John says it himself very early on; "I have two lives and I'm trying to be free of one of them so the other may survive." John is a man at constant conflict with his more violent past. He hates it, he wants something more honest and fulfilling, but the pursuit of that life has only gotten him into more trouble. And his willingness to perform countless misdeeds and dangerous violence In the naive hope of returning to that quiet life is precisely what convinces the government to have him killed in the end. It's ironic and tragic. This is why he continuously puts up with shit from people despite his threats; they mean him no harm, they do not deserve his wrath, and in the end, they do fulfill their part of the bargain. And John is impatient, dumb, and reckless. These are flaws in his character and it's perfectly summed up in that first scene. Him getting shot is not a problem, it's a lesson. John's redemption happens all around him. He saves the MacFarlane ranch, rescues the ranch hands in Pike's Basin, rids the state of a violent and horrible gang, wins a revolution for the common people, faces down his old mentor who is one of the nation's most notorious outlaws, and the kicker is he doesn't care about any of it. He just wants to save his family. His drive to do so no matter the cost makes him a hero to countless people, even if he still believes he's just a killer. But the only person he wants to be a hero for is his son. And he fails. But by god does he try. That's why John is so well-loved.
@@gabrielf204 I disagree, since the sequel has came out John has become a secondary to a lot of players, how many times have you seen the comment "I wanna play as arthur, not john"
@@masterassassingaming692 This has nothing to do with john being unappreciated, for 8 years that rdr2 was on development, John has been the face of the franchise and a lot of people have considered him to be one of the best video-game protagonist of that era. However rdr2 came out as this new big ambsious sand box game, and a lot of people that didn't played the original game, start to play rdr2 like an introduction to the series, so of course that they will preffer Arthur over John. So for the people that already played the original, these comments that you are mentioning, isn't on the same that they talk some shit like "I want to play with John, not Jack" in relate to the first? The thing is, people like new stuff, they are not "underappreciating" just because they found something objectivaly better than the other thing, the love still there, he just moved to another thing.
@@masterassassingaming692 Not really, honestly his character was made batter in 2. Makes his journey in the first game and love for his family more profound.
I respectfully disagree with your opinions on John Marston. I think you’re criticisms of him are just you complaining that he doesn’t conform to the stereotypical western protagonist. He’s not supposed to be some bombastic intelligent perfect badass hero/outlaw. He’s mild mannered and cynical. The fact that he’s manipulated and used as an errand boy is completely intentional, and he even admits himself that he’s stupid. Also, you can’t criticize John Marston for not doing certain things or for not being written like Joel from the Last of Us and Lee from TWD, because he’s not those characters. That’s not a fair comparison. But all in all, good video.
Aku Fan I love The Last of Us and Red Dead Redemption. I think Joel is a fantastic character. But you can’t compare two characters from two completely different stories and say one is better or not. They’re different characters in different stories.
Or Edgar Ross ') oversimplification I know but I really hate that guy... I never had anything against Bill Javier or Dutch because we never really learn anything about them, we just had to get them to get Abigail and Jack back.
@@mullaoslo interesting, red dead 2 does great job at expanding on them. Especially dutch who is a great character. 2 just gives more depth to the interactions in this game too.
@@pelucheCR7 you really do feel this game was begun as soon as red dead hit the shelves. I love the expansion on all the characters.. Javier especially since I felt he got the least story in the first game, Bill set the tone and even though I didn't like him I could imagine where he came from, duch was talked about in such I regard I was almost disappointed the first time we met him (in red dead) but Javier was just this guy.. Now I know him better and I kinda feel bad for the way John is going to treat him later. John they have somehow been able to make more flawed and less likeable, but in a good way if that makes sense.. I thought all I wanted was to ride around with John as a companion before I played it but I'm kinda happy they made him more flawed, showing us that his stories in the original game might be just as much full of shit as the stories he's sold by the people he meet. Sure he is right about Dutch (I'm not done with 2 yet so this is subject to change) but he never mentiones Arthur (something that is scaring me when it comes to the end of the game) he never mentioned he left his family for a year or that he has put many people's lifes at risk cleaning up his mistakes. I love the way they story weaves together like that. Sorry for ranting this game is just to big and complex.. Both games together might make one of the most epic storytelling in games to date
well as a mexican i can tell that the towns in nuevo paraiso. are really cool and thematic, mexico was on a civil war a revolution, multiple fronts and revolutionaries fighting the goverment and echother so it make sence that many towns where deserted ore taken by armed groups, escalera and chuparrosa are a nice example of frontier mexican towns in that time, i love the seting eaven when most of the mexican steriotipes and cliches come from that time what really bothers me is the spanish spoken in the game it most of it sucks, how coud the anafabethic pesnts of that time speak english way better that his own lenguage? it make no god dam scence. no mexican pronounce "alende" ore "alande" is like an american cowboy saing "jorje wachinton" but never the less i apreciate the efort put in to nuevo paraiso in the game is an amazing seting
I've had a few comments asking about the multiplayer, a pretty sizeable part of the game which is totally absent from my review. Well, I did have a whole section written about the multiplayer but I ended up having to cut it because every time I tried to get into a game to record some footage, it wouldn't load! I tried a bunch of times to no avail and in the end I had no footage to use over the stuff I was saying so ultimately, I decided to just cut it from the video. But for the record, I really enjoyed the multiplayer. I feel like the game and a lot of the systems I criticised for having no place/purpose in the single player really came alive in the online connected world. Being able to form gangs and take on hideouts, start posses and hunt down wanted criminals or be a wanted criminal yourself, added a new dimension to the idea of a wanted/bounty meter. It influenced your behaviour and gave consequence to your actions. I loved the multiplayer mode and it's something I'd really like to see developed further in the sequel.
ah, i couldnt take it. i really want to respect your opinion, but this game is truly an artistic masterpeice. goddamit- please listen to yourself (22:33)-those things didnt work because it is NOT GTA. thats why it played differently(26:08) it was a different experience-yes.... the game was serene, vast, but empty because it was ment to be visual art, while the narrative was synonymous to literature full of themes and motifs. now why is marston doing other peoples errands? thats a theme of the game-that there are higher powers at play-sorta like bio shock. that game. but alot of the game's aspects are lead by its own themes! IF you wnat to compare it to GTA, why do you run errands for everyone? oh yea, its a game-crime simulator as some call it :P now well written? you mentioned joels relationship with Ellie, and how she has an effect on him. she is the conflict of joels story. in Marstons case-his daughter died long ago-his conflict is his current family: GODDAMIT he plays other peoples games in order to get back to his family. is this memorable, or great writting? we learn about how he keeps trying to ESCAPE anything keeping him from his family-he wants no part of it, but does he have a choice?or is that memorable,because in that case fuck joel then. at (46: 26) you talk about how joel shows the lengths that he would go to for ellie-well Marston went through a whole game then stepped infront of a firing squad all for the saftey of his family---an arc, no-what is he supposed to throw his charcater consistency so that he could live to tell people that he has an arc? no fuck that man-he doesnt care what you or anyone else would think-everything is irrelavent except for his familys saftey. is he well written yet??? (50:05) hes not that outlaw anymore-he doesnt want to be, and he wants to escape it all together. so hes practicing patience, what? (51:25) thats exactly what he is, a simple man, at least at that point in his life. your review got better at the point when you actually reviewed the themes. i typed everything before (101:00)-couldnt stand it-but i cant believe that you understand it, but you forget it earlier in your review. and by the way, if you want money to function(and the game to be more challenging) put ur aiming to free aim-expert. now you can actually practice shooting,then dead eye becomes helpful. you'll miss alot of shots and end up looking for ways to make cash to buy ammo for the non common guns.
It doesn't really matter that much, and someone else probably also told you this, but Red Dead Redemption isn't really "the original game," it's a sequel to Red Dead Revolver. Redemption is the first one that people generally heard of, though. ninja edit: also, i'm only a minute into the video, so apologies if I look stupid here.
John is so casual about his daughter dying because shit like that just happened in the west. You just had to deal with it and move on. You really can't compare his loss to Joel's. Especially when Joel's kid is a symbol of the world and life he also lost that night.
Hi there, I understand that people were more accustomed to death during that era but my point wasn't that Marston should have cared as much as Joel, it was that he didn't seem to care at all. The comparison was intended to highlight how the same aspect of a character's backstory has relevance and meaning in one game and absolutely no relevance or meaning in the other. Marston having lost a child has absolutely no bearing on his character or events in the story whatsoever to the point where I wonder why it was even mentioned at all.
That's ultimately the point, though. His lack of emotion towards his daughter's death WAS the characterisation. It re-enforces the idea that John has been calloused by a lifetime of chaos and death, causing and witnessing it. It also functions as an uncomfortable reminder that child death was fucking booming back then and realistically John would have experienced it. Think of it as fucked up world-building. It IS ultimately a foot-note in the story but I don't think it needed to be more.
I can see that you're interpreting this example as a form of characterisation; a hardened and calloused attitude towards death and loss. I just don't see it that way. When John delivers that line it doesn't, for me, function as an uncomfortable reminder of infant mortality rates during that era or demonstrate that Marston is so used to killing that he is largely unaffected by the death of his own child. What I see in Marston is just total indifference as a result of inept writing. You see, all of the traits you're describing, hardened callousness or whatever, can be shown and explored through actions and dialogue, in fact I think they are in Joel in TLoU. But I don't think they are in Marston. The characterisation you're talking about isn't seen or explored at any point throughout the story, it isn't challenged or brought into question. Apart from the fact that his child is never mentioned again, he is never shown to be unmoved by a loved one's death or unphased by the killing of innocents. It's not a character trait or theme that is explored throughout the game, it's just totally absent. In fact I'd say the game outright contradicts your impression of Marston. He is often so moved by other people's emotions that he endeavours to help them with their problems. He often judges other people for their treatment of others like how he obviously views Reyes with contempt for his lack of respect for Luisa. Personally I don't call delivering one throwaway line with total indifference an example of good characterisation. Not when it isn't backed up or reinforced in some way through character actions or events in the story and there are so many ways they could have done that, but they just didn't. So actually that one line about Marston losing his kid amounts to nothing more than crap exposition and a failed attempt at characterisation in my opinion. Ask yourself, if they cut that one line out completely, would it have made the slightest bit of difference to anything or anyone in the whole game? I don't think so. I can totally see the logic behind your reasoning, all the stuff you've said makes sense in theory, but I think your projecting aspects of a character you would like to see onto Marston rather than reading what is actually there.
