There is no doubt that Red Dead Redemption 2 is a game packed to the brim with enthralling content. One of the most precise definitions of an "open world" as it allows you to explore a vast, beautiful, wild west frontier with striking detail paired with one of the most enthralling stories and empathetic characters in video games.

Although you're playing a game filled with outlaws in nearly every definition of the word, there's beauty in the souls of repeat criminal offenders. The player comes into contact with several different people among many different walks of life, leading to dynamic encounters both scripted and even player-driven (if not in a railroaded mission) that make this world and its characters feel so genuine. The sheer number of "important" characters to the narrative is intimidating, leading to an expected lengthy runtime; a runtime that is understandably a bit much for many, and itching close to a dealbreaker for me. Thankfully, the aforementioned strong narrative guides the player through an often dark, sometimes beautiful, and tear-jerking narrative that you won't forget anytime soon.

Red Dead Redemption 2's story and aesthetics are admittedly its saving grace among a litany of long-standing issues with Rockstar's game design. There's no need to go over every one of them, but if you've played any other open-world Rockstar game, you'll find yourself in the samey travel, talk, shooting gallery, talk mission structures found in their games of yore. Be prepared, come the later chapters of the story, that's going to be a large majority of story missions.

As long as you stick to Rockstar's strict guidelines on what it wants from you in its story, you'll have an amazing time with this game. While I did enjoy my time, I found being railroaded through extensive - and sometimes quite boring - missions and travel bloated the completion time more than it should have. Red Dead Redemption 2's scenery does make the tedious-to-swallow travel time easier to digest. Eventually, the player will even gain access to fast travel, yet like many other mechanics in Red Dead Redemption 2, it's buried under heaps of poor UI and the game's assistance in sticking to its underwhelming survival mechanics.

In this attempt to create a more "realistic" open-world experience, you're bound from the beginning to engage with some (mostly optional) survival mechanics. Some of these may be fun and even turn into decent companion missions (ex: hunting, fishing, ambushes), but many slog down the pace of the game and introduce more burdens on a game that demands a lot of your time. Having to worry about babying Arthur around to make sure he eats, gets proper sleep, bathes, as well as cleans and feeds his horse gets old when you need to do these things and have to take extended breaks from the story. All of this comes from someone who hasn't had many positive experiences with survival games as it is. I know that in the grand scheme of survival games, Red Dead Redemption 2 doesn't go very far; that begs the question though as to why they'd bother to implement these features if they weren't going to go all-in?

It's sad to know that many developers literally hurt themselves for the production of this game; something we should never excuse or forget. With that crunch and strong ambitions for what Red Dead Redemption 2's world was to be, there are some problems worth discussing. Many have pontificated already about the need for these 100+ hour work weeks to code in your male horse's balls shrinking in the cold (obviously unnecessary), but that also sheds a dichotomy to Rockstar's overall mission structure. With how many obsessive little things there are to find and do throughout Red Dead Redemption 2, the gameplay structure of many story missions buckles down into drawn-out shooting galleries with a janky cover system and less-than-stellar shooting controls. There's good reason to question Rockstar's priorities when it comes to game design.

At the end of the day, my experience with Red Dead Redemption 2 is obviously a positive one. That said, when you're expected to be railroaded through very specific mission structures, with specific half-baked survival mechanics, and with clunky, outdated gameplay on behalf of an overly-detailed animation system, I begin wondering if Rockstar is ever going to evolve beyond its writing and tech prowess and will begin providing better gameplay experiences in the future.

If I wasn't such a fan of Final Fantasy X, I would say without a shadow of a doubt that Red Dead Redemption 2 is the greatest game I've ever played. I got into RDR2 at the request of several around me who had been prodding me for years and years to finally get on it, I didn't have a PS4 for some time and didn't have a capable PC either so I had held if off. Lo and behold upgrade time came and I finally got on both the proverbial and actual train.

