Search
Search results
Montessori Nature
Games and Education
8.0
Rate It
App
This app offers a very realistic environment in which kids have to plant, nurture, harvest, and sell...
F-Sim Space Shuttle
Games and Education
App
Have you ever wondered what it’s like to land the Space Shuttle? Now you can find out. F-Sim Space...
VR Hollywood Blvd by Car Virtual Reality 360
Entertainment and Travel
App
Nice VR experience and beautiful memories if you already were there or if not, gain experience as if...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
I’m a big fan of Tom Cruise. He is a real old-fashioned film star, generous with his fans on the red carpet and with real star power at the box office. And I can happily sit down in front of just about any one of his DVD’s time and time again and still enjoy it. Unlike many critics, I even enjoyed his last outing as Jack Reacher.
Unfortunately, and it pains me to say this but, his latest outing – “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back” – is a bit dull.
Lee Child’s Reacher has many years before turned his back on his military past and wanders the country as a drifter righting wrongs outside of the law. In this film, his military past again makes a major (“No, ex-Major”) intrusion into his life. Potential love interest Major Susan Turner (Colbie Smulders, from the “Avengers” world) is arrested on trumped-up espionage charges and Cruise sets out to clear her name. Along the way he accidentally (and rather too conveniently for the plot) discovers that a paternity suit has been filed against him and Reacher confronts the rebellious and light-fingered teenager Samantha (Danika Yarosh, aged 18 playing 15).
Unfortunately the big-cheeses involved in the international arms skulduggery are determined to tie up each and every loose end in their intrigue, and that includes Reacher, Turner and young Samantha by association. Needless to say, the villains – led by a one-man killing machine (Patrick Heusinger) – haven’t counted on Reacher’s ‘particular set of skills’.
My problem with the film (after an entertaining opening) is that the screenplay lumbers from standard thriller set-piece to standard thriller set-piece in a highly predictable way. It’s as if the scripts from 20 different films have been stuck in a blender. Shadowy arms dealing shenanigans: check; Cute teenager in peril: check; Gun fight on a dockside: check; Rooftop chase: check.
Are all the individual set-pieces decently done? Yes, sure. But the combination of these bits of action tapas really don’t add up to a satisfying meal. The story arc is almost non-existent as there is no suspense in the ‘investigation’: the plot is all pretty well laid out for you.
Where there is some fun to be had is in the play-off between the born-leader Reacher and the born-leader Turner, both trying to be top-dog in the decision making. The romantic connection between the leads seems almost plausible despite their 20 (TWENTY!) year age difference: this is more down to how incredibly good Cruise still looks at age 54 (damn him!). Turner makes a good female role-model right up to the point where there is a confrontation in a hotel room and Turner backs down: despite Cruise being the “hero” it would have been nice for female equality for this face-off to have gone the other way.
The director is Edward Zwick, who helmed Cruise’s more interesting movie “The Last Samurai”.
The trailer started off well and then progressed into general mediocrity. Unfortunately – for me at least – the film lived up to the trailer. Watchable, but not memorable.
Unfortunately, and it pains me to say this but, his latest outing – “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back” – is a bit dull.
Lee Child’s Reacher has many years before turned his back on his military past and wanders the country as a drifter righting wrongs outside of the law. In this film, his military past again makes a major (“No, ex-Major”) intrusion into his life. Potential love interest Major Susan Turner (Colbie Smulders, from the “Avengers” world) is arrested on trumped-up espionage charges and Cruise sets out to clear her name. Along the way he accidentally (and rather too conveniently for the plot) discovers that a paternity suit has been filed against him and Reacher confronts the rebellious and light-fingered teenager Samantha (Danika Yarosh, aged 18 playing 15).
Unfortunately the big-cheeses involved in the international arms skulduggery are determined to tie up each and every loose end in their intrigue, and that includes Reacher, Turner and young Samantha by association. Needless to say, the villains – led by a one-man killing machine (Patrick Heusinger) – haven’t counted on Reacher’s ‘particular set of skills’.