That's a major misinterpreatation thinreaper, a major component to Marston's character is that he's a family man that admires and still loves his family so he's a man who has principles on how people are supposed to be treated and how they treat others. Marston losing a daughter is just another competent to add to what John has been through in his past and moved on from and is also a bit of world building on how incredibly harsh real life in the west can be. Crap exposition? Marston telling his story to Bonnie is an example of GOOD exposition, he owes Bonnie something for saving his life and he's bonded with her a little bit over the tutorial missions.
J Man a man so moved and motivated by his family... But speaks about his dead family members with absolutely zero reverance. Its absolutely terrible characterization. Marston has absolutely zero characterization, just a bunch of things that happened to him in his past that impact zero ways he reacts to things in the present.
I don't understand the first 30 minutes of this video. "This game is a copy paste of GTA, but I don't understand why it's not rewarding me for behaving like I would in GTA. It's like this game has a moral and emotional weight to it that is... Entirely unlike GTA... But this game is just a GTA Clone!" You can't have it both ways. You either just wanted a GTA where you play a bandito, or you want a Cowboy Game where you get small-town feel, and small town repercussions. By the way, I robbed plenty of trains and banks and carts and kept my honor near full- it's called a Bandana. Edit: I don't get the review, period. I feel like the Marston Character may have went over under your head in its simplicity. Just because it's simple doesn't mean its poor, or that there is no emotion. John Marston's been shooting people by the dozens for years- the rag doll physics and the excellent aim demonstrate that. People's immediate, pressing issues are of trifling concern because he's seen it all. He's the 'Open World Veteran' for people who have been playing those sorts of games since the beginning- it's really more of a (very) dry, black-humor tale. Marston's sense of 'agency' as you aptly put it being revoked is a direct consequence of his character's back story- we hear and see all the time what Marston DID in his previous 20 years. He doesn't DESERVE a sense of Agency. His atonement comes from doing what other people want- and, as the game shows us, what people want him to do is almost always with a disastrous result. This is not the player's fault/John's fault but the character he says Yes to. This is intentional: It's Self-Depreciation of the genre, and Rockstar's Magnum Opus. Furthermore, the timing of leaning cattle rustling/horse breaking/hunting at the start and end is perfect. If you ignored those events for a while, you're trying to recall them as you teach John's son- it actually connects you to the character via your false memory recollection- as if you are older. If you've kept up with them, it makes you feel wiser and almost frustrated. All of this are examples of Good Writing and great character interaction. You wanted a character at the start, middle, and end of a full life-progression as if it's a novel or something. Marston's story arc begins in this game near its apex.
Like how he complains allot of the missions has nothing to do with the objective when Marston constantly complains to the people he's trying to get help from keeps dicking him around, it's one of the main jokes of the game
He did, he actually brought the cons and the pros of the character and made valid points for what it was at the time. I remember 7 years ago despite loving this game founding myself agreeing with a lot of his problems with the game
I get a lot of your criticism of the story, but I think, as you mentioned, The Last of Us and The Walking Dead and the like really set a high bar. I think Red Dead Redemption helped push storytelling in games to the forefront and The Last of Us pushed it to a whole new level that Rockstar didn't even realize was possible at the time. I also like how they didn't show the family until the end. For me at least, I envisioned a "perfect family" like movies have conditioned us. The you see the reality of the situation. anyway, great video I really enjoyed it. Thanks for your hard work
Look, man, you'll get a lot of hate for daring to share your honest opinion, but keep it up. I can't say I agree with a lot of what you've said, though, especially when it comes to the story. One standout example is that John Marston lost his daughter. In the time the game takes place in, that's a fairly common occurrence. These people have simply become used to horror. In addition, he simply doesn't have any control or power. The political situation has left him completely and utterly fucked. They explicitly show this when they ruthlessly gun him down at the end. This guy just didn't have a chance. He is very much Camut's Absurd Hero, The closest comparison that can be drawn for this game would be The Witcher 3, for that reason, although the latter executed it better. In many ways, I would argue that we wouldn't have seen something like The Witcher 3 if RDR hadn't laid a foundation for it in the first place.
I really enojyed this analysis. I just recently 'finished' this game and really loved it. Although, I liked the game so much, I still found myself agreeing with everything you said as a negative. For me, though, I think the problems with the game just matters to me less. Lovable characters or at least interesting and a snappy, satisfying shooting system that I can bring personal challenges to allows me to never get bored. I really enjoyed this game and when you bring attention to them, this game has a lot of problems. Even with these problems, they didn't seem that major.
As a followup. I also didn't enjoy the story, but I strongly disagree that John Marston is poorly written, a bit cliche, yes, but I think he's wonderfully written. How John Marston interacts in the World is a big part of this. Simply his conversations during the semi-boring traveling sequences really build him as an interesting lovable character. At least this is what I thought. As you bring attention to his problems I think back and, yeah, John Marston doesn't show a lot of emotion, in fact, he's quite emotionless. This doesn't mean John Marston doesn't have highlights, for example, I found that the scenes with John Marston and his Son as he tries to redeem himself. Cliche, yes but incredibly touching and you feel Marstons effort. Another good section is his relationship with Bonnie. Not spoiling much, I think his relationship with Bonnie can be repetitive but it's incredibly touching and sweet, especially if you include their encounter in Undead Nightmare. That's mostly Bonnie to be honest, Marston can be a little bit of a fence post *sometimes.*
although rdr has my favourite gaming storyline , i still agree with you for what you said , furthermore , saying these problems weren't so important shows that the problems weren't much there to begin with , and most of the reviewer's gameplay problems would be immediately solved if he played on hardcore mode.
I agree with that bth red dead games have issues like this but it depends on the person as to how much they affect ur enjouement. I personally enjoy the slower paced story focus of both games and the combat I’ve grown to like so I loved these games but I can c where people have issues with it
After watching this review again, I must say you made some great and interesting points. It's still the favorite game of all time but I definitely agree on money not being as useful and the repetitveness of the missions. Hopefully once the prequel RDR 2 comes out, you'll get to appreicate the characters like Dutch a bit more and gain some more insight on him.
Again, never found John deep. I found him more interesting to watch than deep. I don't even think he was supposed to be deep. Why do gamers nowadays want EVERY character to be deep? Deep doesn't always mean it's a good idea.
Let's make a Mario game with cursing, guns, and a different playable character who's more dark than Mario. Or how about a God of War game where we try to make a murderer who stomped a man's face to a pulp loveable and good hearted.
+chu ske You see ehy being deep isn't necessary? Because in most cases, it doesn't work. And comes off as pretentious, while also removing elements of gameplay. But hey, I guess modern gamers don't care about gameplay.
I think you're trying to say that some games don't need to have complex characters because they focus on other things? I agree, but RDR was obviously trying to do more with its narrative. You have a weird definition of "deep" too, putting shadow the hedgehog in mario won't make the game "deep", only juvenile. The argument that you should never attempt complexity because you'll probably fail is pointless too, and I have no idea what you're talking about for "removing elements of gameplay"
what he is saying is that "deep"characters aren't always good , deep has become mainstream and boring , John Marston has a realistic backstory and he feels like a real human being , he isn't pretentious and doesn't act like he is better than the scumbags he hangs around with , he is a simple man , a man with his priorities straight and his mindset on them . The reason he is so good is because he feels human , you have the sense that he actually exists , like he is your firend , you care about him , you like him , He is truly one of gamings greatest heroes.
I think in regards to Marston's character you got it completely backwards, he is a very believable character and arguably well written but not at all memorable and I would say not even all that likable. He is believable because he is so understated, most people don't generally wear every bit of angst in their past on their sleeves, like with the story about his daughter, You brought up Joel from the last of us, well he angsted about his daughter because that is a big part of Joel's character, in the case of Marston it's his nonchalant mention of her before moving on that is supposed to tell you that whatever feelings he felt about her death he has long since moved on, real people don't tell everyone their life story at the slightest provocation and have character arcs, those are interesting traits but not very realistic. tl;dr: Marston is perfectly believable character but he is also quite dull. Which I think may have actually been the point, RDR is something of a deconstruction of westerns, Marston isn't supposed to be a hero, or legendary, he's just a guy, he's an everyman, the story isn't some epic it's more like a shaggy dog story, or I've heard some other people say that the story isn't really supposed to be Marston's story at all but rather that the game is meant to be a prequel to Jack's story.
i disagree about John not being memorable , there is not a single person that i know who has played red dead redemption and doesn't remember john marston , you see , realistic and believable is very rare and it was done incredibly well with john , he was so believable that you couldn't help but like him and feel like he was your friend , his quest to find his family was your quest , you wanted him to succeed . anyway , you were almost spot on for me .
Exactly, this wasn't supposed to be a gta clone. It's it own game. Instead of comparing it to the latter, you would be able to appreciate it for the master piece it was. This video, review, is complete garbage in my opinion. It seems like a pissed off fan boy crying the entire video.
+1 Subscriber. Your channel will probably never get big on this stuff because of attention spans and what people like. But I have to tell you, watching your game reviews means a lot to people like me who take interest in this and may pursue a career in game making, even though it won't be on that large of a scale. Keep it up, I love this.
Great review and convinced me to sub. It's pretty incredible how many suggestions you make to improve the game are actually implemented in Red Dead Redemption 2.
