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

Bojan11 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Jaysus you just got really defensive in a post whee you asked me who is getting defensive. All his points are extremely logical and sound, and I can't see the rationale against it. It's fairly simple. If the main campaign of this game was 100 hours, that would most definitely be a bad thing. The entire point is that long doesn't necessarily mean better. It can mean better. It can also mean worse.

I appreciate the differences between this and GoW but the point remains a correct one. Just because Rockstar has made sense very good own world games in the past doesn't mean they haven't had their shortcomings either. And I couldn't care too hoots about perception. That wasn't what I commented on.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Jaysus you just got really defensive in a post whee you asked me who is getting defensive. All his points are extremely logical and sound, and I can't see the rationale against it. It's fairly simple. If the main campaign of this game was 100 hours, that would most definitely be a bad thing. The entire point is that long doesn't necessarily mean better. It can mean better. It can also mean worse.

I appreciate the differences between this and GoW but the point remains a correct one. Just because Rockstar has made sense very good own world games in the past doesn't mean they haven't had their shortcomings either. And I couldn't care too hoots about perception. That wasn't what I commented on.
Click to expand...
Isn't that what reviews are for, though? They all caught out MA Andromeda for being a massive waste of time that was made long for the sake of it whereas the likes of TW3, HZD, Persona 5, all huge time sinks, all got great reviews despite being enormous too.

The way he's talking it's as if making a game really long is an automatic plus point in most people's eyes but plenty of games that have tried to do that in shitty ways have been critiqued for it.
 
Massive Spanner said:
Isn't that what reviews are for, though? They all caught out MA Andromeda for being a massive waste of time that was made long for the sake of it whereas the likes of TW3, HZD, Persona 5, all huge time sinks, all got great reviews despite being enormous too.

The way he's talking it's as if making a game really long is an automatic plus point in most people's eyes but plenty of games that have tried to do that in shitty ways have been critiqued for it.
Click to expand...
Of course the reviews do tend to reflect those aspects. But they aren't out for this game and it can go either way. One game I can recall that got rave reviews despite being barren in its content (both literally and metaphorically) was Fallout 4. Great reviews and a great giant pile of nothing.

I don't expect that from RDR 2 though. I expect to genuinely really like this game and not experience the slight disappointment I did with GTAV (although it was an objectively good game and my view was in the minority). But I think the logic that poster was applying was perfectly good.
 
Alright so given I adored the first RDR, this looks like the next game I can see myself absolutely loving living in. And in order to truly enjoy it and objectively be able to assess how good it is, I'm going to stay as clear of videos as possible. I did that with GoW and playing it with a lack of knowledge enhanced my experience. Granted it was so incredible it's among the best games I've ever played. But it's worth it to go into RDR2 that way as well.
 
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:
The entire point is that long doesn't necessarily mean better. It can mean better. It can also mean worse.
Click to expand...

Exactly... the game should be as long as it needs to be, No longer, no shorter.

I've never understood the "too much is never enough" mentality. Some of my favourite games have had parts that I felt were unnecessary. Remember backtracking in MGS1 to get the sniper rifle? That completely broke the flow of the game. It would have been better with that removed. Even though it would have made the game dangerously short.

I also wonder if people think of games more as a product, over a piece of work/art. A game like FIFA might be a great product (lots of replay ability, modes etc.) where as something like The Last Of Us might be considered a great piece of art, because of the story, acting etc? Movies are never really compared as products, because they are all virtually identical in that regard.

kouroux said:
Look at this, another one whose intellect is on another level to us mere mortals.
Click to expand...

Thanks! Hold my beer while I call my high school teachers to let them know they were wrong about me :drool:
 
I'm sorry but the quality of discussion in here is atrocious. I tried to lay out my points carefully over several posts and explained my arguments. It's fair to disagree and argue against it but all I'm getting is condescending replies with laughing smileys because I, as a non-native English speaker, happened to use an expression you find funny. Some of you guys should really grow up.
 
kouroux said:
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.
Click to expand...
Pretty much every single game revolves around repetitive actions, but there's repetitive and there's repetitive. There's Bloodborne repetitive and there's Mad Max repetitive. I thought @Jev's concerns were valid, but people seem to be wilfully ignoring his points just to pick out a statement to ridicule him. I've often found myself frutstrated by the tendency of open world games to grow longer and longer and even more bloated over the years. It's a valid concern.

That's not to say I have that particular concern about RDR2. Rockstar are one of the few I'm willing to give the benefit of doubt they can pull off a lengthy game while avoiding the pitfalls of modern open world design.
 
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...
:lol: Good one
 
kouroux said:
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.
Click to expand...
As if other posts in here are saying "something new". Every game is repetitive to a degree but how the next action is received by the gamer is hugely influenced by how interest he feels it is. The witcher's quests repetitive quests felt fresh, deep and engaging whereas those in Fallout 4 felt like an effort I didn't want to make.

Nevertheless, even good games can be prolonged to their deterrence rather their benefit. I think it's a good point to make. If you're just looking for something new, I'm not sure how the caf keeps you hooked.
 
The standard edition of this game costs around the same as something like COD or FIFA. For the amount of effort R* have put into it that is bloody good value for money. Even if you don’t make use of the 60 hour long story you’ll get value for money anyway.
 
2018. What a time to be alive, where the great pain of the age is the the conundrum of painstakingly trudging our way through repetitive moments in video games. Quality throughout or not, repetition or not, we're getting fecking games that transport us into a make-believe world, satiating our desires to re-live ancient, classical, and modern periods of history! That we even get this at all is an absolute wonder.
 
Ainu said:
Pretty much every single game revolves around repetitive actions, but there's repetitive and there's repetitive. There's Bloodborne repetitive and there's Mad Max repetitive. I thought @Jev's concerns were valid, but people seem to be wilfully ignoring his points just to pick out a statement to ridicule him. I've often found myself frutstrated by the tendency of open world games to grow longer and longer and even more bloated over the years. It's a valid concern.

That's not to say I have that particular concern about RDR2. Rockstar are one of the few I'm willing to give the benefit of doubt they can pull off a lengthy game while avoiding the pitfalls of modern open world design.
Click to expand...
The concerns are valid but the whole point about respecting the player's time is ridiculous.
 
Redlambs said:
Though to add to the discussion, I still hate cut scenes you can't skip. That wastes my time.
Click to expand...

There’s a special place in hell for boss cutscenes you can’t skip after you’ve already died at that boss before.
 
Jev said:
Game developers don't see it that way: https://www.pcgamer.com/do-games-have-enough-respect-for-your-spare-time/

This explains my POV well too: https://www.cannotbetamed.com/2015/09/10/things-i-dont-get-about-gaming-respect-for-ones-time/
Click to expand...
I am not a game developper so only talking from a consummer POV. I don't buy games that I don't do research on (asking on the caf at first and then going through several various sites). It's easy to have information relatively reliable about any game so if at the end of the day I feel like my time has been wasted, the fault lies mostly with me.
 
Redlambs said:
Though to add to the discussion, I still hate cut scenes you can't skip. That wastes my time.
Click to expand...

Even worse if like MHW they give you that option for Kulv Tarroth and then take it away for some stupid reason, had to watch her stupid entrance about 80 times now.

I don’t really care if a game is 30hrs, 40hrs,50 or 100hrs as long as for what I’m playing I get entertained and it can eat up some time and provide an escape from reality. Like above MHW I’m now at 800hrs of play time and as long as capcom keep releasing free content and new monsters I’ll probably continue to play. I’m not even sure how this conversation of not wasting our time came about. I just want to shoot people, hopefully tie some people up and place them in front of a train and if I feel crazy I might try and take on a bear armed only with a butter knife, if that’s an option. Any knife will do really.
 
Andersons Dietician said:
Even worse if like MHW they give you that option for Kulv Tarroth and then take it away for some stupid reason, had to watch her stupid entrance about 80 times now.

I don’t really care if a game is 30hrs, 40hrs,50 or 100hrs as long as for what I’m playing I get entertained and it can eat up some time and provide an escape from reality. Like above MHW I’m now at 800hrs of play time and as long as capcom keep releasing free content and new monsters I’ll probably continue to play. I’m not even sure how this conversation of not wasting our time came about. I just want to shoot people, hopefully tie some people up and place them in front of a train and if I feel crazy I might try and take on a bear armed only with a butter knife, if that’s an option. Any knife will do really.
Click to expand...

It's not a new concept of balancing padding out games and not being too boring, but calling it "respecting player's time" is a very new thing. Probably dreamed up on reddit or neogaf and one mouthpiece dev ran with it. As someone said earlier, you literally can't win anyway. Some want games short, some long, overall most don't actually know what they want.

For me, longer is better but it has to be done right. That much should surely be obvious really. The problem is more in open world games that have terrible padding side quests, even Witcher was kind of guilty of that (though obviously they really didn't need to considering the majority of them being outstanding) to a degree, but then why put yourself through them in the first place if you know that? Besides there are plenty of people out there who like doing all those stupid side quests no matter how dull, or those who love grinding games that most of us find boring.

Like with everything, some people like one thing, others another. The answer, for me anyway, is never restricting things based on your own personal opinion. You just pick and choose to suit your tastes. In any case I do find it funny to think of anyone actually thinking their time is being disrespected (and I'm not talking about you here @Jev), like as if you are that important :lol:
 
I have a Halloween party on the 26th :(

Gonna work from home so I can play it all day instead.
 
Hoof The Ball said:
:lol:

After midnight release, it's now 6am, and you're still playing.... on a work day, and you utter the words.

"I wish I knew how to quit you...."
Click to expand...

I'm waiting to start a new job and it's not gonna be before this comes out. Result :lol:
 
VeevaVee said:
I'm waiting to start a new job and it's not gonna be before this comes out. Result :lol:
Click to expand...
In a similar position but more like I don’t need to go offshore until December 3rd with a quick 1 day course in November, so from the 26th till then I can pretty much devote all my time to it if I wish. Just going to load up the kitchen with snacks.
 
Jev said:
Wrote this in another thread once but since it's the same point I'm making, I'll reuse it:

You'd never buy a ticket to see a movie simply because it was eight hours long. Games like Dragon Age: Inquisition and Persona 5 drag on to an extend that you're just begging for them to finish by the end. I'd much prefer a tighter scripted story that leaves you wanting more rather than worn out.
Click to expand...

Persona 5 is one of the best RPG’s of this generation. At no point did the story feel like it was dragging. Just because your preference is for a shorter story doesn’t make it better.

The fact that these two games have been rated so highly and enjoyed by so many shows that you’re in a minority here.
 
I dumped 90 hours into dragon quest XI recently, I should probably email Squareenix and ask them for my money back for not respecting my time by putting so much content into the game.
 
Cloud7 said:
I dumped 90 hours into dragon quest XI recently, I should probably email Squareenix and ask them for my money back for not respecting my time by putting so much content into the game.
Click to expand...
While you're at it, please also bother telling half the open world game developers out there who build large maps full of rubbish and pretend they've given you a lot, to, you know, stop.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
While you're at it, please also bother telling half the open world game developers out there who build large maps full of rubbish and pretend they've given you a lot, to, you know, stop.
Click to expand...

Who are you so upset at? In this gen alone, CDPR gave us a great world in TW3, Bethesda did great with FO4 if you care to look beneath the surface, even Skyrim has a lot more depth. 7 years later and I’m still discovering new stories being told by Bethesda’s unique style of environmental storytelling. Dragon age inquisition was the first game that I actually enjoyed for the PS4.

What open world games have hurt you this much?
 
I understand the points made, however, look...... you can save a game and continue. When you have enough time, continue, and if you don't, then don't. It's not a big, long movie where you're duty bound to watch it all in one go. Way too fussy. Just enjoy the fact that you can enjoy this s**t in the privileged generation you live in.
 
Hoof The Ball said:
I understand the points made, however, look...... you can save a game and continue. When you have enough time, continue, and if you don't, then don't. It's not a big, long movie where you're duty bound to watch it all in one go. Way too fussy. Just enjoy the fact that you can enjoy this s**t in the privileged generation you live in.
Click to expand...

Exactly mate. I remember playing platforming games on my gameboy color where if you got 10 hours of gameplay out of it it was plenty.

To be able to experience modern gaming, where the worlds are rendered so spectacularly, the audio sounds like something from a movie, and you can sit and immerse yourself for hours and hours, I don’t see how anyone can complain about having too much game, when you can easily just put it down and pick it up when you have time.

Edit: not even 10, if you 6 hours out of some of those older games it was a lot.
 
Last edited:
Cloud7 said:
Who are you so upset at? In this gen alone, CDPR gave us a great world in TW3, Bethesda did great with FO4 if you care to look beneath the surface, even Skyrim has a lot more depth. 7 years later and I’m still discovering new stories being told by Bethesda’s unique style of environmental storytelling. Dragon age inquisition was the first game that I actually enjoyed for the PS4.

What open world games have hurt you this much?
Click to expand...
I'm upset at nobody.

But Fallout 4 was rubbish.
 
Cloud7 said:
Exactly mate. I remember playing platforming games on my gameboy color where if you got 10 hours of gameplay out of it it was plenty.

To be able to experience modern gaming, where the worlds are rendered so spectacularly, the audio sounds like something from a movie, and you can sit and immerse yourself for hours and hours, I don’t see how anyone can complain about having too much game, when you can easily just put it down and pick it up when you have time.

Edit: not even 10, if you 6 hours out of some of those older games it was a lot.
Click to expand...

I still don't see why long games are necessarily better. A lot of great mini-series are good because they're shorter. Similarly, there's a bunch of great TV shows with some annoying filler episodes that you don't want to repeat. Movies that are over 3 hours long are difficult. Have you ever sat through a 4 hour play? It's hard.

I'll also repeat that Dan Houser - yes, the English video game producer as well as the co-founder and vice president of creativity for Rockstar Games - already came out and said they cut some content from the game because they felt it didn't add enough.

Edit: In fact, he said 'it was fun at first but then not after a while'. Which seems to be a reflection of Jev's point that repetition is not always a good thing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.