Topic: Red Dead Redemption 2 OT

I love coming home to the gang at the campfire after being away hunting for days (that day/night cycle is rapid). I especially love the way that each character remembers how Arthur treats them. For example, I was teasing one of the girls and the following morning she asked if I was going to be nice to her today. It's very immersive.

@LN78 @kyleforrester87 @BAMozzy Digital Foundry have examined the HDR and essentially said that it is basically SDR upscaled, so that scaler just changes the white balance and all of the lighting levels are completely incorrect for a HDR display. I thought I was going mad with this game constantly adjusting it and I even booted up Horizon to see if I'd done something with the TV but that looked incredible, I've turned the HDR off now and it doesn't look much different.

I do find it strange that such a high profile big budget game has issues like this and the dodgy 4K reconstruction on the Pro

@LN78 a little bit, I know they sometimes do have a separate video for HDR but for something so obvious it seems strange not to even mention it

@carlos82 It's a weird thing really, I actually started playing with it turned off last night and by the end of the night I'd found myself preferring it off.

It looks dramatically different on/off on my TV, not really BAD by any stretch, but I guess washed out is the only word. I wasn't sure if it was an artistic choice or something.

@kyleforrester87 yeah washed out seems like a good way to describe it, shame really as the lighting in this game is amazing and I can only imagine how incredible it could look with true HDR. For me the likes of God of War, Horizon and good old FFXV are still the standout games in that regard

@carlos82 I can't comment on the PS4 (Pro or base version) as I bought for Xbox One X. The use of HDR does seem to be more 'subtle' and reminds me more of watching some of Netflix shows which are HDR but you feel you have to check if your TV has actually switched to HDR because it doesn't look as 'spectacular' as the HDR demo's. Certainly the first Chapter, the snow wasn't exceptionally bright. I thought though that as you move on and into chapter 2, when you start to see the green coming through the snow, the skies brightening up etc, the colours become more vibrant although still seemingly more 'natural' than bright and saturated. Certainly doesn't seem washed out, crushed etc. Its not the most impressive or most 'extreme' use, and by extreme, I mean pushing the TV to its limits by having extreme brights and excessively saturated colours and shiny materials. This is 1899 after all and things like plastics and vibrant, unnatural dyes are not in use.

As for Rockstars implementation of Chequerboard rendering, its their first and only version to use this method. It maybe that the decision to try it came very late on - maybe with pressure from Sony because of the X and its native 4k. I don't know for definite but as we know, all other versions just use 'native' rendering techniques and the Pro is the only one to use CB rendering. It would make sense for the XB1 to use it too to deliver a 1080p image and would probably have helped with the performance in towns a bit as it would be rendering lower than 862p (960x1080p essentially). Other games, especially Sony's own studio's, may well have had a LOT more time and support from Sony and other studio's who had also implemented CB. After al, GG used CB in Killzone:SF back in 2013 and the best use of it on a Pro in H:ZD so had experience that they could pass on to Sony Santa Monica for God of War. Rockstar may well of only had months or even weeks to try and do something for the Pro. Maybe they will update the game, get some help from GG or Sony to improve it but for all we know, the decision to go this route rather than native and upscale on Pro could have been a late after-thought.

Most developers have their own variation on this technique - often built into the engine. The principals maybe similar but there isn't a 'standard' for it. As such, I think its worth giving Rockstar the benefit of doubt and see what develops. We can't blame them without hearing their side. I don't play GTAv but I don't recall that being updated for Pro enhancements so isn't this Rockstar's first Pro enhanced game?

@BAMozzy it's essentially not HDR at all on any of the consoles, the scale in the options doesn't affect the peak luminance but the white pixel brightness of the SDR signal, so something like a white painted wall is the same brightness as the sun. It also explains why light sources such as torches/fireplaces don't appear to be brighter than much around them. I doubt it's an artistic choice but probably HDR coming to the fore fairly late in its development cycle, perhaps it'll be something they patch in at a later date.

As for the checkerboarding, there are so many different interpretations on the Pro from those built in the system to the quite magnificent solutions Insomniac and Guerrilla Games came up with for Spiderman and Horizon respectively, the latter of which has fantastic HDR support too. I will say that this isn't as bad as that digital foundry video suggests, as that was almost entirely zoomed in for the duration but it is softer than I'd expect, this could be just a result of halving the resolution on one axis coupled with TAA, it still looks great overall just less impressive then I'd expect from such a large budget title. Maybe they spent too much time playing with horse balls

@Kidfried I know it runs 'great' on a PS4 Pro, better than on a PS4 and XB1 and better than RDR did on its release too - especially the PS3 version. That WASN'T the point I was making. The point though was more about the use of CB rendering and the decision to go that route. The Pro is the ONLY console to use CB rendering and the FIRST time Rockstar have attempted this rendering method. GG first used it in Killzone in 2013 and being a Sony Studio could have helped on God of War - at least in an advisory capacity. We have no idea when Rockstar may have considered using this method and it may have been weeks before the game went gold. Its often built into the engine and they may not have had much time to perfect it.

