GTA 4 vs RDR

RDR. The gunplay in Red Dead is undeniably better. GTA 4 had the most sluggish cover system I've ever seen this gen, and the movement speed when in combat sucked, RDR fixed that by making Marston change his speed when in danger. Also, the dead eye system made the euphoria a hell of a lot more fun to play with.

Also, the variety in the world is, once again, undeniably better. Mexican villages, cactus-filled deserts, lakes, waterfalls, ranches surrounded by prairie fields, swamps, the great plains, green forests, and snowy mountains. Also, not to mention the many towns and villages, many of which differ nicely, as well as all the different animals and life in between.

GTA 4 lacked features that I expected after San Andreas, it was basically "Vice City" set in Liberty City, which in its own right was great, but is a disappointment after San Andreas, and all the things that game brought to the table. To me, RDR is like the new San Andreas, it has so many more features and things to do- I've already put more hours into it, than I ever did GTA4. The only thing you can really argue about here are the stories each game has, because those are much more subjective than the features and gameplay of both games.

Red dead is prettier but gtaIV is more fun.

gta iv is much better. it took me a lot longer to really notice all gta iv's bad points. i've only had 2 weeks with rdr and i'm already pulling it to pieces. it's an extremely good looking game and is decent enough but lets itself down badly with a myriad of small annoying elements/bugs and has a really anti-climatic and underwhelming second half

*sigh*

I've posted this before, so I'll post it again as there seems to always be these new but done threads popping up again and again....

"I really don't understand how anyone can see GTA IV as the superior game. Mostly everything is improved upon in RDR. The cover and targeting systems, while still a bit touchy, are smoother and more refined and the gunfights are brutal. The world is alive with its own eco-system and random events (and weather), and there's more weapons and items. The characters are better written and voice acted and are far more interesting, the horses are a hell of a lot more fun to ride than GTA's cars were to drive, and the framerate is smoother and more consistent. The world doesn't have mindless drones roaming the streets as everyone in RDR has a schedule that they follow. Because of this, it doesn't cater to the gamer's demands (sometimes there will be nobody at the poker table or behind the counter at a store) which helps the game feel more alive, not so centered on the player, hence more immersive.

On top of that, it's varied in its environments, and the economy is better balanced as money is harder to come by (at least until way later in the game), which gives incentive to hunt, gather, and go out and explore....which is very enjoyable and leads to a variety of dynamic encounters. The Dead Eye mechanic is a brilliant idea which is well implemented. The story, while still not the main draw for me as is the freedom, is much better and actually has me curious as to what's going to happen unlike GTA. I find John interesting, whereas with Niko I couldn't care less about what happened to him. And finally, there's NO PHONE- the best thing of all. I can't comment on the multiplayer as I played neither.

RDR is far and away a better game than GTA IV ever was. The only thing GTA has going for it is that it is more polished and less glitchy, the novelty of the new engine and the physics it afforded, and the setting, if that's your preference. RDR is what GTA IV should've been, and has fully restored my faith that R* still knows how to create the best open world sandbox games out there."

RDRwas ahuge suprise to me andway better than GTA4. I still can't believe GTA4 received such high reviews. It was basically GTA3 with better graphics but more of the same old thing. RDR is still alot like GTA but far more interesting settings, characters, and missions. I think the nature, weather, and animals make RDR more interesting for me. Can't get enough of the old west.

*sigh*

I've posted this before, so I'll post it again as there seems to always be these new but done threads popping up again and again....

"I really don't understand how anyone can see GTA IV as the superior game. Mostly everything is improved upon in RDR. The cover and targeting systems, while still a bit touchy, are smoother and more refined and the gunfights are brutal. The world is alive with its own eco-system and random events (and weather), and there's more weapons and items. The characters are better written and voice acted and are far more interesting, the horses are a hell of a lot more fun to ride than GTA's cars were to drive, and the framerate is smoother and more consistent. The world doesn't have mindless drones roaming the streets as everyone in RDR has a schedule that they follow. Because of this, it doesn't cater to the gamer's demands (sometimes there will be nobody at the poker table or behind the counter at a store) which helps the game feel more alive, not so centered on the player, hence more immersive.

On top of that, it's varied in its environments, and the economy is better balanced as money is harder to come by (at least until way later in the game), which gives incentive to hunt, gather, and go out and explore....which is very enjoyable and leads to a variety of dynamic encounters. The Dead Eye mechanic is a brilliant idea which is well implemented. The story, while still not the main draw for me as is the freedom, is much better and actually has me curious as to what's going to happen unlike GTA. I find John interesting, whereas with Niko I couldn't care less about what happened to him. And finally, there's NO PHONE- the best thing of all. I can't comment on the multiplayer as I played neither.

