User Reviews (1 - 11 of 43)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Too difficult to be entertaining.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 2
Date: May 17, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Though the graphics are OK and story decent, this game really isn't anything new. Moreover, it will inevitably frustrate anyone who has any semblance of a life. Unless you like playing and replaying certain segments again, and again and again, you will soon find yourself very bored and more than a little angry for shelling out $50. The best thing about this game is the probably the soundtrack...

good idea but boring

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 16
Date: June 22, 2004
Author: Amazon User

It was a good idea for a game but it wasn't very challenging, it had really jacked controls, it had a really boring plot, multiplayer was boring, and the game altogether wasn't fun

Where did all the cowboys go?

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 3 / 6
Date: August 21, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Let's face it, American cowboys have gotten far less attention then their Japanese samurai counter-part, it seems like every month we get some new hack 'n slash title full of sweaty samurai. But perhaps the most reasonable explanation to all that could very well be that western games stink. The only bright spots that come to mind are Lucas Art's Outlaws and Konami's Sunset Riders. So attempting at all cost to bring the cowboy back into the picture, perennial controversial-spurring-favorites Rockstar Games have planted for us in the gaming soil Red Dead Revolver.

o discuss Red Dead Revolver without bringing up an issue of just how much explicit graphical nature this game has would be almost unheard, especially taken from the game company that gave us Manhunt and Gran Theft Auto. Much to my surprise, this game didn't really have anything that was over-the-top, it was all kept to a minimum.

You start the game as Red, the lone gunman whose pa' was killed when he was just a young 'un. Much like Conan the Barbarian revenge upon your father's grave is the primary focus for igniting the plot. Think Conan, just not as many governors and well, more sheriffs. The games story mode doesn't play anything similar to Gran Theft Auto, so cancel out any assumption that you'll be robbing people of their wagons and horses to cruise around town--instead the levels are condensed to linear and very tight surroundings. In addition to playing as Red, about 1/4 of the way to finishing the games many levels you'll take control of an additional character, who plays just the same.

Regardless of which character you play as, Red Dead Revolver is a standard action game dressed in a cowboy costume. You manuever around the playing field taking cover from enemy fire, thanks in large part to the backgrounds this isn't much of a problem. What did annoy me was how unresponsive the controls were--Rockstar took a gamble by creating a control scheme too different than everyone elses. The finished results are unpleasent; by moving around with one analog and aiming your gun with the other poses a seroius problem when faced with numerous enemies. Also the inability to quickly change the camera freely led me on many occassions to die without ever knowing who was the culprit responsible for my death. There is a brief moment when you are allowed to use more firepower then usual. This mode is called 'Dead Eye', when you have accumulated the points for "bullet time" you can press a button and slow down the camera in a Matrix fashion. Doing so allows you to chain six seperate hit points on the enemies body, after that you can send them straight to the ground. My conclusion on this is, the ability itself sure is useful but a little more creativity would've been nicer. Then at final praise, comes the dualing action the game offers which happens at scripted times of the game. It attempts to simulate a classic gun duel, and to some degree succeeds in authenticating this as a western game. You pull back the analog stick to grab your gun, push it forward to point it at the bad guys, and then giving you a short amount of time to try aiming for the sweet spots before all hell breaks loose. It's a novel concept, but the fact that you can't actually decide when to use it turns it into nothing more than a flashy gimmick.

If I were to choose a version I would go with the Xbox edition, merely based on visuals. The game is a little more polished and the resolution is a few pixels higher, but in the end both PS2 and Xbox versions of Red Dead Revolver suffer from low frame-rates and glitchy looking character models. Character models that a first grader can make out of wooden blocks and construction paper. And some levels really do heighten the amount of suspense higher than what is really offered, take the train stage for example. The music is decent, there are those same tunes that flavored Kill Bill Vol. 2 so well. Too bad the voice acting has to go and screw things up, when I say it's bad I mean its' really BAD. The writing is also poorly done, I understand this is only a game but with so many standards furthering the crossing of movie and game dynamics, cheesy voice acting just doesn't cut it. With a little more freedom to whatever you want to do, better graphics and a more understandable controls--Red Dead Revolver could've been a top choice action game. As it is given to us, it will sell and obtain some acclaim thanks to Rockstars Games' incompetent marketing moves but listen to me, it isn't what the hype makes it out to be.

