Why I Hate... Red Dead Redemption

By Jeffrey Matulef Published 18 February, 2011

Unforgiven.

With this latest instalment in Eurogamer's Why I...series of articles, Jeffrey Matulef discusses how he feels about Red Dead Redemption.

If you missed out on the previous articles, check back to find out why some of our favourite writers hate Halo and WOW but love Wheelman, and so on.

I've always been a fan of Westerns. I love the way they're full of spirit, adventure and gritty tales of hard men in hard times. The traditional dichotomy of dull browns punctuated by bright sunsets makes for wonderfully atmospheric settings - and such settings are just perfect for great videogames.

With this in mind I was really looking forward to Red Dead Redemption. I may not have been a Grand Theft Auto IV fan, but RDR's sparse, open landscape appealed to me infinitely more than Liberty City's cramped and bustling metropolis. Plus - horsies!

So what went wrong? How come I spent the majority of my time with RDR cursing its name to the heavens? Why did I take every opportunity I could to hogtie people in a futile attempt to dull the pain?

The game starts out promisingly enough. As you'll know if you've played it, John Marston is on a quest to save his family from corrupt government agents. This involves taking out gang members who have been terrorising the land.

'Why I Hate... Red Dead Redemption' Screenshot 1

Hogtieing folk; the most fun thing to do in RDR.

After Marston is shot and left for dead, he's taken in by strong-headed rancher Bonnie MacFarlane. Bonnie, her father and the local town sheriff are all well-realised characters who help ease you into the setting. Marston begins helping out around the ranch as he works out how to accomplish his goal, and the momentum starts to build...

Then you meet Seth.

Seth is a Golum-like caricature, a grave-digging, corpse-looting lunatic who hasn't bathed in six months and is always looking for his precious map. Supposedly he'll be able to assist Marston in taking out his target, but it's clear he's off his rocker.

While any sensible man would consider this a dead end, Marston inexplicably aids Seth in his not-so-subtle requests to kill lots of people he believes have his map. Seth is obviously delusional and for all we know these people are innocent. Yet Marston carries on regardless, completing a further two missions for his new best friend, no questions asked.

Things only get worse as the game progresses. Later on, Marston assists a corrupt Mexican dictator in burning down rebels' houses so he and his men can have their way with their women. You can't continue on unless you make Marston, who's proven himself a proponent of the fairer sex on multiple occasions, assist in these actions without raising a fuss.

'Why I Hate... Red Dead Redemption' Screenshot 2

This pic makes me want a smoke. And I don't even smoke.

Maybe that's the point - Marston is a desperate man who will stop at nothing to save his family. But there's a fine line between desperation and gullibility, and Marston's behaviour suggests he's sitting on the latter side of it.

When the snake-oil salesman, Nigel Wes Dickens, ropes him into playing along with his charade, Marston swears, "This is the last time" - every single time. He's full of empty threats, a pushover willing to do the biggest favour for the smallest reward.

It's not inherently a bad thing that Marston is a morally grey character who takes orders from a bunch of scumbags. However, the lengths the player is made to go to push the boundaries of credulity.

Then there's the dialogue.

At one point, Marston allies himself with a Mexican revolutionary named Abraham Reyes. This guy's only character trait is that he's such a louse he can't remember his fiance's name.

This conceit handled with all the grace and subtlety of an elephant walking a tightrope. It's bad enough Reyes forgets the name once, but this running joke presents itself in practically every scene he's in.

The idea of a guy who's doing good things for his county but is personally a dick is interesting. However, RDR seems unable to present a character as flawed without belabouring the point to its utmost extreme.

Reyes is just one example. Almost every character has one outlandish trait which you're hit over the head with throughout each scene they're in. Irish is always drunk. Prof. MacDougal is a spectacularly and permanently foolish cokehead. Federal agent Edgar Ross repeatedly insists that he can't communicate with his own Native American informant, even though he's told multiple times that the man speaks English.

During the game's second act Marston takes an extended detour to Mexico, which is in the grip of a civil war. Both the military and the rebels are portrayed as ineffective drunken scoundrels - yet Marston aids them both, and neither side seems to care.

There are only two remotely likeable characters in this whole chapter. One is Luisa, Reyes' fiance. However, the fact he can never remember her suggests she is a fool to have any feelings for this creep.

The other is legendary gunslinger Landon Ricketts. He's a cool cat who dishes out vigilante justice to help peasants, because apparently Mexicans are completely helpless unless there's an American around to do their work for them.

Along with the outlandish plot and weak writing, the repeated use of combat is a serious issue. Shooting is fun, initially, with fantastic sound effects and the empowering "dead eye" slow-motion power which allows you to tag where you want your shots to go.

But the novelty wears off fast. The lobotomised enemies are content to stay behind cover, occasionally poking their heads out into enemy fire. They never even attempt to flank you, making the cover-shooting intolerably dull.

More on Red Dead Redemption

But hey, it's got horsies, right? Plus, it's got possibly the best setting I've ever seen in a game. The lush sunsets, bright, open deserts and dusty saloons are absolutely staggering. Eventually, though, even they are ruined by an over-reliance on to-ing and fro-ing all across the land.

I also hold a bit of a grudge against RDR because of how much time I spent on it. After a few hours I found myself bored and irritated, but a bevy of intelligent people whose opinions I respect urged me to go on. "Just a few more hours until you get to the good part," they promised.

A few hours later, they'd tell me the same thing. And then tell me again. And again. After several cycles of this I figured I'd already gone halfway through the desert so I might as well go all the way.

And you know what? They were half-right. [Spoiler alert - you may want to skip the next few paragraphs if you don't want to know the ending of RDR.]

Suddenly and without warning, John Marston reunites with his family and the game gets very, very good. Gone are the cartoonish, one-dimensional psychopaths. Instead we meet John's wife, Abigail, and his son Jack. The relationship between Marston and Jack is particularly remarkable. Their dialogue sizzles and the missions make sense.

When I recahed this point, and found myself no longer distracted by the sheer stupidity of the script or distracting thoughts of "Why am I doing this?", I began to enjoy the scenery again. Finally, I could see the light at the end of the tunnel.

Then, two hours later, the game ended.

That last, brilliant segment is what really makes RDR so infuriating. If it were a complete pile of dreck through-and-through, it would be easy to dismiss. Yet there are moments of true brilliance, notably in terms of the game's setting and the father-son relationship.

These elements serve as a painful reminder of what could have been, and that just makes me all the more angry. If the rest of the game were of the same quality it could have been a masterpiece.

Instead, 90 per cent of Read Dead Redemption is devoted to meandering storytelling, embarrassing dialogue, thinly drawn caricatures and blase shooting. The end result is a game which is impossible to either completely write off or unreservedly recommend.

Picture of Jeffrey.

About Jeffrey Matulef

Jeffrey Matulef is a yank, but don't hold that against him. A freelance journalist by trade, he likes eating rhubarb pies, but not baking them.

Read more articles from Jeffrey by visiting the Jeffrey Matulef archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (133) Latest comment 12 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • DoctorFouad #1 1 year ago

    I want someone to write this article : "Why I hate Grand Theft Auto"

    or even more courageous : "Why I hate Halo", edit : apparently this was the first article in the series, lol this shows why I hate reading these too much negative articles...lol

    thats not necessarily my opinion, but I am sure a lot of gamers have this feeling but do not dare to express it...
    Edited by 2 at 18/02/11 @ 14:19

  • towser #2 1 year ago

    Opinions are obviously fine and a matter for the individual concerned. However, in this case, you're wrong. Sorry! :-)

  • DAN.E.B #3 1 year ago

    Probably get negged to hell here but Im really disapointed with the undead nightmare pack Im trying to enjoy it but the controlls
    just dont seem to fit!
    Everyone else seems to love it what am I doing wrong?

