• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

When the controls kill all your enthusiasm (RDR2)

I abandoned the first one because I hated controlling the horse.
I thought the horses in the first game were the most pleasant and responsive I'd ever played in a video game, I think that's still the case.
Horses in RDR2 have a bad tendency to strip the player of control. If you've ever tried to thread the proverbial needle between two trees before there's a good chance you've noticed that the horse will sometimes drift right or left without your input and ram you into the nearest tree. It's very frustrating, it's as if the horse has a mind of its own except it's stupid and suicidal.
My early in my second playthrough to 100%, I smacked into a stupid amount of objects because my horse would take control and drift me into the nearest object, the AI horse's pathfinding is directly clashing my inputs in high intesity situations(like being chased by wolves) causing me to be dehorsed repeatedly.
 
I didn't like the controls. I hated with so much passion on how often I would get off my horse and be forced to reequip weapons I had previously equipped. That shit got old. Other things like horses getting spooked whenever a cougar came around, knocking you off and getting ambushed because you couldn't get your gun out quick enough.

I learned to tolerate them and I do feel they work fine when you plan with them, but they are a huge detriment when the unexpected (animal attacks, enemy ambushes) occurs.
 
The controls turned me off because of the input lag, I had to go back to first game to make sure it wasn't just me. I stop playing after I got AC:O when it went to $30 and think it's more fun. But I will go back to RDR2 now that I know it's not just me, I kept putting off playing it because I had to be in a certain mood to try to play it because of it has sleep inducing mechanics.
 
I didn't like the controls. I hated with so much passion on how often I would get off my horse and be forced to reequip weapons I had previously equipped. That shit got old. Other things like horses getting spooked whenever a cougar came around, knocking you off and getting ambushed because you couldn't get your gun out quick enough.

I learned to tolerate them and I do feel they work fine when you plan with them, but they are a huge detriment when the unexpected (animal attacks, enemy ambushes) occurs.
Getting equipped with the "wrong" weapons is your own fault. You should have set your weapon selection properly at camp or the gunsmith.
It isn't input lag you guys are complaining about! It is the animation being played out, similar to when you attack in Soulsborne.
 
Last edited:
Best game ever made.

You lost an in game competition ?

You ran your horse into a tree?

You died once?

Lol .. go play a game that dosent hurt your feelings.
 
Last edited:
Getting equipped with the "wrong" weapons is your own fault. You should have set your weapon selection properly at camp or the gunsmith.
It isn't input lag you guys are complaining about! It is the animation being played out, similar to when you attack in Soulsborne.
A good game animator should know when they need to cut some animation while making look good but also make it feel responsive. At end of the day they are making a game not a movie, the controls still need feel responsive and fun.

Also games like Soul series and Monster Hunter don't have over animation like RDR2, What they have is anticipation in their attacks. The heavier your character's weapon is the bigger the anticipation for your attacks, its risk & reward system. you need find nice opening for your attacks instead of blindly attacking, the animation those two games is in service of the gameplay while over animation in RDR2 doesn't help the actual gameplay, its there to make the game more "realistic".
 
Last edited:
We all know Rockstar has bad controls, steering cars, cycling through weapons etc. GTA 4's, not that good, GTA V's not that good. Rockstar will not win an award for controls.
 
I am just here to quote and laugh at this gem of a sentence.

You are sounding more and more like an Apple fanboy. It's not a bug, it's a feature. Jesus Christ.
Do you expect the game to play itself? There's intricacies to the controls because there's intricacies to the functions of the game that need to be accounted for on an input method with less buttons than there are functions. These functions and prompts need to be learned so they can be used properly, if you choose to be obtuse and not invest the five minutes it takes to understand the controls in their entirety that is on you. You guys are coming off like those simpleton editor's over at GameSpot who had trouble navigating the Xbox One interface and couldn't even find the settings.

Things like this are only as unintuative as a person's willingness to spend a few minutes of time learning. It says more about the person than the game.

Wow DynamiteCop! DynamiteCop! On the verge of melting down. Haven't seen anything like this since the "square shot themselves in the foot" ffxiii meltdown
Melting down? If you call skepticism and grilling people melting down then so be it. If you're going to criticise something you need the mental aptitude to be able to coherently explain your criticism. If you can't explain yourself your criticism is invalid, it may appear valid to you because you understand why you're feeling that way but when you completely fail to outwardly delve into your issues you can't expect the outside world to view it as valid.
 
Last edited:
As i said the gamplay and the story is better in red dead redemption 2 .. so it is better at being a game.

So feel free to keep jumping on that bandwagon on the horse you rode in on.
I tried to ride in on a horse. I dismounted, tried to hitch the sucker and I ended up shooting some asshole by mistake, because I hit the 'wrong' button. Then I tried to escape but ran into the 'realism' again. I mean, I pushed the joystick forward to try and run away but nothing happened. Not exactly true. Eventually my dude moved forward. I was already dead by then.

The controls for this piece of shit are appalling.
 
I tried to ride in on a horse. I dismounted, tried to hitch the sucker and I ended up shooting some asshole by mistake, because I hit the 'wrong' button. Then I tried to escape but ran into the 'realism' again. I mean, I pushed the joystick forward to try and run away but nothing happened. Not exactly true. Eventually my dude moved forward. I was already dead by then.

The controls for this piece of shit are appalling.

