Red Dead Redemption
Anybody else picking this up?
I like the idea of this game, but I don't like the fact that it's built on the GTAIV engine with very few changes. People who have played the game state that the on-foot gameplay in RDR is identical to the on-foot gameplay in GTAIV. That may not bother some, but it's bad news to me.
It's not so much that GTAIV was a bad game. I loved it. But it came out quite a while ago now; since then a number of games have come out where you do similar things but with substantially better gameplay upon which to do it. Taking such a step back would be pretty tough. I don't think I could do it.
So I guess this is just a long-winded way of saying "not me". 
Here's basically what I'm going to do. I'm only going to buy one game from Rockstar this year, and if any at all plans for the next GTA are shown at E3 coming up in June, I am going to get GTA without a doubt. If not, great, I'll go rent RDR. This game looks absolutely epic, and I've heard the visuals, voice-acting, and environments are on par with Assassins Creed and Uncharted. I really want this game, but I REALLY want GTA more, so if no GTA plans are announced at E3, I'll unquestionably be picking this up shortly after.
Asaic I would at least give this game a rent because it seriously looks too good to pass up if only for a week.
I wish I could but it. But the thing is I need to save some money for Brotherhood, and Reach, as the brainwashing campaign worked with me as well. Still, maybe I can get a discount from my friend on the videogame store.
ROB_88 wrote:
[On the meaning of BAMF]i figured it was something similar to a MILFBabes Await My..............Flap-a-doodle
Asaic I would at least give this game a rent because it seriously looks too good to pass up if only for a week.
I wish I could, but rental places around here are dying like crazy. The few that are left (just Blockbuster in my area of town) are charging an arm and a leg for game rentals. It's $12.99 plus tax for two days.
I hear that Blockbuster in the States eliminated late fees, but we still have them and they're full price – if the game isn't back on time, it's the full $12.99 fee again. It's atrocious. 15 bucks for two days. Renting a game three times virtually pays for it, so I'd rather just buy a game outright.
I'm going to tell all of you right now that if you do not pick up this game you are missing out on easily one of the best games this year. I can't describe how awesome it is, and the multiplayer is actually better than MW2 and is extremely intense. Do not miss out on this, I rented it and then bought it. It's the best game I've played since AC2 hands down.
Ok, it's decided, I got someone to buy it in Miami and send it to me. Just for the multiplayer. And the Dastardly achievement. I loved those scenes when the bad guy had the girl tied to the railway, at least I finally get to see it end.
ROB_88 wrote:
[On the meaning of BAMF]i figured it was something similar to a MILFBabes Await My..............Flap-a-doodle
I'm going to tell all of you right now that if you do not pick up this game you are missing out on easily one of the best games this year. I can't describe how awesome it is, and the multiplayer is actually better than MW2 and is extremely intense. Do not miss out on this, I rented it and then bought it. It's the best game I've played since AC2 hands down.
Have you spent much time with it yet? I managed to get my hands on it for a while, and while I really got into it at first, I came to really dislike the game.
The following is somewhere between a review and a rant. If you don't want to read it, I'll sum it up: This game starts out looking like it's going to be amazing and keeps baiting you on like it's going to become just totally awesome if you play just a little bit further, but it just never actually delivers.
From using the lasso to duels to riding horses to racing carriages, the game has so many great ideas, but none of them are really all that fun to actually perform. They feel sloppy, unpolished. Like a first draft, rather than a published work. This game always had this MMO feeling to me; its promises of so many great ideas were what kept me going further and further, because I was convinced that it would get so much better. But it just never did. Nothing ever improves. Once you can do something new, it'll never get any better than the very first time you do it. And in some cases it actually gets worse, adding in further environmental or time constraints to already limited controls. Eventually you realize that it's nothing but story actually carrying this game, and that's not what I originally came for (though it's pretty good in itself).
Then the frustrating parts of the game came along.
You start getting missions to gather or hunt. You check your map and find out that the location of the thing you're going after is on the other frickin' end of the entire game world. Even fast-traveling takes time because you have to set up camp or ride into a town and hop on a carriage, wait for the screen changes, terrible load times, etc. Then you're dropped off in the general vicinity of where you want to be. You move over to the specific area. Look around, nothing there. Five minutes later, you find some of what you're looking for. Kill/gather them, then go in seach of more.
