RDR2 is insanely well made on every level. Just terrific. And it’s boring the hell out of me.

Oct 24, 2007
720
19
855
They aren't boring and they don't suck for a lot of us ,and they can be ignored if you just want to blaze through the game and miss most of the game world.
By playing more organically you can basically play HUD-less because you have spend enough time in the game world.

There is a lot of reflection in the game, for example one side quest has you visit and interact with a character in his house. You become friends and have several hunting and fishing outings with him. Well he dies but his house remains, where you first met him is still there. There is an actual Sense of loss when you pass by those locations later on, you recall that he's gone and the activities done with him, in game conversations.

If you skip all that then passing by that place can feel boring because you have no history with that character, his house or what happened to him, it's just another empty house that could make the game seem boring, when in reality you flew through the game and missed everything
I agree. The sense of mortality, if and only if, you pay attentionto it is pretty staggering. Most of the charcters feel alive in a way that no other game does.
 
Likes: noonespecial
May 2, 2017
740
235
205
I stuck to the story and side missions. I'll admit, at first I was kind of thinking it was really well made, but kind of boring. But as the story develops, it really does get engrossing to the point that I just couldn't put the game down. By the end of the main story, I was left feeling like that was one of the best told stories in gaming history. I definitely didn't think that in the first 10 hours. It just takes awhile to set up the eventual story.
Would you say you only played it because of the story and environments?

I guess it's all the worry about telling a story and being an experience that Rockstar had while making the game.

It's something i have felt with other games, the developer is just too focused on being realistic, having a good story or making the player feel something they forget they are making a game rather than a movie or a book.

Don't get me wrong, i don't mind a game having a great story, i just don't think a good story excuses bad or boring gameplay, the parts where the player are in control are what distinguishes video games from mediums like movies or books, you'd think then that some developers would put more emphasis on making it fun, or at least engaging or not make it so long and cumbersome the player feels like they are doing a chore just to get to some dialogue.
It seems to work for some people, the subordination (or virtual elimination in some cases) of gameplay to story and such.

I know people hate talking about what makes a game a game, but I’d love more nuance in how describe things. Maybe videogame is outdated term for these type of experiences where the game part isn’t important or attractive to the devs or the fans.
 
Last edited:
May 2, 2017
740
235
205
I agree. The sense of mortality, if and only if, you pay attentionto it is pretty staggering. Most of the charcters feel alive in a way that no other game does.
I am not trying to be a dick in any way, but I wonder if folks who can get attached to videogame characters are lonely or maybe highly reactive, like carbon atoms? Like, why does RD/tlou etc. leave me cold while others can make these real emotional bonds.

I feel like I am missing out on where single player AAA gaming is going now because I dont connect with these characters and cannot experince them as living people. Oh well, I can always smash some goobahs without feeling Im missing something...at least for now.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
Mar 22, 2017
5,373
4,209
390
I am not trying to be a dick in any way, but I wonder if folks who can get attached to videogame characters are lonely or maybe highly reactive, like carbon atoms? Like, why does RD/tlou etc. leave me cold while others can make these real emotional bonds.

I feel like I am missing out on where single player AAA gaming is going now because I dont connect with these characters and cannot experince them as living people. Oh well, I can always smash some goobahs without feeling Im missing something...at least for now.

I get attached to video game characters same way I get attached characters in movies, books and comic books. What exactly so strange about that?
 
Aug 20, 2008
9,653
411
825
I get attached to video game characters same way I get attached characters in movies, books and comic books. What exactly so strange about that?
Yeah, this. This is normal and why movies, books etc. connect with most people.

If there's anything not normal it's the people that don't feel emotions when experiencing those kind of things. They're probably somewhere on the sociopath spectrum, though it can be very mild as long as they have empathy and emotions for people in their lives.
 
Likes: noonespecial
Sep 17, 2005
2,327
194
1,175
Loved Red Dead Redemption, one of my favorites of all time. I kind of enjoyed the second half of rdr2. Beginning was just far to slow, they throw a lot of stuff at you and for me it was just to much early for me to really connect with the character. My issue was the game didn’t really click and capture my attention til I was probably 40 hours in, likely 60 percent through the game, and then I couldn’t put it down. At least until the part at the end that takes place in the northern part of the map with no fast travel...

The main story is definitely worth a play. I personally was a little let down by the stranger missions, and if you’re not an achievement hunter I’d just skip them. I missed all the zany characters from the first game, like somebody said above real life is boring, I want to have fun while I, playing, and I did at times.