  • M_of_the_sys #4 1 year ago

    Sounds like Jeffrey needs a 'Little House on the Prairie' game.

  • Duchessprozac #5 1 year ago

    "I want someone to write this article : "Why I hate Grand Theft Auto"

    or even more courageous : "Why I hate Halo"

    The very first article in this series was "Why I Hate Halo."
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 14:16

  • Alf-Life #6 1 year ago

    Hating good games, or loving bad ones might make a good headline that people will click, but reading stuff like this feels like the article is almost written to nitpick.

  • tossetaz #7 1 year ago

    It seems that the authors problems with the game in large parts come down to how you understand the character John Marston. He's not a traditional or proper hero, in no way, and that is exactly why he'll go to such great lengths to fight what is his. If you instead understand him as the crook and skumbag that he were you'll see that in his search to become a better person and joining his family he becomes the exact same thing he used to be, a crook and a skumbag.

  • MiniAmin #8 1 year ago

    Beautiful scenery, incredible sound effects, competent shooting mechanics, uninspired writing, tortuous characters and (at least initially) horrible glitches.

    I was one of the people who protested against EG's 8/10 review for this game, but in retrospect, it was a pretty accurate score. It was a brilliant game with some shoddy elements which dragged it down somewhat. This is one of the few games which is begging for a sequel.

    Don't see how one could actually hate it though!

  • Hunam #9 1 year ago

    Jefferey Matulef has just made "The list"

  • altitude2k #10 1 year ago

    @DoctorFouad

    You haven't seen all of these articles, have you?

  • metalangel #11 1 year ago

    Why I hate... yet another plonker being given the site as their personal drivel-projecting soapbox.

    Yes, opinions are like assholes, but I'd be more favourably inclined towards these pieces if we got something genuinely thought-provoking and interesting in them.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 14:20

  • Greggywocky... #12 1 year ago

    thats not necessarily my opinion, but I am sure a lot of gamers have this feeling but do not dare to express it...


    Indeed, Dr F, I've never met a gamer who says he/she doesn't like Halo or GTA....


  • Aretak #13 1 year ago

    Is someone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read them, metalangel? Would you like me to call the police for you?

  • Zebula77 #14 1 year ago

    Wow, I disagree with pretty much everything in the article. GOTY of 2010 for me, but then I suspect the point of these "hate..." stories is to provoke comments from angered readers?

    umm, what exactly IS the point of these articles, anyways? Whether you agree or not, is just someone saying "this and that sucks".

    Meh.

  • Vanmunt #15 1 year ago

    I will also add it is quite a poorly written article... don't mind these but this one seems a bit pointless... any chance EG actually do something relevant, what is the sharp shooter like in kz3, is it worth getting for the rip off price? not drivel like this.

  • SteveHolt #16 1 year ago

    I agree 100% with the article.

  • jefranklin18 #17 1 year ago

    Interesting opinions, and while I tend to agree with them in part, I do believe that RDR is way better than GTA4. Not a single character in GTA4 (for me) was in the least bit engaging and most of them were stereotypes. The fact that I did not bother finishing the game (one of ony a couple of my PS3 games that I haven't) shows how little I was drawn into it.

    For me, RDR is redeemed by the final act (like all good movies :). When you are riding to your wife and son after having been "set free", the music playing in the background almost brought a lump to my throat.

  • Retroid #18 1 year ago

    Rhythm? Is that you writing this?

  • kingmong #19 1 year ago

    I loved the game but that guy is 100% right.

    also, True Grit FTW

  • Trent_Steel #20 1 year ago

    I couldn't be bothered with this either. I appreciate the setting, atmosphere and story but quite simply it is just GTA with horses. All the reviews say it's so much more but in truth it's nothing more whatsoever. The first few hours were especially mind-numbing.

    As for GTA, Niko's adventure featured some of the most jaw-dropping, funny and outrageously fun moments I've ever experienced. Sadly you had to play through the tedious, repetitive, frustrating and poorly designed missions to get to them. I'd rather catch AIDS than waste another 15 minutes driving to a warehouse with Little Jacob, die in a firefight because of clunky, inconsistent controls, then have to do it again ad nauseum until I finally get lucky. I should really get rid of it but considering it goes for about 50p on ebay or trade-in there's little point.

    Fantastic experiences. Technical marvels. Crap video games, both of them.

    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 14:29

  • drhickman1983 #21 1 year ago

    "After a few hours I found myself bored and irritated, but a bevy of intelligent people whose opinions I respect urged me to go on."

    To be honest, this is pretty much my experience of the game in a nutshell. I really, really wanted to like the game, but found myself getting bored all too frequently.

    I don't share Matulef's hatred of Martson's blindly following of whatever tasks he's given, I can accept those as necessary game-isms.

    For me, Read Dead Redemption is another game that occupies the "flawed masterpiece" section. The game world and atmosphere it created was awesome, but had I encountered the gameplay in a less polished setting, I would not have been blown away at all. I expect negs, but all I can be is honest.

    EDIT: oh, what the hell, may as well ask for negs: I honestly prefered GTA4 to RDR. There, I said it. I actually, somehow, found the combat in RDR even clunkier than GTA, and I prefered the characters and stories found in Liberty City.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 14:30

  • darc #22 1 year ago

    DAN:SOLO - "Probably get negged to hell here but Im really disapointed with the undead nightmare pack Im trying to enjoy it but the controlls just dont seem to fit!"

    Agree, and I think you hit the nail on the head regarding the controls being a poor fit. Specifically, the shooting mechanic is poorly matched with the unpredicatble, lurching movement of the undead. Precise targeting and timing become largely a matter of randomness, which is aggravating in a game where you're constantly swarmed and constantly low on ammo. I seem to spend a lot of time running in circles trying to get to a strategic (e.g. non-swarmed) vantage point, taking the carefully aimed shot and (randomly) missing, and repeating the whole process ad nauseum.

    I should acknowledge, though, that I've only played a few hours of Undead Nightmare.

    I did love RDR overall, despite its weaknesses, some of which are addressed in the article. The "hidden" ending really ticked me off ... having invested so much time, only to have to check Google for the location of the proper ending in order to get some closure. Felt cheap, and left me with mixed feelings even after I had so enjoyed the preceding 2-3 hours. Poor design decision IMO.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 14:36

  • darc #23 1 year ago

    @jeffranklin - SO with you on the point in your spoiler! One of the greatest moments in video game history!

    Kind of holds to my overall assessment, that RDR was a "solid good", not great, in terms of gameplay, but it was sometimes an amazing filmic, musical, and even literary experience. It was uneven in every regard, which warrants the criticisms - but at it's best it was beyond compare.
    Edited by 2 at 18/02/11 @ 14:36

  • strelok #24 1 year ago

    How can anyone write 2 pages about what is bad in RDR and not even mention the single most annoying thing in this game? :/

    F***ing randomly spawned scum constantly whining about someone lynching their friend, constantly trying to steal your horse in the same stupid manner every time, constantly suiciding in front of a pack of wolves, etc. Thus killing every single bit of immersion and turning the West in a f***ing highway even at midnight. Talk about understanding what makes the Wild West charming and appealing...

  • Windypops #25 1 year ago

    This article pretty much articulates my feelings for the Grand Theft Auto series, as well as Red Dead Redemption.

