Red Dead Redemption (2010)

Awhile back I had a resurgence of Red Dead Redemption 2 content on my YouTube home page and my fyp on TikTok and it inspired me to finally get around to playing the first game and while it understandably isn’t as strong as its prequel, it’s still quite fun and interesting to play, especially with how much detail it features given when it was made.

I think having played the second Red Dead beforehand definitely helps with the experience of this one as you already go in knowing the dynamics between characters that aren’t fully shown in this one, more talked about, though the writing is strong enough to make you believe of the camaraderie between John, Dutch, Bill, and Javier to a degree.

I like the structure of the game too with how each chapter takes place in a new area and contains a variety of interesting characters, both new and old to me like Landon Ricketts, Bonnie McFarlane, Abigail, and Jack. It means it stays fresh when some of the missions can get a little repetitive at points though the stranger missions were always quite fun especially the one with the Strange Man.

I think the expansiveness of Red Dead 2 undeniably trumps this one and while it’s unfair to compare the two games, it’s extremely difficult not too, especially when I found that Red Dead 2 was much more engaging for me and kept me coming back to it whereas that wasn’t necessarily the case for this one. That could also be because I very much got obsessed with Stardew Valley whilst playing through John’s story and so this game kind of fell to the wayside for a little bit because of it but overall I think it’s engaging, just not at every level, and at times does feel like it could have done more to expand on the lore of the gang that the game repeatedly hints at.

I played the PC edition on my Steam Deck. Generally, it worked well on the Deck except for a few small hiccups. One time the launcher didn't sign me in which meant I couldn't play the game. That's when I learned you have to be connected to the internet to play this game. Very obnoxious but not unexpected of Rockstar. Also, the audio was occasionally choppy. Lastly, in a few places, the small screen made combat quite difficult because enemies were tiny targets against the background. Otherwise, worked great on the Deck.

I recall seeing the launch trailer for this 15 years ago, when I had no gaming system save for a cheap laptop. I loved the trailer and would watch it over and over on Youtube. I've always been a fan of Westerns and loved the idea of getting to play one. A few years ago, I was able to play RDR2 and that was awesome. Now I've completed the series (for now) and I'm so glad to be able to do so.

For the game itself, it was still good though not quite up to par with the prequel. The story is good but the side missions feel more like repetitive minigames than with RDR2. Maybe it's just that the story is shorter that makes it feel that way. Still, I liked the tale, I liked the story of John Marston and his family, and I liked the way it introduced characters who would later become a lot more fleshed out in RDR2. I've always had a soft spot for stories of parents and children and I like the way John and Jack interact. It felt genuine and moving and real with the stops and starts their relationship suffers along the way.

I kind of wish they had included an easter egg related to Arthur in the remaster but I guess it wasn't to be. Perhaps it would have cheapened the game and angered fans?

Red Dead Redemption – A 5-Star Ode to an Epic Western Masterpiece

I’m giving Red Dead Redemption a full 5 out of 5 stars—and it’s not just nostalgia talking. From the moment I saddled up, I was swept away by its unforgettable storyline, advanced mechanics, and breathtaking graphics—a true technological marvel back in 2010.

The Story That Lingers

The narrative of John Marston, a redeemed outlaw forced to confront his past, unfolds with raw emotion and meaningful depth. His quest to reconcile with what he’s done and protect his family is beautifully written and superbly acted

. The pacing strikes just the right balance—introspective when it needs to be, yet never dragging—and the supporting cast is equally memorable

. Those final chapters? Utterly haunting and emotionally charged in the best way possible

Visuals That Take Your Breath Away

For a game released in 2010, the artistry is staggering:

Environments—from wind-swept deserts under golden skies to snow-laden peaks—are breathtaking and teeming with atmosphere

Facial animations, motion capture, and cloth details like flags rippling in the breeze? Simply stunning . Each region has its own soulful identity, wrapped in layered lighting and environmental nuance

.Critically acclaimed at launch as one of the most beautiful games Rockstar had ever made . Even years later, the visuals hold up brilliantly. Players still marvel at how expressive the characters were—something that even modern updates don’t fully capture

This is simply a beautiful game, and it's provided more than a few moments where I completely forgot where the hell I was supposed to be going while riding over golden hills at sunset or through the desert in the middle of a nighttime lightning storm. It doesn't quite convey the loneliness of the real empty spaces, but does compress the essence of all the varieties of land and weather native to those parts into a few hundred miles ride.

The gameplay and structure may be beginning to show their age a little, but the storytelling, characters and world-building is on a par with the best the medium has to offer. It's a sprawling and engrossing experience, epic in scope and size and offering a gigantic amount of playing time. Rockstar have produced nothing less than the finest recreation of the Wild West on a console, and one of the best video games of all time.

It's really cool that Red Dead Redemption 1 is finally coming to PC. This will finally give me the urge to play it, but there is one thing that really perplexes me: the system requirements. How do you need an RTX 2070 for a game from 2010?

Let's compare this to GTA V's requirements. Looking at benchmarks, the GTX 660 runs well at around 80 FPS on medium settings. Let's also look at Red Dead Redemption 2. The 1060 6GB can run at 1080p 30 FPS on ultra settings. Bit below 60 on lower settings. I'm not complaining that I can't run it because I can. It's just that these specs just don't make any sense. The standard for spec requirements is usually 1080p.

I played RDR when it first came out on the Xbox 360 and loved it. When I heard it was coming to the Switch, enough time had passed that I thought it may be fun to check out.

