Game Informer: ?Playing Red Dead Redemption 2 proves Rockstar is "the best"?

[hanselthecaretaker]

Spoiler: ...according to this guy -

What do you think? I'm sure their attention to detail (as in the aforementioned systems complimenting each other) might fit that level of praise, but as far as how it plays it remains to be seen, felt, heard, etc.

Really though for all the talking he did, there was no mention of one of the biggest gameplay-centric concerns people had from the last trailer which was the apparent lack of ragdolls.

I asked, but am not expecting a response.

 

[sXeth]

"Its totally the best and redefines open worlds but I'm not allowed to tell you why."

Yep, seems like a solid endorsement for sure. Absolutely trustworthy and not marketing hype at all.

"Redefining open worlds" in particular has often been largely attributed to the map expansions that often come with a downgrade in gameplay, storytelling or the actual relevance of much of those giant maps.

 

[Something Amyss]

I will afford I have not played every Rockstar game, but the ones I have usually have a commonality. They're not good because they're the best, or because they're flawless. They usually do one or two things so well that you're willing to ignore the flaws. Usually, they're so big on map size or attention to detail they forget to make the controls good.

 

[an annoyed writer]

I will afford I have not played every Rockstar game, but the ones I have usually have a commonality. They're not good because they're the best, or because they're flawless. They usually do one or two things so well that you're willing to ignore the flaws. Usually, they're so big on map size or attention to detail they forget to make the controls good.

You?re goddamn right there. All I remember from the modern GTA games is that all of the player characters have the turning radius of an Australian road train with extended, double-wide trailers.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I will afford I have not played every Rockstar game, but the ones I have usually have a commonality. They're not good because they're the best, or because they're flawless. They usually do one or two things so well that you're willing to ignore the flaws. Usually, they're so big on map size or attention to detail they forget to make the controls good.

I think this is because they have carte blanche and are allowed (money) to do things most other developers just aren't. I've heard stories how events in RDR2 can cascade from the simpliest things in a non-scripted way. If this is true it's not something other developers wouldn't have come up with, it's just that Rockstar is given however much time and money they need to achieve it.


It's this that still makes their games interesting to check out, eventhough eventually it just turns into an obnoxiously written, overbearing slog.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

The game looks absolutely incredible. I'd go as far as to say that it looks revolutionary and genre defining.

 

[Saelune]

Red Dead Redemption 1 had tons of detail that actually amazed me, such as rain and its effects. I don't doubt RDR2 will continue that.

 

[Elijin]

Rockstar is hands down the best at making Red Dead Redemption games, no question.

 

[stroopwafel]

Looks incredible for sure. Their attention to detail is second to none. 200 different kind of animals all meticulously recreated is just..wow. I just hope missions aren't too scripted and controls aren't too stiff like they tend to be in GTA5. Regardless I can't wait to play this game. Rockstar doesn't seek much(if any) media attention and have like 5 years between new releases but they always deliver.

 

[Something Amyss]

I will afford I have not played every Rockstar game, but the ones I have usually have a commonality. They're not good because they're the best, or because they're flawless. They usually do one or two things so well that you're willing to ignore the flaws. Usually, they're so big on map size or attention to detail they forget to make the controls good.

I think this is because they have carte blanche and are allowed (money) to do things most other developers just aren't. I've heard stories how events in RDR2 can cascade from the simpliest things in a non-scripted way. If this is true it's not something other developers wouldn't have come up with, it's just that Rockstar is given however much time and money they need to achieve it.


It's this that still makes their games interesting to check out, eventhough eventually it just turns into an obnoxiously written, overbearing slog.

Yeah, if they get ore time and resources to actually do the work, it helps. Which is certainly how they can afford to push those boundaries, and sometimes make the purdiest games of a generation. It just frustrates me that I feel the need to keep the sticky aim on in games about expert gunslingers and career criminals because they haven't figured out how to do aiming yet, or that there are still major bugs that cause crashes, delete save progress, or remove expensive items (I'd be really burned if I actually bought shark cards to pay for my lost GTAO vehicles). Or that some of their games make the old RE tank controls not seem so bad in retrospect, and whatnot.

I don't know, in the end I can usually tolerate these things, so I'm just pointlessly griping, but it's the internet and that's what we're supposed to do. And Rockstar also has the benefit of being one of the last developers not locked into a one-year or two-year cycle to produce content, which gives them more time to freshen up between releases.

GTAV kind of burned me out on Rockstar, though. This is the first major release in a while from them I likely will wait for a sale to pick up, especially since I'm done with MP in their games.

 

[CaitSeith]

OP, the proper title should be "Gameinformer: Playing Red Dead Redemption 2 proves Rockstar is 'the best'". If you're going to criticize opinions from Youtube, at least be straightforward in the title (instead of doing a bait-and-switch).

EDIT OT: As I always say: don't believe in the hype. I can't pass that kind of judgement until I play it myself; everything else might as well be advertisement.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I'll believe it when I see. This is Rockstar that has been making the same game since GTA3, Rockstar weren't even top dogs of open world games at the end of the PS2 era let alone now. The role-playing aspects SOUND quite interesting but it'll take a lot for it to work over the length of the game vs a few hours of gameplay. Will it be more than just NPC_42 remembers you were nice to him? Because it takes a lot for a video game world to feel like it's fully reacting to your decisions in meaningful ways.

The game looks absolutely incredible. I'd go as far as to say that it looks revolutionary and genre defining.

The "new" thing about RDR2 is they added role-playing it seems, which is older than most video game genres as it existed before video games. What's so revolutionary? Cyberpunk was claimed to be literally a new genre when it's basically Deus Ex. This hyperbole and hype over new games is so ridiculous.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

I'll believe it when I see. This is Rockstar that has been making the same game since GTA3, Rockstar weren't even top dogs of open world games at the end of the PS2 era let alone now. The role-playing aspects SOUND quite interesting but it'll take a lot for it to work over the length of the game vs a few hours of gameplay. Will it be more than just NPC_42 remembers you were nice to him? Because it takes a lot for a video game world to feel like it's fully reacting to your decisions in meaningful ways.

The game looks absolutely incredible. I'd go as far as to say that it looks revolutionary and genre defining.

The "new" thing about RDR2 is they added role-playing it seems, which is older than most video game genres as it existed before video games. What's so revolutionary? Cyberpunk was claimed to be literally a new genre when it's basically Deus Ex. This hyperbole and hype over new games is so ridiculous.

Well (from the sounds of it) they are going the extra mile and then some to make the game world feel more cohesive and organic; ie ?lived in?. I also like the touches like having to physically interact with your saddle bags for items vs having a magic inventory to peruse. I?m sure there will be dozens of YouTube videos soon after release about all the ?little details? or ?things you didn?t notice? about the game world and how it can be interacted with.

Basically, it?s one of those games that will hopefully feel amazing to get lost in.