You tried to dismount by pulling the right trigger?

I agree though it takes some time to learn the controls.
 
I tried to ride in on a horse. I dismounted, tried to hitch the sucker and I ended up shooting some asshole by mistake, because I hit the 'wrong' button.

Not sure why you have the word wrong in quotations, you literally pressed a completely wrong button and that was entirely your fault.

These functions and prompts need to be learned so they can be used properly, if you choose to be obtuse and not invest the five minutes it takes to understand the controls in their entirety that is on you.
 
Last edited:
None of you have, you've been extremely vague in everything you've said. If what you're saying was the case it would be easy for you to quote chain a few things, this is only a two page thread and I've read everything. As stated it's been a bunch of surface level criticism that doesn't delve into real problems or how the experience of the game is negatively hampered.

You can say whatever you want, you're trying to play devil's advocate and doing no more than the rest. You don't have a leg to stand on. You think the controls are garbage and can't rationalize into words why, your ability to articulate criticism is terrible and you expect people to accept what you say at face value without so much as an explanation.

You're peddling god theory, you expect people to just take you at your word, that's ridiculous. Your scapegoat is to just disregard me and what I'm saying, calling me a "rabid fanboy" is your escape route and it's pathetic, you're not a critical thinker and it shows.

Whew.

First, let me address your Doom input lag comparison from the last page. I did notice Doom had pretty high lag but it turned out manageable after some adjustment. The difference is lag isn't as big a deal in a game where most of the combat is close quarters using rapid-fire, splash-damage based weaponry.

On the flip side, RDR2 asks high fidelity aiming of the player despite its input lag and gives less room for error against opponents that may be far away, behind cover or obscured by various lighting effects while using single shot weaponry with low ammo counts. Combine that with "sluggish" movement due to "realistic" animations and you have an aiming reticle that struggles to keep up with the user along with a 3d character that takes extra time to get where you want them, making combat feel slow and at odds with player input at times. It doesn't help that Arthur defaults to walking even in combat and that.. "cover" system.. if you can call it that.

This aiming problem extends to interacting with objects in close proximity to one another. Often times the game doesn't seem to know how to handle them, either the wrong item is highlighted, or none, or the multi select option won't pop unless you perfectly align Arthur and the camera to the right spot meaning you spend a half a minute spinning in slow circles to pick up a can of beans right next to the gun oil you can't because you're maxed out on it. Its frustrating, its slow, its stupid and certainly not "realistic" as some people keep referring to it.

I find it insulting to my ability to swiftly maneuver around the real world that people call this game's movement "realistic" so I'd appreciate it if people would stop. Call it sloppy or sluggish if you must but certainly not realistic. When I'm near a variety of objects in the real world I don't spazz out or pause for several seconds trying to decide how to position myself before slowly reaching down to individually pick up the wrong item. I also don't continue to pick up and stare at said object if someone were to pop up and start shooting me. Nor do I find it impossible to jump or climb over anything if a can of corn is at my feet. If any of you find that realistic I highly suggest you awkwardly maneuver yourselves to a doctor as quickly as your two left feet can stumble cause your shit is fucked up.

Besides the sluggish inputs, the contextual control layout is asinine.
Y is mount your horse, except if you hold left trigger which changes to lead, but for a nearby NPC it turns to loot or rob.
Better not try to mount your horse while in a sprint with NPCs around or you tackle them.
Whoops, doesn't matter anyway, you forgot you had a weapon unholstered so now you aim a gun and half the town is after you.
Shits getting real tell the horse to flee, shit forgot to hit focus on the horse and now you've punched him out..

The concept of using left trigger to aim or focus depending on a weapon being out is stupid. Just put them on different buttons... It would honestly solve a ton of the games worst contextual problems. They don't even consistently use the focus function. Sometimes you can shift objects of focus with a camera flick other times its right shoulder, other times it just doesn't work... While holding objects, the devs decided to use Right trigger to zoom instead of Left which gets disabled....
Further they arbitrarily use Right trigger to Eat and Drink, like they are intentionally trying to incorrectly train player's muscle memory.
You can say these things are the player's fault but the problem is really that the layout is counter intuitive.

Otherwise, how fun is it that different objects in the world use buttons other that the primary interact button (also the primary climb or jump button...)? For some reason, Y instead of X is used to interact with certain objects... Both of which require you to hold the button down for no reason other than to make things slower.
Further, guns are picked up with a shoulder button... Which is the same as the inventory wheel which can result in some awkward shit if you want to access inventory over a dead enemy's weapon.....
Multi-select is for some reason assigned to the cover button instead of camera input, same problem.

Oh shit, the cover system.. just what the fuck went wrong here? Why is the cover system just Arthur kneeling down regardless of the object in front of him? Why, what, how is it worse than any Rockstar game before it and every game in the past two generations? Taking cover should not be an issue in a game with an advanced animation system like this. It feels like it was implemented in the last month of development. Anyway, I digress.

Inventory and weapon wheel... sigh. Want to reuse binocs as you travel the world? Takes about three button combinations. Want to quickly switch to the weapons you have equipped? Too bad its no quicker than changing your entire loadout from the horse. Yea.. changing weapon loadouts also defaults the ammo type.. why?

