[VIDEO] Rockstar's Game Design is Outdated - NakeyJakey - General

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvJPKOLDSos hot take by a hot boy

I posted a similiar video from Writing on Games where he exposes the sheer absurdity of the Bounterhunter missions because they will physically demand you to go through all of the animations where as in the first RDR you could do whatever you want. So RDR2 actually backslid on player freedom as compared to the first.

It's a shame, Rockstar is one of (if not) the only studios that has the time, budget and talent to do more than what they do. It's not even a matter of Rockstar being afraid of alienating a casual audience because they don't advertise the linear story stuff, it's always the dynamic stuff they focus on in advertisements.

Jake made me realize I don't want that structured style of story telling anymore. I like when I get to go out on my own and do whatever, and complete whatever objectives as I wish. I guess I won't be picking up RDR2

RDR2 is the game that made me realize how much it sucks that structured stories are dying because RDR2 tells such a good fucking story that everything else in gaming pales in comparison.

honestly RDRs story is the best part, and that's honestly saying something. Yeah it's a bit of a drag that you are sorta railroaded at the very very first act but you're free to go all the way to Saint Denis if you so chose once the first camp is set up. Hell, feeling naughty? Go all the way to Blackwater. Actually I feel the restriction is done to make you feel more free when they suddenly say "Okay, do whatever, I dont care" *You might be able to fuck off before the first camp is set up, I dont know. I didn't feel the need to. So... game design done right, I suppose

nonono don't get me wrong, structured stories are nice, but it's like eating the same thing every day. you'll get super tired of it.

I bet you would, and I'm sorry you won't give yourself a chance to do so. I've played probably 30 open world games in the last 5 years. You know how many of those I really, REALLY remember? Almost none of them. Because almost none of them were impactful experiences. I enjoyed myself with them, and would happily go back to wandering the world of say, AC: Odyssey, but it literally pales in comparison to the "Structured" nature of RDR2. RDR2 told a story so concise, complete, and well crafted that I cried, and went into a day long "funk" after the story and it's completion. It was, and remains, an incredible story that I remember quite a lot of because it made every beat of the story special, impactful, and quite different from it's competitors. By all means, feel free to dodge it as an experience, but I would take RDR2's complete structure and nature over any "Open world" competitor on the market today. It hands down trounces those offerings by giving you both the most structured story in an open world game like this, as well as giving you the whole open world to fuck around in. It's without a doubt my GOTY, and maybe one of my contenders for a GOAT.

Aight dude calm down, lol Just this year, a game with came out with a better story, God of War. RDR2's story is great but theres a lot of empty fucking space in there, particularly in act 4-5, that could have been cut out. And what God of War did on TOP of having a great story was having genuinely good gameplay, unlike rockstars shooting galleries.

Human, I don't think you understand my tastes. I'm looking for a game that lets me do what i want. If the game were to give me an objective, I want to have the ability to complete it in many different ways, intentional or otherwise. Basically gimme that lego box.

Lol you're so biased it's not even funny.

It's just a good game that I love and made me genuinely remember why I love stories again. God of War was great yeah but it didn't make me feel how RDR2 did.

I mean... obviously? I prefered GoW to RDR2, that's the definition of bias.

That's fine, then this game isn't for you and you're just going to miss out on it. I'm just telling you what I got out of it and I why I feel so strongly about it.

I don't think that having a well-written script is necessarily indicative of a game being well-designed, though. And in fact, honestly, most other open world games that have come out in recent years have fallen into the exact same failings that are being described in the video, just with poorer writing, so I don't think that it's really the case that RDR2 is actually doing anything different in terms of it's approach to storytelling as a game either. It's not really any more or less "structured" than your average Ubisoft open world game, it just has a better script. I agree with the video very much in saying that there's nothing wrong with having a very "structured" game, the problem comes from having two clashing design philosophies throughout the entire game that each prevent the other from ever realizing their full potential.

