• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

I feel like there shouldn't be guns in Red Dead Redemption 2

Should guns be in Red Dead Redemption 2?

  • Total voters
    222
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tommyleelynn

Member
Mister Apoc said:
but even at the time of the western weren't melee weapons still more effective than guns, because guns weren't that good during the 19th century
Click to expand...
You're a lunatic. This game takes place Post-Civil War. Guns were leagues ahead of any other weaponry at that time. Revolvers, repeaters, Gatling guns, etc. This game is also the spiritual successor to Red Dead Revolver, and one of the main mechanics of Red Dead is Dead Eye for precise aiming.

Face it. You don't want Red Dead Redemption 2. You want an entirely different game and franchise. Why pick on Rockstar for that? Go play Horizon Zero Dawn.
 
iconmaster

iconmaster

Banned
F0rneus said:
No. 19th century firearms were very effective. The most common guns you could find in the "Western" era USA were Colt Navy models, the Remington Army and later the Colt Single Action Army. The ball and cap guns were still very effective, accurate and deadly. And they were easy to mod, into cartridge guns. The SAA itself is such a classic design, it's still produced today by multiple companies. It's a classic for a reason.
Click to expand...

I learned some neat stuff in this thread, so I say it was worth it. And entertaining, natch.
 
M

Mister Apoc

Demigod of Troll Threads
I feel like in RDR 2 there should be a Wakanda like advanced city hidden from the world, a city of outlaws and cowboys that your allowed to visit in free roam or during story missions
 
Virex

Virex

Banned
What about a turn based strategy rpg without guns. Where you have to kill the eternal dragon. Red Dead Redeption Tactics
 
ScrapBrain

ScrapBrain

Member
Virex said:
What about a turn based strategy rpg without guns. Where you have to kill the eternal dragon. Red Dead Redeption Tactics
Click to expand...

10/10 IGN

Seriously though, I could see a no-gun scenario if the time period was further back, where guns exist but they kinda suck and you can only fire one bullet at a time, making weapons like spears and Bow and Arrow more effective in a battle consisting of more than 4 people, but for the post-civil war period guns are entirely appropriate...plus it's a western.

I'm interested in Red Dead having more brawling. I wanna have a proper saloon fight, throw a dude through a window out into the dirt and continue drunkenly fighting in the streets, and tha guy playing the piano in the saloon never skips a beat.
 
Last edited:
M

MiserlyNubian

Neo Member
Mibuokami said:
Here ya go OP. An open world game without a gun:



Now leave RDR2 alone... with its guns.

Edit: And as an FYI, there are reasons real life Africa was filled with European colonies for centuries... A big one was that the European had guns and the Native Africans didn't.
Click to expand...

Centuries is a bit of exaggeration.
 
TrainedRage

TrainedRage

Banned
FICTION .................................... HISTORICAL PAST


Yep those are clearly the same thing. I think OP just wants "advanced spears" in RDR2.
 
Makariel

Makariel

Member
TrainedRage said:
I think OP just wants "advanced spears" in RDR2.
Click to expand...
Bloodborne has something to offer here...

tumblr_ogc7d1nloh1tt3wuco3_400.gif
 
Vawn

Vawn

Banned
Maybe if Ubisoft made a western it could be one where guns didn't exist, a woman was president and they held same-sex cowboy weddings every week.

I expect Rockstar to portray the world how it existed over how they believe it should have been however.
 
MayauMiao

MayauMiao

Member
The "Guns so primitive" quote is so irrelevant to this game. Its like getting rid of cars in Grand Theft Auto series.
 
Velius

Velius

Banned
Catphish said:
Nuke the thread from orbit.
Click to expand...
It's the only way to be sure.

On topic, the notion here is laughable. If they made a western themed game with no guns, it would be fine, and perfectly within their right to do so. But assuming you're being genuine, TS, it's probably futile to hope for something so contrived and random just because something in a Marvel movie resonated with you personally. It doesn't really make sense in the context of what they're trying to do. Different genres, different focus.
 
Velius

Velius

Banned
Mister Apoc said:
people are starting to agree with me
Click to expand...
Nah, on a bell curve you're going to inevitably pick up people with similar social and political... endeavors. But I don't think there's a single person you've convinced. Because it's a capricious and frankly nutty suggestion.
 
