Yeah especially if you've sought out and tamed the White Arabian from up near Lake Isabella. You don't even get new "copies" of the free Ardennes Warhorse you can get for the pre-order code... once s/he's gone that's it.
Red Dead Redemption 2
- Thread starter Rincewiend
- Start date
I'm not ashamed to admit I loaded an old save to get my horse back, sort of.
I had jumped from her to a moving train, and she kept on following behind to the point of smashing/falling into a cliff face. When I eventually made my way back to the location, my saddle had glitched into a place I couldn't get it. I was willing to start over with a new horse, but starting from zero on my saddle and belongings, no fukn way.
I had jumped from her to a moving train, and she kept on following behind to the point of smashing/falling into a cliff face. When I eventually made my way back to the location, my saddle had glitched into a place I couldn't get it. I was willing to start over with a new horse, but starting from zero on my saddle and belongings, no fukn way.
Good idea. I might just do that. I don't think it was that long since my last save anyway.
Saves can be a pain as the game often locks you out of manual saves at critical plot moments. Try and do a save every few side missions and at the start of each chapter if you can.
I am sorry if this sounds like a stupid question (I haven't actually played the game, so maybe there's something I'm missing here), but is there any particular reason why all the state names are fake?
I have the same question re: Grand Theft Auto, BTW.
I have the same question re: Grand Theft Auto, BTW.
Last edited:
Not a stupid question at all. I just googled whether Saint Denis is a real place last week.
My thought is that they wanted to take artistic liberties with the towns and not be held to historical standards.
My thought is that they wanted to take artistic liberties with the towns and not be held to historical standards.
I am sorry if this sounds like a stupid question (I haven't actually played the game, so maybe there's something I'm missing here), but is there any particular reason why all the state names are fake?
I have the same question re: Grand Theft Auto, BTW.
Not wanting to offend anyone, I guess. Though they make it pretty clear that Lemoyne and the raiders are former Confederates and the slave-owning South lost the war, and rightly so. Hell, you get an honor boost for burning the former slave-tracker's things, and NO punishment for shooting him in the head thereafter.
St. Denis is pretty obviously New Orleans.
Plus there's the hopeless KKK twats you can run into who keep killing themselves in accidents - except the ringleader, who I always finished off out of politeness.
I think it's probably just for creative freedom, this way they can pretty much say or do whatever they want and not have to worry about matching things up to real world places.I am sorry if this sounds like a stupid question (I haven't actually played the game, so maybe there's something I'm missing here), but is there any particular reason why all the state names are fake?
I have the same question re: Grand Theft Auto, BTW.
Maybe the game takes place on ancient Caprica. 
Last edited:
Yeah, I think it's so that they can freely do what they want. However, I feel it's quite interesting how they do end up often namedropping real state or city names. I've heard NY being said several times already. So, I don't know their internal logic behind that. Still, despite that, it feels very well rooted historically, better than any of their other games perhaps. It feels like it knows its place better.
Gotta say, unless they move away from the van der Linde gang entirely, I would not be against RDR3 following Sadie Adler as a main character, kicking ass as a bounty hunter down Mexico way.
I would love the option to play as Sadie. I liked how Marsden tied in with this game but Maybe the next game will follow her or another female.
Even if it’s only optional, I think it would be awesome.
They could do that with an expansion maybe. The trouble is that Rockstar hasn't done any single-player expansions since GTA4 when they figured out they could make more money with the online stuff. And RDR's expansion was very well received, so I wish they'd reconsider their stance. With the entirety of RDR's map included in this game, It'd be a waste not to do something with it.
Oh and all is well. The last time loaded into the game, it put me back to before I went out to get the bounty with my horse intact. Some of these bounties are scripted to have you tailed, so I was prepared this time and they didn't stand a chance.
Sadie turned out to be my second favorite character in RDR II, very closely following Arthur Morgan. I'd love to play some DLC following her adventures... or even a full-fledged campaign in Red Dead Redemption III
I still liked Arthur the best. My top five would probably be:
1. Arthur
2. John
3. Sadie
4. Charles
5. Lenny
Honorable mention: Uncle
I love how every single of them have stories to tell. When the game was first announced, I was worried that having many characters would mean thinly developed characters at the expense of focusing on Arthur. But all of them have their own personalities and feel like real people, and I think that it's their best set of characters yet.
Yeah and the history is rich between the older members of the gang - I never bothered reading Arthur's journal entries until tonight, and found one that implies he once cared for Abigail more than the rest of the game implies - it's in his notes about taking Jack fishing. He says he should have married her before she "fell for Marston so damn hard", then blames Mary - either for distracting him from Abigail or possibly getting him interested in that sort of relationship in the first place?
Either way, there's nothing else in his and Abigail's interactions to suggest he is more than just a good friend, but it gives even greater weight to his resentment of John - who not only skipped out on the gang and got accepted back, but skipped out on HER and got accepted back, even though he STILL isn't pulling his weight where she and Jack are concerned. Arthur's decision to help John and Abigail in the conclusion is again even stronger since he's helping Marston get the life with Abigail that Arthur might once have dreamed possible for himself...
Either way, there's nothing else in his and Abigail's interactions to suggest he is more than just a good friend, but it gives even greater weight to his resentment of John - who not only skipped out on the gang and got accepted back, but skipped out on HER and got accepted back, even though he STILL isn't pulling his weight where she and Jack are concerned. Arthur's decision to help John and Abigail in the conclusion is again even stronger since he's helping Marston get the life with Abigail that Arthur might once have dreamed possible for himself...
That last bit might be considered a spoiler for those of us who haven't yet completed the game.
Not much of one. "Arthur decides to help John" doesn't explain how or any of the consequences that follow, other than that Marston and Abigail survive the events of the game, which we know because RDR1.
I could mention I decided to help one of those random fellas to meet in the woods who got savaged by a wolf and is bleeding out. It's only a spoiler if I tell you whether I gave 'em whiskey, a health cure or a shot to the head.
Similar threads
