Support NeoGAF

[Chairman Tickles]

^ Except both Mario and Zelda featured impeccable (i.e objectively amazing) controls and gameplay mechanics. So the core foundation of these franchises when it comes to GAMEPLAY is usually 1st class.

Rockstar games have always had wonky controls and awkward world interactions/combat.

 

[Bigrx1]

Game reviews are almost always by default really high for big name companies even if the game doesn't warrant them. Game reviews by outlets and movie critic reviews are both ones that I just ignore completely and go by the general consensus of a mass amount of user reviews, unless it's obviously just a meta bomb or something out of anger. Usually it isn't and the aggregate user review on sites like Steam and some others are much more accurate than professional reviews more often than not in my opinion.

 

[mayhemking]

I’m enjoying the game. Sad some users aren’t.

It's ok to not like a thing. There's no accounting for taste. Its subjective. Disagreements about matters of taste cannot be objectively resolved. To each his own.

 

[Gormless Noodle]

Haven't played the game myself so I can't say much about it. But do note that during the PS2 era, gaming magazines were still going strong and depended on readers for their paychecks instead of websites like today who depend on publishers. And a magazine in the Netherlands called Power Unlimited, claimed Rockstar/Take Two threatened them with being blacklisted if they didn't give State of Emergency something around 9 or higher iirc. A competing magazine caved to the pressure even according to them. So I can imagine Rockstar's shenanigans now that publishers can exert THIS much power over media outlets.

 

[Redneckerz]

I mean, we also gave it a 95, And we had users saying that in their experience, it isnt worth it. (We are also really small as a site, by the way.)

So what? That's fine. We are small enough that we can say that the grade is purely on the impression that the game gave to the reviewer. If people have a different experience, they can easily remove 10-20 points from our score and grade it a 75 or 85.

That still indicates a perfectly playable and fun game to me. One that might have hamperings that impact certain users more than others, but overall, still a good game overall. And isn't that what ultimately matters?

I can't trust extreme low ranking reviews and then read ''My horse does not get wet when its raining. 2/10 trash game Rockstar do better you slobs''. Same with perfect 100 scores. No game is ever truly perfect, but some games (Who evidently, are classics by time) can and will approach that.

 

[Yoshi]

Same with perfect 100 scores. No game is ever truly perfect, but some games (Who evidently, are classics by time) can and will approach that.

The best possible rating does not indicate perfection (necessarily). It just means a game reaches the highest class you are rating for. You can get an A (US system) or a 1+ (German system) and still make an error in the exam. It looks like that's potentially different with a 10 in the Netherlands, but for most rating systems, that's true. If you say a 100 can never be given, because it would indicate perfection, then the 100 does not make sense in your rating scheme. What is the use of a grade that cannot be achieved?

Rockstar games have always had wonky controls and awkward world interactions/combat.

Which is to say the game is shit (for Yoshi) - which is my impression of everything I have ever played of Rockstar, so I probably agree. Though I think the even worse thing is the terrible mission design, at least in GTA games. Follow the GPS line...

 

[Redneckerz]

The best possible rating does not indicate perfection (necessarily). It just means a game reaches the highest class you are rating for. You can get an A (US system) or a 1+ (German system) and still make an error in the exam. It looks like that's potentially different with a 10 in the Netherlands, but for most rating systems, that's true. If you say a 100 can never be given, because it would indicate perfection, then the 100 does not make sense in your rating scheme. What is the use of a grade that cannot be achieved?

100's can be given, but then it would have to explained as to why. We do employ a 100 system aswell here, but even 100 games aren't ever absolutely flawless.

I guess i should have pointed that out as to avoid your comment.

 

[Yoshi]

100's can be given, but then it would have to explained as to why. We do employ a 100 system aswell here, but even 100 games aren't ever absolutely flawless.

I guess i should have pointed that out as to avoid your comment.

Unfortunately, my comments are unavoidable .

 

[Redneckerz]

Unfortunately, my comments are unavoidable .

I do remember that dino's are extinct, and cartoon dino's even more so.