RDR2 starts off slow, and I mean really slow. I think for the first few hours I might have touch a key other than W maybe one or two times (major hyperbole there) but you are doing a LOT of walking and following. However throughout the story of Dutch Van Der Linde's infamous gang, things and people start to change. Greed and anger seep their way into the gang slowly but surely over the fifty+ hour experience.

This game is the definition of a slowburn, but what you get in the payoff is quite easily a top two written story and the greatest open world in attention to detail ever made. Fans of the original Red Dead Redemption are probably aware that this is no shocker, but the minutia that Rockstar gets into here is absolutely off the wall. Animals, people, the weather all interact in unique ways, you're never sure to see the same thing twice in the same location.

The story of Red Dead 2 takes the form of a multi-season cowboy television show, it feels almost surreal in how un-rushed and realistic it is. Fear and death follows Arthur Morgan everywhere he goes whether its his fault or somebody elses. The twists and foreshadowing that occur throughout this game will have you audibly gasping and pausing as they unveil.

Though the ending you can see a mile away, it's the delivery Rockstar achieved that will make anybody no matter how manly they are, cry some damn cowboy tears.

It's Not Coming Back

It’s a con, all of it. The staged world, the stock characters, the hollow story, the “good man” Arthur, the wretched missions, the stupid shooting galleries, the sulky masculinity, the blinkered whiteness, every masturbatory detail. The game believes in nothing, cares about nothing but its own con.

And we want to be conned. We want it. We love the lies. We love the con of videogames.

Videogame culture is humiliating.

It’s not every year that a game so hyped, so lionized, so slathered with superlatives is so plainly godawful. Stupid games like Far Cry 5 are near annual occurrences, but a game as bad as Red Dead Redemption 2 only comes along every generation or so. It takes a certain budget and a particular talent for self-delusion to really pull it off. Because if there’s one thing worse than a stupid game that revels in its stupidity, it’s a stupid game that doesn’t know it’s stupid. That instead imagines itself as something greater, something serious, even magisterial, something like Art. A game that cons not only players and critics but, finally, itself.

I can’t pretend to have any sympathy for it. I’m exhausted by cons, given our current reality. And in the end, cons are very hard to fight. They aren’t just singular lies. They are plural lies, contagious lies, deeply social lies. A con is a lie that requires widespread belief and complicity to work. It’s a mutual lie that depends, absolutely, on the faithful, on willing marks, their participation and investment. When most effective, a con is a generative lie, a lie that produces other lies. A lie that creates more liars. It’s a lie you desperately want to be true, so much so that it undermines the very possibility of truth. Because a con is fundamentally a lie about the world, and about the reality of yourself in it. It is, at heart, a metaphysical lie.

You can criticize a con all you want and still never get at the frame, the assumptions, the motivations that keep it going. Especially if the con is big enough, expensive enough, and ever so attended to by a complicit media. So instead of detailing every single lie in Red Dead Redemption 2, I want to ask a few questions in a sub-essay:

Why do you find this world convincing? Why do you think this story and these characters are good? How can you stomach the mournful tone? How can you play these missions without wanting to claw your eyes out?

Though there is really only one question in the end: why do you love the con of videogames?

Maybe you don’t think videogames writ large are a con. Maybe you don’t think Red Dead Redemption 2 in particular is either. So what do you call something that looks this good and plays this bad? That details this much and means this little? That’s this technically impressive and also this anachronistic? That centers shitty white men and says this is just the way it is? That has you murder thousands and yet declares you’re still a good man?

Is this not videogames? Is this not a con?


collaborators


Games require your participation. This is known. But what are the stakes of that participation? At what point does your investment become complicity? Playing a videogame is a partnership in meaning-making, but how do you know when you can trust that partner? How would you even recognize a con? Consider the playing of games within broader games culture. Is the relationship not mutual, generative, contagious? Before even getting into the metaphysics of the virtual. At what point are you not just collaborating with a videogame, and with games culture, but are yourself a full-on collaborator?

Put another way: why do you want to believe RDR2 is not a con? What’s in it for you? Why do you need this game to be good?