    They've all got fantastic environments, slightly shonky mechanics, a couple of hours of great gameplay, then everything just turns into a chore. If you're going to build massive virtual worlds, you've got to avoid giving the player the feeling that they're schlepping. I get enough schlepping in real life.

  • allydelally #26 1 year ago

    Pretty clear that these articles are designed to give an alternative perspective on otherwise roundly acclaimed games. Obviously doesn't represent the majority or the official review would reflect that, but I appreciate that the site acknowledges more than one viewpoint could be valid. Personally I loved a lot about RDR but share Jeff's disappointment in the plotting and the way it forced you into murdering innocents, while simultaneously implementing an 'honour' system. Its inevitable that an open-world game with such a serious linear plot will suffer. The two ideas have never really gelled, but as game stories and characters become more nuanced, the more I find the game contrivances jar.

  • berelain #27 1 year ago

    I thought we'd grown out of these articles by now.

    Stay classy, EG.

  • RumpyStumpy #28 1 year ago

    100% AGREE!

    This game was a missed opportunity. I bought it with high hopes. I stopped playing as it felt like watching a tumble weed roll along to the sound of bell tolling..except it wasn't that interesting. Rockstar are brilliant technically but their story telling skills are massively overated.

  • Kaminari #29 1 year ago

    Apparently, Eurogamer desperatly needs web traffic.

  • greenllama88 #30 1 year ago

    Personally, I thought that was an interesting piece. I liked RDR a lot but I think these are very valid criticisms. However for a lot of people they were more minor niggles rather than game breaking but its interesting to see a different response to them. And agree wholeheartedly that the end was one of the best things ever in gaming history.

  • AnsemsApprentice #31 1 year ago

    John Marston ruined it for me. I don't care what people tell me, it's no fun playing as someone you don't like. From Tall Trees onwards, it's a brilliant game. Up until that point, John Marston is a cardboard cut-out with a voice, and he doesn't control much better in my opinion. I don't hate the game though, no way, that's a bit far. It's still a hell of a lot better than most, and it's worth playing overall, without a doubt. The only other issue I had was Mexico. That whole section was really tedious; back and forth, same old shit. The story was nothing new. Nothing happened that I didn't see coming, but it got the job done reasonably well.

    Because Rockstar have done such great games in the past, you can't help but compare their latest entries with them, and in that respect they tend not to feel that different. RDR, on its own merits, had a fantastic setting, some memorable, even loveable characters (except the lead, ha!), and a bunch of stand-out missions that made it all worth while in the end.

    7/10.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 14:49

  • Big-Swiss #32 1 year ago

    so next article in line will be "why I hate Uncharted" followed by "why I hate gaming in general"

  • captain_Carl #33 1 year ago

    I feel you. I also hate this game

  • spekkeh #34 1 year ago

    It's rare that I agree 100% with an opinion piece, especially when it's a "why I hate" feature, but Jeffrey hit the nail firmly on its head with this article. While saying that the game was dull may be slightly exaggerated, the Mexico part certainly felt more of a drag than actual enjoyment. By far the best parts of the game were the beginning and the ending, when you weren't shooting hundreds of faceless baddies for hardly any reason. These parts made sense, made you connect with the characters and did a lot more to support and make you feel the overarching theme of the game --that of sorrow for the loss of a simple age and warm family in the wake of the coming civilization, than any of the fourteen hours of story that came in between.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 14:56

  • OlMaster #35 1 year ago

    Bit more of a warning that the article is heavy on plot spoilers would be nice EG, even if they are minor. I know I probably should have expected it given the title, but thought it might have been just some comment on the gameplay mechanics.

  • shikz #36 1 year ago

    SAD SAD SAD::: how can u hate Red Dead or GTA4 ...u must be a complete boring a ss idiot who spends all the time they have playing pokemon or angry birds lol

    or u prob just suck at these time of games :)) haha hate yeah right whatever EG....after all these years i will now say u SUCK

  • shikz #37 1 year ago

    WASTE OF TIME ARTICLE ....jeez are EG running out of things to say if say u better Quit

  • Firvulag #38 1 year ago

    i agree completely with this.
    also, minigames?
    if you have to put other games in your game so people wont get bored you are doing something wrong.

  • metalangel #39 1 year ago

    @Aretak: I object to time and effort being put into these pieces that could be better spent reviewing games, or giving longer reviews to those that get picked for the download roundups.

  • andywilkie35 #40 1 year ago

    To be fair, RDR is a poor man's GTAIV. People think GTAIV was boring, then somehow seem to think that RDR is less boring even though absolutely nothing is happening in it.

  • rudderless #41 1 year ago

    It's funny: people often suggest that reviews need a second opinion, but whenever someone offers a different viewpoint on a game they're trolling for web traffic.

    If games criticism is to mature and evolve, it's important for people to respect opinions and perspectives that are different from their own. A lot of people disagree with Roger Ebert, but ignoring his perhaps ill-advised comments on games over the past year or so, he's a very well-respected critic.

    Features like this are a good opportunity to examine and discuss the flaws with highly-rated games that can often be overlooked or just simply go unmentioned among the glowing appraisals.

  • M_of_the_sys #42 1 year ago

    @andywilkie35

    GTA IV was the first GTA I didn't like and never finished. I didn't think I would like RDR and didn't pick it up for ages but preferred it over GT IV.

  • AcidSnake #43 1 year ago

    Hmmm, I can understand where the author's coming from but I thought it was necessary...

    It's like complaining that the main character never dies of dysentery...It's not supposed to be historically correct...It's just supposed to be a fun little game...Hence the over the top people...
    I much prefer this than having only horse-breaking missions or cow herding...No over the top NPCs means no over the top missions...
    Although it could have been arguably written better it would then put believable characters in unbelievable situations...

    And the last few hours with the family was great because of the catharsis, the sense of having it made finally...Truth be told I liked the story in the last hours but none of the gameplay...

    /kicks out fire, walks into the darkness

  • CraigMcG #44 1 year ago

    "After a few hours I found myself bored and irritated, but a bevy of intelligent people whose opinions I respect urged me to go on."
    This was me too

    Agree with this article, the game was technologically good but the characters were one dimensional, the writing poor and the story mediocre.

    I also enjoyed GTA 4 more, even though that game had a huge number of issues some of which have been mentioned in these comments

    I'll still get RDR 2 and Gta 5 though

  • bad09 #45 1 year ago

    I hate RDR because it's not on PC.......although some european retails had it on their sites indicating that may change in May....

  • HL706 #46 1 year ago

    "After a few hours I found myself bored and irritated, but a bevy of intelligent people whose opinions I respect urged me to go on."

    This * infinity.

    I never finished it even after getting past Mexico. I just couldn't stomach another; go here, shoot lots of guys, report back mission.

    I also hated the fact that Marston came accross as a relatively decent man in the cutscenes despite the fact I wanted to play as a bad guy. Tying people to train tracks and watching the results followed by a cutscene on Marstons good small town morals just didn't click for me.

  • spekkeh #47 1 year ago

    I found GTAIV to be the best looking techdemo ever released. The game itself was quite tosh. Didn't know whether it was going for realism or cartooniness, every mission amounted to 'go there, kill person, evade police, rinse and repeat', which was already rinsing and repeating from previous GTAs, checkpointing was horrible but above all the 'story' made no sense.

    Maybe it's just the change in setting that made me like RDR as compared to GTA 3.4, but at least it felt like they were trying new stuff in the missions and most importantly, you felt like John Marston was desperate to get his wife and kid back safe, which justified him going to great lengths (although halfway through the game, willingness to suspend disbelief was starting to stretch awfully thin, as Matulef rightly pointed out).
    Niko Bellic, on the other hand, was a badass mofo in action and demeanor, ludicrously wealthy halfway through the game, yet was still taking all kinds of abuse from petty criminals of whom it was obvious they had no way to bring him closer to his goal. I just stopped caring long before the end.

