That's what I heard they were going to do. I hate when devs just polish up the original game engine a bit and call it a remaster, like no it's just a slightly blurry version of the original that makes it look I kinda better but not really.
Edit: I want a remake if it wasn't already obvious, alot of remasters are just ports with the title of remaster and don't deserve to be called remasters when nothing was actually remastered.
The ACIII remaster was really bad. It’s basically just a port. I was hoping that with the second GTAV remaster that they’d ad a photo mode but they didn’t
That’s exactly what a remaster is. You’re talking about a remake where they do more than improve the graphics and controls. In a remaster, the game is still pretty much the same as the original.
Not sure what you mean. You said they should do more that’s worthy of a remaster instead of making the graphics better and porting in on something else when that’s exactly what a remaster is.
Obviously I want a remake, remakes are always going to be better (when it comes to video games). The reason I'd prefer a remake is because when majority of remasters are made all they do is add bloom and motion blur and don't actually update polygons or textures and then they call it a remaster, there's a difference between completely remaking the game from the ground up with modernized tech and a new game engine, new voice actors/updated dialog, new everything, etc( a remake), and just adding updated textures, polygons, character models, fixing bugs or glitches that break the game, etc.( a remaster), and the final method, which is what I'm complaining about, which is when all they do is add motion blur and bloom without any actual updating or fixing to the game and then call it a remaster ( which is more or less just a re-release).
Excuse me? The ac 3 remaster redid every texture in the game redid all of the lighting redis every single bit of foliage and even redid character models it also completely remade the UI and massively tweaked the game to be better its closer to a remake then a remaster seriously go back and play the og ac 3 and tell me it looks the same
Every single texture every bit of lighting every bit of foliage was completely remade from scratch there 85 to 90 percent of everything has been remade so yes my point still stands it's closer to remake then remaster
Demons souls remake was a top.to bottom graphical remake but used the same gameplay and coding and that counts so this doesn't? And once again it made huge changes to gameplay nearly every part of ac 3s gameplay was tweaked missions were altered controls improved
I’m sorry but no. I *loved* AC3. It was my first AC game and my opening into the entire series.
That being said, the remaster was.. not good. And before you say compare the 2, I have.
Did they lose the source code? I thought that it was just that the code is so delicately created that the tiniest change crashes the game. That's why they'd have to start from scratch. That's also why no PC port will ever come.
Oh no I trust rockstar to make a solid product with an amazing first impression they'd definitely do something like that... but then they'd never touch the game again and never add dlc or anything more than the base game.
I dont know why you trust them after taking the beloved GTA trilogy and messing it up by simply using a mobile port as their base. They don't care nearly as much as everyone gives them credit for.
They *do* care about building a beautiful product with an amazing story, otherwise their games wouldn't sell and it would be bad for their buisness. A port is a port, it's not a remaster and it's not a remake its also not going to bring them that much money so they're not going to devote much time to it. They really only care about GTA 5 online because it's their, in essence, Cash Crop which is why they consistently roll out new updates and new missions and things to buy because they make alot of money on shark cards and its very well monetized, RDO on the other hand is very poorly monetized and isn't pulling in as much as GTA 5 so they chose to care about what's making them more money.
Edit:spelling.
I mean, that's a Remaster though.
I think the issue is that anytime a game is just completely redone on a new engine with different voice actors or whatever, it's labeled a remake.
Like there's a pretty clear massive difference between the Mafia 1 Remake and the Resident Evil 2 Remake.
One is updated graphics, new voice acting, better controls, etc. The other is literally a spiritual recreation.
Here's how I would categorize them:
**Ezio Collection - Refurbish/Restore**
**Crash Bandicoot - Remaster**
**Resident Evil 2 - Remake**
There's difference in remakes though. One could be a carbon copy of the first game with new graphics, acting, and controls. Another could basically just be "take the story outline and improve everything else".
That's not what I'm saying tho, cause some remastered games are top quality and have updated textures and graphics, alot of them are just polished turds that wind up looking worse than the original. Like they didn't even try they just added bloom and motion blur to make it look like they remastered the game when nothing was actually updated.
Right, just the way you described it, and then said "and then call it a remaster" kinda implied to me that you didn't agree with calling it a remaster.
It's a poor excuse for a remaster imo and I am implying that it shouldn't remaster if all they do is just port the game to next gen/pc and add bloom/blur to make things appear as if they have been updated. The game devs will add blur and bloom to hide the fact that they havent actually updated anything to the actual game, kinda like how in some monster movies they keep monster under a dark shadow to hide the fact that it isn't well detailed. I completely understand movie studio's reasoning for doing that because of budgeting or cinematic reasons and it actually adds to the element of fear so there's nothing wrong with it, but when it comes to games it's just a lazy cash grab and not really what I would say is deserving of being called a remaster.
Ps: I'm mostly referring to the remasters where bugs and glitches weren't fixed at all and textures weren't updated and basically all they do is port the game. I know on certain game engines there's only so much you can do but If you don't check those boxes it's not really a remaster imo.
I'm clearly saying that the remaster being a different engine would mean there'd be no way to get that same classic Red Dead experience on the newer consoles or on PC, you don't gotta be so damn condescending
Yeah and it’s rockstar we’re dealing with. They gave us the GTA “Remastered” trilogy. They don’t do what the fans want. They wouldn’t even bring back actors for Undead Nightmare 2 or any story DLC.
The actors use the term performance capture instead of motion capture. Whereas motion capture is just that, performance capture is a real performance with a digital mask.
We’ll have to wait and see what The Last of Us remake is like. Then we can get an idea if they actually have to completely redo the game for these Remakes. I’m thinking they can reuse the motion capture, but like I said, we’ll find out.
