*RDR SPOILERS!!!* Now that I’ve got that out of the way, and I’ve filled the word count so I don’t give anything away. I’ll also skip down a bit just to be sure.
There. I FINALLY finished the story portion of RDR yesterday. I seem to remember a while back that Cougar said the ending sucked. I thought the ending was a pitch perfect end to the entire game. Don’t most westerns end in a similar fashion? The hero goes down in a hail of gunfire while protecting his family/what is “right”. It’s not a “happy ending” to be sure, but it fits the tone of the game very well. I also like that RockStar lets you continue playing as Jack.
What does everyone else think of the ending?
I live, work, and play in central Iowa, and I'm looking forward to the birth of my first child in the fall. I've been into gaming ever since I got a SEGA MasterSystem back in the 80s. I play video games almost exclusively on the Xbox 360, but I also enjoy retro gaming, PC, iPhone, card, and board games (except Monopoly).
Also, I predict the sequel (you know there’s going to be one) will be called Red Dead Revenge.
When I stepped out from the barn, I knew I was toast…certainly disappointing after sinking 60+ hours into living as John Marston, staying honorable only to perish before the likes of Ross…so much for Karma.
But, finishing the game out as Jack was satisfying. Pumping Ross full of lead was one of my gaming high points; I love revenge! And, lifting $407 off his corpse was pretty nice.
As I have only played Far Cry 2, I cannot be a true judge of RPG’s, but a game will need to go a long way to beat RDR.
Great graphics; great story! Crappy controls but forgivable.
I didn’t mind the ending either, the only thing I had an issue with was that Marsten was killed by about as many guys as he killed in an average mission. It didn’t make much sense to me because I had been dead-eying that many guys for the last half of the game.
I was cool with his death, just not the circumstances of it. I feel like it would have been more believable if someone had shot him in the back or something.
I think the the time invested in the character made the finale that much more important. You know John is a criminal (and you do tons of killing), but you’re attached to the character since you’ve sunk so much time into him.
Gen brings up an interesting topic in games though. What constitutes an RPG now? I didn’t really consider RDR a RPG. I thought it was more like a 3rd person action game with a few RPG elements, but it was primarily story driven like many RPGs. I thought the same was true of Far Cry 2 (although the story wasn’t that great).
It seems like lots more games are borrowing elements that seem fundamental to the RPG genre without without the game itself being a RPG. MW2 has a leveling system with unlockables, Borderlands had TONS of loot and character leveling, etc. However games that are billed as an RPG like Mass Effect have action oriented combat.
I completely agree with RDR not being a RPG, purely; I only labeled it such, because there is not a valid term to identify RDR, that I was aware.
To me, it certainly is a FPS cloaked in a RGP.
None-the-less, RDR is a close to a RPG as I want to be; so, by definition, it is a Third Person Action Game or TPA; So Let it be Written ,So Let it be Done!.
I’m not really trying to label or be nit-picky about “what kind of game” RDR is. I just think it’s interesting the current trend in video games.
Previously, RPGs have been kind of a niche product with the most notable coming from Japanese developers. Mostly in this console cycle, things have changed where American devs are dominating in the RPG market with games that don’t fit the traditional RPG definition. Some of the lighter aspects of RPGs have started bleeding into other genres. Highly customized characters, XP, weapon mods/upgrades, and character classes are just a few examples.