  • Shinetop #48 1 year ago

    Man, I couldn't agree more. People constantly insist that the writing in RDR is so fantastic, but it's simply nonsense. Every single character is a massive caricature (and don't say "that's how westerns are." That's not how westerns are.) and apart from the opening 15 minutes and the last hour the story consisted of "Hey, I said I could help you find that dude but it turns out I can't. This next guy I'm sending you to will be able to, though, if you do ten missions for him" repeated about half a dozen times.

    All in all, the only things the game did right were the music and the environment. We're in some serious trouble if stuff like this is considered to be great storytelling nowadays.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 15:30

  • Mr #49 1 year ago

    Strangely - I agree with the article - but loved the game...

  • optimusprym8 #50 1 year ago

    Considering it's a game that is a pastiche of everything Western, drawing most of it's influences from films, lack of historical accuracy is hardly something to complain about.

    Plus hate is a very strong word, perhaps something like "Don't believe the hype: why I didn't get " would be better.

    EG hardly needs the readership: http://ww w.gamesindustry.biz/articles/20...

  • Collymilad #51 1 year ago

    Agree.

    Boring tech showcase. Snore.

  • jonfon #52 1 year ago

    I'm quite enjoying RDR. Far more than I did GTA4, which I just gave up on. Mind you I'm only halfway through and haven't gotten to the "setting fire to the house" bit described in the article. I much prefer the character of Marstons over the non-personality of Niko "The Random Thug".

    It's not mind-blowingly wonderful or anything but it's enjoyable and looks and sounds bang on for the period (another reason I dislike GTA4 and still think Vice City is the best of the lot, the setting was the most appealling to me). And the horse kicks the arse out of driving cars. Especially combined with the lasso.


    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 15:44

  • Zerobob #53 1 year ago

    My horse appears to be stuck in a wall!...

    It think I'd have to agree with what the article is essentially trying to say. My relationship with RDR is definitely of the love/hate variety. However, I think the game did a lot more right than it did wrong.

    I didn't like a lot of the weird characters and weird missions though. As the article concluded, if the game had been more about John's family relationship told with more normal classic western characters it would have been so much better. When I first fired the game up that's the impression I got; a great intro, a realistic living & breathing world. Then I was confronted by Seth and West Dickens. Ohhh.h.h.h....

    My other main gripe is that there were all these hunting missions with little to no reward, especially considering how hard some of the cougar/bear ones were. Gaining the unicorn by finishing the hunting in Undead Nightmare was much more like it, and way more satisfying than completing the main game itself!

    However, Marston's character was absolutely brilliant and memorable. The environments were so spot on that when I visited California / Nevada recently I could have sworn I'd been there before! Even the way the horses move and their muscles visibly flex as they walk is beyond superb. Top marks to R* for that.

  • Koborover #54 1 year ago

    I recently finished RDR and I agree that the story would have been better if Marston did not take an unrealistic amount of crap. It seemed quite inconsistent considering his violent background and tough sarcastic attitude. I know he wants to be a better person but that doesn't mean he should have endless patience with the lowest of scumbags.

    No reason for me to hate the game though, the game world is superb.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 15:52

  • Sunyavadin #55 1 year ago

    Tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap tap goes the A button.

    Pretty much sums up what I didn't like about RDR.

    Assassin's Creed handles pad controls for horses so much better.

  • benfresh76 #56 1 year ago

    Nobody really hates RDR, but I 100% agree with this take on it, it's a 'what could have been' game as far as I'm concerned; there is so much more that could have been done to take advantage of the amazingly beautiful world the RDR environment team managed to create.

    Besides the obvious issues with the game's core mechanics, on the whole, I found the experience to be fairly shallow and lightweight, but I completely agree that the last third is easily the best portion of the game with a far more innovative, mature tone; it's the only time I really cared about or believed in the game's characters.

    An example of one area in which the game could have been significantly deeper was Marston's relationship with his horse. Playing as a lone wanderer whose entire existence consists of meandering across the plains of the old west, both as a character and companion, the horse should have been a greater focus. In this and many other ways, I really felt that this is a game that would have benefited from a R* take on more traditional RPG gameplay.

    Don't get me wrong, there was a lot to love about RDR, it just wouldn't have taken much to make it so much better than it was.

  • Whizzo #57 1 year ago

    If I hate a game I stop playing it.

  • darc #58 1 year ago

    @HL706 re: "I never finished it even after getting past Mexico. I just couldn't stomach another; go here, shoot lots of guys, report back mission."

    If you still own the game, wait a couple of months and then try going back to it. I shelved it for over three months after getting bored/ frustrated with Mexico, but then forced myself back into it (difficult at first, I'll admit.) Once I settled into the game's pace, I found that it actually kept getting better. It's one of those rare games that doesn't play its hand early. In fact, new ideas and art assets keep flying at you until very late in the game, which I found impressive and refreshing.

    One thing, you do have to accept the idea that you're going to spend a lot of time playing a game that is often a bit dull in pure gaming terms. At times it felt more like watching a TV mini-series than playing a game, but it was a mini-series I grew to love. I recommend you DO NOT choose the "skip to destination" option, ever. (I regret having done so for the first half of the game.) This option gives the impression that the voice-overs here are inconsequential, but IMO they lend a lot to the game's narrative, and present some beautiful scenery along the way. (Perfect way to sit and enjoy a beverage. :) If you don't care about the narrative, or smelling the proverbial flowers, there are better shooters you ought to be playing instead.

  • kirankara #59 1 year ago

    Thought I was only person who didnt really like this game, i was initially wowed, then bored stupid once that wow factor wore off. I kept vowing to go back and try stick it out, but couldnt find enthusiasm to play it, so traded it in.Maybe it's it's the genre itself, as I didnt like gta4 much , for same kind of reasons, but these games did nothing for me once the initial excitement wore off

  • berelain #60 1 year ago

    @ Rudderless

    Second Opinions are fine - great, even - but thats not what these "Why I hate..." articles are. The headline alone is simple fanboy baiting, designed to elicit a strong response from the reader. Its the sort of tabloid journalism that sites like GamesRadar peddle, but I thought EG was better than that.

  • TetsuZaemon #61 1 year ago

    I rather liked RDR.

    I hate typos, though. And therefore, I'll never have more than trifling respect for this guy's opinion. :)

  • BOBBYLUPO #62 1 year ago

    I think the writer's main issue is with suspension of disbelief. Time for a new hobby perhaps?

  • kirankara #63 1 year ago

    berelain
    18/02/11 @ 16:14
    ignore poster | #66
    0
    @ Rudderless

    Second Opinions are fine - great, even - but thats not what these "Why I hate..." articles are. The headline alone is simple fanboy baiting, designed to elicit a strong response from the reader. Its the sort of tabloid journalism that sites like GamesRadar peddle, but I thought EG was better than that.


    Bit harsh , what should they have called it?"an article about why I thought Red Dead Redemption wasn't as great as Everyone Else thought it was", it's more accurate, but isnt as catchy.

    Its effectively just an article that goes against the general consensus of being a great game and highlights aspects they didnt like about game. In terms of flame baiting, people who bite deserve everything they get, and lets be honest, RDR is extremely well liked by most people, so it's not like there's huge factions of opposing people kicking off.

    I just found it an interesting read, if only to see what it is that another person disliked about the game, as I didnt get the great reviews people were giving game either.

