All Channels
Popular
310°

Should Red Dead Redemption 2 Even Have Multiplayer?

Just how much of a difference is the multiplayer of Red Dead Redemption 2 going to make on the story? Is multiplayer really necessary for a narrative title?

Read Full Story >>
thenerdstash.com
Kashima3549d ago

I don't care about online, just focus on single player story.

BullyMangler3549d ago (Edited 3549d ago )

I for one felt like i wasted my time

after i played the campaign mode.

Cheesy no skills required, lame carriage missions .. .

multi player is where the replay value is.

not the kiddy horse sh** campaigne.

i get pissed just thinking about it!

Kashima3549d ago

i'm just afraid this ended up like GTAV with all online bullshit.

UCForce3548d ago

I'm not even try to talk about this BS of your. Fine, go ahead and kill off single player then let see how strong your connection is.

Xenial3548d ago

I agree the multiplayer is great! It also requires individual player skill, not just who has the better weapons, team, i.e. However, i disagree on the campaign. Yes, it isn't the most difficult, but it had so much replay value and experiences in it alone, not to mention the awesome dlc packs released. RDR is an all-round great game in my opinion.

joab7773548d ago

GTA 5 online is amazing and has been supported so well. RDR2 will be even better... BUT the single player for RDR2 will not suffer in any way, and it's amazing as well!

spicelicka3547d ago

"Cheesy no skills required, lame carriage missions .. . "

Then play on harder difficulty and don't do side missions.

"not the kiddy horse sh** campaigne."

It must suck not to have any imagination or interest in having story driven experiences. As much as I love multiplayer, if that's the ONLY thing you care about then maybe you're just a simpleton happy with doing the same thing over and over again.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3547d ago
lelo2play3548d ago

More interested in singleplayer... but after this... http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

I'm sure Red Dead Redemption 2 will have multiplayer with microtransactions.

JackBNimble3548d ago

What microtransactions with free Dlc?
If all those fools in GTA 5 like buying shark cards so we can have free Dlc then let them.
I've never had to pay for anything other then the game itself.
I hope RDR2 online matches GTA 5 online structure to a tee. With free Dlc and bone heads who are to lazy to do missions to earn money so they buy shark cards.

Artemidorus3547d ago

I don't care about the single player, just focus on the multiplayer

Artemidorus3547d ago

It's online is extremely fun but millenials want to restrict it to one person per gameplay.

Snookies123549d ago

Normally, I'd rather they focus on single-player for most games. Though, I have to say Red Dead Redemption had some really entertaining multi-player. Excited to see this one's!

xPhearR3dx3548d ago

Honestly, I felt RDR was ahead of its time for open world MP games. I believe their goal for RDR was what GTA Online is now, but they couldn't quite get it. But with the success of GTA Online and having a few years of feedback, I'm more than certain Rockstar will bring something very entertaining that I'll be playing on and off for years just like GTA Online.

Sm30003547d ago

This will be the culmination of everything they've learned so far. Yes, I'm excited for single and MP

Sm30003547d ago

Exactly!...... Draw! Member that?

PhoenixUp3549d ago

Yes it should have multiplayer. The first title from what I see has a great campaign narrative and the included multiplayer didn't compromise it, so no reason to expect the sequel's multiplayer to compromise the single player

Kallisti3548d ago (Edited 3548d ago )

You mean like how GTA V's online compromised us getting any single player DLC for the game?

NarooN3548d ago

GTAO = hella extra revenue for R* via microtransactions. SP DLC would take much more effort and time to make for much less overall revenue.

Seeing as how RDR's online was pretty much setting the groundwork for what GTAO eventually became, it's foolish for people to expect RDR2 to NOT have some sort of microtransaction-driven online component.

Sm30003547d ago

Gta4 got three dlc sp stories. So it's not like they haven't done it. They went another direction with V.
Ideally, there will be a nice balance with RDR2

PhoenixUp3548d ago

GTAV's multiplayer didn't compromise the single player mode that's already in the game

Kallisti3547d ago (Edited 3547d ago )

But the mass bank they made from selling Shark cards for people to buy all the dlc items in the online mode was enough for them to not even bother making any future single player dlc for the game. GTA IV's first single player dlc came out just over a year after IV's launch but we haven't seen a sign of any SP dlc for GTA V since it came out.

sho0ok3548d ago

In b4 some smart ass use the world "cringe worthy" to describe the multi-player mode.

I hate this stupid word.. It's everywhere nowadays.

