifle, but a Winchester from the weapon menu, shoot a man's hat off during a chase, or stumble across robbers with bandanas covering the bottom half of their faces.

Due to the general scarcity of decent Western titles, and the developer's own skill at mimicry, Rockstar's latest is shaping up to be that rare game in which it's still exciting to see your favourite genre clichés enacted as much as undermined. And while we've only been given a quick glance at a gigantic title, it's more than enough to remind fans of Revolver what a perfect match Rockstar's found in the Wild West. With a setting that offers a handy means of exploring the company's fascination with brutal morality, while simultaneously providing a neat framework of cinematic references to hang the whole thing on, Red Dead Redemption sees Rockstar shooting from the hip - and, so far, it's hitting most of its targets.
Hah! YOU WERE WRONG MYP! ADMIT YOU WERE WRONG! *backs him into a corner with a stick with some dog poo on the end* ADMIT IT!
It's still not made by Rockstar North though, is it? Hence is not made by the same devs as GTA. You berk.
Stop trying to wriggle out of it. My brother will be along in a while, and he is bigger than me. You'd much rather eat him. *clanks bell*
Yeah, but, all of Rockstar's teams usually put on a good show.

And with MC:LA and the awesome Table Tennis under San Diego's belt, I'm willing to bet this is gonna be good.
Yup. Frankly, they could take pretty much all the content that's already in MC:LA, rewrite what's necessary to make it into a GTA game, and have a fucking amazing GTA game (because, I have to admit, it looks at least twice as nice as GTAIV - it really feels like cruising through a hot American city whereas GTAIV's Liberty City was beset by uncanny valleyitis)
MetalAngel wrote:
Yup. Frankly, they could take pretty much all the content that's already in MC:LA, rewrite what's necessary to make it into a GTA game, and have a fucking amazing GTA game (because, I have to admit, it looks at least twice as nice as GTAIV - it really feels like cruising through a hot American city whereas GTAIV's Liberty City was beset by uncanny valleyitis)


Good god, only as long as they left out all the people. And added in ones I can run over.
Well, yeah, but the vast majority of the content needed (huge city, textures, vehicles, physics engine, traffic system) are all there and looking amazing.
A bit too solid though. 90% of the roadside is effectively a wall painted to look like the side of a road - no alleyways or street furniture of note.
Better rain effect, too.
Watch, read and then wish April 30th 2010 was today -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/ga ... games-xbox

Most anticipated game of next year? Fuck yes.
Yep, watched it last night and feel the same way. Let's hope it doesn't turn out to be a GTAIV boreathon.
Good King Owenceslas wrote:
Watch, read and then wish April 30th 2010 was today -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/ga ... games-xbox

Most anticipated game of next year? Fuck yes.


Man, that is beautiful. Can't really judge anything else from a video without playing for myself, but it looks promising.
after getting burned by Call of Juarez 2 I'll probably avoid.

the Wild West should make for a good game but I think the last one I really liked was Kane on the Speccy.
Dimvinterblot wrote:
Yep, watched it last night and feel the same way. Let's hope it doesn't turn out to be a GTAIV boreathon.


See, I love GTA IV and I love the wild wild west, so this game appears to be made just for me. But you can play too, if you want.
It seems like you can actually see your enemies on this so its bound to be better than juarez 2.
Bring back Redneck Rampage !
Spruce_Tree wrote:
the Wild West should make for a good game but I think the last one I really liked was Gun Fright on the Speccy.


FTFM. I thought I'd like Lucasarts' Outlaws but it ran really poorly on my PC back then.
I keep watching that trailer and loving it more each time. The reaction of the local sheriff to Marston's arrival, the galloping outlaws at the beginning.

I also absolutely love 'The Shootist' aspect that it's set in 1908 when the Wild West is essentially history. I'll be very disappointed if there's no nod to the GTA games with a mission involving stealing an automobile!
After seeing this first-hand at the Rockstar office, I can safely say it's my most anticipated game of 2010.

(Here's an in-depth preview I wrote if anyone's interested.)
grumpysmurf wrote:
After seeing this first-hand at the Rockstar office, I can safely say it's my most anticipated game of 2010.

(Here's an in-depth preview I wrote if anyone's interested.)


Great preview. Thanks a lot, chap.
Thanks, Smurfster. Your preview has upgraded me from mildly interested to ZOMG MUST HAVE.
Ok, consider me a-needin' this something desperate too.

I love westerns, me. I love reading Zane Gray, and Elmore Leonard's classic early stuff, and Louis L'Amour. And I love the spaghetti westerns.

