Interiors

[Benjo]

So the big question that always crops up around a pending Rockstar release is "will we have more explorable interiors?".

You've got to ask yourself why you would want this. For instance, in GTA 5 there are a few - offices and such - that you can wander round. Once you have wandered around it that's about it - what do you do next? Shoot a PC screen. Look at a piece of paper on the desk. Leave.

I can see why R* don't really put much effort into this - there just isn't that much point.

HOWEVER

If you ever played GTA: San Andreas you'll remember the robbery mechanism which allowed you to enter peoples' homes and steal their stuff. Not sure why this wasn't in RDR1 but it would be really good to have it in 2. What kind of bandits are you if you don't steal stuff? You could break into a house, steal some shiny goods, then sell them to your contact.

Chances of them actually including it? Probably nil, but this would be a good way of justifying making more interiors. Instead of the traditional R* way of placing a house-style cube and sticking some images of windows on the outside, how good would it be to be able to go up to a house, kick in the back door and wander round it to find some treasures to sell?

[Lonestar]

I agree... this could be a huge game changer, especially for those of us coming off having played Grand Theft Auto V for several years. Also, in terms of workload from Rockstar, it wouldn't be as much work for them as it would be for say, Los Santos. Because in the West the towns were smaller along with the buildings, the latter were also more sparse and spread out. This is a great idea/feature/function and I'm very interested to see how they've approached it in RDR2. But as you say, I won't be holding my breath!

[jACKx]

I like this idea. I mean I really loved that about that GTA game as well. Like just the realistic aspect of being able to fully be in charge of the environment makes it feel more real. Little touches like this really sell a game to me personally. 

[Archbell]

Having a substantial amount of interior spaces in Red Dead Redemption 2 would definitely make the world more immersive and it would not be difficult for Rockstar to do, they had no problem putting a multitude of detailed and dynamic interiors into Red Dead Redemption.

Grand Theft Auto V had a good amount of detailed interiors but most were not included in Grand Theft Auto Online which is a slight shame but due to the nature of the combat it didn't really bother me, I stay clear of interiors other than Apartments and Offices in GTA Online anyway as don't think interiors work in GTA Online due to how easily accessible RPGs are but in a Western setting interiors would work extremely well assuming explosive spamming is not made an option in combat.

[Benjo]

53 minutes ago, Archbell said:

Having a substantial amount of interior spaces in Red Dead Redemption 2 would definitely make the world more immersive and it would not be difficult for Rockstar to do, they had no problem putting a multitude of detailed and dynamic interiors into Red Dead Redemption.

Grand Theft Auto V had a good amount of detailed interiors but most were not included in Grand Theft Auto Online which is a slight shame but due to the nature of the combat it didn't really bother me, I stay clear of interiors other than Apartments and Offices in GTA Online anyway as don't think interiors work in GTA Online due to how easily accessible RPGs are but in a Western setting interiors would work extremely well assuming explosive spamming is not made an option in combat.

Even though there were some accessible interiors in RDR1 there were still very few. The houses outside BlackWater for example, just boxes with window images on the outside. The house at the MacFarlane ranch, most of the buildings in Armadillo. The only modelled interiors are functional - ie doctors, shops, places where you can play poker. Granted, there wouldn't be much point in having an accessible house if there were no function inside it (ie you couldn't really do anything) which is why the suggestion of being able to loot places you break into would work for this.

Again, GTA5 interiors were only modelled if they were functional. I'd estimate that 95% of the buildings on the map had no interiors, and those that did either had functions (shops, safehouses etc) or were used as part of missions. Even then, those that were solely used for missions are closed off and can only be accessed via a mod. 

[Archbell]

1 minute ago, Benjo said:

Even though there were some accessible interiors in RDR1 there were still very few. The houses outside BlackWater for example, just boxes with window images on the outside. The house at the MacFarlane ranch, most of the buildings in Armadillo. The only modelled interiors are functional - ie doctors, shops, places where you can play poker. Granted, there wouldn't be much point in having an accessible house if there were no function inside it (ie you couldn't really do anything) which is why the suggestion of being able to loot places you break into would work for this.

Again, GTA5 interiors were only modelled if they were functional. I'd estimate that 95% of the buildings on the map had no interiors, and those that did either had functions (shops, safehouses etc) or were used as part of missions. Even then, those that were solely used for missions are closed off and can only be accessed via a mod. 

There was a large amount of inaccessible buildings in Red Dead Redemption but in my opinion there was more than enough accessible buildings as well especially if you take into account how many buildings were in the game altogether and look at the ratio of inaccessible to accessible buildings.

Blackwater and Armadillo were some of the few places where there were more inaccessible buildings than accessible ones due to them being two of the larger towns in the game and I have no doubt Rockstar will aim to have more accessible buildings in Red Dead Redemption 2 I just hope buildings that are accessible in Singleplayer are not made inaccessible in Online without good reason, I also believe having an interior with no function is not pointless as it adds not only another layer of detail to the game but another layer of combat to multiplayer.

