My bad then,I was not implying that however.Im saying learnig all the AI patterns in order to finish it maybe no hurt or with teh original life bar or things like that.That is essentially what people do too,knowing what you are going to do and anticipating your every move in the game no?

Beating those guys that think they will anticipate your move or your playstyle its more satisfying to you more as it is for me anticipating what the AI enemie in a game will try to do to me and defeat it with no damage or with the less effort and with the more coolest way possible.

The mere fact you qualified people as being predictable is enough to imply that they are more predictable than AI within the context of your sentence. I mean, how do you feel about playing against UNpredictable people in multiplayer games? Why not leave out the "predictable" if you just don't like playing against people in general?No, but people are able to learn and adapt and aren't as confined by programming as AI enemies are.It's not necessarily a matter of how advanced or difficult something is, and I'm not trying to take away from the skill required to beat games like NG or Bayonetta on hard. However, the fact is you can learn patterns of AI enemies like you said you do. With respect to human players, some will have patterns you can learn, but in general, they will change play styles and strategies to counter you. Within the rules of a game, humans aren't bound by anything besides their own brains. AI players are bound by their comparatively limited programming.The thing is, you can play against a thousand scrubs who are easily dominated, but even though they suck, they can STILL be less predictable than the hardest AI enemies. I KNOW that incendiary shuriken ninjas(and just so we're clear, I'm not in any way claiming ISNs are the hardest AI enemies) are going to throw a ton of incendiary shurikens at me. I can predict that shit. It can still be hard. Conversely, scrubs might try some weird shit in Reach that I never would have thought of(and can't...else I'd be able to think of examples), but at the end of the day, I'll still be able to own them.

A music from the soundtrack:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz8JdBidRqs

Took a peak, soundtrack sounds really great.

Oh yeah. Absolutely awesome. GOTY contender for sure. I lost many hours without realizing it today. Soooo good. Once you get the hang of the horses and switching weapons(it's on a radial menu, but for some reason, I have some trouble with it). Nothing better than blowing out someones leg, then lassoing them and leaving them there hog-tied! Love the characters too...

;)...

All this horsing around is bound to stirrup an otherwise stable thread.

Dammit, I lol'd. What has become of me...

Neigh, I disagree. In fact, I think this thread has steedily gone downhill.

I don't take as much issue with people not qaulifying opinions as much as I do people presenting their opinion in an arrogant as fuck manner. To say that one didn't enjoy GTA IV is a far cry from saying "GTA IV is just a pile of shit excuse of a game". I didn't enjoy MGS4 much at all, but I can also see outside my own tastes enough to realize that it's a polished game with plenty to offer other types of gamers. It's not "broken" in any way and to think that me personally not liking it makes it an objectively piss poor game just seems far too self-centered.

Grift, you obviously have very strong opinions and are a very opinionated person, but I don't think you feel like your opinions are objective truth as your posts imply you agree to this I believe.

but, again, it's the way that someone phrases their opinion that can make game argument threads so vile and annoying. How can someone not realize the difference between "you are wrong", "i think you are wrong", and "I disagree with you". The first sounds VERY arrogant, the second sounds less arrogant but still degrading one's opinion, and the third simply states a difference in opinion and taste.

It's as if you think there is no room for being polite and NOT trying to sound like an arrogant prick? does this make sense?

Anyhow, sorry, I'm not trying to turn this thread back into a long debate, I just didn't want my original point to be too misunderstood

I'll be buying this game as soon as my tax refund comes in (I hate being a poor college student...ugh) as the game seems like it's going to be really interesting in a very wide variety of ways.

My biggest problem with the MP side of GTA IV was that I didn't enjoy the gunplay enough to make the player vs player combat feel nearly as fun as combat against the AI in a mission. If the gunplay feels a lot more natural and intense, the MP side of RDR should be just as thrilling as the co-op stuff. Can't wait to try it out!!!

Well said.

He is wrong!!! :P

LOL

Come on RDR its almost mine,this sunday is my birthday and RDR will be mine Saturday night!!! I will do an all nighter for this masterpiece!!!

I'm sure this game is great, but does anyone get the impression that it's perhaps a little too manestream?

What do you mean by that? If you mean, easy to play and throughout enjoyable (like ME2 was), then I'm all for it.

edit: Otherwise, I don't think there is something like mainstream in videogames. Certainly not something comparable to the music industry. Games are defined by their over all quality and not by their artistic execution.

I don't think this game is mainstream at all,it may seem because its about the old wild west but is not.

Or maybe it is but who cares the game look magnificient!!

? Nothing mainstream about the game. It's not too easy to play, the story doesn't cater to teeny boppers, and it is friggin' great. Loving every second of it. I really like Marston too- he's one polite bad-ass...

Oh my god...3 swings and misses.

Don't worry blmbox, I got it.