I bet what happens is like in that Simpsons episode where Principal Skinner was discovered to be an imposter but when they found the real one no one liked him so they shipped him off. Then the judge proclaimed that no one would ever speak of this ever again, under penalty of law. I bet it goes something like that.
Veefy
1562
They could add in some dialogue about rumour about zombies to the random things that the poker players say.
Cool, thanks. I’ll have to try it out sometime.
Dealing with the zombie plague that’s decimating the landscape and reawakening the hungry dead in next week’s Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare means helping those that are still alive and fighting off zombies in many of the towns, outposts and settlements.
To help save these towns from the zombie hordes, you’ll need to find survivors and assist them in eradicating the zombies, both by supplying them with much needed ammunition, which can be found in ammunition chests scattered around town, and by taking to the rooftops to assist first hand in wiping out the attacking mobs of undead.
A town’s infection level is indicated by the number of circles displayed on the town defense meter. As you root out zombies and deliver ammunition to townsfolk the circles will begin to fill up. Once all the circles in the display are full, any remaining zombies in town will automatically be added to your map.
Once all the zombies in town have been hunted down and dealt with, the town will be considered “safe”, and you can save your progress there as well as fast travel to other towns from that location. But beware, the undead threat is persistent - so towns will only remain safe for so long before coming under attack again. Additionally, if you ignore a town in peril for too long, survivors will slowly start dying.
This looks freaking great. I started out being slightly disappointed by the Undead Nightmare DLC announcement, but I have really spun a 180 on this since info has been trickling out. $10 for 5 hours of additional RDR SP content with zombies? OK!
I, too, must hang my head in shame and admit that the previews of this content have me very interested now.
Jazar
1567
Has anyone played it yet? I’d like to know if it’s worth it.
Razgon
1568
Okay, while I find the thing horribly wastefull, this review kinda got me interested, since it sounds freaking awesome!
http://www.xbox360achievements.org/news/news-6701-X360A-Review--Red-Dead-Redemption-s-Undead-Nightmare-DLC.html
Forget everything you know about Red Dead Redemption; Undead Nightmare is an altogether different beast and should be treated as such. It has nothing to do with the main game’s narrative, other than the setting and characters of course, some of which have been turned by the onset of the zombie plague. It’s still the same Red Dead you know and love though, but the entire landscape has been transformed, with fires burning on the horizon, trees gnarled and twisted, and a perpetual gloom hanging in the air. The zombies are a coming! Run for them there hills!
Undead Nightmare is an astonishing achievement as far as DLC is concerned. The sheer size and wealth of options is something you’d expect from an expansion pack, not a cheaply-priced add-on. The narrative portion is as slickly produced as the rest of Red Dead Redemption, and we’ve not even touched upon the multiplayer yet.
Sounds pretty damn interesting - I’ll be getting this after all!
I disengaged from RDD at some point around 60% into the story, I think. Wasn’t entirely sure what I was supposed to do next and wasn’t all that motivated, as fun as the game world was. This sounds like an excellent way for people like me to get back into the saddle.
Co-op town zombie defense would be great. Hope they don’t make it too different from the singular version, as they did with the main game.
So it doesn’t sound like there are any spoilers for the main plot. I haven’t really touched much of the main game, but I’d like to pick this up this week for a little Halloween zombie action.
Anyone know if it’s going to ruin anything for me?
Jazar
1572
Anyone know if it’s going to ruin anything for me?
I’ve only played up until the first save point (basically the opening cutscene)
It seems to play out during the events of the final act in the game (not the end though). The spoiler for that isn’t mind blowing but it does give away a part of the plot if you care.
From what little I’ve seen it looks like it’s going to be awesome. I haven’t played a lot of single player DLC but I’m glad that this one has full voice work and good cutscenes. I wish I had more time to dedicate to this.
SPOILERS
The 60% mark is definitely where the game lost steam for me too. There were too many redundant Mexico missions for my taste. I would have been much happier if there had been half as many Mexico missions, although I did like the fact that you get Williamson and the other guy by the end so I wouldn’t have changed the outcome of the Mexico Act.
