Poll of the Day > Red Dead Redemption 2 or Detroit Become Human?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Need an immersive game to while away my saturday

---

yes
---

Red Dead is the better game Id say. Detroit is really cool though.

---

Red Dead has its flaws, but it's still a very good game. Detroit has good moments, but is generally a flawed game.
---

now if only i hadnt sold my xbox i could play this on my tv without shitty steamlink

---

Detroit is a simple, curated experience and it delivers pretty well. Its not perfect, but its a fun story and I like those CYA type situations.

RDR2 is certainly better as an actual video game but can be tedious at times. Like the previous game, there's a certain amount of grinding and repetition involved.

---

I havent played Red Dead, but I did play Detroit. It was really fun. And it has replay-ability, as well...
---

RDR2 is way more fun (and with a lot more replayability, too).

---

Having only played Detroit, I'd say RDR2. Detroit is a narrative experience that branches in an interesting way, but still falls victim to Cage-isms. It's drastically better than his previous work though. I can actually make it through multiple scenes without eye rolling.

I have heard RDR2 was kind of boring though.

---

Smarkil posted...

Detroit is a simple, curated experience and it delivers pretty well. Its not perfect, but its a fun story and I like those CYA type situations.

RDR2 is certainly better as an actual video game but can be tedious at times. Like the previous game, there's a certain amount of grinding and repetition involved.

This.

---

Red Dead Redemption 2 is more than a interactive movie so that.

---

Lenny?!

Anything is better than a David Cage game, so RDR2.
---

Detroit may be the pinnacle in video game storytelling, the most advanced visual novel...

...no gameplay.

RDR2, I haven't played, but I'm pretty sure it's a game

---

Lokarin posted...

Detroit may be the pinnacle in video game storytelling, the most advanced visual novel...

...no gameplay.

RDR2, I haven't played, but I'm pretty sure it's a game

LOL, I can't believe anyone thinks that a David Cage game is the pinnacle of anything.
---

LeNNYYYYYY

---

Lokarin posted...

Detroit may be the pinnacle in video game storytelling, the most advanced visual novel...

...no gameplay.

RDR2, I haven't played, but I'm pretty sure it's a game

Really stupid logic there bud. Theres plenty of gameplay in a game like Detroit.

This is just like how trolls used to claim that turn based RPGs werent really games because you couldnt control your characters in real time.

---

Mead posted...

Really stupid logic there bud. Theres plenty of gameplay in a game like Detroit.

This is just like how trolls used to claim that turn based RPGs werent really games because you couldnt control your characters in real time.

It's a visual novel

---

RDR was boring.

Detriot was fun.

---

RDR2 if you're feeling like getting lost in the world.

DBH if you feel like having a fun choose your own adventure.

Both are worth it.

---

Lokarin posted...

It's a visual novel

It literally isnt

Something like Three Fourths Home is a visual novel

---

Mead posted...

It literally isnt

Something like Three Fourths Home is a visual novel

I'd count Indigo Prophecy and Heavy Rain to be visual novels...

Might even count A Way Out as one, but there's a few too many interactions.

Edit: Also Man of Medan

---

They're both really great, but RDR2, by far, ok?

---

Lokarin posted...

I'd count Indigo Prophecy and Heavy Rain to be visual novels...

Might even count A Way Out as one, but there's a few too many interactions.

Edit: Also Man of Medan

okay

but youre wrong

---

Neither.

---

Lokarin posted...

I'd count Indigo Prophecy and Heavy Rain to be visual novels...

Might even count A Way Out as one, but there's a few too many interactions.

Edit: Also Man of Medan

This is stupid, Lok

---

Far-Queue posted...

This is stupid, Lok

Sure, but it's also dumb.

---

Lokarin posted...

It's a visual novel

Visual novels are games, though. Like PW or Danganronpa...
---

Lokarin posted...

Detroit may be the pinnacle in video game storytelling, the most advanced visual novel...

...no gameplay.

RDR2, I haven't played, but I'm pretty sure it's a game

Basically. Just like Heavy Rain Detroit is more a QTE game than anything. Technically that's gameplay although Red Dead Redemption 2 offers way more because it's more than a series of QTEs.

---

Detroit is by far the best David Cage game... Which really isn't saying much. It's pretty much the only competently made one.

I liked it though. It's relatively short and highly replayable. After beating the game, you can actually replay any individual scene and see how different things can play out.