It can’t just be what you want to be true. I wanted Dead Cells to be great because I enjoy roguelikes and admire how the company is organized as a worker collective. I wanted Gris to be great because I love metaphoric play and examinations of pain and being submerged in another subjectivity. I even wanted Red Dead to be great because I love westerns, I love ambitious worlds, and I love a good redemption story. Even for Rockstar. After all, I did once love GTA III and San Andreas. But actually, unfortunately, I don’t like Dead Cells. I don’t like Gris. And I hate Red Dead Redemption 2. I don’t want this to be true. But it is true.

This isn’t just a taste thing. I don’t think the con of RDR2 is that controversial. I think saying it matters is the problem. So what if it’s full of lies? The it’s just a game defense jumps to the tip of every tongue. But what actually happens to you when you play a videogame? Where does all that heat come from, all those gaming emotions? How do you feel when you look out on the landscape? When you talk to those in your camp? When you shoot someone in the face? You can’t feel something about one aspect and not the others.

Somehow our guard comes down. Perhaps because it’s just a game. Sure it is. But it doesn’t end there. Things are activated within us. Things we carry back into the world after the game. Which is not to say games makes people violent or anything reductive like that. But it does mean we’re vulnerable when we play. Not just to the game but to ourselves, to things lurking within us. Our beliefs, our needs, our fears, our very way of being is at play. Every game implicitly asks: how should a virtual person be? So why wouldn’t Red Dead’s answer matter?


playing along


The truth is, I think most gamers totally relate to Arthur. He’s a character without much character, which is exactly what players are encouraged to be. They know something isn’t quite right, but they keep following along. They can’t muster the gumption to insist on anything different. They know Dutch is a con artist, but they need the con to live. Gamers are in too deep to turn back now.

Like Arthur, you don’t need to be a true believer to perpetuate the con. A con relies on skeptics as much as the faithful. Those who remain just suspicious enough, just aware enough to convince themselves they’re not being conned. Even as they go along with it. You tell yourself: I see what’s going on here, I see the faults, I’m no fool. Even as you mount your internal defenses, justify your actions, and play along. Do this long enough and you become the best mark of all. The mark who thinks they’re in control, who can quit anytime. Complete self-deception comes from thinking you’re un-con-able. Sure, you might have a modicum of self-awareness. Just not enough to make a difference.

The entire game invites this. Like the skeptic, Red Dead Redemption 2 has just enough self-awareness to seem smart but no courage to actually change anything. It’s not weird or revolutionary or even valiantly slow. Its unwieldiness, its supposed ‘resistance’ is meaningless. To read any of its quirks as significant, you have to want this to be true. You have to want to believe. And you have to ignore what a reactionary game it actually is, the worst since BioShock Infinite.

Dutch, like Comstock before him, though with a more self-serving inclusivity and without all the quantum theory, hails from the same era of frontier grifting. Let us seek a promised land together, a final refuge, and we only need to shoot thousands to get there. That it proves false is nothing to hang your hat on. That was not the lesson here. It was still you who pulled the trigger. You who took the pleasure. You who still believe. Because Dutch’s con — necessary violence as a path to freedom — is the videogame con.


the american con


You see where this is going, right? Red Dead Redemption 2 came out in 2018. And in 2018, you can’t talk about cons without talking about the con that is America. With its conman president, enabled by the con that is conservatism, selling the con that is the American Dream. It’s an old story, one that Red Dead thinks it’s in on. The con of the frontier, the con of settlers, the con of whiteness, the con of exceptionalism. Necessary violence as a path to freedom. The con of freedom.

Defenders might say Red Dead Redemption 2 is about this very American con. It’s not. If it were, it wouldn’t center shitty white men. It wouldn’t use Native characters as props for white plots. It would have actual cogent criticism embedded in its structure rather than all this wasted extravagance. It wouldn’t have dead eye. It wouldn’t be a shooter at all. It would explore alternative mechanics. It would not mourn.