  • darc #64 1 year ago

    I think these articles are all in good fun, and they usually have a few valid points even if I don't agree with the overall assessment.

    Lord knows there are plenty of games I have personally despised, despite legions of loyal followers, and I think it's fun to have a good rant about them from time to time. (Thank god for Amazon reviews!) I enjoy hearing others opinions, too, if they're presented logically and with a dose of humor.

    The only thing I would advise is to signpost the spoilers a little better. It isn't just the ending of the game that can be spoiled - plot points all along the way are often intended to be surprising.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 16:36

  • Windypops #65 1 year ago

    Ooh, and plus one for Firvulag's point about mini-games.

    Mini-games: substandard games that no one would ever consider paying for put into bigger games in order to bulk them up and give the illusion of variety.

  • CHACK #66 1 year ago

    I'm with towser on this - love the game, I also think the writing and acting is some of the best around.

  • agparrot #67 1 year ago

    An argument that you don't like other characters forcing your character to do something in a videogame isn't really an argument against RDR, it is an argument against the majority of gaming.

    I completely understand that some people liked RDR, and some people did not, and some people liked some bits and not others but most of those opinions, sensibly, were covered in blogs, more around the time when the game was still in living memory, not in this slightly tiring Why I Hate format, that seeks merely to pick at the perceived ironclads of gaming sales figures.

  • deez #68 1 year ago

    Agree with this, I was bored but loved the ride home music, and end part.

  • Scopeh #69 1 year ago

    Great article series EG, keep em coming. Im loving it.

  • metalangel #70 1 year ago

    While I agree with the article's criticism of the story (I've posted as much and more in comments on here before) I don't try and hang an entire article off them, claiming they're why I "hate" the game.

  • Stranded87 #71 1 year ago

    Largely agree with this article, i didn't hate the game, it was an 8/10 for me, but i agree with most of the points made. I also stopped playing when I was made to burn down those houses in Mexico, so apparently I didn't even get to the good bit.

  • EthanWoods #72 1 year ago

    You're completely right about Marston's inconsistent writing, and the pacing was so bad throughout that, at the end, I was begging for it to be over. There is a very fine line between writing a complex character, and writing an inconsistent one. John Marston is the latter by a country mile.

    It made me most angry when not only was he working with the two Mexican guys who spun him along for 5 hours worth of missions, but who were raping women in practically every cutscene.

    Outside of that though (and I do think a lot of the actual dialogue was well written - even if the characters weren't overall) I enjoyed it. It's story and Marston are just given far too much credit.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 17:37

  • dudefella #73 1 year ago

    "We're in some serious trouble if stuff like this is considered to be great storytelling nowadays. "

    Agreed. I liked RDR but goddamn that game was terminally dull in spots. The writing wasn't good, the story wasn't good, the characters were horrible and Marston had no integrity as a protagonist whatsoever. I enjoyed the action and loved the setting, but certainly not a game I played for story. Truth of the matter is most videogame players (and journalists) are far too easily impressed with things that look and sound like movies, and some are so desperate to prove that "games are art, man" that they'll latch on to any game that has a pretense of a good story. And most of these people don't even know the difference between story, writing and narrative.

  • iago71 #74 1 year ago

    Gotta say I played through the full game (Have t bothered with the Zombie affair as I'd already traded it by then). I really enjoyed playing and I felt (personally) that is was a more polished game mechanicswise than GTA.

    I do agree with some of the points in the article though - After a while it did seem a little like there was too much backward and forward and became a bit of a chore. Even the beautiful world became a bit samey.

    If there were a sequel I think I would approach with caution. I would hope that perhaps there was a little more depth in the sequel.

    Having said all that I did feel there were some wonderful moments that hv stayed with me. Which is more than I can say about alot of other games.

  • darc #75 1 year ago

    Negging a post that includes "I enjoy hearing others opinions, too" is the best yet. :)

  • deez #76 1 year ago

    @Darc, ha so true!


    Mind you, I was still tempted to neg you x

  • TRUTH #77 1 year ago

    The problem I found with RDR was after 2-3 hrs the game just repeats it self. Missions are all to familiar...No real change in tactics or skill needed; This is the same problem I found with Assassins Creed 1&2, GTA IV...the world may be large, but the missions and sub quest/missions are repetitive and most of the time not important.

    If these games stretch 8hrs +, these games really need to offer gameplay variety or it just starts to become one long grate - I especially found that with AC series, GTA IV and RDR.

    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 17:57

  • HugePS3Fan #78 1 year ago

    Suffers from the same issue as all Rockstar games. The writing is brilliant in tiny doses, but largely moronic and derivative. Moments of genuine emotional resonance take a backseat to silly accents and sight gags. And for games that ask you to spend SO much time doing relatively mundane activities (driving across huge maps, riding horses across huge maps, getting in firefights that ALMOST feel like a broken game mechanic), the writing and characters really need to be more of a catalyst for your actions in order for any of it to feel worthwile.

    Maybe they'll get there with LA Noire. But I have a feeling that Rockstar's massive sales figures have made them a little too comfortable with their abilities to craft a story and direct a cutscene.

  • twmac #79 1 year ago

    Two thumbs up on this opinion piece, agree with pretty much all of it.

  • Nikanoru #80 1 year ago

    "Just a few more hours until you get to the good part," they promised.

    Huh, really? The good part was pretty much from beginning to end, for me. Personal defining moment: riding into Mexico for the first time and that song starts playing...

  • DarkSeptember #81 1 year ago

    I'm going to be honest , I didn't read the article. I really don't like RDR either . There was something about that game that just didn't click with me .I played the first few missions but became bored very quickly. My friend however , absolutely loves the game and can't get enough of it !

  • Xardan #82 1 year ago

    Anyone who openly admits to hating a great game like Red Dead Redemption should be ashamed and embarrased.

  • kirankara #83 1 year ago

    Feel no shame or embarrassment for not loving RDR I'm afraid, that's just life , different strokes for different folks.
    " what you talkin about Willis?"
    Ah the genius that was Gary Coleman , god bless his little person cotton socks

  • Paul_cz #84 1 year ago

    100% agreed.
    I liked RDR overall, but most of its story and writing was SO BAD. The mexico part was just eyegounginly idiotic.

    I loved the beginning and ending of RDR. Everything between that was ranging from "meh" to "who wrote this shit?".

    Amazing world, music and atmosphere though.

  • dfooster #85 1 year ago

    It needs to be fun and sometimes that means stretching reality which is what the article writer needs to remember. However I did think a lot of the characters were very forgettable

  • rudderless #86 1 year ago

    Re. this series being Why I Hate... and Why I Love...

    It's probably because Why I'm Not Particularly Keen On Certain Elements Of... and Why I Like But Totally Understand The Reasons Other People Aren't Mad About... aren't very catchy.

    Besides, if the features weren't remotely balanced and were just unbridled hate or love, the trolling accusations would be louder and more frequent. If the content is good, then it's a bit churlish to complain about the title. Anyone who's familiar with this feature will know what to expect, so it's hardly misleading.

  • kirankara #87 1 year ago

    But fun doesn't necessarily mean written for teenagers. I admit im not generally a fan of game stories, they are a far inferior media currently than movies IMO , and this partly is due to purile and cliched writing , and partly cause , I prefer to be playing than watching movies in my games. I like some story, but not huge cut scene after cut scene, and this is partially down to how poor the scriptwring usually is.

    I still think video game story writing needs to mature with it's audience a bit, not just being stuck in 80's/90's when we were kids at school and fart gags and pictures of penises were funny

  • z8Jay #88 1 year ago

    John Marston shares a voice with the engineer from TF2. Not acceptable.