My problem with the film (after an entertaining opening) is that the screenplay lumbers from standard thriller set-piece to standard thriller set-piece in a highly predictable way. It’s as if the scripts from 20 different films have been stuck in a blender. Shadowy arms dealing shenanigans: check; Cute teenager in peril: check; Gun fight on a dockside: check; Rooftop chase: check.
Are all the individual set-pieces decently done? Yes, sure. But the combination of these bits of action tapas really don’t add up to a satisfying meal. The story arc is almost non-existent as there is no suspense in the ‘investigation’: the plot is all pretty well laid out for you.
Where there is some fun to be had is in the play-off between the born-leader Reacher and the born-leader Turner, both trying to be top-dog in the decision making. The romantic connection between the leads seems almost plausible despite their 20 (TWENTY!) year age difference: this is more down to how incredibly good Cruise still looks at age 54 (damn him!). Turner makes a good female role-model right up to the point where there is a confrontation in a hotel room and Turner backs down: despite Cruise being the “hero” it would have been nice for female equality for this face-off to have gone the other way.
The director is Edward Zwick, who helmed Cruise’s more interesting movie “The Last Samurai”.
The trailer started off well and then progressed into general mediocrity. Unfortunately – for me at least – the film lived up to the trailer. Watchable, but not memorable.
Kyera (8 KP) rated Daughter Of The Burning City in Books
Jan 31, 2018
There were more twists and turns in the story than the labyrinthine paths through the Gomorrah Festival. I was impressed that this was Amanda Foody's debut novel, but that does not mean it was without its faults. Overall, I felt that the Festival itself as a setting was the most intriguing part of the story.
I didn't feel that the magic system was as developed as it should have been, or perhaps it was too developed. It wasn't always clear what people could have as abilities. The added element of being able to have multiple abilities that alter how each other works or each ability manifesting itself completely differently in people made following how the magic worked very difficult. There were also rules or examples that you read that seem to contradict one another. You just had to accept that it wasn't entirely clear and anything could happen.
The setting was certainly the most intriguing part of this story. The Gomorrah Festival, also known as the City of Burning Desires, is a traveling Carnival full of thieves, strumpets, charlatans, performers and fortune tellers. The gates of the city have ever burning flames and the cloying scent of smoke, perfume, and sugar cloak the tents. Amanda Foody's writing brilliantly brings the city to life, although we sadly see very little of the actual Festival. I loved the performance elements of the Night Circus and Caraval, so I was a little disappointed that the locale didn't play a bigger role.
I never really connected with the main character, Sorrina, our thread through the entire story. She is a magic worker who can create illusions with her mind, despite having no eyes to see for herself. Since coming to the Festival, she has begun creating illusions to become her family. They perform with her and despite not being truly real, are quite beloved by Sorrina. Unfortunately, one night a member of her illusion family is killed - but how can illusions be killed?
Sorrina vows to discover who hurt her family and protect the remaining members no matter what. Soon she meets an Up-Mountainer named Luca who is definitely the best character in the book. At first, he seems like the stereotypical sassy, "bad boy" love interest, but he is actually incredibly intelligent. I really enjoyed the dimension he brought to the story and how he balanced out Sorrina's more romantic, unfocused, indecisive character.
Despite the fact that Sorrina's family are illusions, they do feel like real people. Some are more developed than others. You feel for two of her sisters, one who bears the weight of the family on her shoulders and the other who just wants to be a real person. Those two will tug at your heartstrings and make you forget that they are illusions. I didn't feel like I got to know the other family members as well and that was a shame. They were such unique creations that they deserved that connection and time.
The story was fantastical, yet I enjoyed the mystery element as you puzzled through the clues with the characters to discover who killed an illusion, and how. The plot was a little convoluted so at times my attention waned, but overall I enjoyed the book. There were some pacing issues that could have been resolved by some additional editing/culling of scenes. Sometimes when I sat down I was completely engrossed in the plot, but there were also others where I picked the book up and put it down moments later.
I felt that the story was tied up satisfactorily and it didn't leave me with too many questions, but I won't lie and say I wouldn't enjoy another book set in that world with different characters. The level of development is still impressive for a debut novel and I cannot wait to see more from Amanda Foody.