G

GrimDarkDarrel

Member
If I was a mod I would have taken this for trolling and closed it right away. Even if this is somehow not trolling, which it definitely is, it's a stupid concept that anybody should have to explain the idea that people look for specific things from specific IPs to OP. I assume he's just being given the benefit of the doubt because be might be a naive kid and we don't want to shut that down cruelly.

I mean how many of the responses are only addressing the actual topic for fear of being considered derailing? At some point even naive kids have to learn not to post dumbass topics if they want to participate, right?
 
Last edited:
DiscoJer

DiscoJer

Member
While the idea is odd, it's not completely outlandish. Doesn't anyone remember the TV show Kung-Fu? It was about a Shaolin monk in the old west who didn't use guns but still beat the crap out of people. That made a certain amount of sense because a large number of Chinese worked on building the railroads.

If they had a multiple character game, you could have the traditional gunfighter, then the shaolin monk, then maybe a spear wielding African. Maybe an American Indian with an tomahawk. Of course, then the game would probably get attacked for stereotyping.
 
Last edited:
Velius

Velius

Banned
GrimDarkDarrel said:
If I was a mod I would have taken this for trolling and closed it right away. Even if this is somehow not trolling, which it definitely is, it's a stupid concept that anybody should have to explain the idea that people look for specific things from specific IPs to OP. I assume he's just being given the benefit of the doubt because be might be a naive kid and we don't want to shut that down cruelly.

I mean how many of the responses are only addressing the actual topic for fear of being considered derailing? At some point even naive kids have to learn not to post dumbass topics if they want to participate, right?
Click to expand...
I want to start by saying I really do understand how you feel. This guy's post history is nauseating.

But we have to be fair. We have to respect the principle that, whenever feasible, we exchange and address ideas in good faith.

Mods did revise the OT to inform him that he's walking on thin ice. You know he's trolling, I know he is and the mods do too. But it's not about him, it's about upholding the rediscovered principles that make a good forum- freedom of expression. It's about setting a good precedent and always being on the lookout for knee-jerk reactions that could set a bad one.

Because we know full well that there could come a person who genuinely suggests a seemingly ludicrous idea. If we have allowed ourselves to become an echo chamber we will not be able to digest anything absent from or conflicting with our preemptive menu.

Nobody is being fooled by this guy, don't worry.
 
Last edited:
daibaron

daibaron

Banned
Velius said:
I want to start by saying I really do understand how you feel. This guy's post history is nauseating.

But we have to be fair. We have to respect the principle that, whenever feasible, we exchange and address ideas in good faith.

Mods did revise the OT to inform him that he's walking on thin ice. You know he's trolling, I know he is and the mods do too. But it's not about him, it's about upholding the rediscovered principles that make a good forum- freedom of expression. It's about setting a good precedent and always being on the lookout for knee-jerk reactions that could set a bad one.

Because we know full well that there could come a person who genuinely suggests a seemingly ludicrous idea. If we have allowed ourselves to become an echo chamber we will not be able to digest anything absent from or conflicting with our preemptive menu.

Nobody is being fooled by this guy, don't worry.
Click to expand...

Well said sir. It is nausea inducing but fair game. And this is not era, let Mister Apoc speak freely about his game ideas.

Lets so a terminator movie without guns, so terminator can be the new black panther.
 
Makariel

Makariel

Member
Perhaps you should just wait until they make a decent game out of Into the Badlands?



Western without guns right there. Doesn't make much sense why they wouldn't use guns, but it does look cool.
 
Grinchy

Grinchy

Banned
I feel like Sea of Thieves would be getting less flack if the pirates didn't use a blunderbuss and the ships floated in a made-up, high-tech African city.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll
11 (non technical) design flaws with Helldivers 2...
47
2K
Dacvak replied
Lara Croft Crowned Most Iconic Video Games Character of All Time, According to BAFTA Poll
2 3 4 5
208
8K
ResurrectedContrarian replied
Baldur's Gate 3 Patch 6.0 is now live
News
24
2K
Hero of Spielberg replied
The Australian Classification has classified Red Dead Redemption 2, most likely for the PC
5
734
Digity replied
Roger Clark had to redo some Red Dead Redemption 2 lines because he sounded too intimate with his horse
0
2K
Bullet Club replied
Top Bottom