It is here, between its seeming subject and the actual experience of playing it, that we have the heart of Red Dead Redemption 2’s con. We have white american outlaws and traditional gamers, both sick with empire. We have collaborators with the systems that enable their delusions. We have pain at the expense of everyone who is not us. And in this particular moment, that makes RDR2 not only the worst game of the year, not only the worst game of this generation, but an active contributor to the all-consuming falseness eating our world.

Replace the cowboy hats with MAGA hats, and it becomes a little clearer. This is a family not of outlaws but of reactionaries. There’s nothing radical or courageous about them. The entire tone of Red Dead reflects this current conservative moment, the con being perpetuated. Your main man Arthur isn’t even a special case. Sure the world has plenty of dumb loyalists like Bill and charming young dipshits like John, always claiming “I don’t have a choice”. But there are just as many Arthurs out there in red caps as racist fucks like Micah. Not true believers but sad sacks gone sour. With more sulk than bile, longing for a past that never even existed. And these Arthurs, like so many gamers, don’t even care anymore that it’s a lie. They gave up responsibility for the truth a long time ago.

What does it mean to long for a lie? Where does it end? Especially when, at most, what you’re longing for is a feeling. Well, what you remember of a feeling. Hasn’t anyone told you the bad news, sweetheart? It’s not coming back. Not the old west, not your white stories of America, not frontier or freedom. And not Soulcalibur or Far Cry 2 or Rockstar’s heyday either. None of it’s ever coming back. Certainly not your lost feeling. It’s just as your conservative heart fears. Nothing will be made great again. Because past greatness is a con. And there is no again.

- tevis thompson, 2019

A masterpiece, striking the perfect balance of fun and emotional open-world gameplay

NOTE: THIS GAME JUST TOUCHES ON THE SINGLE PLAYER. I HAVE NOT PLAYED THE MULTIPLAYER. CHECK OTHER REVIEWS FOR OPINIONS ON THAT IF THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE AFTER!

What is it about?

It's American Old West in 1899. The Wild West is being tamed. The days of the outlaw are dying out, with the few that are clinging on to it finding out the hard way. We follow the life of Arthur Morgan and the notorious Van der Linde gang, which is as close to family as Morgan has.
We follows the gang as they try to survive, get that one big score and find a better life for themselves, or the while they are pursued by lawmen, fellow gangs and Pinkerton agents.

The Review

Back in 2010, Red Dead Redemption was released on Xbox 360 and PS3. It wasn't just Grand Theft Auto in the Wild West, it was a near-revelation, showing that Rockstar could not only pull off a open-world game that was fun but also a game that was mature and tell a down-to-earth story. A great game that stood alongside GTA, instead of its shadow.

To say that Red Dead Redemption 2 has surpassed it is almost an understatement. This is a game that had high expectations and has not only met them, but made it look so easy that it's quite breathtaking how good this game is.

This is a very detailed game. Even if you're PC isn't a powerful, future-proof kind of rig, it's still looks fantastic on high settings and damn good on medium. Places just look breathtaking and you come across locations and sites that make you pause rather than just glance and pass them by and the way cinematic are used just add to the visual flair.

But it's not the surface that gives it the visual appeal it's the way that everything seems natural. The way people and animals go about their lives, the conversations you can overhear, the layout of locations and establishments. the details on items and weapons, etc, the world feels alive and not in a artificial way.

You could argue that characters in Red Dead Redemption 2 aren't the most visually impressive in a AAA game, but they feel as real as they can get in a game. The conversations they have is charming and you really begin to feel emotionally tied to people, whether you love them, hate them, find them charming, creepy, etc. Other great small touches are a journal that is joy to look through and newspapers that are fun to read, detailing exploits not just touched by your hands.

The music just adds another delightful slice to the thick layer of presentation, especially in the later stages of the game.

Of course, you can have a beautiful game but it all becomes nothing but a pretty, expensive picture if the game is not up to scratch and while it's bursting at the seams, it's held together.