KwietStorm_BLM3548d ago

People love to play follow the leader on the internet, sometimes even more than offline. I have no idea where that stupid phrase even came from. The wind blows and people cringe.

Phill-Spencer3548d ago

It's cringe worthy to dislike that phrase

Kallisti3548d ago

Your comment is cringe worthy

Ogygian3548d ago

It's not a word. It's two.

BEASELY3548d ago

You yourself said "inb4,"

You're not any more cultured or unique yourself.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3547d ago
Show all comments (82)
30°

Red Dead Redemption 2 Turns Into Elden Ring in New Mod, Featuring Uncle as Final Boss

Red Dead Redemption 2 mod turns the game into Elden Ring, adding spells, boss fights, and Uncle as the final boss.

110°

GTA5 Has Sold Over 220 Million Copies, Red Dead Redemption 2 Has Sold Over 79 Million Units

Take-Two announced its financial results for Q2 of fiscal year 2026, and shared an update on the sales of GTA5 and Red Dead Redemption 2.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
TheDreamCorridor248d ago

You think Rockstar views Red Dead 2 as a failure because it didn't sell 150m copies?

jznrpg248d ago

3 billion or so in revenue not including online stuff I’m sure they don’t

SethNW247d ago

I am pretty sure they don't. It was profitable and made them a lot of money. Not GTA5 money but far from failure. Maybe it is lower priority franchise, due to being smaller, but that is about the lowest they would put it as. Only thing they do consider failure is RDR2 Online, unlike GTA5 Online, that RDR2 Online flopped. Hence why it got less support. And when it come to profits, sales for both combined don't come close to GTA Online microtansactions. Hence why everything very quickly got canceled and GTA Online was top priority, so no GTA6 for a long time, no DLC for GTA5, despite there being 5 DLCs planned, at least I think it was 5, give or take one. But as I see it, they needed to rejuvenate interest and all, hence why GTA6 eventually is getting made. But what they are really looking forward to is refresh of Online.

ZeekQuattro247d ago

Only in terms of the online aspect of the game. They didn't support it as much as they did GTA V Online. I remember people being pissed about that.

jznrpg248d ago

I own a few GTAs but never played them. I love Red Dead though

Yui_Suzumiya242d ago (Edited 242d ago )

Boring and overrated. Red Dead Redemption is pretty good though. The Hundred Line: Last Defense Academy is my personal GOAT. We need more stuff like that from TooKyo.

victorMaje248d ago

I must be one of the few who are fine with the GTA6 delay. People treat that game like it’s the 2nd coming lol.

FIELDMARSHALL_P247d ago

My daughter asked me how I felt about I shrugged and said I don't care gives me time to finish up games I already have. It's all good let them make the best game they can.

RedDevils247d ago

Wish they make another Manhunt or Bully.

gold_drake247d ago

damn, thats a ridiculous number

Show all comments (11)
160°

Dan Houser: RDR2 was "behind schedule" and "over budget so much I didn’t want to think about it"

Dan Houser opens up about Red Dead Redemption 2’s rocky development, calling it behind schedule, massively over budget, and full of pressure to prove doubters wrong.

Read Full Story >>
thegamepost.com
Storm23252d ago (Edited 252d ago )

The world they built is pretty amazing. Unfortunately, the game was mostly boring to me. I definitely had fun in some parts, but it didn't do it for me as a whole like the first one did. I loved RDR so much.

The budgets and time it takes to make games these days is out of control. Such a big risk. If a game isn't a huge hit, it is often it for a studio. Scary. I really miss the PS2 and PS3 days where studeios could make 4 games in a generation and take risks in making something new. And so many were using their own engines. Those were the days.

neutralgamer1992252d ago

Agreed. I love RDR but couldn't get into RDR2. The animations take forever and game slows you down on purpose. It won't let you have fun because R* want us to play the game they want to. I know millions love RDR2 and I even bought and own it. But just wasn't for me.

It's like comparing GTA4 to saints row 2. One game was about fun while the other was about realism and that's coming from someone who beat GTA4 many times. I much rather a game be fun to play than chase realism

YodaCracker252d ago

GTA IV’s realism is what made it so much more fun for me. I loved experimenting with the physics.

Storm23251d ago

I bought RDR2 also. Put 100+ hours into it and beat it our of respect for Rockstar and all the people saying it was the greatest game ever. RDR blew my mind but might also have been the best time in gaming for me personally. l loved that PS3 gen so much.

I am excited to see what GTA6 is like.

252d ago Replies(1)