RDR is far and away a better game than GTA IV ever was. The only thing GTA has going for it is that it is more polished and less glitchy, the novelty of the new engine and the physics it afforded, and the setting, if that's your preference. RDR is what GTA IV should've been, and has fully restored my faith that R* still knows how to create the best open world sandbox games out there."

Rekunta

*sigh*

I've posted this before, so I'll post it again as there seems to always be these new but done threads popping up again and again....

"I really don't understand how anyone can see GTA IV as the superior game. Mostly everything is improved upon in RDR. The cover and targeting systems, while still a bit touchy, are smoother and more refined and the gunfights are brutal. The world is alive with its own eco-system and random events (and weather), and there's more weapons and items. The characters are better written and voice acted and are far more interesting, the horses are a hell of a lot more fun to ride than GTA's cars were to drive, and the framerate is smoother and more consistent. The world doesn't have mindless drones roaming the streets as everyone in RDR has a schedule that they follow. Because of this, it doesn't cater to the gamer's demands (sometimes there will be nobody at the poker table or behind the counter at a store) which helps the game feel more alive, not so centered on the player, hence more immersive.

On top of that, it's varied in its environments, and the economy is better balanced as money is harder to come by (at least until way later in the game), which gives incentive to hunt, gather, and go out and explore....which is very enjoyable and leads to a variety of dynamic encounters. The Dead Eye mechanic is a brilliant idea which is well implemented. The story, while still not the main draw for me as is the freedom, is much better and actually has me curious as to what's going to happen unlike GTA. I find John interesting, whereas with Niko I couldn't care less about what happened to him. And finally, there's NO PHONE- the best thing of all. I can't comment on the multiplayer as I played neither.

RDR is far and away a better game than GTA IV ever was. The only thing GTA has going for it is that it is more polished and less glitchy, the novelty of the new engine and the physics it afforded, and the setting, if that's your preference. RDR is what GTA IV should've been, and has fully restored my faith that R* still knows how to create the best open world sandbox games out there."

Rekunta

For fun ill reply because right now im bored and I do respect your opinion a bit. For one, in GTA4, the pedestrians do not walk around as mindless drones. The world is alive and kicking with a flow of traffic and the people you see changes throughout the day. One will notice this if they were to stop running and gunning. I disagree on the voice acting and story being better. GTA4 was far superior on this level with its dialog and story telling. The characters were believable and "well acted", and the episodes really connected well to explain all the question marks left in GTA4. The characters really felt true to their environment as well.

In GTA4, you will notice that not everything was about Niko. As mentioned already, the world isnt filled with mindless drones. Peds would start fights, cops would chase suspects, taxi drivers will pick up peds, mail man would come at a certain time of day doing his business, garbage collectors, and the list goes on. Also, the radio and internet would mention other characters you may or may not have interacted with in the GTA world. You can turn OFF the phone and the multiplayer is better than in RDR. Also, an Infernus > Horse :P

gta 4, rdr feels like a rehash of gta 4 with lesser features (and before someone says "OMG ITS IN THE WESTERN CIVILIZATION NOT URBAN" stop its a rehashMicrosoft1234

For fun ill reply because right now im bored and I do respect your opinion a bit. For one, in GTA4, the pedestrians do not walk around as mindless drones. The world is alive and kicking with a flow of traffic and the people you see changes throughout the day. One will notice this if they were to stop running and gunning. I disagree on the voice acting and story being better. GTA4 was far superior on this level with its dialog and story telling. The characters were believable and "well acted", and the episodes really connected well to explain all the question marks left in GTA4. The characters really felt true to their environment as well.

In GTA4, you will notice that not everything was about Niko. As mentioned already, the world isnt filled with mindless drones. Peds would start fights, cops would chase suspects, taxi drivers will pick up peds, mail man would come at a certain time of day doing his business, garbage collectors, and the list goes on. Also, the radio and internet would mention other characters you may or may not have interacted with in the GTA world. You can turn OFF the phone and the multiplayer is better than in RDR. Also, an Infernus > Horse :P

Fuhgeddabouditt

I agree that the AI was pretty cool in GTA 4, I've had a lot of great random experiences with them, but overall for the most part, Liberty City in the game felt like a "look, but don't touch" type of world. I wanted to go places in that game. It needed more interiors, more things to buy, more things to interact with and go see. This includes the AI, RDR had it so you could at least interact with them more, it's so much more alive.