I generally like the Rockstar model for their open world games, think they tried to go to big though with this one. So much boring time on a horse.
 
Jun 12, 2004
7,931
243
1,375
Its a better life simulator than game. The snail slow walking speed through camp and yoyr guns being randomly unequipped is obnoxious. Having these clunky controls coupled with environments that bumping into stuff can cause problems is a gameplay recipe for disaster. Try playing an modern assassins creed game and the difference in movement fluidity is astounding.
 

roflcaust

Neo Member
Dec 11, 2018
34
43
80
Just finished the game last night.

Was a good game but I was never able to get into the hunting/ mini-games/ side activities. I only stuck with main and side missions and still had a good time.

Won't even bother with online.

Oh and the horse travel times... never again. Huge missed opportunity to implement a convenient fast travel system.
 
Last edited:
I personally was a little let down by the stranger missions, and if you’re not an achievement hunter I’d just skip them. I missed all the zany characters from the first game,
Really? I thought the strangers were excellent. The two different mad scientists, the civil war survivor missing a leg, the poisoned hillbillies, the railroad Forman stealing from his workers were all excellent.. Not to mention all the side stories, people talking to your character, discussing what they think of his life, etc.

I tthink rdr2 is light years beyond GTA 5 in regards to interesting side activities and stories.
 
Likes: noonespecial
Nov 6, 2018
5
3
70
I have literally fallen asleep playing this game on 2 separate occasions.
I wish I could have my money back, something I never normally would think, but I bought it digitally on PSN so I’m stuck with it.
Not the worst thing.. someday when I have all the time in the world and over 12 hours of sleep- I will get through the story.
Problem with that is that I am an adult with a family and a job, this game takes so much to get into that most full blown RPG’s feel like pick up and play titles compared to RDR.
And that’s crazy.
 

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,105
807
540
Yeah don't worry about the side tasks if that's not your thing. For some people, they liked this "realism" because they want to be fully transported, to feel like they're a cowboy living the life. For others, they just want to hit the main story beats. The game accomodates both playstyles and it's seen in the way where doing chores or hunting don't provide any must-have benefits. If you want to do it, you'll get a bit of a reward, but you certainly don't need it for any kind of end-game buff to complete a mission. In fact I'd argue that you're about as powerful as you're going to get in the game in chapter 2.
This is good to know, and makes me more likely to try to just power through story chapters than bother with the side stuff.
 
Apr 5, 2018
1,740
841
215
30
South Florida aka Outer Haven
For me this is a problem that many open world games have. Also a problem that games with any kind of similar "honor system" have.

The open world element completely destroys any chance of tightness or urgency in the story telling.
The flexibility of the honor system destroys any chance of a consistent main character.

In a sense RDR2 wants to have it's cake and eat it too.
On one hand it's looking to be a completely immersive and "real" open world adventure where you can go hear and there and do whatever you want.
On the other hand it wants you to be Arthur Morgan, a solid well defined character who participates in a tight well paced story.
It's almost impossible to be both.

In an early mission where you have to rescue Reverend Swanson he ran away and got into an altercation with 2 dudes. I shot those dudes dead. No questions asked. I do not think the Arthur that I saw in cutscenes up to that point would have done that.

When you have to go get Micah from Strawberry? Same deal. Why the hell would Arthur be doing these things? And the mission fails when Micah dies? Fuck, that guy.

I would put forward Breath of the Wild and Skyrim as superior open world experiences as the end goal is pretty clearly set out but the character is too underpowered to achieve that goal. Then the player is asked to go off and have their own adventures. Anything the player character does is moving them towards being powerful enough to achieve the goal. It's a basic story yes but it fits well with an open world videogame.

RDR2 is obviously vastly superior technically. Presentation is better. Acting is better. Scripting is better.
If it were a more "on rails" experience like God of War or Uncharted then it would be a better game for it. At least a better story. Arthur would be a better character. Spider-Man even did a better job of marrying story driven experience to open world gameplay.

As it stands, Arthurs actions and reactions in the storyline are COMPLETELY at odds with things we've been up to in the open world.

This is the same issue I've had with both of the recent Assassin's Creed games. I love the setting for both and the graphics are wonderful but the characters? Urgh. The stories have no pacing and there's no real reason to plow through story mode and then come back to go through all the side tasks.

They need to get rid of "you can be good or bad" and just give you a solid consistent character to play as (Aloy or Link would be good examples but there is little "character" there, really).

They need to come up with stories that can fit into open world scenarios.

