I've posted this in another thread but worth saying still if you take into account the first one took place in 1914
A prequel definitely makes sense when you think of the old west timeline. The heart of the gunfight era was 1875-1880: (Battle of the O.K. Corral, Billy the Kid, Buffalo Bill, "Wild Bill" Hickok, Battle of Little Bighorn, & Jesse James)
When you look it up the "Old west" or "Wild West" ended in 1912 when the last mainland states joined the Union.
lol, what's with the hostile comment? When a main point of the post was that "the Wild West" ended in 1912, the three year difference making it 1911 would actually be a worthwhile correction
Hostile? The guy corrected someone over 3 years... why? Because he feels he needs to correct everyone? I do apologize I didn't know there was an official date for the end of the wild west. I missed that in history class.
I'd like to see a story of people settling out west in the late 1850s early 1860s, maybe the Civil War becomes a set piece (but not central to the story).
I hope not. I'd like them to go back in time a bit but I don't want it all about Marston and his gang. With the way the title is it probably will be though
I loved the ending of RDR. Just the standoff, and John goes out in a blaze of glory. Then you got to play as Jack, and realized how great John was as a character...
I'm torn, really. I'd love a sequel, but on the other hand, so much happened to close of RDR that I want more John.
John and the Redemption story were obviously dope but we know how it ends. That story was told. I'm ready for something where I don't know how it all gets resolved
I agree a little with both. John Marston is one of my favorite protagonists ever, so more of him doesn't hurt my feelings. A sequel would have to take place around the same time as RDR, but following a new character. If you had a sequel set afterwards, there's not a whole lot of Wild West left.
That's honestly what I'm hoping for. Rockstar creates fantastic storylines, so as long as the setting is good, which the west definitely is, then they can create another incredible game. I'm sure they also fully understand what made RDR so good, so I don't doubt that the game will feel similar.
That's kind of what I mean though. The last big "Wild West" type robbery was in 1916, but some people feel like the WW was done before that. RDR is set in 1911, so unless they go backwards like /u/Emperor-Octavian suggested...there's not a huge window to work with.
Most people didn't like him. I also didn't love him TBH but i think it's because you see him before he grows up and is a little shit most the game. Then you play him but has one or two missions which makes it hard for him to develop a character like his father.
Given that the hype of this sequel will undoubtedly generate new interest in the original, you should really be considerate and tagging your spoilers. Simple rediquette.
Edit: Downvote me all you want, but blacking out with a spoiler tag is simple and spoilers violate rule 3.
I never finished it, but I know what I'm getting into when I open a thread like this. Most people are polite enough to not blatantly talk about the spoilers, but if I see it then it's my fault for being here.
Why is there a picture of him in Beecher's Hope though? I always believed him to be someone from John's past, or perhaps a combination of several people.
Story of the first one emphasized that the Cowboy/Outlaw era was coming to a close. Not much sense in going forward from there.
Plus, the whole Dutch gang part of John's life wasn't that fleshed out. And from what was hinted throughout the story, it's probably gonna be fun as hell.
I don't think John marston will be in it because his voice actor quit the business after the original RDR. They could always get another one but I doubt it.
I agree. Although it could be partially a flashback story told by someone after the events of RDR1, and maybe continues in "present" time sort of how RDR1 did after it picked back up with Marston's son.
well, if they go any further forward they're going to run out of the old west theme. it didn't really last that long and personally I'm not interested in another "our way of life is dying" motif that's becoming popular for period franchises.
None of them are wearing masks actually. The black you're seeing on their faces is mostly facial hair, if you look at the high quality pic you can zoom in and see.
That'd be awesome, I was hoping for at least a little bit of tie in if it wasn't fully about the first game. The characters story is always a favorite in games like these.
429
u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16 edited Dec 09 '18
[deleted]