Red Dead Redemption: Another reason not to trust review scores

Red Dead Redemption has recently released to critical acclaim. With such a high profile title, in development by a world class developer, receiving review scores where the mean is 95, putting this at or near the best scored game of the year, you would expect that Red Dead Redemption is near perfect. But how is there such a disconnect between the reality of Red Dead Redemption, its bugs and problems easily detectable by anyone that has played the game's multiplayer component, and the theory that Red Dead Redemption is near perfect in every review score.

Boomtown,, 1Up, GamePro, GameReactor, Gameplanet,Planet Xbox 360, Telegraph, Cheat Code Central, Videogamer, Gamespy all gave Red Dead Redemption a perfect score. In these reviews there are no mentions of the glitches that prevail in some of the games modes. So, why is there no mention of these problems? Is it because Red Dead Redemption launched a web marketing campaign rivaled by few before lauch?...continues

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
sixaxis3049d ago

"game to find glitches within the first 10 minutes of gameplay you have to question the integrity of media outlets who have reviewed this game and give it a perfect score. "

so true.

toaster3049d ago

I have also heard my friends say that RDR is not perfect in terms of graphics and glitches.

StanLee3049d ago

It's not even about the graphics or the glitches. The game suffers the same poor design of GTAIV. While admittedly it's not as shallow, the mission structure is still as repetitive as go here, chase him, kill them, go back. Frankly, I haven't encountered any glitches and I'm about 5 hours in. I'm just disappointed that it's a GTAIV cloned Western.

KiRBY30003049d ago

and what did you expect exactly?

i mean, your complain is like saying that all you do is fight in a fighting game or all you do is drive in a racing game.

what solution do you propose to break RDR missions "repetitiveness"?

toaster3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

I played GTAIV. After looking at reviews I got the game on 360 and played for a while because everybody praised it for doing everything right. I quickly found out how boring it was and only played until the part where you have to chase the guy on a motorcycle. I stopped there because it was just boring.. the graphics were not jawdroppingly awesome the way a lot of critics said it was. The controls were uncooperative. The story was not very compelling though I did not play much so maybe it got better the more I played, but an exciting beginning would have helped hook me in to playing more of the single-player. I think the only good part about GTAIV in my experience was that the open-world was lifelike and fluid. Going from one part of the city to the next was smooth and everything looked natural, from the pedestrians going about their business to other drivers.

I still to this day do not understand all the perfect scores and the GOTY awards and praise..

Here's my friend's opinion on RDR. lol. And no I could not have faked this because it was posted yesterday, FYI. I also censored his name for privacy.

HolyOrangeCows3049d ago

You pretty much have to assume at this point that reviewers will give anything Multiplat Rockstar a near perfect score.

Don't get me wrong, it looks fun and I'm probably going to get it, but most reviewers will overlook the problems, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's because Rockstar sent them all "care packages"

Figboy3049d ago

i think for him to not feel that the game is repetitive, the game designers should have made it where, while you are going to a mission, the earth opens up with a sudden volcanic explosion, and mole people emerge, riding dinosaurs and declaring they will finally have their day, forcing you to single handedly battle the mole people leader.

just when you are going to deliver the killing blow, a siren wales, and alien spacecraft careen back and forth through the air, peppering the ground as you flee with your new ally, the mole leader, as you declare that your beef will have to wait in order to defeat this new quest.

but then, as you are escaping, a small army of Jedi and Sith break into a beatmania style contest, forcing you to compete with them in order for you gain their respect so they can repel the alien invasion.

as you are crowned the victor of the competition, zombies (because EVERY GAME needs zombies), crawl from a nearby crypt, and you and 4 friends must fight them off while trying to reach the next safehouse...

and i'm spent.

i don't know what he could possibly be expecting from a game that is clearly in the GTA mold. in fact, just about ALL open world games follow that template, because HOW ELSE would the game play out? it couldn't all be random encounters (of which, i hear, RDR has plenty of), and there is a story being told, so yeah, to get to those story points in RDR, you have to travel to them.

as for the repetitiveness, ALL GAMES are repetitive. not a single game out there that i can think of has new game play mechanics every few seconds to keep you interested. if you really need that much new stimuli to keep you playing a game, then you should get checked out for ADD.

in a game, what matters is that the game play mechanics are FUN. if they are fun, it doesn't really matter if the game is repetitive.

God of War 3 has great game play mechanics, with enough depth to keep you playing and finding fun ways to defeat enemies.

Tetris is a classic example of a game with a highly repetitive game play mechanic, but it's so fun and addicting that you could literally play it for hours and not be bored with it.

hay3049d ago

Perfect scores aren't about perfect games.
They are about awesome games which can be awesome despite some issues. But on the other side awesomeness is a matter of opinion(I think Blaze&Blade was awesome but it was 5/10 game max), so perfect scores should be about top quality games.
Glitches like that should prohibit the reviewer from giving the game full score but today quality of reviews are as we see it now.

Not reliable at all.

Word of advice?

Don't follow other's opinion blindly.

JohnnyMann4203049d ago

What the hell are you talking about. Besides the R* style....this game IS NOT GTA IV...Not in the least.

Just because a game has the same controls, doesn't make it the same friggen game.

If that was the case then every FPS would be the same, right?

Perjoss3049d ago

the bottom line is for every person on the internet complaining, there are 1000 gamers looking past the bugs and glitches and having a great time.

WinterWolf3049d ago

Bubbles for making me lol!

I am playing RDR right now, and to be honest it is not nearly as repetitive as most games. There are random encounters throughout the landscape with wild animals and bandits, many of which come in different varieties (people trying to rob you, trick you, or challenge you). The missions are engaging and fairly unique, introducing you to different characters and ranging in tasks from herding cattle, breaking horses, collecting bounties, raiding camps and so on. And choosing a playing style of honor or dishonor adds a level of depth.

And when you get tired of that, Texas Hold 'Em never gets old for me. :)

KiRBY30003049d ago

that was an awesome reply! lol

i dont know which Bubble up + category i should pick, they all work with your post! Interesting, Well said, Intelligent, Funny and Helpful!

Millah3049d ago

Figboy, you nailed it. +1 for you. I'm starting to think that people will hate on any game no matter how good it is, as long as it gets highly praised. Seems you can't satisfy everyone, some people resist it too hard.

Figboy3049d ago

thanks guys!

i just think it's kind of ridiculous that "repetitive" has become a "valid" complaint with video games.

as stated before, all games are repetitive by nature.

what we are really complaining about when we say the game is "repetitive," is that the game play mechanic that is being repeated the most isn't fun, and it makes the game feel repetitive (ie, boring).

i've certainly played my fair share of boring games.

if the core game design mechanic is flawed, then you will more than likely have a weak game (see: Turok, Blacksite: Area 51, Legendary: The Box, Conflict: Denied Ops, etc).

a rock solid core game play mechanic, and solid production values generally lead to high praise. i haven't played RDR myself, but the general consensus from gamers (not reviewers, but those that have actually played the game and aren't being paid for it), is that it nails those two aspects and is an, overall, enjoyable experience.

i just can't wait to get mine in the mail from Amazon on Monday.



their was even one point where a puma came out of no where and attacked my horse, first I was upset at losing my horse, that emotion surprised me, then I was scared cuz the puma turned around and started for me. I like the game

AngryTypingGuy3049d ago

Figboy, that was a brilliant reply!

Kleptic3048d ago (Edited 3048d ago )

figboy I totally agree, however I have yet to play RDR...but what all this review stuff did do is motivate me to play through GTAIV...

I bought the game the day it released and put a solid month into it...and never touched it again after MGS4 released...while GTAIV was ok at the time, I definitely saw it and felt it played like a step backwards from the unstoppably awesome over the top PS2 gta's...

repetitive gameplay is built into an open world game...there is no way to do it, like you said, with a story and completely illiminate having to revisit known locales or travel 'to get there'...but that doesn't mean developers have to over inflate that...GTA games have always had failed mission problems...always...and there is no real way to fix them I guess...but I would LOVE for an open world game to have some sort of mission save option...or some mechanic where you can simply save the game wherever you want...whenever you want...thats what makes these types of games much more accessible to people that simply don't have 2 hours to plop on the couch and play...or at least don't have that time very often...