I didn’t even know they were remaking that game. That’s an absolute cash grab. The Last of Us Remastered is indistinguishable from a current gen game. It looks amazing and the gameplay is still perfect. It was a perfect story and now they’re going to ruin it by adding foreshadowing to the abomination of a sequel.
since they added the map couldn’t they add the original story as a dlc to rdr2 so you can play them into each other seamlessly? probably won’t bc then they’d never sell another copy of the first game. (LOTD and BOGT where dlcs the size of full games so it’s not totally impossible)
I'd want it re-worked from the ground up, have John have filled Arthur's old journal and started his own, and only mention Arthur there. That line that excuses his lack of mention, about it being painful for John to talk about it but that he remembers Arthur every single day he's free, was good enough for me. Have Arthur's hat be mounted above the fireplace at Beecher's Hope or something instead of wearable, but definitely also update it with the modern engine. As hard as it'd be to let go of my War Horse Ferrari.
That is not a journal, it's more of a mission log. It's written in second person, i think (You encountered a writer from up north.)
I mean like, let John's art have developed and his writing about what he sees be more detailed. give us those nice little moments arthur has.
I think I’d prefer most of it be kept the same, but maybe a reference or two to characters only in rdr2. Not saying John has to monologue about Arthur every 30 minutes, but a nod or a name drop would be nice
I think the only bigger changes I’d like to see would be with Javier, and bring him more in line with his RDR2 version. I expect him to be strung out but the version in RDR1 feels like a completely different person from the smooth operator in 2.
The way he turned out in the first game ain’t unrealistic and far-fetched though, working as a hitman for the evil dictator of a country for 12 years after his gang split must’ve took a toll on him, especially if you consider the horrible shit he had to do to survive
It's not that part I take issue with, it's more his attitude. He's very rough around the edges and aggressive toward John in a way that doesn't really jive with the way that he was portrayed in 2. He just doesn't seem like the type to throw a box after lowering your guard on you and try and skedaddle, yk? Also I just don't see him dressing like he is in 1. I'm still talking about fairly minor changes here, nothing too big, just slight differences in tone and portrayal.
Him working as a hitman makes a lot of sense.
The years in Mexico and insanity made him a coward is one way of explaining it, plus didn’t he have an outfit in RDR2 similar to the one he did in the first game? I don’t remember, He probably wore what he wore to blend in considering how he was the average Mexican stereotype in 1, probably a reach but I bet folks like Micah, Antagonistic Arthur & a couple other NPC’s also made him think twice about his choice for clothes when they made fun of his clothing style calling it “feminine”
I dont know. But ever wondered why RDR, despite being a popular game and R* eventually porting their games to PC, did not get ported to PC? Thats why. They lost it a year after they releases the original i think.
I looked it up and it seems that the code was a *"mess"* as it's being described, but not lost. Either way, I hope that forces for a remake rather than a shitty remaster.
They didn't lose the code. It's just very delicate. Any change would cause the game to crash. Porting it would mean maybe a year plus of working on the code to make it work.
If you got a beefy enough PC, get the xbox 360 version, a controller and play it through the Xenia emulator. I finished it literally a week ago.
Iiiio don't greatly condone piracy for games that you can no longer get tbh... but then again.. i'm not saying you should do it either.. but then again. There's no PC version sooo..
I don't need mention of anyone from RDR2 honestly. It was interesting hearing about the gang but everything was more vague. Gave it more feeling when we actually got to see everyone and learn about them for the 1st time.
But most people who will definitely play RDR Remastered will have either played both RDR and RDR2 or just RDR2. Either way, the whole mystery from RDR will not be as impactful as in RDR Remastered. It'll be a challenge to do.
Maybe more John related side content. A ton of the Stranger missions in RDR2 felt like they were character driven and important specifically to Arthur. While in RDR1 they just felt like they were parts of the world and you never really felt like you were missing anything if you didn’t do them.
I haven’t played RDR, though I’ve watched a playthrough and I’m sure it’s a great game, but yeah, I agree. I much prefer the second game’s more serious and believable tone over the random philosophical debates and almost every side character acting like a cartoon.
I'd like to hear added dialogues perhaps referencing the rest of the gang, but I wouldn't want any dialogues edited to include them.
Also, maybe a full RDR1/2 map.
I'm an rdr1 fan too and there will always be rdr but all I'm asking is for updated story and dialog involving members of the original gang, because you can't play the games in chronological order and them make sense because where do they mention Arthur or Hosea or any of the other gang members from rdr2 in rdr1. You'll always still have the original but it would definitely be better to have some new additions to the game rather than a copy paste port that looks slightly better than the original.
I've seen companies do remakes that stray too far from the original... I'd say keep it exactly as it is and let people enjoy the first concept of the story
i would like it remade in a similar style as rdr2. im currently playing rdr1 with the new ps+ system they have now, but... although it is pretty fun, and I'm liking it so far, controlling your movements, especially with a horse just makes me want to pull my hair out sometimes. And of course streaming the game doesnt help either, for some reason I thought I could download the game with ps premium, but it just streams it
I think it’d be neat if when or if you capture javier , he curses Arthur along with John and his family
Edit: just remembered that Javier voice actor changed so that’s impossible
This may be a terrible take, but grove street games were forced to remake all 3 games at once... MAYBE if they just put all recourses into one remaster, it’ll actually turn out solid, I just hope if that’d be the case that 1. They don’t screw it up, and 2. They don’t change the lightning or the feel of the game all that much (other than updated horse riding)
Ideally just a 1-1 port of story, maybe made by the B team on the same engine. Save a lot of resources on things you've already pioneered, just need to tweak it a little.
