Gaming Red Dead Redemption 2 (PC, PS4, Xbox One, Stadia)

This game has taken 8 years to make. We won’t see another one in a while. So great that it’s a long game. You don’t need to play it all at once. You can play it weekly or whatever. Unless you are one of those people who trade in games constantly.

Not sure what you mean by respecting the players time. Nobody has put a gun to your head and said finish it within a week.
 
Jev said:
Yeah, like I said just above: I'm not saying a game can't be 65 hours and exactly the right length but too many of these really long games don't respect the players' time enough.
Click to expand...


I'd trust Rockstar to be one of those games though, with something like AC Odyssey I'd back you all the way, great game with probably the most immersive and beautiful world out there but too much content plenty of it repeitive shite.. Some excellent main/side quests dotted around, just frustrating that it's very much quantity over quality.
 
feck is respecting the players' time? You don't like it you know you do not have to finish it or, better yet, just not buy it?
 
Kostur said:
feck is respecting the players' time? You don't like it you know you do not have to finish it or, better yet, just not buy it?
Click to expand...

Or just play it weekly.

Games like GTA or Red Dead are easy to pick up and play. The controls are not complicated and the games are not really difficult.

It’s not really something like Dark Souls even though real skilled players can pick up and play that. Something like that for me I need to play it within a few weeks rather than keep going back to it once a week.
 
Jev said:
Yeah, like I said just above: I'm not saying a game can't be 65 hours and exactly the right length but too many of these really long games don't respect the players' time enough.
Click to expand...
Respect the player's time :lol: ? Wtf is this ? If you don't like a game, no one forces you to keep playing it. It's easy to sell it
 
kouroux said:
Respect the player's time :lol: ? Wtf is this ? If you don't like a game, no one forces you to keep playing it. It's easy to sell it
Click to expand...
You can laugh but if you ask players to repeat the same boring tasks 50 times in order to complete a game then I don't think you're respecting their time.
 
Jev said:
You can laugh but if you ask players to repeat the same boring tasks 50 times in order to complete a game then I don't think you're respecting their time.
Click to expand...

Well don’t complete it then...
 
Bojan11 said:
Well don’t complete it then...
Click to expand...
Which isn't exactly an ideal solution when you've spent 50 pounds on a game. Jesus christ, guys, I've explained my arguments very carefully in recent posts and you keep fixating on one half sentence here and there.
 
Respect players time?

Wtf is this shit? I'm planning on playing this game non stop until tlou2 drops, platimum that then play RD until ps5 comes out.
 
I don't know why people are having such an issue with the term "respecting players time". It's fairly commonly used phrase when critiquing a game. It's when games have elements which artificially stretch the time it takes to finish a game.

For what it's worth, we have no way of knowing if RDR2 will have that problem
 
Jev said:
Which isn't exactly an ideal solution when you've spent 50 pounds on a game. Jesus christ, guys, I've explained my arguments very carefully in recent posts and you keep fixating on one half sentence here and there.
Click to expand...

Well wait for a sale then. Nobody forcing you to buy it on launch are they? Nobody is forcing you to complete it.

If you that bored, I’m pretty sure GTA V you had the ability to skip missions. Or you could just watch a let’s play if you interested in what happens in the story.

People criticise developers when they make short games. Now they get criticised for long games. They just cannot win.
 
Jev said:
Which isn't exactly an ideal solution when you've spent 50 pounds on a game. Jesus christ, guys, I've explained my arguments very carefully in recent posts and you keep fixating on one half sentence here and there.
Click to expand...

Wait until it’s on discount then! :lol:

I haven’t even finished GTA V 50% yet, but I still absolutely love to pick it up now and again to progress slowly.
 
Jev said:
Which isn't exactly an ideal solution when you've spent 50 pounds on a game. Jesus christ, guys, I've explained my arguments very carefully in recent posts and you keep fixating on one half sentence here and there.
Click to expand...
It makes sense to me. GTA V and even the first RDR (once past some point south of the border) had notable lulls in story progression that were quite dull. Even The Witcher 3 had problems with pacing around the time you had to chase Dandelion around town, even if it did serve the purpose of exploring the city. Skyrim was, well... Skyrim.

Point being, open world games are still a mixed bag when it comes to a single-player focused story. It’s a delicate balancing act that TW3 has come closest to perfecting, though R* made a valiant attempt with the triple-protagonist GTA V and I’m hopeful they can make more progress here.
 
Organic Potatoes said:
Even The Witcher 3 had problems with pacing around the time you had to chase Dandelion around town, even if it did serve the purpose of exploring the city.
Click to expand...
Someone mentioned earlier something about how the Witcher 3 not having luls and in my head this was the exact point in the story I thought about. Hated that whole portion, stupid go fetch missions. Hopefully RDR2 doesn’t have many like that but Unfortunatly they are part of most games.
 