Such a great review mate! I m revisiting Red Dead atm and looking through a couple of reviews online and EVERY single american reviewer praises the shit out of this game and minimises all the issues with the game just because ooooooh weeeee you get to play a cowboy and play blackjack. So I’m really glad I stumbled upon your channel, it relieves me of a lot of frustrations I have with the game. X
Excellen video, but I cannot help but to comment on the dead daughter vs. Last of Us. Back in the wild west times, children dying was a lot more common than it is today, but I understood your main point with your comment. I just couldn't help but to be that "actually" guy. :o)
These are some solid points, still love this game to death. As for improving for the sequel, Rockstar is pretty good about making their games better than the last. GTA V fixed a lot of my issues from IV with the driving, rewards, color palette, shooting, money, and mission formula so hopefully they'll follow their record and make mass improvements for RDR2.
Comparing an open world sandbox game to a choice based linear adventure game and a linear action adventure game is the stupidest comparison I have ever seen anyone make. For the kind of game it is, Red Dead Redemption's narrative is brilliantly told and Marston is a perfect protagonist for this story of revenge, redemption, and moving on from your past mistakes. Marston doesn't really deserve much agency given what we know about his past outlawing days and him doing specific favors for people is very important to getting his goal of doing whatthe corrupt government officials told him to do, he can't just forcibly kill people to get what he wants because that's just going to slow things down for him and not to mention his family's life is on the line. Marston is also not characterized as some crazy legendary badass gunslinger, he's a man out of his prime and past his glory days of outlawing and it's emphasized greatly in the narrative that the Wild West is dying and that gunslingers arent as prominent and famous as they used to be so it makes sense that most people treat John as any other low time thug because that's what he is in the narrative. Marston has seen it all, he's killed people, robbed people, and he's suffered for it and all he wants to do is put a cap off his outlaw past and start anew with his family, he doesn't need to have some meandering moral dilemma about his two lives of being an outlaw and family man because he's already gone through that and it's not the point of this game's story because it's all about redemption and having some closure on your life. A lot of your flaws with the narrative and Marston's character really felt like exaggerated nit picks and more so in making incoherent comparisons to characters who are not even in the same persona or personality spectrum as John Marston.
Have you tried playing without auto aim? I play every Rockstar game since GTA IV without it and I think it should be turned off by default since RDR (GTA IV's free aiming was not very good). It cheapens the gameplay a lot imo, specially in RDR, where the enemies take less bullets than in GTA. With free aiming, I did rely on Dead Eye a lot, because with no automatic weapons, hitting moving targets was pretty difficult, especially while riding on horse. Combat felt perfect and challenging with that setting imo.
I haven't ever played the game without auto-aim, tbh I didn't realise it was a thing. I don't tend to check the options menu unless I'm specifically looking for something so I never knew about this option but I definitely want to revisit the game at some point because quite a few people have brought this up. Sounds like the game will be a better experience without it!
@@thinreaper wow. Your gameplay critic just became more shallow since there's already a feature that improves on the player engagement during shootouts. There's also a hardcore mode that makes the game even more challenging.
Idk cuddie I never had too much useless money because I was always buying hella guns and horses. Then again I also had a serious Liars Dice problem too lol
I never finished RDR1 back in 2010, lost interest in Mexico feeling a disconnect with the main plot. When RDR2 came out, it wasn't on the hype train but after the first playthrough it became my favourite game of all time. And added so much to the Marston character. Having now finally played through RDR1, with the all of the context and weight of the prequel, I am in agreement with all of the points here.
xDDDD not in a million years. They may have great graphics but their open worlds are all boring and without anything to do ... Ubisoft does their open world much better and I would argue with better overall details in that world.
@@budlikycz2445 No fucking way you actually prefer Ubisoft more?! Most of Ubisoft open world games are honestly medicore or terrible or decent at best Ubisoft put no care, effort or detail into their games anymore nowadays it feels like Ubisoft tries to make their games as big as possible but most of the time the collectibles are useless, maps look boring and empty, the writing for Ubisoft is honestly HORRIBLE they haven't come up with a great story since 2014. Compare that to Rockstar that puts actual effort into their games and aren't just a bunch of cash grabs, the writers in Rockstar games are soooo good they come up with one of the best stories that gaming has to offer Yeah Ubisoft is definitely better!!
I largely agree with what you say about Marston's character and characterization. His voice actor makes him feel like a better character than he is, but Marston seems entirely too passive both as a character and a "plot element" in the story.
I haven't played RDR in a long while, and haven't gotten very far in RDR2 yet, but I considered it the best thing they've ever done, BUT the point where you could see them banging against the storytelling limitations of the whole Rockstar open world genre--the feeling of being on a series of side quests, the "ludonarrative dissonance."--and GTA V and RDR 2 haven't managed to break through to something new.
Now, personally, I don't think death should be a huge consequence in this game. It's already easy enough to die if you stay out in the open during a shoot out. The game has enough tension as it is. Why would I want risk losing my shit?
I played Shovel Knight. And the consequence for death is that you lose money. But you can gain that money back in the level you lost it. However, the money is usually in a spot where it's unreachable, because you'll die. I don't want that kind shit in this game. The consequence in RDR is good as it is. You die, you start from your saved point. Which also loses immersion. I'm not a masochist.
I'm in the process of designing my own survival game, and I thought wouldn't it be cool if there was some treasure hunting. I think this would be a really cool mechanic which players would love. It would give them a reason to go explore. Interesting that you mentioned that the treasure hunting in Red Dead Redemption is one of your favorite things to do.
I think your point about bounties kinda is what the game was going for. John Marston is trying to be the good guy, which you said. I think the game is actively not incentivizing doing the GTA commit crimes thing. There's really no reward for it and it makes the game more annoying, which I think is the point. There's not much reward for a life of crime and it's really hard to escape without dying. I agree with you this isn't GTA with horses, it's instead teaching the opposite, to be a decent person and focus on the story and side missions instead of going crazy.
Awesome vid mate you gained a sub from me. Very Good points you make on the depth of the character and how he was supposed to be a bad ass but really wasnt in most situations. I hope R* sees this vid and hires you to work with them everything you said almost was spot on but i still love the game obviously (my icon) Lol !!! Great job mate !!!! Someone share this on R* Forums !!!!
You say that john has no character development but he learns to accept the modern eara and a new found respect for the law also starts to care for people again.
I wouldn’t say he finds new respect for the law and didn’t he always care for people? I mean sure he kills people but is shown to be a nice respectful man through most of the game as well.
Dutch's line about finding someone else to justify their wages was just foreshadowing how they would ultimately come after John Dutch is right as usual
The first point is your fault for not swtiching to expert targeting once you got warmed up. Two clicks down from max sensitivity is perfect. But I do think the lock on is satisfying with how once you got the technique down you can really drop some people
It's not revolutionary storytelling it was simple and effective. The writing for marston was good. He has many great lines of dialogue. All in all he's a charming badass.
god it bothers me to hear a lot of the story complaints after rdr2’s release. i totally understand his points in relation to the sequel not being released yet, so i would LOVE to hear your opinions on the second game.
Good video. I liked this game at the time but I agree with your points about gameplay and story. The only part I remembered were the end bit and the theme of the dying West.
I like how you said that a lot of people's love of the game stemmed from it just kind of being the first of its kind, not really from any of it's own merit. I remember my brother playing it a lot, but whenever I would glance at the screen, he was just riding through the desert. All the times I took a look at his game, he was just riding, no action. I really didn't get it... Anyways, great video!
There were a lot what ifs, I want to add one: The animals in world could be affected by players or even citizens hunting making them either abundant or scarce, but I guess that would alone would be difficult to balance.
I think they actually did that with the Buffalo in the game, there were only a certain amount and you could hunt them to extinction, but yeah, that would be a good idea if every animal could potentially be hunted to extinction in an area. Maybe you could drive up the price of animal meat and fur in certain regions through over-hunting and then make money by hunting it somewhere else and bringing your goods back to sell where the prices are higher.
Good review. I don't agree with many points but I think it was very well done and thought out. I think money, in the game, is needed for ammo and so on. The "story" is fun because it 1) Has many cowboy-esque cliches and people presented in them. 2) It allows us to go on adventures (river rafting, bear hunting, riding on a mine car and so on. It' (can be) a "peaceful" game to play if you work it that way (Ride around and just enjoy how cool it all is, without fighting people every 2 minutes.). The details in the game are insane. The landscapes are amazing. Hunting, in the game, is also very fun. The treasure hunt and other challenges are excellent.
This is fantastic. Really articulates the little things that made this game such a phenomenon for some and hard to get into for others. Wonderful job on this.
For some reason I expected you to praise the shit out of this game, but you gave it the review it deserved. It clearly has a lot of flaws that loads of people overlook. I didn't realise the story was that highly praised, but there's certainly nothing great about it. Ray McCall from the Call of Juarez games, is a way better character than John Marston. The stories in the first two games are much better too. I'd consider Bound in Blood to be my favourite game with a western setting. This game did handle the setting itself, better than any other game, though. You did a very good job explaining why. People saying it's one of the best games ever, just tend to annoy me a lot.
The story is actually very well handled. The reviewer mentions that John should have been more forcible, but ignores the fact that John can't really go around killing just anyone. A very flawed review, imo.
Crono explain how the story is objectively well handled. It isnt good enough to just say that the review is bad. No Marston cant just kill anyone he wants, but he absolutely doesnt need to be everyones whooping boy when hes built up to be the supreme western badass he is. This review was excellent. Just because the reviewer didnt like it as much as you did doesnt make it bad. He in fact spends over an hour explaining exactly what his issues are and why. Nah the review objectively isnt shit. Your review of his review is tho lol
Interesting review, first of all. I did find that the point you were trying to make was elusive. You compare it to GTA, saying they made a mistake making it like GTA, while at the same time explaining why it's very different to GTA. The difference is the setting, and I do believe they nailed it. The desert is deserted, towns were the places where things happen. Finding someone in the wild should be a rare accident. Really, comparing one of the busiest cities on earth with a land that retains it's mythological barren mystique due to the fact that it's mostly empty is missing the point. The protagonist is also very different. You mention this, and then go on to rue the fact that crime is not as worthwhile in RDR, lamenting the fact that it's even an option. Why wouldn't it be an option and why does it need to be worthwhile? Purely for gameplay or simulation reasons? My opinion is that focus shift would ruin the story and the character. Nico is a sociopathic nihilist because he brings his war to a largely peaceful and civilized place. He remains such throughout the story, and this justifies anything the player does. I can't say the same about Marston, because even if you go off the rails and start raising hell he still remains someone who is on a path of redemption, both because the story forces the redemption before his final arc, and because the setting is an barely a civilized place. A place where murder and pillage is not uncommon.