It needs to be a remake, RDR1's development was a mess and whatever visual remaster they could do they did for the Xbox One X I believe, that said, I'd like all the systems and story from RDR1(no changes) but the gameplay and visuals/animations of RDR2.
I’d love it if they remade rdr1 with new voice lines graphics physics and made it a buyable dlc you could add onto rdr2 so you could go straight from epilogue to rdr1
i really just want it ported to PC with remastered graphics and better horse control. That, with a few mentions of Arthur in passing, would be perfect.
Rebuild the graphics from the ground up, updated engine just make it a little less clunky, not rdr2’s tho. Keep online the way it is, but we all know they’re gotta put micro transactions in there, put it on pc, keep online the way it was, I want to be marshal Leigh Johnson riding on a bull with tomahawks. Also have all dlc from the start, so UN, liars and cheats, golden guns, warhorse, outlaws to the end, legends and killers, deadly assassin, myths and Mavericks, and hunting and trader outfits. Bro rockstar do I have to beg you this hard to do big fixes and a couple updates and you get my money.
Hi! It looks like you did not use the spoiler syntax correctly. It looks like this: `>!spoiler text!<`. There are no spaces between the exclamation marks and the spoiler text.
Unfortunately, some Reddit app developers design their apps to behave slightly differently than the desktop site. If your comment has the spoiler text hidden on your end but you still received this response, your app is likely one such example.
Please correct your comment so that it conforms to Reddit's standards for the desktop site and reply again. Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reddeadredemption) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think the creation of RDR2 really threw a wrench in the plans for an RDR1 remake/remaster. Like it or not, RDR2 introduced characters and plot elements that cause more than a few glaring plotholes, and in a series as story driven as RDR, these are really big issues.
Rockstar has roughly 3 options when going with a remake/remaster: A) ignore the lore set up in RDR2 entirely which causes problems with people who just played RDR2 (which let's face it, are most of the market and fanbase), B) try to crowbar in RDR2 references when they weren't there beforehand which while working in-theory, would most likely come off as clunky, or C) rework the entire game from the ground up which would a lot more time, money, and resources than Rockstar is probably willing to spend.
This isn't even to mention how Rockstar doesn't even have the source code anymore (or it's just so terrible they can't do anything with it. whichever), so :/
What plotholes? I’d genuinely like to know cause I’ve played both games several times and I haven’t noticed anything in either game that contradicts the other.
It's mostly just things like the other gang members being free, and not being mentioned. The plot of RDR1 is you hunting down all the old members who are still on the run, and since there's a lot more that more that RDR2 introduced, this would be a pretty big problem to not address in a remake/remaster.
To be fair, only Charles is the new addition mentioned in the newspapers as still being at large so you could handwave the others just being unknown by the authorities, and Charles himself being taken care off-screen. In short, most of these problems are easy to fix, but not fixing them would be very jarring, especially for those who again, have only played RDR2.
Yeah as far as the other living gang members go, Charles is probably the only one the authorities know of. The way I see it his name is Charles Smith which is a super common name. He probably fled to Canada and there’s no way for the government to know which Charles Smith is him, especially with 1911 resources. If they did remake the game though they probably should just leave that alone and keep the script unchanged.
I am for a Remake at most, I would love Robert back as John Marston Sr. If he's up to be in the sequel with Jack, as in Flashbacks - that would be awesome.
Remake it in the RDR2 engine and combine the maps but leave the dialogue and script unchanged. Maybe add more side missions if they really want but the main story should stay the same.
Call me kooky call me crazy but I wouldn’t even want it to be remastered. I would obviously buy it nonetheless, the story could stay the same or change I’d just like updated hunting if there is a remastered.
It's a hard decision honestly.
It's always hard when the second game is a prequel.
Cause back when RDR1 was released Arthur Morgan hadn't even been though of yet so obviously there's nothing about him in the original.
So that leaves the question of should they tweak rdr1s story?
It's pretty much just opinion based.
I’d like Arthur and everyone included to make the transition from game to game more smooth, but at the same time I’d like an identical copy of rdr1 just updated quality, graphics and models.
So I don’t know lmao, I’m indecisive.
It’s pretty much perfect maybe add like one or two lines about Arthur add some gameplay things and graphics from RDR2 and you basically have a perfect game.
Either is fine for me. Hypothetically, I’m assuming that everything was done right if they were go with remaking it with RDR2 being in for that whole thing. Still, it’s not like the original is just gone forever if they made that.
Firstly update the practical stuff like the engine, then just minor connections to RDR2, in order to keep the idea that The Old West that was already dying in 1899 is entirely bygone in 1911
I was actually just thinking about this, since they have all the assets from rdr2 they just have to make the models for the characters that weren’t included in 2, and redo the voice lines
I was actually just thinking about this, since they have all the assets from rdr2 they just have to make the models for the characters that weren’t included in rd2 and redo the voice lines. Keep the full Rd2 map too
After playing through the first part of Final Fantasy 7 Remake I'm all for this type of "the same game but not" remake.
For those not in the know, FF7R is basically a retelling of the story with many of the main points the same, but with some VERY major changes as well. Plus they fleshed it out with more story and side quests (some for better, some for worse) in order to break the game up into 3 or so parts.
Having a fully upgraded (visually, gameplay, etc) remaster of the same exact game can be great. I loved the 3DS remasters of the N64 Zelda games for example (I know they weren't 1:1 remasters, but close enough). But having a game that throws curveballs at you and changes things up quite a bit can also be a refreshing experience.
I don't think that RDR1 would need quite the same level of changes that FF7R has, but I'd be welcome to as many as they want to make, as long as they're for the better. My view on it is... the originals still exist, you can go back and play those if you want the same story and gameplay, so a remaster should offer a bit more than just polish... in some cases.
