Red Dead Redemption 2 Review Embargo Revealed

Red Dead Redemption 2 (PS4/XONE) reviews will start going up on Thursday, October 25 at 4:01am Pacific.

Central European Time: 1:01pm
UK Time: 12:01pm

[DarkVoyager]

I predict a 95 metacritic.

[angelsx]

That's mean someone playing RDR2 right now

[AcidDvl]

That* means* that* someone is* playing RDR2 right now.

[b163o1]

Auto correct "StandingOvation"

[Skull521]

They’ve crafted the finest game of the generation, do we really need other people to tell us that?

[UCForce]

Mine prediction is 97.

[OB1Biker]

I predict a riot. To find a copy.

[ziggurcat]

not if you buy digital. no riots or problems getting a copy whatsoever.

[paintedgamer1984]

A 90 at the very least... but we shall see

[patrickman]

It'll be 100/100 metacritic!

[SoldierTypeNtGen]

Its probably going to be three more numbers higher than that my friend :) !!!

[jagermaster619]

97- 98 for me

[ArchangelMike]

I don't think anyone is waiting for reviews on RDR2.

BTW - I predict a 98 Meta.

[sander9702]

And the only reason it won't have 100 meta is because a couple sites will clickbait as always.

[IanTH]

Because if a site gives this game an 8 or 9 out of 10 then that's clickbait? Getting a 90 is one hell of an achievement when factoring in around 100 (or more, for a game like this) different reviewers' opinions. The fact many here are predicting 95 and above should speak volumes to the expectations people have for this game.

[81BX]

@instantstupor
??? Act like you dont know. Were not talking about 8 or 9's. Hes talking about the sites giving 6's and 4's.

[PoopsMcGee]

I'm going to get killed for saying this, and I loved the first Red Dead Redemption, but I'm not really feeling it for this one yet.

I mean, I expect I'll probably love it when I actually play it, but it just hasn't struck me as looking like it's very FUN from what I've seen.

I'm not very excited about up keeping my gun and horse and keeping the NPCs and townsfolk happy. Besides that, the art style is a bit drab (which, granted, fits the genre but even still).

The details are definitely amazing and I'm sure it'll be great but I'm just not as excited for it as I thought I'd be. Hopefully, playing it will change my tune...

[JackBNimble]

It's going to be GOTY regardless of meta.

[n1kki6]

Or a couple people with have different opinions, which is fine. Gamers are morons.

[ziggurcat]

@instant:

he's referring to the sites that will give a game a 4/10 score for no real good reason.

[81BX]

100

[mark_parch]

I genuinely think this game would have the potential to get 100 on metacritic if it wasn't for the occasional clickbait review.

[rainslacker]

I always thought reviews that were so far outside the norm shouldn't be factored into the average. They can still be posted on the site so people can see, but when the meta is 80-90, a review of 50 is such a departure and unfairly pulls down the meta. Same is true if a game gets a random 100 when the meta is around 80.

[WelkinCole]

Mine is 97 meta prediction

[Mr_Commander]

i predict 98 metacritic for normal reviews.

96 could be with those swj and other bullcrap reviews. there are plenty of site which seaching click generators.

[IanTH]

Certainly. Those SJWs will work hard to push their agenda, bombing the score from a 98 to a 96. Is SJW just used as shorthand these days for "people I don't agree with"? I feel like the term is being used as some kind of strawman to point at anymore.

[OB1Biker]

I think its actually used to signal critics or opinions that have concerns unrelated to gaming or challenging the idea of games as a free expression of art

[bluefox755]

No, they're moral puritans. People that get angry when a work of fiction depicts something that they don't like, because they want. I don't know if you're familiar with the TV Sopranos, but it was a fantastic show, and one that could never be made today. The protagonist, Tony Soprano, was a bit of a horrible person. He treated women, minorities, and people in general pretty badly. But the writers of the show somehow managed to make you still care about him, it was fantastic writing. A good story is sometimes dark and gritty. It might sometimes offend your sensibilities, but that doesn't mean it should be shouted down and banned. The best stories make you feel a whole spectrum of different emotions, not just good ones. This whole moral purity spiral that has taken hold in the culture has definitely hurt creative works. People need to stop being offended by fiction.