I think FarCry 5 tried to solve this problem at least by making it such that completing side quests led to escalation by the cult.
Obviously though having your character be kidnapped etc multiple times wasn't great.
I could see what they were trying to do though.
It's a good idea to have the world be in a somewhat calm state and then have it react to the actions of the player. Triggering a well paced story moment before calming down again and building to the next big thing.

Reviewers tend to be harder to trust with open world games too. Imaging playing like 100 hours of a game over just 2 weeks. Or going through the story only and keeping side content only to what is necessary. Is that really how most players experience these?

RDR2 is still impressive to me but not really a GOTY experience.
Very good read. Agreed 100%. I feel everyone needs to seriously read this post. This is pretty much how I feel and I know many feel about this game. They should have just got rid of the whole honor thing if they were just going to tell us how they wanted his character to be.

Game be like "You can make Arthur good or bad"

(also them)

"Remember guys, no one gets hurt on this mission, I don't want anyone killed" - Arthur lol
 
Likes: Saruhashi
Apr 5, 2018
1,740
841
215
30
South Florida aka Outer Haven


my thoughts EXACTLY !!

I felt pretty burnt out on the whole OpenWorld Thing... the FarCry´s and Assassins Creeds of late felt more like "clicking checkboxes to completition" to me - Didnt even manage to get exited/interested for HORIZON ZERO DAWN or SPIDERMAN yet... but this Game man, THIS GAME !! made me find my long lost enthusiasm for the Medium again, it was so immersive and yeah... un-gamey ! Funny enough the latter is used by many as a negative :)
"It's a slow game, just like any western tale should be" Yea....no.

The wild west was called the WILD west for a reason. The game's biggest issues are that the most exciting things about western films, barely happen in this game and I found out not to long ago you can't even independently ROB a bank, even though you can ROB CITIZENS, so this is what western tales should be? No man, just no. The issue has nothing to do with it being set in the wild west, it has everything to do with the team focusing on some boring elements, like the CORE of the game isn't you robbing trains, robbing banks, kidnapping people, putting them on rail road tracks etc. LOTS of exciting things about the west that are not "slow", this game is just slow and has a set of events that contradicts the theme
 
Oct 24, 2007
720
19
855
I am not trying to be a dick in any way, but I wonder if folks who can get attached to videogame characters are lonely or maybe highly reactive, like carbon atoms? Like, why does RD/tlou etc. leave me cold while others can make these real emotional bonds.

I feel like I am missing out on where single player AAA gaming is going now because I dont connect with these characters and cannot experince them as living people. Oh well, I can always smash some goobahs without feeling Im missing something...at least for now.
Ha! Nice try.

You have to work at making emotional bonds. You also may have to had some life experience as Red Dead deals with some pretty adult themes that wouldn't connect with you if you were a kid.
The lack of gameplay in Red Dead kind of forces you towards the story though. With most games, the writing isn't good enough to get emotionally involved. Here it most definitely is.
 
Jun 21, 2018
295
172
195
I doubt I'll ever play this one, every Rockstar game over the last decade has put me to sleep and even hardcore Rockstar fans are moaning about this one, definitely not for me.

They need to try something new besides GTA and cowboy GTA.

Cowboy GTA its a simplification, RDR is nothing of a cowboy GTA.

Its like saying that The Last of Us is a apocaliptic Uncharted.
 
Jul 14, 2018
627
414
240
A bit beside the point but I feel like there's a distinction to make between 'boring' and 'slow':

Slow is the speed at which something plays out. Its rhythmic qualities. Think of the difference between a cello concerto and a drum 'n' bass track. Or how a shot in an Ozu movie lingers on one character during dialogue compared with how Hollywood movies uses cuts every three seconds for the same thing.

Boredom, on the other hand, usually comes from a lack of purpose. Its a fault of many games which ask you to do shit for the sake of it, often to pad out content or, in this case, add realism. From the player's side, it can be defined by a lack of care or understanding about what you're doing and why - sometimes the players fault but most often the game's.
 
Last edited:
Jun 13, 2018
373
345
195
Brazil
Never understood why people want more realism in their games. Real life IS tedious and boring, that's why we play games to get away from it.
Praise this comment.

Reality sucks.

If I want realism I hit my bank's website, pay a bill and cry.

If I want realism I change a diaper and I clean my kitchen. I like gaming to throw fireballs out of my hands, flying and doing some wacky superhero shit that I can't do in real life. Eff realism.
 