 

[Beerman462]

Game's a 9/10 for me. Guess I'm an unpaid shill.

 

[Valonquar]

I love the game, but I can totally see how some games could get bored with it fast, even with the amazing looks.

 

[Yoshi]

I do remember that dino's are extinct, and cartoon dino's even more so.

That's fake news, but I would have expected no better from the orange press .

 

[zackmorris]

Not shocked honestly. I think the game is very good, but I think it asks a lot of the player. It doesn't provide instant gratification and it seems like the more you put into the game the more you get out of it. I wonder how many of those fan reviews were from people who beat the game or put in significant (20+ hours) of play time in.
I mean, I've played a good amount of games over the years and even I had some issues with the way the game was presented. I think the game is best played by just going along for the ride, but it can be frustrating especially when games are so often framed in a way that everything is explained to you from the start versus still figuring things out 10+ hours in.

 

[zackmorris]

It's ok to not like a thing. There's no accounting for taste. Its subjective. Disagreements about matters of taste cannot be objectively resolved. To each his own.

Especially in a game where two players can have wildly different experiences depending on how you approach it. There are people seeing things a few hours in that others aren't seeing till 30-40 hours in.

 

[Elenchus]

I’ve said this forever, but was told I was just crazy. There’s so many using Metacritic to defend how good their beloved franchise is.

Let’s see if all this belly aching about 90+ meta scores continues when the media starts gushing over a Last of Us 2. I’m guessing the circle jerk around here for those reviews will break the internet. I’m also guessing we wouldn’t be hearing any of this if the game was running in native 4K on a Pro. Could you be any more transparent GAF?

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

Let’s see if all this belly aching about 90+ meta scores continues when the media starts gushing over a Last of Us 2. I’m guessing the circle jerk around here for those reviews will break the internet. I’m also guessing we wouldn’t be hearing any of this if the game was running in native 4K on a Pro. Could you be any more transparent GAF?

Grow up, for fuck sake.

 

[Stuart360]

You can never trust user reviews on sites like that. You have users voting up bad games, voting down good games, exclusives being voted down by rival fans, Xbox and Sony fans voting down each version on this game.
Having said that, the game is slow paced and very much stuck in realism mode. Some people will love it, some wont.

 

[deriks]

It's probably GOTY, but it's just great, not that great.

 

[Beerman462]

Said it before, I'll say it again: the game is a masterpiece, and is probably the best game I've played on PS4.

I'm doing my best to burn it slow. Had one session where I left the horse and rifles at camp and just went exploring on foot, walking (not running), catching fish as I went, and camping overnight where I needed to. Spent about five in-game days on this little journey, and I can't even tell you how much fun I had doing that. The world they've built is so lush, vibrant, and teeming with detail.. I have no idea how anyone can call it 'empty'.

And when I'm ready to push the story along, that's also very well done. Great dialogue, interesting stories, well-acted voices.. dunno what else anyone could ask for.

I think people are doing themselves a disservice if they're just plowing through the story. Me, I don't use fast-travel, only use the small compass instead of the minimap, and explore whenever possible. If ever there was a game that was meant to be savored, it's this one. It really rewards you for taking the time to soak everything in.

I had quite the adventure the other day. I was wrapping up the White Cougar quest, which was decent, but after I turned in the skin, shit went south.

I was riding my horse across the bridge in Strawberry, was going a bit fast and collided with another rider. Both horses spilled over and mine landed on the other rider killing him. WANTED! I quickly jump into the creek and get washed away from town and exit the creek outside the red zone to call my horse. I ride my horse(Wretch) to Riggs station and jump on the train as it speeds by so I can catch a ride back to camp. While riding the train I decide to practice my deadeye on the birds scared up by the train and finish an achievement. Then someone on the train sees me and starts shooting. I jumped off the train around Flatneck Station. Crime Reported! My horse is to far away to call, so I run away from the station until I can make camp. I make camp and do some cooking/crafting and sleep until morning. In the morning I run to Valentine to get my horse from the stables. It was a rough day, so I got a bath and a bed.

Such a good time.