GTAIV for example...multiple missions involve driving for a few minutes to one area...shooting some people, or picking some up, or both, and then driving somewhere else and doing the same thing...and if for any reason something goes have to do ALL of it over, not just the section you screwed up...the bank heist mission can take up to 20 minutes, with nearly non-stop action and a lot of 'luck' involved...with no option to save during it...being almost done with it and getting arrested simply because some crap taxi randomly pulled into the intersection at exactly the wrong time in front of your SUV is beyond annoying imo...these are the ONLY types of games that get away with a shooter it would be the equivalent of starting at the beginning of a particular level every time you die...modern games have insanely complex mechanics known as 'checkpoints' that completely changed gaming entirely...why these sandbox game developers think they are above that will always be beyond me...

GTAIV did have a mission restart option that was new to the franchise...but its nearly pointless because its almost always suicide to start any real mission without the 'right' way to do it is either reload your last game save after you die, or at the very least drive across town to get weapons and ammo...

so i'm not saying its easy to fix...but I see what this guy is saying about repetitiveness bordering on being overly tedious...and true; an in mission save option could make the game too easy...but for me personally, i'd take too easy over the mundane process of re-equipping your character after failing a mission...especially under random situations that are not always your fault for being a 'bad player'...

beyond all that I do see where he is coming from with reviews in general...I don't care about this argument of people saying a perfect score does not mean a perfect game...uh...well fix the numbering system then...most review sites still do something down to a .1 significance...which is retarded considering they still argue that a 10/10 still doesn't mean its perfect...GTAIV received 10/10's left and right too...and its far from that for me personally...reviewers should just skip a score altogether...give it a thumbs up, or down...or middle for something simply average

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 3048d ago
Alcon3049d ago

What I fear is another GTA4 case, where everyone raved on the game, only for us to find out it was good but not as great as those reviewers told us. So in the end we where left a bit disappointed, because we expected much more?
I did not play RDR yet so I will hold making any judgment,but I believe that nontheless it looks like a very good game worth buying.

raztad3049d ago

You have a good point but the problem are the perfect reviews all over the place (95 meta) that rises the hype (and expectations) through the roof.

To tell the truth I've been avoiding to fall for the media created hype. It's better to wait for fellow gamers reviews.

TooTall193049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

and the game is fun. I don't see why everyone hates GTA4 so much on this site!

Edit: RDR sp and free roam is best when using expert aim.

vhero3049d ago

Been saying this all along just because its open world single player and made by rockstar reviewers immediately gave it a near perfect score just like with GTA IV.

Raf1k13049d ago

You'd think the fools would have learned from GTA4. It's still probably a great game but to have none of those reviews even mention the glitches and bugs just isn't right.
Maybe they were just reviewing certain parts of the game but what kind of reviewer worth his salt would do that unless he was to review the SP separately to the MP.

Myze3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

Big thing RDR has over GTAIV is that it's actually a lot of fun. Review scores encompass countless possible reasons for the score given. A few bugs here and there (none of which I've seen playing for about 4-5 hours) does not detract from a game if it has enough good going for it. Also, since I haven't seen, or at least haven't noticed, any of the bugs people are claiming, it's quite possible that the reviewers never saw any of them either.

The Multiplayer problems are a valid complaint, but that would not go into determining the score, since most reviewers were probably playing it on a different server than the average gamer is, or at least on a server where very few people were playing to avoid the massive overload that it received on release day.

I could understand people worrying about RDR getting such good reviews after the debacle of GTAIV, but having played the game myself, I can say that is not the case, and RDR deserves the high scores it's getting for the single player alone. I suggest some of you people play the game, rather than having some no-name site reaffirm what you were hoping to be true, and claim so many other sites are in on a huge conspiracy.

morganfell3049d ago

Personally I am enjoying the SP portion of RDR.