Nov 13, 2013
1,385
6
355
It's most definitely a well polished game, but it is hella slow...

I also don't like how the game is essentially a pretty limited open-world game. You can't really do anything you want, it's sorta guided...
 
Jul 12, 2012
10,054
1,266
500
I don't doubt this. I haven't picked up RDR2 yet, but RDR1 I dropped after 8-10 hours for almost this exact reason. As a result there's no way I touch RDR2 unless I get it for an extremely steep discount. Which is a shame, because it looks fantastic.
 
Oct 2, 2018
208
479
200
"It's a slow game, just like any western tale should be" Yea....no.

The wild west was called the WILD west for a reason. The game's biggest issues are that the most exciting things about western films, barely happen in this game and I found out not to long ago you can't even independently ROB a bank, even though you can ROB CITIZENS, so this is what western tales should be? No man, just no. The issue has nothing to do with it being set in the wild west, it has everything to do with the team focusing on some boring elements, like the CORE of the game isn't you robbing trains, robbing banks, kidnapping people, putting them on rail road tracks etc. LOTS of exciting things about the west that are not "slow", this game is just slow and has a set of events that contradicts the theme
In some ways I think the game is trying to do two inherently contradictory things.

There's the slow paced western story that I think many people would appreciate. The in game realism works with that "slow burn" story in mind.
Look at how the first hour or so of the game really is wonderfully immersive and fantastic looking. It's just really awesome.

What they also want to do though is have an open world where "you can do anything". For this you need everything you've pointed out. Robbing banks on a whim, tons of fast and satisfying action, genuine WILD west action.

A consistent character in Arthur but also a guy who could go on a murder spree at any moment OR just spend his life hunting. It just doesn't work.

I'm not even sure that it CAN work.

I was thinking about Breath of the Wild and how people criticize the "story" there.
They have a problem where the "what happened 100 years ago" story is so cinematic and action packed that people are left thinking "hey, I want to play through THAT story". Instead Nintendo basically says that was the story of this world but their GAME is about exploring the aftermath.

I wonder if these AAA open world games wouldn't benefit from having the story compacted into the first 20 hours. Keep tight control of the narrative and reign in what the player has access too. Then, once the narrative has played out, finish with a massive world changing event and then free up the true open world content.

Horizon, Assassins Creed Origins & Odyssey, Spider-Man even God of War, to some extent, all have their narrative sense of urgency completely neutralized by the fact that the player can, at any time, just go off and start engaging in other tasks.

Imagine if, during the Avengers Infinity War movie, Thor goes off and gets Stormbreaker and then instead of going to Earth immediately to face Thanos he spends a few days pottering around the other locations in the universe doing other assorted tasks before finally going back to the main story mission.

That's open world games though. "Bayek! We need to kill The Snake he is at the location right now". OK, let me just hunt some deer and clear up a few of these enemy camps and... I wonder if I could kill one of these Phylakes guys for loot and... and... didn't I have something urgent to attend to.
 
That's open world games though. ... and... didn't I have something urgent to attend to.
That to me is the beauty of open world games though. Some nights I don't feel like having to play through the hectic story, I just want to unwind and have fun with little stress or do something "low impact".
I enjoyed several nights collecting the top gear bags in rdr2 ,hunting and exploring and doing random events as they appeared.

If I wanted to have my hand held on what I need to do to get further in the game I'd play a corridor shooter
 
Oct 2, 2018
208
479
200
That to me is the beauty of open world games though. Some nights I don't feel like having to play through the hectic story, I just want to unwind and have fun with little stress or do something "low impact".
I enjoyed several nights collecting the top gear bags in rdr2 ,hunting and exploring and doing random events as they appeared.

If I wanted to have my hand held on what I need to do to get further in the game I'd play a corridor shooter
Surely this has some kind of impact on the story part of the game though?

I get what you are saying. It's possible, and sometimes preferable, in open world games to just take it easy and spend time on a fishing minigame etc.
Same with gathering supplies for crafting etc.

I would make the case that a competent narrative requires a certain degree of hand-holding and allowing the player to just say "meh, I don't feel like doing the story tonight" breaks the previously established character of Arthur Morgan.

In a sense, you end up with multiple versions of Arthur. You have the story guy who does what the narrative requires and acts how the director/writer of that narrative dictates. Then you have the player controlled guy who can be one or many of a number of different things.

"I need to save my friend who's going to hang in the morning..."
"...or I could spend several nights collecting gear bags and save him whenever"

I guess I'd see that as if a show like the Sopranos had episode 20 of season 6 wrap up and then this is followed by 2 or 3 episodes of Tony and his crew doing kind of random and unrelated stuff before we go back to finish off the story arc from episode 20.