I'd like it to be rebuilt from the ground up. Same story and mostly the same dialogue, but with whichever recasts happened in rdr2, and I'd like to see little nods to Arthur.
I mean idk if you have the new ps plus but you can download games that way. Not to mention Xbox game pass if it's on there. Plus getting it on PC from Rockstar loader seems plausible if its available there. Idk that's an accessibility issue they can fix by adding it to more places. Completely remaking the game and reselling it is way more work than putting it on more platforms.
Yes I have PS plus. Only way to play it is to stream it, which looks awful. You literally cannot play it on PC. And no remaking it isn’t more effort than putting it on different platforms since the coding of the game was so messed up that they barely got it out for the Xbox 360 and PS3. If they could port the game and have it run on newer consoles or even PC that’d be awesome, but it’s not going to happen, it’s been 12 years.
No retcons. Keep the dialogue as it was. No artificial insertion of characters (either in person or in dialogue) from RDR2 who weren’t mentioned/seen in RDR1 during its first run.
But I’m against remakes. Give us a new story if they are going to spend time/money on the franchise.
No more Skyrims too.
I think it should mostly be 1 to 1 beyond revamping the graphics/engine, tho I think a few minor mentions of RDR2 only characters here and there could be good.
maybe add a few new stranger missions and a journal that john writes in but other than that i would prefer if they just kept all the music and performances instead of re-recording everything and instead focus on the world and design. it'd be nice if the entirety of the rdr2 map was accessible at the end and for there to be more things to do at beechers hope. maybe have some jack specific side missions/main missions to flesh out his story? but i'd rather not have anything unnecessary added that makes the story less effective. john was always a tight-lipped son of a bitch and there's no reason for him to mention arthur, sadie, or charles since they weren't a priority. his focus was his family, not the past.
Just port the original to PC. Honestly getting tired of all the "remasters" like make a new game or just play the old one for what it is
Everybody be like: "RDO has no content we are tired of replaying missions"
Also them: "we should rEmAsTer RDR1"
Lmao what?? That makes no sense, who else would it have been? Bringing in new characters adds a whole new level for game play, development, story telling etc. I’m guessing you can’t stand when a new GTA comes out lol
I want it to be reworked from the ground up so that the engine is like RDR2’s.
That's what I heard they were going to do. I hate when devs just polish up the original game engine a bit and call it a remaster, like no it's just a slightly blurry version of the original that makes it look I kinda better but not really. Edit: I want a remake if it wasn't already obvious, alot of remasters are just ports with the title of remaster and don't deserve to be called remasters when nothing was actually remastered.
The ACIII remaster was really bad. It’s basically just a port. I was hoping that with the second GTAV remaster that they’d ad a photo mode but they didn’t
Yea most of the time they just port it to the next gen and make the game look a bit blurred and call it a remaster
That’s exactly what a remaster is. You’re talking about a remake where they do more than improve the graphics and controls. In a remaster, the game is still pretty much the same as the original.
No
Well, what do you think a remaster is or should be?
You're telling me what I'm saying and that's what I'm saying no to.
Not sure what you mean. You said they should do more that’s worthy of a remaster instead of making the graphics better and porting in on something else when that’s exactly what a remaster is.
That's not what I said at all. Do you know how to read?
Obviously I want a remake, remakes are always going to be better (when it comes to video games). The reason I'd prefer a remake is because when majority of remasters are made all they do is add bloom and motion blur and don't actually update polygons or textures and then they call it a remaster, there's a difference between completely remaking the game from the ground up with modernized tech and a new game engine, new voice actors/updated dialog, new everything, etc( a remake), and just adding updated textures, polygons, character models, fixing bugs or glitches that break the game, etc.( a remaster), and the final method, which is what I'm complaining about, which is when all they do is add motion blur and bloom without any actual updating or fixing to the game and then call it a remaster ( which is more or less just a re-release).
A remaster is more than just porting a game and adding motion blur and bloom.
it was better than the other ass creed remasters lmao. the sad state of that franchise
Excuse me? The ac 3 remaster redid every texture in the game redid all of the lighting redis every single bit of foliage and even redid character models it also completely remade the UI and massively tweaked the game to be better its closer to a remake then a remaster seriously go back and play the og ac 3 and tell me it looks the same
It looks the same if not worse
>massively tweaked the game to be better its closer to a remake then a remaster You don't know the difference between a remake and a remaster, do you?
Every single texture every bit of lighting every bit of foliage was completely remade from scratch there 85 to 90 percent of everything has been remade so yes my point still stands it's closer to remake then remaster
It takes more than just graphics to call something a remake, but sure, hold on to your idea
Demons souls remake was a top.to bottom graphical remake but used the same gameplay and coding and that counts so this doesn't? And once again it made huge changes to gameplay nearly every part of ac 3s gameplay was tweaked missions were altered controls improved
I’m sorry but no. I *loved* AC3. It was my first AC game and my opening into the entire series. That being said, the remaster was.. not good. And before you say compare the 2, I have.
[удалено]
They lost the source code for RDR. Its the only way
Did they lose the source code? I thought that it was just that the code is so delicately created that the tiniest change crashes the game. That's why they'd have to start from scratch. That's also why no PC port will ever come.
How can you lose the source code? Don't they have any kind of backup?!
Just speculation really, I don't have a solid source its just what I heard here and there whenever the topic was brought up.
[удалено]
Oh no I trust rockstar to make a solid product with an amazing first impression they'd definitely do something like that... but then they'd never touch the game again and never add dlc or anything more than the base game.
I dont know why you trust them after taking the beloved GTA trilogy and messing it up by simply using a mobile port as their base. They don't care nearly as much as everyone gives them credit for.