I would definitely recommend this to young adult/teen readers who enjoy fantasy novels with really intriguing worlds, but don't expect too much of the carnival element to be present in the plot.
I didn't feel that the magic system was as developed as it should have been, or perhaps it was too developed. It wasn't always clear what people could have as abilities. The added element of being able to have multiple abilities that alter how each other works or each ability manifesting itself completely differently in people made following how the magic worked very difficult. There were also rules or examples that you read that seem to contradict one another. You just had to accept that it wasn't entirely clear and anything could happen.
The setting was certainly the most intriguing part of this story. The Gomorrah Festival, also known as the City of Burning Desires, is a traveling Carnival full of thieves, strumpets, charlatans, performers and fortune tellers. The gates of the city have ever burning flames and the cloying scent of smoke, perfume, and sugar cloak the tents. Amanda Foody's writing brilliantly brings the city to life, although we sadly see very little of the actual Festival. I loved the performance elements of the Night Circus and Caraval, so I was a little disappointed that the locale didn't play a bigger role.
I never really connected with the main character, Sorrina, our thread through the entire story. She is a magic worker who can create illusions with her mind, despite having no eyes to see for herself. Since coming to the Festival, she has begun creating illusions to become her family. They perform with her and despite not being truly real, are quite beloved by Sorrina. Unfortunately, one night a member of her illusion family is killed - but how can illusions be killed?
Sorrina vows to discover who hurt her family and protect the remaining members no matter what. Soon she meets an Up-Mountainer named Luca who is definitely the best character in the book. At first, he seems like the stereotypical sassy, "bad boy" love interest, but he is actually incredibly intelligent. I really enjoyed the dimension he brought to the story and how he balanced out Sorrina's more romantic, unfocused, indecisive character.
Despite the fact that Sorrina's family are illusions, they do feel like real people. Some are more developed than others. You feel for two of her sisters, one who bears the weight of the family on her shoulders and the other who just wants to be a real person. Those two will tug at your heartstrings and make you forget that they are illusions. I didn't feel like I got to know the other family members as well and that was a shame. They were such unique creations that they deserved that connection and time.
The story was fantastical, yet I enjoyed the mystery element as you puzzled through the clues with the characters to discover who killed an illusion, and how. The plot was a little convoluted so at times my attention waned, but overall I enjoyed the book. There were some pacing issues that could have been resolved by some additional editing/culling of scenes. Sometimes when I sat down I was completely engrossed in the plot, but there were also others where I picked the book up and put it down moments later.
I felt that the story was tied up satisfactorily and it didn't leave me with too many questions, but I won't lie and say I wouldn't enjoy another book set in that world with different characters. The level of development is still impressive for a debut novel and I cannot wait to see more from Amanda Foody.
I would definitely recommend this to young adult/teen readers who enjoy fantasy novels with really intriguing worlds, but don't expect too much of the carnival element to be present in the plot.
Great writing (2 more)
Never slows down
Great characters
Of the few children's horror books out there, Neil Gaiman's 2002 short novel Coraline, is one of the must-read for that age group. When a young girl named Coraline, and her family move into a new house (one which shares its basement and attic with other tenets), she finds a locked door that leads to nowhere, but soon after the door opens to a house that mirrors her own, yet the people there are a little bit "different. "
The people here look like the people from the world on the other side of the door, but these people have big buttons for eyes, and some are younger than their counterparts, but the most odd are her "other" parents, who, in her world, don't spend very much time with Coraline, and these two buttoned-eyed parents pay so much attention to her that they want her to stay with them forever just so they can make her happy. Coraline even meets a talking black cat, but the cat tells her it was smart to bring protection to this world (a stone with a hole in it that was given to her in the other world by two older lady tenets); this makes Coraline wonder why she would need protection in such a great place like this.