Assign a loadout at a gunshop... why? What's the point of the weapon wheel then if not to assign a loadout? Even so after a while it will disappear and default to unequipped regardless what you set at a store in town 40 miles from where you currently are. Because thats realistic. I know before I go to work I make sure I've checked in with the store clerk at Walmart to ensure I have my briefcase and tie with me when I leave the house every morning....

These are just a few of the ways the controls for this game are "bad" as some people put it. There's plenty of other situations I could delve into but this is quickly becoming a manuscript.

So, Mr. Critical Thinker, now that the surface level criticism is sated how bout we change things up and you detail to us how the controls are any good. You have incessantly complained that no one details how they are bad (except for when they did) but you haven't detailed a damned thing to the contrary yourself. So please, be specific. I'd love a good laugh to ring in the New Year.
 
It was rough at first but I pushed through it and I'm glad I did. It's one of my favorite games ever. The Witcher 3 was the same way for me.
 
Whew.

First, let me address your Doom input lag comparison from the last page. I did notice Doom had pretty high lag but it turned out manageable after some adjustment. The difference is lag isn't as big a deal in a game where most of the combat is close quarters using rapid-fire, splash-damage based weaponry.

On the flip side, RDR2 asks high fidelity aiming of the player despite its input lag and gives less room for error against opponents that may be far away, behind cover or obscured by various lighting effects while using single shot weaponry with low ammo counts. Combine that with "sluggish" movement due to "realistic" animations and you have an aiming reticle that struggles to keep up with the user along with a 3d character that takes extra time to get where you want them, making combat feel slow and at odds with player input at times. It doesn't help that Arthur defaults to walking even in combat and that.. "cover" system.. if you can call it that.

This aiming problem extends to interacting with objects in close proximity to one another. Often times the game doesn't seem to know how to handle them, either the wrong item is highlighted, or none, or the multi select option won't pop unless you perfectly align Arthur and the camera to the right spot meaning you spend a half a minute spinning in slow circles to pick up a can of beans right next to the gun oil you can't because you're maxed out on it. Its frustrating, its slow, its stupid and certainly not "realistic" as some people keep referring to it.

I find it insulting to my ability to swiftly maneuver around the real world that people call this game's movement "realistic" so I'd appreciate it if people would stop. Call it sloppy or sluggish if you must but certainly not realistic. When I'm near a variety of objects in the real world I don't spazz out or pause for several seconds trying to decide how to position myself before slowly reaching down to individually pick up the wrong item. I also don't continue to pick up and stare at said object if someone were to pop up and start shooting me. Nor do I find it impossible to jump or climb over anything if a can of corn is at my feet. If any of you find that realistic I highly suggest you awkwardly maneuver yourselves to a doctor as quickly as your two left feet can stumble cause your shit is fucked up.

Besides the sluggish inputs, the contextual control layout is asinine.
Y is mount your horse, except if you hold left trigger which changes to lead, but for a nearby NPC it turns to loot or rob.
Better not try to mount your horse while in a sprint with NPCs around or you tackle them.
Whoops, doesn't matter anyway, you forgot you had a weapon unholstered so now you aim a gun and half the town is after you.
Shits getting real tell the horse to flee, shit forgot to hit focus on the horse and now you've punched him out..

The concept of using left trigger to aim or focus depending on a weapon being out is stupid. Just put them on different buttons... It would honestly solve a ton of the games worst contextual problems. They don't even consistently use the focus function. Sometimes you can shift objects of focus with a camera flick other times its right shoulder, other times it just doesn't work... While holding objects, the devs decided to use Right trigger to zoom instead of Left which gets disabled....
Further they arbitrarily use Right trigger to Eat and Drink, like they are intentionally trying to incorrectly train player's muscle memory.
You can say these things are the player's fault but the problem is really that the layout is counter intuitive.

Otherwise, how fun is it that different objects in the world use buttons other that the primary interact button (also the primary climb or jump button...)? For some reason, Y instead of X is used to interact with certain objects... Both of which require you to hold the button down for no reason other than to make things slower.
Further, guns are picked up with a shoulder button... Which is the same as the inventory wheel which can result in some awkward shit if you want to access inventory over a dead enemy's weapon.....
Multi-select is for some reason assigned to the cover button instead of camera input, same problem.

Oh shit, the cover system.. just what the fuck went wrong here? Why is the cover system just Arthur kneeling down regardless of the object in front of him? Why, what, how is it worse than any Rockstar game before it and every game in the past two generations? Taking cover should not be an issue in a game with an advanced animation system like this. It feels like it was implemented in the last month of development. Anyway, I digress.

Inventory and weapon wheel... sigh. Want to reuse binocs as you travel the world? Takes about three button combinations. Want to quickly switch to the weapons you have equipped? Too bad its no quicker than changing your entire loadout from the horse. Yea.. changing weapon loadouts also defaults the ammo type.. why?

Assign a loadout at a gunshop... why? What's the point of the weapon wheel then if not to assign a loadout? Even so after a while it will disappear and default to unequipped regardless what you set at a store in town 40 miles from where you currently are. Because thats realistic. I know before I go to work I make sure I've checked in with the store clerk at Walmart to ensure I have my briefcase and tie with me when I leave the house every morning....

These are just a few of the ways the controls for this game are "bad" as some people put it. There's plenty of other situations I could delve into but this is quickly becoming a manuscript.

