Red Dead Redemption
- Thread starter Tap In
- Start date
What version are you getting?Because i have played 360 version,though not for long but there werent any noticable frame rate drops or tearing.Good thing is that shadows look much better then in GTAIV and texture pop in is gone,albeit he had it installed on HDD.
Its more like living city vs open desert with some small dessert settlement.
If you have less things to render you can up the draw distance and other effects.
Did i do it right?
I meant that question more in line with Ruskie's impressions that no open world game compares. Like RDR brings x, y, z to the table and this why its beyond something earlier from the Rage engine like GTA IV or another top open world achievement like Assassin's Creed.
Don't rip through it! I'll join up once I get my copy. Maybe set your router to kick you off a bit earlier
Last edited by a moderator:
Its a Trap !
Seriously speaking..I liked GTA4 but I did think it was a bit of drag & was repetitive. But THIS....does looks very interesting & seems to have a lot of variety too.
I don't understand this mentality. No one is *forcing* you to buy anything. If you'd rather play the game on PS3, then by all means do it. You sound like a . . . well, the word should not be spoken.
Tbh the difference between 640p & 720p are bare minimum....atleast when done right.
Billy Idol
Legend
I don't like GTA at all! These games just don't click with me!
But I am highly interested in RDR, it looks extremely cool and judging the graphics in the early video footage floating around: it looks like to feature one of the best graphics available!
Billy Idol
Legend
Hm, what are you talking about mister? You sound like a...(I don't know what, but what ever you accused me to be, please fill it in this empty space) too!
But to give you a reason behind my "mentality":
-For instance, I just like the PS3 controller better -> that is why I prefer to buy the PS3 version.
-I am mostly interested in SP mode, not in MP mode. At the moment, I don't have a gold account (waiting for Gears 3 to hit), but maybe I want to try out MP one time!
-On the other hand, I want that the game looks good! And if I pay 70Euro for the game I first weighing all pros and cons - if the game would look roughly the same, like a lot of available MP games, the first mentioned pros would outweigh the lesser graphics. But if the difference is night and day ...this is what I call "forcing", especially when these devs constantly spam the "both versions are identical" BS!
So I don't know you and thus I cannot judge how this sounds to you, but for me this is a reasonable process I do for each MP game I buy!
Game is getting some ridiculous scores...here are new once...
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=395097&page=81
Official PlayStation Magazine (US) 10/10
Official Xbox Magazine 10/10
PSM 10/10
Also some Spanish review also leaked giving it 98/100,highest score of magazines history
Dont know if this has been posted but anyway...
http://www.ausgamers.com/features/read/2893081
Technology
While GTA IV was hailed as a crowning achievement in technology for the open-world genre with its expansive and detailed world, physics system and Euphoria, the game engine Rockstar North used was actually developed by Rockstar San Diego. The RAGE engine was originally built for Red Dead Redemption (and was shown off in tech-demo form at E3 in 2005), but has since found itself as the company's staple development architecture; evolving as needed to cater for anything being built within the collective Rockstar studios' walls. What this means, however, is that while the engine is available to everyone within Rockstar, the team who know it best are clearly the guys who built it.
And all the while it was being tweaked and moulded to bring us GTA IV, San Diego were in development with Red Dead Redemption; learning from mistakes or shortcomings essentially tested with GTA IV. This shows in the final result; the game is very, very quick to load (so no annoying GTA IV pre-load art screens), and the game-world seamlessly renders in incredible scope. The only time you're really facing any lengthy loads is if you fast travel to different areas, otherwise it's all-immersive, never once pulling you out of suspended disbelief and your overall experience.
