Red Dead Redemption (Xbox 360, PS3): Review Scores Justified?

As most of you will be aware by now, Red Dead Redemption is now available to buy on either the Xbox 360 or PS3 in the U.S. The game received pretty amazing reviews – now that you have had a chance to play it, do you think the review scores are justified or not?

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
trounbyfire2833d ago

no one said that anything was wrong with the scores.

LTC2833d ago (Edited 2833d ago )

probably justified on the 360 version but not the PS3.
Due to the differences the PS3 version should have scored less. I'm sure R* had something to do with the PS3 reviews so it wouldn't affect sales.

Consumers have a right to be told the quality of something they are buying and not "hidden" which seems to have been done here.

Not one major site has mentioned any differences which is wrong. We as consumers should know what we are purchasing.

Lazy developers should not be aloud to get away with it which is what will probably happen here.
R* aint taking my money.

SprSynJn2833d ago

Please do inform those of us who are planning to get the game oh wise one.

RememberThe3572833d ago (Edited 2833d ago )

Because the PS3 version has a slightly lower resolution you want to get all butt hurt and not buy an obviously great game? Grow up...

If not one major site has mentions the difference then it's probably not worth mentioning.

EDIT: Yep the PS3 version has bonus content:

It seem like that would be a version to get, but I suppose you guys would rather cry about graphics then get more game for the money.

rob60212832d ago (Edited 2832d ago )

TLC is right.

I have the PS3 version, and I was left very disappointed with the visuals, given what I had read, where sites like IGN gave it a 9.5/10 on visuals. And I had seen videos of the 360 version in action. I wonder if R* gave out the PS3 bonus content because they knew it wasn't up to par. Graphics do effect a game - they're a big part of it, when they're choppy/blurry/aliased it takes away from the whole experience.
Parts of it look pretty good, but other parts look like they're out of 2006 or 07..

They better get their sht together for AGENT, hopefully it won't run on RAGE.

kneon2832d ago

I've been playing the PS3 version and I'd only give the graphics an 8. They are ok, but nothing special. And there are obvious aliasing issues on the PS3 version.

But that's ok, I love great graphics but great graphics alone don't make a great game. I'm finding the game play kind of dull and the shooting is really pretty crappy. I'd give the game a 7.5 overall. I had more fun with the Saboteur which received far lower scores than RDR. Even with the obvious pop-in issues in the Saboteur I liked the look of it better and the game play was more fun and intersting

Maybe RDR will improve as I get further into it but I doubt I'll ever get used to the controls.

Dread2832d ago

funny look at all the sony fanboys arguing that graphics are not important. It is hard to keep up with all of your constant spining.


+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2832d ago
Argento-Nox2832d ago (Edited 2832d ago )


I understand your reasoning, but the same should have been said for FFXIII on the 360. The 360 version of FFXIII actually scored higher or equal to the PS3 version of FFXIII (even at metacritics) despite the PS3 version being the superior version in all regards (visuals, load times etc.).

Mind you, the difference for Red Dead Redemption seems relatively minor in comparison to the FFXIII fiasco (PS3: 1080p for cut scenes, 720p in game --- 360: 576p for both cut scenes and in game) . The fact that game play isn't affected (load times etc.), while having extra content for the PS3 version of RDR is enough to satiate most gamers IMO.

cereal_killa2832d ago

The only reason that the 360 version scored higher is that Metajoke placed certain low scores on the PS3 version only and not on the 360s.

LTC whatever you say I'm playing RDR on my PS3 and it looks and plays fine stop counting pixels, play the game and STFU.

bjornbear2832d ago


anyone vexed by this is looking way too into it.

if im playing a game, and thinking "wow this looks bad, the 360 version looks better", am I really ENJOYING THE GAME?


if i was enjoying the game, i wouldn't be thinking of anything but "YEHAW IMA SHOOT ME SOME CRIMINALS!!"

so, next time you play, try to play the game, not the fanboy warz

Nicholas Cage2833d ago

the ps3 actually scored higher than the 360 version but we cant have that can we...

editor: sir the ps3 version of final fantasy is amazing on ps3, great graphics, great textures, and i think we should give the ps3 a higher...

ign: higher what?!

editor: uhh higher score sir...

ign: your fired!

IHateYouFanboys2833d ago

the 360 version is better though.

also, IGNs scores arent averages.

waltercross2832d ago (Edited 2832d ago )

better? how?
oh you mean the graphics? the missing grass etc? I thought Graphics doesn't mean anything? It's all about game play, now suddenly graphics and textures mean something?

lh_swe2832d ago

You know he's not talking about RDR right? He's talking about FXIII.

RatFuker2833d ago

there editors are payed off, nuff said.

BYE2833d ago

If the bribe was high enough, yes /jk

Amazing game!

ClownBelt2833d ago

I think so. To be honest, I haven't seen anyone who dislike the game so far.

Show all comments (44)
The story is too old to be commented.