What effort do they need to put in if they didn’t do the port? Seems like a weird thing to do. Do you want them to make new games or not? This is a generation defying game now on new consoles.
brother, they paid for the port, they can ask to do more than the minium. gra 3,vc,sa were ass, this is ass, gta v has been rereleased 25 times and rdr2 had 0 content for online and it died.@@AlienwareGaming
They didn’t even develop this port, it’s a third party they hired to do it. I’m counting on them working full steam ahead on GTA 6. I think that game will be insane because their track record shows they only make groundbreaking games. I’ve got no reason to doubt rockstar when it comes to single player. It’s the multiplayer aspect which they greedy over. And I’m not really a multiplayer man so it doesn’t faze me. What does is having to wait 12 years for another GTA game though. So I’m hoping it’ll be amazing like all their single player games are.
Understandable. Rockstar is an indie developer and after gta v low sales they really needed money fast to keep the company afloat. No greed here whatsoever.
@@davidgrg21 Your standards are too low, it's just outstanding how people who defend such practices still exist, this is a 13 years old game, sold for 50 bucks, sorry but it doesn't have a "port" price tag, for this price you should expect far better
@@jazzfan67though I’m not happy with Rockstar to be fair to them they never claimed this was a remaster. It’s a port, nothing more. It’s not their fault you can’t read 😂😂
I played this four years ago on Xbox One X in 4K and the game cost £4 used. Scary to think that Rockstar thinks that essentially the same experience is worth ten times more for minimal effort on PS4/5.
Manhunt, The Warriors, Bully, RDR, GTA VC, GTA SA, GTA 4, Midnight Club. So, yeah. I'd say definitely contenders for some of the best ever. @@MetalDeathHead
@@ayoshikillersee fps never bothered me, as long as it is stable. Playing older games in 60 can be quite jarring, I tried playing some of the old Assassin’s Creeds in 60 and it just felt weird. For the more cinematic and slower games, like AC and Red Dead, I think 30 is fine. That said, the visuals could definitely be improved more.
Rockstar’s CEO also did an interview in 2021 claiming they had no interest in doing simple ports, and they would differentiate themselves from the competition here. An actual quote: ‘Remastering has always been a part of the strategy. We’ve done differently than the competition - we don’t just port titles over, we actually take the time to do the very best job we can making the title different for the new release, for the new technology that we’re launching it on.’ This is why people expected more to begin with. Guess that mentality went out the window. Word was they were planning an overhaul (likely with the same tech Grove Street used for the GTA Trilogy) and when that turned disaster they went with bare bones port. We just have to come to terms with Rockstar being the new EA. The lack of XBox version is even more egregious since they are marketing this as a last gen port with a PS4 and Switch version. Either the dev who ported it didn’t do any research to know this ran worse on One consoles and only One X and Series X got the 4K versions (and as mentioned the Series S gets a subpar version of that). For such minimal effort and from a company as massive as Rockstar, why skimp even more here in an already bare bones port with no effort as is? We have to come to terms that they are the new EA from 2017. And I truly fear for GTA 6. Especially with Houser gone now (head writer on every Rockstar game through Red Dead 2). When your cofounder and creative lead leaves to start a competing studio, you know shit went south. They’ve lived long enough to become the villain.
Dan is big loss but they have made games like Manhunt with out him. My issue is the next Red dead without him would to see him write a priate game also.
Yeah but usually a CEO is out of touch with reality big time. Remember the disaster gta trilogy "definitive" , he said something like " we are aware of the glitch" 😂😂😂
Series S didn't get a subpar version, it got a 1440p version that is exactly what the console was aiming for. No idea why Oliver phrased it that way, game looks great on XBSS.
Honestly I wouldn't even mind the limited changes if they dropped the price to like $30, the game still holds up amazingly well visually but the lack of 60fps is just so bizzare.
Ikr! Idk why people keep putting the price aside, like... You're PAYING almost FULL price for a HALF assed port. What's the logic?! But yeah, although the changes are not much, there is the localization too. The game originally wasn't translated to a lot of languages so people from other countries do count that in too.
THIS is something that needs to be pointed out more. They’re capable of so much more but god forbid they give any attention to anything but their beloved cash cow.
@@kyynareth270 but today everyone wants a 10-30% increase in pay yearly. per person. id like to see how you expect things to still be cheap but be part of the general public who wants thier earnings to increase, dollar to stretch out longer, and still expect things to be cheap? you dont get to get your cake and eat it too my man
You mean the treatment of the fans not the ip (rd2o players getting shafted for gta online ,this game, etc) we're lucky we even got a port over to the new systems with red dead's code being a mess. Not okay for them to price it at 50 tho.
@Joao_M RDO had potential but all they ever added to it was Hunting, Moonshine , Bounties , Herbalists, and the blood money dlc when fans were asking for things that an outlaw would be doing back then like idk robbing banks?
@@gamingcantina9157 Exactly. Red dead online had very good ideas. Even I, as someone who normally doesn't like multiplayer, had a lot of fun with it. Unfortunately they lacked the imagination to make it last.
@@MadX8of course they’re not better since they don’t have access to the original code and it still runs on all the old technology since it’s the same game as 360 but it doesn’t mean it’s not impressive
Even AI can upscale the 720p Map and UI elements to a serviceable degree. The fact that they couldn't even automate a simple task like this speaks volumes about their commitment.
@@xMikeMan54xthat's because the GTA games were a full generation behind RDR, textures are vastly worse in the old GTA games, which can confuse the AI and cause mistakes On 720P textures, the AI can make out what the text is saying with no issues and the textures are easier to upscale. It wasn't the AI's fault it was used on games it wasn't at all suited for, it was the people who expected it to upscale 3 games from 3 generations ago flawlessly and didn't check before release, that lies at Rockstar and to a much lesser extent Grove Street, who weren't equipped to make these new versions
Rockstar Games don't care in the slightest, that's why. To even say that they couldn't do something is simply being too charitable to their credits here. They can do that, in fact they have no reason to use AI assistance because they **can** do the job themselves. I mean, we're talking about an extremely massive game development studio currently working on just one new title to a mainline franchise. It's the studio's executive board who never give a single f' 'k about complying to the fans demand of remastering their old games in the first place. So much that they decided to outsource the job to a 3rd party studio nearby while also asking them to do the absolute bare minimum to the port treatment.
@@xMikeMan54x The text screw ups weren't actually AI, they were done by hand. AI doesn't just magically read and spell shit wrong with AI texture upscaling. All it does is make blocky lines look smoother than they were previously. AI was used on things like road textures, not signs.
Another huge difference between the two version that they didn't go over is Multiplayer. The new port of RD on Playstation doesn't have Multiplayer but on Xbox it does since it's running Orginal code.
I bet they didn't want to reimplement entire XLive on top of PlayStation SDK. The same happened for GTA IV, instead of reimplementing it on top of Steamworks SDK to make use of Steam's Peer2Peer matchmaking they just simply cut it out because they find it too expensive I guess, or their Social Club don't support that feature easily.
@@davidrenton But they have hired modders a week ago from FiveM and before that they listened to a modders who found out why GTA 5 took years loading into online which Rockstar used on the console version of GTA 5. Lately Rockstar has been accepted helping from the community.
I'm positive you would have to pay for the Red Dead 2 graphics and performance update...$25-$40. As for 120fps Red Dead 2 on ps5 cannot hit 120fps....come tards will ask for that.
"$50 asking price" 😬 This should have been a TLOU Part 1 level remake for that price point. It's a shame R* doesn't care anymore about anything. There is more work put into this review than the actual release. Thanks for the video! 👍
Especially considering they were in the same situation: a new engine was made with mostly the same characters, the same enviroenment art etc..rdr remake was basically half done in the form of rdr2 and yet they still didn't deliver.
Even the TLOU Part 1 remake was asking way too much. I played the Plus trial and I was like "it looks great, but this is literally the same game I already own on PS4 and PS3"
Considering naughty dog got ripped apart after remodelling, retexturing and improving the lighting throughout part one. Rockstar are nuts for charging 50 for this
@@pixeljauntvr7774It’s Rockstar man. I know it hurts to admit so people like to obfuscate and blame the parent company but the facts don’t support it. Remember, the Mafia franchise is under Take Two as well and Hanger 13 was allowed to spend over two years completely remaking - not remastering - the original Mafia game. They hired new actors to record all new dialogue, rebuilt the entire map, updated the engine, optimized it on all consoles and PC, and then charged ten dollars less than what Rockstar is asking for this port. So spare us the tired excuse of trying to blame Take Two when it’s clearly Rockstar. They’ve become an absolute joke, as sad as it is.
