I was very late playing Red Dead Redemption and finally completed it the other day.
This has the same game mechanic as GTA = follow the letters on the radar for the missions, exploring the open world and its diversions as you like.
However, while the acting and face motion capture is top drawer as you'd expect from Rockstar, the wagons, steam trains, saloon bars, cacti, lassoing and open camp fires lend themselves a lot more to the enjoyable pursuit of RP than thug-city ever can.
In particular, the owning of horses (the more you bond the less likely it will throw you off) adds to the whole RP thing. It's the little things like being able walk/trot/canter/gallop at various speeds that all add to the immersion.
The other difference from GTA, is that being in the Wild West you can play lead John Marston as honourable (or as bad) as you like, whereas in GTA you are forced to be involved in crime.
I found the first couple of hours to be wonderful. Riding around the Wild West soaking up a very polished new game. The more I progressed into the game, the less spectacular it felt as the game obviously follows a very familiar formula to GTA veterans.
However, the difference in being in the wild west and the improved gun fights were enough to keep me entertained. In fact I enjoyed this game a lot more than GTA IV. The former game's flaws such as the difficulty spikes and the over familiar Liberty City were gratefully missing.
My only criticism is that I don't understand why these sandbox masterpieces have to be so big in terms of the main story. I would have been happy for the game to have ended in Mexico (the game's second zone) as I felt the third and final zone stretched my patience a little. Surely a huge open world can get away with a shorter main story as those gamers that have more gaming time can deviate away to their hearts content?
RDR won't change your mind about GTA/open worlds in gameplay terms, but if you like cowboys in the Wild West, well worth checking it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment