Finally I got a chance to play Red Dead Redemption 2 for the very first time, and the graphic is clean sharp and none of that blurry mess most of the AAA games have nowadays.
-
Even though I play it on my old low end laptop, I still able to get a stable 60fps on medium settings at 1080p (Linux) and the game is still gorgeous looking probably looks better than most if not all UE5 games released in the past 3 years.
I played it a little after release. Yeah, no. I needed an upgrade for it, but I played it anyway, and it was blurry as shit. Worse than modern games. Their version of TAA was so much worse than the modern DLSS/FSR TAA we have today. It was purely a temporal blur, adding previous frame data to new frames. It still looked good, but it was blurry. I should try it again now that I’ve upgraded…
-
when characters eat a meal they actually cut up their food and eat it, not just a few motions on loop. Lots of love and detail in this game
also the horses balls go up when you ride into cold water
Honestly, this is just one more of the indicators that AAA development budgets have gotten way too large. I love when devs put care into their art, but it should be somewhere it matters. I can’t count the number of times I noticed my horses testicles retracting on my knee. It’s just a waste of money.
In Dwarf Fortress, for example, when detail is added and actually relevant, it’s great. We need more of this, where useful additions are done to create a more tactile world. When time and money are spent doing stuff like the testicles in RDR2, I just imagine how that could have been spent on a different game, instead of just inflating an already massively expensive game and adding essentially nothing, except something for people to post about online.
-
Honestly, this is just one more of the indicators that AAA development budgets have gotten way too large. I love when devs put care into their art, but it should be somewhere it matters. I can’t count the number of times I noticed my horses testicles retracting on my knee. It’s just a waste of money.
In Dwarf Fortress, for example, when detail is added and actually relevant, it’s great. We need more of this, where useful additions are done to create a more tactile world. When time and money are spent doing stuff like the testicles in RDR2, I just imagine how that could have been spent on a different game, instead of just inflating an already massively expensive game and adding essentially nothing, except something for people to post about online.
I can’t agree with you on this one. Sometimes, I think this is the kind of detail that benefits other games : the assets are there and can be reused, in other forms.
Plus, sometimes it’s better to make one great game than a plethora of good games.
RDR2 wasn’t my cup of tea but I have nothing bad to say about this game. It was a masterpiece, in all aspects and in all comes down, at the end, to the attention given to trivial things such as horse testicles.
-
Even though I play it on my old low end laptop, I still able to get a stable 60fps on medium settings at 1080p (Linux) and the game is still gorgeous looking probably looks better than most if not all UE5 games released in the past 3 years.
I was looking forward to play it once it was on GOG. I had avoided all spoilers for years. Only for Lemmy to spoil the apparently unavoidable ending via a meme on All…
-
I really wanted to like this game. I wanted to so bad. I can acknowledge many of its pros, and I can understand why many people like it.
But everything is so. Fucking. Slow. And every mission is “hold A to ride your horse for a long time and then do a small amount of actual action, if you’re lucky”.
Surely there is a mod to speed things up. Faster horses and whatnot.
-
No hes talking about TAA temporal anti aliasing. Makes everything look smeared
TAA is good, if implemented right. Most games don’t do it right tho.
-
I played it a little after release. Yeah, no. I needed an upgrade for it, but I played it anyway, and it was blurry as shit. Worse than modern games. Their version of TAA was so much worse than the modern DLSS/FSR TAA we have today. It was purely a temporal blur, adding previous frame data to new frames. It still looked good, but it was blurry. I should try it again now that I’ve upgraded…
I feel exactly the same. My rig is much better now. Need to try it again.
-
Honestly, this is just one more of the indicators that AAA development budgets have gotten way too large. I love when devs put care into their art, but it should be somewhere it matters. I can’t count the number of times I noticed my horses testicles retracting on my knee. It’s just a waste of money.
In Dwarf Fortress, for example, when detail is added and actually relevant, it’s great. We need more of this, where useful additions are done to create a more tactile world. When time and money are spent doing stuff like the testicles in RDR2, I just imagine how that could have been spent on a different game, instead of just inflating an already massively expensive game and adding essentially nothing, except something for people to post about online.
I don’t think it was their plan to make testicles things, game development is not one process but many separate processes tied together. So while several hundreds people were working on important stuff one dude could have finished their tasks and had nothing to do, so they thought why not do fun stuff quickly.
-
I don’t think it was their plan to make testicles things, game development is not one process but many separate processes tied together. So while several hundreds people were working on important stuff one dude could have finished their tasks and had nothing to do, so they thought why not do fun stuff quickly.
Rockstar has well documented crunch. I can confidently say nobody there had enough spare time to add this on a whim.
-
Are you describing Motion Blur by chance? A very common graphical effect used in AAA games these days that try to mimic how objects look blurry when moving quickly in real life. I hate it and always turn it off when I’m able to.
Side note, why the FUCK do devs turn motion blur on by default?!