---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Red Dead has its flaws, but it's still a very good game. Detroit has good moments, but is generally a flawed game.

I enjoyed genociding the dangerous robots who thought they were human.

---

DBH can be summarized as 'Robots are Black People. Slavery is bad and you needed an entire narrative to remember that, MY ANALOGY IS SUBTILE AND I AM ARTSY!'

RDR2 wins by default. Helps that it's a fun game.

---

Far-Queue posted...

This is stupid, Lok

Sarcasthma posted...

Sure, but it's also dumb.

Fine, they're movies where there's DVD prompts... kek

---

Lokarin posted...

Fine, they're movies where there's DVD prompts... kek

No. Those are different. I think they usually pause the movie. And you choose what you do for each step. These, you dont always choose, so much as some things will just happen a certain way. And the games have QTEs while the movies just have choices. And it would probably be closer to a series of movie, or a TV series rather than a very long movie...
---

Unbridled9 posted...

RDR2 wins by default.

I dont think it just wins by default. It depends on what people like or like more...
---

LinkPizza posted...

No. Those are different. I think they usually pause the movie. And you choose what you do for each step. These, you dont always choose, so much as some things will just happen a certain way. And the games have QTEs while the movies just have choices. And it would probably be closer to a series of movie, or a TV series rather than a very long movie...

speaking of, have any of you guys ever played a DVD game where you have to prompt what to do next? I think one of the Harry Potter movies has such a thing as a mini-game

---

Lokarin posted...

speaking of, have any of you guys ever played a DVD game where you have to prompt what to do next? I think one of the Harry Potter movies has such a thing as a mini-game

Final Destination 3. It had a few different scenes where some if he victims could be saved so a few scenes changed or were added. Though, they still did die... They also added a scene where it explains what happen to the survivors of the 2nd film... They died in an unfortunate wood chipping accident... Well, wood chipper accident...
---

Unbridled9 posted...

DBH can be summarized as 'Robots are Black People. Slavery is bad and you needed an entire narrative to remember that, MY ANALOGY IS SUBTILE AND I AM ARTSY!'

Are you so fragile that this is what you came away with while playing that game? The game is angling more for a Blade Runner vibe in "What defines a human? Can androids ever be human, or gain true autonomy? Should androids be allowed to self-govern (to be free)?"

That you feel the game boils down to "robots are black people" is more damning of you than your summary is of the game.

---

Terminonatator posted...

Are you so fragile that this is what you came away with while playing that game? The game is angling more for a Blade Runner vibe in "What defines a human? Can androids ever be human, or gain true autonomy? Should androids be allowed to self-govern (to be free)?"

That you feel the game boils down to "robots are black people" is more damning of you than your summary is of the game.

Firstly, 'fragile' has nothing to do with it either way. It was a dumb narrative through and through that was less subtle than a flying brick to the face. I mean...

The first mission happens literally because a family decided they wanted to buy a new android who proceeded to attack his former owners sparing the only person who treated him like a human. It follows it up with buying an android in a manner similar to a slave auction and a bit in which we see androids are shuttled to the back of the bus. How could you NOT get that sort of message?

Yea. It thought it was being deep while re-iterating dumb points we've heard a thousand times and hiding it behind a thin coat of paint.

And 'damning of me'? What are you on about? How am I 'damned' because I thought a game tried to be artsy and deep but ended up being blatant and shallow due to a hamfisted narrative? Let me guess. 'Gone Home' is a narrative worthy of a generation as well and not something you can predict in the first five minutes.

---

Terminonatator posted...

Are you so fragile that this is what you came away with while playing that game? The game is angling more for a Blade Runner vibe in "What defines a human? Can androids ever be human, or gain true autonomy? Should androids be allowed to self-govern (to be free)?"

That you feel the game boils down to "robots are black people" is more damning of you than your summary is of the game.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qvne4d/detroit-become-human-review-marginalized-struggle

Instead of attempting to explore the history of how robotics and automation are wielded as weapons against labor, how they are a symptom, rather than a root cause of out-of-control profit motives and worker disempowerment, we instead must suffer through paper-thin allusions to Americas civil rights struggle: robots on the back of the bus, belligerent masters yelling at chastised servants, and unceasing references to slavery. Instead of a real discussion about power hierarchies, were served milquetoast Martin Luther King Jr. quotes and Instagram-ready parables about equality and freedom.

