And Here's The Red Dead Redemption 2 Trailer

Haven't gotten enough reveals tonight? Well here's another -- some in-game footage of Red Dead Redemption 2.

It's a pretty short trailer, and we don't really see an awful lot.

The scenery is pretty but ... well, that's really it. I'll wait until I see more before passing any shred of judgement, though.

What did you think?


Comments

    I know I joked about this being on NX... but it looks like Take 2 is back on board with providing content for Nintendo again.

      I didn't see anything indicating that...

        They were right there on that big image with everyone's logos. Couldn't find it on my phone atm but they're listed here too: http://www.nintendo.com/whatsnew/detail/first-look-at-nintendos-new-home-gaming-system

          Oh, so not a confirmation of this game then. Maybe.

    Get fucked bloke. How are those graphics possible?

    Last edited 21/10/16 2:56 am

      PC! Even with my 980ti I don't think it'll look as good as in the trailer though.

        it was running on the regular ps4 as per sonys fb post

          Not even the biggest fan boy can believe that was ps4 graphics.

            I still look at the graphics of the first Red Dead Redemption in disbelief. When I see what they did with an Xbox 360, I have little doubt they can pull off something similarly ridiculous with PS4. It was only the animations / character models that let the first one down. This is just so much better looking than I was expecting though.

              Yeeeeah but that was years of working out the most efficient to use 360 and ps3scomputing power. Ps4 and xbox1 are so simmilar to PC they were pushing them to their limits since release there wont be a massive increase in performance like previous generations. That and the cards in current consoles just physically couldn't crunch those kinda numbers.

              No flame just my opinion, time will tell.

                Optimisation. The greatest strength closed systems like consoles and apple products can leverage. I don't think we've seen close to what these consoles will achieve by the end of their life cycle.

    Disappointingly pedestrian music. I hope that's just placeholder stuff. The previous game absolutely nails the Western feel, with appropriate instruments and sounds and everything. Didn't hear any of that in there. Hope it's better in the actual game.

      I dunno, it sounded almost like it was about to break into "the Shootist" right at the end. Hopefully Bill Elm and Woody Jackson are still on board.

      Mate, you're bananas. For a mood-setting trailer that music was fantastic! (I'm sure there will be plenty of spaghetti twang in the game proper, but this was wonderfully evocative trailer music - it made me think of John Marston pushing up daisies. Sniff.)

        It's not the music itself, it's the instruments used. The music in context is fine, but it doesn't have the RDR / Spaghetti Western sound at all. The piano in that was tuned differently, for example, and there were no orchestral strings (just guitar) and there was more brass and stuff.

        Seriously go listen again and then compare to... well, anything from RDR except maybe the ending theme.

        It's probably just placeholder music put in by 2K, but it rubbed me the wrong way because IMO the best part of RDR was the soundtrack and the atmosphere it has.

    I hope the game has a bit more spaghetti than that trailer implies.

    Last edited 21/10/16 6:26 am

    Looks breathtaking. Can't wait for more info.

    Looks stunning. Seriously stunning. Only a teaser obviously but I'm hoping more and more this is the story of why Marston fled his gang.

      +1 from me for this storyline.

        Indeed, even better, would be if you actually *didn't* play as Marston, but as someone familiar to him, a friend maybe, freeing up your own chains of fate, adding in ambiguiity to your own destiny. You may live, you may die. You know what happens to John eventually, but whats your own story? Why did he leave etc?

          That would be very cool. But a lifetime of enduring subpar videogame stories makes me doubt even Rockstar would show that much ambition and clearheadedness.

          Last edited 21/10/16 2:59 pm

            I haven't seen a bad story yet from the Houser brothers, even GTA V which had the lesser of the GTA stories was still leagues ahead of nearly all other open world games out there. I've got faith they'll deliver something good one way or another.

            Last edited 21/10/16 3:49 pm

      I disagree, Marston's story is over, delving into an 'origin' might ruin it.

      They should totally find a reason to bring back Bonnie Macfarlane though <3

        *shrug* Going by the fact we're seeing a gang there, with characters that look like the ones he hunted down, we'll see. But I have faith that the Housers won't rush out a shoddy storyline or a cheap cash-in.