The controls can be a bit finicky at times (especially when picking up items that are close together) and take a while to get use to, but after a while the latter is cleared up and becomes second nature and the former is never a deal breaker.

The missions are excellent fare and don't always end up with shooting someone, with a favourite standout being a drunken night out with a fellow gang member. There are a few key choices in the game that can have an impact (there is also a morality system, but this has less of an impact on the story, more helpful to see how good or bad you are). Optional missions are worthwhile as they opened up to anecdotes and fun missions that make them more than throwaway distractions.

Outside of missions, the game rewards exploration. There is some repetition to what you can encounter but mostly just when you think you've seen what this game has to offer, it subverts your expectations by throwing something new or calling back to a moment you thought was insignificant such as one very early mission ends up having huge ramifications down the line. And hunting and fishing can take up huge hours, being frustrating at times but hugely satisfying when you catch a big game fish, a legendary predator or snag a perfect pelt. A few side-quests are long scavenge hunts, so if you are someone who considers 100% a game to collect EVERYTHING, you are in for the long haul.

There are some weird gameplay choices, like fast travel (which has to be unlocked) only available while camping or at your home base (same for crafting), Eagle Eye (allows you to highlight tracks and items/collectables in close range) only being temporary instead of being able to keep it on for good and no-mid auto-saves for missions. These don't even really impact the game negatively, it's more of a chin-scratcher.

But really the biggest issue (PC wise) is the technical issues. Still the game has crash issues, loading issues, bugs and even some glitches. These are the closest to deal-breakers but honestly, the game is so damn great that if you experience these, you grin and bear it. And you maybe lucky to not experience these at all. Even at full price, this game more than justifies its worth.

This is more than just some violent open-world with shooting and collectables. This is a gritty adventure with a tale worth seeing to the full end, with flair, personality and substance to last for a long, long time.

Rating: 10/10

Game is mad pretty but everything else... wow... uhm... honestly, I literally don’t understand. The realism takes away so much from the game. It became unplayable for me after trying for awhile. I just couldn’t get into it. Everything you do takes so long because of their dedication to realism.

If I loot someone or something, just give me a menu to decide what to take, don’t do an animation or make it hard for me to see or decide. You don’t need to open cabinets and chests to loot them. It’s just so many inconveniences. Not to mention lack of customization for the crosshair. Should I be sitting in front of my 55inch tv? Because I can’t see the HUD or UI at all. And everything is written in messy cursive. I can read and write in it but it’s borderline illegible and only some of it provides subtitles for it.

Arthur sucks too. I did not like and him and willingly choose to not spend anymore time with him.

Overall, I did not enjoy myself at all and I was waiting for it to get better or more fun—it never did. I assume this is controversial but I tried and it just... I tried so hard to like it.

To me, Read Dead Redemption 2 is a game that is both remarkable in its artistic achievements but also painstaking to play at times.

Everything about this game is methodical and requires patience on the part of the player. Actions like skinning an animal, dismounting your horse and crafting ammunition at your campsite feels deliberate and oftentimes cumbersome. I can't help but feel like this was intentional on the part of Rockstar - to make the player slow down and immerse themselves in this ludicrously accurate world they've built.

When I think of the story, I think mainly of Arthur Morgan - the complex, richly layered and conflicted main character. Arthur stands among gaming's greatest protagonists with characters like Joel + Ellie, Kratos and Atreus and even John Marston himself. Arthur might be my favorite written character in video games, and in most fiction in general; his arc throughout the game is profoundly impactful, and the ending of his story, without any spoilers, leaves me feeling empty in a sad but almost beautiful way.

I remember playing this for the first time when it came out in 2018, 8 years after the original. I saw advertisements for the game in subway stations and on posters, and couldn't remember the last time a video game had generated this much hype around its release. Up until that point, video games for me had been a vehicle for entertainment, a way to pass the time. RDR2 was the first time that I allowed myself to get truly swept up in the narrative of a video game, to allow myself to identify with the characters, their struggles and achievements, their friendships and betrayals. I remember finishing this game for the first time and being shocked at just how incredible I thought this game was, at how Rockstar had managed to create a game that I considered to be a work of art. I thought about this game for weeks afterward.