  • BurningR #89 1 year ago

    Exactly my experience as well, wellwritten piece Jeffrey! I didn't finish it though, I got to the first FBI mission, then I couldn't take the stupid characters anymore. Maybe I should pick it up again, I'm probably quite close to the good part with Marstons son.

    And to the people who say it's not a relevant critique, I disagree - of course it is relevant to point out how the story isn't up to par with the background of westerns that it is supposed to build on - instead it offers nothing but carricature and unbelievable characters, without any depth. It is a serious problem with Rockstar games in my opinion, GTA IV had the same - it coulnd't decide wether it wanted to deliver a serious story or "Saint's Row"-style carricature. The good gunplay saved it though.

  • Rodchenko #90 1 year ago

    Was the first game in a while that I actually finished (haven't finished GTAIV yet). I agree, that Marston's character was inconsistent and some of the side characters were overly caricaturized, but given that I saw it as a condensed pastiche of Western movies rather than a depiction of the West itself I could easily oversee those flaws.

    I also liked the way it forced you to ride from A to B and spend a lot of time in the landcape thereby creating a sense of scale and an idea of the nuisances of travelling in those times. Sure, not everybody's cup of tea, but slowing down a game instead of smacking spectacular set-piece upon setpiece and funneling you through a six-hour rollercoaster-crescendo (CoD, Uncharted) I regard as something as a daring approach these days.

    For my taste, there is too little introspection in computer games, and RDR had this in heaps.

  • smelly #91 1 year ago

    I think "hate" is a strong word.

    I dont hate RDR - i just think it was overrated. I enjoyed it for what it was. But found riding a horse for long periods of time wasnt as enjoyable as driving a car in gta.

    - yes i know you can fast travel using campfires - but not in missions.

  • AgentCool #92 1 year ago

    Totally disagree. Yes, there's a lot about the writing that doesn't make sense but it's pretty obvious from the over-the-top characterisation that it isn't a 'serious' Western, more a satire than anything else. Overall, it's a much, much better game than GTAIV for so many reasons and, for my money, the best game of the past decade.

  • BlinkeredAxis #93 1 year ago

    I enjoyed it, but after 25 hours was not really motivated to carry on. that's not a bad duration for a game really.

    However, I only got 130 out of 1000 gamerscore - and to get more achievemnts you would have to work REALLY hard at hunting, hideouts etc. Just too stingy again, Rockstar. GTA4 was worse; you could play for days and only get the awards for winning bowling or darts versus your girlfriend.

    But there were still lots of excellent moments in RDR, better than most games.

  • MrDurandPierre #94 1 year ago

    Thanks for all the kind comments! My girlfriend's reaction to reading through them all was "EG seems to have a really smart readership." I'm inclined to agree:)

    I realize many of my criticism of RDR apply to GTA IV as well, but there are 3 reasons I picked RDR. a.) I never finished GTA IV. b.) GTA IV came out first, so I was more forgiving and impressed by it's scale. RDR had time to fix a lot of GTA's flaws, but didn't. And c.) I didn't want to dilute the piece by constantly comparing it to another game. It seemed stronger and more concise to narrow it down to one specific title that could live or die by its own merits.

    While most of my criticisms came down to writing, I wanted to say that I'm not always so nitpicky about that sort of thing if I'm otherwise enjoying myself. Games like Bayonetta and Vanquish come to mind as being stupid as hell, but otherwise a blast so I didn't give a damn. RDR's slow, contemplative pace gave a lot of time to reflect on what was happening so if the writing falls flat it's harder to invest in these slower moments.

    Comparatively, I liked sailing in Wind Waker because the world was enchanting and I felt like what I was doing was important. I liked driving (to an extent) in Deadly Premonition because I was interested in the plot and it gave me time to mull over the red herrings and guess what was coming up next. RDR had moments like this (arriving at Blackwater comes to mind), but much of the time I didn't care what was going on, so roaming the landscape lost its luster. I hinted at that a bit in the piece where I said that I grew to enjoy the scenery more towards the end as the narrative picked up steam, but wanted to elaborate on that more here.

  • HurbleBurble #95 1 year ago

    Why I hate... Why I hate ((Game)) articles

    Call me a cynic, but when gaming websites start resorting to negative 'catch-all' publicity with the depth of a toddler's paddling pool during a hosepipe ban, I begin to fear that we might all be in trouble.

    There are two trains of thought as to the best possible approach when confronted by a rabid grizzly bear. A) Do nothing, look tall and menacing in the hopes of scaring it away or B) Poke it repeatedly with a stick just to see what happens.

    Replace 'grizzly bear' with 'fandom' and remove option A) totally and essentially you have in a nutshell what these articles are doing. There's no depth, no involvement just spurious commentary on a personal opinion (Let's be honest, there is no standard for objectivity in being a critic in the first place). What purpose do these articles serve other than to provoke a negative reaction amongst the fan boys, of which the gaming community is largely made up of? Basically, it's just trolling for trollings sake.

    The 'informed' opinion is no more 'informed' than you get in the reader's reviews section, except I tend to trust them a hell of a lot more because they don't have an explicit agenda in mind,=.

    Sort it out, it's rapidly becoming a joke.




    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 21:00

  • ShiroBen #96 1 year ago

    I ... I actually agree with this article completely. I'm kind of shocked, considering how past 'Why I Hates...' have been.

  • HistoryTeller #97 1 year ago

    Jeffery Matulef - you are so right. With everything you say. Probably so much that people will refuse to see that by highlighting the things you say RDR is somewhat a complete failure.

    Well, its the same thing with GTA - the storys protagonist doesn't make sense to a 6 year old kid.

  • Wyrm #98 1 year ago

    Thank god the Jack section was only a few hours long. I enjoyed it for what it was, but any more would have been boooooooring.

  • dr_faulk #99 1 year ago

    I only got to the point where you can wrangle the horses and suddenly got sick of the by-the-hand 'no you have to catch five more horses because we don't believe you've gotten the hang of this yet' throat-ramming gameplay mechanics.

    I think since playing Oblivion, I can only play games where you aren't forced through dribbling conversations, where you can walk off mid-sentence and nick their apples and books.

    I felt that Arkham Asylum suffered the same as RDR: shitty cut scenes that halted the flow of the gameplay.

  • GamesConnoisseur #100 1 year ago

    People, you know what we are playing are essentially a game?

    I mean there are limits to how we can make it's work, how much of story we can make it alongside how entertaining within the mechanism and boundaries of the game at the time?

    I mean how silly is the fact that Nathan Drake murdered his way through a percentage of human race and broken up so many families with lost father, husband, brother and so on? Yet if we try to be so grounded in reality the game will have to end at the second or third level after 20 or so henchmen got murdered?!

    Games were simpler before the stories get involved, but you have to appreciate how developers matured in story telling but we are still ar from reaching the totally epic and yet really balanced.

    RDR for me was always about homage to Western, and includes all sort of references to Movies, TV series, books, whether comedic, tragic or otherwise. I enjoyed RDR as appreciated the balance much more than GTA4.

  • RedSparrows #101 1 year ago

    Not played it, but that thing about the main guy going 'one last time!' reminds me of Nico Bellic going 'I hate all this killing....OK I'LL GO KILL MORE PEOPLE'.