 

[Catphish]

I had quite the adventure the other day. I was wrapping up the White Cougar quest, which was decent, but after I turned in the skin, shit went south.

I was riding my horse across the bridge in Strawberry, was going a bit fast and collided with another rider. Both horses spilled over and mine landed on the other rider killing him. WANTED! I quickly jump into the creek and get washed away from town and exit the creek outside the red zone to call my horse. I ride my horse(Wretch) to Riggs station and jump on the train as it speeds by so I can catch a ride back to camp. While riding the train I decide to practice my deadeye on the birds scared up by the train and finish an achievement. Then someone on the train sees me and starts shooting. I jumped off the train around Flatneck Station. Crime Reported! My horse is to far away to call, so I run away from the station until I can make camp. I make camp and do some cooking/crafting and sleep until morning. In the morning I run to Valentine to get my horse from the stables. It was a rough day, so I got a bath and a bed.

Such a good time.

Hahahaha. Awesome.

 

[Lightsbane]

Same with nintendo games.

Zelda = far from perfect, story is shallow, "musics" are just random noises, world is kind of empty, technically it is nothing impressive, so while it is great game, giving it 10/10 is just silly.

10/10 = nothing left to improve.

Mario odyssey: repetitive, boring game.

I dont read reviews anymore as they are just fanboyfantasies without real objectivity

10/10 doesn't mean "nothing left to improve," that would be silly.

But I get you. The latest Zelda has so many flaws that it's hard to understand some of these scores. Same with Mario Odyssey.
Then again, I stopped caring about scores a long time ago. They really don't mean anything. What matters is the information contained within these reviews, but even then, watching gameplay on YouTube is often far more informative.

 

[Future]

Game is really good, and it does tons of things almost no game bothers to do. As an experience it can be super engrossing

But it’s not always a very fun game. And some sections are legit too slow and drawn out. Story isn’t always super entertaining. Not surprised user scores are low, cuz you gotta appreciate the craft to get deep into this one.

 

[TacosNSalsa]

The first line in the first user review that I noticed was "I've seen several gameplays of this game, but ... it's a bit boring " ...

 

[mckmas8808]

The first line in the first user review that I noticed was "I've seen several gameplays of this game, but ... it's a bit boring " ...

#1 reason why people shouldn't care about them.

 

[Halo0629]

The first line in the first user review that I noticed was "I've seen several gameplays of this game, but ... it's a bit boring " ...

Which makes user reviews not to be taken seriously. People can give reviews without even playing the game, heck anybody could make 10 accounts and give a game a 0/10 or 10/10 if they also wanted to.

 

[zenspider]

People can bash user reviews all they want, but the media/user numbers line up pretty reliably - enough so that you know there is a story when you see a dramatic difference (payola, publisher backlash, politicization, bugs, sleazy monetization, etc.). It's a powerful tool against gaming press collusion.

Could be a number of things including PC players being butt-hurt, the ResetEra crowd bitching about those poor Rockstar employees (LOL), etc. A bunch of utter fucking nonsense, in other words. Who really gives two shits?

Nobody at ERA seriously boycotted this game. Jason S. absolved them in his exposé, and they fell for it and stepped right in line, and give clicks to the daily RDR2 blog posts on Kotaku.

I'd admire anyone who actually deprived themselves of a modicum of enjoyment if they thought it could ease someone else's suffering, but the second ERA heard they could have cowboy cake and eat it they gobbled that shit up.

 

[noqtic]

Red Dead Redemption is fine. I don't find it to be the end all be all that some reviews make it out to be but it is still a great game albeit flawed. The controls are bad and the movement is just as bad or worse than GTA5. Although the voice acting is top notch and the narrative seems to be good it doesn't save most missions from becoming repetitive.

Gunplay is boiled down to take cover - aim (snap onto enemy with auto-aim) - move the right analog up a little bit for a headshot - shoot - rinse and repeat and for more crowded situations use deadeye to kill everyone. I don't even take cover anymore it's quicker to just walk forward and kill everyone as they pop out from cover or try to run by. Even most of the side missions I've played leave a lot to be desired, there was one I did for a drunk who used to own slaves that just felt like it could have been handled so much better.