During the last year I revisted gta Iv, Red dead redemption, gta san andreas definitive edition. The formula of rockstars game design wore thin on me a few missions in on red dead. Fast traveled the rest of the game. San andreas bugged me but the map is so small it wasnt as much of a nuisance. Idk if the nee gta is the same thing all over again I might be disappointed. It needs something new.
Finally finished watching your review over the course of the day. On point analysis through and through. I've always loved the game but never felt like it was as perfect as it is made out to be, and you do make a good point as to why it is treated in such a way: it's the only Western game of such scope, a one of a kind thing. I'm sure -- or at least I hope -- most of the points you make in the review will have been addressed in the sequel (or prequel, most likely). I figure it's quite likely that a lot of good ideas by the developers might have been scrapped for time and money constraints -- if I'm not mistaken, the game had some troubled development time. When you compare in the video the game's core design to that of the GTA series, it gets kinda evident how RDR shares the DNA of both its Grand Theft Auto developers and its Red Dead Revolver developers, but in a hasty, not really "measured" way: specifically, the excessive reliance on the GTA formula, and the stronger focus on third person shooter gameplay (at least the shooting mechanics are great!). Ah, I absolutely love the treasure hunts, too! It is great that the developers put a challenge in the game with at least some focus on exploration and observation -- both fun things to do in a game so gorgeous. Aaanyway, I'll keep an eye out for your next videos and watch some more of the ones you've already posted, mate, you're doing a great job here, I hope more people can appreciate your work in the near future.
Fantastic review. You have a new subscriber in me. I hope your channel gets the same traction and success that other similar viewers like Joseph Anderson and Matthewmatosis are garnering. Keep at it!
This is amazing. Really love that you offer insightful and thought out solutions to many of the problems with the game you addressed. Those incentives would have added hugely to the game and I have no doubt that Rockstar will amend them for the next iteration.
While I won't consider you a hater, I hear you as a contrarian. It's a masterpiece. Nothing is perfect, but it's no accident many consider RDR one of the greatest games ever. Are you going to do a video where you praise a game for an hour and a half?
Harsh but true. I listened all the way through. Last night I finished RDR1 for the first time. The atmosphere and sound are excellent. The story is good but clunky. Having played 2 first, I’m glad because I had more invested in all the characters here.
Red Dead Redemption is one of the best games of our time......by accident. It is my favourite game to date however I understand and agree with most of the flaws you pointed out and would not argue against them. However I believe most of the short comings such as Marston's seemingly worn out character, the overly long riding sections, the constant petty jobs you are asked to do and the overall rather unrewarding gameplay.....somehow rather improves this game then hurt it. If we would remove or change all things you have touched upon, we would have a better game....on paper. Though I can imagine that we would then complain about it being generic.
i literally just downloaded this game on Xbox One for 9 bucks, i had to buy it again.....just incase im not happy with RDR2, i still have something to satisfy my western fix. mission wise, i couldnt stand it but it was an amazingly beautiful open world.
"Can't just run around guns blazing, bc he takes damage fast and this really drives home the necessity to utilize cover" *meanwhile Marston running around, guns blazin and taking so many bullets even 50cent would say "damn bro you ok...?"* 🤣🤣
I agree with you. Red Dead Redemption was a great foundation - and an amazing game - but the potential was not fully taken advantage of. However, considering the hardware at the time and how poorly this game runs already, I think Rockstar made the best choice possible.
I just started playing this last week after years of everyone saying how brilliant it is. Been on it for maybe 12 hours so far and I'm not hugely impressed, it's not really gripped me like I hoped it would. Missions aren't terribly interesting because it's like shooting fish in a barrel. I'm still looking forward to playing through Undead Nightmares though, do love my zombie games!.
"There's a disconnect between gameplay and story" *Acts like killing loads of innocent people as a character who is in America to begin with to escape from the horrible things he did during the Yugoslav conflict is perfectly okay*
At first I didn't like RDR2's lower accuracy for the guns, but remembering how easy it was to kill every person you cross with a single accurate head shot from half a mile a way, I realize that you need a lot more effort for combat. I'm kinda glad they nerfed gun accuracy in the second game.
expert aiming invalidates your argument about the accuracy. Guns are no longer able to snipe across canyons and it makes you value deadeye. Couple that with hardcore mode, which defaults aiming to expert AND prevents deadeye from auto-replenishing (kills fill it up) and you have an incredibly difficult-but-fair gunplay experience.
While I see Red Dead Redemption as one of my favorite games of all time, this is a good video. I skimmed over your complaints about the gameplay because well, thats all true really. A lot of the game could have been expanded, gameplay and story wise both. I still think the shooting mechanics, sounds and kill animations make it exceedingly satisfying to play, but thats where it pretty much stays. Also, I look at the story more as a world focused story than a character focused story. Your criticisms about John Marstons character basically boil down to "how does his backstory actually relate to things and affect things?" And sure, it maybe doesn't for the most part, but it still fleshes out relationships for the other gang members and especially Dutch. The story is more about the dying of the wild west, and not characters like John or Dutch. They both are a dying breed of people, something the game completely undermines in the end because after all you did, you still got gunned down like a dog. This is why I think your comparisons to TLOU are pretty pointless, TLOU focuses 99% on its characters. I think the game has a fuckload of flaws and could have been a lot better, but I guess I am one of those impressionable people who craved a wild west shooter and boom, got one, even with all its flaws.
Glad to finally have a video to refer to when I say this game isn't as amazing as people set it out to be. Really do appreciate the themes and what the team wanted to put off with this game, I just hope they execute it better in the sequel. Here's hoping the sequel gets an eventual PC release as well.
A lot of your criticisms are about the lack of role playing elements. Lack of consequences etc. But red dead isn't a role playing game and isn't supposed to be. I don't want my actions to have consequences the way they do in fallout or elder scrolls
Oh mate, there's probably dozens throughout this vid since about 1 in every 5 guys you kill in Red Dead lets out that bloody scream! I even wrote and recorded a little section about it but it didn't make the final cut.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 86 | คู่เอก "คมเพชร vs ชาติพยัคฆ์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m3q_dRYDuU8/mqdefault.jpg)
John says it himself very early on; "I have two lives and I'm trying to be free of one of them so the other may survive." John is a man at constant conflict with his more violent past. He hates it, he wants something more honest and fulfilling, but the pursuit of that life has only gotten him into more trouble. And his willingness to perform countless misdeeds and dangerous violence In the naive hope of returning to that quiet life is precisely what convinces the government to have him killed in the end. It's ironic and tragic.
This is why he continuously puts up with shit from people despite his threats; they mean him no harm, they do not deserve his wrath, and in the end, they do fulfill their part of the bargain. And John is impatient, dumb, and reckless. These are flaws in his character and it's perfectly summed up in that first scene. Him getting shot is not a problem, it's a lesson.
John's redemption happens all around him. He saves the MacFarlane ranch, rescues the ranch hands in Pike's Basin, rids the state of a violent and horrible gang, wins a revolution for the common people, faces down his old mentor who is one of the nation's most notorious outlaws, and the kicker is he doesn't care about any of it. He just wants to save his family. His drive to do so no matter the cost makes him a hero to countless people, even if he still believes he's just a killer. But the only person he wants to be a hero for is his son. And he fails. But by god does he try.
That's why John is so well-loved.
Finally someone who understands Johns character. Hes so highly underappreciated
@@masterassassingaming692 It's actually the contrary, he is always praised to be a masterpiece of a character
@@gabrielf204 I disagree, since the sequel has came out John has become a secondary to a lot of players, how many times have you seen the comment "I wanna play as arthur, not john"
@@masterassassingaming692 This has nothing to do with john being unappreciated, for 8 years that rdr2 was on development, John has been the face of the franchise and a lot of people have considered him to be one of the best video-game protagonist of that era.
However rdr2 came out as this new big ambsious sand box game, and a lot of people that didn't played the original game, start to play rdr2 like an introduction to the series, so of course that they will preffer Arthur over John.
So for the people that already played the original, these comments that you are mentioning, isn't on the same that they talk some shit like "I want to play with John, not Jack" in relate to the first? The thing is, people like new stuff, they are not "underappreciating" just because they found something objectivaly better than the other thing, the love still there, he just moved to another thing.
@@masterassassingaming692
Not really, honestly his character was made batter in 2. Makes his journey in the first game and love for his family more profound.
I respectfully disagree with your opinions on John Marston. I think you’re criticisms of him are just you complaining that he doesn’t conform to the stereotypical western protagonist. He’s not supposed to be some bombastic intelligent perfect badass hero/outlaw. He’s mild mannered and cynical. The fact that he’s manipulated and used as an errand boy is completely intentional, and he even admits himself that he’s stupid. Also, you can’t criticize John Marston for not doing certain things or for not being written like Joel from the Last of Us and Lee from TWD, because he’s not those characters. That’s not a fair comparison. But all in all, good video.
Butthurt red dead fab is just mad cuz Joel is a better character
😆😆😆😆
Aku Fan I love The Last of Us and Red Dead Redemption. I think Joel is a fantastic character. But you can’t compare two characters from two completely different stories and say one is better or not. They’re different characters in different stories.
@@frogglen6350 so joel is a better character just because of this? Wow...
@@frogglen6350 saying things like this make you look like a child
@@frogglen6350 Keep thinking that, Joel ain't that good compared to John Marston and his perfect character development
To be fair, it’s called Red Dead Redemption, not Red Dead Rampage.
The “clear villain” is not dutch, bill, or javier but the dying west and the west being civilized. As your a relic of a dying age.
