Please consider registering
Yes, as a fan of spaghetti westerns and shooters, I waited Red Dead Redemption for a long time and the hype made me more and more curious each day I waited for it. However... The sequel of the great ps 2 game (in spite of all the effort devoted to it) was full of unconvincing characters, repeating/similar missions and a boring story line. I even did not wonder about the ending and eventually sold the game for a fair price without even feeling the need to finish it. My expectations were high but the product was less than satisfying. As I previously said, I like shooters (my favorite games are those of the Battlefield series). But RDR... Sorry but, it was definitely a mess... You may think differently, but I want to hear about those who don't. Waiting for your comments...
I feel the game dragged a bit in the Mexico section but overall I felt it was quite an enjoyable game. It had good gameplay mechanics, a great world and a decent story. I wouldn't say its the best story going but it was an interesting tale nontheless. I guess it can vary though, I mean i personally thought GTA4 had a pretty terrible storyline and I'm a huge fan of the GTA Series but I just am not that big on GTA4.
The co-op mode, online free-roam and Undead Nightmare for RDR are great additions though I must admit.
I believe one problem with the game was something like, 'There comes the fat man selling medicine, here we go again, racing' or 'that grave digger is approaching, another shooting episode is on the way'. However... Apart from the 'no surprises-story line', what was terribly boring was the repetitive actions like skinning animals or collecting flowers along the way. Whenever you skin an animal, it's the same animation is on the screen -blood splatters on the screen- and the same repetitive quotes like, 'Arggh, what have you been eating?'. Hmmm? What does a coyote or bear eats? It doesn't matter anyway. I grow tired of doing the same thing again and again and that's why I quickly got fed up with shooting and skinning poor animals. Moreover, the game has a sick 'trophy' like "kidnap and tie a lady, place her on the railroad and have her squashed by the train'. Yeah, Rockstar. No wonder that their games always receive high points: "Dude, any point under 90 will have terrible consequences for us, let's give them a 95, otherwise they may tie us and throw us under the wheels of a train -or they may stop our cars in the traffic, force us out of the car and smash our brains with iron pipes (remember GTA?)". Anyway, I believe I won't be buying another Rockstar game in the future... Full of mindless violence and psychotic intentions, these games provide real bad role models -especially for kids-...
Yes. M-rated for most people equals to: "Let's buy it for our naughty kid, who is simply a little monster and make him busy with games of violence, so that he won't destroy the furniture and beat the neighbors' kids -at least during the time he plays them-". Of course, M-rated games should not be played by kids. But (sadly) they are. And no one can prevent this because their parents are irresponsible. Join the fps servers and see it for yourself. And I think the Rockstar games are no exception...
Even for adults, tying helpless women with a lasso and throwing them under trains can't be ethical...
We can compare an awesome fps with GTA:
Bad Company 2: You are a soldier, you do what's your duty to stay alive and kill the soldiers of the opposing force who have equal opportunity to defend themselves (which is ok)...
GTA: You are a bandit and you can kill old people and helpless women who have no means to protect themselves and take the money they leave behind... (which is...? Yeah you know it can't be ok, even for a game)
If this example is not enough, I have nothing more to say...
I don't really understand why you're bringing ethics into this. You don't HAVE to lasso the woman and tie her to the traintracks you CHOOSE to do it and if you do then the law comes after you. The ethics are already there, you perform a bad act and you get punished for it.
Also it might be worth noting that the idea of the achievement itself is a reference to the stereotypical bad guy act from old silent movies. It's just a funny little thing to do in game, remember all you're doing is interacting with algorithms.