So, Mr. Critical Thinker, now that the surface level criticism is sated how bout we change things up and you detail to us how the controls are any good. You have incessantly complained that no one details how they are bad (except for when they did) but you haven't detailed a damned thing to the contrary yourself. So please, be specific. I'd love a good laugh to ring in the New Year.
Well this is pretty simple.

It asks high fidelity aiming of you if you remove the auto-aim systems which are specifically there to account for fumblesticks, and deadshot slows down time to allow free aiming in a non-obtuse fashion.

The criticism with input lag is not a unidirectional problem because the input lag itself is actually quite low, people are compounding different mechanics and writing them off as input lag. Halo 5 has some of the lowest input lag for a shooter this generation which rings in at about 63ms, RD2D is around 90ms, still perfectly normal and acceptable latency that few would complain about. It appears there's no winning when it comes to animations because no matter which direction you take the game people complain about it. Remember Quantum Break? I do, I remember people complaining heavily about the animations in that game because your actions snap instead of linearly progressing in a cohesive animation.

What I've learned with games is people complain no matter which direction you take your game, they find fault and there's no consistency to criticism. I'm sure you're familiar with the age old "this sequel is too safe and they didn't change enough" or "you've changed too much it's not the same game anymore". It's a lot of white noise and there's no pleasing people. So what is that actual problem with movement then? Well I can tell you it's weighted, it's based upon physics, momentum, velocity and kinetic energy. It's up to the user to decide whether or not this is a problem and if it contextually makes sense for the game. Does it? Well I think it does, we've never had a video game which so accurately depicts a humans weight and motion in the world or a games world itself.

Some may find this as a detriment to gameplay but I find no fault with it and actually believe it enhances the experience, it's another mechanic to engross you in the world and creates a sense of believability. Arthur still does exactly what I want him to do when I want him to do it but the the former needs to be accounted for when making actions. You need to account for the physics of the world when making movement decisions, this isn't a hard concept to wrap ones head around but for some it seems to be. X action commands Y result, account for it in your play or don't, that's a personal problem. You need to adjust to the game and stop this false sense of entitlement that the game needs to adjust to you, or that it needs to play like some other game.

In terms of inputs I'll make this really simple, there's dozens and dozens of actions in this game that command input from the player and there are 14 possible buttons on a controller which can account for all of these actions. Sub-systems and combinations, and varying actions had to be created to account for this. If they did not they would have to of dumbed down the gameplay dramatically to account for all of these things you can do in the game. Now I ask, with a controller how could this have been made more efficient of better served for the player without eliminating actions from the game? It can't be simplified and maintain the integrity of game actions, it can't be. The only way this could possibly be remedied would be on a PC where individual inputs could be mapped for each aspect and function of the game, on a controller this is how it had to be.

The more and more I read the more hyperbolic the situation appears to be, you're giving some good examples of control fumbling but my question to you is how could these rare occurrences (and they are rare) be remedied; again without compromising the integrity of input and interactivity with the use of a controller? Can you answer that? What I can say is this game is ambitious, it has more systems than should feasibly be handled with the use of a controller but it still works. With 60+ hours in this game the controls tripped me up only a couple times and caused some situations like you've highlighted, but does that make them bad? Absolutely not, especially with the consideration of fumbled inputs making up not even a whole of 5 minutes out of nearly 4,000. I believe the selection of things and objects in the world should have a wider birth in third person however when in first person this is not a problem, different camera settings obviously change aspects of how systems in the game can be approached.

What it comes down to is a divergence in a players ability to contend with these systems, their level of tolerance as opposed to the tolerance of another individual. Do I think they're perfect controls? No, however they've never presented a real problem for me as a player or my progression through the game, I've never sat there and blamed the game for something I botched or a slip up in control that momentarily botched a situation. These problems have presented themselves so infrequently I can only recall a couple events and ironically they led to something funny. I appreciate what you've said here, you're the first person in this topic to be concise and while I don't agree with all of your opinions on the matter I respect that you took the time to express your feelings on the matter.
 
There are several things that are annoying, so I just stopped playing. The controls are atrocious. Equally annoying is the slow as molasses walking speed through camp. Then you have to also be extremely careful because bumping into anything will send you flying off of your horse or will have you bumping into someone and a shootout will ensue. One more issue is the fact that the game just randomly unequips your assigned weapons from the weapon wheel, so that shotgun that you expected to be there? Enjoy a blank inventory slot.
 
Well this is pretty simple.

It asks high fidelity aiming of you if you remove the auto-aim systems which are specifically there to account for fumblesticks, and deadshot slows down time to allow free aiming in a non-obtuse fashion.

The criticism with input lag is not a unidirectional problem because the input lag itself is actually quite low, people are compounding different mechanics and writing them off as input lag. Halo 5 has some of the lowest input lag for a shooter this generation which rings in at about 63ms, RD2D is around 90ms, still perfectly normal and acceptable latency that few would complain about. It appears there's no winning when it comes to animations because no matter which direction you take the game people complain about it. Remember Quantum Break? I do, I remember people complaining heavily about the animations in that game because your actions snap instead of linearly progressing in a cohesive animation.