Or Edgar Ross ') oversimplification I know but I really hate that guy... I never had anything against Bill Javier or Dutch because we never really learn anything about them, we just had to get them to get Abigail and Jack back.
@@mullaoslo interesting, red dead 2 does great job at expanding on them. Especially dutch who is a great character. 2 just gives more depth to the interactions in this game too.
@@pelucheCR7 you really do feel this game was begun as soon as red dead hit the shelves. I love the expansion on all the characters.. Javier especially since I felt he got the least story in the first game, Bill set the tone and even though I didn't like him I could imagine where he came from, duch was talked about in such I regard I was almost disappointed the first time we met him (in red dead) but Javier was just this guy.. Now I know him better and I kinda feel bad for the way John is going to treat him later. John they have somehow been able to make more flawed and less likeable, but in a good way if that makes sense.. I thought all I wanted was to ride around with John as a companion before I played it but I'm kinda happy they made him more flawed, showing us that his stories in the original game might be just as much full of shit as the stories he's sold by the people he meet. Sure he is right about Dutch (I'm not done with 2 yet so this is subject to change) but he never mentiones Arthur (something that is scaring me when it comes to the end of the game) he never mentioned he left his family for a year or that he has put many people's lifes at risk cleaning up his mistakes. I love the way they story weaves together like that. Sorry for ranting this game is just to big and complex.. Both games together might make one of the most epic storytelling in games to date
I love Dutch because at the end he said the government would just find a new monster once he was gone
That's exactly what happened
Didn't Dutch shoot in an innocent woman in the face? Sounds villainous to me
well as a mexican i can tell that the towns in nuevo paraiso. are really cool and thematic, mexico was on a civil war a revolution, multiple fronts and revolutionaries fighting the goverment and echother so it make sence that many towns where deserted ore taken by armed groups, escalera and chuparrosa are a nice example of frontier mexican towns in that time, i love the seting eaven when most of the mexican steriotipes and cliches come from that time what really bothers me is the spanish spoken in the game it most of it sucks, how coud the anafabethic pesnts of that time speak english way better that his own lenguage? it make no god dam scence. no mexican pronounce "alende" ore "alande" is like an american cowboy saing "jorje wachinton" but never the less i apreciate the efort put in to nuevo paraiso in the game is an amazing seting
Criminally underrated TH-cam channel.
Always the good ones that get the least attention :/
Because the majority of people are sheep.
Agree
I've had a few comments asking about the multiplayer, a pretty sizeable part of the game which is totally absent from my review. Well, I did have a whole section written about the multiplayer but I ended up having to cut it because every time I tried to get into a game to record some footage, it wouldn't load! I tried a bunch of times to no avail and in the end I had no footage to use over the stuff I was saying so ultimately, I decided to just cut it from the video.
But for the record, I really enjoyed the multiplayer. I feel like the game and a lot of the systems I criticised for having no place/purpose in the single player really came alive in the online connected world. Being able to form gangs and take on hideouts, start posses and hunt down wanted criminals or be a wanted criminal yourself, added a new dimension to the idea of a wanted/bounty meter. It influenced your behaviour and gave consequence to your actions. I loved the multiplayer mode and it's something I'd really like to see developed further in the sequel.
ah, i couldnt take it. i really want to respect your opinion, but this game is truly an artistic masterpeice. goddamit- please listen to yourself (22:33)-those things didnt work because it is NOT GTA. thats why it played differently(26:08) it was a different experience-yes.... the game was serene, vast, but empty because it was ment to be visual art, while the narrative was synonymous to literature full of themes and motifs.
now why is marston doing other peoples errands? thats a theme of the game-that there are higher powers at play-sorta like bio shock. that game. but alot of the game's aspects are lead by its own themes! IF you wnat to compare it to GTA, why do you run errands for everyone? oh yea, its a game-crime simulator as some call it :P
now well written? you mentioned joels relationship with Ellie, and how she has an effect on him. she is the conflict of joels story. in Marstons case-his daughter died long ago-his conflict is his current family: GODDAMIT he plays other peoples games in order to get back to his family. is this memorable, or great writting? we learn about how he keeps trying to ESCAPE anything keeping him from his family-he wants no part of it, but does he have a choice?or is that memorable,because in that case fuck joel then.
at (46: 26) you talk about how joel shows the lengths that he would go to for ellie-well Marston went through a whole game then stepped infront of a firing squad all for the saftey of his family---an arc, no-what is he supposed to throw his charcater consistency so that he could live to tell people that he has an arc? no fuck that man-he doesnt care what you or anyone else would think-everything is irrelavent except for his familys saftey. is he well written yet???
(50:05) hes not that outlaw anymore-he doesnt want to be, and he wants to escape it all together. so hes practicing patience, what?
(51:25) thats exactly what he is, a simple man, at least at that point in his life.
your review got better at the point when you actually reviewed the themes. i typed everything before (101:00)-couldnt stand it-but i cant believe that you understand it, but you forget it earlier in your review.
and by the way, if you want money to function(and the game to be more challenging) put ur aiming to free aim-expert. now you can actually practice shooting,then dead eye becomes helpful. you'll miss alot of shots and end up looking for ways to make cash to buy ammo for the non common guns.
Jym E. Changa That is literally the opposite of what I said in the video.
thinreaper The honor system actually does effect how people treat you.
It doesn't really matter that much, and someone else probably also told you this, but Red Dead Redemption isn't really "the original game," it's a sequel to Red Dead Revolver. Redemption is the first one that people generally heard of, though.
ninja edit: also, i'm only a minute into the video, so apologies if I look stupid here.
Well I think he's fucking deep and well written character and no I'm mistaking him for a memorable one.
You've become my new addiction after I finished all of Joseph Anderson's videos and he recommended your channel.
Maria Yuri I've heard about him but I haven't watched his videos.
Yes
John is so casual about his daughter dying because shit like that just happened in the west. You just had to deal with it and move on. You really can't compare his loss to Joel's. Especially when Joel's kid is a symbol of the world and life he also lost that night.
Hi there, I understand that people were more accustomed to death during that era but my point wasn't that Marston should have cared as much as Joel, it was that he didn't seem to care at all. The comparison was intended to highlight how the same aspect of a character's backstory has relevance and meaning in one game and absolutely no relevance or meaning in the other. Marston having lost a child has absolutely no bearing on his character or events in the story whatsoever to the point where I wonder why it was even mentioned at all.
That's ultimately the point, though. His lack of emotion towards his daughter's death WAS the characterisation. It re-enforces the idea that John has been calloused by a lifetime of chaos and death, causing and witnessing it. It also functions as an uncomfortable reminder that child death was fucking booming back then and realistically John would have experienced it. Think of it as fucked up world-building.
It IS ultimately a foot-note in the story but I don't think it needed to be more.
I can see that you're interpreting this example as a form of characterisation; a hardened and calloused attitude towards death and loss. I just don't see it that way. When John delivers that line it doesn't, for me, function as an uncomfortable reminder of infant mortality rates during that era or demonstrate that Marston is so used to killing that he is largely unaffected by the death of his own child. What I see in Marston is just total indifference as a result of inept writing.
You see, all of the traits you're describing, hardened callousness or whatever, can be shown and explored through actions and dialogue, in fact I think they are in Joel in TLoU. But I don't think they are in Marston. The characterisation you're talking about isn't seen or explored at any point throughout the story, it isn't challenged or brought into question. Apart from the fact that his child is never mentioned again, he is never shown to be unmoved by a loved one's death or unphased by the killing of innocents. It's not a character trait or theme that is explored throughout the game, it's just totally absent. In fact I'd say the game outright contradicts your impression of Marston. He is often so moved by other people's emotions that he endeavours to help them with their problems. He often judges other people for their treatment of others like how he obviously views Reyes with contempt for his lack of respect for Luisa.
Personally I don't call delivering one throwaway line with total indifference an example of good characterisation. Not when it isn't backed up or reinforced in some way through character actions or events in the story and there are so many ways they could have done that, but they just didn't. So actually that one line about Marston losing his kid amounts to nothing more than crap exposition and a failed attempt at characterisation in my opinion. Ask yourself, if they cut that one line out completely, would it have made the slightest bit of difference to anything or anyone in the whole game? I don't think so. I can totally see the logic behind your reasoning, all the stuff you've said makes sense in theory, but I think your projecting aspects of a character you would like to see onto Marston rather than reading what is actually there.
That's a major misinterpreatation thinreaper, a major component to Marston's character is that he's a family man that admires and still loves his family so he's a man who has principles on how people are supposed to be treated and how they treat others. Marston losing a daughter is just another competent to add to what John has been through in his past and moved on from and is also a bit of world building on how incredibly harsh real life in the west can be. Crap exposition? Marston telling his story to Bonnie is an example of GOOD exposition, he owes Bonnie something for saving his life and he's bonded with her a little bit over the tutorial missions.
J Man a man so moved and motivated by his family... But speaks about his dead family members with absolutely zero reverance. Its absolutely terrible characterization. Marston has absolutely zero characterization, just a bunch of things that happened to him in his past that impact zero ways he reacts to things in the present.
I don't understand the first 30 minutes of this video. "This game is a copy paste of GTA, but I don't understand why it's not rewarding me for behaving like I would in GTA. It's like this game has a moral and emotional weight to it that is... Entirely unlike GTA... But this game is just a GTA Clone!"
You can't have it both ways. You either just wanted a GTA where you play a bandito, or you want a Cowboy Game where you get small-town feel, and small town repercussions. By the way, I robbed plenty of trains and banks and carts and kept my honor near full- it's called a Bandana.
Edit: I don't get the review, period. I feel like the Marston Character may have went over under your head in its simplicity. Just because it's simple doesn't mean its poor, or that there is no emotion. John Marston's been shooting people by the dozens for years- the rag doll physics and the excellent aim demonstrate that. People's immediate, pressing issues are of trifling concern because he's seen it all. He's the 'Open World Veteran' for people who have been playing those sorts of games since the beginning- it's really more of a (very) dry, black-humor tale. Marston's sense of 'agency' as you aptly put it being revoked is a direct consequence of his character's back story- we hear and see all the time what Marston DID in his previous 20 years. He doesn't DESERVE a sense of Agency. His atonement comes from doing what other people want- and, as the game shows us, what people want him to do is almost always with a disastrous result. This is not the player's fault/John's fault but the character he says Yes to. This is intentional: It's Self-Depreciation of the genre, and Rockstar's Magnum Opus.
Furthermore, the timing of leaning cattle rustling/horse breaking/hunting at the start and end is perfect. If you ignored those events for a while, you're trying to recall them as you teach John's son- it actually connects you to the character via your false memory recollection- as if you are older. If you've kept up with them, it makes you feel wiser and almost frustrated. All of this are examples of Good Writing and great character interaction. You wanted a character at the start, middle, and end of a full life-progression as if it's a novel or something. Marston's story arc begins in this game near its apex.
Shamino1 fucking thank you, i couldnt stand the criticisms and then him saying why gta 4 handled it better and its like what? have you played gta4?
tbh it's really interesting to experience a character's end of am arc , especially when a prequel is just around the corner
Thank you man agreed
Like how he complains allot of the missions has nothing to do with the objective when Marston constantly complains to the people he's trying to get help from keeps dicking him around, it's one of the main jokes of the game
Shamino Warhen If this guy had any integrity he’d pin this comment. Very well said. This guy just seems misguided.
I don't think you fully Understand John Marston as a character
He did, he actually brought the cons and the pros of the character and made valid points for what it was at the time. I remember 7 years ago despite loving this game founding myself agreeing with a lot of his problems with the game
Now i really want a GTA IV and V in depth review.
I get a lot of your criticism of the story, but I think, as you mentioned, The Last of Us and The Walking Dead and the like really set a high bar. I think Red Dead Redemption helped push storytelling in games to the forefront and The Last of Us pushed it to a whole new level that Rockstar didn't even realize was possible at the time. I also like how they didn't show the family until the end. For me at least, I envisioned a "perfect family" like movies have conditioned us. The you see the reality of the situation. anyway, great video I really enjoyed it. Thanks for your hard work
Look, man, you'll get a lot of hate for daring to share your honest opinion, but keep it up. I can't say I agree with a lot of what you've said, though, especially when it comes to the story. One standout example is that John Marston lost his daughter. In the time the game takes place in, that's a fairly common occurrence. These people have simply become used to horror. In addition, he simply doesn't have any control or power. The political situation has left him completely and utterly fucked. They explicitly show this when they ruthlessly gun him down at the end. This guy just didn't have a chance. He is very much Camut's Absurd Hero, The closest comparison that can be drawn for this game would be The Witcher 3, for that reason, although the latter executed it better. In many ways, I would argue that we wouldn't have seen something like The Witcher 3 if RDR hadn't laid a foundation for it in the first place.
Lourens Bester thanks for absolutely ruining the ending.
after 7 FUCKING YEARS
I really enojyed this analysis. I just recently 'finished' this game and really loved it. Although, I liked the game so much, I still found myself agreeing with everything you said as a negative. For me, though, I think the problems with the game just matters to me less. Lovable characters or at least interesting and a snappy, satisfying shooting system that I can bring personal challenges to allows me to never get bored. I really enjoyed this game and when you bring attention to them, this game has a lot of problems. Even with these problems, they didn't seem that major.
As a followup. I also didn't enjoy the story, but I strongly disagree that John Marston is poorly written, a bit cliche, yes, but I think he's wonderfully written. How John Marston interacts in the World is a big part of this. Simply his conversations during the semi-boring traveling sequences really build him as an interesting lovable character. At least this is what I thought. As you bring attention to his problems I think back and, yeah, John Marston doesn't show a lot of emotion, in fact, he's quite emotionless. This doesn't mean John Marston doesn't have highlights, for example, I found that the scenes with John Marston and his Son as he tries to redeem himself. Cliche, yes but incredibly touching and you feel Marstons effort. Another good section is his relationship with Bonnie. Not spoiling much, I think his relationship with Bonnie can be repetitive but it's incredibly touching and sweet, especially if you include their encounter in Undead Nightmare. That's mostly Bonnie to be honest, Marston can be a little bit of a fence post *sometimes.*
although rdr has my favourite gaming storyline , i still agree with you for what you said , furthermore , saying these problems weren't so important shows that the problems weren't much there to begin with , and most of the reviewer's gameplay problems would be immediately solved if he played on hardcore mode.
I agree with that bth red dead games have issues like this but it depends on the person as to how much they affect ur enjouement. I personally enjoy the slower paced story focus of both games and the combat I’ve grown to like so I loved these games but I can c where people have issues with it
There was a reason for doing the horse race. It was to get money to fit out the carriage to be a Trojan horse
I dont think this guy really paid attention to the story lol he totally failled on understanding Johns character
Review?
more like rant on a game you clearly barely played or paid much attention too.
After watching this review again, I must say you made some great and interesting points. It's still the favorite game of all time but I definitely agree on money not being as useful and the repetitveness of the missions. Hopefully once the prequel RDR 2 comes out, you'll get to appreicate the characters like Dutch a bit more and gain some more insight on him.
A like the missions of Rdr
They are good variety in opinion
Repetitive sometimes but always Fun
Again, never found John deep. I found him more interesting to watch than deep. I don't even think he was supposed to be deep. Why do gamers nowadays want EVERY character to be deep? Deep doesn't always mean it's a good idea.
Yeah shallow characters are good actually
Let's make a Mario game with cursing, guns, and a different playable character who's more dark than Mario. Or how about a God of War game where we try to make a murderer who stomped a man's face to a pulp loveable and good hearted.
+chu ske You see ehy being deep isn't necessary? Because in most cases, it doesn't work. And comes off as pretentious, while also removing elements of gameplay. But hey, I guess modern gamers don't care about gameplay.
I think you're trying to say that some games don't need to have complex characters because they focus on other things? I agree, but RDR was obviously trying to do more with its narrative. You have a weird definition of "deep" too, putting shadow the hedgehog in mario won't make the game "deep", only juvenile. The argument that you should never attempt complexity because you'll probably fail is pointless too, and I have no idea what you're talking about for "removing elements of gameplay"
what he is saying is that "deep"characters aren't always good , deep has become mainstream and boring , John Marston has a realistic backstory and he feels like a real human being , he isn't pretentious and doesn't act like he is better than the scumbags he hangs around with , he is a simple man , a man with his priorities straight and his mindset on them . The reason he is so good is because he feels human , you have the sense that he actually exists , like he is your firend , you care about him , you like him , He is truly one of gamings greatest heroes.
If i had a shot of whiskey each time you mentioned GTA 4, I'd be in a hospital... dying.
If I had a shot of whiskey each time someone grumbled about me mentioning GTA in this comments section, I'd have been dead years ago.
Well.. cheers then.
"YOU COULDN'T SHOOT A FART OUT OF YOUR OWN ASS" - John Marston
Good to see the in-depth review series back, dude. I haven't even watched it yet but I already can say thank you for making this video.
If they constantly were taking your money from the bank you'd probably get really annoyed over time
I think in regards to Marston's character you got it completely backwards, he is a very believable character and arguably well written but not at all memorable and I would say not even all that likable. He is believable because he is so understated, most people don't generally wear every bit of angst in their past on their sleeves, like with the story about his daughter, You brought up Joel from the last of us, well he angsted about his daughter because that is a big part of Joel's character, in the case of Marston it's his nonchalant mention of her before moving on that is supposed to tell you that whatever feelings he felt about her death he has long since moved on, real people don't tell everyone their life story at the slightest provocation and have character arcs, those are interesting traits but not very realistic. tl;dr: Marston is perfectly believable character but he is also quite dull.
Which I think may have actually been the point, RDR is something of a deconstruction of westerns, Marston isn't supposed to be a hero, or legendary, he's just a guy, he's an everyman, the story isn't some epic it's more like a shaggy dog story, or I've heard some other people say that the story isn't really supposed to be Marston's story at all but rather that the game is meant to be a prequel to Jack's story.
i disagree about John not being memorable , there is not a single person that i know who has played red dead redemption and doesn't remember john marston , you see , realistic and believable is very rare and it was done incredibly well with john , he was so believable that you couldn't help but like him and feel like he was your friend , his quest to find his family was your quest , you wanted him to succeed .
anyway , you were almost spot on for me .
It's weird how so many people compare this to GTA. yet when I played this, GTA never even crossed my mind.
Exactly, this wasn't supposed to be a gta clone. It's it own game. Instead of comparing it to the latter, you would be able to appreciate it for the master piece it was. This video, review, is complete garbage in my opinion. It seems like a pissed off fan boy crying the entire video.
+1 Subscriber. Your channel will probably never get big on this stuff because of attention spans and what people like. But I have to tell you, watching your game reviews means a lot to people like me who take interest in this and may pursue a career in game making, even though it won't be on that large of a scale. Keep it up, I love this.
Thanks man, that's really, really kind of you to say and it means a lot to hear such amazing feedback. Thank you, appreciate it
So glad to see another in-depth review. I love your other ones.
Great review and convinced me to sub. It's pretty incredible how many suggestions you make to improve the game are actually implemented in Red Dead Redemption 2.
Even his suggestion to make the weapons innacurate was actually added to rdr2 gunplay, which made it far worse than rdr1.
I'm sorry but Marston is an amazing character
Apology accepted!
Such a great review mate! I m revisiting Red Dead atm and looking through a couple of reviews online and EVERY single american reviewer praises the shit out of this game and minimises all the issues with the game just because ooooooh weeeee you get to play a cowboy and play blackjack. So I’m really glad I stumbled upon your channel, it relieves me of a lot of frustrations I have with the game. X
I really hope Rockstar watched your review before they made RdR2.
sadly they didnt :( every mission is still a fucking slog with your slow ass horse, and it has the same structure as every rockstar game
Excellen video, but I cannot help but to comment on the dead daughter vs. Last of Us. Back in the wild west times, children dying was a lot more common than it is today, but I understood your main point with your comment. I just couldn't help but to be that "actually" guy. :o)
These are some solid points, still love this game to death. As for improving for the sequel, Rockstar is pretty good about making their games better than the last. GTA V fixed a lot of my issues from IV with the driving, rewards, color palette, shooting, money, and mission formula so hopefully they'll follow their record and make mass improvements for RDR2.