But for Coraline to stay in this world, her other mother and father tell her there is only one little thing she has to do to make that happen: " 'If you want to stay,' said her other father, 'there's only one little thing we'll have to do, so you can stay here for ever and always. '
They went to into the kitchen. On a china plate on the kitchen table was a spool of black cotton, and a long silver needle, and, beside them, two large black buttons. "
Coraline must allow her other parents to sew buttons over her eyes, but she adamantly refuses to allow them; her other parents don't argue with her, but rather bid her farewell, stating they'll see her again soon.
When Coraline returns to her normal world, she comes to realize that her parents are missing. Coraline now knows that the other parents will stop at nothing, including kidnapping her real parents, to get her to join them. Coraline goes back to the other world, demanding that the other parents give her real ones back. It's always that easy, right?
Wrong. Since the other parents are not willing to let Coraline go so easily, the other mother decides to play a game with Coraline, which is if she can find the souls of the other children this other mother has taken, she'll not only get to go home, but also get to take her real parents with her.
Fortunately, Coraline wasn't working alone in this game - - - remember the black cat? - - - she even has to face the 'other' counterparts of the tenets that live in the building. Since the movie of Coraline is still popular, most readers can guess what happens, but maybe not exactly how it happens.
Some readers may realize that the movie is quite different from the book. Most books are different from their film counterparts, but then you have books such as Stephen King's 'The Shining,' which are practically complete opposites of the movie. I don't believe that those, like myself, who watched the movie 'Coraline,' before reading the book will be disappointed by it, although there are quite a few differences throughout.
I have to end my review here because to tell you any more of the story would give away some of what makes Coraline such a great book. Which is not surprising coming from Neil Gaiman whose writing is always clear and concise, never slowing scenes down. Gaiman's children-age books are always flawless in both idea and writing.
Although this story is for ages 8 - 12, as an adult, I thoroughly enjoyed it! I highly recommend this book as a great way to introduce children to the horror genre, and to older people that like a good creepy story to read.
The people here look like the people from the world on the other side of the door, but these people have big buttons for eyes, and some are younger than their counterparts, but the most odd are her "other" parents, who, in her world, don't spend very much time with Coraline, and these two buttoned-eyed parents pay so much attention to her that they want her to stay with them forever just so they can make her happy. Coraline even meets a talking black cat, but the cat tells her it was smart to bring protection to this world (a stone with a hole in it that was given to her in the other world by two older lady tenets); this makes Coraline wonder why she would need protection in such a great place like this.
But for Coraline to stay in this world, her other mother and father tell her there is only one little thing she has to do to make that happen: " 'If you want to stay,' said her other father, 'there's only one little thing we'll have to do, so you can stay here for ever and always. '
They went to into the kitchen. On a china plate on the kitchen table was a spool of black cotton, and a long silver needle, and, beside them, two large black buttons. "
Coraline must allow her other parents to sew buttons over her eyes, but she adamantly refuses to allow them; her other parents don't argue with her, but rather bid her farewell, stating they'll see her again soon.
When Coraline returns to her normal world, she comes to realize that her parents are missing. Coraline now knows that the other parents will stop at nothing, including kidnapping her real parents, to get her to join them. Coraline goes back to the other world, demanding that the other parents give her real ones back. It's always that easy, right?
Wrong. Since the other parents are not willing to let Coraline go so easily, the other mother decides to play a game with Coraline, which is if she can find the souls of the other children this other mother has taken, she'll not only get to go home, but also get to take her real parents with her.
Fortunately, Coraline wasn't working alone in this game - - - remember the black cat? - - - she even has to face the 'other' counterparts of the tenets that live in the building. Since the movie of Coraline is still popular, most readers can guess what happens, but maybe not exactly how it happens.
Some readers may realize that the movie is quite different from the book. Most books are different from their film counterparts, but then you have books such as Stephen King's 'The Shining,' which are practically complete opposites of the movie. I don't believe that those, like myself, who watched the movie 'Coraline,' before reading the book will be disappointed by it, although there are quite a few differences throughout.
I have to end my review here because to tell you any more of the story would give away some of what makes Coraline such a great book. Which is not surprising coming from Neil Gaiman whose writing is always clear and concise, never slowing scenes down. Gaiman's children-age books are always flawless in both idea and writing.