[rainslacker]

Actually, it's short hand for people that go to ridiculous extremes to make a ridiculous argument that can't be substantiated beyond their own personal belief, and then saying that any one who calls them out for such a thing is somehow less of a human who is just a hater.

[generic-user-name]

When Kotaku, Polygon and their ilk inevitably criticise the game/R* for not having a female protag or for allowing the player to get rubbed down by a woman in a bathtub, or hogtie a prostitute and feed her to a bear you'll know what he's talking about.

Go read Polygon's 8/10 review of The Witcher 3 where they say:

"The Witcher 3's subject matter, its almost defiant doubling down on its treatment of women as titillating props for Geralt and the player, even as it tries to flesh out more female leads, is its most disappointing aspect. This constant presence weighs down what would otherwise be an excellent bit of closure for Geralt's video game saga"

[rainslacker]

Not enough gay female horses? Or maybe the more likely realistic horse anatomy being something that pollutes our society in some way

[Mulletino]

“People will bow to it”

[Mulletino]

Apparently not many Grandmas Boy fans..

[franwex]

It’s a terrible movie. Look at metacritic of 33. You cannot possibly enjoy that!

[Larrysweet]

Grandmas boy is amazinh asf

[TheColbertinator]

A solid 94 right here. Should be fun.

[bluefox755]

That's what I'm thinking, low to mid 90's. Although this game looks very promising, Rockstar have always been a bit wishy washy in the gameplay mechanic area. It seems like they've upped their game this time around, but they've only shown us what they want us to see, so it's too soon to be say for sure. I really hope it's as good as it looks. I'm certainly buying it day one.

[Larrysweet]

Wishy washy hahaha ur mistaken

[bluefox755]

@Larry You think the gunplay in the GTA series was top knotch? R* makes fantastic game worlds, but their gameplay mechanics aren't always on the same level.

[UnholyLight]

I foresee this game smashing some records. The hype for this game is through the roof

[franwex]

Wow, you guys are rating it really high. I was thinking about an 80. I haven’t played it yet obviously, but that’s how I would’ve rated red dead redemption when it originally came out.
Kinda don’t care about critics anyway. We put way to much weight on what metacritic says.

[EazyC]

I think 80 would probably be a disappointment, this game is the sequel to one of the most beloved games of the 21st c. so far

[OG_TK_Cole]

It's not a Sequel, Its a Prequel.

[I_am_Batman]

I'm interested to see what the general consensus is even though I frequently disagree with it. When it comes to reviewers I only listen to a handful of them that happen to align with my gaming tastes the most.

[EazyC]

Well it's not like R* is an unknown quantity, it's virtually guaranteed that it's gonna be of the highest quality in most aspects, the only place I could see them dropping the ball is post-release transition to online /microtransaction model and perhaps the story, given that RDR's is so fantastic

[rainslacker]

The meta score itself isn't usually a problem, and I feel it tends to come close when all is said and done.

Problem is more the weight out on individual reviews, which is usually used for arguments in ways that end up being conformation bias. This is especially true with exclusives. Ones that are low, people will say, finally....an honest review,, ignoring the many other reviews which may be good.

Otherwise if someone doesn't like a game, but the meta is high, people call it overrated.

[BenRC01]

Too many games! This can wait till after Xmas.

[mark_parch]

after christams is even more loaded with resident evil 2 remake, metro exodus, anthem, sekiro shadows die twice, days gone, crackdown 3, kingdom hearts 3, devil may cry 5 and the division 2

[Ricegum]

Crackdown 3 lol.

[mark_parch]

@Unreal01
LOL It certainly ain't going to be game of the year but i'll give it a try on gamepass. It could turn out to be really fun. I think a lot will hinge on wrecking zone which is the multiplayer mode. Should find out more at XO18

[michellelynn0976]

94 on Metacritic.

[Fishy Fingers]

I predict I’ll enjoy the game all while giving zero f***s about the metacritic score

[mark_parch]

if only everyone shared this view

[Movefasta1993]

are the people who are reviewing these games the type of people who struggle to complete cuphead's tutorial? I never trust reviews, I trust studious like naughty dog,from soft and rockstar and some youtubers.