I wish there had been about 2 Blackwater missions that had quickly culminated in the showdown with Dutch. That would have wrapped the game up very nicely for me. Instead we got 5 stupid missions where John keeps saying “and what if I refuse” over and over.
So then you get Dutch and I figured “hey great game!”
Then I played one or two of the Abigail missions and became VERY suspicious that the game was still going even after I had finished it so I looked up what was coming next in the walkthrough and I was beyond disappointed. I’ve actually decided that I am NOT going to “finish” RDR. I’m done.
I am getting really sick and tired of so many stories having unhappy endings. Why do you have to die at the end of FO3 and RDR? What purpose does that serve? Does it prove something? Did Nintendo get a patent on happy endings and now they’re not allowed on the XBox?
Anyway count me out. In my mind, I did what the government slimeballs asked, I redeemed myself, and I lived happily ever after with my wife and son. Jack Marston lived to be 65 and died of a heart attack after eating too many steaks from the fantastic cattle he bought from Bonnie.
The End.
A real happy ending would’ve had John settling with Bonnie.
I’m going to agree with that conditionally. First, I really think they dropped the ball on the storytelling in this game quite badly.
From a gameplay perspective, RDR is a masterpiece and quite possibly my GOTY for 2010.
From a storytelling perspective it’s a C-
The botched the Bonnie character very badly. I almost threw up in my mouth when John saves her from almost certain death and brutal treatment only to have her start joking around. Tonedeaf and sickening.
Frankly, they should never have even given John a wife in the first place…they should have only been holding his son hostage. That way we could have gotten the Hollywood ending we all secretly (or not so secretly) wanted where John settles down with Bonnie and lives happily ever after.
I don’t have a problem with sadness in stories, but only if they’re well written. Sadly, the writing in this game is not even close to being good enough to pull off tragedy. The story is so ham-handed and filled with tropes that you’re NEVER going to pull it off in a million years. When you have writing like that, do yourselves a favor and hand us a standard Hollywood ending rather than embarrassing yourselves.
Now I have to have a completely bipolar reaction to this game: loved the game, hated the ending (which, again, I refused to participate in.) The only way I could have hated it more is if John Marston climbed into a device that provided fresh water for all of New Austin but died in the process.
Jazar
1576
Continuing with the spoilers and providing an alternate viewpoint, I’m very happy that the game did not provide the happy sappy Hollywood ending. I love the moment when you’re staring at the gravestones and the slow realization of what just occurred. I’m glad that a happy life with Bonnie was nothing but an unmentioned hint of a dream in the back of John’s mind.
Man, I couldn’t disagree more. I think the story in RDR is easily one of the best I’ve ever seen in the medium - probably the best since Planescape: Torment. And the ending (and epilogue) are perfect for the style of revisionist Western that obviously influenced the game.
Spoofy, I think that’s fair. I loved the game and I really liked the interaction between Bonnie and John. I think John’s wife gets the shaft in presentation. You never develop any attachment to her.
The story is all over the place, which is something we’ve all discussed before. John is a totally inconsistent character.
“I want to do what’s right and I’m no longer a killer.”
“Hey, help us kill some villagers and burn down some homes.”
“Okay.”
Jazar
1579
That is sacrificing story for gameplay. An illogical conceit that I can personally forgive given that the gameplay is awesome.
See, for me it’s the exact opposite. Despite the inconsistent characterization, I thought it was one of the best examples of storytelling in gaming that I’ve ever seen, but the mission gameplay fell flat. Though there were only a couple of train missions, nearly every mission was on rails. I like open world games to take advantage of the open world for missions, not just use it for travel sequences between where you accept the mission and the relatively small area where the mission takes place.
Ultimately RDR suffered for me having played Just Cause 2 first, which is a game that really got missions right by letting you use every tool and approach at your disposal. It makes some missions ridiculously easy depending on when you do them, but it makes other missions that much more awesome.