GTAv was built for the PS3/360 era. Its not a PS4/XB1 game as such and like I said, never been 'enhanced' for Pro either so RDR2 is their first Pro enhanced game. I know if I only had a Pro, I would be content with the way it performs - particularly out of towns - its still better than base consoles. Its no different to being 'happy' with most console games that obviously look or run better on a PC.

There are reasons for Rockstar to improve on the Pro version - also the base and even XB1X version as there are still inconsistencies - however small and/or limited to particular areas. As for the implementation of CB rendering on the Pro, that too could be improved as its not as good as games like H:ZD, God of War etc as well as some other 3rd Party implementations but again that is something they could take time over as I don't think its a game breaking issue rather than rushing out a patch to fix something that is causing major issues. The ONLY time you don't need to do further patches is if the game is running perfectly and we know that RDR2 doesn't run perfectly in every situation/area. Even if it runs at a locked 30fps for 99% of the time, it would benefit from a bit of work to get that to 100%.

My post was actually defending Rockstar and their implementation of CB - given them the benefitt of doubt as its their first time and we don't know when they decided to go this route. Like I said its the first Rockstar game with CB rendering and its only the Pro version too that uses it. Performance is very good overall - better than most games on launch and the Pro is better than both base consoles in that regard too.

Some people may well be making more out of it than is necessary as even the XB1 version looks 'good' - especially when compared with other games on XB1. You can't expect the game to look like the X version just like you can't expect it to look like a high-end PC version (if they do release it on PC of course). You don't expect 60fps minimum either on console - not for a game like this anyway and there are other RPG's that don't perform as consistently. People need to focus on the games on their console and see how RDR2 stands up alongside those - not concern themselves with how it performs on superior hardware - whether that's the enhanced consoles or high-end PC's. If you want what those offer, buy the hardware to run it at that level. As I said, if you only have an XB1, you can't expect it to look as good as a PS4 version as the PS4 has a superior GPU so should offer a better looking game! Its never going to look as good as the X version because the X has a vastly superior GPU compared to the base console(s).

The other option would have been for Rockstar to use native resolutions on ALL consoles and that would mean the Pro would be offering around 1500p (give or take) and then upscale. They could have used Dynamic resolutions too to improve performance in those areas that see a drop in frame rates as other devs do. Not saying any of these would be 'better' overall but that these are the options or routes they could have decided on but none would be as good as the X version because it has more limited hardware by comparison - still better than the PS4 version which is better than the XB1 version - its a direct correlation with the hardware - as its been since day 1 in 2013. Games that maybe on a par probably have a LOT more overhead on the 'better' machine - games like Fifa 17 which is 4k/60 on a Pro (I believe) will have more overhead on an X that's also running 4k/60 just like games on a PS4 that run the same as the XB1 version probably has more overhead - or can use that to improve visual settings above the level of the inferior hardware.

Anyway, to get back to the point, the PS4 Pro version, like the others, isn't perfect - not even on the X which we know may well be even more consistent and with fewer, less significant drops - apart from one cut-scene it seems, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. The CB rendering is not the 'best' implementation either but we don't know whether it was a late decision by Rockstar and its also their first ever attempt. If they decided weeks before going gold and never implemented it before, then can you expect it to be the best? Maybe it can be refined, improved, maybe the use of a different form of AA might help as that does bring a bit more 'blur' - even to native 4k? I don't know but they may feel its still better than the alternatives available and provides less 'blur' overall than going the native and upscale route....

As I also said, its not game breaking problems and people should just play the game for what it is and not worry about what better hardware has been able to offer. If its 'that' bad in their eyes, buy better hardware. If they don't like the implementation of CB rendering and minor drops in towns, set the console to output at 1080p, turn off super-sampling and then get a native 1080p with the benefit of more overhead to eliminate/reduce frame rate drops - although on a 4k screen, I expect it will look more blurry as its being upscaled by 400%!