[mark_parch]

the only reviewer I trust is ACG

[UnholyLight]

That was a really, really good prediction. We need more like you good sir.

[cfc83]

I predict i couldn't give a frick about review scores. Day 1.

[zivtheawesome]

A day before release like GTAV. Makes sense. I predict a 94 score due to some critics disliking survival mechanics. However it can go even lower due to the controversy around the development with the unfair treatment of the employees (not like it hurt GTAVs score though, so maybe same in this case)

[stefd75]

wow a whole one day before release

[Razmiran]

Was the same for GTA V

[generic-user-name]

How many days does it take you to read/watch a review?

[stefd75]

One day is not enough to cancel a pre order if the game turns out to be shit

[generic-user-name]

Then don't pre-order?

[stefd75]

You know your right. I will just wait until release day

[TheOtherMoon]

Oh man, I am so excited for all the hot takes that this amazing game is going to create: "Red Dead Redemption has you Play as Outlaw Cop." "RDR2 Should have Waited for the Next Gen." "Opinion: Rockstar Recycles their Stories" "Rockstar: Tumbleweed Graphics Downgrade"

[rainslacker]

Maybe if it were exclusive, but I don't see as much of this for multi plats

[TheOtherMoon]

The only reason is disagree is because of how volatile the gaming community is, looking through some of the most popular cross-console games, there are haters for the sake of hating, and article that take a non-popular view simply because...

[rainslacker]

That's fair enough. I do know the community, or at least some vocal people therein, do indeed like to be contentious when its not really needed. Even if they don't like something, they can stir things up much more than is really necessary over any given topic. I don't even think this is isolated to gaming or fandom type communities, but seems to be more a thing since social media took over how we communicate.

That being said, maybe I just don't notice it as much, because there haven't been as many multiplats this gen that interest me, and the exclusives tend to get my attention more, at least some of them. I typically don't talk much about MS exclusives in terms of their quality, or how I feel about them, because I'm not that interested in many of them. There are a couple notable exceptions though. Usually when I speak of them, it's on the broader impact of the console, and console war itself. The notable exceptions would be when people bring them up for comparison in a game I am interested in, or when it was a game I found interesting, but usually ended up being disappointing in the end.

[Spartacus10]

So apart from a pay off or any sort of 'deal', which an impartial reviewer shouldn't be involved in anyway, what's stopping them from breaking the embargo?

I dont get it, R* have such a good game on their hands, why do they need to get involved in this shady shit? The consumers are still going to get gameplay and reviews from people who somehow managed to get their copy early.

[rainslacker]

The reviewer would have signed a legally binding contract, which could land them in court and them having to pay money. Not worth the risk.

Further, they'd likely be blacklisted by every publisher going forward, which severely limits the free games and less swag that most of them want for their fairly marginal service to the industry or their readers.

My guess on the review embargo is to limit story spoilers. It's not really shady, as it is before release, although not by much. Plus it insures that these sites aren't rushing through a game just to be first to review to get clicks

[Spartacus10]

I can understand why both parties would sign a legally binding contract if it meant they could get the game early and put their review out early. But just 1 day? Not worth it.

The way it will pan out is with random youtubers and second-rate websites flooding their impressions on the internet days before the embargo because some copies got leaked early like they always do before a big launch.

[jordan22290ps]

I'm just wondering what the potential cons are going to be for non-perfect scores. I doubt anything too serious but who knows. Maybe something along the lines of...I really can't think of any lol. Annoying gang members wanting things constantly?

[Scatpants]

Your gang members are probably going to be constantly telegraphing you wanting to go bowling.

[Realms]

Don't care about metacritic, don't care about reviews, don't care about the score neither. All I know is Rockstar takes their time to craft well made single player experiences so day one buy for me. I will decide wether the game is good for myself I tend to decide which games I buy based on the developers track record not on subjective reviewers opinions.

[Grievous]

Rockstar will get a pass on plenty of issues the game will have just like they got with GTA5. User reviews will be more telling but I think it will have a better user score than GTA5.

[rob-GP]

All these people claiming it will get a 95+ are the same people who will most likely target any sites which gives the game an honest non-biased review and scores it accordingly. As such, I wonder how many sites will feel pressured into giving the game a high score to risk being the target for these verbal attacks?