Although this story is for ages 8 - 12, as an adult, I thoroughly enjoyed it! I highly recommend this book as a great way to introduce children to the horror genre, and to older people that like a good creepy story to read.
Nail Star - Nails Salon Manicure and Decorating Game for Girls
Social Networking and Lifestyle
1.0
Rate It
App
Design the most amazing nails ever and compete on leaderboards! See if you can make it to the top...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Free Guy (2021) in Movies
Aug 13, 2021
Some comedy action feels like a no-brainer really, and I do love a bit of Ryan Reynolds.
Guy is loving life in Free City, his goldfish, the amazing view from his apartment, getting to work with his best pal at the bank, it's all great. But when he meets the girl of his dreams, he starts to realise that there might be more to his world than he ever realised.
Well... this is exactly my sort of film, and yet, I'm really not feeling the excitement for it. The audience experience had me chuckling though, to my left... yawning, to my right... squeals of glee.
I think my main issue is that it felt very much like something I'd seen before. Almost instantly my brain said LEGO Movie and Truman Show, with some Ready Player One thrown in for good measure. Looking at the writers' back catalogue left no real surprises. Zak Penn wrote the screenplay for Ready Player One (one of his first credits on IMDb is for the story of Last Action Hero, and that feels like it gave some contributions too), and I had a mild recognition of bits from Matt Lieberman's Scoob and Playing With Fire.
Guy's initial evolution in the film is quite nice to watch with his days changing slightly each time. Everything then ramps up quite quickly once he steps out of his NPC programming properly for the first time... and this is where I thought I would be on board with it.
Once the video game elements kicked in I did have a bit of Easter egg spotting euphoria. Watching the background players jumping randomly, the generic but obviously named shops and locations. Much like Ready Player One, there were lots of things to discover in scenes outside of the storyline. But the style kept jumping between this "real life" video game and the video game that didn't know it was a video game. Admittedly there's a very fine line between those two realities. I did like that it replicates the way immersive play can feel when you forget that you are just playing a game, but even this, at times, felt a little forced.
As much as I love Ryan Reynolds, this wasn't a very challenging or original role for him. And just like the film overall, this felt like a mish-mash of his role that we've already seen on the big screen.
Comer's performance was great, and her online and real life personas had the subtle differences I'd expect to see... this does however, mildly highlight a slightly wider issue, and that's the stereotyping of gamers.
Computer nerds and gamers living in their mum's basements and being a little odd. That's a staple in media. Matty Cardarople's gamer, Kevin Smith's Warlock, Chris Reed's Todd Zarnecki. We love them, or we love to hate them, but it's getting a little tired.
One thing I couldn't fault the film for was the look of everything. Vibrant colours, a bit of fun with the costumes, and the effects throughout the action. It worked as a whole package, and for the most part, it balanced out the danger of the comedy getting a little too ridiculous.
I didn't overly notice an excess of IP/brand plugs, but there was one little cluster in Free Guy. One of the few things I truly enjoyed was where the Disney property merged into a fight scene towards the end. It amused me because I was expecting something like it to happen. It may have gone a smidge over the line of enjoyable, but I'm going to give it a pass. (And I do have a point that would have made this scene better, and I'm honestly disappointed that they didn't think to do it.)
I had been hoping that Free Guy would be a 4 star film, but I don't think I could give it more than a 3. It's watchable, but I don't feel any great need to own it or hunt it down before it's streaming. That being said, I am going to see it again. In the same vein as Ready Player One and 1917, I've watched it for the story, now I'm going back for the background detail.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/08/free-guy-movie-review.html
Guy is loving life in Free City, his goldfish, the amazing view from his apartment, getting to work with his best pal at the bank, it's all great. But when he meets the girl of his dreams, he starts to realise that there might be more to his world than he ever realised.
Well... this is exactly my sort of film, and yet, I'm really not feeling the excitement for it. The audience experience had me chuckling though, to my left... yawning, to my right... squeals of glee.
