Grand Theft Auto 4 is one of the highest rated Xbox 360 games of all time. It combined an open sandbox world with a third-person shooter and a driving game all lumped into one. Developer Rockstar Games proved they had created a formula that works with that franchise. The old adage is, "Don't fix something that isn't broken." And Rockstar haven't. But contrary to what some people think, I don't see Red Dead Redemption as Grand Theft Auto in the wild west. It does, however, borrow heavily from their already proven formula.
The big problem I have with Red Dead Redemption is it doesn't give the player anything we haven't seen before. The control scheme, cover system and mini map have been yanked almost completely unaltered from Grand Theft Auto 4. There is a time slowing mechanic that can be activated to help take out multiple targets at a time, which puts Red Dead Redemption in a long list of "Bullet Time" games like Max Payne, F.E.A.R., Fallout 3, Mass Effect 2, any Matrix game, Hitman, etc, etc. Though Red Dead Revolver also did this, so I guess it could be considered a part of the loosely based "series." Redemption even has a "weapon wheel" a la Mass Effect 2. Have we really reached the point in video game production where we literally don't have any new ideas?
That basically leaves this game to survive on its setting. There aren't a lot of games set in the American west in comparison with the future, medieval periods or fantasy realms, making Red Dead Redemption unique in that respect. My only previous foray into the west was a little title called Mad Dog McCree- which came out in the early 90's. But I must say the environments impressed me. Places and locales were distinct, the different trails and roads were appropriately barren or lush with flora and fauna, while being varied enough that they didn't get too boring. The U.S. and Mexican zones offer distinctly different building architecture and overall atmosphere. What impressed me most, however, was the way the sun lit the dry ground. There isn't anything too special about it, but it reminded me of what it was like to hike around the badlands of South Dakota. The game conveys the feeling of a dry heat just perfectly.
Along with the environment, I really enjoy the voice acting of all the major characters. It is pivotal for a game like this to have a good voice for the lead role, and Rob Wiethoff delivers a great drawl for protagonist John Marsden. It is gruff, but not annoying, polite, but not wussy. So far it seems to fit the role and give life to an otherwise unassuming cowboy. The gun physics are also well done. Shooting someone in the leg won't kill them. It will cause them to collapse to the ground grabbing their leg. When they do get up, they will limp appropriately. Hitting someone with a shotgun at close range will cause their body to react differently from being hit in the same spot by a revolver at medium range. That attention to detail makes this game seem all the more rewarding when attempting different tactics in the same situation. When John Marsden gets too close to an enemy, he will even launch into an execution, changing camera angles briefly to show you that he did just shotgun that outlaw in the chest at point blank range. These are the little details that improve the overall experience.
I haven't played a lot of Red Dead Redemption's multiplayer, but I have made several conclusions with my limited time spent in the multiplayer hub. For starters, the multiplayer experience could be really fun and enjoyable. It could bring a bunch of players together to gain a ton of experience as a group. I could have fun exploring the world with a couple pals. But I'm not going to because I'm too busy being spawn killed on my donkey by a guy some 40 odd levels above me laughing hysterically. I shouldn't have to throw my avatar off a cliff just so I can spawn out of range of a player who has all the weapons and equipment. I don't have a good solution for this problem. Not everyone is going to have the same initial problems that I had, but in a free roam setting, people who are online are out to kill you dead. Even if working together is more beneficial, people will either charge at you guns blazing or jump on their horse and ride away expecting you to start attacking them. This isn't Red Dead Redemption's fault, but more of a current generation gamer mentality. People just seem to think that killing the same person over and over again for tiny bits of experience is more fun than working as a team to take down a gang hideout full of NPC's.
All annoyances aside, there is nothing really wrong with Red Dead Redemption. The story is a little dull at times, the horseback riding is tricky at first, shooting the different guns is easy and rewarding, the environments are well put together, and the voice acting is some of the best I have heard in a video game. But Red Dead Redemption doesn't try anything that hasn't been done before. It doesn't push any boundaries or take any chances. It's competent. It is a fun game but ultimately it doesn't bring anything to the table to change the video game community.
NOTE: All photos are property of IGN.
No comments:
Post a Comment