          I don't see the resemblance to Dutch's gang, but then we only have outfits and hats to go on, and people are known to change clothing.

          Perhaps we'll see the gang responsible for the Blackwater Massacre that Landon RIcketts was involved in?

            Oh I do, this seems pretty bang on:

            http://www.gamesradar.com/will-john-marston-ride-again-in-red-dead-redemption-2-check-out-these-character-theories/

              The only one I agree looks the same is Bill Williams, and no one matches him in the trailer. We've got a year to find out, and I'm sure there'll be casting leaks that might hint yea or ney for some characters.

    Looks like what I was expecting. Here's hoping its as great as the original was!

    Cant help thinking of Dead Island trailer, it was really pretty but game looked nothing like trailer (still enjoyed the game). Will more then likely get this when its release as I loved the first one and I bought the DLCs for it.

    It says Pre-Order Now.....

    Last edited 21/10/16 10:31 am

    no news about it comiong on pc, but RDR is comming to PS Now, so i gots a question if your streaming a game on PS NoW, does that require a controller or can you still use mouse and keyboard?

      Unfortunatly it requires a controller.

        bah there goes my hopes of playing RDR with a mouse and keyboard

    This definitely won't be 60 fps on current gen consoles (graphics look far too good for anyone to expect that). I've already tried sitting down many times to complete Red Dead Redemption, and there is something about 30 fps (especially with drops below that) that just takes me out of the experience. The same thing happened with GTA V on last gen consoles, I just couldn't enjoy it because the gameplay felt unbearably choppy ... and when GTA V finally did come to PC, the experience was infinitely better. Sometimes I wish I was never spoiled by better PC hardware, but it is what it is ... and I say that with all due respects because I don't want to be that 'PC elitist' douche bag, but the reality is that the experience IS better (and to be fair, there is a lot of console users who will say that framerate and resolution aren't important until they are promised a console reiteration that will deliver on that, and then all of a sudden they start flaunting it).

    I'll wait for Digital Foundry's analysis when Red Dead 2 releases, but I'm not even expecting a solid 30 fps when it comes to PS4 and Xbox One (I don't think PS4 Pro will be any better because they are too busy stupidly pushing resolution over framerate). I don't know, maybe Scorpio will be the answer for being able to play this game at 60 fps, or maybe I can wait until the next generation of consoles for the inevitable 'remaster' release *rolls eyes*. As it stands, I'm not really feeling the excitement for this game, and that's simply because of what it's being limited to. I just wish Rockstar would cut the BS and treat PC users the same way they treat console users. Sales were strong on PC for GTA V, I don't see why they need to skip over that platform like it doesn't exist, or to delay it as long as they've done in the past. It's simply a case of double dipping - limit the release to consoles, then later on, "look how amazing this is on PC, buy it now".

      I appreciate your even-handed and mature comment about this, but I hope you can understand that a lot of the strengths of PC gaming are actually seen as weaknesses for different types of consumers, including people like myself. I don't play console because it's the most technically amazing, I play it because it fits into my life much better than a PC. I don't want to worry about whether or not I have the right specs, or drivers, or anything like that. I want to play the games, in my living room, with my friends, while we get drunk.

      I get no satisfaction from building my machine and turning it on for the first time, from aggressively price matching individual parts, and working out what words like "overclock" mean. I don't want my resolution at 4000p or whatever it's up to now. Games like The Order 1886 are a classic example of the empty beauty this sort of mindset creates, good art direction lasts forever, chasing the unreachable bleeding edge of graphical fidelity only ages your product and hollows it out.

      I know you can hook your PC up to a TV, I know you can connect console controllers to it, but at that point what is it? I'll tell you, a console with the most disappointing list of triple A exclusives there is. There's no point to all that power if you don't have games like The Last Of Us, or Destiny, or Red Dead Redemption to take advantage of it.

      The fact of the matter is even the biggest PC hits pale in comparison to console sales numbers. Games of the calibre and scope of Rockstar's just don't make financial sense to release on PC first.

