was literally looking for this gif when the thread got locked yesterday
mods how you gonna make me hold that in for 24 hours
lmao, amazing gif
was literally looking for this gif when the thread got locked yesterday
mods how you gonna make me hold that in for 24 hours
Jim actually really likes the game, but he does rag on some of the simulation aspects being too detailed/time consuming in a similar way to BOTW
Huh? What if some people do think Rockstar's games are better? Not sure why that's an invalid thing to feel. To me all those games you mentioned (save for Sleeping Dogs) pale in comparison to Rockstar's work, but I'm not allowed to think that because....reasons?Look, I've bought nearly all Rockstar games, multiple times over in a bunch of cases. I've given them my time and my money. But they absolutely get a pass from reviewers and fans when it comes to reviews. It's not that their games are better, they're just bigger. Few people want to be the ones to point out the flaws in the games (and all games have flaws) when the comments sections are so viciously hostile.
Cheers. Sounds interesting although I must admit I was quite disappointed when the Wanted & Witness kept coming up yet there wasn't anyone around at all. This is especially annoying when considering previews never mentioned this - way too gamey for my liking and goes against everything people are saying about the realism.
Well you'd be 99% wrong. It didis that list even correct? i'm 99% sure bayo 2 didn't win goty.
I was so glad to be done with RDR, and I wasn't interested in giving the zombie dlc a try. Watching gameplay didn't seem interesting at all to me. I'm a bit surprised (or maybe not) that the reviews so far have no 80s or low 90s. Looking forward to seeing if in retrospect the reviews, if they continue to be near perfect, are enlightening like GTA4's.Ok so I've watched a few video reviews now. Loving the visuals and atmosphere, but at the same time, a lot of it looks so plodding, monotonous, slow and also slightly boring. I'm talking so slow it makes narrative driven games full of lots of walking segments look action packed. The predominant bulk of gameplay appears to be walking around, setting things up, hunting, petting horses, talking to people at camp fires, putting stuff on horses, transporting things, galloping around and so on and so on, eg more methodical slower paced tasks. In other words it seems like vast amounts of gameplay will have you doing things that are very sombre and lacking in intensity or thrill. Even the gunfights in the reviews don't exactly look mind blowing.
I'm someone who didn't finish RDR, just got a bit bored someway through, and I really hope the same doesn't happen with this. The pace and richness of content or the world, due to the setting, seems to lack the vibrancy, density and diversity of say Grand Theft Auto, and I wonder if once again that will work against it for me due to the combat not being able to compensate for the mundanity of some of the core gameplay.
Still, the reviews seem super complimentary and hyped, so I'm excited to find out either way.
Not talking about this one specifically. There have been multiple occasions where Slant had a score that positioned them on the main page for said game for clicks though. Their Breath of the Wild review comes to mind.
My impressions, pasted over from Twitter:
Red Dead Redemption 2 is in many ways a game better "experienced" than "played." If you can envelope yourself in this world, accept its incredibly leisurely pace, and embody Arthur Morgan, you'll have an experience like no other video game.
Everything Rockstar promised about the fluidity of missions, dialogue, and interconnected game systems is true. Missions just start, or are found. Items are bought by browsing a store, not browsing a menu. You exist in this space. It is not a theme park.
But this lovingly detailed design has its downsides. This is not a wish fulfillment, power fantasy video game. Complete a mission far from home and you'll spend a LONG time on horseback. Get dirty and you'll have to pay for a bath. Run out of food and you'll stop to make more.
In many ways this is quite brave. Rockstar knows this game will sell millions and yet stubbornly refuses to give horses infinite health, drop fall damage, forces players to clean their guns, forces them to eat (but not too much), and withholds fast travel or a long, long time.
But the downside of all of this is less patient gamers will call RDR2 boring, and even more generous gamers will likely concede that AC Odyssey and Spider-Man probably are more purely fun to play "in the moment." They're video games that feel like video games.
Red Dead Redemption 2 doesn't feel like anything else.
like if you're not gonna be around on the embargo day why make a review thread
Jim actually really likes the game, but he does rag on some of the simulation aspects being too detailed/time consuming in a similar way to BOTW
My impressions, pasted over from Twitter:
Red Dead Redemption 2 is in many ways a game better "experienced" than "played." If you can envelope yourself in this world, accept its incredibly leisurely pace, and embody Arthur Morgan, you'll have an experience like no other video game.
Everything Rockstar promised about the fluidity of missions, dialogue, and interconnected game systems is true. Missions just start, or are found. Items are bought by browsing a store, not browsing a menu. You exist in this space. It is not a theme park.
But this lovingly detailed design has its downsides. This is not a wish fulfillment, power fantasy video game. Complete a mission far from home and you'll spend a LONG time on horseback. Get dirty and you'll have to pay for a bath. Run out of food and you'll stop to make more.
In many ways this is quite brave. Rockstar knows this game will sell millions and yet stubbornly refuses to give horses infinite health, drop fall damage, forces players to clean their guns, forces them to eat (but not too much), and withholds fast travel or a long, long time.