To be fair to the Last of Us , they charged 70$ and had no multiplayer either. The only real new thing was accessibility support which could've been a patch for the PS4 version. The reason they remade it was so they could port it to PC and they knew people would buy it on PS5. I still like what Xbox did with Gears of War 1 and that should be held as a standard on how to remaster a game. They remade the cutscenes, models, environments, audio, score. Added in an extra act for the campaign, kept the multiplayer, added a few new maps for free and added light MP customization which the original didn't have. For 40$ not even 60$ which they easily could've done. Last of Us was a glorified remaster sold for 70$ with less content and Red Dead is a piss poor effort that charged more for less as well.
What happened to the excuse a few years ago, that there couldn't be a PC version because a lot of the source code was archaic / lost (can't remember the exact excuse) and lo' and behold, we have a PS4 port. Doesn't the PS4 have an x86 CPU (Jaguar IIRC) so they could have ported it to PC.
The code isn't archaic neither lost, is just spaguetti code, and most of the OG devs at Rockstar left after 2015, a PC port would be a pain in the дss for the new devs at R*
The one positive thing about this is that after all of the backlash it will likely drop in price shortly after release. As others have said it should at least be running at 60FPS or more preferably 120FPS, considering there's no upgrade in asset quality to tax things enough to prevent that. Maybe if the port sells poorly Rockstar will release a port to unlock the frame rate to 60FPS to up the appeal of the game.
It is selling very well. People forget that the kind of people who watch DF and get angry about this kind of thing (not that it isn't warranted here and some other circumstances) are far less than the general population of gamers
I wouldn't bank on it, Rockstar games don't drop in price that quickly and considering how little effort was needed for this port, they only need a tiny percentage of gamers to buy into it for it to be a success at that price point, that's very likely to be the case.
They missed the biggest opportunity to implement RDR1 into RDR2 as an expansion, imagine after finishing the epilogue in RDR2 you could seamlessly start RDR1 story with a bigger map (mexico), and also RDO would've been benefited with additional missions to bring many players as possible it would been really good, not to mention it would've also been another good opportunity to update RDR2 for ps5/xboxsx with 4k/60fps. But hey Rockstar only cares on titles that has GTA Online on it.
i never watched any RDR2 videos, didn't look at the map at all while playing. Took me a year to finish. When you got to Armadillo, i for a second thought, hey hand on a mo, did they put RDR 1 in this as well. RDR1 with all the enhancements of 2 would have game of the decade
Even not a DLC, but a separate and smaller game (like Spider-Man Miles Morales was). It's such a waste not to use the whole map, models, animations, etc they already have...
@@ivonei666 That could also work, at least it would be a much better option than the current port we got. And I honestly would pay the full price of a new game for something like that.
Exactly man, ever since I played RDR2 and noticed the majority of the first game's map already ported to the second game, and after looking at some videos showing off the unfinished Mexico (but with the entire base of it there), my first thought was exactly that, that they could easily implement the RDR1 into the second game as a paid DLC to play seamlessly and to fill in the "weird gap" that that portion of the map had (only for an epilogue and some RDO content). But as months and years passed by, my hopes droped more and more, and what I thought as a waste of that big map portion, ended up being true: a waste.
Same, the shimmering doesn’t bother me enough to drop $50 on another copy of the game, esp with the more muted look and sharp shadows. Will stick with upscaled BC360 until prices drop before I triple dip. May consider the Switch version if it goes
Absolutely stunning effort by Rockstar, IMO. About one lazy weekend's worth of effort put into the port and sent out with a $50 price tag. Just ... I mean, what an effort.
@@chemergency I think piracy is their main issue but is funny because fun fact: people are more likely to buy your game if you don't add cancerous drm and the terrible rockstar launcher that also prevents family sharing they hate PC gamers yet they created the issue themselves
@@WH250398 RDR2 uses checkerboard rendering on PS4. On PC it's rather blurry, but in 4K it's great. I recommend using mod Visual redemption which greatly enhances the TAA, it looks amazing with it.
Yep, I’d consider the price with all of that. Right now it should be $20 most on PS and $30 most on Switch. Still would wait for sale on either since the Bc360 version holds up nicely.
And textures upgrades; super easy nowadays with AI upscaling. And RDR2 could also run with better settings at 60 FPS on PS5 and SX, as it works on PC, with a simple patch.
1:27 Very subjective.. Does look substantially more stable on PS5, but also substantially blurrier as well. From this comparison, I prefer the sharper image on XBox. It's "easier" to look better on PS5 when zooming in all the way in particular areas but when in full screen during gameplay, it's a step back imo.
Tbh this is one of the saddest re-releases of a Rockstar game ever. I know you guys like the people involved with the port and that’s fine (as mentioned in the podcast), but RDR1 was one of my favourite games and seeing it handled like this is so disappointing. I feel like these companies know they can do the bare minimum and still make decent profit, I just wish all the remake rumours were actually true. Definitely a skip from me.
I mean, it could've been worse, or did people already forget GTA Trilogy Definitive Edition? The only thing required here is for the price to drop significantly.
Same. Though that's probably because we are watching over youtube compression which by itself softens the image a lot. So when playing natively the aliasing on the backcompact version is probably more bothersome. FSR 2 with native 4K isn't supposed to soften the image afaik that's more of a TAA problem.
@@charlesbronson1959It has a TAA component to it, so in this case it's similar to DLAA. At least it's a lot better than RDR2's TAA, so you get that for $50,- 😂
@@charlesbronson1959 It is weird but these temporal upscaling methods like FSR 2 and DLSS 2 are also great anti-aliasing methods so that's why it implemented here.
Fast port, enhanced resolution and frame rate, no new textures. No new missions, no multiplayer support. Probably a job done in a few months by a good developer and a tester. Nothing wrong with that, but 50$? For something that required so little work? 20$ would be a fair price.
Wrong choice. Just bought it. It's superior to the Xbox Version. And the Multiplayer that was filled up with Hackers is also removed. Can't wait to get the Platinum on this beauty.
Had this on PS3 but never finished it and don’t have the game or system anymore. I have a PS4 and definitely want to dive back into this, preferably when the price goes down!
If you have only played the PS3 version like me its a decent upgrade but it really should have been running at 60 fps and the price should have been at least $25 cheaper.
Yeah I played the ps3 version awhile back and enjoyed the game but the only compelling reason to make me play it again would be 60fps which this amazingly doesn’t have. Knowing RS they’ll ‘remaster’ it in a couple years for current gen and charge $70 dollars for it
@@kefkazeromus91 Oh yeah you get rid of a few barely noticeable jaggies, but lose a whole game mode and pay $50 for the pleasure. What a win for PS fans lol
Gotta say I completely disagree with the verdict that image quality is better on PS5 compared to Series X back compat, looks way sharper on Series X. would take a cleaner image with some aliasing over the softer image on PS5 any day.
It's DF, friend. what did you expect? They always do the same with these analyses. They give an absolute verdict to personal appreciations and at no time do they say "even seeing that the Xbox Series X version is backward compatible from Xbox 360, the image quality is impressive." No, they set out to measure a backward compatible version of a previous generation with a backward compatible version of two previous generations.
And I thought the PS5 GTA5 release was lazy. This is another level!!! - No 60fps - Same Textures as 7th Gen - No Gameplay Improvements - Terrible UI - No Multiplayer Thanks Cockstar!
The gamma looks much better on the xbox version. Reminds me of limited range HDMI on the PS4 version, looks washed out. Also mind blowing the UI is all still for 720p.
Idk the Xbox version still looks better to my eyes. I do see the smoother lines for ps5 but it also looks slightly blurry compared to Xbox. I definitely see more detail in things like the ground, horses and other textures in the Xbox version. The colors also look richer and deeper in Xbox in some scenes shown here
to me it's like sound if you ever see headphone reviews it's always "too much bass bad flatter = better" and that same logic is applied here the punchier contrast, and sharpness from the shimmering might look better to some but on a technical aspect it will be seen as inferior
No multiplayer in this version either. It's really dissapointing that they're charging more than the original release and yet it has less features. I had the same complaint about The Last of Us PS5 but that at least had a substantial visual upgrade AND ran at 60fps
It's not bad, if it cost $20 I'd understand it, and that's when I'll buy it. But for $10 more Capcom completely remade a GameCube game and Rockstar can't even redraw the maps at 4K, a job that would literally take 2 days...
I know many people are disappointed (including me) for the unrealized potentials. However, this is the first time RDR is being officially localized in my country and I’m thrilled to have an opportunity to finally play the game, after RDR2.
If you mean Russian localization, then the fan translation for the ps3 version was done in a very high quality. Even textures are translated there, including newspapers and street signs. There was also a translation of "book" quality subtitles. One of the most epic fan projects. The fans have put far more effort into it than Rockstar has put into this port.