However, it must be admitted that this isn't the first prominent game with a broken Multiplayer component that had it's online failings completely glossed over and forgiven, no, ignored by reviewers. That very thing happened in a prominent, not to old title and it took them months to patch it. Meanwhile media outlets gave them a pass. And it wasn't a Rockstar game either.

kingdavid3049d ago

I had a go at it. Its far from unplayable online and I had fun playing the free for all and gold rush (not much lag and proper maps).

I did however see my entire character disappear for about 20 seconds at one point.

Even so, its a far better effort then what went into gears 2 multiplayer *vomit.

ALFAxD_CENTAURO3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

I was sure the Multiplayer gonna fail, since I saw the phrase: The multiplayer is ''Powered by Gamespy'', in my experience, Gamespy it's a mediocre service in consoles, but not on PC.

sikbeta3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

Ah... What everyone is Expecting, This is a R* Game, last time GTAIV wasn't that Great Either but it got Loads of Perfect Scores...

I knew something like this was going to happen (but ina different way), but it'll be like GTAIV all over again...

"It's a Rockstar Game, No Matter What, IS Perfect!"

TheHater3049d ago

yesterday on Attack of the Show, Morgan Webb admitted that they had no attachments to the characters or Story in GTAIV and it was over hyped but they still gave it a good score because it was GTA. Even Kevin admitted that it was a good game

TheHater3049d ago

Everyone got on me when I said that reviewers are giving all this game flaws a pass because it made by R*. When I called out the media for not bring up the problems with the online, everyone disagree with me. R* has already been caught with Red Redemption controversy
That is why I will never trust or ever will trust reviews because you never know that is going on behind the scenes, whether or not reviewers are bias toward a specific company and so on.

JohnnyMann4203049d ago

Well the Red Dead Redemption "Controversy" was explained. Also if you read into it a little more you will find nothing more than your run of the mill PR notice.

I will be blunt and honest with you.

I've played this game for 10 hours (officially) and I have seen no bugs. Zero. I have seen some bugs on youtube, so I know they exist and I also saw a bug while watching a stream.

There are bugs but they are really not game breakers and probably cause very little grief to the player.

As far as giving R* a free Pass? IGN and other reviews mention bugs as a negative and it ruined hte final score of the game.

After playing the game for 10 hours and still have tons to do (I'm doing all the challenges etc) this game was worth my 60 bucks.

I would still rate it around a 9.5

I am in no way a R* Fanboy. I liked GTA IV for what it was but when I compare it to GTA SA, I think SA was better as far as things to do when the game was complete.

RDR seems to bring R* back on pace with their old series. There is so much to do in this world and it just feels right.

This is a must have game and I am happy the reviews show it.

RedDevils3049d ago

you can never satisfied everybody. especially fanboy

Shepherd 2143049d ago

Figboy is my freakin hero.

badz1493049d ago

or maybe not exactly the same but kinda! I saw the game already up on shelve today but I didn't buy it although I would really love to. the reason was, I thought back about GTAIV and how hyped I was for the game just to be disappointed later on!

it's true, that there's a lot to do in a sandbox game like this but if the main missions are the repetitive "go there, kill him" kinda things, then that's just BORING!

EvilBlackCat3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

wow by reading all this comments i ask my self now

Why all this critics (n4g fans) are not designing games?

glitches? YES

POOR GAME DESIGN? Come on give me a break!

"seems like it's GTAIV all over again"

YUP because is not a PS3 exclusive again


sikbeta3049d ago

"because is not a PS3 exclusive again"

What a short-sighted dude, he takes everything as a "tool" for his Fanboy-war, No-1 is talking about the Game being BAD or something like that, Only saying that is NOT F*CKING PERFECT and if is not Perfect, a 10/10 got no justification, you get it?

You're probably the guy that was PRAISING MW2 while other players were being pissed cos how crap the game was, [man, the PC version $ucks BAD], is not about fanboysm, you paid for a Game, you want the Best, is really difficult to understand?