-
Even though I play it on my old low end laptop, I still able to get a stable 60fps on medium settings at 1080p (Linux) and the game is still gorgeous looking probably looks better than most if not all UE5 games released in the past 3 years.
Oh so I’m not a crazy old man? I always thought UE5 games had that weird motion blur I just thought it was my computer/eyes.
-
I really wanted to like this game. I wanted to so bad. I can acknowledge many of its pros, and I can understand why many people like it.
But everything is so. Fucking. Slow. And every mission is “hold A to ride your horse for a long time and then do a small amount of actual action, if you’re lucky”.
A game for everybody is a game for nobody.
I like the fact that everybody seemed to be expecting Grand Theft Horsey, and got a slow paced Wild West sim.
I actually played Assassin’s Creed Origins right after playing this for like two months straight, and it just felt so “gamey” in comparison.
-
Oh so I’m not a crazy old man? I always thought UE5 games had that weird motion blur I just thought it was my computer/eyes.
Since UE4 motion blur has been on by default. And I absolutely despise when devs don’t include the option to turn it off.
Motion blur makes games look like absolute garbage and I will die on this hill any day.
-
Since UE4 motion blur has been on by default. And I absolutely despise when devs don’t include the option to turn it off.
Motion blur makes games look like absolute garbage and I will die on this hill any day.
I will die on that hill with you, friend.
-
Even though I play it on my old low end laptop, I still able to get a stable 60fps on medium settings at 1080p (Linux) and the game is still gorgeous looking probably looks better than most if not all UE5 games released in the past 3 years.
First thing to do when starting a new game. Go to visual settings and turn off motion blur, depth of field, chromatic aberration, vignette, film grain, and depending on the game, anti-aliasing, ambient occlusion, and texture filtering.
Maybe it’s just because I’m stuck in 1997, idk, but all that stuff just looks bad to me.
-
A game for everybody is a game for nobody.
I like the fact that everybody seemed to be expecting Grand Theft Horsey, and got a slow paced Wild West sim.
I actually played Assassin’s Creed Origins right after playing this for like two months straight, and it just felt so “gamey” in comparison.
I play games of many varieties, and didn’t care for AC Origins either. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-
There’s a lot to like in there: The environments are gorgeous. The main characters are full of texture. The wildlife feels alive. The soundtrack is excellent. The voice acting is good. The details are fine and abundant. I’m really impressed with the team members who worked on these things.
But sadly, the slapdash user interface, hostile save system, unskippable cut scenes, and absolutely garbage mission mechanics (mostly having to do with robbing the player of agency and imposing ridiculous failure conditions) ruined it for me.
The time I spent wandering around the world simulation was mostly enjoyable. The time I spent playing it as a game was mostly miserable.
The UI is why I couldn’t finish it. My gaming PC is hooked up to my TV and even with a 70" screen I couldn’t read hardly any of the maps or menus. I even dusted of a pair of readers but still struggled. It’s a beautiful game and looks incredible but after a few hours of that I just got tired of squinting and moved on.
Maybe someday I’ll come back to it and try to find a mod or something but it’s just not worth giving myself a headache when there are so many great games out there.
-
I don’t think it was their plan to make testicles things, game development is not one process but many separate processes tied together. So while several hundreds people were working on important stuff one dude could have finished their tasks and had nothing to do, so they thought why not do fun stuff quickly.
but their point is that if there are hundreds of people working on stuff and some of them have nothing to do, then the budget is too big in the first place
-
I really wanted to like this game. I wanted to so bad. I can acknowledge many of its pros, and I can understand why many people like it.
But everything is so. Fucking. Slow. And every mission is “hold A to ride your horse for a long time and then do a small amount of actual action, if you’re lucky”.
I’m with you. I loved the first RDR, one of my favorite games of all time. Fun interesting characters, the side quest plots all went a little sideways, which was refreshing. I really wanted to like RDR2 but it ended up feeling tedious. Lots to love in the game so I understand why so many people said it was an amazing game.
I feel like Rockstar did the same thing with the GTA games. GTA3, VC, and SA were somewhat realistic games set in a goofy world with strange characters and interactions. By GTA4, all the interesting plots were replaced by pointless minigames and going bowling with cousin Roman. That’s basically the same way I felt about the jump between RDR and RDR2.
I never played Red Dead Revolver so I don’t know how that fits in with the rest.
-
I don’t think it was their plan to make testicles things, game development is not one process but many separate processes tied together. So while several hundreds people were working on important stuff one dude could have finished their tasks and had nothing to do, so they thought why not do fun stuff quickly.
True. That feature may have just been added randomly, though I doubt it, because it requires the artists to add things to the models, the programmers to add reactivity, and the designers to mark things as cold/hot. It’s more than just a one person job on a game this big, because it touches so many things. In an indie game, sure. There’s too much bureaucracy in a large studio to just go off and do this though.
Regardless, the point is they have way too many people working on a project. Instead we could get dozens of games for that same budget. Budgets have gotten ridiculous.