Another ten minutes go by and you find a couple more. You get them and then begin searching for the last one. Seems easy enough so far, though it feels like something this simple shouldn't be taking so damned long. Then, all of a sudden out of nowhere a cougar or bear comes leaping at you and you're dead. The game reloads and you're back at the other end of the countryside where you got the mission and none of what you did counted.
So after a few choice words that should not be repeated in a public forum, you drag yourself to go all the damned way back and start your search all over. This time, however, you search around for 10 minutes and find absolutely nothing. Not even one. You search some more and...guess what? Another random cougar attack out of the blue. Wipe yourself off, man – you're dead.
But you're not giving up. Despite this being anything but fun at this point, you're still convinced that this was just really bad luck and it will get better. You're still chasing that intangible carrot on a string. So you travel back to that area yet again. You look around for several minutes and find nothing, yet again. You turn around to go look somewhere else end you see another cougar coming at you. So you take aim and manage to get a shot off just in time. You killed it! You survived! You're just about to feel relieved when a second goddamned cougar lunges at you from behind and kills you.
. . .
For the life of me, I cannot fathom how any human being could possibly consider this to be "fun". It's about as fun as having a drill sergeant screaming obscenities in your face for a half hour straight, drenching you in spittle as you try not to throw up from his terrible breath. I think I'd rather have a rectal exam. At least it would be over with faster. 
Yes, you can save during the events above. But saving in itself is a pain in the ass because it relocates you every time and it passes the in-game time, so the animals you're hunting are no longer around. The very thing that allows you to retain your progress is the thing that most hampers your ability to get things done in a timely manner.
Any way you look at it, this is poor game design. I could have accepted crap like this 10 years ago, but certainly not today. My time is worth too much to me to be wasting it like that. And it just further proves to me the truth that, like in MMOs, the carrot this game holds out in front of you isn't real. There truly is no cake. This game will never truly deliver because it never gets any better. Once you've won a duel, lassoed a bad guy, broken a horse, won a race, survived a shootout and herded some cattle, you've pretty much done it all. Everything will continue to be exactly the same in every future event, and it wasn't really that great to begin with when you really think about it.
Better controls and a tighter setup for some of the other features would have gone a long way to helping this game become something great. But the way it is now, it fails to hit the mark. It's all bark and no bite. It's hollow calories. While the intention was spectacular, the implementation was quite the opposite. RDR feels like an old PS2 game. I expect better games in this day and age.
Regarding the multiplayer, I haven't actually played it myself but I've heard from several people who have. They all agree that it's seriously lacking content. Apparently most of the stuff that people want to do from single-player but with a friend is simply unavailable in multiplayer. No trains, no lassos, no missions, a fairly empty world with little to do other than hunt the same generic bounty over and over and to shoot at other players. Nothing to drive you other than a level up system (a concept which just reeks of MMO). Open games are plagued with griefers using auto-aim and private games are said to be boring as hell due to lack of anything to do that doesn't get old pretty quickly. I really have yet to hear anything positive about the multiplayer.
I really wanted to like this game, and at first the promise of cake made me look past all of its shortcomings. But now that I know that it doesn't get any better than what I've already done (and didn't really enjoy so much), I've returned this copy to its original owner. I've logged around 12 hours into the game and apparently made it about half-way through the story, based on what others tell me. That's more than enough for me. The story is good, but it's nowhere near good enough to make me overlook the shortcomings and frequent frustrations.
I'm going to go try out Prince of Persia. It looks and sounds like a much safer bet to me.
It sounds to me like you're just an absolutely terrible hunter, Asaic. You've got to keep moving and using all your senses to survive. I can't tell you how many times turning up SFX has helped me avoid getting mauled by bears, and it once allowed me to take out THREE cougars when I thought for sure I was going to die. Hunting is a deep and complex affair in this game, and I find it more enjoyable than bounties despite the fact that I make less money. And there's no more liberating feeling in the world than pulling out your shotgun and taking down a full-fledged grizzly that's hell-bent on clawing off your face.
As for everything else you've said, I do agree with you to a certain extent. It is essentially GTA IV in the wild west and it is very much like an extremely basic MMO, but both of these things I believe make the game a much more deep and rewarding experience. The essential difference, I believe, that separates GTA from RDR is not the setting, but rather the necessity of your senses. In GTA IV, auto aim was all you ever needed to beat the game. In RDR, you can't hold onto auto aim forever, and you will need to train your senses to adapt to a multitude of situations. It's the same thing I had to do with Modern Warfare 2, you just need to play enough to get into the groove of a game.
The only problem I have with the game itself is, like you stated earlier, the control system. Driving horses is a little confusing, and shooting on horses is no picnic either, but that's a little mishap that is certainly overshadowed by all of the tremendous features it has, including the most beautiful environment I have seen since the Third Crusade in Assassins Creed.
I'm not close to being done with RDR, but I can assure you that it was well worth my money that I had originally planned to use for Halo Reach.
It sounds to me like you're just an absolutely terrible hunter, Asaic. You've got to keep moving and using all your senses to survive. I can't tell you how many times turning up SFX has helped me avoid getting mauled by bears, and it once allowed me to take out THREE cougars when I thought for sure I was going to die.
I'm actually a fairly decent hunter in real life. There's plenty of wilderness up here in Canada. 
Nothing about the hunting in this game is similar to RL. Especially using your senses. All you have in the game is sight and sound, and they're not particularly helpful. 
There are two issues which cause wild animal attacks in this game to be overly successful.
The first is that the animals don't always make a sound. I use an awesome set of surround headphones and I can assure you, the cougars don't always make a sound before attacking. Nor should they, technically – they're cats, and cats are nature's ninja. But it's poor game design if anything can pop up out of nowhere and insta-kill you with absolutely no warning. Game Design 101 tells you that's a big no-no.
The second is that they can spawn behind you. And close to you. It's not like these things spawn off on the horizon and can always be seen and avoided; they can spawn anywhere in your vicinity as long as you're not looking directly at the spawn spot. Including directly behind you. If you're not moving, they don't always see you when they first spawn. I've had times where I was running along and then stopped to pan the camera around. About 10 feet behind me was a cougar facing off in another direction. But right behind me – I literally ran over top of the spot he's obliviously standing on not five seconds earlier.
Believe me, I keep my "head on a swivel" so to speak when searching all over for my prey, so it's not like I'm missing these cougars. They can (and do) spawn behind you. But that's part of the GTAIV engine – you can simply do a full 360° pan of the camera and stuff that you passed by once can be despawned by the time the camera comes all the way around. Anything outside of your view can spawn or despawn at any time. And that's just poor game design. Poor engine design.
There's an easy way to test out this engine limitation for yourself. Go catch a bounty, throw him on your horse and ride back towards town. You know that invisible line where when you pass it, the chasing bandits will give up and leave you alone? Stand just before that line and zoom out the mini-map and wait for the red dots to appear. Pan the camera or press in the analog stick to look behind you and see them in the distance. Face the camera forward again and then cross that line so that the red dots disappear. Immediately pan the camera back or press in on the stick again. They've completely vanished. Now head back away from town to the other side of the invisible border again and repeat as above, but this time keep the camera on the bandits while you cross the line. This time they turn around and ride away.
I can see how this might have been necessary in the GTA games where there could be literally dozens of cars and peds all over the street in all directions. To keep the performance high, the game would despawn some actors/objects outside of your view and randomly respawn new ones when you look back. But there's never that much going on all at once in RDR, so there's no reason to leave that aspect of the engine intact. But they did. And this games suffers for it.
It's not just wild animal attacks either. Walk into a town where the people don't like your kind and people will start shooting at you. It wouldn't be so bad if you could just find cover and slowly take them out and continue to move forward, but the buggers will occasionally spawn behind you too, in areas you've already cleared. It's a good thing the gang hideouts don't work this way. But then again, those instances are highly scripted. Anything not scripted in this game is a smorgasbord of randomness and dumb luck. The most hilarious time was when I followed one of a bounty's guards on his random wanderings. I kept out of range and just followed the red blip. Eventually he got so far away that when I finally killed him, I immediately got the warning to close the distance to the target, and by the time I whistled for the horse, hopped on and started heading towards him, I got the message that he got away, mission failed. Gimmie a break! 