The messages are pretty ham fisted.

Also it was too easy getting the good ending. All you have to do is pick the cheesiest hallmark options and you win.

---

Unbridled9 posted...

Firstly, 'fragile' has nothing to do with it either way. It was a dumb narrative through and through that was less subtle than a flying brick to the face. I mean...

The first mission happens literally because a family decided they wanted to buy a new android who proceeded to attack his former owners sparing the only person who treated him like a human. It follows it up with buying an android in a manner similar to a slave auction and a bit in which we see androids are shuttled to the back of the bus. How could you NOT get that sort of message?

Yea. It thought it was being deep while re-iterating dumb points we've heard a thousand times and hiding it behind a thin coat of paint.

And 'damning of me'? What are you on about? How am I 'damned' because I thought a game tried to be artsy and deep but ended up being blatant and shallow due to a hamfisted narrative? Let me guess. 'Gone Home' is a narrative worthy of a generation as well and not something you can predict in the first five minutes.

Anytime there is oppression you can tie it to black people. I mean they could have done an alien thing and how aliens had to fight for their rights also. The game still has a lot of good moments, and a lot of people liked the game.

Claiming well it's just androids are black people is completely missing the point of the game.

Monopoman posted...

Anytime there is oppression you can tie it to black people. I mean they could have done an alien thing and how aliens had to fight for their rights also. The game still has a lot of good moments, and a lot of people liked the game.

Claiming well it's just androids are black people is completely missing the point of the game.

Yea, but the game specifically alludes to many things which happened to black people in America (EX: the back of the bus thing). Like I said, it's not subtle in the slightest. More accurately it tries to be subtle and hide it's allegory behind the paper-thin illusion of being androids without bothering to explore what that really means.

Let's take the very first bit for example. Right at the start of the game we are presented with a hostage situation in which the player character needs to talk down a robot who has taken a child hostage. The 'ideal' ending has the player succeeding in this and talking the robot down, convincing him to trust you, before the police guns the robot down once the child is safe. This makes no sense if this was about what it means to be human or anything else. If the robot really was a robot, even one starting to attain sentience, then the whole scene should have been presented differently. Instead it's designed specifically to only make sense if you make the connection that the robot is already akin to a human and it is the prejudice of the humans that is the problem especially since the robot is portrayed in a wholly sympathetic, or at least relatable, light. This is made especially clear when the one person he chose to spare was the child whom had treated him like a human and a friend. A move that only makes sense if the robot is already sentient.

Had they wanted to handle this scene better and make it clear it was about the measure of a person instead of a hamfisted racism allegory they should have picked a robot that couldn't be mistaken for human acting legitimately on the fritz and the whole problem being that the developing free will was conflicting with its preprogrammed instructions. It didn't want to kill the family, it was a legitimate accident, but now it also doesn't want to die but assumes violence is the only deterrent. It would be even better if this was not shown and was only uncovered later in the story. That way the player wouldn't immediately realize the whole plot from the getgo.

Two games that had similar things did this better. In Neir your first contact with the robots is a bought of explicitly hostile conflict with a blatantly dangerous foe. Even afterwards the enemies will be robots as well so even if you somehow accepted that they were sentient from the getgo you'll remain on-guard around them. This way the player is actively encouraged to treat them as enemies and a danger and the contemplation as to if they are sentient beings can be put off until the assumption that they are not is sufficiently strong to challenge the notion.

Likewise in Megaman the robots that rebel are hostile and need to be dealt with, free will or not. However robot life is never devalued in the series and it's shown that devaluing it is what leads to such conflicts as the robot masters are frequently discarded robots whom have outlived their usefulness. We even see this eventually come to a head with the decision to not revive humanity in legends 2 (I think that was the one) because doing so would mean destroying synthetic life.

Even in Mass Effect we spend the first game battling the Geth. We know that the geth are dangerous beings who drove the quarians off their homeworld and remain occasional enemies throughout the franchise. However we also meet not only a Geth who is our ally but ED-I; both of whom are sentient. We can easily see the harm that synthetic life can do via the Geth and reapers, but at no point is it suggested that it's because they're synthetic. In fact the quarians assumption that there would be a geth uprising is what lead to the whole problem in the first place.