What I've learned with games is people complain no matter which direction you take your game, they find fault and there's no consistency to criticism. I'm sure you're familiar with the age old "this sequel is too safe and they didn't change enough" or "you've changed too much it's not the same game anymore". It's a lot of white noise and there's no pleasing people. So what is that actual problem with movement then? Well I can tell you it's weighted, it's based upon physics, momentum, velocity and kinetic energy. It's up to the user to decide whether or not this is a problem and if it contextually makes sense for the game. Does it? Well I think it does, we've never had a video game which so accurately depicts a humans weight and motion in the world or a games world itself.

Some may find this as a detriment to gameplay but I find no fault with it and actually believe it enhances the experience, it's another mechanic to engross you in the world and creates a sense of believability. Arthur still does exactly what I want him to do when I want him to do it but the the former needs to be accounted for when making actions. You need to account for the physics of the world when making movement decisions, this isn't a hard concept to wrap ones head around but for some it seems to be. X action commands Y result, account for it in your play or don't, that's a personal problem. You need to adjust to the game and stop this false sense of entitlement that the game needs to adjust to you, or that it needs to play like some other game.

In terms of inputs I'll make this really simple, there's dozens and dozens of actions in this game that command input from the player and there are 14 possible buttons on a controller which can account for all of these actions. Sub-systems and combinations, and varying actions had to be created to account for this. If they did not they would have to of dumbed down the gameplay dramatically to account for all of these things you can do in the game. Now I ask, with a controller how could this have been made more efficient of better served for the player without eliminating actions from the game? It can't be simplified and maintain the integrity of game actions, it can't be. The only way this could possibly be remedied would be on a PC where individual inputs could be mapped for each aspect and function of the game, on a controller this is how it had to be.

The more and more I read the more hyperbolic the situation appears to be, you're giving some good examples of control fumbling but my question to you is how could these rare occurrences (and they are rare) be remedied; again without compromising the integrity of input and interactivity with the use of a controller? Can you answer that? What I can say is this game is ambitious, it has more systems than should feasibly be handled with the use of a controller but it still works. With 60+ hours in this game the controls tripped me up only a couple times and caused some situations like you've highlighted, but does that make them bad? Absolutely not, especially with the consideration of fumbled inputs making up not even a whole of 5 minutes out of nearly 4,000. I believe the selection of things and objects in the world should have a wider birth in third person however when in first person this is not a problem, different camera settings obviously change aspects of how systems in the game can be approached.

What it comes down to is a divergence in a players ability to contend with these systems, their level of tolerance as opposed to the tolerance of another individual. Do I think they're perfect controls? No, however they've never presented a real problem for me as a player or my progression through the game, I've never sat there and blamed the game for something I botched or a slip up in control that momentarily botched a situation. These problems have presented themselves so infrequently I can only recall a couple events and ironically they led to something funny. I appreciate what you've said here, you're the first person in this topic to be concise and while I don't agree with all of your opinions on the matter I respect that you took the time to express your feelings on the matter.


giphy.gif
 
Well this is pretty simple.

It asks high fidelity aiming of you if you remove the auto-aim systems which are specifically there to account for fumblesticks, and deadshot slows down time to allow free aiming in a non-obtuse fashion.

The criticism with input lag is not a unidirectional problem because the input lag itself is actually quite low, people are compounding different mechanics and writing them off as input lag. Halo 5 has some of the lowest input lag for a shooter this generation which rings in at about 63ms, RD2D is around 90ms, still perfectly normal and acceptable latency that few would complain about. It appears there's no winning when it comes to animations because no matter which direction you take the game people complain about it. Remember Quantum Break? I do, I remember people complaining heavily about the animations in that game because your actions snap instead of linearly progressing in a cohesive animation.

What I've learned with games is people complain no matter which direction you take your game, they find fault and there's no consistency to criticism. I'm sure you're familiar with the age old "this sequel is too safe and they didn't change enough" or "you've changed too much it's not the same game anymore". It's a lot of white noise and there's no pleasing people. So what is that actual problem with movement then? Well I can tell you it's weighted, it's based upon physics, momentum, velocity and kinetic energy. It's up to the user to decide whether or not this is a problem and if it contextually makes sense for the game. Does it? Well I think it does, we've never had a video game which so accurately depicts a humans weight and motion in the world or a games world itself.

Some may find this as a detriment to gameplay but I find no fault with it and actually believe it enhances the experience, it's another mechanic to engross you in the world and creates a sense of believability. Arthur still does exactly what I want him to do when I want him to do it but the the former needs to be accounted for when making actions. You need to account for the physics of the world when making movement decisions, this isn't a hard concept to wrap ones head around but for some it seems to be. X action commands Y result, account for it in your play or don't, that's a personal problem. You need to adjust to the game and stop this false sense of entitlement that the game needs to adjust to you, or that it needs to play like some other game.

In terms of inputs I'll make this really simple, there's dozens and dozens of actions in this game that command input from the player and there are 14 possible buttons on a controller which can account for all of these actions. Sub-systems and combinations, and varying actions had to be created to account for this. If they did not they would have to of dumbed down the gameplay dramatically to account for all of these things you can do in the game. Now I ask, with a controller how could this have been made more efficient of better served for the player without eliminating actions from the game? It can't be simplified and maintain the integrity of game actions, it can't be. The only way this could possibly be remedied would be on a PC where individual inputs could be mapped for each aspect and function of the game, on a controller this is how it had to be.