Personally, I never got into the original RDR and GTA V never really clicked with me so I sold it a week or so after buying it on launch. Regardless, we should be getting our review copy in a few days and I'm sure people won't like it if we're honest with the review - ah well. Will be nice to see it from non-biased eyes without nostalgia for the original or peer pressure forcing us to artificially inflate our 'subjective' score.

[Larrysweet]

So ur already being biased anticipating ur gonna give it a low score because u wanna see the outlash so whomever you are we should skip ur review thanks

[rob-GP]

Nah, if the game is good then of course it will get a high score based on our playthrough. If there are issues or if the game is just another open world game with nothing new and an uninteresting story, then it will get scored accordingly. Why would I be biased and make up my mind before I play the game by judging my decision on the original game?

Also, how do you get from my original comment that we will be "biased anticipating ur gonna give it a low score"? I never anticipated us giving it a low score. I simply said I have no nostalgia for the series and don't see how people can instantly claim it's going to be GOTY and 95+ on MC before it's even come out.

Just look at the comments, people claiming sites that don't give it a 9 or above are simply 'click bait sites' - those people are simply going to verbally attack sites which doesn't give this game a perfect score. That's your 'biased' crowd right there...

[generic-user-name]

You very much sound like you're looking forward to giving this game a low score.

[rob-GP]

Again - why? I clearly said that I'm going into it without the pre-conception that it's going to be a 9+ game. Basically, I'm gonna go in and see what it's like without the biased mindset a lot of people in this thread seem to have with their "less than 9 means the site is click bait", "this is GOTY", "This will be 9.5+ with no issues" etc...

Those people will be the ones instantly jumping on every single review which goes out that doesn't score it high. I can't say what we will score it, I may not be the one reviewing it as I may give it to my colleague when it arrives. I'm just saying that a lot of people, and people who are currently reviewing it for certain sites, will instantly give this game a pass on any flaws it may have (I don't know as I've not played it yet - that's the key point here), just because it's RDR. Just like how so many reviewers game Zelda BotW a free pass on a lot of its mistakes and flaws just because it was Zelda. Also, don't forget all the 9's and 10's Shenmue got a few months back, just because they were reviewing the game as if they were playing it on release, 10 years ago, rather than on modern consoles today. In the process, they overlooked its black cutscenes, terrible controls, very boring and primitive mission structure and a large array of bugs and glitches.

There is a lot of bias in video game reviews as it's how the reviewer felt after playing the title they are given, and not a set rulebook which people must follow when they put down a subjective score. All I'm saying, which the people who have replied to me so far don't seem to understand, is it's clear to see within this thread who will be jumping on all the non 9+ reviews in the next week and claiming the reviewers are wrong when nobody in here will even have started playing it by that point. That's all. You seem to be reading way too much into what I'm saying and putting words into my mouth. If the game's good, which it probably will be, then the subjective score will be typed in accordingly. If it's a massive open world with little going on and a bad story (which I honestly don't think it'll be), then that would obviously be taken into account.

Again though, explaining myself for the third time because you can't comprehend what I've said is getting rather boring by this stage.

"Previous RDR was absolutely a 10. One of the best games of that generation, if not the best. I can state my opinion as fact too!" - Wish I'd seen this first - kinda proves my point nicely. You're clearly one of the ones who will jump on the non 9-10/10 reviews.

[generic-user-name]

Why? It's pretty easy.

"I never got into the original RDR and GTA V never really clicked with me so I sold it a week or so after buying it on launch."

You've already stated that this type of game doesn't float your boat with this quote here, despite RDR1 being widely regarded as a classic. But it's this next quote that is most damning.

"I'm sure people won't like it if we're honest with the review - ah well."

Here you are implying that to give this game a high score you'd have to be dishonest. So it's pretty blatant to see why I came to my conclusion.

"You're clearly one of the ones who will jump on the non 9-10/10 reviews."

Your site seems small, I'm not sure if it's on metacritic but I doubt it. I'd wait until I was on metacritic though to pull a Tom Chick on it. The lower score might get you a bit of a temperature here on N4G, but save it for metacritic is my advice.

"explaining myself for the third time because you can't comprehend..."