Hunting is a deep and complex affair in this game.
I have to disagree. There is absolutely nothing deep nor complex about hunting in RDR. You go to where the animals are supposed to spawn, make sure you've got the right time of day, then just wander around that area until you see some. Then go kill and skin them. Super easy, zero challenge.
This is very unlike real life hunting where you have to move very slowly and quietly, keep downwind, aim for specific areas of the body so that they bleed out very quickly to avoid torturing the animal, etc. You need a lot of patience because you have to do a lot of waiting, particularly for opportune moments. Even real life hunting isn't very complex; it's just a very careful and fragile process. In RDR, you can't sneak up on animals – once you move within accurate shooting range, they are instantly made aware of your presence no matter how slowly you move and whether or not they even had a line-of-sight to you. All you can really do is find what you're looking for from a distance, blitz in and snap-shoot it before it gets away, then go skin it. Bam, done. Just pray that you don't have a cougar sneak up on you and make it all for naught.
In GTA IV, auto aim was all you ever needed to beat the game. In RDR, you can't hold onto auto aim forever, and you will need to train your senses to adapt to a multitude of situations. It's the same thing I had to do with Modern Warfare 2, you just need to play enough to get into the groove of a game.
You're right about getting into a rhythm in RDR. And it's extremely easy to do. Look in the direction of the target, press aim, wait a fraction of a second, then fire. For human targets, you can tap to aim slightly upwards to get an instant head shot too. Works every time.
This game is far from challenging with the auto-aim. Sure, you can't hold it forever, but you only really need one or two shots anyway, and the auto-aim hangs there more than long enough to get off the necessary shots. When there are dozens of bandits chasing down your wagon and you're riding shotgun, you just snap shots at them and it's insta-win. Even worse is when you're on foot or horseback and being chased, you can simply stop and stand in one place and just take them out as they come. It's like a free shooting gallery. No risk, no challenge. The auto-aim isn't quite as mindless as GTAIV's, but it's not really any more challenging either. It just requires a bit more attention.
The only times you die in RDR are when you're screwed over by the controls (you try to do one thing and the character has trouble actually doing it) or, like mentioned above, by random wild animal attacks. You can be the best or worst player in the world and this game won't be any different for you. Even if you turn off the auto-aim completely ('Expert' aim mode) all you do is hide behind cover and do your aiming, then peak-and-fire. All it does is take a bit longer.
I'm not close to being done with RDR, but I can assure you that it was well worth my money that I had originally planned to use for Halo Reach.
I'm glad you like the game. A lot of people do, and that means more money for Rockstar. I still like the company.
However, the issues in RDR are just too difficult for me to overlook. These are the same issues that plagued sandbox games 8+ years ago. I simply cannot accept the same crap served to me yet again, all these years later. It's just a rehash of stuff that the evolution of game design should have left in the dust long ago.
This game really feels like a high-res update of an older game. It looks fantastic, but it fails big time in the gameplay department. Compared to other amazing games I've played over the last couple of years, RDR just doesn't come anywhere close to feeling like a good game to me. Or a modern game, for that matter. The only thing modern about it is the graphics.
I got lucky as hell today during one of my lengthy hunter expeditions.
I hunt to make all my money, I find bounties in some cases to be far too risky due to lack of cover. Today during the expedition I managed to take out 6 wolf packs (that's 24 wolves), about 18 coyotes, 20 vultures, and 6 bears. Then came the cougars. I had managed to take out three of them on my trusty Kentucky Stallion that I have kept since the beginnings of the game, but then I heard the growl of one from my blind spot and my heart stopped, thinking I was going to lose all of my progress and my awesome horse. Then the strangest thing happened, this cougar ran right between the legs of my horse and attacked a nearby armadillo, tearing it to shreds. I quickly whipped out the double-barrel shot gun and killed it, but I got extremely lucky.
Asaic I understand now the problems you were having and how frustrating that could be. I seriously got so much game today I would have been so pissed off had that cougar wiped out all my progress. I just hope I never have to be that lucky again when hunting.
That's a pretty freaky occurrence.
On the plus side, though, you wouldn't have permanently lost your horse. If your horse is stolen or killed, just wait a while (10 minutes, maybe?) and whistle and it'll respawn nearby.
The first time I encountered a horse thief, I wanted to snipe the bastard off my horse (never thought to just whistle) and I got run over by a passing pair of guys on horseback (they didn't even apologize). By the time I got to my feet and tried to take aim, the bandit was disappearing over the hill at full speed. So I just waited a bit and then whistled and it appeared nearby like it always does.
You know what else baffled me? You kill someone who's beating on a whore and you gain honor. You kill someone who murders people in the wilderness and steals their horse and you lose honor. If a lawman is chasing an escaped prisoner on foot and you stop and you go near the lawman, he yells for you to kill or capture the thief, both of which give you honor. But if you don't wait for the lawman to yell that out and you just take the initiative to kill the thief, you lose honor and the lawman tries to kill you. Unless you're already on horseback at this point and make a hasty getaway, you can't survive unless you kill him first, and that just makes things a whole lot worse.
What a strange game.
You know what else baffled me? You kill someone who's beating on a whore and you gain honor. You kill someone who murders people in the wilderness and steals their horse and you lose honor. If a lawman is chasing an escaped prisoner on foot and you stop and you go near the lawman, he yells for you to kill or capture the thief, both of which give you honor. But if you don't wait for the lawman to yell that out and you just take the initiative to kill the thief, you lose honor and the lawman tries to kill you. Unless you're already on horseback at this point and make a hasty getaway, you can't survive unless you kill him first, and that just makes things a whole lot worse.What a strange game.
I will agree with you that the logic in some parts of the game doesn't make sense. I don't see what's so honorable about blowing the heads off of bunny rabbits for a sharpshooter challenge but I get rewarded anyway. If you did that in Fable II you would quickly become hated.
Here's another thing I don't understand. One of these random events consists of a woman lying that she needs help and then runs away when you get close and a bunch of robbers jump out and take everything you have. After having it happen twice, when it was about to happen a third time and I heard her call out to me, I whipped out the Evans and blew her head off, and I lost honor. I don't understand how I lose honor if her intent was to get me robbed anyway, especially since the alternative is to kill six of her co-workers.
Yeah, it's messed up. If you're trying to go the honor route, it's a real pain when several of these kinds of events happen within a short period of time. It's a fair amount of work just to earn back the honor you lost.
It's far easier to lose it than it is to gain it.
I would buy it, but Im saving up for MGS PW
TEAM HEADKICK has do it again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NhMsZGv1Ck&annotation_id=annotation_4260...
My mission is redemption and you're straight Red Dead.
ROB_88 wrote:
[On the meaning of BAMF]i figured it was something similar to a MILFBabes Await My..............Flap-a-doodle
Fucking awesome.
Lol, to join the gold rush I had to go WEST SIDE!!!
I thought it was a fantastic game with a fantastic story.
Then again, I'm not Asaic, so....
Sig created by SBIzokronus
Whoever you are holding me now in hand,
Without one thing all will be useless,
I give you fair warning before you attempt me further,
I am not what you suppos
I was never a big fan of the GTA games but i have a genuine appritiation for classic westerns(who doesn't?) which is what RDR is all about. It's got a compelling story, colorful characters aswell as a enormous open world to explore!
I haven't explored the multiplayer too much but the co-op missions are a lot of fun.
I think RDR shares one of the major problems that GTA SA had, and that is the world is nice and big...A little too big. Like some missions have you travel very long distances, and it gets boring very fast, and not to mention if you die before you get there, uh oh, you gotta start over. I still enjoyed RDR, I just got angry at it on a few occasions.
You do realize you can teleport, yes?
I finally beat the game, by the way. This was the only time I've ever teared up at the end of a video game (closest I ever came before RDR was the end of Halo 3)... what a depressing, but also appropriate ending to one of the greatest games ever made...