The more and more I read the more hyperbolic the situation appears to be, you're giving some good examples of control fumbling but my question to you is how could these rare occurrences (and they are rare) be remedied; again without compromising the integrity of input and interactivity with the use of a controller? Can you answer that? What I can say is this game is ambitious, it has more systems than should feasibly be handled with the use of a controller but it still works. With 60+ hours in this game the controls tripped me up only a couple times and caused some situations like you've highlighted, but does that make them bad? Absolutely not, especially with the consideration of fumbled inputs making up not even a whole of 5 minutes out of nearly 4,000. I believe the selection of things and objects in the world should have a wider birth in third person however when in first person this is not a problem, different camera settings obviously change aspects of how systems in the game can be approached.

What it comes down to is a divergence in a players ability to contend with these systems, their level of tolerance as opposed to the tolerance of another individual. Do I think they're perfect controls? No, however they've never presented a real problem for me as a player or my progression through the game, I've never sat there and blamed the game for something I botched or a slip up in control that momentarily botched a situation. These problems have presented themselves so infrequently I can only recall a couple events and ironically they led to something funny. I appreciate what you've said here, you're the first person in this topic to be concise and while I don't agree with all of your opinions on the matter I respect that you took the time to express your feelings on the matter.

I don't know how I can respond to this. Entitlement? I appreciate you are willing to accept the controls of this game as they are but I have no idea why you think everyone else should if people find them disagreeable. What the hell does entitlement got to do with it? You might as well say we aren't allowed to speak displeasure about anything.

I don't believe the lag is only 30 ms more than halo 5. Although that isn't an insignificant amount for some. If this game has no input lag issues what is the reason so many have trouble aiming then? Is it a conspiracy that only people on social media are on about?

I'd like to point you to Naughty Dog's body of work for examples of meticulously detailed, weighty animations but with decent to good player feedback. Uncharted 4 is nuts, utilizes physics animations, looks amazing and feels great to control (melee is still a little wonky but its getting better each game).
Another example? A little game I like to call Max Payne 3, made by Rockstar. Great animations, amazing sense of weight, and snappy movement and aim. I don't need shoot dodging but why can't they bring everything else from that over?

I challenge the prospect that you made it through this entire game encountering the object interaction issue only once or twice. If thats true then you simply "adjusted" your play style so you wouldn't experience it by barely picking up objects. I've encountered it numerous times and I'm still in Ch 3. I'd like to see some video of someone effortlessly ransacking drawers and cupboards in small spaces.

I'm with you in a way, though. I have adjusted how I'd prefer to interact with the world just so the systems don't break down at the wrong time. I played with auto aim until core levels made combat a joke. I never try to change my weapon in combat because I dont want to risk accidentally swapping out my weapon with a dead guys. I dont bother looting until everyone is dead. I dont try to clamber around anything in combat because there might be an object there to pick up and stop me (this happened to me on a train, it sucked). I dont try to complex interactions with my horse around NPCs. I avoid cover spots where dead guys are cause it might be broken by the multi-select prompt.. etc.. That shouldn't be the way this works. The controls actively dissuade the player from doing certain actions in certain situations because we are afraid something unintentional will happen, which is a telltale sign of control issues.

As for everything else. Refer to my post history in the official topic where I suggested a much improved controller layout, in my opinion of course. It can be done I think. They just didn't properly group contextual actions and gave prime real estate to unnecessary functions.
 
I don't know how I can respond to this. Entitlement? I appreciate you are willing to accept the controls of this game as they are but I have no idea why you think everyone else should if people find them disagreeable. What the hell does entitlement got to do with it? You might as well say we aren't allowed to speak displeasure about anything.

I don't believe the lag is only 30 ms more than halo 5. Although that isn't an insignificant amount for some. If this game has no input lag issues what is the reason so many have trouble aiming then? Is it a conspiracy that only people on social media are on about?

I'd like to point you to Naughty Dog's body of work for examples of meticulously detailed, weighty animations but with decent to good player feedback. Uncharted 4 is nuts, utilizes physics animations, looks amazing and feels great to control (melee is still a little wonky but its getting better each game).
Another example? A little game I like to call Max Payne 3, made by Rockstar. Great animations, amazing sense of weight, and snappy movement and aim. I don't need shoot dodging but why can't they bring everything else from that over?

I challenge the prospect that you made it through this entire game encountering the object interaction issue only once or twice. If thats true then you simply "adjusted" your play style so you wouldn't experience it by barely picking up objects. I've encountered it numerous times and I'm still in Ch 3. I'd like to see some video of someone effortlessly ransacking drawers and cupboards in small spaces.

I'm with you in a way, though. I have adjusted how I'd prefer to interact with the world just so the systems don't break down at the wrong time. I played with auto aim until core levels made combat a joke. I never try to change my weapon in combat because I dont want to risk accidentally swapping out my weapon with a dead guys. I dont bother looting until everyone is dead. I dont try to clamber around anything in combat because there might be an object there to pick up and stop me (this happened to me on a train, it sucked). I dont try to complex interactions with my horse around NPCs. I avoid cover spots where dead guys are cause it might be broken by the multi-select prompt.. etc.. That shouldn't be the way this works. The controls actively dissuade the player from doing certain actions in certain situations because we are afraid something unintentional will happen, which is a telltale sign of control issues.

