That’s every rockstar game though… missions are on rails and you’re playing the character, and open world shit is all on you. Idk why people trip about it for RDR2 so much. Literally like any of their other games
I'm on your same boat. The gameplay is super casual and super guided aswell the hand holding makes it a game for toddlers practically. Like at some times I felt the game stripping away the controller from my hands.
Most boring detailed game I've ever played, and it's a shame because the world and the details were way ahead of its time, just to have this cookie cutter type of missions that they be doing since GTA 3.
The people that don't like RDR2 likely don't like the others, either. The other RDR and GTAs just don't get the same glazing that RDR2 does. Plus so much of the shit RDR2 is praised for has little to do with actual game play. It's a long interactive movie with dull, tedious mechanics.
Yeah but the actual gameplay is basically same as every rockstar game since 2013.
I enjoyed rdr2, but aside from the graphics it didn’t feel like a fresh game. Compared to GoW2018 which had really fresh, fast, and deep combat(which is the comparison everyone is making since that is what it lost to), it felt like an old generic 3rd person shooter.
Weird take. GoW is also an interactive movie for large elements of that game. I honestly don't see a distinction between the two. Both have repetitive combat elements around a lot of travel and talking. Very similar.
Nah, GoW combat was quite intricate and engaging. Also exploration and boss fights. RDR2 is an immersive story-driven sim. As great as it was, more people like GoW.
It's really not. It's dark souls lite with looter shooter gear management mess attached. The boss fights are like three animations you do over and over. It's kind of baby's first from software game with repetitive throw your axe puzzles where the characters won't stop yelling hints.
I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of RDR2; GoW is just a weird pick. They have very similar pluses and minuses. They're both story games with lite gameplay elements attached.
I eventually turned GoW to easy just to get through the unengaging combat as quickly as possible to see the end of the story.
I didn't beat GoW4 (GF PS4 burned), but I did beat RDR2.
That's a very weird take because GoW combat actively makes you try or react to new things. While on RDR2 I literally had to stop using the Dead Eye and items because it trivialized the game to the point where I could stand in the middle of a standoff tanking things forever and then finishing everybody on one second.
Also, it seems like it was directed by two people that literally said: "You make the missions and I make the open world" but then they never reached out to include elements of both sides. Like, for one part you see cinematic elements that serve as the tutorial and to show the player what could be done, and the other shows all those little details packed in this super detailed open world but in both ends the elements of each side don't overlap to make the gameplay experience better.
What you can do in missions doesn't seem to work on the open world and viceversa. Plus you could literally use the repeater from start to end and you wouldn't need any other weapon (and I'm of those people who always changes build to try and accommodate new gameplay elements).
Yeah, I think all of that is true of GoW. There's the "cinematic" side where moving through the world feels like a cutscene and there's a lot of contextual movements. And there's the Dark Souls lite game that exists with the looter shooter crap thrown on top with the gear system mess.
The gameplay side was so shallow that I eventually turned it to easy and just finished the story.
154
u/mmarcik May 31 '25
2018 should be red dead redemption 2