Well I understand the willingness to play this game on your language, which would be the same for me (brazilian). But c'mon man, we already speak english, we understand it well enough to play it FULLY and deny paying this lazy and disappointing port any more than 10 bucks. A simple localization should not be worth the price their charging, you should wait for a huge price drop
I did, on PS4. Been modding it with HD assets since release, too. Sadly it crashes near Chuparosa, otherwise I'd use it constantly. Insane what a few modders did within days of the release, I wouldn't pay anything for this. Btw the mod is for the Switch version but this game is literally the Xbox 360 version ported over. All the files are the same, nothing was changed but resolution bumping and these new upscaling options. In fact, there's a file called "shadowmaps_ps3" in the game, and when restored, we get the softer shadows back. I much prefer that for the trees, but it does look bad near light sources in interiors. Tweaking is needed, everything is in .xml files, or yaml.
@@nuckerball1259 Yes. But it sucks to play like that, it doesn't stay on 60. It jumps from mid 30's to late 40's or early 50's, gets worse during rain and in Tall Trees. Not to mention the extra strain on the console, not worth it. Maybe with a 900p resolution patch. So far the only patch I use is to skip the intro logos and legal stuffs, I'm on my save within 10 seconds with autosave disabled, too.
“We’ve done differently than the competition - we don’t just port titles over, we actually take the time to do the very best job we can making the title different for the new release, for the new technology that we’re launching it on.” - Strauss Zelnick CEO of Take2
I wouldn’t even really care about the lack of effort if the price was right. If they put this out for 10 -20 bucks I’d still think it was low effort, but the price makes sense. For 50 dollars I expect more then this.
Compiling the game to run on x86 processors is 1 step closer to a PC release at least. I'm not holding my breath but it would be excellent if it came to PC in some form. The ideal would be for them to just use RDR2 assets with custom additions where needed and retrofit the story and missions into it.
Considering the amount of effort put I don't think they want to port it, especially since at the very least 60fps and mouse aim are considered bare minimums on pc. That would require work on the actual game. Not just recompiling and adding FSR2.
This was their chance to redeem themselves after killing us with the GTA trilogy but instead they just teabagged us hard. I knew this was just gonna be a resolution bump for the most part, but I'm blown away that they didn't update the UI or the render distance and still had the balls to charge such an absurd price for this.
TBH IMHO i like the Xbox version better than the PS4/5 I'm not seeing what the reviewer is seeing, to my eyes, the PS4/5 looks Softer to me, Just saying
Frankly, I am STUNNED that this is the route Rockstar chose to take rather than remaking the game using the Red Dead Redemption 2 engine. They literally included THE ENTIRE MAP from the first game in RDR2. 2/3s of that map (New Austin and West Elizabeth) are completely finished, playable parts of RDR2. In other words, aside from minor tweaks based on the change in time between the prologue of RDR2 and when the events in the first RDR start, THE PLAYABLE GAME WORLD IS LITERALLY ALREADY FINISHED! The Nuevo Paraiso part of the map is also present within RDR2, it simply isn't accessible. So literally all Rockstar had to do was add the few small towns, roads and foliage to Nuevo Paraiso, and create character models for the very few characters who appear in the RDR story but are not already present in RDR2. Characters like Landon Ricketts, Abraham Reyes, Leigh Johnson, etc. Then just port the already-recorded dialogue from RDR into the new version that is remade in the RDR2 engine AND RELEASE THE GAME ON PC AND MODERN CONSOLES AND PRINT MONEY! Even if you made small tweaks to the story to add in mentions of characters/events from RDR2 like Arthur Morgan, we are STILL only talking about a relatively small amount of work. And in the context of a developer as big as Rockstar, it's an EXTREMELY SMALL amount of work. I was so certain that this is what Rockstar had planned all along when I first saw the leaks of the RDR2 map. When I saw that West Elizabeth and New Austin were playable areas in RDR2, I was CERTAIN that Rockstar intended to eventually remake the first game using the RDR2 engine so we could play through John Marston's entire story from start (in RDR2) to finish (in RDR) with the same modern, cutting-edge graphics and gameplay, and that was their specific reason for including those two map sections from RDR in RDR2 in the first place. I mean just think about it...New Austin is basically a totally useless, unnecessary area in RDR2. I'm not saying that I'm mad that they included it, but there is LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO in that area...an area you don't even get access to until after Arthur is dead. They could've just included West Elizabeth for the Blackwater and Beecher's Hope part of the story in RDR2. But they took the time to create the entire New Austin map AND add in the towns and landmarks from the first RDR...even though they serve no purpose whatsoever in the RDR2 story. And as I said before, the Nuevo Paraiso area was ALSO rendered and landscaped...they just didn't add in the small smattering of adobe buildings that make up the towns in that area because it isn't accessible in RDR2. So Rockstar went through ALL THAT TROUBLE during the development of RDR2 for essentially no reason at all. If they aren't going to release a proper RDR remake, then they spent all that time and money creating those original RDR map sections just so we can ride around the desert of New Austin and do nothing as John after we complete the main story in RDR2. What a ridiculous decision. Rockstar is quickly becoming a failing company. A falling giant. I was a little worried when we started hearing some angry rumblings about the direction Rockstar was heading as a company. Then they shocked everyone with their DISASTROUS "definitive editions" of GTA SA and VC. Now this. This, to me, is the big one. This is what sets off alarm bells in my head about Rockstar. The GTA "Definitive Edition" debacle could've maybe been brushed off as a foolish one-off mistake. But now I'm convinced that the people running Rockstar (who are no longer the guys who FOUNDED the company) are well on their way to destroying it. Not releasing a modern remake of RDR using the RDR2 engine is a MASSIVE mistake. And charging people FIFTY BUCKS for nothing more than a resolution upgrade of a nearly 15-year-old game is just disgusting. Absolutely disgusting. Maybe I'm way off base here, but I think GTA6 is going to end up being a huge letdown. I think it will be the first time we see Rockstar make a catastrophic mistake with their GTA IP. I'm not necessarily saying that it's going to be a "financial flop" of a game, but I just have a feeling that it's going to a huge letdown after GTA5 (which I always thought was dramatically overrated anyway...I haven't replayed the game in years and years) and the absolute masterpiece that is Red Dead Redemption 2.
Literally felt the exact same way since i reached new austin in rdr2. I knew it in my head that they definately would remake rdr1 i was 100% certain of it.........until they didnt! Wankers mate! I loved rdr1 in 2010 and i still love rdr2 now but i dont think my head will accept the gameplay and graphics of a 2010 game to merit a replay of it. For 50 quid rockstar can piss off!
GTA 6 is going to make a billion dollars overnight, and will eventually overtake GTA 5 as the most profitable piece of media ever created. Fortunately, it will also be even better than any engine Rockstar has created so far, and will be the crowning achievement of the company. They are not a failing company.
Rdr2 is my world to relax in, even though I've never played Rdr1 and probably never will. Nothing compares to Rdr2 and I mean no game ever made to this date can live up to it. Not only the graphics but also the detail of the living world, everything is made to perfection
I get the argument that crisp flat line shadows are "better" on ps5 but i prefer the soft edge shadows over the AA shadows because i think it looks better and more realistic with soft fuzzy edges on tree branches and leaves. Just my opinion. Yours is as valid.
It would be interesting if you compare this ps4 pro/ps5 version to the emulated one on pc based on Xenia to see which is superior , obviously the Xenia emulation is better in terms of frame rate if you have the hardware to run it at 4K 60fps+ , but which one is best in terms of picture quality (shadows, anti aliasing , UI ) and if there are mods to enhance the picture quality ? Until rockstar games releases a real pc version if ever !
Really appreciated that they threw in the bit about Xenia being able to do 60fps in emulation. That really puts into perspective what a low-effort port this is. Like most cases, having at least 60fps is superior over a few visual enhancements because the higher framerate actually improves gameplay.
@@jgunner94 Witcher 3 on PS5 is massive open world and runs on 60FPS. Sure, not with 4K enabled at the same time, but at least there is a choice. And I'd prefer a dynamic resolution etc with 60FPS. Maybe it works with 1440p. Always better than only having 30FPS
The sad reality is as much as gamers complain there will always be enough who will give money. Its up to each individual to make their choice how to spend their money.
Don't worry, everyone hating on this will either buy it anyway or forget all about Rockstars screw ups once GTA6 comes around. Gaming community in a nutshell.
@main_tak_becus6689 RDR is a 2010 game and Switch is more powerful than the console of that generation. There's absolutely no excuse to the port on Switch be lackluster and if it's the case, won't be the console's fault.
To be fair, this is a port of a PS3 game to PS4, which is no small task. I think the price should be closer to $30, or for $50 throw in a few improvements like a modern control scheme, bit I don't run the financials for a big business so what do I know.
It's sad that Rockstar didn't want to spend that much money. Seems like they easily could've dumped the game on the RDR2 engine. Use the captures from the OG with the new models like TLOU1.