Fun, nice to look at, but lacking in depth.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 23 / 33
Date: May 05, 2004
Author: Amazon User

It's been said of Stephen King before that he could publish a grocery list and it would sell a million copies. The perception of Rockstar Games is very similar these days. From GTA3 forward, the Grand Theft Auto series have been instant classics. That Rockstar is promising to "blow people away" with the upcoming San Andreas title is a scary thought considering how far they pushed the envelope with Vice City. With titles like State of Emergency, Max Payne, and Manhunt, they further solidified an already stellar reputation. Here's a company who puts out games the way gamers want them. No compromises or shortcuts, this crew clearly lives and breathes gaming and it's evident that they enjoy what they do. These days that's something pretty special, as huge production houses churn out/rush out titles that feel like they were made by people who never played them.

The point of all of this is that many people (myself included) probably went out and bought Red Dead Revolver more because it's a Rockstar game than anything else. Sure, it hits shelves at a time where HBO's Deadwood might have rekindled some national interest in Western-style media. But if I'm honest, I don't know that I buy this title on the first day if it's coming from EA, UBI, or some other company.

In that light, Red Dead Revolver is going to be a bit of a disappointment in the long term with people who buy it before checking the reviews. Make no mistake, the game is fun, the storyline compelling, the characters fun and interesting. The game play is solid, the controls easy to get down, there are no major flaws with the game. Except that it's relatively shallow. It is as linear as games can get. There's nothing to be determined or decided, save your shot/hit ratio, the damage you take during a given chapter, and what little extras you unlock. My experience playing is going to be exactly like yours, and yours like anyone else's.

Not that this is a bad thing for everyone. Red Dead plays like an arcade shooter. You play as one of a few different characters, but mostly the main protagonist, Red. With a variety of weapons (which can be upgraded throughout the game) you take down waves of opposition in a number of gritty Western movie-style settings. A ghost town, a graveyard, up in the mountains, on a train, on a ranch, etc. Beyond the normal aim, shoot and run, you also make use of something called "Deadeye Mode", which is a familiar slow-time mode where you can make a series of precise shots against one or more enemies. The third mode of play is QuickDraw, which is just as it sounds. The screen comes up, you pull down on the right stick, push up, and try to line up a number of shots before a slow-time clock runs out. I would have liked to have seen this worked into the game a bit better.

The game as a whole is fun once you put aside what could have been, accept it for what it is and enjoy the experience. It is not a title I will keep long-term, once done with the single player mode, it will get traded in towards something else. There is a multiplayer mode, but it's limited, and doesn't add (in my opinion) anything to the long term playability of the title. I felt Rockstar could have done much more with this title. There are times where you run around town between chapters with no real purpose. Let me get myself in trouble at the Saloon with a bar brawl, or end up in a Quickdraw shootout because I hit on some saucy barmaid that some other tough unwashed thug is interested in. Without some of the freedoms and depths Rockstar has worked into its other titles, you do eventually feel like you're just pulling the trigger in one chapter after another, just going through the paces until the inevitable finale with the men who killed your parents.

I highly recommend renting this game before buying it. I'm glad I played it, and I enjoyed it, but when you're done, there's nothing drawing you back in. Even Western fanatics might not find this one worth keeping long term. Definitely worth playing, but you might be better served hanging on to that purchase money for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas if you're a fan of that series. Make no mistake, this isn't about Red Dead not being considered on its own merits. I'm not holding it up against Rockstar's previous home runs, despite that being what drove me to buy it blind. This game isn't a flop, and it's not going to ruin the image of Rockstar, but my opinion is that it's one of their weaker titles. This game was handed off a couple times, starting with Capcom, ending with Rockstar, perhaps that has something to do with the lack of depth.