I saw the closing off of Grand Theft Auto V's Mission interiors in GTA Online a waste but not a huge draw back due to the nature of the Online combat, I just hope they do not repeat this trend in Red Dead Redemption 2 and if they do choose to do something more with interior spaces in addition to making them accessible that would be even better.

[shawn]

I think the main focus back then was outside though. Like being out in the wild... Ya know, "wild west". 

I felt like the major cities could have been more to look and and I can get they will have more places to go in and out of. They did a good job in the first one though. When you think of GTA V, they didn't have all building being accessible but the ones that were, they made them count. 

[Benjo]

The delay had better have been caused by them adding this to the game

[tadp0le]

I would like to think they will put more effort in this time around. I am all about look and feel of games like this. I know the outdoors will be great.

Edited February 15, 2018 by tadp0le

[mizTik]

On 2/14/2018 at 7:01 AM, Benjo said:

The delay had better have been caused by them adding this to the game

Let us hope so. One of my only complaints about the last game was lack of interior options and even the buildings you could go in felt lacking.

[Qu3ster]

They better improve this. There were so many cool aspects of the old west in terms of buildings they missed out on in the last one.

[Benjo]

5 hours ago, Qu3ster said:

They better improve this. There were so many cool aspects of the old west in terms of buildings they missed out on in the last one.

Every single GTA game fans ask for more interiors. Surely R$ must know it's what we want, right?

[watery buffalo]

I just want to be able to go into any building in the game. It doesn't have to be fully furnished or greatly detailed like a Sims game or something. 

[GatoNegro]

On 2/28/2018 at 1:34 AM, watery buffalo said:

I just want to be able to go into any building in the game. It doesn't have to be fully furnished or greatly detailed like a Sims game or something. 

This is how I feel man. Like the last one was so lacking. There were some really great spots too they could have allowed you to go in and just have hidden stuff or side missions really. 

[redscrew]

I was thinking about this. I know I am a bit late to the thread but what if they focused as much on the interior as exterior and environment? Would it really make THAT much of a difference at the end of the day? I don't think it will. The game will likely be spent mostly outdoors and that is where the prime focus should be. I mean if they want to make mission buildings and shops fancy, go for it but I honestly don't care.

[Benjo]

3 hours ago, redscrew said:

I was thinking about this. I know I am a bit late to the thread but what if they focused as much on the interior as exterior and environment? Would it really make THAT much of a difference at the end of the day? I don't think it will. The game will likely be spent mostly outdoors and that is where the prime focus should be. I mean if they want to make mission buildings and shops fancy, go for it but I honestly don't care.

Even when I'm outdoors there's something about an empty box house with painted-on windows that really kills the immersion for me. 

[Gh0stRyder]

On 3/26/2018 at 3:19 AM, Benjo said:

Even when I'm outdoors there's something about an empty box house with painted-on windows that really kills the immersion for me. 

If the exterior looks great, I am not too bothered but when you really put thought into it and that you actually can't go inside a "public" building, it is kind of cheap feeling. Like I get not being able to go in everything, but giving an action would help. Like an interactive door that signals you that it is locked or something. 

[Looney Dan]

Am I the only one who doesn't care so much about this? I mean I get it, you want to be able to go in more buildings but for what? If they serve no purpose and have no interactions for them, why?? I would much rather they focus on things we can interact with and do things with. 

[Benjo]

3 hours ago, Looney Dan said:

Am I the only one who doesn't care so much about this? I mean I get it, you want to be able to go in more buildings but for what? If they serve no purpose and have no interactions for them, why?? I would much rather they focus on things we can interact with and do things with. 

Did you read my post?

[Skrylaxx]

The idea is to be able to "explore" the entirety of the map. There can be value in "breaking and entering" as well. Say a door is locked, you bust it open and you get a warrant out for your arrest if someone happens to be home or if someone sees you. Can steal jewelry, guns, ammo, etc. 

 

[VICKSUN]

Dan, if there was a purpose the point being is that it can make the game better, no? I mean that is what I got from this. 

At face value, going into empty buildings would be a waste but if there was something you can do, find, or even establish by breaking into someone's house or place of business within the game, it would make online more fun and generally up the value fo the campaign mode. 

[Benjo]

 

[debbo89]

I agree that unless there is something specific to do and/or find inside buildings then it would be pointless. I don’t want and wouldn’t spend time exploring empty buildings. 

On another note if Rockstar are going for realism then there surely would have to be some restrictions, like you can’t just wander into everyone’s houses, you would need to 'break in'. I always found it amusing in the Witcher 3 that you could walk into everyone’s homes, loot their house bare then just leave without them so much as batting an eyelid. 

[Benjo]

1 minute ago, debbo89 said:

you would need to 'break in'.

They referenced this a few seconds into the video I just posted. 

[Qu3ster]

I was wondering if new information came out on this. I'll take a gander at the video. I just hope it isn't anything I don't want to hear. 

[Benjo]

Rockstar: "You are a bandit and we have built a world you can explore and rob houses and stuff"

Also Rockstar: "Let's build a city with 238 buildings in but only let them enter 9 of them."