I think my main issue is that it felt very much like something I'd seen before. Almost instantly my brain said LEGO Movie and Truman Show, with some Ready Player One thrown in for good measure. Looking at the writers' back catalogue left no real surprises. Zak Penn wrote the screenplay for Ready Player One (one of his first credits on IMDb is for the story of Last Action Hero, and that feels like it gave some contributions too), and I had a mild recognition of bits from Matt Lieberman's Scoob and Playing With Fire.
Guy's initial evolution in the film is quite nice to watch with his days changing slightly each time. Everything then ramps up quite quickly once he steps out of his NPC programming properly for the first time... and this is where I thought I would be on board with it.
Once the video game elements kicked in I did have a bit of Easter egg spotting euphoria. Watching the background players jumping randomly, the generic but obviously named shops and locations. Much like Ready Player One, there were lots of things to discover in scenes outside of the storyline. But the style kept jumping between this "real life" video game and the video game that didn't know it was a video game. Admittedly there's a very fine line between those two realities. I did like that it replicates the way immersive play can feel when you forget that you are just playing a game, but even this, at times, felt a little forced.
As much as I love Ryan Reynolds, this wasn't a very challenging or original role for him. And just like the film overall, this felt like a mish-mash of his role that we've already seen on the big screen.
Comer's performance was great, and her online and real life personas had the subtle differences I'd expect to see... this does however, mildly highlight a slightly wider issue, and that's the stereotyping of gamers.
Computer nerds and gamers living in their mum's basements and being a little odd. That's a staple in media. Matty Cardarople's gamer, Kevin Smith's Warlock, Chris Reed's Todd Zarnecki. We love them, or we love to hate them, but it's getting a little tired.
One thing I couldn't fault the film for was the look of everything. Vibrant colours, a bit of fun with the costumes, and the effects throughout the action. It worked as a whole package, and for the most part, it balanced out the danger of the comedy getting a little too ridiculous.
I didn't overly notice an excess of IP/brand plugs, but there was one little cluster in Free Guy. One of the few things I truly enjoyed was where the Disney property merged into a fight scene towards the end. It amused me because I was expecting something like it to happen. It may have gone a smidge over the line of enjoyable, but I'm going to give it a pass. (And I do have a point that would have made this scene better, and I'm honestly disappointed that they didn't think to do it.)
I had been hoping that Free Guy would be a 4 star film, but I don't think I could give it more than a 3. It's watchable, but I don't feel any great need to own it or hunt it down before it's streaming. That being said, I am going to see it again. In the same vein as Ready Player One and 1917, I've watched it for the story, now I'm going back for the background detail.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/08/free-guy-movie-review.html
Fred (860 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Red Dead Redemption 2 in Video Games
Dec 4, 2018
Beautiful humongous world (5 more)
Tons to do. Hours & hours of stuff.
Great acting and characters
Lots of Easter eggs
Wonderful music
Great story
That feckin robin (2 more)
Big world means lots of riding
New Austin is kind of dead
Rockstar let my mama's baby grow up to be a cowboy
Yes, I'm a little late to this party, but I wanted to play until I completed the game & today, I finally did. I've also played a few hours of the online beta, but I'll get to that later.
Let's start with what this game is about. It's an open world game, set in the old west. It's set before the events of Red Dead Redemption. In that game, you played as John Marston. In that game, John was a man trying to change his life. He was a criminal, a thief, a murderer, but he's gone straight In this game, you play as Arthur Morgan. A criminal in the same gang with John. He is a bad guy, no doubt. But throughout the game, he has many opportunities to do good. Of course, you can play him that way, or you can play him as a heartless bastard. This will effect some of the story, the dialogue & the ending of the game. I played the game as if Arthur was a good guy inside & the ending I got was very satisfying, very emotional.
For most of the story, you're on the run with your gang, setting up different camps throughout the map, evading rival gangs & the law. This is a great way to get to know the world, however, you're free to explore most of the map freely. It is enormous & gorgeous. Some of the best scenery I've seen in a game. Sometimes you will really feel you're living in a real world. And that's the greatest thing about this game. The immersion. You really feel like you're living the life of your character. And Rockstar did that by making you take care of your character. You shave, bathe, eat & take care of your horse. Yes, you name your horse, feed it, brush it, pet it. You get very attached to it, as it is your main way of getting around. If your horse dies, it's gone. And believe me, it hurts to lose your horse.