First off, the open world is still amazing. Moving around the world truly makes you feel like a cowboy in the west. Unfortunately, the story of the game itself was extremely underwhelming. Rockstar always has characters that are a little, extra, but this time the tone of the writing just didn't fit the environment. I have not played RDR2 so maybe they toned it down, but I didn't remember the characters being so ridiculous.

Secondly, the controls on the Switch just felt bad. I may have made it worse because I played the game on Hardcore, but aiming just always felt sluggish and off. I remember popping headshots pretty easily before outside of the time slowdown, but it was hard to do in this version. The small reticule for aiming just simply a dot, which depending on the light could make it very hard to see where exactly I was aiming.

This review comes across more negative than I truly felt while playing the game, but I definitely won't remember it as fondly after this playthrough. Maybe I should have left a 14 year old game in the past!

i just picked up rdr on switch and was struck by how much the "lone cowboy" framing, marston's separation from his family and his mandate from the pinkertons to take in bill allows rdr to really just play with basically every western trope in a way that makes the game seem more lightweight. What's the driving force in the first thirty minutes? establishing your cred, on your own terms, so that you can take bill in. everything you do is in service of establishing yourself within the confines of the game's mechanics so that you become the person that approached fort mercer by the time you get to that mission later on.

it's a nice twist because you sort of understand where you're supposed to end up but you don't know how you get there and if you're in the mood for some pretty straightforward missions, you eventually roleplay renegade long enough to know what you'd need to do to have accomplished the first cutscene successfuly.

my main takeaway here is how light this game feels. it's very open, has just a handful of missions and mechanics in the beginning, and doesn't feel burdened down by much. it's clear what's going on, it's clear what you're supposed to be doing. after twenty minutes or so you can already roam across the area and take in the sights and run into random challenge npcs. it's more arcade-ey and more role-play heavy in that sense, and less like an interactive fiction setpiece.

Red Dead Redemption has always been a game I've wanted to check out. No joke, I've known about this game since I was 8 or 9 years old. I wanted to play it, but my parents understandably were hesitant given my age. My desire for this game only increased after playing Red Dead Redemption II and being so impressed with the characters and expertly woven narrative. The minute I completed Red Dead Redemption II, I instantly got to playing the first Red Dead Redemption via PSNow. Needless to say, I really loved it... Although it does have some glaring issues.

First off, the plot. Red Dead Redemption takes place in 1910, 3 years after the events of its sequel (Or should I say, prequel). John Marston has been tasked by the US Government to eliminate the remaining members of the Van Der Linde Gang, a gang John, his wife Abigail, and his son Jack were in (As well as Uncle). He is tasked to kill Bill Williamson, Javier Escuella, and of course, Dutch Van Der Linde in exchange for his freedom from any prosecution from his past. The plot is so much more interesting with knowledge of the second game. It makes this plot feel so much more personal and emotional. I loved the story. It was the best part of the game.

As for gameplay, it's really dated. Is it bad? No. It's very much early Rockstar. So I expected it to be dated. Shooting, covering, and horse riding feel fine (clunky at times) but passable. The game's main issue though is repetition. Bounties are the same every time, so after the 5th one, it's boring. The overworld is very VERY empty. There's not much to do. And the AI is very bad.

That said, I can say for sure that I was spoiled by Red Dead Redemption II. But that doesn't take away what this game accomplished. It's one of Rockstar's most engaging games. And I'm so happy I finally got around to playing it.

3/5

Would Recommend

So I've finally finished Red Dead in the xbox 360, unfortunately I experienced a ton of bugs.. don't know if it was the xbox version or if I was just too unlucky but i think the best choice is probably playing a more recent version.

Well, it's an extremely mature story with a deep and bitter end, making the game totally worth trying just for the story itself, tho it wasn't the most refined gameplay, the game was released in 2010 so it was expected, as i said in the title I'm sure it was a great game for i'ts time, nowadays it's just alright.

In the end I enjoyed but I wouldn't play it again.

7/10
Good Game.

I genuinely hate Rockstar mission structure, it is a scourge of poor narrative pacing and game design that I hope whoever coined it first gets fired off a cliff. That being said, Red Dead Redemption is an alright time overall, mostly because when the narrative actually decides to hit, it does.

Red Dead Redemption is one part really weak open world with middling side stuff, one part gameplay that just barely passes, and one part great narrative poking fun at Wild West revisionism and revisionism in general that is somewhat taken apart by shitty pacing thanks to its meandering structure. That ends up all combining to make something cohesive and somewhat immersive, not really a match of gameplay and story because the mission mechanics undercut the freedom you can have (hey there's a NakeyJakey vid on this you should see for RDR2). But it works, at least.

I really do find however, that the story elements it offers are genuinely great and competent to be worth the venture. Rockstar's writing while not perfect does end up generally understanding and evaluating the culture and time period it works with, putting up heralded ideals of Wild West storytelling and then cutting its limbs, pointing out the issues of its supposed "freedom" as you go from Mexican war where both sides are narcissists, wanted lists that give no real glory, the old guard completely exploited by the police and government as capitalism decides the real truth. And even with all of that subtext, RDR still manages to bring out a last act that hits home with core family tenants. Again though, a lot of this is terribly paced, with a shitload of "do this favor for x so you can get to y, and then do another favor for x or maybe even y this time! And then after you've done this 5 times we'll actually continue the fucking story." It's grating, but I think the heart of it shines through over time.

Overall, it's an alright game where the positives while strong are cut under by the scope and structure it works with. It's fine, worth trying out at least but maybe not finishing. (6/10)