The man that destroyed rdr2

I enjoy watching people just throw personal insults at the guy in threads like these because they know his vid on red dead is literally indefensible

*unarguable

Who the fuck moves to NYC in 2020? Especially when your work is Youtube and doesn't require a specific location

his views on Rockstar are right. They have gone down hill in terms of mission design.

It's funny because Rockstar made fun of Driver 3 having limited ways to do their missions and they go and pull the same mistake in RDR2.

Honestly he just stated the obvious, what he didn't say that the story was mediocre and you don't need triple digits iq to find the flaws in it

Not really. It's just not worth the time and effort. People are too busy actually playing and enjoying the game to argue with some guy about it.

>This whole post
>Zig Forums

I got to chapter 6 in rdr2 and stopped, how long am I from the ending it felt like a drag and I stopped playing

You won't miss anything desu i literally used fast travel cheats at the end because of boring/predictable the story got and the epilogue made it worse

Chapter 6 is the last chapter. There's some epilogue for a few hours after it.

>get to story shootout in town
>decide to take cover near buildings
>NO FUCK YOU FAILED MISSION YOU WERE ONLY SUPPOSED TO MOVE WITHIN 5 FEET STAY ON SCRIPT

Not really. Leaving aside the fact the game sold and continues to sell a lot, which is irrelevant as copies sold ≠ quality, his argument is that the missions are scripted. The problem is there's not a problem with that. People for some weird reason want to treat R*'s games as if they were RPGs like Elder Scrolls were you can do missions however you see fit. It doesn't help that the likes of GTA III were like that. What people don't realize is that back then they did it out of need, not because they wanted to. The Housers have always been film nutjobs, when technology or their dev knowledge was limited they made do with famous VAs, but each game already starting with Vice City had more and more dialogue and scripted missions. It was a natural evolution. Continuing from the earlier thought, people for some reason think of R*'s games as open worlds ala TES or The Witcher, not realizing RDR's is different. In the former the open world is part of the questing experience, in the latter is what you do when you don't want to do quests. That's why I'll never understand the complaints in his video: he says missions are scripted, but when I've spent the last 15 hours freeroaming, hunting, collecting cards, crafting, buying clothes, investigating weird parts of the map, updating the journal... etc. all with total freedom, the one thing I want the most next is a scripted mission with dialogue, explosions and cover shooting. When he complains about how you can't rob the gunsmith by doing parkour from behind the building or something, to me it sounds the same as complaining about not being able to leave the car in a Need For Speed game, I just take it for granted because I know the type of game I'm playing. I've seen complaints so bizarre you'd think it's the first Rockstar game a lot of people have ever played, as if they didn't know their formula.

Attached: 0_0.jpg (1920x1080, 391.11K)

He’s from a small sheltered town. NYC is the epitome of a “big city” to those kinds.

someone is gonna read all of this, safe travels

I have a bad habit of leaving games unfinished I think ill just have to push through it. Thanks
How long is the 6th chapter? From what I heard it has the most missions

That's a whole lot of text for just saying you accept the Rockstar formula as an open environment with scripted missions/setpieces. That's fine if you're okay with it, but that doesn't excuse Rockstar's lack of growth when it comes to open world design and mission structure.

>create the best open world in history
>it's a cinematic linear game
JUST

>the fact the game sold and continues to sell a lot
>starting out your arumgnet with "if its popular it must be good''
brainlet

this guy is turboreddit based on that thumbnail alone

Watch his RDR video, it's actually pretty well thought out and interesting. Very true too, IMO.

You may not like the humor or his jokes but he does bring up some good points.

>lack of growth
I hate that narrative, it implies that RDR2 isn't a massive step down in terms of gameplay from GTAV. GTAV is actually fun

He still is too forgive of Rstar in his video, most "critial" reviews are afraid to say "its shit and the developers dont give a shit". But instead just beat around the bush the whole time.

Here's the thing though, it implies Rockstar absolutely MUST grow out of the type of games they do, which is fallacious as fuck. There's nothing wrong with the kind of scripted main missions they do. If you don't like them that's fine, don't buy the kind of games they do, just like I don't buy fighting games because I couldn't care less about them. But thinking they have "lack of growth", when RDR2 is the biggest and most expansive game they've done yet is stupid. They've grown, just not in the area you would've wanted them to.

>reading comprehension