But the downside of all of this is less patient gamers will call RDR2 boring, and even more generous gamers will likely concede that AC Odyssey and Spider-Man probably are more purely fun to play "in the moment." They're video games that feel like video games.
Red Dead Redemption 2 doesn't feel like anything else.
Hmm...reviews seem all over the place. A 7/10 from Slant.
Will wait for more impressions.
I was, until I started reading reviews . Sounds like it's boring by design. I loved me some red dead 1 and GTA 5. But I've gone from pre order paid in full months ago hype. To well, hopefully I'm not throwing my money away negative hype
Let me tell you how this review and all the other reviews they've published work, my man. They get the game, they play the game, they write their review, they give it a score, and then they turn it in, and Slant puts it on their website.
If someone were to write a review for this game and give it a 10/10 Slant would not send it back and be all "Yeah, but could you make this more controversial and change the score for the clicks?"
Same goes for any game. The score they put out is what the writer wants to be put out.
RDR2 outscoring Botw is nice to see.
There's always next gen to try to be better than we were.
Same here.Has anyone's BestBuy preorder shipped yet? Mine still says In Progress.
so this is fine but someone bringing up the bee-oh-tea-double-you word is shitting up the thread?RDR2 outscoring Botw is nice to see.
There's always next gen to try to be better.
I'd wait a few days on this one...RDR2 outscoring Botw is nice to see.
There's always next gen to try to be better than we were.
I can't take reviews of Rockstar games seriously, even their worst games score 96% on average, which is ludicrous when you think about it. Money and ad revenue has too much influence on these review scores. The only reviews you should trust are those on ad-free sites or videos.
There appears to be an adherence to realism and detail that goes against the grain of conventional game design, such as guns needing to be maintained or they won't fire or operate properly and the blurb about how you can very easily get yourself stranded in the wilderness which will require a very arduous journey back to your home base.
Of course it's still a game but many of the reviews suggest there's a simulation aspect that takes things to an entirely new level, which may or may not jive with some people.
That's my impression anyway.
I'll have a better idea once I start playing.
You could write great reviews. Very nice insights that I will check out in about five hours from now here in Germany. And then I'll get back to you and everyone else with my impressions :)
Red Dead Redemption 1 was boring by design too, though. You start off with a long train ride, and then a horse ride, and then you immediately get shot. The first actual thing you get to do is shoot rabbits and take crops to market, before the raw excitement of herding cattle gets introduced. I can't imagine why anyone who played Red Dead Redemption 1 would assume the sequel was going to completely do away with the deliberate pacing.I was, until I started reading reviews . Sounds like it's boring by design. I loved me some red dead 1 and GTA 5. But I've gone from pre order paid in full months ago hype. To well, hopefully I'm not throwing my money away negative hype
Yeah, this isnt a game for me. I hate all this micromanaging to be immersive shit.
Uhm... Look at the Xbox One meta: 98!
https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-one/red-dead-redemption-2
Positive reviews are one thing, but this is just embarrassing:
"ARE YOU A R34L G4M3R OR ARE YOU COMATOSE?!!!!1"
Ok so I've watched a few video reviews now. Loving the visuals and atmosphere, but at the same time, a lot of it looks so plodding, monotonous, slow and also slightly boring. I'm talking so slow it makes narrative driven games full of lots of walking segments look action packed. The predominant bulk of gameplay appears to be walking around, setting things up, hunting, petting horses, talking to people at camp fires, putting stuff on horses, transporting things, galloping around and so on and so on, eg more methodical slower paced tasks. In other words it seems like vast amounts of gameplay will have you doing things that are very sombre and lacking in intensity or thrill. Even the gunfights in the reviews don't exactly look mind blowing.
I'm someone who didn't finish RDR, just got a bit bored someway through, and I really hope the same doesn't happen with this. The pace and richness of content or the world, due to the setting, seems to lack the vibrancy, density and diversity of say Grand Theft Auto, and I wonder if once again that will work against it for me due to the combat not being able to compensate for the mundanity of some of the core gameplay.
Still, the reviews seem super complimentary and hyped, so I'm excited to find out either way.
I actually regret calling them out as low balling hipsters earlier; that was unfair.
Their reviews are well written and clearly delineate the thought process behind the score even if I almost always disagree with them.
Also, if they consider BOTW a 60 then RDR2 getting a 70 is high praise indeed. :)
Still literally an anime picture, haha
It's confirmed in reviews and in previews that this stuff isn't too intrusive but is all distinctly there.Yeah, this isnt a game for me. I hate all this micromanaging to be immersive shit.
Positive reviews are one thing, but this is just embarrassing:
"ARE YOU A R34L G4M3R OR ARE YOU COMATOSE?!!!!1"
Just pick one of the ~70 at random.
Spoiler I guess. It was in the reviews. So I didn't think it was spoilerlywait, so does this game not have fast travel at all or just when you're engaged in specific tasks (like hunting)?
Positive reviews are one thing, but this is just embarrassing:
"ARE YOU A R34L G4M3R OR ARE YOU COMATOSE?!!!!1"
Pretty spoilerey, if you ask me.From what ive read. You can fast travelout of your camp to a place you've already been but not back. So it's a 1 way trip. And sppetently it doesn't unlock until late in the game