The incredible thing about this streaming world is just how unbelievable the draw-distance is. I'm reminded of the likes of Oblivion, Fallout 3 or even the recently released Just Cause 2 - all showcasing massive landscapes as far as the eye can see. But Red Dead draws so much more detail out of this scope, and the game-world is much more engaging as a result. The build I was playing only suffered minor moments of pop-up, and I never noticed a single hitch in frame-rate. There's also an incredible level of real-world detail - something I touched on in part 1 of my hands-on. Essentially there are never two areas of the landscape repeated twice. Texturing is insanely detailed with smooth load-ins that barely catch your eye, this helps in a gameplay facet too. One of Red Dead's optional side-quests involves finding treasure, the only thing is, the maps designed for this purpose are usually very vague, often only representing locations via crudely drawn landmarks. The idea then is to match up these amateurishly-drawn maps with the real-world. The first one I attempted was reasonably easy, but the second had me utterly baffled. I can see this quest seriously pushing the cerebral envelope for a lot of players.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=395097&page=81
Official PlayStation Magazine (US) 10/10
Official Xbox Magazine 10/10
PSM 10/10
Also some Spanish review also leaked giving it 98/100,highest score of magazines history
Dont know if this has been posted but anyway...
http://www.ausgamers.com/features/read/2893081
Technology
While GTA IV was hailed as a crowning achievement in technology for the open-world genre with its expansive and detailed world, physics system and Euphoria, the game engine Rockstar North used was actually developed by Rockstar San Diego. The RAGE engine was originally built for Red Dead Redemption (and was shown off in tech-demo form at E3 in 2005), but has since found itself as the company's staple development architecture; evolving as needed to cater for anything being built within the collective Rockstar studios' walls. What this means, however, is that while the engine is available to everyone within Rockstar, the team who know it best are clearly the guys who built it.
And all the while it was being tweaked and moulded to bring us GTA IV, San Diego were in development with Red Dead Redemption; learning from mistakes or shortcomings essentially tested with GTA IV. This shows in the final result; the game is very, very quick to load (so no annoying GTA IV pre-load art screens), and the game-world seamlessly renders in incredible scope. The only time you're really facing any lengthy loads is if you fast travel to different areas, otherwise it's all-immersive, never once pulling you out of suspended disbelief and your overall experience.
The incredible thing about this streaming world is just how unbelievable the draw-distance is. I'm reminded of the likes of Oblivion, Fallout 3 or even the recently released Just Cause 2 - all showcasing massive landscapes as far as the eye can see. But Red Dead draws so much more detail out of this scope, and the game-world is much more engaging as a result. The build I was playing only suffered minor moments of pop-up, and I never noticed a single hitch in frame-rate. There's also an incredible level of real-world detail - something I touched on in part 1 of my hands-on. Essentially there are never two areas of the landscape repeated twice. Texturing is insanely detailed with smooth load-ins that barely catch your eye, this helps in a gameplay facet too. One of Red Dead's optional side-quests involves finding treasure, the only thing is, the maps designed for this purpose are usually very vague, often only representing locations via crudely drawn landmarks. The idea then is to match up these amateurishly-drawn maps with the real-world. The first one I attempted was reasonably easy, but the second had me utterly baffled. I can see this quest seriously pushing the cerebral envelope for a lot of players.
Ah, so it's GTA4-based. The developers may also get more practices and tuning there because of the GTA4 DLCs MS bought exclusively.
I aborted GTA4 in err... Chapter 2 ? Right where the girl called me on my cell to go out for a date. I started it 2-3 more times, but instead of going out with her, I went out with my wife instead. ^_^
RDR looks more interesting. I'll probably get it.
I aborted GTA4 in err... Chapter 2 ? Right where the girl called me on my cell to go out for a date. I started it 2-3 more times, but instead of going out with her, I went out with my wife instead. ^_^
RDR looks more interesting. I'll probably get it.
not sure I follow you.
It says that the engine was built by the RDR team and used by GTA4 team but mistakes form the technical side of GTA were used to improve RDR. not sure how that means GTA based
I didn't know the name of the engine. So as long as it's driving GTA4, then it's GTA4 in my mind.
Rage engine :smile:... built by R* San Diego for RDR, borrowed by other R* teams including the team that did GTA but continued to be improved upon since 2005 by R* San Diego purely for RDR.
I wouldn't say I am a hater, but I think the its way to hyped
And got serious reservations about RDR, but my pre-order is in.I think I played the 2 first missions of GTA4 before it started collecting dust
Similar threads