Rockstar fills the game with so many missions, side activities, random encounters & hidden Easter eggs that it will take you weeks to do them all. I've been playing since day one, an average of 6 to 7 hours a day, & today, 5 & a half weeks later, I finally got 100% in the game. To be honest, when I first started, I spent lots of time just riding around, finding activities & hidden goodies & enjoying the scenery. Like most of their games, there's a supernatural element to some things as well as supernatural encounters. Steampunk, monsters, etc... a little bit of everything. Some encounters are funny, some terrifying, all of them cool.
I think what makes this game different & better than it's predecessor is the characters themselves. I'm not talking about the main characters alone, I'm talking about the people who litter the world. In RDR, some of the characters were silly, off-the-wall & unnatural. They were cartoonish. In RDR2, the people are real. Some may be weird and a bit crazy, but they never feel fake. They never feel like a character. Because of this, the world lives. They breathe life into it with every interaction. From the
Civil War veterans to the blind beggar, to the racist jackass standing on the corner in Saint Denis handing out pro-white pamphlets. They really make you feel like you're there. Again, immersion.
Some of the things you can do besides the missions are rob people, trains, coaches, banks. Another thing is hunting. Hunting can be a great way to make money. During the game, there are many challenges that you can undertake as well. There's are 9 categories with 10 challenges to each that can be done at your leisure. I left a lot of these to do last. I honestly didn't think I'd be able to do some of them. They just seemed ridiculous. But funny enough, I did about 50 of the last challenges within 2 days. And when I finished, I expected my 100% trophy to pop up. But it didn't. I was at 99%. What the? Looking at my completion list, there was something under the collections section that said unknown collection. Searching the internet, I found that most sites didn't have it listed. But I finally found a site that did. The last collection was the hunting challenge. And this brings us to that feckin robin.
Okay, let me explain. The hunting challenge you are given is to kill 5 different lists of animals. Each animal must be a perfect carcass. Which means, they have to be of perfect quality before you kill them & you must not damage them while killing them. Well, all of these animals are small animals. And most of them are small birds. It was fairly easy to get most of these animals. But there was one that was a huge pain in the ass. Can you guess what it was? Yes, a robin. A small, fast bird that is so rare, there are pages & videos galore on finding one. Most of which as total bollocks. How do I know? I spent over 7 hours trying to find one. Going to all these spots, seeing 3 of them total, shooting one & ruining it's carcass, & missing the other 2 based on their disappearance through the trees. I was really going to give up. So close, but so far. Luckily, using some people's hints & coming up with my own, I finally figured out how to get him. And it then took me 15 minutes. Yes, 15 minutes with 7 hours of wasted time. I am putting this as a negative, because it was really ridiculous to try to hunt this thing. So aggrivating. I understand if they want to make something rare, but it's just not nice. I felt like Rockstar was pulling a joke on it's players.
But anyway, this still doesn't bring down my score of the game. It's one of the greatest games I've ever played. But Rockstar has many perfect 10 games under it's belt in my opinion, including RDR. Is this game better. Yes, I think so. But it's oh so close.
A quick word on RDR online. It's only in beta, so I can't give a true review yet. However, I'm finding it so much fun doing missions with other people. Of course, there are jackasses going around shooting people for no reason. It gives no benefit to do so. Not all of the features are in there yet, but I will be playing when it goes to full online & will giv an update.
Let's start with what this game is about. It's an open world game, set in the old west. It's set before the events of Red Dead Redemption. In that game, you played as John Marston. In that game, John was a man trying to change his life. He was a criminal, a thief, a murderer, but he's gone straight In this game, you play as Arthur Morgan. A criminal in the same gang with John. He is a bad guy, no doubt. But throughout the game, he has many opportunities to do good. Of course, you can play him that way, or you can play him as a heartless bastard. This will effect some of the story, the dialogue & the ending of the game. I played the game as if Arthur was a good guy inside & the ending I got was very satisfying, very emotional.