  • kafly #102 1 year ago

    I love these articles. I think the video game community in general is just way too accepting.You know that thing were only the top half of the scale is ever used, how a 7/10 is a sub-par game and a 6/10 is terrible. And how games critics can somehow collectively agree that f.ex. gears of war is a great game. The story in that game is just plain dumb. imagine if it was a movie. critics would hammer that thing to a pulp. Granted it has polished game-play and whatever, but it isn't the pinnacle of what games could be, its a pretty simple shooter tailor made for dumb 12 year old boys of all ages. Metascore of 94(!). and thats from guys are "critics". its amazing

    The first generation of people growing up with video-games are closing in on 30-35 years of age by now. I wish people would start demanding more from video games, because there is so much potential. Tis the coolest medium of all, i just wish the developers would stop consistently underestimating their audience. And critics are somehow accepting it too. I come here to eurogamer because these guys sometimes write genuinely good articles, but even here they often end up praising hilariously stupid games.

    I'd love to see some more actual criticism, and put it in the reviews themselves and not just these retrospect thingies.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/11 @ 23:46

  • slivir #103 1 year ago

    Mexico was certainly a stretch to get through.

  • jellyBelly #104 1 year ago

    Gameplay in GTA and this never really gelled with me. I can appreciate all the effort that went into the writing, music, world creation and ambience, its just that the fundamental gameplay tokens seem terribly mundane to me with no real sense of excitement or buzz
    Edited by 1 at 19/02/11 @ 00:52

  • DrStrangelove #105 1 year ago

    The other is legendary gunslinger Landon Ricketts. He's a cool cat who dishes out vigilante justice to help peasants, because apparently Mexicans are completely helpless unless there's an American around to do their work for them.

    Dude take care. Someone might read this and wake up the Mexican ambassador.

  • Sevens #106 1 year ago

    Well done, Jeffrey.

  • frazzl #107 1 year ago

    "Instead, 90 per cent of Read Dead Redemption is devoted to meandering storytelling, embarrassing dialogue, thinly drawn caricatures and blase shooting."

    This is exactly how I feel about the GTA titles. Take GTA IV for example. Despite Niko's monologues on the horrors of war and wanting to lead a regular life, the game repeatedly leads him into situations where violence, sometimes against the innocent, is the only solution. On top of that, the various one-liners he spouts whilst gunning down pedestrians and criminals alike suggests he enjoys killing, making him, in my opinion, an unlikeable character. I am not the biggest fan of Kratos, but at least he's unapologetic about being the crazed sociopath he is.

    I feel that not only do Rockstar need to improve on their script writing, they need to design their game around it appropriately. If not, they should just get off their high horse and make a fun and unpretentiously violent open world title like Saints Row 2. Now neg away :).
    Edited by 1 at 19/02/11 @ 03:58

  • Atropos #108 1 year ago

    I agree with most of this article; I finished the game, so it wasn't that I didn't enjoy it at all. It was pretty and sometimes enjoyable... But I kept thinking of Demon's Souls NG+ while I was playing. So... Red Dead Redemption: the rebound relationship of gaming.

  • jabberwoky #109 1 year ago

    I bought RDR on the strength of the reviews, and the trailers and paid full price for it which I don't normally do. Got blown away by the atmosphere and location, wandered around for hours enchanted by how real it all seemed. Then I thought, OK now lets get down to the game itself. After about 8 hours of going from person a to person b, doing annoying little minigame after annoying little minigame , and realising combat consisted of poor mechanics masked by hordes of baddies to try to give it more content, - well I just gave up and sold it while it had re-sale value. And I was pretty well pissed. And actually I still am. So its nice to know that I'm not the only one.

  • olionajudah #110 1 year ago

    thank you. I, for one could not agree more with this article. unfortunately I have not gotten to the good part yet.. and I keep going back hoping to reach the end.

    ridiculous writing. barely capable gameplay. enough is enough.
    thank you. I could not agree more, and while I will continue, between sessions with more enjoyable games like vanquish (2nd playhrough on hard), bayonetta (2nd playhrough on hard), demon's souls (ng+++.. with a friend), and come Tuesday, kz3, to plug my way towards the likable and quizzical john marston's final act, I will be utterly relieved when the credits have run

  • absurdio #111 1 year ago

    Have to agree completely with you, Jeffrey. This is one more wildly inconsistent game from the Rockstars of inconsistencies. I would not consier myself as picky when it comes to flaws in games - indeed some of my favourite games are full of faults and niggles. But when the experience as a whole doesn't come together for me, it lessens my fun considerably. When you put so much emphasis on the story in games as Rockstar does - yes they do, don't even try to argue against it - I expect at least some shred of logic and common sense in my character, instead of being forced down contrived routes of repeatedly inane missions that are so morally stupid they beggar belief. Like in GTAIV, where you several times end up with a "moral" choice of letting a notorious gangster die or get away, never mind that you in the process of getting that far have gunned down, say, a few dozen policemen. In RDR, you have the "choice" of being a moral, honourable person, or a dangerous outlaw. Whatever you choose, you still HAVE to be nice to the ranchwoman (whose nagging voice drove me nuts,) and despite being a scoundrel and a criminal (by history and by choice) your character speaks and acts like he has been living the etikette of the British court his entire life. This is unarguably really crappy writing, and ruins for me what should be a believable and cohesive expericence. Shows my own hypocrisy as I still enjoy several elements of the games, although no gtas or rdrs will ever reach my top ten list.

  • Darren #112 1 year ago

    I thought Red Dead Redemption was the best game of 2009 with Mass Effect 2 a close second so I can't agree with this article at all I'm afraid. Loved every second of it even if the last stretch to the ending was ultimately a little disappointing. Still doesn't ruin for me what was an exemplary, thoroughly enjoyable and extremely polished game. As I've come to expect from Rockstar. Can't wait for L.A. Noire either.

  • Leolian #113 1 year ago

    I fully agree with everything said in this article.

  • Genyus #114 1 year ago

    I like how you first neg on Marston about how he complies so easily to everyone even though he says "This is the last time". Isn't that the same what you did when your friends told you: "Keep playing, the good part will be there".

  • O11Y #115 1 year ago

    Reading these comments, I feel like the only person on the planet who likes GTA IV. Sure, the game play was often ropey but the atmosphere and characterization in in that game still remains several light years ahead of the rest of the market. Niko is also one of only a handful of video game characters who, whether you liked him or not, actually had depth.

    I started RDR but soon gave up because I found the characters to be flat and uninteresting. To me RDR felt like GTA IV with its heart ripped out, leaving only the shonky game mechanics and the uninspiring missions.

  • OliverH #116 1 year ago

    @optimusprym8 #54
    "Considering it's a game that is a pastiche of everything Western, drawing most of it's influences from films, lack of historical accuracy is hardly something to complain about. "

    While that may be true, it's not an excuse. The other poster who pointed out "No, westerns aren't full of caricatures" got it right: The word is archetype, and there's a difference. I don't think anyone expects historical accuracy, but character consistency has something for it. For some serious out-for-revenge characters, take a look at the better ones of the Italo-Westerns, or some of the films Eastwood later did on his own. Sans Eastwood, "Once upon a time in the West" is precisely what you mention: A pastiche of everything western, an homage to some of the genre's greatest films and at the same time a farewell to its concepts.

    The parallel to the concept of RDR would have been Eastwood in Pale Rider teaming up with Coy Lahood, killing all of the "good miners" just so that Coy and Stockborn get too comfortable in his presence and only then gunning them down. Or Harmonica in "Once upon a time in the West" hiring up with the railroad so that he can get to Frank. But that's not who these people are. And therein lies the inconsistency of the main character - and the lack of necessity for caricatures.