      I always think of it like music. You look at traditionally "amazing" guitarists like Steve Vai. Dude is technically proficient as fuck, but I can't name a single one of his songs. Technical ability means nothing if you don't have the creativity and brains and even cashflow to take advantage of it. I've fallen in love with guitar riffs that are so simple a child could play them (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryImbOTDXe8), but i've rarely heard a metal song that has held my attention longer than "wow, that's pretty impressive musicianship".

      The PC community is anecdotally filled with metal fans, and it's because both PC and Metal scratch the same itch, but console gaming is like Drake (or insert whichever artist / band you like here that fits that mould), he's not the best, but that's not what he's selling.

        Yeah, I can hear what you're saying. I totally understand why there are a lot more people who prefer to play on a console over building a computer. I even advised my girlfriend's 18 year old nephew to buy a PS4 instead of getting a PC (that he wanted me to build) because I knew that he's the kind of guy who likes to push a button and have everything 'just work', and I know that isn't what you get with a PC. I would be happy to invest more into consoles myself if it meant that I could play more games at a stable 60 fps. I have no issues with consoles, other than the fact that they can't always provide the smooth gameplay experience that I'm looking for.

        I only game on a 1080p monitor, and I'm personally sick of hearing about 4K. I don't have extremely expensive tastes, I just want a game to run at 60 fps (by far the most important thing to me). Graphical fidelity comes in at a pretty distant second ... I'm not overly concerned about 'jaggies', or texture quality/filtering, or having all settings turned to ULTRA (I'm more than happy to put a lot of settings at MEDIUM to HIGH if it means a more stable framerate).

        The ONLY issue I have with consoles is that graphics take precedence over framerate, and because this generation of consoles came out the gate on the weaker side (hardware wise), it means that it's constantly taking a hit in how stable a game can run. Every time I watch a technical analysis on Digital Foundry, I keep seeing the same thing - an assumed 60 fps framerate that is far from locked, that will often dip down to the 40's and even the 30's and constantly bounce all over the place (the end result is really noticeable stutter), OR it's a 30 fps target, and even then it can sometimes be a struggle for the consoles to maintain that number as well.

        And now we have the PS4 Pro, which I was really hoping would mean more solid 60 fps games @ 1080p, but instead they've chosen to jump on this marketing bandwagon of 4K. So instead of seeing choppy framerates at 1080p, we just get to see them in checkerboard 4K instead. It all just seems so insanely redundant to me. Why not give people more options? Do you want to have a 4K resolution, or would you prefer a 1080p resolution with a more stable framerate? But from what I've read it's easier for them to focus on a 30 fps target @ 4K then it is to try and target 60 fps @ 1080p because the weaker CPU is holding everything back.

        And that is precisely why I prefer a PC. If a game isn't running well? Simple, turn down a few options, and BAM, your instantly back to everything running flawlessly. To me it isn't about drooling over hardware, or wanting the most expensive graphics card, or seeing how far I can overclock individual components. It's simply about having choice in how the game LOOKS and PLAYS. It's a level of choice that you can't get with a console. But once again, I understand exactly why more people are gaming on a console, and why there is more money being made there.

        This is the first generation of consoles where I have mostly kept my feet out of the water. Up until this generation I've owned as many consoles as you could care to name. I just wish that they had a little more oomph under the hood, and that developers were a little less concerned with how games looked, and focused more on how stable they are running. But it's ultimately up to them how the final product comes out, and I can't manipulate a single thing to make them run better. I just hope that project Scorpio can turn things around a little in that department.

        Sorry for the massively LONG post. I just had to get that off my chest. I also appreciate the even-handedness of your response as well. It's good to have a civil conversation about something instead of two different opinions having a head on collision at 200km/h :P

          Yeah definitely a good debate. In the end, as with all things consumer-centric, it comes down to personal taste. I personally would rather see 50% more graphics per square graphic than a silky smooth frame-rate, but people like you want the opposite. Maybe through console gaming almost exclusively I haven't experienced enough 60fps to realise what i'm missing out on, but when I think of all the best memories I have of playing games, the way the games run was never the reason why.

    Oh snap....
    I've just had a revelation.
    That guy with the hat turned up on one side, one right of the center figure.
    That's Bill Williamson.
    This is a prequel. We're gonna see the "Old" Dutch's Gang in West Elizabeth.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now