You, sir, just gained a new subscriber! absolutely great and detailed review/analysis, just what I was looking for :)
man, this video was amazing. i love the narratologist approach used by you, j anderson or mrbtongue.
Comparing an open world sandbox game to a choice based linear adventure game and a linear action adventure game is the stupidest comparison I have ever seen anyone make. For the kind of game it is, Red Dead Redemption's narrative is brilliantly told and Marston is a perfect protagonist for this story of revenge, redemption, and moving on from your past mistakes. Marston doesn't really deserve much agency given what we know about his past outlawing days and him doing specific favors for people is very important to getting his goal of doing whatthe corrupt government officials told him to do, he can't just forcibly kill people to get what he wants because that's just going to slow things down for him and not to mention his family's life is on the line. Marston is also not characterized as some crazy legendary badass gunslinger, he's a man out of his prime and past his glory days of outlawing and it's emphasized greatly in the narrative that the Wild West is dying and that gunslingers arent as prominent and famous as they used to be so it makes sense that most people treat John as any other low time thug because that's what he is in the narrative. Marston has seen it all, he's killed people, robbed people, and he's suffered for it and all he wants to do is put a cap off his outlaw past and start anew with his family, he doesn't need to have some meandering moral dilemma about his two lives of being an outlaw and family man because he's already gone through that and it's not the point of this game's story because it's all about redemption and having some closure on your life. A lot of your flaws with the narrative and Marston's character really felt like exaggerated nit picks and more so in making incoherent comparisons to characters who are not even in the same persona or personality spectrum as John Marston.
THANK YOU !!! his gameplay problems were mostly nitpicks that would've been solved if he played on hardcore mode, this review is simply bad.
Have you tried playing without auto aim? I play every Rockstar game since GTA IV without it and I think it should be turned off by default since RDR (GTA IV's free aiming was not very good).
It cheapens the gameplay a lot imo, specially in RDR, where the enemies take less bullets than in GTA.
With free aiming, I did rely on Dead Eye a lot, because with no automatic weapons, hitting moving targets was pretty difficult, especially while riding on horse. Combat felt perfect and challenging with that setting imo.
I haven't ever played the game without auto-aim, tbh I didn't realise it was a thing. I don't tend to check the options menu unless I'm specifically looking for something so I never knew about this option but I definitely want to revisit the game at some point because quite a few people have brought this up. Sounds like the game will be a better experience without it!
@@thinreaper wow. Your gameplay critic just became more shallow since there's already a feature that improves on the player engagement during shootouts. There's also a hardcore mode that makes the game even more challenging.
Idk cuddie I never had too much useless money because I was always buying hella guns and horses. Then again I also had a serious Liars Dice problem too lol
I never finished RDR1 back in 2010, lost interest in Mexico feeling a disconnect with the main plot. When RDR2 came out, it wasn't on the hype train but after the first playthrough it became my favourite game of all time. And added so much to the Marston character. Having now finally played through RDR1, with the all of the context and weight of the prequel, I am in agreement with all of the points here.
I'm sure that Red Dead Redemption 2 will be as good as the original because Rockstar Games are the King of Open World Games.
xDDDD not in a million years. They may have great graphics but their open worlds are all boring and without anything to do ... Ubisoft does their open world much better and I would argue with better overall details in that world.
@@budlikycz2445 No fucking way you actually prefer Ubisoft more?! Most of Ubisoft open world games are honestly medicore or terrible or decent at best Ubisoft put no care, effort or detail into their games anymore nowadays it feels like Ubisoft tries to make their games as big as possible but most of the time the collectibles are useless, maps look boring and empty, the writing for Ubisoft is honestly HORRIBLE they haven't come up with a great story since 2014.
Compare that to Rockstar that puts actual effort into their games and aren't just a bunch of cash grabs, the writers in Rockstar games are soooo good they come up with one of the best stories that gaming has to offer
Yeah Ubisoft is definitely better!!
I largely agree with what you say about Marston's character and characterization. His voice actor makes him feel like a better character than he is, but Marston seems entirely too passive both as a character and a "plot element" in the story.
I haven't played RDR in a long while, and haven't gotten very far in RDR2 yet, but I considered it the best thing they've ever done, BUT the point where you could see them banging against the storytelling limitations of the whole Rockstar open world genre--the feeling of being on a series of side quests, the "ludonarrative dissonance."--and GTA V and RDR 2 haven't managed to break through to something new.
wonderfully made : )
Now, personally, I don't think death should be a huge consequence in this game. It's already easy enough to die if you stay out in the open during a shoot out. The game has enough tension as it is. Why would I want risk losing my shit?
I played Shovel Knight. And the consequence for death is that you lose money. But you can gain that money back in the level you lost it. However, the money is usually in a spot where it's unreachable, because you'll die. I don't want that kind shit in this game. The consequence in RDR is good as it is. You die, you start from your saved point. Which also loses immersion. I'm not a masochist.
I absolutely love this review, you're truly a talented critical thinker, fantastic work. Keep it up!!!
That's really kind of you to say, thank you!
I'm in the process of designing my own survival game, and I thought wouldn't it be cool if there was some treasure hunting. I think this would be a really cool mechanic which players would love. It would give them a reason to go explore. Interesting that you mentioned that the treasure hunting in Red Dead Redemption is one of your favorite things to do.
Great video dude. I liked this game a lot but you definitely summarised its shortcomings excellently.
I think your point about bounties kinda is what the game was going for. John Marston is trying to be the good guy, which you said. I think the game is actively not incentivizing doing the GTA commit crimes thing. There's really no reward for it and it makes the game more annoying, which I think is the point. There's not much reward for a life of crime and it's really hard to escape without dying. I agree with you this isn't GTA with horses, it's instead teaching the opposite, to be a decent person and focus on the story and side missions instead of going crazy.
He doesn't have any agency! He's working for everyone else the whole game. I agree the missions needed more variety, cause they're all kinda the same.
Awesome vid mate you gained a sub from me. Very Good points you make on the depth of the character and how he was supposed to be a bad ass but really wasnt in most situations. I hope R* sees this vid and hires you to work with them everything you said almost was spot on but i still love the game obviously (my icon) Lol !!! Great job mate !!!! Someone share this on R* Forums !!!!
Yes! Finally a proper review for this game!
Red Dead Revolver is a less GTA like game and was much more fun for it. The story in Redemption was much more interesting though.
You say that john has no character development but he learns to accept the modern eara and a new found respect for the law also starts to care for people again.
I wouldn’t say he finds new respect for the law and didn’t he always care for people? I mean sure he kills people but is shown to be a nice respectful man through most of the game as well.
Do characters need character development to be good? I think RDR1 proves otherwise.
Dutch's line about finding someone else to justify their wages was just foreshadowing how they would ultimately come after John
Dutch is right as usual
The first point is your fault for not swtiching to expert targeting once you got warmed up. Two clicks down from max sensitivity is perfect. But I do think the lock on is satisfying with how once you got the technique down you can really drop some people
Also turn off auto centering even if you use lock on
It's not revolutionary storytelling it was simple and effective. The writing for marston was good. He has many great lines of dialogue. All in all he's a charming badass.
Red Dead Redemption 2 really makes this game so much better lol
god it bothers me to hear a lot of the story complaints after rdr2’s release. i totally understand his points in relation to the sequel not being released yet, so i would LOVE to hear your opinions on the second game.
Good video. I liked this game at the time but I agree with your points about gameplay and story. The only part I remembered were the end bit and the theme of the dying West.
Just found your channel. Very good work with your in depth analysis. Can't wait to see more of your videos!!
I like how you said that a lot of people's love of the game stemmed from it just kind of being the first of its kind, not really from any of it's own merit. I remember my brother playing it a lot, but whenever I would glance at the screen, he was just riding through the desert. All the times I took a look at his game, he was just riding, no action. I really didn't get it...
Anyways, great video!
Because the world and music is so excellent you can just ride for hours and not get bored. That's how you know the game is something special.
There were a lot what ifs, I want to add one:
The animals in world could be affected by players or even citizens hunting making them either abundant or scarce, but I guess that would alone would be difficult to balance.
I think they actually did that with the Buffalo in the game, there were only a certain amount and you could hunt them to extinction, but yeah, that would be a good idea if every animal could potentially be hunted to extinction in an area. Maybe you could drive up the price of animal meat and fur in certain regions through over-hunting and then make money by hunting it somewhere else and bringing your goods back to sell where the prices are higher.
Good review. I don't agree with many points but I think it was very well done and thought out. I think money, in the game, is needed for ammo and so on. The "story" is fun because it 1) Has many cowboy-esque cliches and people presented in them. 2) It allows us to go on adventures (river rafting, bear hunting, riding on a mine car and so on. It' (can be) a "peaceful" game to play if you work it that way (Ride around and just enjoy how cool it all is, without fighting people every 2 minutes.). The details in the game are insane. The landscapes are amazing. Hunting, in the game, is also very fun. The treasure hunt and other challenges are excellent.
This is fantastic. Really articulates the little things that made this game such a phenomenon for some and hard to get into for others. Wonderful job on this.
SolePorpoise Thanks so much man, that's something I was really aiming for so it means a lot to hear it, much appreciated.
For some reason I expected you to praise the shit out of this game, but you gave it the review it deserved. It clearly has a lot of flaws that loads of people overlook.
I didn't realise the story was that highly praised, but there's certainly nothing great about it. Ray McCall from the Call of Juarez games, is a way better character than John Marston. The stories in the first two games are much better too. I'd consider Bound in Blood to be my favourite game with a western setting. This game did handle the setting itself, better than any other game, though. You did a very good job explaining why. People saying it's one of the best games ever, just tend to annoy me a lot.