This is your first reply to me.

[rob-GP]

Nah, I meant the third time I've had to explain myself in general. And again - you're reading way too much into what I said. I never got into RDR because at the time of release I wasn't really a fan of open world games - that's changed over the years but I've never gone back to it. GTA is just a personal preference thing - I've never been a massive fan of the series. That doesn't impact how I'll feel about a game though - if I didn't like the first iteration of a game, I'll still go into the second with no pre-conceptions or biased mindset.

Also, I never said if it gets a high score it'll be dishonest - another case of you reading too into it. I was commenting on those people saying if it's below a 9 then it's a clickbait site. Which is a load of crap. IF a site gives it lower than a 9 (not saying they will, I'm saying IF), then as long as they have justification within their text then how can it be passed off as clickbait?

I agree, the guy who gave TR a 2/10 is clearly doing it for a laugh based on what he wrote, but those are the anomalies, I'm talking about general publications who may see fit to give it less than a 9 for various reasons - they shouldn't be attacked by the angry mob which is seemingly already gathering on this site. We all remember the death threats the GTA V reviewer got when that was released.

that's all I was saying and you and the other person decided to read into what I said and come to your own conclusions of what I said. Well done. Like I said from the beginning, our copy hasn't arrived yet so I've not played the game - as such, how people can come to a conclusive opinion about a game when they haven't played it and have only seen a few trailers is rather silly and creating a biased opinion whether you want to believe it or not. An yeah, I believe a lot of the reviews will appear with biased opinions within them, but I don't care - it's not them who will get jumped on 'IF' something stops this from becoming a perfect 10 - 9.5

Also, you're right, we're not on Metacritic but we're on the list to be reviewed for it later this year - not that a MC score actually affects how a person should feel about a game they're excited for...

[nucky64]

i don't care what reviewers say - i'm buying.

[Elwenil]

What? No rage about their being an embargo? I guess Rockstar gets a free pass again...

[rob-GP]

why would anyone 'rage about an embargo'? All games have embargos these days. I have Call of Cthulhu on PS4 yet that embargo is on launch day at 9am due to spoilers. At least this game is allowing reviews the day before.

[franwex]

Nop. No rage these days. GoW had an embargo, as did Spider-Man. Honestly you should know if you’re the audience for this type of game.
We shouldn’t give review scores that much regard.

[BadElf]

1 day early? Was expecting more

[EdMcGlone]

Wonder how much, if at all, the 100hr work week controversy (valid or not) will impact the scores?

[Kuma]

As Gamers we are due for a great game that matches the pre release hype and the long wait . This game might be it.

[Saijahn]

Remember when N4G critics would say embargos that close to release is a bad thing and shows the game is trash or the lack of faith in the game? No one will say this now

[rob-GP]

It doesn't always mean that though, it's usually to avoid spoilers rather than lack of faith in the product.

[Larrysweet]

1 day embargo cuz they know u dont need a review games gonna be a damn 10 period this is rockstar and one of there most beloved framchises belive they didnt mess it up..u will see thumbnail best ooen world ever pushes boundries so realistic etc

[XxExacutionerxX]

Activision and EA are about to see how you quote “Make a game that brings value to the gamer” I hope every other copy cat will take notes on how to make an OPEN world game. Not a some big world with 200 boring missions and 50 side missions plus DLC. A virtual world that you can truly go off and just have fun in a many different ways.
God of War showed everyone how single player is done with a rich story.
RDR2 will show everyone how an Open World is done the right way.

[Father__Merrin]

Most reviews will be 10 purely because that's the narrative and it's a rockstar open world action game.

Previous red dead was good but no 10-10

[franwex]

I really enjoyed the story of the previous game. The gameplay was a bit wonky and sometime John’s actions were delayed which caused frustration. But nothing game breaking. I’m thinking a solid 8. But if they polished up the gameplay and the story is as good, or better, I cannot argue against a 10.

[generic-user-name]

Previous RDR was absolutely a 10. One of the best games of that generation, if not the best. I can state my opinion as fact too!

[foster426]

I predict a 92

[jjb1981]

I'm gonna just go ahead and give it a 102 out of 100 just a little early.

[Smokehouse]

Why so late?