Red Dead Redemption Fans Aren't Happy About Rockstar's "Lazy Port"

These „boycotts“ are highly effective, as past has proven several times.

@Max_the_German Well it did get lootboxes removed from Battlefront 2

Is a "lazy" port really a bad thing, though? I mean if the game runs good and the price is decent what really more do you need? I get that for most people the game has a steep price and we haven't seen a performance review yet, but game development costs time and money. You can always wait for the price to drop. I am just saying: more classics on modern hardware is always a plus.

And regarding this tweet from Pyo: I‘ve seen no evidence that the PS4 version lacks a 60 fps mode on PS5.

"with many fans of the company now essentially calling for a boycott"

Those always work out as we can see with games like Pokemon SwSh, Pokemon BDSP, Pokemon Legends Arceus, Pokemon SV etc

I think that with 60fps and a better price tag (let's say 30€ instead of 50€), they would have receveid way less complaints.

Boycotting a game, because that always works, right? /s

As a Switch owner, I'm not bothered by this. All I wanted when this was rumored for it to be on Switch. As a bonus, the Switch version even looks a bit cleaned up compared to the original release, so I'm happy.

People wanna boycott everything. The game is being brought to modern consoles. Why is that bad now?

I have never played a RDR game before, so if this releases decently I'd consider getting it.

Let's just wait for the reviews first? 360 era games are fine. If they would do a lazy port like this for Mass Effect I would be really happy.

Personally, I'm gonna wait for reviews and a sale. $50 seems way too much for a 13-year-old 360 game to me.

After the disastrous "Definitive Edition" we got for GTA, I'd settle for a "lazy port". If I don't like the asking price for what's on offer, I'll just wait for a sale.

I mean, they‘re not being total a-holes this time or anything, they give you the game as it is and if you want it you pay 50 bucks and you get it. Chances are you already own a PS3, PS4, XBOX 360, etc. and can get it a lot cheaper there.

People will say this is fine and then act like Nintendo is commiting a crime for charging full price for a remake.

It’s not surprising, “Gaming fans” are some of the most self-entitled people out there. Though after the “definitive GTA trilogy” I’ll be waiting till after launch.
But wasn’t the MGS trilogy announced before the MGS3 PS5/Xbox series remake?

If they'd just released the game for ps4/ps5 I think the price would have been cheaper. The Switch port is what's making the price high because it's a new platform for the game and older games ported to Switch have been able to command a high price. The price will drop very quickly for playstation, and less quickly for Switch if I had to guess.

I’m interested in the game as I’ve never played it and know little about it, other than it seems a very popular franchise.
However after the mess that was the GTA trilogy port I’ll definitely be holding out for reviews, Rockstar have earned a grand total of zero trust from me after that.
It’s a different dev so I’ll reserve judgment and decide on release whether to pick up otherwise I’ll get the sequel from steam at some point

On an individual level, boycotting just means not buying a game you don't want.

Would remake of RDR2 be possible for Switch? My son plays it till these very days and as a foreigner he learned English from it and its subtitles. It was and is just a fantastic game with superb story. RDR1 looks that those screenshots are from Anbernic device, not from Switch Alan Wake remastered was also hammered on its release date and one patch fixed most of its troubles. Could one patch fix RDR1 all those complaints or is it DOA?

What a sad bunch. Either buy it or don’t buy it.

These Red Dead fans can boycott what they want and keep enjoying the game on their PS3s/XBSXs until full-time jobs and own families make them forget what a TV looks like. The original isn't even emulated well on Steam Deck. But good luck calling others for a boycott over blatant FWPs.

@Moistnado but the term makes this simple course of action sound so much more socially assertive and impactful! ...in some people's heads, anyway.😏

I consider a lazy port a port that is technically poorer than the console it came from, factoring in the console it came from of course (I don't expect a Switch to run a PS4 game as well as the PS4).

If this Switch port is at least equal to the 360 version in performance and resolution then the only issue is the price and that is up to each individual person.