If you really think about it the message of DBH simply doesn't make sense on any level. Most people would be over the moon to have a robot friend. Even if they didn't treat them the same as a living being they CERTAINLY wouldn't treat them like slaves unless they were the sort of person whom would also treat humans like slaves anyways. Likewise most humans are well aware that things like racism and slavery is wrong, especially in America where the narrative is practically blared through loudspeakers. So a game which deals with such a thing has no choice but to be a played out and predictable in it's story and message. It's like listening to a story in Sunday School. No matter what happens you know the story will somehow relate back to the Bible and Jesus and try to deliver a moral in some way even before it begins.

---

Don't be a sex object.

So a good game or a David cage game?

Pretty obvious

---

Unbridled9 posted...

Yea, but the game specifically alludes to many things which happened to black people in America (EX: the back of the bus thing). Like I said, it's not subtle in the slightest. More accurately it tries to be subtle and hide it's allegory behind the paper-thin illusion of being androids without bothering to explore what that really means.

Let's take the very first bit for example. Right at the start of the game we are presented with a hostage situation in which the player character needs to talk down a robot who has taken a child hostage. The 'ideal' ending has the player succeeding in this and talking the robot down, convincing him to trust you, before the police guns the robot down once the child is safe. This makes no sense if this was about what it means to be human or anything else. If the robot really was a robot, even one starting to attain sentience, then the whole scene should have been presented differently. Instead it's designed specifically to only make sense if you make the connection that the robot is already akin to a human and it is the prejudice of the humans that is the problem especially since the robot is portrayed in a wholly sympathetic, or at least relatable, light. This is made especially clear when the one person he chose to spare was the child whom had treated him like a human and a friend. A move that only makes sense if the robot is already sentient.

Had they wanted to handle this scene better and make it clear it was about the measure of a person instead of a hamfisted racism allegory they should have picked a robot that couldn't be mistaken for human acting legitimately on the fritz and the whole problem being that the developing free will was conflicting with its preprogrammed instructions. It didn't want to kill the family, it was a legitimate accident, but now it also doesn't want to die but assumes violence is the only deterrent. It would be even better if this was not shown and was only uncovered later in the story. That way the player wouldn't immediately realize the whole plot from the getgo.

Two games that had similar things did this better. In Neir your first contact with the robots is a bought of explicitly hostile conflict with a blatantly dangerous foe. Even afterwards the enemies will be robots as well so even if you somehow accepted that they were sentient from the getgo you'll remain on-guard around them. This way the player is actively encouraged to treat them as enemies and a danger and the contemplation as to if they are sentient beings can be put off until the assumption that they are not is sufficiently strong to challenge the notion.

Likewise in Megaman the robots that rebel are hostile and need to be dealt with, free will or not. However robot life is never devalued in the series and it's shown that devaluing it is what leads to such conflicts as the robot masters are frequently discarded robots whom have outlived their usefulness. We even see this eventually come to a head with the decision to not revive humanity in legends 2 (I think that was the one) because doing so would mean destroying synthetic life.

Even in Mass Effect we spend the first game battling the Geth. We know that the geth are dangerous beings who drove the quarians off their homeworld and remain occasional enemies throughout the franchise. However we also meet not only a Geth who is our ally but ED-I; both of whom are sentient. We can easily see the harm that synthetic life can do via the Geth and reapers, but at no point is it suggested that it's because they're synthetic. In fact the quarians assumption that there would be a geth uprising is what lead to the whole problem in the first place.

If you really think about it the message of DBH simply doesn't make sense on any level. Most people would be over the moon to have a robot friend. Even if they didn't treat them the same as a living being they CERTAINLY wouldn't treat them like slaves unless they were the sort of person whom would also treat humans like slaves anyways. Likewise most humans are well aware that things like racism and slavery is wrong, especially in America where the narrative is practically blared through loudspeakers. So a game which deals with such a thing has no choice but to be a played out and predictable in it's story and message. It's like listening to a story in Sunday School. No matter what happens you know the story will somehow relate back to the Bible and Jesus and try to deliver a moral in some way even before it begins.

I think you need to understand that no matter how they are treated they would be not seen as human until they started thinking on their own+feeling and even then some would still see them as just a machine. It's like if I start abusing my vacuum cleaner no one would say shit if I did that I could literally treat it like dirt and do whatever I want to it. The cops won't be showing up to my door demanding justice for what i did to my vacuum cleaner.

Yes, we get it. Blade Runner.

---

Monopoman posted...