Like there's no consistency in the world or the story or the characters but people are like "hell yeah, I just abandon the story whenever and come back to it whenever".

I think the game tries to be both things, compelling story and truly open world, and fails because of that.
 
Likes: noonespecial
Aug 20, 2008
9,653
411
825
Like there's no consistency in the world or the story or the characters but people are like "hell yeah, I just abandon the story whenever and come back to it whenever".

I think the game tries to be both things, compelling story and truly open world, and fails because of that.
Personally, I get what you're saying as that's an issue that plagues most open world games. I think it works here because of the 1800s wild west setting.

Things were slow paced, people spread out and disconnected still back then etc. It's not like GTA were it's in a busy big city and you'd expect more constant action from criminals committing crimes, running from the cops etc.

It makes sense that Dutch and his gang could carry out a heist, get away and lay low with crew members doing whatever as the law can't find them and they don't need cash for a bit. Money gets tight, and on to the next heist. Then get away and lay low and chill for a while.

Not saying it has to work for you of course. But it did work for me. That said, this issue doesn't bother me in other open world games. I don't care about games as some artistic experience. So I'm able to just suspend disbelief and not care that if this were real the character would be rushing to the next story mission event and not taking time fishing or collecting whatever. They're just games to me and I play for fun and just aren't looking at them with that level of depth and thus don't get put off by things like that. To each their own though.
 
Mar 23, 2015
1,621
194
310
www.egregoredesign.com
I could excuse most of the criticism of the controls and grit my teeth to bear it. But the forced slow walking at the main camps (which is a major aspect of the game for a good portion) made me drop it.

Realism is not one walk speed for a camp and then different walk speed for nearly every other location.
 
Last edited:
Sep 24, 2012
822
55
405
"the controls and mission design and it’s failstates turn me off,"

This.

I hate when its because you didn't kill someone a certain way even with them still dying. The controls are just horrid, I've had moments where I'm trying to get on my horse and he starts kidnapping someone.....real story lol A mission I just did he has to jump on a stage coach, but I got it to stop...tried to get on and he wouldn't do it even with the damn thing stopped....I then got on my horse and jump from the horse to the stage coach.....WHILE IT WAS STILL STOPPED soooooo why on earth are they having me do this crap when the point is to just get inside, not JUMPING from the horse, it made no sense and felt so poorly designed and thought out as if the team didn't even play their own game.

The transition from day to night is really bad, like its happening in seconds and it looks like crap compared to something like Horizon which had some of my favorite transitions from day to night etc

The narrative of the game is a joke and all over the place. They are making it seem as if you can choose to be good or bad.....yet the damn character is telling you stuff like "Make sure no one gets hurt guys" ??? WTF? Soooooo you folks are outlaws right? Then you get on the mission and the game like "You can choose to let them go" can I though? Cause sounds to me like the game has already made that choice for me and I was right.

The whole game goes on to have Arthur pretending to be some boy scout while confessing to be a killer outlaw at the same time.

Example. You get a mission where the gang goes to mansion, kills like 50 dudes and cops and Dutch kills the dude they kidnapped, the whole gang acts like "WOW, DUTCH IS crazy bro, can't believe HE KILLED THAT 1 guy"

(Game decides to ignore the 50 dudes you just killed including police) The game keeps flip flopping on them making them seem as if they are indeed about that outlaw life, then pretending to be this band of good guys that just steals and doesn't kill.....
The reason the gang had a problem with Dutch killing that one guy is
that the whole plan was for them to kidnap him and ransom him for money. After going through all of the danger of capturing him, instead of potentially getting a payday they got jack because he pissed off Dutch so Dutch just straight out kills him.
That is why the gang called Dutch crazy and were so pissed at him. Had nothing to do with shooting/killing the guy's gang members or the police.

You do definitely have a point about the strangeness in the game between "my" Arthur going around murdering people in the open world to the "game's" Arthur all of a sudden having a conscious in the main story missions or when talking to other characters. There is a disconnect evident there that does take a little bit away from the game (but not enough to completely disengage me).

A bit beside the point but I feel like there's a distinction to make between 'boring' and 'slow':

Slow is the speed at which something plays out. Its rhythmic qualities. Think of the difference between a cello concerto and a drum 'n' bass track. Or how a shot in an Ozu movie lingers on one character during dialogue compared with how Hollywood movies uses cuts every three seconds for the same thing.