Image

This pic sold me, basically.

Just the idea of being able to free-roam and mosey around a genuinely mammoth Western landscape is sweet. I also hope that killing people is harder, and conversely being killed is harder, so you don't get the faintly ludicrous megadeath of the GTA games. Importantly, I hope this Western game allows a man to do what he's a-fixin' on doing. I hope it lets a man walk down the path he chooses. And I'd like to get truly lost in the wilderness in the game. Feel like I'm miles from anywhere. Yup, that'd be plum nice.

I also hope it comes out on PC and isn't a hideously coded, jerky, unplayable piece of dreck like GTA 4 was.

I remember Outlaws on the PC, by the way. I liked it. Best taunting in a game ever.
Oh dear. http://www.joystiq.com/2010/01/12/sourc ... n-trouble/

Quote:
When we recently spoke with our trusted sources from Rockstar San Diego, in addition to yesterday's information regarding the Midnight Club franchise, we were also told about the allegedly troubled state of Red Dead Redemption. One source said that the game "was a complete disaster for most of 2009 and previous ... it has since turned around a little bit, but there are huge problems with it still." Unsurprisingly, the issues with the game are repeatedly claimed to be the result of mismanagement -- along the same lines as what was mentioned in the recent "Rockstar spouse" letter.

"Red Dead [Redemption] has been in production for six years (mainly because of horrible management/lack of direction due to fear of disrespecting Rockstar NY) and it will never get the money back in sales it cost to create for those six years," claimed another source.

We asked Wedbush Morgan's Michael Pachter to estimate how many copies he thinks Red Dead Redemption needs to sell to make back its development costs and, more importantly for Take-Two, to be profitable. "I'd say realistically, if everybody [at Rockstar San Diego] was working on it this whole time -- so let's assume it's four years to be fair [Red Dead Revolver was released in March 2004], that's $40 million (about $10 million a year to run the studio) -- to make that back and just break even you need at least $80 million in sales; 1.75 million units. For profit: $160 million/3.5 million units."

Pachter added that "it's got a shot" and that, from what he's seen of the game, "it looks phenomenal." Our sources are less hopeful, unfortunately: "The functional team that was Midnight Club was shattered. All the people who didn't quit or get fired were thrown onto Red Dead Redemption, many of them being demoted. The completely disfunctional team that is RDR was put to top priority. The people who had floundered on that project or outright screwed it up were promoted and are now in complete control of the studio, and they're running it into the ground." We'll have to see when the game arrives in stores this April -- if it does.

We contacted Rockstar for comment on this story and have yet to hear back as of publishing.

Update: We were contacted regarding this story by one Rockstar source, who told us: "It will take 5 million sales at full price to recoup the development costs of Red Dead. The good news is they [Rockstar] are not expecting to make money with Red Dead Redemption. At this point, that project is just supposed to prove that the San Diego studio can make a great quality AAA title."
Maths fail. If you break even on 1.75 million units, you profit on 1.750001 units.
GOD-DAMMIT.

All I want is one ground-breakingly awesome old Western open-world sandbox game that echoes my treasured and beloved cowboy fiction of Louis L'Amour and Elmore Leonard, is that too goddamn hard to ask?!

>:( :'(
Hey, you may get it. But it's an insight into the seemingly troubled existence of one of the largest selling games studios out there.
Craster wrote:
Maths fail. If you break even on 1.75 million units, you profit on 1.750001 units.
Could there be some sort of sliding scale payments system between the studio and publisher, where between 1.75 million sales the studio doesn't have to repay advances to the publisher, but doesn't get any royalties either?
Sadly the massive feature on this in Edge revealed that the controls and movement are the same as in GTA, so I think I might have to pass on this.
Excellent news! *preorders*
myoptikakaka wrote:
Excellent news! *preorders*


I'm sorry. I can accept that you're a big fan of GTA, but I can't believe you can control that guy for an hour and think "Yes, this control system is excellent. Definitely better than most other 3rd party runny-shooty games". Because it's just not true.
I've never found it a problem except for getting used to the leaning if I haven't played it for a while. I quite like the fact you can move around at walking speed without having to push the analogue stick forwards a tiny amount, as it means you can take your time and drink in your surroundings. There's not many games in which I enjoy doing that.
I don't want to drink in my surroundings while being shot to death. Or when trying to get back into a race after crashing. Or when trying to find cover during a gunfight.
Just remember to hold down A, then. It's not brain surgery.
Hold down A is just a half jog rubbish. Batter A like a spastic is run.
Mountains and molehills spring to mind.
Page 1 of 10 [ 490 posts ]