Red Dead Redemption 2 is a better history game than Assassin’s Creed

Red Dead Redemption 2 does a better job at capturing and evoking an historical period than Ubisoft’s acclaimed action RPG Assassin’s Creed

[anast]

This is by far a top 5 game of the last generation.

[rippermcrip]

It's on my top 5 of most overrated. Boring game play. Boring story. Terrible controls.

[MadLad]

Same.
You can be a high quality product and still not be a fun product.
I know they made some changes to up the "fun factor" but I still find the game monotonous and boring.

[anast]

Maybe there is something wrong with you because I know I'm good. I got close to 3 years of fun out of it. In fact I've been thinking about firing it up again.

[FunAndGun]

Also a top 5 game for putting players to sleep.

[ToddlerBrain]

It’s period accurate but not as geographically or architecturally accurate as AC games. AC also tends to feature famous historic figures in their stories. Both treat history with reverence but the world of Red Dead feels more alive than any AC setting.

[anast]

I agree. I wanted to play Syndicate the other day and it looks horrible on the PS5. I hope they fix it. It's my favorite AC.

[SyntheticForm]

Syndicate doesn't really run (well) on PS5. I'm still seeing the exclamation triangle whenever I run the game on PS5 which indicates issues.

Constant flickering and other weird occurrences; it's not really viable on PS5.

[kneon]

The entire "wild west" is largely a myth, so I guess it somewhat accurately portrays that myth rather than reality

[anast]

Do you have any evidence for this statement?

[Sniperwithacause]

@ anast
Everything we know from the past has been either document or told from generation to generation. Misinformation has definitely been past down from years past. So you can't believe everything that's been told. Yes, we know the lifestyle of ppl during those time periods, but we really don't know much else except what again has been documented. So as far as "evidence " we have little of that. Take the Templar castles for instance. We know they were there, but now destroyed, no one alive really knows what they could have looked like. This goes for the vast majority of everything that once was, but not anymore.

[GhostTurtle]

@Sniperwithacause

Bro, the "wild west" wasnt that long ago.

[TheColbertinator]

@sniperwithacause

Ghostturtle is right. We have photographs, drawings, memorabilia museums and even voice recordings of accounts (Leander Herron interviews) from the Wild West. Red Dead Redemption has had plenty of research done to capture the time period.

The Templar castle speculation is fair game for doubt since a religious military order like that had many enemies and records of them were constantly destroyed.

[anast]

@Sniper

The "Wild West" wasn't a "1000" years ago. There is a metric ton of primary source accounts during the "Wild West". As others had stated here, the printing press and cameras existed. Journalists did interviews and regular people documented their lives.

Every single time period including this very second is part myth and romanticization and part observable fact. There is no real way to separate this. Yes, we can approximate but there is no way to completely get rid of myth. Given this, the more primary source accounts the closer the approximation, than let's say, writing about Bigfoot.

[jznrpg]

I get a lot history is just a lot of guesses or told from the ruling people of the time so it’s not very accurate . We are lucky to have any history from the few areas that could write 5000 years ago or even the Templar’s time as things get lost and embellished , changed and flat out lied about to make whoever was in power look good and their enemy to look like less than human . So older history is more of a story than fact .

But the Wild West is fairly recent history .
Yes people exaggerate things of course we do that today with current history but we know fairly accurate history of the Wild West . Of course you have to take out the romanticized parts . But we have good detail compared to the far past which we really know little about

[RabbitFly]

The title is quite misleading. It clearly indicates that the argument is one of historic accurracy. But that is not what is being argued at all. Rather one of focus in story telling.

The more correct title would be. "RDR2 has a better story mode than AC". Something No one disagreed with ever and is way late to the party.

Pointless article with a clickbait title.

[MrChow666]

Asscreed is rubbish

[jznrpg]

Stories are really an eye of the beholder thing . Some may love AC story more than RDR and that’s true to them. I like RDR more personally as games and stories but there was some good AC games of the past but they just were pumping them out each year and branched off way too much imo.

[YourMommySpoils]

Isn't that already a no brainier. Ubisoft just don't know how to research.

[StarkR3ality]

No shit 😅