Fast forward 4 years, and I decided to take another dive into the world of Arthur and the gang. This time, I decided to take my time with the game as much as possible. I deliberately sat down at my camp and chatted with members of the gang; I skipped the fast travel so I could take in this expansive, gorgeous world; I cooked meals for myself under the starlit night sky while I was out on the road. I engaged with this game in a way I hadn't before, and I'm so happy I did.

Having played other story-rich games like The Last of Us and God of War since my first play-through in 2018, I was able to appreciate this game in an entirely new way this time around. Despite certain aspects of the game seeming purposefully frustrating, and some jankiness around movement/gun mechanics, this game is very special to me and an objective masterpiece in my eyes. RDR2's scope, writing, world design, voice/motion capture performances and music are all near flawless, and when you bring them together you get a product of such remarkable quality that doesn't seem like it should even exist - but I'm so glad it does.

This is not a comprehensive review or even a really interesting one, just some of my thoughts after what is surprisingly my third play through (I like this game more every time I play it wtf)

—A scathing commentary on a rapidly changing capitalist America, red dead redemption 2 seems determined to push the studio’s themes of corruption, greed, hypocrisy, racism, sexism, class struggle and disparity, and much, MUCH more. this is rockstar’s best game, and honestly it isn’t even close. Well maybe it’s a little close; San Andreas hits the mark more often than not, and GTA V rarely but surely has some moments of wisdom, albeit buried under a sea of college frat boy humour. Now I don’t think red dead 2 is by any means the greatest piece of political non fiction or whatever, but it definitely is the natural progression of rockstar’s story telling, and most certainly their crowning achievement. Also the soundtrack is amaaaazing. Seriously guys you’re making everyone else look bad lol.


—There’s a mission that unlocks at the beginning of chapter 3, where going into Rhodes leads you to an old war veteran half asleep on a bench with a bottle in hand. He asks you to get some stuff from his house, a house that is no longer his, and so you do just that.
Entering the decrepit place triggers some moody soft music, music that only gets more layered the more you advance through. You can find many photographs and letters, all of which are voiced over, something that is surprisingly pretty rare. The letters tell of family disputes, homes being taken away, and you can’t help but feel bad for this guy, who’s had everything taken away from him, and in a desperate moment asks YOU to reclaim some of his treasured belongings. after encountering some crazy people who’ve claimed the house as their own and are carrying one of the items you need, a fight ensues. Progressing past this part leads you to the final area in the house.

The cellar is where the music reaches its peak, and though it never gets loud (thankfully) the synths really help accentuate the horror of this moment: the man you’ve felt empathy for, the man you’ve helped reclaim valued possessions, the man whose life story sparks nothing but empathy within you, was nothing but a slave owner. Chains upon chains litter the cellar, Arthur groans as he reads through the slave ledger, and everything you’ve learned in this mission has been immediately flipped around on you, tainted by horrific acts of pure hatred and evil. When you go back to him the man mumbles something along the lines of “they took everything from me, I was a working man”. Arthur throws his stuff in the fire, and watches as the man breaks down into tears, and the mission only ends when you leave the area, or kill him.
Killing him raises your honour.

If I had one thought after playing this mission, it was that everything was so intricately designed, from the music to the voice overs, to the environments of the house and the revelation of the cellar. It’s honestly hard to put into words what red dead 2 gets so right, but I’d say a faithfulness to capturing a specific moment in history has led to some of the most incredible experiences I’ve ever had in a video game. I very much appreciate rockstar’s determination to the critique of America in every game, with gta being the over the top satire, and red dead 2 being the more thoughtful and mature contemplative commentary. And the
soundtrack is fucking awesome.