At one point, I had killed someone who was trying to kidnap a lady in town at night. Immediately after I killed him, a message appeared on my screen saying the weapon shop would be closed for a while, because the shopkeeper had been killed. That's the kind of random and unscripted stuff that just blows my mind.

On another note, RDR also had the newspapers, which described story actions that you had done, and not to mention people on the street would talk about stuff you did, or even if you sat at a campfire at night with a couple of guys in the middle of nowhere, they would tell stories about big events you had a hand in. So that aspect is much better than GTA's.

Also, I'm trying to figure out how the multiplayer is better than RDR. RDR improved it in almost every way, better gunplay and cover system, level up and unlock stuff for free roam, challenge list gives free roam an almost mmo-like questlog list of stuff to do with friends, coop-style gang hideouts against AI, and a much better wanted system in freeroam, one that could practically lead to another type of multiplayer mode all together- "Public enemy". If a player was wanted enough by the cops in free roam, he would get a huge bounty on his head, and all the other players in the game are offered the job to kill him for the money. This happened to me once, my buds protected me in a mexican townhall, while pratically a dozen other players were trying to break in and kill me for the money, it was a 20 minute defense, and it was amazing.

GTA4 had the greater impact, but RDR is the greater improvement.

mo0ksi

[QUOTE="Rekunta"]

*sigh*

I've posted this before, so I'll post it again as there seems to always be these new but done threads popping up again and again....

"I really don't understand how anyone can see GTA IV as the superior game. Mostly everything is improved upon in RDR. The cover and targeting systems, while still a bit touchy, are smoother and more refined and the gunfights are brutal. The world is alive with its own eco-system and random events (and weather), and there's more weapons and items. The characters are better written and voice acted and are far more interesting, the horses are a hell of a lot more fun to ride than GTA's cars were to drive, and the framerate is smoother and more consistent. The world doesn't have mindless drones roaming the streets as everyone in RDR has a schedule that they follow. Because of this, it doesn't cater to the gamer's demands (sometimes there will be nobody at the poker table or behind the counter at a store) which helps the game feel more alive, not so centered on the player, hence more immersive.

On top of that, it's varied in its environments, and the economy is better balanced as money is harder to come by (at least until way later in the game), which gives incentive to hunt, gather, and go out and explore....which is very enjoyable and leads to a variety of dynamic encounters. The Dead Eye mechanic is a brilliant idea which is well implemented. The story, while still not the main draw for me as is the freedom, is much better and actually has me curious as to what's going to happen unlike GTA. I find John interesting, whereas with Niko I couldn't care less about what happened to him. And finally, there's NO PHONE- the best thing of all. I can't comment on the multiplayer as I played neither.

RDR is far and away a better game than GTA IV ever was. The only thing GTA has going for it is that it is more polished and less glitchy, the novelty of the new engine and the physics it afforded, and the setting, if that's your preference. RDR is what GTA IV should've been, and has fully restored my faith that R* still knows how to create the best open world sandbox games out there."

Fuhgeddabouditt

For fun ill reply because right now im bored and I do respect your opinion a bit. For one, in GTA4, the pedestrians do not walk around as mindless drones. The world is alive and kicking with a flow of traffic and the people you see changes throughout the day. One will notice this if they were to stop running and gunning. I disagree on the voice acting and story being better. GTA4 was far superior on this level with its dialog and story telling. The characters were believable and "well acted", and the episodes really connected well to explain all the question marks left in GTA4. The characters really felt true to their environment as well.

In GTA4, you will notice that not everything was about Niko. As mentioned already, the world isnt filled with mindless drones. Peds would start fights, cops would chase suspects, taxi drivers will pick up peds, mail man would come at a certain time of day doing his business, garbage collectors, and the list goes on. Also, the radio and internet would mention other characters you may or may not have interacted with in the GTA world. You can turn OFF the phone and the multiplayer is better than in RDR. Also, an Infernus > Horse :P

I could've sworn GTA's citizens, while they did have random acts that gave the illusion of having a set schedule were in actuality simply emergent encounters stemming from randomized set paths that would occasionaly clash with another. Now I'm not a designer so I can't say if this is truly how it was, but that's sure how it felt. I remember following around people in GTA IV and it never really led anywhere. In RDR I've followed around a few people and have found that they have an actual routine. Almost too much so, as at one point while playing I was unable to progress because the person that was required to be at the letter to trigger the mission was far too busy sweeping the porch, cleaning the windows, and shooting the crows. I don't remember any of that in GTA IV, but admittedly it's been a while since I've played, so I'd have to go back to be 100% sure.