I doubt this will be the end of patches though - for all consoles and no doubt there will be 'some' improvements but, like you say, the game is certainly performing better than a LOT of games do this soon after launch!

Anyone know how severe the loss of content is for those who didn't pre-order or get the special edition or whatever? I'd rather not wait until the complete edition comes out just to get the full game.

Nothing you can't live without.

Ahh, sweet. May just go pick the game up, in that case. Thanks!

@KirbyTheVampire And actually the “preorder bonus” is actually more like a Day 1 Edition bonus — every case of the game that was shipped to be sold on Day 1 release has the download codes for the bonus items in it (also includes access to a new horse). I went and bought it on Day 1 without a preorder and still got the bonus. By now all those copies might be sold, but depending on the retailer they may have some left over that they are still getting rid of.

I caved in and grabbed myself a copy of RDR2. I'm about two hours in, having finished the first two story missions (still in Chapter 1). I can see where some of the complaints of it being too slow come from, but I personally love these atmospheric, slow, dialogue-driven missions so far. I can't wait to continue my time with this game. The graphics are gorgeous, and I'm really digging the snow in this! I can't remember the amount of times I've just run around in the snow looking at the tracks I'm leaving behind.... So far the characters are also being introduced and developed at a nice pace, each with great voice actors as is standard Rockstar fashion. No real complaints so far, apart from the controls being very convoluted. Not particularly a bad thing or something that has hindered my experience so far, but it's taking some getting used to. I'm sure I'll be putting a lot more hours into this later today.

@Tjuz I think when talking about it being slow, it's more about how Arthur handles and that coupled with a control scheme obsessed with holding down buttons before an action is performed. It's definitely started to grate on me after a while and with every mechanic introduced it seems to get worse. It's certainly a fantastic game and the world is incredible but I'm becoming a bit more bemused as to why so many reviewers apparently haven't noticed any of these and more nagging issues that I've come across

@Tjuz Just wait until the game opens up and allows you to basically do what you want. If, like me, you want to loot all the dead on a battlefield. then having to go up to 'every' body, hold down a button for half a second or me, wait then for Arthur to get into the perfect position to then crouch and do a search, wait for him to stand up and then move to next body and 'repeat'. If you have 30 or more 'dead' to loot, that can take quite a while compared to some games where you could spend 10secs or so just running over all the bodies and have picked up every bit of loot and be back to doing the 'fun' stuff. Maybe the reviewers didn't bother doing this too much, more keen on getting through the story and some side quests than spending too much time looting, exploring, shopping etc so they could get to the end to write their review. It doesn't bother me too much but I can see why some may find it slow or will grate after a while...

Its not that the game is bad or less of a game because of this, its beautifully animated and the attention to detail is great too. Shopping is more realistic as you can just see what you want and pick it up to examine or just buy. The catalogue idea is great too - and whilst it is essentially like the old menu system of shopping with some detail and/or stats, the presentation adds more to the immersion.

I do think that its considered 'slow' because of all the animations - even just picking up your hat after its been knocked off can take a few seconds as Arthur bends down, gives a bit of look over before putting it on his head and handing control back to you. Its not a 'fast' game either when it comes to movement speeds. The snow chapter 1 is more of an extended tutorial - giving you an introduction to the gang and mechanics. When you get to chapter 2 though, that's when things open up and leaves you more to your own devices. That snow area is also more linear in story progression too and leads you through the basics so its relatively well paced in terms of story. I haven't progressed much into Chapter 2 yet or really gone too far from that initial area/town. It could really drop in pace if I decide to go off hunting, resource gathering or exploring.

I don't have a probably taking the time to loot the dead but having someone in the gang tell me to hurry up the whole time drives me crazy.

I've been playing the game all week, I'm kind of "meh" about it really. I'll keep playing, maybe it'll grow on me.

But it's not immediately fun, like BotW.

And I just wish it handled like MGS5.

This game has really clicked for me now. Every minute away is spent thinking about it. I can see this becoming one of my all-time faves. I've not even progressed through Chapter Two, story wise. I've just been doing odd jobs, bounty missions and wandering around the world.

@carlos82 @BAMozzy I definitely meant story-wise. I've seen complaints here and there that the opening hours of the game were too slowly paced. I can see how the gameplay might become a bit tedious at some point with all the extended animations. So far, however, the extended animations have added a sense of realism that I've personally really enjoyed, but like I said, I'm only about 2 hours in! I could hate the slower animations in 10 hours for all I know.

I've been playing it like a hunting simulator. At my own pace, slow and steady and it's been absolutely fantastic.