The game's main story missions are restrictive, that's true. However, some of his claims are outright false, such as failing a mission because he used stealth, or because he flanked enemies, or not being able to whistle for his horse.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Red Dead Redemption 2 Review Thread
- Thread starter spad3
- Start date
The game's main story missions are restrictive, that's true. However, some of his claims are outright false, such as failing a mission because he used stealth, or because he flanked enemies, or not being able to whistle for his horse.
Yeah you probably wouldn't like it.
I think it's one of the best games ever and my personal game of the generation.
Last edited:
Guess I'll throw my post here since the other thread got locked before I could post it.
While the Mark Brown review raises some good points, I though this point was really poor.
RDR2 may not be a structurally different game, but it didn't really need to be. Take hunting for example. Sure you're still just shooting an animal at the end of the day, but it's innacurate to say its just more of the same with all they've added to flesh it out. The world is so much alive, filled to the brim with stuff. I have gone a trip in game without coming gacross something interesting, wether that be a person showing off their new gun to their friend and accidentally shooting them, leading to a man hunt from the law or a horse collapsing and catching on fire inexplicably. Even after finishing the game, I'm sure there's countless things never even came across.
There's also interesting dynamic elements. For example, I learned about a high stakes poker game hidden upstairs in the Saint Denis gun shop after, on a whim, deciding to help out a person caught by bounty hunters. You could find this out and many other hidden things, through various random means like this.
While the Mark Brown review raises some good points, I though this point was really poor.
And otherwise was one of the most barebones open world games this gen.
Not remotely a recent feature as its been in almost every Far Cry and Assassins Creed since Assassins Creed Brotherhood. Not only that, but it's a combat option and doesn't really have anything to do with the open world.
It didn't at all. You aren't even going to come across side content with voice acting in BotW, let alone the quality of cutscenes, animation, etc. found in RDR2's. It's quite obvious that the npc asking for 50 razershrooms might not be part of the main quest. Even the best side quest in BotW on a mechanical level consists solely of chopping wood, bringing it to a character and then asking a npc to go to a place x 4.
RDR2 may not be a structurally different game, but it didn't really need to be. Take hunting for example. Sure you're still just shooting an animal at the end of the day, but it's innacurate to say its just more of the same with all they've added to flesh it out. The world is so much alive, filled to the brim with stuff. I have gone a trip in game without coming gacross something interesting, wether that be a person showing off their new gun to their friend and accidentally shooting them, leading to a man hunt from the law or a horse collapsing and catching on fire inexplicably. Even after finishing the game, I'm sure there's countless things never even came across.
There's also interesting dynamic elements. For example, I learned about a high stakes poker game hidden upstairs in the Saint Denis gun shop after, on a whim, deciding to help out a person caught by bounty hunters. You could find this out and many other hidden things, through various random means like this.
Last edited:
I wrote this in the Mark Brown review thread but it was closed, so I'll post it here:
I think RDR2s design is brilliant and it will have a major influence on open world game design going forward.
The best thing you can do when playing it: Forget everything you think you know about open world games and how to play them. Learn to appreciate the slow pace.
I recorded a good example of why I think this game is so special yesterday.
Its just me trying to get back to camp after I got a new horse. Its basically just 10 minutes of getting from point A to point B, but it turned into a little adventure, like everything you do in this game.
I wanted to keep my old horse and the new one didn't yet trust me much. I went the wrong way and had to go through the swamps and was terrified of losing one of the horses. I've already lost one before.
It might not be for everyone, the core gameplay mechanics like shooting are not the focus and I understand when people can't accommodate to the slow pace.
But I love it and I hope we will see many more games like this one in the future.
I think RDR2s design is brilliant and it will have a major influence on open world game design going forward.
The best thing you can do when playing it: Forget everything you think you know about open world games and how to play them. Learn to appreciate the slow pace.
I recorded a good example of why I think this game is so special yesterday.
Its just me trying to get back to camp after I got a new horse. Its basically just 10 minutes of getting from point A to point B, but it turned into a little adventure, like everything you do in this game.