Jev said:
You can laugh but if you ask players to repeat the same boring tasks 50 times in order to complete a game then I don't think you're respecting their time.
Click to expand...
This is a videogame. Of course, at some point, it's bound to get repetitive. Even on 10-15 hours, shit can get repetitive. Face it man, you're clutching at straws here

Jev said:
Which isn't exactly an ideal solution when you've spent 50 pounds on a game. Jesus christ, guys, I've explained my arguments very carefully in recent posts and you keep fixating on one half sentence here and there.
Click to expand...
Nobody forces you to spend 50pounds on it though.
 
Jev said:
Which isn't exactly an ideal solution when you've spent 50 pounds on a game.
Click to expand...

Spending £50 on it is a reason for more game though, not less. I get that you don't want it to be repetitive grinds. I don't think it will be.
 
SirAF said:
Wait until it’s on discount then! :lol:

I haven’t even finished GTA V 50% yet, but I still absolutely love to pick it up now and again to progress slowly.
Click to expand...

Disgusting pleb.

It's people like you who reassure companies like Rockstar that they can disrespect our time.
 
Bojan11 said:
This game has taken 8 years to make. We won’t see another one in a while. So great that it’s a long game. You don’t need to play it all at once. You can play it weekly or whatever. Unless you are one of those people who trade in games constantly.

Not sure what you mean by respecting the players time. Nobody has put a gun to your head and said finish it within a week.
Click to expand...

I forget buttons too easily, really need to finish games ASAP
 
I think repetitiveness is part of every game, however, if you become invested and immersed in the world and the storyline it doesn't seem repetitive at all.
 
@Jev

What the people in this thread think you should do:
  • Only continue playing a game if it is perfection through-out
  • Know if a game is going to be perfection before you buy it
In reality what you should do:
  • Don't use phrases people don't understand
  • Don't question games people are really hyped for
 
I'm kinda with Jev on this. A lot of recent Ubisoft games seem to be padded out and I'm not sure convinced they're better for it. I get bored of them halfway through.

Anyway, Dan Houser did an interview recently where he mentioned that they cut five hours from the game because they felt it didn't add enough to it. Sounds like they've established an actual editing process in order to make the length appropriate.
 
Last edited:
Faetheshire86 said:
@Jev

What the people in this thread think you should do:
  • Only continue playing a game if it is perfection through-out
  • Know if a game is going to be perfection before you buy it
In reality what you should do:
  • Don't use phrases people don't understand
  • Don't question games people are really hyped for
Click to expand...

What kind of passive aggressive pissy bullshit is this? The football forum is leaking.
 
Vidyoyo said:
I'm kinda with Jev on this. A lot of recent Ubisoft games seem to be padded out and I'm not sure convinced they're better for it. I get bored of them halfway through.

Anyway, Dan Houser did an interview recently where he mentioned that they cut five hours from the game because they felt it didn't add enough to it. Sounds like they've established an actual editing process in order to make the length appropriate.
Click to expand...


Ubisoft are known for poor form though. They just rush games out with a serious lack of depth imo.
I saw you mentioned MGS as well. The depth in that let it down too. That oil rig thing had so much promise but was pointless, and the world could've been way more interesting.
If Rockstar make a world as good as promised and with more life and random stuff going on then ever then it shouldn't be an issue.
 
VeevaVee said:
Ubisoft are known for poor form though. They just rush games out with a serious lack of depth imo.
I saw you mentioned MGS as well. The depth in that let it down too. That oil rig thing had so much promise but was pointless, and the world could've been way more interesting.
If Rockstar make a world as good as promised and with more life and random stuff going on then ever then it shouldn't be an issue.
Click to expand...

Yeah, comparatively Rockstar make great game worlds so I expect they know what they're doing with respect to time. I think they go in with the intention of making games that players can dip in and out of. It usually works quite well.

I changed it to Ubi as somebody (Solius?) already mentioned MGS V. Plus Ubi bug me more.
 
VeevaVee said:
What kind of passive aggressive pissy bullshit is this? The football forum is leaking.
Click to expand...

I was being facetious... lighten up

VeevaVee said:
If Rockstar make a world as good as promised and with more life and random stuff going on then ever then it shouldn't be an issue.
Click to expand...

Yip, if there's one dev I'd trust to make a 60 hour campaign that will keep me engaged... it's Rockstar
 
Faetheshire86 said:
Yip, if there's one dev I'd trust to make a 60 hour campaign that will keep me engaged... it's Rockstar
Click to expand...

I think it'll be pretty awesome. A while back we had a discussion about whether it'll be 'revolutionary' or not. I said I can see it being similar to what we've seen from other stuff but heavily improved upon. Either way it'll be very good though I think.

Vidyoyo said:
Yeah, comparatively Rockstar make great game worlds so I expect they know what they're doing with respect to time. I think they go in with the intention of making games that players can dip in and out of. It usually works quite well.

I changed it to Ubi as somebody (Solius?) already mentioned MGS V. Plus Ubi bug me more.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've always thought Ubisoft worlds were very average. Or rather the people in them were. Nothing happens.
 
Jev said:
Which isn't exactly an ideal solution when you've spent 50 pounds on a game. Jesus christ, guys, I've explained my arguments very carefully in recent posts and you keep fixating on one half sentence here and there.
Click to expand...