As for everything else. Refer to my post history in the official topic where I suggested a much improved controller layout, in my opinion of course. It can be done I think. They just didn't properly group contextual actions and gave prime real estate to unnecessary functions.
I'm not saying you're entitled just rather people have a sense of entitlement that games need to bend to them and not the other way around, few things in life work this way.

Well DOOM is 24ms above Halo 5 and you saw how RDR2 reacted in relation to that, near identical so it's clearly around the 90ms mark at least on Xbox One X which even for a fighting game is considered good. I'm not sure if you saw my previous post but latency can vary from platform to platform, controller to controller and it does vary television to television. There's many different things outside of the scope of the game that can cause that to happen including people suck at aiming. That video of the response time for RDR2 was on a PlayStation 4, maybe its worse on PlayStation 4 and seeing as the majority of people are playing there maybe the majority of that feedback is coming from PlayStation owners. As I've said response time is not intrinsically platform agnostic. My TV is 18ms response under its current settings, how many people have displays which are worse? How many of the people issuing complaints in response are using an Xbox One X?

Is no one also thinking about the nature of the firearms? These are revolvers, repeaters, pump shotguns and so on, if you whiff a shot and go to shoot again time is passing between your shots to cock a weapon so you're likely to whiff again especially with a moving target. People who play shooters are generally acclimatized to games with fully automatic weapons, guns with burst firing and weapons in general where very little time passes between shots. In those games accuracy is not of great importance as you're likely to hit some of your shots with a 30 round magazine which can be unloaded in seconds, this game is much different and requires calculated trigger pulls and people need to be conscious of over and under correcting their shots.

You want to bring up Uncharted 4's physics, animations and movement? Not the best example, they're very arcade oriented and drake may appear weighted but he's really not. What you're seeing here cannot be replicated in Red Dead because the movement in the game is actually based upon a real physics model, Uncharted is not.




You're free to challenge the prospect and I have no qualms with that but I'm very much a learn from your mistakes type of gamer, I'm malleable and able to easily adjust to what a game asks of me. I go with the flow of the systems and don't try to fight them. People saying they've actually stopped playing the game over the controls is just ridiculous to me, they're not the best controls ever conceived but to quit the game over them? Get out of here lol, that's just crazy. If you think a better layout can be done feel free to submit it to the proper channels, it's not going to do any good bickering about it on Gaf.
 
Last edited:
Then they shouldn't be discussing it, if you can't quantify your issues with the controls then you're just whining. Whining provides nothing to a discussion, it doesn't further it, it doesn't provide information, it doesn't showcase your actual problem, it doesn't inform.

Just to touch on this point, while we don't expect an essay on why controls are poor, we do expect some substantial content or elaboration as to why you arrived at that conclusion. On the other side, it is expected that those entering the thread are already versed with the common problems experienced by significant numbers of users, even if from a personal perspective you don't see them as issues.
 
Last edited:
Just to touch on this point, while we don't expect an essay on why controls are poor, we do expect some substantial content or elaboration as to why you arrived at that conclusion. On the other side, it is expected that those entering the thread are already versed with the common problems experienced by significant numbers of users, even if from a personal perspective you don't see them as issues.
The problem more or less was that people were not doing due diligence to explain what their problems actually were to even be in a position to come back with anything. Vagaries doesn't constitute actual criticism because there's nothing attached to it. The only person in this thread to really get into it was GlassAwful, he's the only person who reasonably explained his issues with the controls and mechanisms of the game.

I'm all for criticism but think of this thread like feedback to a developer, is there any useful post out of the 100+ that were made in this thread (barring GlassAwful's) that could be presented to a developer as useful information and criticism as to what underlying control problems might be? There's absolutely nothing and that's what I was getting to, there's no useful information with specificity as to the actual issues.
 
The problem more or less was that people were not doing due diligence to explain what their problems actually were to even be in a position to come back with anything. Vagaries doesn't constitute actual criticism because there's nothing attached to it. The only person in this thread to really get into it was GlassAwful, he's the only person who reasonably explained his issues with the controls and mechanisms of the game.

I'm all for criticism but think of this thread like feedback to a developer, is there any useful post out of the 100+ that were made in this thread (barring GlassAwful's) that could be presented to a developer as useful information and criticism as to what underlying control problems might be? There's absolutely nothing and that's what I was getting to, there's no useful information with specificity as to the actual issues.

Well rather than 100 essays on why people dislike the controls, just read glassawful's and assume that people mostly mirror his explanation. I fail to see why people are not allowed to say they didn't like the controls without an essay. It's a pretty widespread criticism. I waited all gen for this game only to sell it a week later. The controls just made it frustrating and the game was pretty boring. Though I've heard people say it gets better after 25 hours. But that's a time investment I'm not willing to give.
 
The problem more or less was that people were not doing due diligence to explain what their problems actually were to even be in a position to come back with anything. Vagaries doesn't constitute actual criticism because there's nothing attached to it. The only person in this thread to really get into it was GlassAwful, he's the only person who reasonably explained his issues with the controls and mechanisms of the game.

I'm all for criticism but think of this thread like feedback to a developer, is there any useful post out of the 100+ that were made in this thread (barring GlassAwful's) that could be presented to a developer as useful information and criticism as to what underlying control problems might be? There's absolutely nothing and that's what I was getting to, there's no useful information with specificity as to the actual issues.