Anyways, as far as I know the Game is Awesome, so keep Gaming...

badz1493049d ago

yah, I'm busted! happy now? I was planning on getting the game since the 1st time I saw the footages and with all the hype and everything I really really want the game! - and I knew from the get go that it's a multiplat!

I said "seems like it's GTAIV all over again" because in terms of reviews and reception, you can't deny that it's kinda similar! perfect reviews all over the place but the game itself is not reflecting the 10s it's getting! where exactly in my previous comment I was disappointed RDR is not a PS3 exclusive?

I think I'll get the game eventually but silly me for being hyped (again!) by the reviews, I just hope that I'll not be disappointed the way GTAIV did!

SeanRL3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

It's still a fun game, but it doesn't deserve a 10/10. The same thing happened with gta 4.

Edit: Evilblackcat, if you think we don't like the game because it's not exclusive to ps3 then you are stupid. It's gta all over again because it doesn't deserve the 10/10 scores it's been getting.

thetruthinator3049d ago

Red dead revolver was a cartoony shooter with very entertaining game mechanics. You actually had to aim when you shot an enemy in the first one.

Whats the point of a shooting game where your character shoots with 100% perfect accuracy every time... with little effort on your part? Theres no sense of accomplishment in that.

But if exploring large amount of content is your thing than redemption is probably still worth your money

SpinalRemains1383049d ago

I totally agree. They even changed Red's voice. Nothing is the same except for the Reds facial scar(stolen from Josey Wales).

The game is fun as hell, but it doesn't resemble RDRevolver at all. I think it's entirely too much like GTA.

AngryTypingGuy3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

I love Rockstar games. They are made specifically for adults. You will not find a more extensive western anywhere. The game is getting phenomenal reviews, and people still find reason to complain. I guess no single game can please anybody.

Heisenberg3048d ago

Rockstar clearly gets special favorable treatment by reviewers. But lets be honest, we all know the people reviewing the games we play are generally full of it. Far better games get scrutinized much more harshly for issues that are trivial in comparison.

pixelsword3046d ago

...they matter to you.


Spydiggity3045d ago (Edited 3045d ago )

it's an open world game. an open world game where everything you kill stays behind for a time after you kill it the after you skin it (the bodies don't just burst into orbs and disappear. they don't turn into light as a feather rag dolls). an open world game where you have full control over the camera, where you go, what you do, when you do it. an open world game with dynamic weather and a day and night cycle. and so much more. so're going to get some glitches...that's just the way of it.

it's not like it's some "next gen" game where your path is already set before you, the enemies and events are completely scripted, and in many cases (one major one in particular) you can't even control the camera. i think it takes a pretty arrogant (and ignorant) person to find fault with a game that does so much more than most other games on the market by a LONG SHOT. especially faults as trivial as the ones in red dead. the game is great fun, and the glitches almost never detract from the game and often add a little chuckle to the experience.

and on top of all that, they added a pretty heafty multiplayer. the multiplayer is a bonus, not something you should expect to be amazing when you think of all the content they've already given you. it's just meant to be fun with your friends...and it is. yeah it's buggy as hell and not at all balanced; but it's very enjoyable non-the-less for just free roaming with your posse and getting into a battle in the middle of a giant world you've grown to be familiar with.

seriously...what more do you want?

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 3045d ago
Hellsvacancy3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

The good outweighs the bad, Fallout 3 was a glitch fest but that didnt stop me from getting the Platinum trophy, i loved Fallout 3 its the best game ive played this gen even with all the glitchs and freezes and crashes

Mega lookin forward to Red Dead 2 (hav been ever since it was announced) people are just to picky

"If it wasnt for Gravitys inperfections none of us would be here now, Perfect isnt a word in the Unviverse because nothin can b perfect"

unknownhero11233049d ago

agreed. I only experienced 2 glitches, one huge frame rate slow down and another glitch where marston was floating in the air after fast traveling. other than that, it's a great game and I'm having fun with it.

Digibull3048d ago

... and dispite the glitches Fallout still turned out to be GOTY.