@@nicholasmartins4316 Why exactly? TLoU 1 was remade on TLoU II engine and I think rockstar has a bit of money to do the same and remake it on RDR2 engine. Or AT LEAST unlock FPS or release it on PS5, not on a 10 year old hardware
@@zblsk the same game from 2013, with updated graphics (yet worse than tlou part 2), for $70. Everything is the same, the dubbing, audio mixing, gameplay, animation, scripts, the same game 1:1 overall, thats a bargain, for sure.
I got the game as a birthday present when it came out in 2010 on PS3. Despite it being slightly inferior to the 360 version, I still loved the experience there. I later bought it on Xbox One in 2016 (but finished it in 2018 on One X just before 2 came out). I love the first RDR, but since I've put a lot of time into the original between two versions across 4 different consoles, I'd find it hard to want to buy the PS4 version at even 10 dollars. The only "good" thing the announcement for this game did was make me want to install it on Series X and play it a bit. Ultimately I don't care THAT much, but it is disappointing to see that the PS4 version is already selling well.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
Nice to see Rockstar putting in the absolute minimum in terms of effort. Would hate for them to overexert themselves.
What effort do they need to put in if they didn’t do the port? Seems like a weird thing to do. Do you want them to make new games or not?
This is a generation defying game now on new consoles.
At 50 bucks, yeah, no thanks.@@AlienwareGaming
brother, they paid for the port, they can ask to do more than the minium. gra 3,vc,sa were ass, this is ass, gta v has been rereleased 25 times and rdr2 had 0 content for online and it died.@@AlienwareGaming
@@jwtrailers5317 sure, but that’s not the discussion at hand.
They didn’t even develop this port, it’s a third party they hired to do it.
I’m counting on them working full steam ahead on GTA 6. I think that game will be insane because their track record shows they only make groundbreaking games.
I’ve got no reason to doubt rockstar when it comes to single player. It’s the multiplayer aspect which they greedy over. And I’m not really a multiplayer man so it doesn’t faze me.
What does is having to wait 12 years for another GTA game though. So I’m hoping it’ll be amazing like all their single player games are.
Understandable. Rockstar is an indie developer and after gta v low sales they really needed money fast to keep the company afloat. No greed here whatsoever.
Sarcasm here is somehow searing my eyes. Haha
Can't blame them. Changing a number in the code from 30 to 60 would have likely required billions of budget that they don't have.
Sarcasm is strong with this one 😂
Rockstar dont make this decisions , just shows your ignorance having no idea that Take2 decides
First comment in a while I liked
This analysis has more effort put into it than the actual RDR port
yes port.. port not remaster!
it's a port
@@davidgrg21 Did i said something else ?
@@devostripes5964 port meaning it's basically the same game.
what exactly were you expecting?
@@davidgrg21 Your standards are too low, it's just outstanding how people who defend such practices still exist, this is a 13 years old game, sold for 50 bucks, sorry but it doesn't have a "port" price tag, for this price you should expect far better
@@devostripes5964then your original post should have said that, not the silly "low effort" comment
The 720p UI and 30 fps are truly mind boggling
I dunno, seems like good value for money according to their CEO. Remember, it includes the DLC /s
@@jazzfan67though I’m not happy with Rockstar to be fair to them they never claimed this was a remaster. It’s a port, nothing more. It’s not their fault you can’t read 😂😂
No way they thought 30 fps was passable
I thought the fsr was more crazy.
@@jazzfan67 could you imagine if they remade it with the rdr2 engine? the things I would do...
I played this four years ago on Xbox One X in 4K and the game cost £4 used. Scary to think that Rockstar thinks that essentially the same experience is worth ten times more for minimal effort on PS4/5.
Is it just me or does the image look better on Series X? I don’t know what this reviewer is seeing.
You got better deal. You still have online. PS4 and Nintendo Switch users are robbed of that.
@@chrisstucker1813you looking at the lighting other than that both are identical
@@chrisstucker1813the image is more stable on PS5 but the lighting and actual color looks better on Xbox. I definitely noticed that.
@@freshprinz9829 yeah it looks better. There’s more contrast unlike the ps5 which looks a bit washed out.
Sometime it's not about providing quality product or pushing for customers satisfaction... But just about getting a new yacht.
Good one😂
Wait, buying this gives me 3 million or whatever in GTAO? /s
Never seen a studio with the greatest games ever made hate it’s own creations so much
Konami?
My man Nintendo keeps all their games in a vault, being a fan can be frustrating, thank you emulators
greatest games ever made?? lol gta5 and rdr2 are 2 of the most overrated boring games ever made!
Manhunt, The Warriors, Bully, RDR, GTA VC, GTA SA, GTA 4, Midnight Club. So, yeah. I'd say definitely contenders for some of the best ever. @@MetalDeathHead
Valve.
I think the worst part is that this game of all games deserved so much more. To be fair so did vice city and SA... It's a shame.
im honestly shocked its in 30fps lmfao that makes absolutely zero sense whatsoever
@@ayoshikillersee fps never bothered me, as long as it is stable. Playing older games in 60 can be quite jarring, I tried playing some of the old Assassin’s Creeds in 60 and it just felt weird. For the more cinematic and slower games, like AC and Red Dead, I think 30 is fine. That said, the visuals could definitely be improved more.
@@charliefen that isn’t my point, a remaster should improve upon the original…. not keep it the same and charge the same price… again
And GTA 3, let’s not forget it’s the grandfather of modern day open worlds.
This just made me lose alot of respect for rockstar. If they can add fsr 2.0 then they could’ve add 60 fps
Rockstar’s CEO also did an interview in 2021 claiming they had no interest in doing simple ports, and they would differentiate themselves from the competition here. An actual quote:
‘Remastering has always been a part of the strategy. We’ve done differently than the competition - we don’t just port titles over, we actually take the time to do the very best job we can making the title different for the new release, for the new technology that we’re launching it on.’
This is why people expected more to begin with. Guess that mentality went out the window. Word was they were planning an overhaul (likely with the same tech Grove Street used for the GTA Trilogy) and when that turned disaster they went with bare bones port. We just have to come to terms with Rockstar being the new EA.
The lack of XBox version is even more egregious since they are marketing this as a last gen port with a PS4 and Switch version. Either the dev who ported it didn’t do any research to know this ran worse on One consoles and only One X and Series X got the 4K versions (and as mentioned the Series S gets a subpar version of that). For such minimal effort and from a company as massive as Rockstar, why skimp even more here in an already bare bones port with no effort as is? We have to come to terms that they are the new EA from 2017. And I truly fear for GTA 6. Especially with Houser gone now (head writer on every Rockstar game through Red Dead 2). When your cofounder and creative lead leaves to start a competing studio, you know shit went south. They’ve lived long enough to become the villain.
Dan is big loss but they have made games like Manhunt with out him. My issue is the next Red dead without him would to see him write a priate game also.
Yeah but usually a CEO is out of touch with reality big time. Remember the disaster gta trilogy "definitive" , he said something like " we are aware of the glitch" 😂😂😂
It was Take2’s CEO, not Rockstar’s. Take2 is Rockstar’s parent company.
Series S didn't get a subpar version, it got a 1440p version that is exactly what the console was aiming for. No idea why Oliver phrased it that way, game looks great on XBSS.
Truly an impressive disappointment
30FPS release for 10 year old platforms in 2023 is INSANE, Truly a Rockstar moment
@ballincat43. Thank you ballinkitten43
Rockstar has turned to crap thanks to all the idiots paying for microtransactions on gta5 online
Rock$tar is truly one of the developers of this industry.
@ballincat43.Fartstormcat69
It's even more galling when it can be emulated on PC at 120fps (admitedly with beefy hardware).
No 60 fps, all I needed to know.
Even on Ps5? 😂😂😂
That maters why
Yes
That is so pathetic.
Glad I quit gaming. This had turned into more of a comedy channel for me in my free time
Well yea, they said it was a straight port.
Honestly I wouldn't even mind the limited changes if they dropped the price to like $30, the game still holds up amazingly well visually but the lack of 60fps is just so bizzare.
Ikr!
Idk why people keep putting the price aside, like... You're PAYING almost FULL price for a HALF assed port.
What's the logic?!
But yeah, although the changes are not much, there is the localization too.
The game originally wasn't translated to a lot of languages so people from other countries do count that in too.
They recently updated the PS4 version to 60fps
The fact we’ve gotten 2 remasters of GTA V, and a port of Red Dead Redemption is mind boggling.
THIS is something that needs to be pointed out more. They’re capable of so much more but god forbid they give any attention to anything but their beloved cash cow.
@@kyynareth270 but today everyone wants a 10-30% increase in pay yearly. per person. id like to see how you expect things to still be cheap but be part of the general public who wants thier earnings to increase, dollar to stretch out longer, and still expect things to be cheap? you dont get to get your cake and eat it too my man
@@WilliamLeGod exactly bunch of mindless consumers soiling themselves over a video game.
I'm just counting all the nerds in the comments that say "mind boggling.
