I heard RDR1 better than RDR2?

[Hey I'm Back!]

Is that right?

[didymos1120]

That doesn't have an objective answer. It's all a matter of opinion.

[GOO GHEENGA]

Red Dead Redemption is a simpler games during simpler times. Both are products of their time. To elevate the experience, whether for good or bad (subjective) it was important to separate the first game from the second. All that being said... I myself enjoy the first one more as a straight up video game, whereas the second one is a piece of premium entertainment in a modern day gaming environment. Both were fantastic for the time in which they released. My opinion though, of course. I just CANNOT wait to replay this game. I haven't played it since back on the 360 when it first came out. It's gonna be one hell of a nostalgia trip cause the game is still FANTASTIC, even putting nostalgia aside.

[V I D A L]

They are quite similar games and a lot of the mechanics of RDR2 was already in RDR1.

But RDR2 is naturally a bigger game, for better or worse. It's a much slower pace progress and more focus in story and characters.

RDR1 is a bit closer to the GTA formula... Less world building, more focus in missions.

[fishnpeas]

For me, the second one was dull as dishwater that I was so bored I never bothered finishing it.

The first one I couldn't put down, it was just straight up fun.

[biohazardgang]

It depends.
I had a lot of fun with RDR1 from start to finish but I didn't really feel the urge to come back to it right away. As for RDR2, I felt that the pacing was too slow at first and put it down for like a month. But once the game started to pick up its pace, its world, story, and characters really hooked me and I beat the story mode twice in a row.

I don't know if you have already played RDR2. If you haven't, I recommend you play RDR1 first. You'll appreciate RDR2's story even more.

[MajorAF]

The best thing about the first game is not having to wait for all the animations to finish to do simple actions like picking up guns, gaining health. Do the animations look cool in RDR2? Sure, but gameplay wise I enjoy RDR1 better. Story is subjective, graphics look good but clearly not as good looking as RDR2. It's a typical Rockstar game, so if you die you will reload to the previous checkpoint or certain location on a map, so there's not much consequence to dying other than losing some ingame money. I started the Undead DLC but I didn't like what the gameplay was going for so I can't say much on it. (Played PS4 version)

[TheDankKnight]

RDR2 more cinematic and deeply story rooted, rdr1 is too but the difference is that rdr1 has better gameplay and more action than rdr2.

[1337Walrus]

It's really subjective. RDR1 is more action-y and plays more like a western (huge gunfights, much simpler hunting mechanics, etc) whereas 2 is very story focused. You'll probably like 1 if you liked 2 and vice versa.

[JtDarth]

The first game is an old western, the 2nd is a more 'modern' western. Like comparing Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, up against something like Tombstone with Kurt Russel, or maybe moreso Dances With Wolves, given how plodding RDR2 can be at times.

They have a very different vibe and overall tone. RDR1 is more focused, while RDR2 branches out into more 'day in the life' aspects that, for many, feel like padding instead of good gameplay decisions.
I have far more fun with RDR2 just wandering around existing than I do playing the main story stuff. Not so much with RDR1 (although Undead Nightmare is a wholly different beast there, I must admit).
Which is part of why the way Rockstar just totally neglected RDO infuriates me so much. It had SO much potential, but they got greedy right out the gate, harming it's initial reception, and when it didn't print money as fast as GTA5 does, they cut and ran, instead of trying to implement changes to make it into the same kind of money printing capability.


I think of it like trying to compare GTA:SA to GTA4. They are so different in tone and approach that you are better off not even treating them as entries in the same series.

[Bqwasdfq]

It still actively has academic articles discussing the plot's relevancy to our times. It's interesting because R* said it was a "coincidence" as they werent trying to mirror any current events at all. Doubly more interesting that even now it still has points worth discussing.

[Kweeb]

This is more fun to play because they were going for a spaghetti western feel.. (over the top reactions)