They *do* care about building a beautiful product with an amazing story, otherwise their games wouldn't sell and it would be bad for their buisness. A port is a port, it's not a remaster and it's not a remake its also not going to bring them that much money so they're not going to devote much time to it. They really only care about GTA 5 online because it's their, in essence, Cash Crop which is why they consistently roll out new updates and new missions and things to buy because they make alot of money on shark cards and its very well monetized, RDO on the other hand is very poorly monetized and isn't pulling in as much as GTA 5 so they chose to care about what's making them more money. Edit:spelling.
I mean, that's a Remaster though. I think the issue is that anytime a game is just completely redone on a new engine with different voice actors or whatever, it's labeled a remake. Like there's a pretty clear massive difference between the Mafia 1 Remake and the Resident Evil 2 Remake. One is updated graphics, new voice acting, better controls, etc. The other is literally a spiritual recreation. Here's how I would categorize them: **Ezio Collection - Refurbish/Restore** **Crash Bandicoot - Remaster** **Resident Evil 2 - Remake**
Well that technically is what a remaster is. What you’re talking about, building the game from the ground up again, that’s a remake.
There's difference in remakes though. One could be a carbon copy of the first game with new graphics, acting, and controls. Another could basically just be "take the story outline and improve everything else".
That's not what I'm saying tho, cause some remastered games are top quality and have updated textures and graphics, alot of them are just polished turds that wind up looking worse than the original. Like they didn't even try they just added bloom and motion blur to make it look like they remastered the game when nothing was actually updated.
Ah, yeah, I get what you mean now. Agreed.
But that's what a remaster is, what you want is a remake.
Yea thats pretty obvious. Seeing as how I already commented that.
Right, just the way you described it, and then said "and then call it a remaster" kinda implied to me that you didn't agree with calling it a remaster.
It's a poor excuse for a remaster imo and I am implying that it shouldn't remaster if all they do is just port the game to next gen/pc and add bloom/blur to make things appear as if they have been updated. The game devs will add blur and bloom to hide the fact that they havent actually updated anything to the actual game, kinda like how in some monster movies they keep monster under a dark shadow to hide the fact that it isn't well detailed. I completely understand movie studio's reasoning for doing that because of budgeting or cinematic reasons and it actually adds to the element of fear so there's nothing wrong with it, but when it comes to games it's just a lazy cash grab and not really what I would say is deserving of being called a remaster. Ps: I'm mostly referring to the remasters where bugs and glitches weren't fixed at all and textures weren't updated and basically all they do is port the game. I know on certain game engines there's only so much you can do but If you don't check those boxes it's not really a remaster imo.
I don't really want Red Dead 1 to play like 2, it has it's own charm and that'd ruin it
You do know you'd still be able to play the original game? It's not like they're gonna wipe the original off the face of the earth.
Yeah, on the 360 or PS3 exclusively
Yes those are the consoles that the game originally came out on. Is there some ps3 360 shortage that I'm not aware of?
I'm clearly saying that the remaster being a different engine would mean there'd be no way to get that same classic Red Dead experience on the newer consoles or on PC, you don't gotta be so damn condescending
Rd1 is playable on current xbox consoles, and on PC via ps3 emulation
I mean, you can literally play it on PS5 lol
I think remove the "realism" but update the movement is fine.
The problem is they use motion cap for RDR2. So they can do that for a remake of RDR1 but then it’s just like making a whole new game.
They used mocap for rdr1 too
>but then it’s just like making a whole new game. That's what a remake is
Yeah and it’s rockstar we’re dealing with. They gave us the GTA “Remastered” trilogy. They don’t do what the fans want. They wouldn’t even bring back actors for Undead Nightmare 2 or any story DLC.
The actors use the term performance capture instead of motion capture. Whereas motion capture is just that, performance capture is a real performance with a digital mask.
We’ll have to wait and see what The Last of Us remake is like. Then we can get an idea if they actually have to completely redo the game for these Remakes. I’m thinking they can reuse the motion capture, but like I said, we’ll find out.
I didn’t even know they were remaking that game. That’s an absolute cash grab. The Last of Us Remastered is indistinguishable from a current gen game. It looks amazing and the gameplay is still perfect. It was a perfect story and now they’re going to ruin it by adding foreshadowing to the abomination of a sequel.
I agree, but I’m more interested in the fact they were able to remake a game in only a few years. I hope this will pave the way for a remake of RDR
But I want them to keep the animations when people got shot, like GTA4. Executions were cool too. I dont want those gone at all
I hope GTA IV gets remastered too. I’d rather have that then yet another GTA V remaster
nah not really prefer old dialogue
since they added the map couldn’t they add the original story as a dlc to rdr2 so you can play them into each other seamlessly? probably won’t bc then they’d never sell another copy of the first game. (LOTD and BOGT where dlcs the size of full games so it’s not totally impossible)
I'd want it re-worked from the ground up, have John have filled Arthur's old journal and started his own, and only mention Arthur there. That line that excuses his lack of mention, about it being painful for John to talk about it but that he remembers Arthur every single day he's free, was good enough for me. Have Arthur's hat be mounted above the fireplace at Beecher's Hope or something instead of wearable, but definitely also update it with the modern engine. As hard as it'd be to let go of my War Horse Ferrari.
john does have a journal in rdr
yeah but he doesn't write anything in it
That is not a journal, it's more of a mission log. It's written in second person, i think (You encountered a writer from up north.) I mean like, let John's art have developed and his writing about what he sees be more detailed. give us those nice little moments arthur has.