As for the characters and story....we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Many of the characters in GTA felt underdeveloped and overwritten, forgettable cookie cutter stereotypes, and were certainly overacted. IMO, poor writing is one of R*'s biggest weaknesses when it comes to their open world games, and while RDR is not that far removed from GTA in this aspect, it is nevertheless much better. John is a man in the midst of not only a changing landscape and his trying to find identity in it, he's also at conflict with his past and his attempt at reconciliation. Niko's story didn't nearly have this amount of depth nor said anything noteworthy about his past aside that he was an immigrant heading to a new land. He felt like Gordon Freeman from HL-a shell of a protagonist. The side characters in RDR are more memorable and less irritating as well, although they still maintain the intensely annoying tendency to blabber on forever without actually saying anything at all. But again, much improved from its predecessor.

I didn't realize you could turn off the phone in IV, but why should/would you want to? That's a fairly large part of what brings the game world alive, but the execution was simply mediocre. It wouldn't have nearly been as bad if the activities weren't so repetitive or if being allowed to ignore the incessant calls did not end up affecting Niko's relationships with said person, but that wasn't the case. So it felt forced if you wanted to truly experience GTA the way it was designed to be played. As for the cars vs. horses....again-all down to preference. I like the horses better because there's a huge, vast expanse to be able to use them in. GTA had some cool cars, but I never felt like I was able to stretch my legs with them. RDR gives me freedom. I love the ability to wander off the beaten path at any time to explore the unknown. Finally, as I said, I can't comment on the multi but from what I gather the general consensus at this point seems to favor GTA due to stability issues.

But yea, an Infernus DOES beat a horse. :P

*sigh*

I've posted this before, so I'll post it again as there seems to always be these new but done threads popping up again and again....

"I really don't understand how anyone can see GTA IV as the superior game...

Rekunta

easy. as good as rdr is and taking into account the improvements it made on gta iv such as the refined shooting and removal of the friends system, amongst other things, it also has its own share of problems and frustrations and ultimately, in terms of preference, it boils down to which game's problems annoy you the least.

so for me that would be gta iv

I haven't played Red Dead but I love GTA IV.

GTA 4 was too over-the-top with the porno and violence..RDR is lighter and more realistic. (Ex. You don't see porn and gun shooting every street corner/house) I find RDR is better for realism and theme. GTA 4 is if you had a bad day and just want to steal cars and piss cops off.

RDR hands down. I had to force myself to finish GTAIV while I couldn't put the controller down when playing RDR.

RDR has better single player.

GTAIV has better multiplayer.

RDR is better then GTA 4 in every way possible.

RDR has better graphics, better gameplay, better voice acting, better online, bigger fun factor and better AI.

kozzy1234

I absolutely enjoyed RDR more than I ever did with GTA4

RDR for me, altho I got to blackwater and never finished the game, still on my shelf. I also never finished GTA4 or Just Cause. I guess I dont like sandbox games. :?

RDR for me, altho I got to blackwater and never finished the game, still on my shelf. I also never finished GTA4 or Just Cause. I guess I dont like sandbox games. :?

Advid-Gamer

Red Dead Redemption by a longshot. I put a good 60 hours or so into that game.

thats too easy RDR obviously,

San andreas vs RDR would be harder

Half-Way

I like them both for different reasons :

GTA4 brought Next gen Graphics to one of the best games of last gen , on top of that top notch voice acting , combat , Story was Awesome how all 3 expansions tied into each other .brought a full awesome experience.

RDR - a visually updated Engine Brings the West to life in this Drama , Again Top Notch Story , voice acting and John Marston has to be the best protagonist R* has made to date . Immersive world with tons to do Side Missions , Hunting , Collecting Flowers , Gamble , five finger filet .

but in the end i have to go with GTA 4 there story was Great and what sealed the deal was the DLC and how they Finish the story. Was Hoping RDR would have a Ballad of Gay tony Sized DLC but Dont see that happening ,Instead we get Junky DLC pack .

RDR because it has decent controls, while GTA IVs controls were a sloppy mess. That being said, RDR was only good for one playthrough.