Positives:
Graphically impressive, everything is convincingly gritty and bleak. Everything has a spaghetti Western-style feel to it visually.
Solid storyline.
Fun arcade-style gameplay.
Hard enough to be a challenge, easy enough to be fun.
Bull/horse riding, stagecoach driving and train-related opportunities really add to the fun factor.

Negatives:
Restrictively linear, no opportunity for playing outside the lines.
Shallow. I know I keep harping on this, but depth is a hallmark of Rockstar titles.
No real replay value.
Weak online aspect doesn't really add to the game.
After about half the chapters, you start to feel like you've been there and done that.
Wants to be both an action shooter and a story-based adventure game. Doesn't really grab onto either and is sort of missing a real identity.

Rent it. Play it. Enjoy it. Then move on to something else.

High end of the 3 star rating for me.

Well thought out but...why buy a game you'll never beat?

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 2 / 8
Date: June 10, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I'll admit, Red*Dead Revolver is one of the first good western games (Besides the Wild Arms series, but thats more RPG based). Anyway, you won't be able to beat this game, you'll either get stuck where your Jack Swift fighting Perry, getting overrun by clown guys and knife throwers, in the hills fighting bad bessie who has a seemingly unending life meter, in the cemetary fighting Mr. Black with the coffin on his back that turns into a gatling gun, or where youre Diago fending off the entire SouthWestern-American Army by yourself, 2 soldiers (they die quickly), and 8 cannons that are barely under your control. Rockstar, like capcom, tends to put some unbeliveabally stupid part(s) in thier games, (Manhunt, GTA:3, Onimusha-Cap., Onimusha2-Cap.) I garuntee you that you wont beat this game unless you cheat. Other than that, the guns are really cool and vary greatly, the music is also very old-timey which goes along great. The Storyline is pretty average, but the fact that your a bounty hunter in the wild west makes it better. Don't buy this game, RENT IT...
Review:
Gameplay: 7/10
Storyline: 6/10
Fustration level: 10/10(10 meaning very fustrating)
Replay factor: 7/10
Intrest factor: 9/10

I want to like it but...

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 5
Date: May 31, 2004
Author: Amazon User

The game starts out good but as you go through the levels the bosses get next to impossible to beat. It is very annoying repeating the "Luck of the draw" Duels as others have mentioned. I thought it was only me.

This turned out to be a game you want to throw the controller at the tv and bend the disc to get back at it after agonizing through it.

If you have anger management issues, stay away from this game. If you don't have anger management issues, you soon will.

Also, the camera moves around so much in the most inopputune times (i.e.,being chased by the big boss who can kill instantaneously). Another annoyance is sometimes the bull's eye will turn red (indicating you will shoot the opponent), only to not graze him.

The mission where you protect the women has to be the lamest and most frustrating worthless level. Especially since you don't have a gun there.

I definitely recommend renting it before buying it as I did.

Almost solid game ruined by worthless levels and riddled with annoyances.

Interesting concept but constrained...

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: March 18, 2005
Author: Amazon User

The concept of a western action / RPG was something that called to me loud and clear: blast those varmits! C'mon, who doesn't like that idea?

The graphics were fantastic, the sound effects were phenomenal (with surround sound), and the performance was excellent. The weapon selections are cool and the combat system is innovative (the dead-eye and showdown features are great: cue old west music and quick-draw movie cut). Those were the game's strongest points by far.

The weak spots had to do with the storyline and gameplay. The story, by itself, was excellent and well-written but its execution was sadly lacking. The game is 100% linear with absolutely no choice in course of action or deviation. Even character choice is up to the story and not the player - you'll use different characters, both good and bad, throughout the game. Totally linear gameplay really bugs me. I finished the game just to finish it - but halfway through the game it was apparent that the gameplay was poorly implemented.