Yeah. People with different opinions annoy me too.
Good.
gilgamesh310 I mean whether you like it or not, it's considered one of the best games of the PS3 and 360 generation
The story is actually very well handled. The reviewer mentions that John should have been more forcible, but ignores the fact that John can't really go around killing just anyone. A very flawed review, imo.
Crono explain how the story is objectively well handled. It isnt good enough to just say that the review is bad. No Marston cant just kill anyone he wants, but he absolutely doesnt need to be everyones whooping boy when hes built up to be the supreme western badass he is. This review was excellent. Just because the reviewer didnt like it as much as you did doesnt make it bad. He in fact spends over an hour explaining exactly what his issues are and why. Nah the review objectively isnt shit. Your review of his review is tho lol
Pretty much all his problems, which were non problems, were fully addressed in red dead 2
Interesting review, first of all. I did find that the point you were trying to make was elusive. You compare it to GTA, saying they made a mistake making it like GTA, while at the same time explaining why it's very different to GTA. The difference is the setting, and I do believe they nailed it. The desert is deserted, towns were the places where things happen. Finding someone in the wild should be a rare accident. Really, comparing one of the busiest cities on earth with a land that retains it's mythological barren mystique due to the fact that it's mostly empty is missing the point. The protagonist is also very different. You mention this, and then go on to rue the fact that crime is not as worthwhile in RDR, lamenting the fact that it's even an option. Why wouldn't it be an option and why does it need to be worthwhile? Purely for gameplay or simulation reasons? My opinion is that focus shift would ruin the story and the character. Nico is a sociopathic nihilist because he brings his war to a largely peaceful and civilized place. He remains such throughout the story, and this justifies anything the player does. I can't say the same about Marston, because even if you go off the rails and start raising hell he still remains someone who is on a path of redemption, both because the story forces the redemption before his final arc, and because the setting is an barely a civilized place. A place where murder and pillage is not uncommon.
During the last year I revisted gta Iv, Red dead redemption, gta san andreas definitive edition. The formula of rockstars game design wore thin on me a few missions in on red dead. Fast traveled the rest of the game. San andreas bugged me but the map is so small it wasnt as much of a nuisance. Idk if the nee gta is the same thing all over again I might be disappointed. It needs something new.
I love how basically everything you complained about was improved in like the exact ways you suggested. Ya love to see it
Finally finished watching your review over the course of the day. On point analysis through and through. I've always loved the game but never felt like it was as perfect as it is made out to be, and you do make a good point as to why it is treated in such a way: it's the only Western game of such scope, a one of a kind thing. I'm sure -- or at least I hope -- most of the points you make in the review will have been addressed in the sequel (or prequel, most likely). I figure it's quite likely that a lot of good ideas by the developers might have been scrapped for time and money constraints -- if I'm not mistaken, the game had some troubled development time. When you compare in the video the game's core design to that of the GTA series, it gets kinda evident how RDR shares the DNA of both its Grand Theft Auto developers and its Red Dead Revolver developers, but in a hasty, not really "measured" way: specifically, the excessive reliance on the GTA formula, and the stronger focus on third person shooter gameplay (at least the shooting mechanics are great!).
Ah, I absolutely love the treasure hunts, too! It is great that the developers put a challenge in the game with at least some focus on exploration and observation -- both fun things to do in a game so gorgeous.
Aaanyway, I'll keep an eye out for your next videos and watch some more of the ones you've already posted, mate, you're doing a great job here, I hope more people can appreciate your work in the near future.
Thanks man! Really appreciate the kind words, hope you enjoy the other videos!
Wonder how his opinion is now since rdr 2 is out
I'm excited to see this but need to play it first!
do play it , this review is terrible .
Fantastic review. You have a new subscriber in me. I hope your channel gets the same traction and success that other similar viewers like Joseph Anderson and Matthewmatosis are garnering. Keep at it!
Thanks very much! I love those guys so feedback like that means a lot, cheers
Im interested to see your take on RDR2 when it comes out. Seems like it will address some of the major gripes you had will be fixed.
This is amazing. Really love that you offer insightful and thought out solutions to many of the problems with the game you addressed. Those incentives would have added hugely to the game and I have no doubt that Rockstar will amend them for the next iteration.
Thank you so much! Yeah I have a lot of high hopes for RDR2 but I'm not as confident they'll pull it off...fingers crossed though!
They should have included compass in Red Dead Redemption 2 instead of a mini map that they have in every Open World Games.
While I won't consider you a hater, I hear you as a contrarian. It's a masterpiece. Nothing is perfect, but it's no accident many consider RDR one of the greatest games ever. Are you going to do a video where you praise a game for an hour and a half?
Harsh but true. I listened all the way through. Last night I finished RDR1 for the first time. The atmosphere and sound are excellent. The story is good but clunky. Having played 2 first, I’m glad because I had more invested in all the characters here.
This is a really great video, keep up the good work!
Red Dead Redemption is one of the best games of our time......by accident.
It is my favourite game to date however I understand and agree with most of the flaws you pointed out and would not argue against them.
However I believe most of the short comings such as Marston's seemingly worn out character, the overly long riding sections, the constant petty jobs you are asked to do and the overall rather unrewarding gameplay.....somehow rather improves this game then hurt it.
If we would remove or change all things you have touched upon, we would have a better game....on paper. Though I can imagine that we would then complain about it being generic.
Fuck. Yes.
i literally just downloaded this game on Xbox One for 9 bucks, i had to buy it again.....just incase im not happy with RDR2, i still have something to satisfy my western fix. mission wise, i couldnt stand it but it was an amazingly beautiful open world.
“The skinning animation takes way too long” 😂😂😂😂
"Can't just run around guns blazing, bc he takes damage fast and this really drives home the necessity to utilize cover"
*meanwhile Marston running around, guns blazin and taking so many bullets even 50cent would say "damn bro you ok...?"*
🤣🤣
I agree with you. Red Dead Redemption was a great foundation - and an amazing game - but the potential was not fully taken advantage of. However, considering the hardware at the time and how poorly this game runs already, I think Rockstar made the best choice possible.
I just started playing this last week after years of everyone saying how brilliant it is. Been on it for maybe 12 hours so far and I'm not hugely impressed, it's not really gripped me like I hoped it would. Missions aren't terribly interesting because it's like shooting fish in a barrel. I'm still looking forward to playing through Undead Nightmares though, do love my zombie games!.
play the game on hardcore mode , most of his gameplay issues are solved on hardcore mode, such as the game being easy , or money not being important.
Finally someone who doesn't think this game is a godsend. Loved this.
It is a godsend for me, love literally everything about this game.
me too lol , best game i've ever played .
It's a damn pear perfect wild west game, it's definitely a godsend for me lol
right? Now I need someone who will ripped that overrated fucking shit called Witcher 3 for all those fucking bullshit that are in that game
"There's a disconnect between gameplay and story" *Acts like killing loads of innocent people as a character who is in America to begin with to escape from the horrible things he did during the Yugoslav conflict is perfectly okay*
I really love your in-depth reviews. Keep doing what you do!
With the money problem, dude clearly never bought the explosive rifle
wasn’t the explosive rifle only in undead nightmare
At first I didn't like RDR2's lower accuracy for the guns, but remembering how easy it was to kill every person you cross with a single accurate head shot from half a mile a way, I realize that you need a lot more effort for combat. I'm kinda glad they nerfed gun accuracy in the second game.
Austin Grider it was only “easy to kill eveything” if you relied on autoaim which is funny enough the same exact thing in rdr 2
expert aiming invalidates your argument about the accuracy. Guns are no longer able to snipe across canyons and it makes you value deadeye. Couple that with hardcore mode, which defaults aiming to expert AND prevents deadeye from auto-replenishing (kills fill it up) and you have an incredibly difficult-but-fair gunplay experience.
While I see Red Dead Redemption as one of my favorite games of all time, this is a good video.
I skimmed over your complaints about the gameplay because well, thats all true really. A lot of the game could have been expanded, gameplay and story wise both. I still think the shooting mechanics, sounds and kill animations make it exceedingly satisfying to play, but thats where it pretty much stays.
Also, I look at the story more as a world focused story than a character focused story. Your criticisms about John Marstons character basically boil down to "how does his backstory actually relate to things and affect things?" And sure, it maybe doesn't for the most part, but it still fleshes out relationships for the other gang members and especially Dutch.
The story is more about the dying of the wild west, and not characters like John or Dutch. They both are a dying breed of people, something the game completely undermines in the end because after all you did, you still got gunned down like a dog. This is why I think your comparisons to TLOU are pretty pointless, TLOU focuses 99% on its characters.
I think the game has a fuckload of flaws and could have been a lot better, but I guess I am one of those impressionable people who craved a wild west shooter and boom, got one, even with all its flaws.
Glad to finally have a video to refer to when I say this game isn't as amazing as people set it out to be. Really do appreciate the themes and what the team wanted to put off with this game, I just hope they execute it better in the sequel.
Here's hoping the sequel gets an eventual PC release as well.
Very prophetic review timing
A lot of your criticisms are about the lack of role playing elements. Lack of consequences etc. But red dead isn't a role playing game and isn't supposed to be. I don't want my actions to have consequences the way they do in fallout or elder scrolls
Prog Rock Anarchy
So....you don't role play as a cowboy bounty hunter?
Came back because of the pc release and yes review RDR2 asap
31:07 you want a linear Red Dead game? Then play Red Dead Revolver.
I would LOVE to play this game but I don't have the funds for a Playstation. Really wish they'd release it for PC, but not bloody likely.
I have my fingers crossed that PC, PS4 and Xbone copies are coming with RD2. -- Printing money really.
Im playing on xenia emulator on pc rn,just reached mexico and its very worth playing on pc
4:02 found the Wilhelm scream
Oh mate, there's probably dozens throughout this vid since about 1 in every 5 guys you kill in Red Dead lets out that bloody scream! I even wrote and recorded a little section about it but it didn't make the final cut.
Oh well lol, Nice vid btw subbed ;)
Thanks!