Boredom, on the other hand, usually comes from a lack of purpose. Its a fault of many games which ask you to do shit for the sake of it, often to pad out content or, in this case, add realism. From the player's side, it can be defined by a lack of care or understanding about what you're doing and why - sometimes the players fault but most often the game's.
That is a very good way of expressing the difference and I wonder how many people claiming RDR2 is "boring" really just mean that the game is "slow". I loved the slow pace of RDR2 but I can certainly understand others not enjoying a slow game as much. I also wonder how many people not enjoying RDR2 are approaching the game differently from those of us that are thoroughly enjoying it. The game is supposed to suck you into an environment, an atmosphere, its characters and its story. It's trying to be as immersive as possible. Again, I certainly can understand some people not being into a game like that which is completely fine.

The best way I can compare this is with movies. The Godfather movies, for instance, certainly aren't fast paced but they sure aren't "boring" to me. I don't find "2001: A Space Odyssey" to be boring but I could see some people finding its downright leisurely pace and almost complete lack of action to be "boring" (even if saying it is "slow" is possibly a better word to describe it as it is far from being a boring movie to me). I think there's room for both types of movies just as I think there's room for both types of games.
 
Last edited:
Aug 26, 2018
330
318
230
It all comes down to personal preference. I cant convince someone this is an amazing ride of a game and if you really dropped it at chapter two, you have no idea what you are missing. Its a slow burner but after all the high octane releases recently, it fit like a glove for me. The story is awesome, twists and turns, betrayal, sadness all of it. But I think you are either in the mood for a game like that or not, simple as that. Everyone on GAF was praising Steins Gate 0 so I bought it. I hated the game, totally boring, I gave it 8 hours and sold it, I just couldn't take it anymore. So it depends what fits your niche.
 
Oct 22, 2018
17
12
80
I'm kinda hoping the PC version gets decent modding support and someone makes a "I don't care about realism" mod or something
Yep, also hoping they make the character a little more responsive like the witcher 3. Who knows if that can happen with so much of Arthur's movement beeing bespoke animations. I usually play games like this on pc with a controller. Maybe I'll mkb this one to make it feel more gamey. Besides that, it's still possible it won't even come out for pc so I'm not thinking about it too much until it's announced
 
Nov 13, 2017
77
35
160
I'm always confused when I hear of people playing this game and being surprised or shocked by it's slower pace. I felt like it was made pretty clear on the lead up to release that it wasn't going to be paced similarly to GTA or other bombastic open world games like AC or some such. All the less than favorable opinions I've seen about the game though pretty much boil down to ill-informed or misguided expectations.
 
Apr 5, 2018
1,740
841
215
30
South Florida aka Outer Haven
I'm always confused when I hear of people playing this game and being surprised or shocked by it's slower pace. I felt like it was made pretty clear on the lead up to release that it wasn't going to be paced similarly to GTA or other bombastic open world games like AC or some such. All the less than favorable opinions I've seen about the game though pretty much boil down to ill-informed or misguided expectations.
Nah, has nothing to do with it. We all know its not like GTA, but we are talking about the Wild West, I don't think anyone was under the impression that a game about robbing and killing would have very little.....well robbing and killing. Too much of the game is a massive chore and the great things that happen in the bank robberies are too few and can't even be done on your own independently despite being able to actually rob people in the game. So of course its not GTA, that doesn't really answer why the best missions robbing trains and banks are extremely few.

The story is complete trash too. The character is so fake its not even funny, a confessed killer, telling other killers not to kill while bragging that he's killed while doing a mission killing like 50 dudes and then right after telling others not to kill......

So the best thing about Red Dead 2 might be its setting, details and graphics, beyond that the issues about the story and controls are enough to question and understand why someone might thing the game is boring or the controls are bad, I own the game day 1 and even I agree with that and I like the game LOL

I can't just tell folks to ignore all of that when even I can see how bad that is and how little sense it makes for a major AAA game to have some of those issues.

The guy isn't an outlaw man, he is a PBS, Disney rated G version of one and a walking contradiction

Speaking about walking.....the game has a MASSIVE issue with controls where the character would walk indoors as if he was unable to run, even during shoot outs where people are legit trying to kill you, he is walking as if nothing is wrong calmly dying...

The controls are gltichy to the point where trying to get on your horse can result in you robbing someone instead and or punching your horse.