For most of the story, you're on the run with your gang, setting up different camps throughout the map, evading rival gangs & the law. This is a great way to get to know the world, however, you're free to explore most of the map freely. It is enormous & gorgeous. Some of the best scenery I've seen in a game. Sometimes you will really feel you're living in a real world. And that's the greatest thing about this game. The immersion. You really feel like you're living the life of your character. And Rockstar did that by making you take care of your character. You shave, bathe, eat & take care of your horse. Yes, you name your horse, feed it, brush it, pet it. You get very attached to it, as it is your main way of getting around. If your horse dies, it's gone. And believe me, it hurts to lose your horse.
Rockstar fills the game with so many missions, side activities, random encounters & hidden Easter eggs that it will take you weeks to do them all. I've been playing since day one, an average of 6 to 7 hours a day, & today, 5 & a half weeks later, I finally got 100% in the game. To be honest, when I first started, I spent lots of time just riding around, finding activities & hidden goodies & enjoying the scenery. Like most of their games, there's a supernatural element to some things as well as supernatural encounters. Steampunk, monsters, etc... a little bit of everything. Some encounters are funny, some terrifying, all of them cool.
I think what makes this game different & better than it's predecessor is the characters themselves. I'm not talking about the main characters alone, I'm talking about the people who litter the world. In RDR, some of the characters were silly, off-the-wall & unnatural. They were cartoonish. In RDR2, the people are real. Some may be weird and a bit crazy, but they never feel fake. They never feel like a character. Because of this, the world lives. They breathe life into it with every interaction. From the
Civil War veterans to the blind beggar, to the racist jackass standing on the corner in Saint Denis handing out pro-white pamphlets. They really make you feel like you're there. Again, immersion.
Some of the things you can do besides the missions are rob people, trains, coaches, banks. Another thing is hunting. Hunting can be a great way to make money. During the game, there are many challenges that you can undertake as well. There's are 9 categories with 10 challenges to each that can be done at your leisure. I left a lot of these to do last. I honestly didn't think I'd be able to do some of them. They just seemed ridiculous. But funny enough, I did about 50 of the last challenges within 2 days. And when I finished, I expected my 100% trophy to pop up. But it didn't. I was at 99%. What the? Looking at my completion list, there was something under the collections section that said unknown collection. Searching the internet, I found that most sites didn't have it listed. But I finally found a site that did. The last collection was the hunting challenge. And this brings us to that feckin robin.
Okay, let me explain. The hunting challenge you are given is to kill 5 different lists of animals. Each animal must be a perfect carcass. Which means, they have to be of perfect quality before you kill them & you must not damage them while killing them. Well, all of these animals are small animals. And most of them are small birds. It was fairly easy to get most of these animals. But there was one that was a huge pain in the ass. Can you guess what it was? Yes, a robin. A small, fast bird that is so rare, there are pages & videos galore on finding one. Most of which as total bollocks. How do I know? I spent over 7 hours trying to find one. Going to all these spots, seeing 3 of them total, shooting one & ruining it's carcass, & missing the other 2 based on their disappearance through the trees. I was really going to give up. So close, but so far. Luckily, using some people's hints & coming up with my own, I finally figured out how to get him. And it then took me 15 minutes. Yes, 15 minutes with 7 hours of wasted time. I am putting this as a negative, because it was really ridiculous to try to hunt this thing. So aggrivating. I understand if they want to make something rare, but it's just not nice. I felt like Rockstar was pulling a joke on it's players.
But anyway, this still doesn't bring down my score of the game. It's one of the greatest games I've ever played. But Rockstar has many perfect 10 games under it's belt in my opinion, including RDR. Is this game better. Yes, I think so. But it's oh so close.
A quick word on RDR online. It's only in beta, so I can't give a true review yet. However, I'm finding it so much fun doing missions with other people. Of course, there are jackasses going around shooting people for no reason. It gives no benefit to do so. Not all of the features are in there yet, but I will be playing when it goes to full online & will giv an update.