I would never spend £50 on game,l look around can always find at decent price, the cheapest l found for sofar is £44 if you pre-order at smyths Toys or £32 at playstation store indonesia.
 
I just hope they don't over complicate the game mechanics. With added things to take care off.

And I also hope they have nailed the background score. There is nothing like an aimless wander on RDR. The music was a big part of that
 
JamesB__ said:
Prediction: Similar to how John dies in RDR and you end up playing as Jack, Arthur will die and you’ll end up playing as John at the end.
Click to expand...
This is set prior to the original?

Jev said:
I could point to a lot of TV shows that outstayed their welcome, because fans were addicted and wanted more and more and more while no longer really caring about the quality.



Your point is fair, I just feel like with video games in particular, it has become a quality stable in itself for a game to be long. With every new release, people are obsessed with the length and complain if it's not long enough. But some games should be 10 hours. Some should be 20. Some should be 40, and some should be 60. But by putting such emphasis on length, I feel like the gaming community is pushing developers to make their games longer and longer, and then you get more games like Dragon Age: Inquisition or MGS5 that should be around 30 hours but end up being closer to double that. I'm not saying a game can't be 65 hours and exactly the right length but too many of these really long games don't respect the players' time enough.


Sure. But my point was that you don't buy the ticket because it's eight hours long. You don't pick the three-hour movie over the two-hour movie to get more movie for your money because we all know that different films should have different lengths. But with video games, I feel like the community tends to think that longer is always better, and I believe that creates these bloated games with way too much repetition.



Thank you!
Click to expand...
All very good points.
 
Bojan11 said:
This game has taken 8 years to make. We won’t see another one in a while. So great that it’s a long game. You don’t need to play it all at once. You can play it weekly or whatever. Unless you are one of those people who trade in games constantly.

Not sure what you mean by respecting the players time. Nobody has put a gun to your head and said finish it within a week.
Click to expand...
I don't see why people are being so defensive about this. Long doesn't necessarily mean better, and this has been proven time and time again. For example, God of War could have been longer but I think it was just the perfect length for that kind of game. That's not to say that RDR2's length is going to be an issue, but, like every game, it can. The idea that 'you can play it in batches' is a strange reasoning. He's taking about the quality of the experience and how the length of the experience isn't irrelevant even if the game is good
 
Faetheshire86 said:
@Jev

What the people in this thread think you should do:
  • Only continue playing a game if it is perfection through-out
  • Know if a game is going to be perfection before you buy it
In reality what you should do:
  • Don't use phrases people don't understand
  • Don't question games people are really hyped for
Click to expand...
Look at this, another one whose intellect is on another level to us mere mortals.

amolbhatia50k said:
I don't see why people are being so defensive about this. Long doesn't necessarily mean better, and this has been proven time and time again. For example, God of War could have been longer but I think it was just the perfect length for that kind of game. That's not to say that RDR2's length is going to be an issue, but, like every game, it can. The idea that 'you can play it in batches' is a strange reasoning. He's taking about the quality of the experience and how the length of the experience isn't irrelevant even if the game is good
Click to expand...
It's not about being defensive. It's just a pointless point to make regarding repetitiveness when every single game is repetitive to a degre. Even GOW on PS4 is repetitive, we're not being told anything new. It's just a matter of appreciation or tolerance, if the overall quality of the game is good, repetitiveness isn't much of an issue.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
I don't see why people are being so defensive about this. Long doesn't necessarily mean better, and this has been proven time and time again. For example, God of War could have been longer but I think it was just the perfect length for that kind of game. That's not to say that RDR2's length is going to be an issue, but, like every game, it can. The idea that 'you can play it in batches' is a strange reasoning. He's taking about the quality of the experience and how the length of the experience isn't irrelevant even if the game is good
Click to expand...

Quality of experience? This isn’t a rehashed and reskinned Ubisoft game. It’s made by one of the best developers in the world in terms of open world.

Why is playing it in batches strange reasoning?

Yet he is mentioning spending £50 on a game for some reason. Nobody is forcing him to play it. If you find a game boring or chore then move onto the next one. There are tons of games out there. Nobody is forcing a gun to your head and saying you must complete this. This isn’t the 90s. If you interested in the story then I’m sure someone within a week would have released all the cut scenes video.

There’s nobody being defensive. Developers just can’t win with some people. If Rockstar were to say the game was only 20 hours long then people would moan that they don’t care about single player anymore and that they only care about online. They charging £50 for a short game.

Comparing Rockstar games to Ubisoft or MGS is just silly. MGS was their first real attempt at open world and Kojima wanted to do a lot more, but Konami wouldn’t let him so probably why some of it was repetitive and why he fell out with them. It was why when GTA V came out that Kojima was tweeting that he was depressed because MGS V would never come close to that. That was two years before the release of MGS V.

Ubisoft open games like it’s been mentioned they just soulless. There’s no life in the city. It’s just all generic.

Also mentioning God of war is strange considering the producer said he wants 5 more games. This one took ages to develop, but the others won’t and people will end up getting bored if it’s a two year thing.
 
anyone get a decent deal for digital download?

I take it there won't be any bundle deals for the x with this game?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.