I wonder how many of those calling for a boycott bought all those full priced Wii U ports for Switch?

I'll wait for a big discount... Which is unlikely to happen, imo. And information about the file size. Also, I want a Digital Foundry review of the game to know the game's performance in handheld mode. Since I don't have a lot of free space on console, I'll wait for a physical version as well. And like others, I hope that the game will be 100% on the cartridge, without any "Additional Internet download required" bs.

@SBandy1 «I wonder how many of those calling for a boycot bought all those full priced Wii U ports for Switch?»
Zero. If talking about Nintendo games, I have only one Nintendo game on my Switch – Super Mario Odyssey. That's all.
Edit: The only one game that I'm boycotting is Skullgirls 2nd Encore. That censorship patch sucks and killed the game for me and many others. Skullgirls is dead for sure.

@Vyacheslav333

Are you calling for a boycott of this game?

@SBandy1 Nope. I want this port to be good. But 50$ price tag and omission of multiplayer really sucks. And I can understand what the boycotters feel, I think.

I'm so tired of gamers trying to boycott games. It's up to the person whether they want to buy it or not. And lets face it the boycott of GTA Trilogy hardly went down a treat... "Definitive Edition collection has sold-in at least 19 million copies since launching"

@Vyacheslav333

OK, well I was specifically asking about the boycotters.

As for you only having one Nintendo game on your Switch......it's unusual but meh different strokes.

I'm not supporting this either.

Maybe if they added... ANYTHING to the game it might warrant the price tag, but this is a ps3 game that gets thrown onto modern hardware with zero changes. And no, "but Muh switch portability" isn't a particularly great argument for the game. At least not to me and I'd argue if Switch/Nintendo gamers had any respect for themselves they wouldn't gobble these low effort cash grabs up all the time.

@SBandy1 «As for you only having one Nintendo game on your Switch......it's unusual but meh different strokes.»
Haha. I want Kirby and the Forgotten Land, but I don't have enough money for it. Also, I am fighting games fan and my wishlist consists almost entirely with fighting games. And... Nintendo still uses transcreation instead of localization in their games, and that sucks, imo. I don't want to play Fire Emblem and Xenoblade 'cause of these reasons. Also, Nintendo still censors their games. Worldwide versions of Famicom Detective Club are censored, and that really sucks. I hate censorship. And I don't want to support the censorship. Especially, censorship in Japanese video games.

I think the price is definitely is a little high but if I’m being completely honest, this is literally for people who didn’t own it originally and couldn’t play it, or if you don’t have the means to you can play it on newer hardware, for everyone that owns it….it’s…not really made for you, or I just don’t understand? Idk, 🤷‍♀️

I wonder why this game wasn't released sooner.

oooo I must do what the internet says, lol.

I'm buying day one. I've never had the opportunity in the PS3 era so it's like a new game for me.

I don’t think this release is aimed at hardcore Rockstar fans.

I'll take a lazy port than no game at all!😃

That game always looked incredibly boring to me. The only part that I would actually consider buying is the zombie dlc. That looked kinda fun.

Also yeah, too expensive. But other than that Rockstar has not really been known to actually care about remakes and re-releases and some of them have been obvious cash grabs for them to 100% focus on the next release. The gta collection is the last example of that and it's downright infamous.

I prefer a good port over a bad remaster anyday.

Which is why I’ll be waiting for the technical review before buying. I prefer to have it on my switch, but otherwise I’ll buy it one day on my xbox.

Thy mess up GTA trilogy and fans would have preferred a port. They port Red Dead and fans would have preferred a botched remaster.

Fans are never happy.

They are indirectly saying the game is rubbish lol. Some fans.

This is what happens when you take rumors as fact. My only issue right now is the asking price is a little high.

It's a pass for me. I still have the 360 version that I could play any time in my XSX, no difference in that version.

@SwagaliciousJohnson it depends, Pikmin 3 for the Switch was considered a lazy port by some, but in my opinion it wasn’t that bad, because it wasn’t such a old game and it looked modern enough (however a resolution bump would have been nice)

Some would call all these retro collections lazy too, but then we could start about the fact how often the amount of games in them, can justify the price.