How is it mind boggling? GTA makes them buttloads of money due to multiplayer.
the treatment of the Red Dead Ip by rockstar is truly embarrassing. someone tell them its their best games and they deserve much better.
You mean the treatment of the fans not the ip (rd2o players getting shafted for gta online ,this game, etc) we're lucky we even got a port over to the new systems with red dead's code being a mess. Not okay for them to price it at 50 tho.
They are stuck in milking RD Online and GTA Online... Why bother?? 2 out of 4 of their main leads have left already
rockstar dont own Read Dead IP Take2 do
@Joao_M RDO had potential but all they ever added to it was Hunting, Moonshine , Bounties , Herbalists, and the blood money dlc when fans were asking for things that an outlaw would be doing back then like idk robbing banks?
@@gamingcantina9157 Exactly. Red dead online had very good ideas. Even I, as someone who normally doesn't like multiplayer, had a lot of fun with it. Unfortunately they lacked the imagination to make it last.
The game now has 60fps support on PS5
Multi billion dollar studio moment.
Publisher*
Multi billion dollar publisher moment@@pixeljauntvr7774
*small indie game company
Kudos to Microsoft for achieving comparable results for free, TakeTwo would’ve been ashamed if they had conscience.
Better results you mean, especially on Series X and One X
Visuals are largely the same but RDR1 multiplayer is the best Rockstar ever made. Xbox version is also cheaper off the bat.
@@MadX8of course they’re not better since they don’t have access to the original code and it still runs on all the old technology since it’s the same game as 360 but it doesn’t mean it’s not impressive
@@MadX8 I mean, not according to DF
It's not Microsoft that developed the Xbox ports of rdr, it's Rockstar themselves
Even AI can upscale the 720p Map and UI elements to a serviceable degree. The fact that they couldn't even automate a simple task like this speaks volumes about their commitment.
Exactly, would honestly take seconds to let an AI at least scale up their UI Assets, the laziness & greed is unfuckingbelievable
Last time they relied on AI upscale we got the myriad of text screw ups in the GTA Definitive Trilogy
@@xMikeMan54xthat's because the GTA games were a full generation behind RDR, textures are vastly worse in the old GTA games, which can confuse the AI and cause mistakes
On 720P textures, the AI can make out what the text is saying with no issues and the textures are easier to upscale.
It wasn't the AI's fault it was used on games it wasn't at all suited for, it was the people who expected it to upscale 3 games from 3 generations ago flawlessly and didn't check before release, that lies at Rockstar and to a much lesser extent Grove Street, who weren't equipped to make these new versions
Rockstar Games don't care in the slightest, that's why. To even say that they couldn't do something is simply being too charitable to their credits here.
They can do that, in fact they have no reason to use AI assistance because they **can** do the job themselves. I mean, we're talking about an extremely massive game development studio currently working on just one new title to a mainline franchise.
It's the studio's executive board who never give a single f' 'k about complying to the fans demand of remastering their old games in the first place. So much that they decided to outsource the job to a 3rd party studio nearby while also asking them to do the absolute bare minimum to the port treatment.
@@xMikeMan54x The text screw ups weren't actually AI, they were done by hand. AI doesn't just magically read and spell shit wrong with AI texture upscaling. All it does is make blocky lines look smoother than they were previously. AI was used on things like road textures, not signs.
Another huge difference between the two version that they didn't go over is Multiplayer. The new port of RD on Playstation doesn't have Multiplayer but on Xbox it does since it's running Orginal code.
Possibly the reason why they charge 40$: No micro transactions or new features to milk player’s nostalgia and wallets.
I bet they didn't want to reimplement entire XLive on top of PlayStation SDK. The same happened for GTA IV, instead of reimplementing it on top of Steamworks SDK to make use of Steam's Peer2Peer matchmaking they just simply cut it out because they find it too expensive I guess, or their Social Club don't support that feature easily.
Ahhh I knew they were gonna exclude it!
@@huntercz1226 yet unpaid modders managed to put MP back in GTAIV, maybe instead of harassing modders, RS should hire them
@@davidrenton
But they have hired modders a week ago from FiveM and before that they listened to a modders who found out why GTA 5 took years loading into online which Rockstar used on the console version of GTA 5.
Lately Rockstar has been accepted helping from the community.
I’ll get this when it’s $20. Perfect price for a job like this. $50 is highway robbery.
20 bucks for a 10 year old game is highway rubbery
this is at most 10 $.
Good that i have it for One X, did the job quite nicely.
It's 4$ on Xbox and includes multiplayer
I'll wait for 10€. Or free on PS Plus lol
More like $10
It is absolutely baffling how little effort went into this, considering the vast resources.
All we want is a 4K 60fps update for RDR1 and RDR2!
I wish you worked at Rockstar bro :(
*sigh* maybe one day pardner…
All i want is 4k 120hz on pc with mods.
I'm positive you would have to pay for the Red Dead 2 graphics and performance update...$25-$40. As for 120fps Red Dead 2 on ps5 cannot hit 120fps....come tards will ask for that.
@@seizonsha What's sad is, Xbox seems capable of making last gen games 4k60fps but Rockstar probably refuses coz it would be free
It's really infuriating to see this gem of a game still not ported to the PC
It runs and looks great emulated. You can play at 60fps.
The best Rockstar can do on PC is a 480p 15fps port for $69.99.
thats not a pc port stop talking about emulation emulation is not a replacement for pc games@@Goober89
lol@@DecimalD_
@@DecimalD_I couldn't say it better
"$50 asking price" 😬 This should have been a TLOU Part 1 level remake for that price point. It's a shame R* doesn't care anymore about anything.
There is more work put into this review than the actual release. Thanks for the video! 👍
Especially considering they were in the same situation: a new engine was made with mostly the same characters, the same enviroenment art etc..rdr remake was basically half done in the form of rdr2 and yet they still didn't deliver.
Even the TLOU Part 1 remake was asking way too much. I played the Plus trial and I was like "it looks great, but this is literally the same game I already own on PS4 and PS3"
🤪👍🏼🍪🍪🍪 i need a price point to move out of mums basement....
Considering naughty dog got ripped apart after remodelling, retexturing and improving the lighting throughout part one. Rockstar are nuts for charging 50 for this
Take Two*
@@pixeljauntvr7774It’s Rockstar man. I know it hurts to admit so people like to obfuscate and blame the parent company but the facts don’t support it. Remember, the Mafia franchise is under Take Two as well and Hanger 13 was allowed to spend over two years completely remaking - not remastering - the original Mafia game. They hired new actors to record all new dialogue, rebuilt the entire map, updated the engine, optimized it on all consoles and PC, and then charged ten dollars less than what Rockstar is asking for this port. So spare us the tired excuse of trying to blame Take Two when it’s clearly Rockstar. They’ve become an absolute joke, as sad as it is.
@@Ward413damn you hit the nail on the head
@@Ward413Don't waste your time trying to explain, these people only see what they want to see
To be fair to the Last of Us , they charged 70$ and had no multiplayer either. The only real new thing was accessibility support which could've been a patch for the PS4 version. The reason they remade it was so they could port it to PC and they knew people would buy it on PS5.
I still like what Xbox did with Gears of War 1 and that should be held as a standard on how to remaster a game. They remade the cutscenes, models, environments, audio, score. Added in an extra act for the campaign, kept the multiplayer, added a few new maps for free and added light MP customization which the original didn't have. For 40$ not even 60$ which they easily could've done.
Last of Us was a glorified remaster sold for 70$ with less content and Red Dead is a piss poor effort that charged more for less as well.
My dream: Full remake with RDR 2 graphics 60fps
My expectation: Simple remaster with 60fps
Reality: This
Damn I wish they announced the button icons had an increased resolution, would have definitely preordered it..
What happened to the excuse a few years ago, that there couldn't be a PC version because a lot of the source code was archaic / lost (can't remember the exact excuse) and lo' and behold, we have a PS4 port. Doesn't the PS4 have an x86 CPU (Jaguar IIRC) so they could have ported it to PC.
It shows…
They took the ps now version of the game and just upscaled it (from what I hear)
The code isn't archaic neither lost, is just spaguetti code, and most of the OG devs at Rockstar left after 2015, a PC port would be a pain in the дss for the new devs at R*
@@danielaponte4054This was never proved, and there’s no evidence that the games code had “spaghetti code”.
The one positive thing about this is that after all of the backlash it will likely drop in price shortly after release.
As others have said it should at least be running at 60FPS or more preferably 120FPS, considering there's no upgrade in asset quality to tax things enough to prevent that.
Maybe if the port sells poorly Rockstar will release a port to unlock the frame rate to 60FPS to up the appeal of the game.
You mean a 60fps patch I'm guessing
Rockstar games rarely drop a substantial amount in price. You’ll be waiting another 10 years.
