Massive gulf between user and press reviews of Red Dead Redemption 2 on Metacritic

#51
It gets seriously tedious in some parts and the story line missions.... Controls are horrible a lot of the time. It's a good game don't get me wrong but it contains a bunch of issues the press seem to ignore. Kinda like botw and 20fps etc..
 
#56
Most of them complain about the clumsy controls,long travels and that its not fun,and I agree with them, the game doesn't deserves the praises it got,the visuals are great,but that's all there is about this game,videogames are meant to be fun,if I want a realistic world I just live my own life
I get what you're saying, but do you live in the western country during the 19th century? ;) For me personally, realism makes the game more immersive, enjoyable and therefore fun.
 
Last edited:
#57
https://www.metacritic.com/user/Reivilo85

"The game is slow, boring and punitive for all the bad reasons. It's slow because controls are awful, the world is huge and empty and you spend your time going from A to B and dying for stupid reasons. It's boring because all the quests are the same, you have narrative where Rockstar believe they can master dialogues as well as Tarantino, then you have a very bad gunfight where you cover/auto-aim/shoot, have a quick narrative and rinse and repeat. The rest of your time you actually work. You cook, you collect grass, you hunt animals for hours, you clean stuff, you clean yourself, you clean your horse, you clean your guns, etc. It's a miracle you don't have to brush your teeth and wipe your ass."

For a 97 Metacritic GOTY billion-dollar seller, this review, by an ACTUAL GAMER is damning.
This is pretty much word for word how I was explaining this game to the missus, when I told her I'm going to take it to CeX.
 
#62
https://www.metacritic.com/user/Reivilo85

"The game is slow, boring and punitive for all the bad reasons. It's slow because controls are awful, the world is huge and empty and you spend your time going from A to B and dying for stupid reasons. It's boring because all the quests are the same, you have narrative where Rockstar believe they can master dialogues as well as Tarantino, then you have a very bad gunfight where you cover/auto-aim/shoot, have a quick narrative and rinse and repeat. The rest of your time you actually work. You cook, you collect grass, you hunt animals for hours, you clean stuff, you clean yourself, you clean your horse, you clean your guns, etc. It's a miracle you don't have to brush your teeth and wipe your ass."

For a 97 Metacritic GOTY billion-dollar seller, this review, by an ACTUAL GAMER is damning.
The world is empty
Dialogue as well as Tarantino
ACTUAL GAMER
I have no fucking idea who's trolling who any more.

Also, lol, Metacritic user reviews, here's one for Deus Ex:

absolutly horrible, this game is one of the worst ive ever played, all these reviews are fake, i think someone payed someone else to write all these positive reviews almost everyone of them says " bets game ever" or something along those lines, dont buy it its freakin horrible and they tryed to decive you with these reviews, i just hope they dont deny my oppinion to cover up the truth
 
Last edited:
#71
To be honest I've just got the game and yes it looks amazing, sounds great.

However the controls feel a little off, the story it introduces you was boring me in parts, god I hope it gets better.

The problem with media coverage is that they are literally paid to review the game and a bonus would have been thrown in.

It's deffinately not a 10/10 game, no.

It's a good game from what I've played so far, that looks beautiful, but you can't survive on just that in my eyes.
 
Last edited:
#72
I dont really trust gaming websites anymore and never trusted user reviews to begin with. I read that a ton of PC users gave the game a 0/10 to protest the game not being launched on that platform.
 
Last edited:
#74
I always believed (and continue to believe) that the gaming press is dishing out 10s because of fear from backlash from the fanboys. We all know that nerds can´t handle criticism, as seen when Rotten Tomatoes had to shut down their commentaries because Dark Knight Rises got a couple of unfavourable reviews, or when Zelda fans lost their fucking shit when Twilight Princess got 8.8 on Gamespot. They can´t even handle a delayment, as seen with No Man´s Sky.

To avoid these insane reactions, with death threats, doxxing, and online harrassment, it´s just easier to score a 10 and be done with it. It inflates the scores, with everything below an 8 being complete garbage, but what are you gonna do? To face the massive mobs of unstable internet nerds is not something one wishes to do, it´s scary, uncomfortable and frustrating. Nobody wants to be a victim of internet bullying, but sadly, that is the state of the gaming landscape today.
 
Last edited:
#77
I always believed (and continue to believe) that the gaming press is dishing out 10s because of fear from backlash from the fanboys. We all know that nerds can´t handle criticism, as seen when Rotten Tomatoes had to shut down their commentaries because Dark Knight Rises got a couple of unfavourable reviews, or when Zelda fans lost their fucking shit when Twilight Princess got 8.8 on Gamespot. They can´t even handle a delayment, as seen with No Man´s Sky.

To avoid these insane reactions, with death threats, doxxing, and online harrassment, it´s just easier to score a 10 and be done with it. It inflates the scores, with everything below an 8 being complete garbage, but what are you gonna do? To face the massive mobs of unstable internet nerds is not something one wishes to do, it´s scary, uncomfortable and frustrating. Nobody wants to be a victim of internet bullying, but sadly, that is the state of the gaming landscape today.
Definitely. Slant currently has 712 ire-filled comments for its three and half star review of RDR2. The website gets 1 or 2 comments on a good day for other reviews. Most people clearly just looked at the score and decided it was the 'worst review ever'. There were indeed threats of doxxing. Loads of harassment for the writer.

I really can't blame websites for wanting to remove scores as many of them have been doing.

Edit:
I noticed recently that Metacritic is fine if you stop paying attention to the numbers and start pay attention to whether something is green, amber or red instead.
It basically ends up being a 'good, meh, bad' chart akin to Rotten Tomatoes binary scale. I find it much more useful.
 
Last edited:
#78
User reviews have too many hyperbolic reviews (where the game is either a 10 or a 0) to be trustworthy.
And "professional" reviews are often too inflated for hyped games, with Rockstar in particular seemingly getting a 90+ score just for being rockstar.

Like you look at the scores of last gen and both GTAIV and V stand as apparently nearly perfect games. Yet personally I think both of them are just good 8/10 games. With well crafted worlds supported by industry leading tech but lacking gameplay, story and mission design. The shooting in both IV and V (which is what you spend a large amount of time doing) is atrocious.

Really though, you need to look at both professional and user reviews to get an idea of how the game plays, what it's strengths and flaws are. And then decide if it's something you'll and enjoy and, as you play, make up your own mind about how good or bad the game is
 
Last edited:
#79
I've done ~80 missions out of about 110, It's a solid 8/10 game. The missions eventually wore thin, despite the strong script and well done voice overs it always devolves to somewhat awkward firefights. ~50x of that so far and I got kinda tired of it. I prefer exploring the world and hunting, honestly.
I'm in the same boat. Great world, great presentation, meh missions, god awful gameplay.

1. Ride to mission.
2. Follow NPC through "stealth" section.
3. Get spotted, hide behind cover, kill thirty enemies.
4. Run for the horses.
5. Shoot a few more as you ride away.
 
Last edited:
#83
Let's read some of the 3/10 and lower reviews dragging down the average. These are not excerpts. You folks are getting the full, unabridged reviews below!

3/10
ride horse for 15 minutes
kill 3 guys
ride horse for 15 minutes kill 4 guys ride horse for 15 minutes kill 2 guys you get the point. its a bit boring to me how wide everything is but i do have to compliment this games great depth and huge amount of content.the wild west isnt just a backdrop but actually integrated into the game and fluently incorporated the aesthetic. the music was pretty generic, it didnt accomplish much or do anything innovative but it still sounded like what you would expect from a huge budget game like this so idk what these 10/10 reviewers are talking about with the soundtrack being out of this world. wasnt for me, pick it up if you want, but i was just bored as **** by the down time in the game
0/10
Player movement is really killing this game for me' slow and clunky. Looks nice though.
0/10
Extremely slow, with tons of unnecessary additions that only worsen the game.
1/10
Honestly, really disappointed with this, it seems like GTA V was Rockstars last hurrah. This game doesnt improve on GTA V, not even graphically.
0/10
Bored ananistic gameplay.
I do not like westerns. Infinite sandbox, no active gameplay.
I know you love to puppet any opinion printed at culture.vg but Metacritic isn't going to help you prove your point.
 
Last edited:
#84
Thats a good reason to sent a first-person game to the trash. I get motion sickness from low fov, if the game doesn't offer one, then it deserves to be trashed for it. The only way to do that on Steam page is to leave a review and I am sure a fuck not giving it a positive if it is missing an essential feature. The bigger problem is that there are no neutral reviews on Steam.
The game does have an FOV slider.... its under First Person camera controls
 
#89
Game and movie criticism is a business of shills these days more now than ever. You won’t see many Disney movies panned; they fucking own everything.

I do trust user scores. You can’t always but at the the end of the day when the numbers settle they kinda aren’t too far off the mark when considering relative factors.
 
#91
I've done ~80 missions out of about 110
I have been intentionally avoiding looking up how many missions there are in the game. In game menus show it as a question mark next to how many you've completed (10/???), which I appreciated. Just saying. Been getting spoiled with several things in this game and next time I'm playing a game that I'm this into, I'm staying away from any fucking thread related to it because people can't use tags.
 
#92
@SlashBringingHasher mentioned GTA IV and it does seem like a similar situation.
  • First "next gen!!!" entry of a series that was huge last gen, and has been hyped to fuck and eagerly awaited
  • Much better looking, but ultimately quite repetitive and feels more like an HD remake of the previous game than something all new
  • Lots of minor quibbles and clunkiness that detracts from the moment to moment gameplay in favour of the overall 'experience'.

I haven't played it because I'm a PC gamer, but there does seem to be a backlash kicking in of people being underwhelmed with the final product after the initial shininess has worn off, just as there was with GTA IV
 
#95
Most of em are "0/10 no pc version fuck you rockstar."
at this point i feel like half of online reviews may be coming from kids. like as in people that cannot afford to buy their own games, they have to have their parents buy them for them. thus they are extremely attached to the identity of the game, if it's something they have wanted for months, maybe asked their parents for for their birthday, and then it gets bad reviews or it's the "inferior version" they go into internet warrior mode or console warrior mode. i think back to when i was a teenager, i had a lot of free time, and not a lot of hobbies. kids have way more time to devote to clogging up the internet w trash.
 
#97
mass effect Andromeda has a critic score of 7.1 and a user score of 4.9. I think at best it would be around a 6 but certainly not 4.9. Even Halo 5 got a 6.5. I think there are users who spam scores by giving a game a really high score or a very low score and don't really put a lot of detail into why they like or dislike it. It needs to be change imo. Such as linking your playstation,xbox,switch,steam,origin,etc. As well checking how much playtime the gamer has put into said game. It should somewhat reduce or those who didn't play the game. I expect it's going to happen to Diablo Immortal when it comes out that there will be some people giving it negative scores, but didn't play it. Just mad because Blizzard showed this and not Diablo 4.
 
#98
Admittedly, the media reviews should have reflected the sloppy controls of the game and tedious "real life eat etc." stuff. Giving 10/10 to a game that has clear flaws makes no sense.
The best are people who claim, "if these were in any other game I would have hated it."

What the fuck does that even mean? So mechanics and pacing you usually skewer other games for gets a pass now?

Look, it's a Rockstar game. It's clunky and self indulgent. It has high production value and good writing. It also has an insanely high marketing budget which means they took out a lot of advertising on most big sites that single handedly paid all the site's salaries. The game was destined to get high scores before it was even installed because of the economics of gaming journalism. It is a damn good game.... albeit slow and clunky to its detriment .

Want to know if a game is for you? Watch Youtube gameplay videos and read reviews being skeptical as fuck knowing their income indirectly comes from the companies they are reviewing (on the big gaming sites). You can easily decide which games are for you.
 
Last edited:
#99
For those complaining that 0/10 reviews are just "sloppy controls", how many 10/10 are just "BEST GAME OF GENERATION", they're equally stupid.

Also, stop saying its getting bad reviews because "it's not for the masses". Really? The game is outselling almost every other game this generation, but somehow "its not for the masses"?
 
Last edited:
For those complaining that 0/10 reviews are just "sloppy controls", how many 10/10 are just "BEST GAME OF GENERATION", they're equally stupid.

Also, stop saying its getting bad reviews because "it's not for the masses". Really? The game is outselling almost everything other game this generation, but somehow "its not for the masses"?
The "it's not for the masses" on NeoGAF is the equivalent of the "worst game ever" and "best game ever" of the user reviews on Metacritic.