I think you need to understand that no matter how they are treated they would be not seen as human until they started thinking on their own+feeling and even then some would still see them as just a machine. It's like if I start abusing my vacuum cleaner no one would say shit if I did that I could literally treat it like dirt and do whatever I want to it. The cops won't be showing up to my door demanding justice for what i did to my vacuum cleaner.

I think the entire point of the game is trying to determine what is considered a person, especially with the things that Connor has to deal with. Connor is put in some of the most notable moments, where he has to establish if an android is a human or not based on his own choices.

Except the game's already poisoned the well right from the get-go as to if they are human or not and then further muddled it with scenes like the back of the bus bit. The androids are blatantly sentient from the get-go and are also suffering a near-identical discrimination to what black people suffered; the exact same one that was going on with Rosa Parks which kicked off the major civil rights reform. There's really no other way to interpret it as anything other than an allegory for racism that has a veil so thin that you can see the throbbing erection of 'fight racism! And if you disagree with us you're racist' underneath.

Simply put, the game doesn't 'ask the question'. It has made up its mind as to what the answer is already and is forcing you to come to that answer. It's especially telling when games that haven't even had either topic ('the measure of a man' or 'racism') as it's focus handled it better than DBH. It's a bad game with preachy morals and a foregone conclusion acting far smarter than it actually is for repeating a lesson most of us learned when we were children.

---

Unbridled9 posted...

Except the game's already poisoned the well right from the get-go as to if they are human or not and then further muddled it with scenes like the back of the bus bit. The androids are blatantly sentient from the get-go and are also suffering a near-identical discrimination to what black people suffered; the exact same one that was going on with Rosa Parks which kicked off the major civil rights reform. There's really no other way to interpret it as anything other than an allegory for racism that has a veil so thin that you can see the throbbing erection of 'fight racism! And if you disagree with us you're racist' underneath.

Simply put, the game doesn't 'ask the question'. It has made up its mind as to what the answer is already and is forcing you to come to that answer. It's especially telling when games that haven't even had either topic ('the measure of a man' or 'racism') as it's focus handled it better than DBH. It's a bad game with preachy morals and a foregone conclusion acting far smarter than it actually is for repeating a lesson most of us learned when we were children.

---

Mead posted...

ofc mead would like D:BH


---

If they wanted D:BH to work...

1) They shouldn't have used human androids. They could still use humanoid designs, but making them be so close to humans from the get-go makes it... way too obvious.

2) Should have had them start off non-sentient or only debatably sentient. Imagine if the first mission was, say, a dishwashing machine that went rogue and destroyed the house/family. It was only following it's programming but errors arose which caused the issue. While it seems straight-forwards loose ends don't quite add up and, as the game unfolds, you discover that the errors were the result of it developing sentience which conflicted with it's programming and said conflicts as it tried to reconcile everything were what lead to the attack instead of it finding out it was going to be replaced or something like that. It would make for a better mystery and the question of robot intelligence wouldn't be poisoned from the get-go. Especially if the sentience was external and not developed by the robot (like via a download or virus or something).

3) Present characters who have things to gain and lose by the sentience in different ways. Like, say, a factory owner who has to deal with the sentience. The sentient robots prove to be more capable but then refuse the treatment they were getting before meaning he needs to either risk human lives or close his factory. Especially if the final decision impacts other plotlines (like closing it down means someone else lacks a crucial material they need in their plotline). Or an older man with a near-perfect recreation of his wife in robot form living a happy life, caring for the robot, and treating it as he did his old wife in what would, otherwise, be a loving relationship. But the sentience results in the robot discarding the 'wife' protocol and developing a radically different persona ruining the one good thing he has left in the world. Or on the alternative end of the scale, some loner making a robot girlfriend and striving to make her sentient. He legit loves her and everything else but since she's non-sentient he's unsatisfied (EX: He could propose to her but he knows she's programmed to say 'yes' which robs it of meaning). If the robot becomes sentient he gets a happy ending and things work out for him, but it ruins the life of the old man and the factory owner. You could easily work in a lot more unique narrative choices revolving around the issue of robot sentience without ever touching upon the issue of 'race' or racial allusions.

4) Show some more 'real' human reactions. I don't know about you but a LOT of people would be overjoyed at the thought of a robot friend. Sure, they may be thinking of Data or Bender or something but they'd be more than willing to acknowledge and accept robot sentience, especially if the robots didn't engage in some form of uprising/revolt.

---