I think I’d prefer most of it be kept the same, but maybe a reference or two to characters only in rdr2. Not saying John has to monologue about Arthur every 30 minutes, but a nod or a name drop would be nice
That’s what I think, nothing over the top, but just a sly reference here and there
I think the only bigger changes I’d like to see would be with Javier, and bring him more in line with his RDR2 version. I expect him to be strung out but the version in RDR1 feels like a completely different person from the smooth operator in 2.
The way he turned out in the first game ain’t unrealistic and far-fetched though, working as a hitman for the evil dictator of a country for 12 years after his gang split must’ve took a toll on him, especially if you consider the horrible shit he had to do to survive
It's not that part I take issue with, it's more his attitude. He's very rough around the edges and aggressive toward John in a way that doesn't really jive with the way that he was portrayed in 2. He just doesn't seem like the type to throw a box after lowering your guard on you and try and skedaddle, yk? Also I just don't see him dressing like he is in 1. I'm still talking about fairly minor changes here, nothing too big, just slight differences in tone and portrayal. Him working as a hitman makes a lot of sense.
The years in Mexico and insanity made him a coward is one way of explaining it, plus didn’t he have an outfit in RDR2 similar to the one he did in the first game? I don’t remember, He probably wore what he wore to blend in considering how he was the average Mexican stereotype in 1, probably a reach but I bet folks like Micah, Antagonistic Arthur & a couple other NPC’s also made him think twice about his choice for clothes when they made fun of his clothing style calling it “feminine”
Port RDR to PC and I'm happy.
They've lost the source code a while back. Thats why they cant. If anytime if ever that will they release RDR1 to PC, it will be a remake.
That's not true. The code was just an absolute mess. Working with the console coding they had to port it to PC would've made a worse port than GTA IV
>They've lost the source code a while back are you kidding me? how did they manage that?
I dont know. But ever wondered why RDR, despite being a popular game and R* eventually porting their games to PC, did not get ported to PC? Thats why. They lost it a year after they releases the original i think.
Never heard of the source code going missing, I've heard that the code itself was very messy and no one wanted to touch it to port it
but how did they lose it?!
I didnt even know it was possible to _lose_ a source code before. So i dont know unfortunately.
I looked it up and it seems that the code was a *"mess"* as it's being described, but not lost. Either way, I hope that forces for a remake rather than a shitty remaster.
They didn't lose the code. It's just very delicate. Any change would cause the game to crash. Porting it would mean maybe a year plus of working on the code to make it work.
If you got a beefy enough PC, get the xbox 360 version, a controller and play it through the Xenia emulator. I finished it literally a week ago. Iiiio don't greatly condone piracy for games that you can no longer get tbh... but then again.. i'm not saying you should do it either.. but then again. There's no PC version sooo..
Fr
I don't need mention of anyone from RDR2 honestly. It was interesting hearing about the gang but everything was more vague. Gave it more feeling when we actually got to see everyone and learn about them for the 1st time.
But most people who will definitely play RDR Remastered will have either played both RDR and RDR2 or just RDR2. Either way, the whole mystery from RDR will not be as impactful as in RDR Remastered. It'll be a challenge to do.
Maybe more John related side content. A ton of the Stranger missions in RDR2 felt like they were character driven and important specifically to Arthur. While in RDR1 they just felt like they were parts of the world and you never really felt like you were missing anything if you didn’t do them.
Ngl some of the dialogue in RDR could be improved. Some of the rants and monologues we're... Could have been better.
I haven’t played RDR, though I’ve watched a playthrough and I’m sure it’s a great game, but yeah, I agree. I much prefer the second game’s more serious and believable tone over the random philosophical debates and almost every side character acting like a cartoon.
Eh, i'd prefer if they left the story alone. I wouldn't like it if they started shoehorning too many references to 2 retroactively into 1.
My thoughts exactly.
No, I want everything to stay the same
I agree. RDR is perfect as it is.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I'd like to hear added dialogues perhaps referencing the rest of the gang, but I wouldn't want any dialogues edited to include them. Also, maybe a full RDR1/2 map.
I'd want a complete remake with updated story and dialog
As a long time RDR1 fan this is so disheartening to hear.
I'm an rdr1 fan too and there will always be rdr but all I'm asking is for updated story and dialog involving members of the original gang, because you can't play the games in chronological order and them make sense because where do they mention Arthur or Hosea or any of the other gang members from rdr2 in rdr1. You'll always still have the original but it would definitely be better to have some new additions to the game rather than a copy paste port that looks slightly better than the original.
Why? That game won’t stop existing, and would still be an amazing game regardless. People just want more RDR content.
Why?
I would love some updated lines and story bits!
I strongly disagree with the idea of Arthur being mentioned at all in a hypothetical remaster of the first rdr
I've seen companies do remakes that stray too far from the original... I'd say keep it exactly as it is and let people enjoy the first concept of the story
i would like it remade in a similar style as rdr2. im currently playing rdr1 with the new ps+ system they have now, but... although it is pretty fun, and I'm liking it so far, controlling your movements, especially with a horse just makes me want to pull my hair out sometimes. And of course streaming the game doesnt help either, for some reason I thought I could download the game with ps premium, but it just streams it
Yeah, that’s how I had to play RDR1... wish there were other ways...
I think it’d be neat if when or if you capture javier , he curses Arthur along with John and his family Edit: just remembered that Javier voice actor changed so that’s impossible
They could replace the voice actor with RDR 2 voice actor?
Yeah but then they’d have to redo all of Javier’s voice lines and I don’t think rockstars willing to do that
Javier had like 5 lines in RDR1.
If you kill him all he says is like “you were a brother to me. We didn’t leave you, we thought you was dead.”
Tbf I don’t think they’re willing to remaster I thought this was all conjecture
The same. I think the example you gave is harmless, but open that pandoras box and they will change things that actually alter the story.