I wanted to keep my old horse and the new one didn't yet trust me much. I went the wrong way and had to go through the swamps and was terrified of losing one of the horses. I've already lost one before.
It might not be for everyone, the core gameplay mechanics like shooting are not the focus and I understand when people can't accommodate to the slow pace.
But I love it and I hope we will see many more games like this one in the future.
I mean, yeah, the mission design is very restrictive, but I don't think this is necessarily dated, it's just a different approach. I love emergent gameplay and different ways of doing missions, I mean, BotW and MGSV are among my favorite games ever, but there's something refreshing (to me) in Rockstar's approach. The curated aspect of missions in RS games mean they can be as bombastic and narratively exciting as a linear game like Uncharted, for instance. Do people complain that Uncharted's missions are restrictive? No, because it's not an open world game, therefore freedom is not the focus. Well, with Rockstar games freedom is only the focus when you are free roaming, but inside the missions the focus is on the events the story is trying to tell, and I think RDR2 does that incredibly well.
It would be one thing if the missions were boring and predictable, but they are not. You never quite know what is going to happen. It's not an unpredictability driven by freedom and mechanics, but driven by the narrative. With Rockstar games you can get both: one in the free roaming and the other in the main missions. I don't think that's dated, it's simply trying to give the gamer the best of both worlds.
It would be one thing if the missions were boring and predictable, but they are not. You never quite know what is going to happen. It's not an unpredictability driven by freedom and mechanics, but driven by the narrative. With Rockstar games you can get both: one in the free roaming and the other in the main missions. I don't think that's dated, it's simply trying to give the gamer the best of both worlds.
Yep, you said exactly what I wanted to. The restrictive nature is by design. It gels extremely well with the super cinematic approach of the game.
I played AC Odyssey right before RDR 2 and it made me realize how much more curation there is in RDR 2's mission design. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but it doesn't make it "dated".
I think that's guaranteed given its commercial and critical success. I agree with your sentiments too.
Couldn't agree more. Some people just don't understand that the missions are cinematically driven and not just an open sandbox that you can approach the way you want. Zelda does that very well but the downside is you get next to 0 story telling. Same for MGS V. It's just a design choice.
TLOU2 will def be 96+ unless certain media outlets decide to dock points for the graphic violence. Cyberpunk will be the first game in a long time where we'll go "oh shit this is the next gen" so I think it has a good shot at 96+ as well.
What I saw here is a guy following a red line for 10 minutes ^ ^
I don't think I would've gotten the appeal either before I started the game myself.
Its hard to describe, but when you accept the way the game works the world really pulls you in, making even the simplest things, like bringing two horses back to camp, exciting.
Like, I don't see how you can categorically say that none of those things happened to him. Why is it so hard to believe that he tried to flank enemies and ended up outside the mission zone? That's been a thing in past R* games.
Well I never accepted how the game worked particularly during the story missions. But even then, even the side activities are useless and meaningless to me.
If I skin an animal in this game, what is it for? Money is not necessary to finish the game and the gameplay for hunting is not fun to me. So there's no point to do any of that from my point of view.
Compare that to BOTW where everything you do is to get stronger in order to be able to defeat Ganon.
I don't know, I guess the context of the world alone provides enough incentive for me to do all these things.
It also keeps story missions from feeling redundant.
MGSV is a great game but from start to finish it feels like you're doing mostly the same thing over and over again save the improved tech and weapons.
Also, even if the story missions are restrictive, the rest of the game is basically a Wild West simulator where freedom reigns.
This isn't true. Sometimes the free flowing nature of stuff like Zelda will tell a better story than most games ever can.
That's the nature of emergent storytelling. Crusader Kings 2 regularly delivers more epic sprawling stories than most games
Extract:
I find all those little events completely meaningless as you barely interact with them and your options limited. Giving a random guy medecine or not is not interesting to play. Moreover, your honour rating doesn't affect the world much.
Example? Because I've played BOTW a lot and I love this game, ok I've done a bunch of things exploring the world that are cool and can be told, but nowhere near a RDR II story plot.