It is selling very well. People forget that the kind of people who watch DF and get angry about this kind of thing (not that it isn't warranted here and some other circumstances) are far less than the general population of gamers
@@DecimalD_that’s not true. They have huge sales all the time
I wouldn't bank on it, Rockstar games don't drop in price that quickly and considering how little effort was needed for this port, they only need a tiny percentage of gamers to buy into it for it to be a success at that price point, that's very likely to be the case.
Appreciate your hard work, Oliver!! Thank you Digital Foundry for everything you guys do!
😂 😂 😂 😂 😂
The video took more effort than the port
Funny thing is, most of the backlash would've been gone had they simply added 60fps and released it at 40$
There is nothing wrong with a straight port, but the price is very off-putting. Feels about 20 dollars to high.
No, 20 dollars is the absolute most this should cost.
Wouldn't even pay more than a dollar for this
@@phant0mdummy well, the original game on 360 is 29 dollars
This game even on Xbox store dont cost 20 dollars but 30
nier automata had a fair price on switch, 30 i think.
DF, the only channel I can depend on for all the details I need to know.
They missed the biggest opportunity to implement RDR1 into RDR2 as an expansion, imagine after finishing the epilogue in RDR2 you could seamlessly start RDR1 story with a bigger map (mexico), and also RDO would've been benefited with additional missions to bring many players as possible it would been really good, not to mention it would've also been another good opportunity to update RDR2 for ps5/xboxsx with 4k/60fps. But hey Rockstar only cares on titles that has GTA Online on it.
i never watched any RDR2 videos, didn't look at the map at all while playing. Took me a year to finish. When you got to Armadillo, i for a second thought, hey hand on a mo, did they put RDR 1 in this as well.
RDR1 with all the enhancements of 2 would have game of the decade
Even not a DLC, but a separate and smaller game (like Spider-Man Miles Morales was). It's such a waste not to use the whole map, models, animations, etc they already have...
@@ivonei666 That could also work, at least it would be a much better option than the current port we got. And I honestly would pay the full price of a new game for something like that.
Exactly man, ever since I played RDR2 and noticed the majority of the first game's map already ported to the second game, and after looking at some videos showing off the unfinished Mexico (but with the entire base of it there), my first thought was exactly that, that they could easily implement the RDR1 into the second game as a paid DLC to play seamlessly and to fill in the "weird gap" that that portion of the map had (only for an epilogue and some RDO content). But as months and years passed by, my hopes droped more and more, and what I thought as a waste of that big map portion, ended up being true: a waste.
If they did that the Switch was going to be left out and the most potential buyers of this are there.
Great comparison, I have to say I like the gamma of the xbox presentation a lot more.
Same, the shimmering doesn’t bother me enough to drop $50 on another copy of the game, esp with the more muted look and sharp shadows. Will stick with upscaled BC360 until prices drop before I triple dip. May consider the Switch version if it goes
Absolutely stunning effort by Rockstar, IMO. About one lazy weekend's worth of effort put into the port and sent out with a $50 price tag. Just ... I mean, what an effort.
I bet the only reason Rockstar made this port happening is that the PS4 don’t have the PS3 BC support
There's absolutely no excuse for them to withhold a PC port besides their petty contempt for the modding scene.
@@chemergency I think piracy is their main issue but is funny because
fun fact: people are more likely to buy your game if you don't add cancerous drm and the terrible rockstar launcher that also prevents family sharing
they hate PC gamers yet they created the issue themselves
They made it for the switch audience and they know people are desperate and would buy it.😂
Obviously, that is why there is no Xbox port. You can just play the Xbox 360 version
@@dustojnikhummeryeah, but this version is inferior to ps4 version (FSR2 helps a lot)
I do feel FSR2's AA implementation is far superior to the blurry TAA implementation used in RDR2, so there's that at least.
Red Dead 2 is stupid blurry on ps4 pro.
@@WH250398 Badly implemented checkerboard + blurry TAA = disaster
100%, even FSR1 was a pretty great AA solution. Dota 2 at 99% rendering resolution looked very crisp.
FSR1 is not AA@@scottmcqueen3964
@@WH250398 RDR2 uses checkerboard rendering on PS4. On PC it's rather blurry, but in 4K it's great. I recommend using mod Visual redemption which greatly enhances the TAA, it looks amazing with it.
If Rockstar included 60 fps, upscaled UI, Per Object and Camera Motion Blur and this port would have been pretty great.
Agreed
Yep, I’d consider the price with all of that. Right now it should be $20 most on PS and $30 most on Switch. Still would wait for sale on either since the Bc360 version holds up nicely.
And textures upgrades; super easy nowadays with AI upscaling. And RDR2 could also run with better settings at 60 FPS on PS5 and SX, as it works on PC, with a simple patch.
imo switch version is the only one worth it because of portability and runs better than the og however the ps4 has no excuse for 30 fps
@@v1kt0u5 yea i had the same thought but they for sure will charge more for upscaled textures and slap a (Remastered) on the cover.
they charging 50$ and still lazy to have option unlock 30fps...
love how the only part of the UI that got upscaled are the Controller Icons
1:27 Very subjective.. Does look substantially more stable on PS5, but also substantially blurrier as well. From this comparison, I prefer the sharper image on XBox. It's "easier" to look better on PS5 when zooming in all the way in particular areas but when in full screen during gameplay, it's a step back imo.
Tbh this is one of the saddest re-releases of a Rockstar game ever.
I know you guys like the people involved with the port and that’s fine (as mentioned in the podcast), but RDR1 was one of my favourite games and seeing it handled like this is so disappointing. I feel like these companies know they can do the bare minimum and still make decent profit, I just wish all the remake rumours were actually true. Definitely a skip from me.
THE saddest OF ALL TIME
We are gonna get so many pretentious "Rockstar's Downfall" video essays after this nightmare
Especially with quake 2 coming out recently
I mean, it could've been worse, or did people already forget GTA Trilogy Definitive Edition?
The only thing required here is for the price to drop significantly.
The series X version looks to have a cleaner image. The PS5 version seems softer. The FSR2 makes it look blurry and less detailed to me.
Same. Though that's probably because we are watching over youtube compression which by itself softens the image a lot. So when playing natively the aliasing on the backcompact version is probably more bothersome.
FSR 2 with native 4K isn't supposed to soften the image afaik that's more of a TAA problem.
@@weaverquest FSR + Native 4k (FSR cutting-edge upscaling technology) Make this make sense
@@charlesbronson1959It has a TAA component to it, so in this case it's similar to DLAA. At least it's a lot better than RDR2's TAA, so you get that for $50,- 😂
@@charlesbronson1959 It is weird but these temporal upscaling methods like FSR 2 and DLSS 2 are also great anti-aliasing methods so that's why it implemented here.
An alias isn't a lost detail.
Fast port, enhanced resolution and frame rate, no new textures. No new missions, no multiplayer support. Probably a job done in a few months by a good developer and a tester. Nothing wrong with that, but 50$? For something that required so little work? 20$ would be a fair price.
Releasing a 13 yrs old game on outdated consoles....truly a Rockstar moment 😎!
Take Two*
720p interface… I was not expecting that. Such an oversight
Not really an oversight since no one looked at it. Just pure laziness, at best. At worst, it's a POS product looking to nickle and dime fans
He was saying more positive things about the PS5 version but almost every comparison shot I thought the XB SX version looked more appealing
I thought the Xbox version looked less washed out at times. Might be just me.
The colors look better on Xbox IMO but the the shadows and image quality still look better to me on PS. Still not worth the price tho.
The ps versions looked more realistic
That's because you are Xbot 🤦🏻♂️
@@user-sp8fi2zv2v me? LOL
Appreciate the level headed and evenhanded analysis as always.
Thank you for putting this out so soon. Saved me 50 bucks. 🙏🏻
The fact you even considered buying it is appalling
@@ashtinoak It is worth buying, just not for 50 bucks. When it's the same price as the Xbox version I might buy it.
Wrong choice.
Just bought it. It's superior to the Xbox Version. And the Multiplayer that was filled up with Hackers is also removed.
Can't wait to get the Platinum on this beauty.
@@MaxNurDerFCBayern-jh3lgminimum difference, double the price, outstanding for sure
@@MaxNurDerFCBayern-jh3lg how's that boot
If you buy this, then you only have yourself to blame.
The colours are noticeably more vibrant on the Xbox version.
That's not the game, it's the console setting. They likely had auto HDR turned off on PS5.
Had this on PS3 but never finished it and don’t have the game or system anymore. I have a PS4 and definitely want to dive back into this, preferably when the price goes down!
Its a shame what they're doing with the rdr franchise, it deserved so much more
Runs at a solid 4k/60 on the Series X!
Still waiting for a RDR2 remaster with 60fps…
Looking at this shit I don’t expect much 😢
@@j.a.weishaupt1748 it doesn't need a remaster, the game came out 2018
@@vloqyit needs a 60fps patch on consoles but rockstar would probably charge an unreasonable amount for that too
@@nick13b 4K30.