—I think the portrayal of colonel Monroe as the white saviour who is part of the U.S. army (an army hell bent on driving the native Americans out of their own country, through murder, deceit, and every other crime you can think of) comes off a little misguided. It seems more like the writers wanted to portray this cataclysmic event with more nuance, with perhaps an insistance that things “weren’t so black and white”. Yes, they were, and it’s telling of how great I think this game is, that I still hesitate to criticize this part of the game too heavily, because on one hand it does tackle these issues with much more sensibility than you’d expect. Sometimes it feels less like they’re saying “well SOME cops were really nice see??” And more like they’re trying to use Mr. Monroe as a way of feeding into Rains Fall’s anti-violence agenda.

As for Rains Fall’s character, I think he’s very well written, and the father son dynamic he has with Eagle Flies is genuinely one of the game’s greatest parts. Still, this section rubs me the wrong way, perhaps only because I see so much potential that’s been wasted, seemingly for the sake of providing more depth and nuance to some of the worst shit this god awful country is responsible of. But hey, this mission with Mr. Monroe ends with him resigning his position as an officer of the law, so it’s possible I’m being a little nit picky with a game that is so strongly opposed to every single philosophy ingrained in a cesspool of corruption, greed, and hypocrisy that is the United States of America. Sometimes I have conflicting feelings about the way this game deals with very serious topics, but then Arthur talks to sister Calderon and everything is alright. Also the soundtrack is killer.

—in terms of technical details; performances, sound design, foliage, textures, lighting…the list of things red dead 2 gets right is a long one, with few blemishes here and there, mainly with regard to shadows and reflections, which while most of the time are genuinely impressive, sometimes flicker and bug out more than you’d like.

—did I mention that the soundtrack is phenomenal?

Loved this game, and hated this game. Everything on the surface is fantastic. The world is incredibly detailed and easily the most impressive looking game I've ever played, from a technical standpoint. There's lots to customize and deck yourself out with, like guns, outfits, horses, etcetera. The world feels incredibly alive, and it always feels like every character and NPC has a place. There are never robotic ones, which is also really impressive. The gunplay is also really snappy, with top notch sound effects and feedback behind it. I played with gyro aim on PC and it made it that much more fun.

Buuuuuuuut, this has the WORST, THE FUCKING WORST mission design and pacing of any game I have ever played. I ended up dropping it for years because it got so boring. Sometimes I can be so moved by amazing writing and characters and not have the motivation to see what happens next. Go to person, talk, ride on horse for 5 minutes, run into a problem, shoot your way out, rinse and repeat. Sprinkle 1 or two wholesome missions in there every 10 hours and you've got your video game. It's genuinely infuriating, and Rockstar needs to shake things up next time.

I love this game and I hate it at the same time. I'm glad I experienced this story, but It's one I'll never come back to.

This isn't a review of Red Dead Redemption 2, but a rant of a certain thing that I believe plagues this game and other Rockstar games.

WHY DO I HAVE TO MASH A BUTTON TO MOVE FASTER!?

All of the Rockstar games I have played, which albeit is not many, have a mechanic where you run faster when mashing 'X'. Why? Why do I have to develop carpal tunnel syndrome to move faster in a Rockstar game? In Grand Theft Auto, you only do this for running and riding a bicycle. In RDR 2 you do it for the same thing, but also when you want to gallop on your horse. And I ask the same question, why?

That's like if you want to drive above 30 mph in GTA, you have to mash 'X'. That's awful. Why do I have strain my thumb to make the boring ride of nothingness between missions shorter. The wild thing to me is that you don't have to do this on keyboard and mouse. I played RDR 2 originally on PS4 and abandoned it because my thumb kept aching because of the stupid mashing. WHY ARE THERE NO ACCESSIBILITY SETTINGS FOR THIS!? As of writing this I'm playing the PC version and not having thumb pain genuinely elevates the experience. Last time I ask this question, WHY DOES THIS EXIST?!

That's all from me, and thank you for reading through all of my rambling. Here's to hoping Rockstar finally develops the technology to allow sprinting without mashing a button on a controller.

Really good story but the game is so realistic it ends up hurting the gameplay.

Slow animations when looting or skining animals (way worse than RDR1), need to do a lot of busy work in the sake of realism, horses (even the best one in the game) get tired too fast considering how big the map is which doesn't make it fun to explore, gunplay was completely fucked and feels very stiff when compared to RDR1, you have to be VERY careful when riding your horse inside cities and towns since it's really easy to get called the cops just by touching civilians, it's way easier for your horse to fall over small rocks as opposed to the first one.

I just wish RDR2 had the physics and gameplay of RDR1.

Red Dead Redemption 2 is sometimes a liberating, immersive experience, one whose languid pace is justified through its attention to detail, and whose finnicky controls are warranted through the range of interactions they accommodate. Other times, Red Dead Redemption 2 is the most guided, tightly scripted experience imaginable - during these times, the range of actions allowed by the controls are fully utilised, but only EXACTLY when the game allows the player to.

The highs of Red Dead Redemption 2 are in its open world - which truly is something to behold, not so much for its explorative potential but rather its sheer scale and atmosphere makes it worth seeing for its own sake (Shadow of the Colossus comes to mind) - and also in its slow-burn death-of-the-old-west narrative. The tale of the Van der Linde gang, and particularly the redemptive arc of Arthur Morgan, is one I found deeply resonant, though I did have to overcome some dissonance regarding the enormous body count I'd built up - despite the range of interactive possibilities, too often the mission structure resorts to shooting people in ridiculous quantities. This compromises the narrative somewhat, both due to how no-one acts like you're killing THAT many people and because it pushes my suspension of disbelief to its limit regarding the gang's survivability (how the hell did more not die in combat?).

Most of my time with Red Dead Redemption 2 was spent in sheer enchantment. If only it could get out of its own way and let loose, it would be the masterpiece it had the potential to be. It's a lavish production, and though this has its strengths, the game can feel overstuffed and messy as a result. I hope that the team can reign it in a bit next time, not just for the sake of the game but the people working on it too.

Red Dead Redemption was a beautiful and depressing game in which an old ghost of the wild west works his way through the other ghosts until there is nothing left. This sequel brings them back to life, which means revising the revisionist western, to what end I am not sure. It is a step back thematically and narratologically, and the first game I've enjoyed that I also hold to be entirely redundant.

It is a feat of open world landscaping but at its heart is an emptiness that is moving when one considers these are all future ghosts. That there never was an Eden.

There comes a point with almost every modern open world game I've played where, after dozens of hours scouring the world for whatever crafting trinkets or rare resources or gear or whatever, I realize I don't actually want to keep doing any of that and have only been doing any of that because I'm generally inclined to delay progressing the main story in favor of vapid side objectives so that I don't 'miss anything'. It's a viewpoint that treats all content in a game as equal and worth doing, even in a game like Red Dead Redemption 2 where that side content consists of some of the most tedious and dreadful hunting and exploring I've seen in a video game that is only occasionally interrupted by a handful of interesting side quests.

It's a shame, really. Rockstar has managed to craft an admittedly awesome narrative that takes place in a vast world teeming with things to do, sights to see and people to rob. I find that the 'vastness' of most open worlds these days relies on a lot of incredibly unsubtle and uninspired shortcuts present throughout the industry that Rockstar is unfortunately no stranger to.

It's understandable to a degree that shortcuts and development shorthand are necessary when producing a game of this scale, but that still doesn't mean that the modern approach to designing an open world of 'scatter x different sets of y collectibles all over the map alongside largely formulaic side quest content' isn't any less tired than I already find it.

I recognize that this isn't a problem in design unique to RDR2, as other games have done it much worse (skyrim lol) which is why I'm not rating this game any lower for how enjoyable I found some of its other aspects. I wish I could care about this game a little more considering how important it is to so many, but when the only major aspect of this game that I care about is its story and generally think very little of anything else it offers when it is marketed as an immersive open world that ultimately fails to impress me outside of the visual department, it's hard to not look at it as another drop in the open-world bucket.