@JCMoorehead: OK, you say the choice is yours. But if it's a "trophy", you have to achieve it to get your platinum and so it becomes a "must". However, I don't have much to say about game ethics anymore because whenever someone speaks about it, he faces ferocious critics (not everyone speaks about the issue with a moderate tone like yours). Most people (fanboys) become angry and begin to swear and I believe that even this fact is the proof of violent games making people more violent than they usually are. And immediately, some other -more moderate- people begin to talk about democratic rights and oppression. I mean, come on! This has nothing to do with it. What's the limit then? No one should be able to say "let's make a game about killing people who innocently walk in the street, because it's fun" (Is it?). I used to play games about war such as Beach Head, Falcon Patrol or Commando when I was a kid (I had a C 64 and Amiga in the 80's). However, soldiers fighting against soldiers is understandable to a great extent, but, smashing the brains of an old lady with a pipe, stabbing or shooting her can't be OK. I understand, you have a choice of not doing it. But most kids and youngsters do it with pleasure. And repeating images become more and more natural for a person as time goes by. In the end, people with a low perception of reality may even end up as criminals. Of course, people like you, like us, will never be affected by those images, but a generation who likes movies like Kick-ass or Wanted for they are just bloody and gory is on the way (those movies were not good as "movies", and that's my opinion). And companies like Rockstar have their considerable consideration in this picture. Today, violence sells. Tomorrow, it becomes a part of the daily life. Even if I didn't want to talk more on this issue, I wanted to make some additional and final comments. I think these are the last words I'll speak about this topic. It becomes tiring after a while, trying to express myself clearly.
@JCMoorehead:However, I don't have much to say about game ethics anymore because whenever someone speaks about it, he faces ferocious critics (not everyone speaks about the issue with a moderate tone like yours).
I have to do a radio piece and the guy I work with is very against violent video games, even soldier vs soldier ones so I do try to approach the whole thing maturely. As you can probably gather I have no issue with violent video games like GTA but my belief is they should be played by mature people and parents need to be educated more on ratings systems. One of the things I try to do in my radio piece and my own website is include sections for parents so they understand why a game is rated as such so they can make an informed judgement on whether or not to buy the game for their children.
Most people (fanboys) become angry and begin to swear and I believe that even this fact is the proof of violent games making people more violent than they usually are. And immediately, some other -more moderate- people begin to talk about democratic rights and oppression.
Those people do have a tendancy to ruin the debate because it gets into an endless cycle. There is a point though and you make it below. What is the limit to what we can really do? We mention the violence in games like Red Dead and GTA but what about a game like Oblivion? Or games where morality is a heavy feature like Mass Effect, Fable or Knights Of The Old Republic? Where if you want to be bad you can but there are consequences? This is the same as in Red Dead or GTA but the consequences are more severe in those games or it has more of an effect.
However, soldiers fighting against soldiers is understandable to a great extent, but, smashing the brains of an old lady with a pipe, stabbing or shooting her can't be OK. I understand, you have a choice of not doing it. But most kids and youngsters do it with pleasure. And repeating images become more and more natural for a person as time goes by. In the end, people with a low perception of reality may even end up as criminals.
The issue here is there is no real proof of this. We don't actually know if the repeating of those images will cause them to make that jump, and if they are going to carry out those acts who is to say they wouldn't have done so anyway without the video game to prompt them. Without jumping into using historical figures to justify the argument some people are immature from the beginning and are likely to turn out bad whether or not they play a GTA, Call Of Duty, Battlefield or no video games at all.
Of course, people like you, like us, will never be affected by those images, but a generation who likes movies like Kick-ass or Wanted for they are just bloody and gory is on the way (those movies were not good as "movies", and that's my opinion). And companies like Rockstar have their considerable consideration in this picture. Today, violence sells. Tomorrow, it becomes a part of the daily life.
Is it not true though that violence has always sold? We see things like Kick-Ass which yes has violence and foul language and is recent but we go back through the years and we see this is hardly a new thing. We only need to go back to the video nasties of the 70s to see that, hell have a look at something like A Clockwork Orange as an example.
I think unfortunately this debate can go on and on and on, we can argue freedoms, rights, maturity, whatever until the end of time but one thing is clear that me and you will agree on and I hope gamers in general can agree on. Games such as Red Dead Redemption are for a mature audience. It is important for parents if they're buying a mature game for their child to be informed about the game and its rating. I don't think they should be restricted because that causes more trouble then good but there needs to be more awareness, more information and education surrounding the rating systems worldwide.
@JCMoorehead: Thank you for your detailed reply. Yeah, I also think that parents should be aware of which games their children are playing, a point that we both agree on. I wish we were living in such a world. But I often see kids aged about 10 to 15 years playing GTA, Killzone, Battlefield. Responsible parents? They are so scarce in this world. Anyway, I hope this will change someday and M rated games will only be played by mature people.
Most Users Ever Online: 349
Currently Browsing this Page:
Guest Posters: 183