If you have only played the PS3 version like me its a decent upgrade but it really should have been running at 60 fps and the price should have been at least $25 cheaper.
Yeah I played the ps3 version awhile back and enjoyed the game but the only compelling reason to make me play it again would be 60fps which this amazingly doesn’t have. Knowing RS they’ll ‘remaster’ it in a couple years for current gen and charge $70 dollars for it
@@Neo_Rain146 i know, its a piss take
At least with GTA 5 Expanded and Enhanced they added 60 FPS mode to it, but they didn't do it with RDR 1.
I think it's also worth mentioning that they removed multiplayer. So Xbox version is still the best one to play
no, ps5 version looks better. as always, best to play it there.
@@kefkazeromus91The fact that you're actually willing to buy this crap is sickening
He's a PS fanboy, Sony could take a dump and he would buy it.@@Eva01-jy2qu7pu9r
@@kefkazeromus91bruhhh
@@kefkazeromus91 Oh yeah you get rid of a few barely noticeable jaggies, but lose a whole game mode and pay $50 for the pleasure. What a win for PS fans lol
Gotta say I completely disagree with the verdict that image quality is better on PS5 compared to Series X back compat, looks way sharper on Series X. would take a cleaner image with some aliasing over the softer image on PS5 any day.
It's DF, friend. what did you expect? They always do the same with these analyses. They give an absolute verdict to personal appreciations and at no time do they say "even seeing that the Xbox Series X version is backward compatible from Xbox 360, the image quality is impressive." No, they set out to measure a backward compatible version of a previous generation with a backward compatible version of two previous generations.
Hard to believe that RDR2 still hasn’t had a PS5/XBSX upgrade and was completely abandoned, only because it’s not GTAV.
And I thought the PS5 GTA5 release was lazy. This is another level!!!
- No 60fps
- Same Textures as 7th Gen
- No Gameplay Improvements
- Terrible UI
- No Multiplayer
Thanks Cockstar!
30fps and 720p ui for £50? I want whatever R* are smoking
One advantage to Brazillians is that now we have subtitles :D, isn't enough, but is something.
50 dollars for some subtitles? lmaoo
@@memoo183as I said, Isn't enough.
The gamma looks much better on the xbox version. Reminds me of limited range HDMI on the PS4 version, looks washed out. Also mind blowing the UI is all still for 720p.
Idk the Xbox version still looks better to my eyes. I do see the smoother lines for ps5 but it also looks slightly blurry compared to Xbox. I definitely see more detail in things like the ground, horses and other textures in the Xbox version. The colors also look richer and deeper in Xbox in some scenes shown here
I agree I swear Digital Foundry are PS shills smh
@Retro_Gamer_89 how many df vids do you watch?
I feel the same.
to me it's like sound if you ever see headphone reviews it's always "too much bass bad flatter = better" and that same logic is applied here the punchier contrast, and sharpness from the shimmering might look better to some but on a technical aspect it will be seen as inferior
Nope Xbox looks like garbage
this is why we love this channel. thank you for this, greed has had its teeth in the gaming landscape for too long ! !!!! ! ! ! !!
imagine laying on your bed but your mind is in the wild west. Such an experience.
No multiplayer in this version either. It's really dissapointing that they're charging more than the original release and yet it has less features. I had the same complaint about The Last of Us PS5 but that at least had a substantial visual upgrade AND ran at 60fps
Multiplayer doesn't have microtransactions, so in the eyes of Take Two its worthless
Hopefully they will finally bring it to pc. I bought the ps3 version on launch and it really sucks that it never got a PC port 😢.
I,d love to see this running with an Rtx4090 and an i9 13900k 🤔
It's not bad, if it cost $20 I'd understand it, and that's when I'll buy it. But for $10 more Capcom completely remade a GameCube game and Rockstar can't even redraw the maps at 4K, a job that would literally take 2 days...
I know many people are disappointed (including me) for the unrealized potentials. However, this is the first time RDR is being officially localized in my country and I’m thrilled to have an opportunity to finally play the game, after RDR2.
The game itself is a masterpiece, enjoy!
If you mean Russian localization, then the fan translation for the ps3 version was done in a very high quality. Even textures are translated there, including newspapers and street signs. There was also a translation of "book" quality subtitles. One of the most epic fan projects.
The fans have put far more effort into it than Rockstar has put into this port.
@@real_ddmxm I’m a Korean. There are many gamers here but Starfield and Baldur’s Gate 3 won’t be localized. Sad news.
@@pancon5 Thanks I will! :)
Well I understand the willingness to play this game on your language, which would be the same for me (brazilian). But c'mon man, we already speak english, we understand it well enough to play it FULLY and deny paying this lazy and disappointing port any more than 10 bucks. A simple localization should not be worth the price their charging, you should wait for a huge price drop
A true and well deserved "just pirate it" moment
I did, on PS4. Been modding it with HD assets since release, too. Sadly it crashes near Chuparosa, otherwise I'd use it constantly. Insane what a few modders did within days of the release, I wouldn't pay anything for this.
Btw the mod is for the Switch version but this game is literally the Xbox 360 version ported over. All the files are the same, nothing was changed but resolution bumping and these new upscaling options. In fact, there's a file called "shadowmaps_ps3" in the game, and when restored, we get the softer shadows back. I much prefer that for the trees, but it does look bad near light sources in interiors. Tweaking is needed, everything is in .xml files, or yaml.
@@xGMVanyone unlock the frame rate on base PS4 yet?
@@nuckerball1259 Yes. But it sucks to play like that, it doesn't stay on 60. It jumps from mid 30's to late 40's or early 50's, gets worse during rain and in Tall Trees. Not to mention the extra strain on the console, not worth it. Maybe with a 900p resolution patch. So far the only patch I use is to skip the intro logos and legal stuffs, I'm on my save within 10 seconds with autosave disabled, too.
“We’ve done differently than the competition - we don’t just port titles over, we actually take the time to do the very best job we can making the title different for the new release, for the new technology that we’re launching it on.” - Strauss Zelnick CEO of Take2
Can you test the 60 FPS mode on PS5?
Can't wait to see your review of the Switch version
I wouldn’t even really care about the lack of effort if the price was right. If they put this out for 10 -20 bucks I’d still think it was low effort, but the price makes sense.
For 50 dollars I expect more then this.
Rockstar with all the money in the world can't give us a proper remake.
And the people saying ubisoft is lazy 😂😂
I remember paying 40 bucks for Mafia remake, there is no way this game could ask for 30 let alone 50 lmao
🤡
Thanks for the video. I will definitely not be supporting Rockstar on this one.
Compiling the game to run on x86 processors is 1 step closer to a PC release at least. I'm not holding my breath but it would be excellent if it came to PC in some form. The ideal would be for them to just use RDR2 assets with custom additions where needed and retrofit the story and missions into it.
No offense, but with Rockstar, the ideal no longer exists.
Just play it on an emulator and enjoy enhanced graphics for free
You say "just do this and that" but that's a remake-level amount of work that would take years to finish.
Considering the amount of effort put I don't think they want to port it, especially since at the very least 60fps and mouse aim are considered bare minimums on pc.
That would require work on the actual game. Not just recompiling and adding FSR2.
@@OneLastScholar Rockstar and Take Two can afford it.
This was their chance to redeem themselves after killing us with the GTA trilogy but instead they just teabagged us hard. I knew this was just gonna be a resolution bump for the most part, but I'm blown away that they didn't update the UI or the render distance and still had the balls to charge such an absurd price for this.
TBH IMHO i like the Xbox version better than the PS4/5 I'm not seeing what the reviewer is seeing, to my eyes, the PS4/5 looks Softer to me, Just saying
Frankly, I am STUNNED that this is the route Rockstar chose to take rather than remaking the game using the Red Dead Redemption 2 engine. They literally included THE ENTIRE MAP from the first game in RDR2. 2/3s of that map (New Austin and West Elizabeth) are completely finished, playable parts of RDR2. In other words, aside from minor tweaks based on the change in time between the prologue of RDR2 and when the events in the first RDR start, THE PLAYABLE GAME WORLD IS LITERALLY ALREADY FINISHED! The Nuevo Paraiso part of the map is also present within RDR2, it simply isn't accessible.
So literally all Rockstar had to do was add the few small towns, roads and foliage to Nuevo Paraiso, and create character models for the very few characters who appear in the RDR story but are not already present in RDR2. Characters like Landon Ricketts, Abraham Reyes, Leigh Johnson, etc. Then just port the already-recorded dialogue from RDR into the new version that is remade in the RDR2 engine AND RELEASE THE GAME ON PC AND MODERN CONSOLES AND PRINT MONEY! Even if you made small tweaks to the story to add in mentions of characters/events from RDR2 like Arthur Morgan, we are STILL only talking about a relatively small amount of work. And in the context of a developer as big as Rockstar, it's an EXTREMELY SMALL amount of work.