If you like a game with some good action and fun combat sequences that you'll have no problem with this game - even the story is okay to watch. But I can't abide 'watching' a story unfold with no choice but to pull the trigger. You have to fight to progress the story and there is no other option - fight and win or start over and fight and win....

Take care!

Fine for a rainy day

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: February 21, 2007
Author: Amazon User

As a long-time fan of Westerns and good shootin' games, for years I was stuck (tho' the more accurate term would be "blessed") with the PC classic OUTLAWS, from back in the day when the LucasArts logo meant consistent excellence (then, apparently, everything "Lucas" suffered karmic payback for his ham-fisted degradation of his own STAR WARS movies). OUTLAWS was not only a great Western game, it's one of the finest examples of a first person shooter action game ever produced. Epic Spaghetti Western style, rich novelistic and immersive story, exciting gameplay, raucous multiplayer with an active online community and a wealth of available mods, a musical score evoking Ennio Morricone and worth listening to all on its own (which you could do, with two full CDs of playable tracks)...magnificent.

Now, in possession of a gaming console for the first time (an Xbox 360, also magnificent), I'm getting to catch up on a lot of games I couldn't play on PC. The latest is RED DEAD REVOLVER, Rockstar Games' attempt at an epic Spaghetti Western.

First, I want to say the game is a hell of a lot of fun. Its emphasis is on action, and it does action well. Some of the levels are pure adrenalin (one that springs instantly to mind in that context has you engaging hordes of enemy soldiers and cannons as you and a handful of men try to blow up a contested bridge). The weapons are satisfying to use, there's a nice cover mechanic allowing you to snipe the bad guys from behind walls and trees and such, and the enemies have enough AI to usually not seem dim as a bush (like some virtual foes or recent world leaders).

The multiplayer is good fun, with a huge cast of gunslingers and a fair variety of locales to choose from.

The game's graphics are overall very good, especially the environments, though the character designs are largely hideous, even clownish. OUTLAWS was done in a cartoonish style, and was many generations of graphics quality in the past, yet its character designs evoke living beings far more than RED DEAD's do.

The worst thing graphically in the game is the bubbling cartoon gouts of gore that fountain out when you shoot somebody. They look silly, they're not true to the genre, and they all by themselves probably gave the game its M rating. A toggle to turn them off would have been nice.

The music's pretty good, and is largely lifted, I think, from movies. One piece I often heard and enjoyed in town is the theme from the comic Spaghetti Western THEY CALL ME TRINITY. It's still pretty paltry in comparison to the OUTLAWS score, and it's a shame that, choosing to use actual pieces from Western movies, they didn't choose or didn't have available to them better pieces (TRINITY aside). Some MAGNIFICENT SEVEN theme, some THE GOOD, THE BAD, & THE UGLY, hell even some BONANZA or WILD WILD WEST would have been a lot more effective and a lot more fun.

The voice work is mostly terrible. It's one of those games that sounds like the designers brought in their buddies and relatives to do voices, made even worse by the embarrassing attempts at dialect.

All the above still adds up to a pretty good game, in spite of the flaws. Heck, even with the weaknesses I cite above, the game could have still risen to greatness had it not been for its fatal flaws...

Lack of immersion. You play a bounty hunter named Red for most of the game, and he's carved from Clint-East wood, but aside from a pretty good visual design (which is saying a lot for this game) and a laconic line delivery, you get none of the actual dimensions of an Eastwood character, or really any character at all. Red has no personality, his motivation (vengeance) is overt but muted and lacking any sense of passion or urgency. Part of this is because there are levels where you don't play Red, playing instead one of various sidekick heroes and, in one instance, one of the villains. Playing the others is actually a good deal of fun, and some their levels are among the most enjoyable in the game (allowing for various styles of play that aren't available as Red), but in a short game with a weakly developed protagonist, these levels put the player at even more distance from identifying with Red. Were the game twice as long, and more immersive overall, these levels would have no downside.

Another factor that dilutes immersion is the clunky use of cut-scenes WITHIN action sequences. You'll be blazing away at a pack of scoundrels and suddenly get torn from the flow of battle by a cut scene showing what the developers must have thought a crucial story element within the battle...then you stumble back into the action, get your mojo back a bit, and another blasted cut scene will pop up. The worst level for this is the one in which you play English pistoleer Jack Swift, which could have been a pure adrenalin delight were it not for all the interruptions.

But the worst flaw in the game is what I'll charitably call its story.

You could say RED DEAD REVOLVER is episodic, but it's episodic the way a game of PAC MAN is episodic. The story is barely there, and the game is mostly just a series of levels putting the player in some action set piece in a tightly defined environment (no sprawling wild West to be found here, only small battlegrounds), each ending with a boss fight. As a boy, Red sees his family killed. Then, next level, he's a man and, we soon find out, a bounty hunter, and he lands in the town of Brimstone (population: 8 or so, each citizen possessing a paragraph or so of exposition that you have to click-to-interact over and over to get each line of) where he can shop and get jobs. For a good part of the game, nothing is really said about Red being on any sort of hunt for the folks who did his folks in, he just goes on various unrelated bounty hunts, and there seems to not actually be a story. After a while, though, he gets to start going after outlaws directly connected to his (subtle) mission of vengeance, and we see that there's a narrative of sorts here, but it's a story the way a single black spit is a full spittoon. In other words, it ain't. The story has no tension, Red seems pretty casual about his burning mission of vengeance, and the game plays like an action-filled arcade game. By the time you take down the big boss, you're satisfied not because you've gotten Red's revenge, or because the game really made you hate the villain, but because he was pretty tough to beat and took a few tries.

Still, as I said initially, for what it is, RED DEAD REVOLVER is a lot of fun. Had I paid full price for it, I'd have felt mightily ripped off, but since it's on old Xbox game you can get it for peanuts (I got it for $8), and it's certainly worth buying for cheap or a rental. So if you have an Xbox or Xbox 360 and want a break from WW II, outer space, Tolkien rip-offs, or playing urban street trash, you might want to give it a shot.

Not as good as expected

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: May 06, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I had been waiting for a game in the western genre, and finally along came Red Dead Revolver. I even put off buying Dead Man's Hand which came out a month or so earlier because DMH was said to be a more of an arcade shooter. This game lacks a lot. My biggest gripe is the number of shots your enemy can endure. 2 or 3 might be understandable, but 15 to 20 shots, and still standing. We're talking shots to the head and nobody faling. But this seems to be the case in video games. Even Medal of Honor which is supposed to be the most realistic you have to shoot a few times to knock em down. The areas are very limited. You're pretty confined to certain small areas. You can't open doors and there are too many cut scenes and not enough hands on action. If you are looking for a realistic portrayel of the old west, this is not it, it's more like the Wild Wild West, with villians like midget clowns and the like.
That all said, there are some pros. It does seem moderately fun, despite the drawbacks. Like the above reviewer said, I don't think I'll want to play it twice, as I'll just be doing the same exact thing with little or no variance.
Some of the elements are fun, like riding the train and horses. The quick draw scenes I could have done without, as they take no skill to perform.
Well, I guess until the upcoming western game "Boomtown" LogicalVice debuts, this is the only cowboy shooter worth playing. I would recommend renting before buying.
Some fun, just not enough.

Its just OK

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: October 29, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I will say i'm dissapointed with this game after playing for about 2 hours. This was enough time for me to realize this game is OK but nothing has impressed me that much. One of the major downers is that most objects aren't affected by gunfire. In this game if you shoot at windows they don't break! What fun is it to shoot a gun if it doesn't affect any of the surroundings?? I actually enjoyed atari's somewhat flawed "dead man's hand" western shooter more than red dead. Sure Dead Man's Hand has some odd glitches...but when you shoot that gun something is going to be destroyed and thats half the fun!! Red Dead is only worth a rental.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next 

Actions