That bit with the backroom casino is just sad, he went the distance but all he got for his troubles was an FU. Makes me wonder why Rockstar even bother with these systems if they're just gonna handhold you through everything anyway.

Also worth watching is video related https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMbW24ggTmE Rockstar's got a nasty problem with not only having their deep and intriguing cinematic story missions clash entirely with the rest of the game, but being unnecessarily dickish with their story missions. They've gotten better about not forcing you through several minutes of busywork between attempts, but it's still annoying having the mission fail you because it tossed a little "gotcha!" moment right at you or reacted poorly to you trying to solve the mission in any way but the one the developers wanted you to. The best way to describe Rock Star's games--all of them-- is basically "excellent open world gameplay, surprisingly good storyline, annoyingly poor humor, abominable mission design". It's been this way since GTA III, and literal decades of working on the same genre really should have taught them what to avoid. Being one of the most deservedly beloved developers in the industry hasn't done much to improve their self-criticality.

Not to defend them not utilizing emergent gameplay in their mission structure, but it could be a budget and feature creep concern. By doing this, it allows the level and systems teams to work independently without major clashes. Accounting for players trying creative solutions can be cost demanding for games that insist on immersion and realism. However, if their games continue to be critically-acclaimed, they might continue the trend due to efficiency. This is my guess.

Rockstar is one of the most profitable gaming companies in the world. GTAV gave them a massive boost, but GTAO insured their position. Further their titles are already riddled with all kinds of feature creep where systems are implemented that serve no purpose and have so little depth and are clearly half finished. Buying properties and trading stocks in GTAV for instance.

I love Jakey's shoutout raps. Gonna miss them (for now)

Oh, budget as in human resource and not monetary. If internal-collaborations get tangled up in an already large scale production such as this will create problems that even money won't solve. Having to reiterate missions because the other team added 6 new features that might interfere with creative solutions is going to drive them crazier. It is a chaos-cutting measure.

While I agree with most of his points, I think people are holding Rockstar up to ridiculous standards. It's all well and good saying that they should pick a side when it comes to story-driven and open-world but no matter which one they picked, a huge chunk of the audience would have complained at the absence of the other. Comparing it unfavourably to New Vegas is also a little misleading and only really works when you compare everything RDR2 does wrong with everything NV does right while ignoring the fact that NV is also a buggy, janky pile of shit (despite being a good game).

Here's God of War's story summarized: Man and his boy goes on quest to scatter his dead moms ashes. Shit get in the way. That's really it. There's some neat characters in there, but the game is linear as fuck and most of the obstacles just make you go "Oh come on, why aren't we done yet?" as opposed to "Oooh, more!". Don't get me wrong, I loved God of War, but in comparison to Red Dead Redemption 2 it pales. They're two very different beasts. RDR2 is just the better beast.

I felt the same way with GTA:V. The open world was so interesting, and there seemed to be all this little stuff around but there was just no way to interact with it.

Former employees and insiders have stated that the teams already don't talk to each other, they're actually not allowed to. Only managers can communicate outside their teams at all, and departments can only communicate through the head of their department. So if a manager doesn't say or ask what another team is doing, their team won't find out and can run in to conflicts.

I just hate how most of rockstar's missions are tutorials for things you'll never do again

It fucking sucks, one of the only things wrong with their recent games is how linear they are. They design these massive open worlds with it being such a massive selling point for their games and where you'll spend a good chunk of your time in, but once you get into missions they throw it out the window and plays like the most linear thing ever. It's such a juxtaposition and missions could be so much more creative with how they play out if they got out of this habit. It sorta extend out to these dynamic events you randomly come across or whatever (like that casino example in the video). They easily have the talent and time to break out of the linearity and get more creative as well which makes it even worse.

Does this video contain any spoilers for Red Dead 2?

Seems like there might be minor spoilers but not really.

I must be missing something. How is that not a fucking stupid idea?