Johnny53049d ago

Can a game have glitches and be perfect? Sure if your name is Rockstar, Bungie, or Infinity Ward

poe3049d ago

MW2 is a good example of this defintely

retrofly3049d ago

GLitches/hacks/bugs for over hyped. I played nearly 3000 games online yet only come accorss a handful of broken games, maybe 12 maximum.

RedDevils3049d ago

can never be perfect, there always will be a glitch

jmare3049d ago

A "perfect score" does not mean the game is perfect. No game can be objectively be determined as perfect. All a "perfect score" means is that, in the reviewers opinion, the game is really fucking good, great even.

Of course, if all the assholes that complain about "perfect scores" would try games that rated less than an 8, then maybe the review scale could widen out from the 7-10 range it's at now.

retrofly3049d ago

Most of the reviewers probably only played Multiplayer locally as it wasnt released when they did the review, so probably didnt experiance any of the MP glitches.

There are a few glitches in SP but these were mentioned by quite alot of the reviews, but despite the odd glitch people still really enjoyed the game.

this has beenr eflected by the community as well, if you check gamer forums etc they will say depite the glitches SP RDR is a great game, but its true the MP glitches need to be fixed.

No game is perfect, RDR being a sandbox game its hard to predict every eventuality so it will have some bugs and glitches.

Maybe thats why it has a 95 score on metactitic instead of 100 ;)

Burn3603049d ago

This is true, and as good as RDR is, there is no way its in the same league with God of War III or Mass Effect though.

retrofly3049d ago Show
RosoTron363049d ago

Retrofly got disagrees for speaking his own mind. Lol. Bubs+ for being the only one that's actually not brain dead...

Raf1k13049d ago

IMO it doesn't make sense to call a game rubbish simply because it's not your kind of game. There are games that I didn't like very much such as Fallout 3 but I can see why so many people liked it. I'll admit it's probably a great game but because it's not for me I'll just say I didn't like it not that it's rubbish.

That may be why retrofly got the disagrees. He did say it's his thought on the game but as usual people take it the wrong way.

RosoTron363049d ago

Agreed. But umm.. "IMO"... I simply agreed to disagree. good point though :D

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3049d ago
RedDevils3049d ago

just cause you don't like it doesn't mean it garbage, just like me saying Mass effect is garbage, but when I say it your head is about to explode and smoke come out of your head

BeaArthur3049d ago

These articles are so stupid. Reviewers are designed to tell you whether to buy a game, they are there to provide information to help you make an informed decision. It has a 95 on metacritic and based on the 6 hours or so I have played I think that's a pretty fair score.

FanboyAttack3049d ago

These articles are stupid to someone like you that agrees with the score that made you go to the store and buy the game.

But to people that read a review and get a completely different experience than the one described to them in the review it might make a little sense. This would be anyone that wanted to play multiplayer in RDR because its broke.

BeaArthur3049d ago (Edited 3049d ago )

I don't allow scores to dictate what I do and don't buy. I do my research, which yes does include reading reviews, but that is only a small part of the equation. And for those who "read a review and get a completely different experience than the one described to them" should have read more than one review.

Besides your argument doesn't make sense anyways because reviews are subjective. Just because this game received "universal acclaim" doesn't mean everyone is going to like it. And this article is stupid because people reviewing the game had early copies and when they were playing it for the purposes of their review the servers were not under the strain they are under now. I didn't see one review where someone talked about turning invisible; and why is that? Because it wasn't happening when they reviewed it. This person is just bitter because they have some delusional idea that this game was perfect and now that he has found a few non game breaking bugs, he is bitter.

**mistake on the original post, I meant reviews are NOT designed to tell you whether to buy a game**

Raf1k13049d ago

It's great that you love the game but as you said reviews are supposed to provide all the information you need about a game for people to be able to make an informed decision which is what I don't like about overly positive reviews.

I'm looking forward to reading some user reviews on this site to get a good idea about the game.

BeaArthur3049d ago

I think a lot of the reviews have been pretty spot on so far. It's not perfect but it is very good. The only issues I have seen have been in the multiplayer and although I don't know what's causing it, I bet they have it fixed by the end of the week.