The saves are also buggy as saving your game may not SAVE information. So I've see saves where an animal on my horse is gone after I load the game, a mission doesn't save after I load the game, items are missing after I load the game etc. They need a fast travel that makes sense as the first game got it right, we don't need a situation where you fast travel from camp and its pretty much R.I.P when you get there on how to get back other then a train or stage coach (let us just travel using the fire like the first game please)

I see no reason to have me going 15 to and back for a total of 30 minutes on a horse for a 5 minute mission.

This is just SOME of the issues. I like the IP enough to want this corrected, I'm not going to just pretend its perfect to make folks feel better. THIS is why this keeps happening as many seem to be scared to bring up the games issues. Why give this a pass?
 
Last edited:
Sep 17, 2005
2,327
194
1,175
They need a Sadie Adler DLC which opens up the map the other side of the river across from Saint Denis and therefore also opens up Mexico from RDR1 further to the West.
I loved Sadie, and her going off on her own maybe leaves it open to do a game based around her off we don’t get a dlc with her.
 
Likes: EDMIX

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
Mar 22, 2017
5,373
4,209
390
Yep, RDR2 is a beautiful game, but boring as hell. Absurdly over-hyped simply because it's Rockstar's game.
Games are supposed, above all, to be fun to play... this is not a fun game.
But we have different type of "fun". I consider games like Silent Hill and Catherine really "fun" but its not blow everything up with with high action "fun".
 
Last edited:
Likes: noonespecial
Oct 13, 2014
804
100
310
Yeah, I begrudgingly agree, since I like to speak ill about something I liked so much. It's slow and clunky to control, but it's such a technical marvel, and the protagonist and storyline so compelling (to me) that I was compelled to play through it. I can't particularly say I was having "fun" with it, but I certainly enjoyed getting lost in the world for a while and greatly appreciated the product Rockstar had put together. I didn't love it as a video game, but as an experience, it really checked a lot of boxes for me.

That said, when all was said and done with the main game, so was I. The epilogue was a struggle, and I didn't get beyond even creating a character for the online mode before finally accepting that I had no interesting in playing it any further.
 
Likes: EDMIX
May 20, 2018
538
408
245
I feel like most people who don’t like “simulation”and immersive games will not like RD2 and honestly all of the “simulation” elements in the game are blown WAY out of proportion.
 
Last edited:
Apr 5, 2018
1,740
841
215
30
South Florida aka Outer Haven
But we have different type of "fun". I consider games like Silent Hill and Catherine really "fun" but its not blow everting up with with high action "fun".
lol no. Trust me when I say this, even with ME liking Red Dead 2, I understand what they mean when they say not fun. The controls don't need to be this "hold here to get on horse" crap, its redundant and makes very little sense. We understand we are getting on a horse and grabbing an animal etc, we don't need a confirmation of that. The missions are not all this high octane robbing trains, banks, kidnapping etc, in fact....they are RARELY that in a game about the wild west in the first place.

So I have no issue with simulators as I love em, but this game is trying to be an action game and a simulator and its failing at both currently. This is a fun game based on the CONCEPT of what you do, it feels just horrid and so many issues and the direction to put the main story stop it from being as great as it could have been.

Let me freely rob many, many banks.

Let me kidnap people for ransom freely.

Let me actually fast travel at the fire.

Let me actually RUN please, stop forcing me to walk indoors or any damn time someone is near me.

STOP FORCING ME TO DO MISSIONS BASED ON A EXACT WAY! Example. You have to beat the crap out of someone that is a nobody, he doesn't give out any quest and HELLO YOU ARE A OUTLAW! So I stab him (MISSION FAILED) ohhhhh yea, I can't kill anyone cause the game tells me I can't (same game telling me i can choose to be good or bad) clearly...I can't.

This is too many times in the game to the point where its literally confusing what on earth they even mean and why they've taken this stance to stop me from killing some people on missions that are not even KEY to the mission.

So I don't know what it is or why, but Rockstar has taken a step back from the freedom the older titles used to have in their IP as waaaaaay to main "fails" happen on the dumbest stuff. Be like "Fail, you didn't use a sniper" "fail, you killed him and not beat him up" lol

So much for that freedom their IP had, Too many restrictions on stuff that don't need that type to restriction .
 
May 29, 2017
420
386
220
I'm always confused when I hear of people playing this game and being surprised or shocked by it's slower pace. I felt like it was made pretty clear on the lead up to release that it wasn't going to be paced similarly to GTA or other bombastic open world games like AC or some such. All the less than favorable opinions I've seen about the game though pretty much boil down to ill-informed or misguided expectations.
I think we all expected the same pace as RDR1.