  • oupe #117 1 year ago

    Can't agree. I disliked GTA IV even if it did push all the right buttons but I enjoyed RDR a lot. You're right about the questionable ethics of the main character and the uninspired combat but the entire package was just too good not to finish this game.

  • Demiath #118 1 year ago

    The game hadn't been overrated if it weren't for all those GOTY awards it got all of a sudden. Stacked up against the likes of Mass Effect 2 this sloppily paced, awkwardly controlled and misanthropically written open world title can't quite compete...

  • Dogs-not-Gods #119 1 year ago

    Can't agree with the article at all. If you haven't played RDR yet do yourself a favour and buy it. It is so cheap these days it's virtually a steal. Hours of incredible gameplay and atmosphere in buckets. A truly outstanding experience.

  • king26 #120 1 year ago

    Bought this yesterday and I am very impressed! Annoyed tha I didn't buy it sooner

  • MrDurandPierre #121 1 year ago

    @Genyus

    Good point! I also spend much of my day roaming around hogtying people;)

  • Sanya #122 1 year ago

    I don't hate the game but I hate the politics of its publisher,they try еo squeeze out every penny from console versions and stubbornly don't port it on PC on which they can sell 30-25 thousand copies more only at retail without digital copies
    Edited by 1 at 22/02/11 @ 09:44

  • dmt2 #123 1 year ago

    RDR has the most memorable ending which, coupled with the stunning landscape, makes it truly epic.

    But that in no way makes up for the tedium of traipsing back and forth across the territory.

    The shooting mechanics, the polished menu structures, the horse animation - all the background stuff is brilliant but, as I think the EG review stated, the fetch quest nature of Rockstar games should be retired.

    I thought, too, that the music should have had a theme. Its good, but only in an incidental kind of way.

    Undead nightmare: agreed on the useless controls - it really needs to be FPS to make it work. Running in circles wildly flailing a flaming torch is not fun.

  • Paulie_P #124 1 year ago

    I found this an interesting article. I love Red Dead Redemption but I feel this article does make some good points about the story writing. For me though, I just got lost in the world of the game. So much so that I rarely used the fast-travel when I needed to go anywhere.

    Many of the points about the story could've been made about the GTA games but it doesn't make them any less valid. Maybe as a group, gamers go too easy on the story because it's a game when we really shouldn't if we want games to receive some sort of higher recognition as an entertainment industry.

  • sirtacos #125 1 year ago

    I thought the caricatures for characters were appropriate considering Rockstar's long-standing record for creating reluctant hero types and populating the game world with cartoonish personalities that are essentially one-note jokes and/or references to films.

    I took RDR for what it was and enjoyed it immensely... for a while. The game undoubtedly sags in the middle, and this is where John Marston's flat personality really becomes apparent (we get it, he's world-weary, repentent etc - but it goes beyond that... the guy barely ever shows initiative... which makes the stereotypical videogame "do this, do that" tropes really transparent).

    Loved the atmosphere though, and the graphics were breathtaking. And yes, HORSIES!
    Although, on a tenuously related note, I would have loved it if you could have benefits for keeping a particular horse for a while... beyond whistling for it. Such as... levelling it up, or having the relationship between cowboys and their horses more salient and involving. As it stands, they're basically sentient cars you can ditch whenever you feel like.

  • watu #126 1 year ago

    Hate is a strong word and even though I was dissapointed with RDR on so many levels, I expected to read an article expressing all kinds of hate for hate's sake.

    I was surprised then, to read exactly my criticisms of the game. The author has detailed his opinions based on facts of the game and I'm surprised at some of the criticism he's getting. I think he laid out his point so clearly and logically that anybody disagreeing with him can only say "Yeah, but I like that thing you hate so it's alright with me". Which would be fine by the way cos we all have different tastes. By clearly explaining "why" he hates the game, his opinion has integrity.

    Some people here disagree with the criticism of Marsdon's character because they claim Marsden was "complex" and "conflicted". I think these people need to read more books and watch more movies of genuinely conflicted characters in genuinely tricky situations to understand true conflicted and complex characters, but they also need to stop and think how they would feel if they came across someone like Marsden and saw how he behaved.

    In my opinion there could have been so many more interesting plot devices using the base material they had- the wild west, revenge, blackmail, mexican revolution, gold diggers, snake oil salesmen etc- without resorting to shallow character cliche's like the deranged gold-digger, bumbling deputies, transparent snake-oil SM, drunken Irishman, Card-board cutout Mexicans etc.. These idiot characters I hated wouldn't have lasted a second in the real wild west and their idiot characters weren't a requirement for the game to be fun and adventurous. I just watched True Grit- a great example of a "fun" fast paced adventure western that didn't sacrifice the 'grit' and identity of the western genre.

    But when the main stream game media lauded Rockstar's credetials as creators of great characters for a game that included one of the most annoying characters I have ever had to endure - Niko's cousin (forgot the name of a forgettable character)- then of course they are going to insert more unbelievably stupid characters into their next game.....

    I agree with article, but there is so much I do like about RDR - it's beauty alone is a reason I'll never sell or trade it- that I don't HATE it. It just disspointed me is all...
    Edited by 1 at 21/02/11 @ 01:56

  • sirtacos #127 1 year ago

    Great comment watu. Agree completely.

  • Blackthorned #128 1 year ago

    These are all fair points but none of them occurred to me when I was playing the game.

  • spekkeh #129 1 year ago

    I just read the original review again, and although I think Simon Parkin is generally a good reviewer, and the 8/10 he gave was both correct and already led to lots of fanboy nerd rage and hysteria, I think Matulef's piece points out the faults much more clearly.

    Maybe EG should go back to what it did a number of years ago, when their (often hilariously scathing) reviews only came up two weeks after the release. I wouldn't like it much, because EG has steadily become my (and perhaps the industry's) only definitive games related authority, but at least it keeps the reviewing process refreshingly hype-free.

  • KongRudi #130 1 year ago

    For me it were that the game forced me to aim and shoot with L2/R2, instead of the proper buttons, L1/R1.
    Gamebreaker. Not gonna buy a Rockstar-game until I'm sure they don't repeat the mistake.

  • KrazyFace #131 1 year ago


    Kudos to the writer of this article for being honest, but I can't say I share the same sentiment towards the game myself. I understand perfectly what it is that R* do with their characters and the angle of satire they take with them. Though they do take a serious note from time to time, RDR and all the GTAs have always been about taking the piss out of these steriotypes, which is exactly why they have them.

    One of the main reasons the GTA franchise has suffered such backlash is simply because people take it on face-value too often. The term "black comedy" is what usually happens in a R* story, but I understand that a lot of people just don't "get" that most of the time. For me the biggest problem I had with RDR was after the last mission, where running around the wild west with Jack's annoying tweeny voice telling his horse to "work ya dang naag" made me cringe so much that I re-played the whole game again and stopped at a certian point just so I could re-visit it in the future without having to deal with having to "be" Jack!

  • JensonJet #132 1 year ago

    Well, this is what you get when a bunch of computer programmers try and tell a story.

    The industry's full of tech-heads. It has barely any creativity running through it. And it's writing and storytelling are embarrassing, amateur, childish and cliche.

    If you want well written scripts and interesting stories, videogames are the last place you should look.

    Walk into a random bookshop, pick up any old story book, pick a random page and the chances are it'll be smarter, better written, more interesting and have more depth than a whole year's worth of products from the videogame industry.

  • MrJoeSnow #133 12 months ago

    Another brilliant article. RDR had the same affect on me. I had totally lost patience early on but soldiered through regardless. The multiplayer was good for a short time but ultimately meh!

    The Original Red dead was brilliant the new Red Dead was Cack. End of.