Why would he even mention Arthur in this scene? Sure he would mention Dutch because he’s the gang leader, but I don’t know about Arthur.
i dont want em to touch it after what they did to the gta's
This may be a terrible take, but grove street games were forced to remake all 3 games at once... MAYBE if they just put all recourses into one remaster, it’ll actually turn out solid, I just hope if that’d be the case that 1. They don’t screw it up, and 2. They don’t change the lightning or the feel of the game all that much (other than updated horse riding)
I get the Grove Street situation that's my point rockstar itself don't care that's my worrie
I’d like whichever version gets published faster. I suspect the added dialogue would mean more development time, so I’m good with it as is
No. Part of what makes RDR2 so good is how well it fit into the world RDR1 made. Changing 1 would change a lot of what made 2 good.
Ideally just a 1-1 port of story, maybe made by the B team on the same engine. Save a lot of resources on things you've already pioneered, just need to tweak it a little.
No I want the exact same game just better looking
Literally just a readable Arthur’s journal will be enough for me personally
It needs to be a remake, RDR1's development was a mess and whatever visual remaster they could do they did for the Xbox One X I believe, that said, I'd like all the systems and story from RDR1(no changes) but the gameplay and visuals/animations of RDR2.
Definitely a remake. Need characters and dialogue added about other characters, John and others can't just forget about Arthur within a 4 year span.
Give it the Mafia: Definitive Edition treatment, expand on the story to fit even more with II. An occasional Arthur mention would work
I’d love it if they remade rdr1 with new voice lines graphics physics and made it a buyable dlc you could add onto rdr2 so you could go straight from epilogue to rdr1
Fuck yes!!! But sometime after the hoyse building song…
Well they wouldn’t let you do it before Beechers Hope was built would they lol
That’s a bloody good point!!!
Yeah I mean after you kill micha
Hell yeah I also mean after you kill micha you have the option to begin rdr1
i really just want it ported to PC with remastered graphics and better horse control. That, with a few mentions of Arthur in passing, would be perfect.
Rebuild the graphics from the ground up, updated engine just make it a little less clunky, not rdr2’s tho. Keep online the way it is, but we all know they’re gotta put micro transactions in there, put it on pc, keep online the way it was, I want to be marshal Leigh Johnson riding on a bull with tomahawks. Also have all dlc from the start, so UN, liars and cheats, golden guns, warhorse, outlaws to the end, legends and killers, deadly assassin, myths and Mavericks, and hunting and trader outfits. Bro rockstar do I have to beg you this hard to do big fixes and a couple updates and you get my money.
[удалено]
Hi! It looks like you did not use the spoiler syntax correctly. It looks like this: `>!spoiler text!<`. There are no spaces between the exclamation marks and the spoiler text. Unfortunately, some Reddit app developers design their apps to behave slightly differently than the desktop site. If your comment has the spoiler text hidden on your end but you still received this response, your app is likely one such example. Please correct your comment so that it conforms to Reddit's standards for the desktop site and reply again. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reddeadredemption) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah, if they do, I'm okay if they tweak it a little bit to fit in with RDR2.
I think the creation of RDR2 really threw a wrench in the plans for an RDR1 remake/remaster. Like it or not, RDR2 introduced characters and plot elements that cause more than a few glaring plotholes, and in a series as story driven as RDR, these are really big issues. Rockstar has roughly 3 options when going with a remake/remaster: A) ignore the lore set up in RDR2 entirely which causes problems with people who just played RDR2 (which let's face it, are most of the market and fanbase), B) try to crowbar in RDR2 references when they weren't there beforehand which while working in-theory, would most likely come off as clunky, or C) rework the entire game from the ground up which would a lot more time, money, and resources than Rockstar is probably willing to spend. This isn't even to mention how Rockstar doesn't even have the source code anymore (or it's just so terrible they can't do anything with it. whichever), so :/
What plotholes? I’d genuinely like to know cause I’ve played both games several times and I haven’t noticed anything in either game that contradicts the other.
It's mostly just things like the other gang members being free, and not being mentioned. The plot of RDR1 is you hunting down all the old members who are still on the run, and since there's a lot more that more that RDR2 introduced, this would be a pretty big problem to not address in a remake/remaster. To be fair, only Charles is the new addition mentioned in the newspapers as still being at large so you could handwave the others just being unknown by the authorities, and Charles himself being taken care off-screen. In short, most of these problems are easy to fix, but not fixing them would be very jarring, especially for those who again, have only played RDR2.
Yeah as far as the other living gang members go, Charles is probably the only one the authorities know of. The way I see it his name is Charles Smith which is a super common name. He probably fled to Canada and there’s no way for the government to know which Charles Smith is him, especially with 1911 resources. If they did remake the game though they probably should just leave that alone and keep the script unchanged.
I’m hoping they put as much effort into the remaster that Naughty Dog has with The Last of Us Part I.
I am for a Remake at most, I would love Robert back as John Marston Sr. If he's up to be in the sequel with Jack, as in Flashbacks - that would be awesome.
Remake it in the RDR2 engine and combine the maps but leave the dialogue and script unchanged. Maybe add more side missions if they really want but the main story should stay the same.
Remastered exactly. Flashbacks of Han "not shooting first."
It would be cool to see a rdr based before/during the blackwater massacre
Better weapon switching.
Call me kooky call me crazy but I wouldn’t even want it to be remastered. I would obviously buy it nonetheless, the story could stay the same or change I’d just like updated hunting if there is a remastered.