Forgot to equip your gun before leaving your horse? jokes on you. Forgot to feed your horse? Here's our 5 minute reminder, also please wash your horse next up... Hey arthur what are you doing hurry up! (Every story mission when I wander or go to slowly, trying to loot the bodies after a shoot out? HURRY UP ARTHUR.) This game is a chore and has huge pace issues.
 
Apr 5, 2018
1,740
841
215
30
South Florida aka Outer Haven
I see so many people saying “the controls are horrible” without actually giving me a solid reason why. I thought the same until I put more hours into it and l learned them.
You are simply not reading why.


FORCED walking isn't fun...especially when people are shooting at you lol
Trying to get on a horse and the game making you rob someone instead or punch your horse isn't fun
The over all feel of the controls is just bad and I think need to be a bit more loose. Keep in mind, I like most of the game, but I can't just over look those issues. They don't need to be in the game and I don't see any reason why the game forcing me to walk while someone shoots the crap out of me would be seen as fun.

(i didn't even bring up the whole "hold button to make sure you want to confirm and verify you want to pick up animal" lol)
 
Last edited:
May 20, 2018
538
408
245
The only flaw
You are simply not reading why.


FORCED walking isn't fun...especially when people are shooting at you lol
Trying to get on a horse and the game making you rob someone instead or punch your horse isn't fun
The over all feel of the controls is just bad and I think need to be a bit more loose. Keep in mind, I like most of the game, but I can't just over look those issues. They don't need to be in the game and I don't see any reason why the game forcing me to walk while someone shoots the crap out of me would be seen as fun.
just because you walk slow in certain situation dose not mean the controls are “Bad” which you offered no compelling argument why. The only solid flaw I see in the crontrols is the cover system and it is spotty at best. You making a mistake and punching someone is your fault not the games.
 
Apr 5, 2018
1,740
841
215
30
South Florida aka Outer Haven
The only flaw

just because you walk slow in certain situation dose not mean the controls are “Bad” which you offered no compelling argument why. The only solid flaw I see in the crontrols is the cover system and it is spotty at best. You making a mistake and punching someone is your fault not the games.
". You making a mistake and punching someone is your fault not the games" ??? Whats happening is a glitch my friend, its no mistake on the user for the game to do something the buttons don't actually represent. ie pressing the button to get on a horse and your character robbing someone, that is a mistake on the developer, not the user. The game was LITERALLY moving my character towards this person even with the horse being in front of me.

Stop making excuses for this crap man, I got the game day 1, but I won't lie for this developer. I don't have that issue in other games and its clear from all the videos regarding these dumb issues that its the developer, stop blaming gamers for this junk. Just cause you are FORCED to walk while someone is killing you doesn't mean the controls are bad? LMFAO! So that means its good to have that happen huh? The lack of control of the character very much is bad controls. He moves like he is legit elderly .
 
May 20, 2018
538
408
245
With all of these similar opinions popping up about this game I am really glad I decided to wait for the PC version, because now I will likely not ever buy it. The backlash on this game has been something to see from afar lol. That is the downside when you are going for a greedy delayed release strategy, you lose a lot of sales if the game ends up being very devisive as the people who waited get to sit back and watch the opinions that form after the initial release hype.
". You making a mistake and punching someone is your fault not the games" ??? Whats happening is a glitch my friend, its no mistake on the user for the game to do something the buttons don't actually represent. ie pressing the button to get on a horse and your character robbing someone, that is a mistake on the developer, not the user. The game was LITERALLY moving my character towards this person even with the horse being in front of me.

Stop making excuses for this crap man, I got the game day 1, but I won't lie for this developer. I don't have that issue in other games and its clear from all the videos regarding these dumb issues that its the developer, stop blaming gamers for this junk. Just cause you are FORCED to walk while someone is killing you doesn't mean the controls are bad? LMFAO! So that means its good to have that happen huh? The lack of control of the character very much is bad controls. He moves like he is legit elderly .
have you actually played games with bad controls. A glitch dose not make the entire control system “bad” I’m not making excuses what I am doing is calling out people who think they know what they are talking about without providing a compelling argument. Stop acting like everyone holds your opinion. If you are going to say the controls are objectively bad you better back it up boy. And agin, no walking slow dose not make the system objectively bad just not your personal preference to walk in cenarios that would be socially awkward in the context of real life, it’s an artistic desicion and it’s fine you don’t like it but it is not an objective “flaw” with the controls
 
Last edited: