In: Reviews by Dave "Holy Goalie" Gardner
19 Jul 2010
There aren’t many perfect video games. Okay, there really is no such animal, but sometimes a game gets as close to perfect as possible. It’s ironic that Red Dead Redemption was one of the only games I did not stand in line to see at PAX East, and it turns out to be the best and most enthralling game that I’ve played in years. Even better than the original Left 4 Dead, which was Holy Goalie’s most addicting Xbox 360 game to date.
RDR did all the little things that push a game from good to great, from regular chips to Pringles, from “ooh” to “ahh.” But though I really love this game, I give it a 9.7, with three simple things costing it a perfect HG rating.
First: It needs a better fast-travel system. In the game you have to leave a town or settlement to find a flat place to pitch a camp site (with a cut scene), then call up the map, then pick a place to travel, then another cut scene — just to leave the camp site. Now, you are finally ready for fast-travel. Just simply cut it and give me the fast-travel option from the pause menu wherever I am. I wasted so much time trying to use the RDR fast-travel system. Making me wait over a minute every time to get from A to B? Minus o.1 points.
Second: Don’t make me ride on my horse for two or three minutes as part of the mission. Though there were many times that RDR gave you the option to skip to the destination, there were many times that it forced you to take the long ride on the horse so you could hear some of the story dialog. Yeah, it may have been neat to further engulf yourself into the story line, but most of the time I just wanted to get on with the mission. I’ve done plenty of horse riding, I don’t need any more practice at that. Let me skip to the excitement if I choose to. Making me needlessly ride to the action for minutes on end? Minus o.1 points.
Third, it needs a “save” system, not a “checkpoint” system. Like most games now, RDR relies on a checkpoint system to save the game. But how many times did I have to ride for minutes on end only to die and have to take the entire ride all over again? Too many! How many times did I fall off the rocky cliff and have to climb all they way to the top for no apparent reason other than I couldn’t save when I got to the top? Again, too many! Ghost Recon is my favorite game ever, and it’s probably because I could save the game at any time. I used to save all the time right before a big battle, so if I died, I could pick it up from a point just before the battle, and not have to muck my way through less exciting parts of the game over and over and over because of the checkpoint system. Making me swear because I had to needlessly climb rocks over and over again and ride my horse down the same paths without a save system? Minus o.1 points.
So what I could have given a perfect 10, falls to a 9.7 for three simple things. All of which involve me wasting my time doing mundane things that I didn’t need to repeatedly do to enjoy this game. Rockstar made a great game, and got it near perfect in my eyes. Hopefully if there is a a third Red Dead game, they will fix some of the little things and keep all the big things that made it a winner in the first place.
Red Dead Redemption
Rockstar Games
Reviewed on Xbox 360 (Also available on PlayStation 3)
Bringing you the latest in news, GameHounds delivers an adult perspective on the video game business and culture.
This podcast is explicit and is intended for adults ages 18 and older.
2 Responses to Last Look: Red Dead Redemption
HeartbreakRidge
July 19th, 2010 at 8:30 am
Not sure that I would agree that even if these flaws were fixed that RDR would be a perfect game, but that’s more of an argument over a scoring system than the game.
I think RDR suffers from using a very similar mission structure to what GTA4 does, and Rockstar could so us all a favor and rethink how they handle missions. Adding checkpoints (which got introduced in post-GTA4 content) helps, but it doesn’t address the bottom line issue.
July 20th, 2010 at 10:32 am
It’s annoying to read how “reviewers” try to justify their subjective view of a game with a pseudo-rating system as if there’s a science behind it. Just say you didn’t like parts of it and name the parts. We all know there are no perfect games. I’ve been gaming since the 70′s. I know and played a ton of them.
You didn’t mention the multiplayer component of RDR. Try it. It might add a .02 to your rating system.
The Dead Eye feature rocks though, right? Maybe another .01 for that?