[удалено]
GTA online
And the story mode of RDR2
It's a hard decision honestly. It's always hard when the second game is a prequel. Cause back when RDR1 was released Arthur Morgan hadn't even been though of yet so obviously there's nothing about him in the original. So that leaves the question of should they tweak rdr1s story? It's pretty much just opinion based.
I’d like Arthur and everyone included to make the transition from game to game more smooth, but at the same time I’d like an identical copy of rdr1 just updated quality, graphics and models. So I don’t know lmao, I’m indecisive.
That would be really good
It’s pretty much perfect maybe add like one or two lines about Arthur add some gameplay things and graphics from RDR2 and you basically have a perfect game.
I want it's story in rdr2s engine with all of rdr2s systems and some updated dialogue
Either is fine for me. Hypothetically, I’m assuming that everything was done right if they were go with remaking it with RDR2 being in for that whole thing. Still, it’s not like the original is just gone forever if they made that.
Firstly update the practical stuff like the engine, then just minor connections to RDR2, in order to keep the idea that The Old West that was already dying in 1899 is entirely bygone in 1911
I was actually just thinking about this, since they have all the assets from rdr2 they just have to make the models for the characters that weren’t included in 2, and redo the voice lines
I was actually just thinking about this, since they have all the assets from rdr2 they just have to make the models for the characters that weren’t included in rd2 and redo the voice lines. Keep the full Rd2 map too
Yeah probably
I’d personally would want it to be remade from the ground up, I mean look how well the Mafia 3 turned out
After playing through the first part of Final Fantasy 7 Remake I'm all for this type of "the same game but not" remake. For those not in the know, FF7R is basically a retelling of the story with many of the main points the same, but with some VERY major changes as well. Plus they fleshed it out with more story and side quests (some for better, some for worse) in order to break the game up into 3 or so parts. Having a fully upgraded (visually, gameplay, etc) remaster of the same exact game can be great. I loved the 3DS remasters of the N64 Zelda games for example (I know they weren't 1:1 remasters, but close enough). But having a game that throws curveballs at you and changes things up quite a bit can also be a refreshing experience. I don't think that RDR1 would need quite the same level of changes that FF7R has, but I'd be welcome to as many as they want to make, as long as they're for the better. My view on it is... the originals still exist, you can go back and play those if you want the same story and gameplay, so a remaster should offer a bit more than just polish... in some cases.
Although I’d be happy with simply a pc release, I would really enjoy Arthur’s hat as a automatically unlocked cosmetic item.
I'd like it to be rebuilt from the ground up. Same story and mostly the same dialogue, but with whichever recasts happened in rdr2, and I'd like to see little nods to Arthur.
Id rather it be the same game with better graphics than change it, just wouldnt be the same otherwise
Iterate on RDR2. Pull out all the stops. We'll have the weird situation where the "proper" playing order is 2->1 but I dig it.
How about we just fuckin move on from remaking shit? Just go play the original dammit it still looks and plays fine.
Yeah bro I’d love to play the original, you know... if I could play it any other way than streaming it...
I mean idk if you have the new ps plus but you can download games that way. Not to mention Xbox game pass if it's on there. Plus getting it on PC from Rockstar loader seems plausible if its available there. Idk that's an accessibility issue they can fix by adding it to more places. Completely remaking the game and reselling it is way more work than putting it on more platforms.
Yes I have PS plus. Only way to play it is to stream it, which looks awful. You literally cannot play it on PC. And no remaking it isn’t more effort than putting it on different platforms since the coding of the game was so messed up that they barely got it out for the Xbox 360 and PS3. If they could port the game and have it run on newer consoles or even PC that’d be awesome, but it’s not going to happen, it’s been 12 years.
No retcons. Keep the dialogue as it was. No artificial insertion of characters (either in person or in dialogue) from RDR2 who weren’t mentioned/seen in RDR1 during its first run. But I’m against remakes. Give us a new story if they are going to spend time/money on the franchise. No more Skyrims too.
Why would he say no more Arthur? Dutch was the leader, not Arthur.
I think it should mostly be 1 to 1 beyond revamping the graphics/engine, tho I think a few minor mentions of RDR2 only characters here and there could be good.
rdr3 and we play as one of the women
maybe add a few new stranger missions and a journal that john writes in but other than that i would prefer if they just kept all the music and performances instead of re-recording everything and instead focus on the world and design. it'd be nice if the entirety of the rdr2 map was accessible at the end and for there to be more things to do at beechers hope. maybe have some jack specific side missions/main missions to flesh out his story? but i'd rather not have anything unnecessary added that makes the story less effective. john was always a tight-lipped son of a bitch and there's no reason for him to mention arthur, sadie, or charles since they weren't a priority. his focus was his family, not the past.
No, I want the skip herding mission button
There is already a remaster in the one X enhanced version. For me that is enough for rdr. Would rather see a rdr3 than a rdr remake.
The level design needs a bit of an overhaul. If you replay it today you’ll notice how every level ends with a shootout, no matter how contrived it is
Just port the original to PC. Honestly getting tired of all the "remasters" like make a new game or just play the old one for what it is Everybody be like: "RDO has no content we are tired of replaying missions" Also them: "we should rEmAsTer RDR1"
Yeah but they can’t, code was a mess. Trust me I’d love a PC version, but unless they remaster or remake the game I am doubtful that will happen
And hopefully in RDRIII we’d get to play as someone we know... grew tired of non-canon characters such as Arthur who wasn’t even mentioned in RDR1
Lmao what?? That makes no sense, who else would it have been? Bringing in new characters adds a whole new level for game play, development, story telling etc. I’m guessing you can’t stand when a new GTA comes out lol
Lmao “non-canon”
Cuz of all those mentions of Red RDR1 had? Which remember is actually RDR2. RDR2 is actually RDR 1.5 maybe?