Poll: Is Red Dead Redemption Overrated?

[mchoueiri]

Yes, it is.

It does nothing revolutionary, it merely does things better than they have (for the most part) been done. But one would hope that would be the case. It still suffers from all the standard Rockstar issues (dragging a solid 15-20 hour game out to 40, lengthy travel sections that serve no purpose but to stretch time, somewhat... bad multiplayer, etc.) and it really is basically GTA4 with horses, down to the basic structure and progression of the story, right down to the "three islands" structure of the world map.

Don't get me wrong, it's a good game, and I had a great deal of fun playing it as much as I did.

But it doesn't deserve to be remembered as one of the best ever, which it seems to be. It's a progression, a refinement, not a next step.

I think your right when you say it does nothing brand new. But it tells a story really well and the game makes you really believe the setting your in. I feel they way they set up the story is really well done. Also I understand some parts of the game seem like they don't need to be there at all. Thought every part made sense in the scope of the story. No game is perfect but I thought RDR was a well crafted world with a story that dragged me in and a world that has so much to do in it that I am still playing it.

 

[Treblaine]

I think ppl put too much focus on the rating system. A game with a score of 10 or a one with a score of 7 don't matter much as long as it's fun to you. Most of the rating isn't so much based on "this game is perfect" but rather compared to all other games of it's genre as a whole and rates the innovation of the game compared to the industry. There are plenty of games with great scores that everyone seem to hate, like FF13 where a majority of ppl treat it like it has leprosy. In the end it just matters how much fun you have in it, I found the game Alpha Protocal to be pretty damn fun despite it's low scores. Nothing that I'd wanna keep playing for hrs but it was worth the gamefly trip, and the play through.

Yeah, here is Proof of how wrong score-aggregates can be:

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/kung-pow-enter-the-fist

http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2

Just look at the discrepancy between Critic and User score. The Kung pow numbers hurt me the most and has me convinced 99% of movie critics are stuck-up humourless snobs and also game critics seem to be all fan-pandering superficial jocks.

I played MW2 last night and it is DEFINITELY a sub 80% game. Yes, I completed the whole mess in 4 hours without even rushing for a muddled and unsatisfying anti-climax. Oh gaawd, the ending credits were cringe-worthy, makes COD4's self-referential rap song seem subtle and sophisticated in comparison.

 

[Mookalakai]

Perfection is obviously a subjective standard for all things, but I don't think RDR is overrated because I don't really hear people praising that often. Most people like it, and admit it's pretty good, but I don't think I ever hear anyone hailing it as the key to immortality. In terms of the game's flaws, the controls kind of suck, which is pretty much how all of Rockstar's games are. I still like it.

 

[icame]

I hated this game with a passion. I already explained why in like 5 Paragraphs on someone else's thread about the game. This game is flawed in so many ways.

 

[cordeos]

Red Dead is a definite improvement over GTA 4 which i had alot of problems with. My major complaint about Red Dead is that every character in the game has some BS annoying as hell personal philosophy that they just HAVE to tell you about. It gets so annoying, rockstar needs better writers.

 

[Burningsok]

It's certainly not perfect, but it's a damn good game. The missions I do admit are sometimes really boring, but traveling around I found to be quite entertaining. That's just me though. Also from what a few of you have said, the game does feel clunky at first. I got use to it in a hurry though.

 

[Burningsok]

Good game, I have a fewissues nothing to fo after the main quest, not enough distractions for a fun sandbox, bad multiplayer (it had peotential))but good story and fun while it lasted.

I agree, the multiplayer could of been probably the best thing. Cool thing right now is they have dlc for online poker and liars dice. To me, it isn't the content, its the other players that ruin the experience ironically. I like it when you have a bunch of players who cooperate together and try to pull off really cool ideas; a posse that is actually a posse not just "oh, your on my team". I hate it when you got a bunch of players that just run around killing everyone else. Sandbox multiplayer has the best potential, but it will never achieve that potential because of the other players who can easily ruin your fun experience.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Repetitive 'random' encounters.

Clunky controls.

Many bugs.

Godawful on-rails missions.

John's irritating habit of doing everything anyone asks him to do.

Yep, it certainly has its flaws. But it's still great in many ways.

 

[DustyDrB]

It was an absolutely amazing experience. I don't remember any bugs in my playthrough, though I only played it 3 weeks ago so they've probably patched the issues. I've never had so much fun just going from point A to point B in a game. I haven't decided if it or Mass Effect 2 is much game of the year.

 

[Chamale]

RDR is good, but it does have flaws. However, many reviewers ignore these flaws because they've been waiting so long for a fun, well-made Wild West game.

 

[PhunkyPhazon]

Best game of the year so far, if you ask me. Of course there's a few things I don't like and the morality system could use some improvements, especially its correlation with the story. But I've clocked in at somewhere around 80 hours...and I finished the story missions at around 30. Now THAT'S replayability!

 

[Vkmies]

Not really. Definitelly one of the best games this year. And nobody even knows that it's a sequal. No other sequal since ocarina of time has been this awesome.

 

[Secret world leader (shhh)]

I got so bored once that I arranged my PS3 games in order of how much I like them, accordng to the order red dead is the 4th best game of this generation that I've played so far.

Apart from the Minor bugs that were there to begin with and fiddly horse controls before getting used to them, I see almost no flaws in the game(apart from the multiplayer but it has nothing to do with what makes red dead brilliant, A good story (I like my games to last a while and I usually Play for story), fun gameplay and lots of things to do, great characters, great voice acting and you can spend hours doing pretty much fuck all.

What little flaws others might find are dwarfed by the good things. I'd definitely give it game of the year.

 

[run_forrest_run]

While it's one of the best games that I've played this year it has some issues. I personally didn't encounter any bugs during my 60 hour playthrough so either I'm the luckiest player there is or everyone else is crazy. It is far to easy, the combat quickly gets monontenous and the missions follow a linear structure that beats the point of the game being a sandbox. Hell the actual gameplay side is pretty poor but the world is so authentic, atmospheric and immersive, the story is brilliantly told and every one you meet is characterised perfectly.

 

[Crimsane]

I voted top option. Stop nitpicking and enjoy a great game, tbh.

 

[JaysonM]

It's not overrated. People making claims that it's the perfect game are a bit off, but it is certainly one of the few games which have come the closest.

 

[Outright Villainy]

Everything is overrated, if it's by a big company.
That said, I enjoyed it quite a lot. The atmosphere, voice acting and story were top notch, and John Marston is one of my favourite video game characters.