I find myself enjoying the game more when I'm just wandering around trying to reveal the map and doing random nonsense like hunting, causing trouble, or doing some side stuff like playing Dominoes and Poker (which the game totally screws you on) or seeing a show.

 

[Harlock]

Both GameFace and Player 1 Podcast talked a lot about the game problems. Very slow, archaic mechanics. I think most of the user score is being sincere here.

 

[anthraticus]

This game sounds like it would be indefinitely better if it borrowed more elements from 2 sub genres....immersive sims (or whatever else they call them) and tactical shooters.

Tac shooters in regards to having more realistic and intense gunfights, without the dumbing down and braindead enemy AI. For instance, I'd rather deal with a smaller group of more challenging AI....no health regen, increased bullet damage, ect...

And immersive sims for having missions that weren't so scripted and linear and could be delt with in different an interesting ways.

 

[Bryank75]

You must consider 90%+ have not finished it and are really judging it based on just a taste of what it has to offer. Then there are PC trolls...

 

[Future]

If you love living in this game, then you love it. Everyone who loves it has these stories where they were out in the wilderness, spent hours hunting and fishing, maybe took part in a random thing they saw..... true role playing. I even read today someone saying they just enjoyed watching a show, which is like 10-20 minutes of pure nothing gameplay wise.

As a reviewer, it’s hard not to recognize the strengths of that feeling and not praise the game. As a player though, if you aren’t imagining yourself as a cowboy living the Dream, over 50% of it is easily riding your horse. Often in cinematic mode, where you don’t control anything beyond holding down a button. Another significant percentage watching events, or slow waking while events happen. The moments of true player agency can be rare depending how you play, so the wide point range makes sense.

I still don’t know what I think of it. One second I am hating, the next I am loving

 

[Elenchus]

Grow up, for fuck sake.

Already handled but thanks for your concern. What I and so many others here are demanding is consistency. The attacks on metacritic and digital foundry have gone into overdrive since RDR2 released. Suddenly the normal indices of success (such as performance, meta, & sales—all of which RDR2 has in spades) don’t matter. Yes I see the hypocrisy and Im going to call it out—your personal insults notwithstanding.

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

Already handled but thanks for your concern. What I and so many others here are demanding is consistency. The attacks on metacritic and digital foundry have gone into overdrive since RDR2 released. Suddenly the normal indices of success (such as performance, meta, & sales—all of which RDR2 has in spades) don’t matter. Yes I see the hypocrisy and Im going to call it out—your personal insults notwithstanding.

Pathetic console warrior bullshit. Again, grow up. You're an adult FFS.

 

[woigemok]

Sony games = Movies = 10/10
I bet the reviews are going to wet their pants if they're watching real movie instead of video game movies

 

[mad597]

Sony fans trolling metacritic cause their version ended up sucking due to the half assed PS Pro hardware. That is pretty much all this is

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

Oh great, another one. I see you learned from your ban.

 

[-Xenokai-]

Xbox has a lower score? Hahaha Sony fanboys are funny giving negative reviews. lol Played both versions myself and the Xbox version runs better and looks so much more crisp.

 

[ROMhack]

What massive gulf is this? Most users are positive towards it. Most critics are positive towards it. Numbers not matching up shouldn't be such a big deal.

I don't necessarily disagree with the OP's post but I think that's a separate argument altogether.

 

[lucius]

So Sony fans are down grading this because of some slight differences in graphics on like 5% of systems gamers are playing on ? come on. Most are playing on regular PS4 and Xbox’s plus this is a marketed Playstion game, besides doesn’t explain why it’s still almost 20 points lower on PS4 also . The original Red Dead Redemption kept user scores high, go play that game again I just put it in on my Xbox S to make sure I wasn’t remembering wrong, it controls better/ faster . I still think RDR2 has some brilliant things in it though .

 

[nemiroff]

It's 2018, how the hell is it possible that we're going back to discussing the validity of user scores on the internets or using it to back up a theory of quality now, it doesn't make any sense. This discussion was quickly settled decades ago.

 

[hollowcupra]

Well what i know is that Rockstar requested from review sites an explanation if the game doesn't get a 10/10.

It doesn't matter how i know that, but even if a game deserves a 10, threating sites in that way doesn't really help freedom of speech. And i don't really think anyone would want to get blacklisted.

 

[Danjin44]

I feel like people are too focus on the score. People think if the game gets 10/10 its grantees they are going to love it and ignore that game might not be their cup of tea. If Turn based RPG gets 10/10 and if you are not in to Turn based combat then you not going like this no matter how high the score it gets.

 

[mckmas8808]

It's 2018, how the hell is it possible that we're going back to discussing the validity of user scores on the internets or using it to back up a theory of quality now, it doesn't make any sense. This discussion was quickly settled decades ago.

Because "some" gamers hate the gaming media THAT much, that they want to believe user scores actually matter.

 

[Hendrick's]

I believe one can genuinely find the game boring or flawed, but to say it is bad is just a flagrant lie.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Sony fans trolling metacritic cause their version ended up sucking due to the half assed PS Pro hardware. That is pretty much all this is

You're obsessed. Time to let the console war shit go, no?

 

[TitanNut88]

I agree that the game may not worth a 97/100 as it is full of bugs (compared to what I am used to with R* games) and it is sometimes boring (e.g. horse travels), but the game is amazing. The graphical quality is superb and the freedom of doing almost anything you want, which may be bad some times too (too many animations can lead to weird responsiveness of Arthur's movements) is remarkable. Saying the game is not a 80/100, at least, is lying.

In addition to that, I have to say that I am enjoying it a lot, but something funny is happening to me: I was in the middle of Dark Souls Remastered before starting with it and I want to finish RDR2 to continue playing Dark Souls. I think that has to mean something...

 

[Spukc]

after i "finished this game" i understand why media gave it a 10 etc.
but comparing the open world feeling with a game like BOTW
makes red dead 2 really look like a last gen game.
that 9.7 is not deserved imo
and it should have been an solid 8.

What annoys me that most of the gaming podcasts i listen too all complained abut the game not actually being FUN.
But they liked it for being what it is. And the story was ok.
Yet all of gaming media went ham and gave the game 10's
calling it the best open world yet etc.
That is just not true.
It's a good looking 1 trick pony at the end of the day,

 

[mckmas8808]

after i "finished this game" i understand why media gave it a 10 etc.
but comparing the open world feeling with a game like BOTW
makes red dead 2 really look like a last gen game.
that 9.7 is not deserved imo
and it should have been an solid 8.

What annoys me that most of the gaming podcasts i listen too all complained abut the game not actually being FUN.
But they liked it for being what it is. And the story was ok.
Yet all of gaming media went ham and gave the game 10's
calling it the best open world yet etc.
That is just not true.
It's a good looking 1 trick pony at the end of the day,

Why do people equate "not fun" to be "not good" when it comes to video games? To me The Last of Us wasn't a "fun" game per say, but it was one of my favorite games of all time. Maybe the word fun is an archaic way of describing some games today, compared to games that came out in the N64 era where it was all about gameplay?

 

[Spukc]

Why do people equate "not fun" to be "not good" when it comes to video games? To me The Last of Us wasn't a "fun" game per say, but it was one of my favorite games of all time. Maybe the word fun is an archaic way of describing some games today, compared to games that came out in the N64 era where it was all about gameplay?

the n64 era was hyper focused on graphics. Gameplay def got worse in that gen.
But that is not what i meant.
The last of us is a game that some people love and some people hate. I love the game for it's story the gameplay def is not as good.
I have the same feeling with red dead 2. It's a nice looking game. But i can't feel arsed to touch it again. But i would recommend everyone to at least play through the game once.

but a 9.7 ? fuck no
solid 8

 

[cryptoadam]

Its the same with every Rockstar game. Basically due to how much money/time/effort is put into the open world and the story/script the small little things are always looked over.

Not saying the game isn't good which I am sure it is, but things like the controls or bugs/over done animations, repetative gameplay etc are generally glossed over.