Go to Blackwater, FLAE.
Sig created by SBIzokronus
Whoever you are holding me now in hand,
Without one thing all will be useless,
I give you fair warning before you attempt me further,
I am not what you suppos
Go to Blackwater, FLAE.
Hah, FLAE fail.
But I share his same thoughts on the ending. I think its the only videogame that has made me tear since Snake Eater. And the music, just another example of great music that relates to the game, nothing like PoP: WW style.
ROB_88 wrote:
[On the meaning of BAMF]i figured it was something similar to a MILFBabes Await My..............Flap-a-doodle
1001Human wrote:
Go to Blackwater, FLAE.Hah, FLAE fail.
Uh, I know that's what you're supposed to do. I don't think I implied that I thought that was the complete end of the game. Besides, everything after the game is dumb anyways.
I wasn't mocking you. >_>
Sig created by SBIzokronus
Whoever you are holding me now in hand,
Without one thing all will be useless,
I give you fair warning before you attempt me further,
I am not what you suppos
I can't believe no one has come back here to talk about this.
Next Tuesday, Rockstar is releasing what is speculated to be one of the best DLCs ever made. I'm talking, of course, about Undead Nightmare.
What is Undead Nightmare, you may ask? Imagine taking Red Dead Redemption's epic western frontier and gameplay, then mixing it with Dead Rising. What you have is an absolutely epic result. Yes, my friends, Undead Nightmare marks the release of the first Open-World Zombie Game ever.
You travel the frontier on horseback fighting off hoards of zombies across the west, all the while searching for a cure. Your wife Abigail Marston has been infected already and you must find a way to save her. The Zombies are extremely durable and can only be killed with headshots, explosions, or being set on fire with the new "Torch" weapon. In addition, the Four Horses of the Apocalypse make an appearance, and once lassoed and broken in, can be ridden just like any other horse. War leaves streaks of fire in it's path and can set zombies on fire at close enough range. Famine and Pestilence both have unlimited stamina (meaning you can gallop infinitely), while Death apparently can make a zombie's head explode by touching it.
The DLC also introduces a new weapon, the Blunderbuss. This gun's ammo is zombie parts, and by collecting parts of the zombie after you kill them, you can have an infinite amount of ammo for taking them all out.
There are also apparently some boss battles with former strangers from the side missions of the original game. Strangers that died in the game rise from the dead to try and claim your brain. The animals in the game also appear to become infected, as zombie bears and cougars all make an appearance. I assume zombie wolves and zombie boars will also appear in the game.
Anyway, the DLC looks to be absolutely fantastic, and perhaps the best part of it all is that it's only $10. It will also be sold on a separate disk, so you can play the game without having the original Red Dead Redemption. I look forward to seeing you all back on the frontier.
Hakunamatata,
FLAE
Go to Blackwater, FLAE.
I totally missed that missed that mission myself. I thought that last cutscene was the end and it was so sad i turned the game off. Eventually i learned about the Stranger mission in Blackwater and then i was happy.
I can't wait for the Undead Nightmare DLC, the Four Hourses of the Apocalypse look awsome! They must be a bitch to break though.
OMG. I've heard the name of the DLC mentioned but had no idea it was basically a whole new game
I think Rockstar has finally cemented its legacy.
Red Dead Redemption just won Game of the Year, and deservedly so. This marks the third time in the last six years that Rockstar has put out a Game of the Year (GTA: San Andreas in 2004, GTA IV in 2008, and now Red Dead Redemption in 2010). They usually find a way to make incredible racing games too (Midnight Club has always done exceptionally well, and it probably would have won racing game of the year last year had it not been for Forza 3). I think that it can be said because of this that Rockstar is the greatest studio in the history of video gaming.
What I personally find so amazing about this is that they took Red Dead Revolver, the first Red Dead game released in 2004 which was complete garbage, and was able to turn it into a Game of the Year in just six years, while mainly focusing on developing the Grand Theft Auto games for essentially four years. I don't think any other studio in the world would be able to accomplish what Rockstar has. It's absolutely fantastic.