I was so certain that this is what Rockstar had planned all along when I first saw the leaks of the RDR2 map. When I saw that West Elizabeth and New Austin were playable areas in RDR2, I was CERTAIN that Rockstar intended to eventually remake the first game using the RDR2 engine so we could play through John Marston's entire story from start (in RDR2) to finish (in RDR) with the same modern, cutting-edge graphics and gameplay, and that was their specific reason for including those two map sections from RDR in RDR2 in the first place.
I mean just think about it...New Austin is basically a totally useless, unnecessary area in RDR2. I'm not saying that I'm mad that they included it, but there is LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO in that area...an area you don't even get access to until after Arthur is dead. They could've just included West Elizabeth for the Blackwater and Beecher's Hope part of the story in RDR2. But they took the time to create the entire New Austin map AND add in the towns and landmarks from the first RDR...even though they serve no purpose whatsoever in the RDR2 story.
And as I said before, the Nuevo Paraiso area was ALSO rendered and landscaped...they just didn't add in the small smattering of adobe buildings that make up the towns in that area because it isn't accessible in RDR2. So Rockstar went through ALL THAT TROUBLE during the development of RDR2 for essentially no reason at all. If they aren't going to release a proper RDR remake, then they spent all that time and money creating those original RDR map sections just so we can ride around the desert of New Austin and do nothing as John after we complete the main story in RDR2. What a ridiculous decision.
Rockstar is quickly becoming a failing company. A falling giant. I was a little worried when we started hearing some angry rumblings about the direction Rockstar was heading as a company. Then they shocked everyone with their DISASTROUS "definitive editions" of GTA SA and VC. Now this. This, to me, is the big one. This is what sets off alarm bells in my head about Rockstar. The GTA "Definitive Edition" debacle could've maybe been brushed off as a foolish one-off mistake. But now I'm convinced that the people running Rockstar (who are no longer the guys who FOUNDED the company) are well on their way to destroying it. Not releasing a modern remake of RDR using the RDR2 engine is a MASSIVE mistake. And charging people FIFTY BUCKS for nothing more than a resolution upgrade of a nearly 15-year-old game is just disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.
Maybe I'm way off base here, but I think GTA6 is going to end up being a huge letdown. I think it will be the first time we see Rockstar make a catastrophic mistake with their GTA IP. I'm not necessarily saying that it's going to be a "financial flop" of a game, but I just have a feeling that it's going to a huge letdown after GTA5 (which I always thought was dramatically overrated anyway...I haven't replayed the game in years and years) and the absolute masterpiece that is Red Dead Redemption 2.
Literally felt the exact same way since i reached new austin in rdr2. I knew it in my head that they definately would remake rdr1 i was 100% certain of it.........until they didnt! Wankers mate! I loved rdr1 in 2010 and i still love rdr2 now but i dont think my head will accept the gameplay and graphics of a 2010 game to merit a replay of it. For 50 quid rockstar can piss off!
GTA 6 is going to make a billion dollars overnight, and will eventually overtake GTA 5 as the most profitable piece of media ever created. Fortunately, it will also be even better than any engine Rockstar has created so far, and will be the crowning achievement of the company. They are not a failing company.
I believe capcom is becoming the best company in terms of reviving it's old IPs.
Rdr2 is my world to relax in, even though I've never played Rdr1 and probably never will. Nothing compares to Rdr2 and I mean no game ever made to this date can live up to it. Not only the graphics but also the detail of the living world, everything is made to perfection
I get the argument that crisp flat line shadows are "better" on ps5 but i prefer the soft edge shadows over the AA shadows because i think it looks better and more realistic with soft fuzzy edges on tree branches and leaves. Just my opinion. Yours is as valid.
*Charges 50$ for a minimal effort port*
Rockstar: You're welcome 😘
It would be interesting if you compare this ps4 pro/ps5 version to the emulated one on pc based on Xenia to see which is superior , obviously the Xenia emulation is better in terms of frame rate if you have the hardware to run it at 4K 60fps+ , but which one is best in terms of picture quality (shadows, anti aliasing , UI ) and if there are mods to enhance the picture quality ? Until rockstar games releases a real pc version if ever !
Series X wins!
Really appreciated that they threw in the bit about Xenia being able to do 60fps in emulation. That really puts into perspective what a low-effort port this is. Like most cases, having at least 60fps is superior over a few visual enhancements because the higher framerate actually improves gameplay.
If we can put reshade onto xenia then it will look better but thats a shaders not vanilla
@@haysoos123 Sacrifices usually have to be made in open world games to achieve 4K and 60fps at the same time.
@@jgunner94 Witcher 3 on PS5 is massive open world and runs on 60FPS. Sure, not with 4K enabled at the same time, but at least there is a choice. And I'd prefer a dynamic resolution etc with 60FPS. Maybe it works with 1440p. Always better than only having 30FPS
I hope that this rerelease tanks so as to let Take Two know how much they missed the mark.
It's already on the top of best selling games on the Playstation store and Nintendo store lol
@@KingJohnMichael sigh 😥
The sad reality is as much as gamers complain there will always be enough who will give money. Its up to each individual to make their choice how to spend their money.
@@LegionIscariot you're absolutely right. It is the sad reality we face with consumer choice.
If you buy this you have no right to complain in the future when Rockstar again releases a low effort re-release of an old game.
Can we get a 60fps patch on RDR2 as a consolation?
FR THAT WOULD BE AWESOME OMG
@@sullivans2004fuck no. Rockstar would rather re-release it on PS5/series x for 69.99
Is it improved? Apart from shadows, i feel it looks superior on the Series X
It’s definitely better, don’t know why he made out ps4 was so much better 😂 you could literally see it wasn’t on the video…
7:59 😂
Markedly inferior lol@@fabio78
@@djm9937 the professionals talked.
Don't worry, everyone hating on this will either buy it anyway or forget all about Rockstars screw ups once GTA6 comes around. Gaming community in a nutshell.
Hope the Switch version will end up being decent. So that I can buy it on a discount in the future.
It is decent. Pretty much same as Xbox one s version.
Given the switch specs, I think it will run at 720p 30fps on handheld/lite and 900p with FSR2 to 1080p 30fps on Dock
@@HanCurunyr 720p in docked and 1080p in handheld is what it is. The same as PS4 version but with lower shadow quality that's literally it.
@@HanCurunyryou are too generous on 720p. Many Switch games run at 480p and 540p on handheld mode.
@main_tak_becus6689 RDR is a 2010 game and Switch is more powerful than the console of that generation. There's absolutely no excuse to the port on Switch be lackluster and if it's the case, won't be the console's fault.
For a game almost 14 years old, you've got to admit it holds up better than most games 13 to 14 years old.
It shows it’s age, and definitely looks like a 360/PS3 game.
@@seIainOP never said it didn't
Better be with the budget it had
Jet Set Radio Future holds up way better.
@@ChuckieGee-nc8jp OtherP never said OP said that.
To be fair, this is a port of a PS3 game to PS4, which is no small task. I think the price should be closer to $30, or for $50 throw in a few improvements like a modern control scheme, bit I don't run the financials for a big business so what do I know.
A game like this should run at 60FPS PS4 and 120FPS on the PS5. Fucking hell rockstar.
It's sad that Rockstar didn't want to spend that much money. Seems like they easily could've dumped the game on the RDR2 engine. Use the captures from the OG with the new models like TLOU1.
After wonderful remakes of RE2, RE4, TLoU part I, MAFIA, FFVII, Demon`s Souls we have this... No words
Tlou Part 1 😂
@@nicholasmartins4316 yeah, you may laugh while playing a 13yo game in 30fps without ANY improvements. For 50 bucks its a bargain for sure
@@zblsk both re-releases of rdr 1 and tlou part 1 are bad. Stop defending Naughty dog cash grab
@@nicholasmartins4316 Why exactly? TLoU 1 was remade on TLoU II engine and I think rockstar has a bit of money to do the same and remake it on RDR2 engine. Or AT LEAST unlock FPS or release it on PS5, not on a 10 year old hardware
@@zblsk the same game from 2013, with updated graphics (yet worse than tlou part 2), for $70. Everything is the same, the dubbing, audio mixing, gameplay, animation, scripts, the same game 1:1 overall, thats a bargain, for sure.
I got the game as a birthday present when it came out in 2010 on PS3. Despite it being slightly inferior to the 360 version, I still loved the experience there. I later bought it on Xbox One in 2016 (but finished it in 2018 on One X just before 2 came out). I love the first RDR, but since I've put a lot of time into the original between two versions across 4 different consoles, I'd find it hard to want to buy the PS4 version at even 10 dollars. The only "good" thing the announcement for this game did was make me want to install it on Series X and play it a bit. Ultimately I don't care THAT much, but it is disappointing to see that the PS4 version is already selling well.