Indeed, I don't want you to take that as something personal to yourself. More a guidance note for the thread in general. Sometimes people just want to blow off steam in a thread about frustration, but we hope with the planned changes, we will be able to have more long form, slow burn topics in the vein of what you mention. At the moment a post like this tends to hybridise as you've mentioned. At the moment try to not get too frustrated, big changes are coming in the next few months and I think a lot of people will be pleasantly surprised as to how it all fits together.
 
The game is beautiful. Story seems cool. But the simple fact that the controls are crap is the only reason I can come up with why I have little to no interest in playing anymore after I put in 4-6 hours. Regardless of anything, without good controls, a game is no good. At the end of the day, all you do is use a controller to manipulate what's on screen. It must be priority one to have fun, easy to use, intuitive controls. The moment they become finnicky, confusing, slightly unresponsive, or just plain frustrating, I'm over it. There is NO EXCUSE and reviewers should be ashamed for not holding R* accountable for this crap. It's not a fucking masterpiece if the most basic element of the game is complete trash. If the controls were good just like HORIZON or GOD OF WAR I wouldn't put it down.


Also I can't tell you how many times I clicked back into the map instead of out of the page menu. Am I the only one who has done that?? I figured out how to go to the map directly and stopped it from happening as much but I would still do it sometimes after a break.
 
Last edited:
I guess that I find ok the controls in RDR2. It has too much stuff to do, so it's plausible to be confused at first.

The most problem I have with gaming controls was in early PC gaming, when some games didn't use the arrows, but a lot used to. For consoles, I guess that Metal Gear Solid and Dark Souls (jumping with R3 is to have my ass sucked to the ground)
 
It's funny how I rarely play a shooter with gamepad, but had no issues with aiming in RDR2. [there is auto aim in this game people for easy headshots - just flick the stick up a little after you pressed aim and press shoot button and boom headshot after headshot after headshot...]

Sadly this mechanic makes multiplayer totally worthless. Maybe R* will make aimbot free lobbies in the near future, so we can have enjoyable online.
 
Now you're just trolling and you're not even good at it. Have fun.
It's trolling to point out that you started the game with the expressed intent of making the controls fail, went to a specific place in the game for maximum effect and then intentionally made the controls fail, or rather do exactly what you wanted them to by catapulting yourself off the side of the bridge...

Did I miss anything?

tom.png
 
Last edited:
This post, so much.

Honestly I know they want parity between third and first person which is why you are bound to inverse kinematics in both - but in first person I shouldn't be subjected to it. If I move or look in a direction I should go that direction - I should not be bound to invisible animations or ragdolls.

Its ruined RDR2 for me and its why I've rushed to complete it. I can't enjoy it because I suck at it because it doesn't adhere to my input.
 
As previously stated, you're doing exactly what everyone else is. You're saying the controls are bad but not saying how the controls are bad. I can't get specifics out of anyone, no one seems to be able to rationalize their thoughts on the controls into a detailed explanation as to what is actually wrong or how they impede gameplay.

It's mainly because we're not in the mood to have people just read what we wrote and make low quality troll responses like "hur dur git gud" or "you need to learn the controls you noob", as happened a few posts below yours. Been there, done that.

But fine, I'll indulge you. The controls are excessively clunky and tank-like. It rarely feels like I'm controlling Arthur so much as giving him guide. And quite often he simply doesn't want to listen to my guidance. You could replace Arthur's character model with an overweight rhinoceros and it would feel 100% spot on.

The control design wasn't great either. I was fine with things like loot animations, because it makes sense that I couldn't just loot everyone in the middle of a gunfight by mashing a button. Things like the radial menu were just bad. Releasing a button while highlighting an item has never been a good control scheme, in any game I've played. You should have to highlight the item you want and press a button to select it, not release the button that brings up the menu. The latter is very prone to error. Being forced to hold X to add items to the camp stash, painstakingly one at a time, and having the interaction auto quit after you add 10 items. That's just outright annoying design for no good reason. Horse management is awful as well, what with how jarringly and slowly Arthur switches between animations for certain tasks. And quite often he fails to start the new task for whatever reason and just stands there like an idiot until you give him the command again.

The list of things wrong with the game's controls is very long, but it's also very dependent on personal opinion. If you want me to give you a detailed breakdown on my issues with the controls, sorry dude, that's not going to happen. I'm not about to give you a breakdown on "how the animations are too drawn out", because a) I don't owe it to you to justify my dislike of the controls to you and b) you'd have to pay me a salary in order to get me to spend that much time justifying a dislike to a complete stranger on the internet.

I get that you're very passionate about the game and don't like hearing criticisms about it. Being upset or annoyed by criticism on something we love is very human and we all do it, even though many like to claim that they don't. But nobody owes you a detailed breakdown of how the controls hamper the gameplay experience to justify their dislike of the controls in RDR2. They're here and they're complaining about the controls, which means the controls hampered their enjoyment to some degree. That's more than enough justification. This is a gaming forum intended for casual discussion, not university. Getting worked up because people aren't giving you academic essays on why they dislike the controls is approaching the point of ridicule. Nobody is going to get into a discussion with you when you're being this over-the-top and aggressive because other people dislike something you like.
 
Last edited:
That's why I'm waiting for PC version. Most 3D games are barely playable to me on pads to begin with and RDR2 seems even more cumbersome than what's standard
 
Top Bottom