Then there's Undead Nightmare, which won DLC of the Year and is widely regarded as the best DLC ever made. Rockstar does so well with their DLC it makes other companies look shameful at best. Their add-ons for GTA IV have been some of the most successful ever, and again, Undead Nightmare is something special.
Ubisoft seriously needs to take notes from Rockstar, because recently I've been nothing but disappointed by them. Rockstar knows that in order to make a good game you need time to develop it. They gave the Red Dead series six years to develop to make it a better game, and look at the result. Ubisoft needs to understand that releasing a game EVERY YEAR in the same saga doesn't make it any better, in fact, it made it even worse. Brotherhood was just AC2's polished turd. Nothing more. And that's chiefly due to the fact that it was released a year after AC2. Rockstar is already in discussion about Red Dead Revolution, but you don't see anyone making outrageous announcements about it releasing some time next June, do you?
Anyway, I'd prefer AC3 being released later than sooner based on the results of the Red Dead franchise. If the game gets released next year it probably will be even worse than Brotherhood was. Ubisoft, take notes from Rockstar, patience is a virtue.
Congratulations to Red Dead Redemption and Rockstar Studios for a once again well-deserved Game of the Year award.
But... Blizzard Entertainment.. St-St-StarCraft..!
But... Blizzard Entertainment.. St-St-StarCraft..!
Hey, I'm with you. But everybody has their own preference.
Blizzard has a HUGE stranglehold on the PC (Warcraft and Starcraft are definitely untouchable), but Rockstar manages to dominate both the 360 and the PS3. Rockstar has a broader range (and also puts out much more games than Blizzard does), which is why I consider them better.
Actually, you could probably argue productivity, since Blizzard spends most of their time creating expansion packs and patches for their PC games. Still, I think starting from scratch like Rockstar does (the exception being GTA IV and RDR built on the same engine) is much more difficult than patching and expanding on software.
Something else Rockstar does better than Blizzard is they don't set unrealistic expectations for their fanbase. When Rockstar announces a release date, they get it out by then. With Blizzard, a due date is pretty much useless. I'm sure you all remember the barrage of Starcraft II delays, because I sure as hell do. My cousin, now a top 1000 player in the world, bitched about it for months, no, YEARS even.
And for the love of God, Diablo III has been in development for a fucking decade. That's got to be pissing some fans off. Seriously, much love for Blizzard, but there has to come a time when they realize you can't announce a game and then not address it for another seven years, and still have it unreleased three years later.
Both are great studios. Rockstar is just closer to perfection than Blizzard is. But that's my opinion, and I'm glad that all the WoW and Starcraft II players are too absorbed by their games to come flame my forum posts claiming Blizzard isn't the second coming of Jesus Christ.
Just got this for christmas, so far it's been amazing.
LL I won't flame you.
I've just never played Red Dead Redemption and in my opinion, all of Rockstar's games are quite repetitive. Blizzard barely releases games, but every single game they release is fresh and great. I don't mean great as in good. I mean great as in famous and godlike.
WarCraft and Diablo don't really matter.
StarCraft is where it's at though LOL.
Play RDR, you'll be surprised. There are some repetitive/boring tasks but they are few and far between.
I've got this and I was far from impressed. The controls were just so infuriating and the storyline could be summed up in 1 short sentance (bad in other words) and the ending was predictable so not a game I reccomend, stick to GTA for a similar game style and COD for shooting ppl!
I've got this and I was far from impressed. The controls were just so infuriating and the storyline could be summed up in 1 short sentance (bad in other words) and the ending was predictable so not a game I reccomend, stick to GTA for a similar game style and COD for shooting ppl!
It's interesting you complain about the controls considering that they are almost the EXACT SAME as GTA IV, which you just recommended.
As for the story, you're probably on your own with that one. Red Dead Redemption's plot has been called one of the best of all time by critics worldwide, and John Marston was listed as the #2 greatest character in video games (behind GlaDOs from Portal). Hell, Asaic hated the game to death but still said the story was pretty good.
I would not recommend COD for shooting people because the mob of children that infest that game is absolutely ridiculous and takes away the little fun that game had to begin with. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is much better for that purpose, but even then Red Dead Redemption beats out COD anyway.