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.
-
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.
-
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.
It cost $540m in just development costs! Skyrim, for example (from what I found online) cost $40-50m. That’s 10.8-13.5 Skyrims. Halo 2 was $40m, and it was big at the time. The Witcher 3 cost $81m in total, not just development. Ghost of Tsushima (which is modern, so surprisingly low, but still not small) was $60m.
Yeah, no way in hell do I think RDR2 was worth it. I’m fine with some large games being made, but this is ridiculous. It’s why the industry is in such a rough spot. They’re putting ridiculous money behind singular projects instead of spreading out risk while also making more unique games. These massive games can’t take risks, because the budgets are too massive. That’s why they’ve all become so bland.
-
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.
Wrong. First thing you do is turn off TAA, DLSS, Frame generation, upscaling, Lumin, and if possible; anything related to sub-pixel geometry.
Ir better yet; don’t play UE5 where most of these things are forced upon you.
-
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.
Also, fuck Bloom. It’s bad enough that my eyes are starting to do it at night, I absolutely don’t want that in video games.
-
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.
For some games it works really well. The finals is a prime example for ue5. At least for me.
-
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.
Bloom, DOF, motion blur. Settings I always turn off if given the option.
-
Also, fuck Bloom. It’s bad enough that my eyes are starting to do it at night, I absolutely don’t want that in video games.
-
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’ve bounced off of it twice now after really trying to get into it. It’s just too damn slow for my taste.
-
Wrong. First thing you do is turn off TAA, DLSS, Frame generation, upscaling, Lumin, and if possible; anything related to sub-pixel geometry.
Ir better yet; don’t play UE5 where most of these things are forced upon you.
I have no idea what any of those are, heh. I stopped playing fancy games about ten years ago and now play 2d indie games.