It depends per game I think, Red Dead Redemption is a older 3D game, one that even at the time didn’t look bad or amazing.

I get where people come from with it being lazy, most people seem to do it mostly because of the €50 price tag it holds, plus other say that even while the GTA Trilogy is a poor remaster (it is), you at least got that and 3 solid games for €60.

From the same company.

So yeah it depends on the game if one could be called lazy.

It's not really a boycot is it? then i'm boycotting zelda, because i haven't bought it yet...

you're only boycotting if you don't buy something what you normally would buy, or from a different shop...

Not having half the games trophies tied to that underbaked online multiplayer is enough for me to plop down the money on the ps4 to play on the 5.

I don’t see a problem with straight ports. I do have an issue with how much companies charge for them nowadays, but nobody is forcing anyone to pay full price. Just wait for a sale.

Still baffled how this is getting a Nintendo version before PC. Baffling.

I don't think Rockstar has the bandwidth to work on both GTAVI and a full-blown remake of Red Dead Redemption. A lot of RockStar employees were crunched to the bone during the development of RDR2 and I imagine many of them are going through the same struggles right now working on GTAVI - I can't imagine them also needing to work on a remake of the first RDR.

Also, the code of the original Red Dead Redemption is apparently poorly written and optimized (this is the reason why it has never been ported to PC even after 10+ years). The fact that a port studio was able to develop native ports of the game for Switch and PS4 is actually kind of a miracle in it of itself.

I’d buy The Last Hope before I even come close to RDR Nodux.

This is the type of port I prefer: as little changes as possible from the original (i.e. unlike the GTA ports). As for the price, I'm sure those who want it at a lower price can just wait for a discount.

Remember when Hellena Taylor tried to boycott Bayonetta 3 and everyone was having none of it? That's how I feel about this "boycott". Let me just play my "lazy" port.

Some of these reasons are quite frankly ridiculous.
It's a port, it's fine, ports are almost always done by outside studios.
Grove Street Games is just the bad one, it's dedicated to GTA pretty much too, considering the name so I'd like to consider it's done by Rockstar on that one.

The $50 price tag however that is way too much for a straight port; with less content than the original even since the multiplayer is gone, and it's the only valid reason.

1080p and 60fps would still be worthwhile. But I was expecting them to use the RDR2 engine and make a must buy.

those boycot looks like a PC player

Excluding an awful multiplayer component is always welcome in my eyes (thanks Naughty Dog), but when will people learn that R* is singlehandedly the worst developer in the industry? They haven't made a single game worth playing, ever. I don't think they've even held a gaming controller because, if you've actually played their games, you'd know they program the absolute worst controls in any game they make. Definitely boycott the entire company, don't play a single R* game ever, it's not worth it. A close second to them is CDPR, Bugthesda, and Microsoft.

Online boycott cries are practically viral marketing these days & not everyone always wants old stuff remastered, just re-released & preserved at a reasonable price. Should be no more than 25 quid. Skip and move on. They are only video games

My only issue is the price. And that's easily solved by waiting for a sale. It will very likely get a permanent price cut in the future too. So there is no issue.

Calling for a boycott = increased release visibility = more sales.

Publishers love boycotts. Keep it up.

Ah yes boycotts from people online over a game, that will work out well, from people who were probably never going to buy it in the first place because they are impossible to please.

Particularly the same issue we Tales fans had with the lazy Tales of Symphonia port which came with less contents, not including the sequel, no 60fps, more bugs than ever, massive downgrade in performance, and cost more. Could had just release a collection with Phantasia, Symphonia, and Dawn of the New World for $40 but nope it's just base Symphonia with nothing new, nothing to get excited for, and to this day is the worst version of all time on any platform. I could see why the RDR fans are pissed, companies really need to stop being lazy and actually show some efforts in these remastered. A game in modern time should not look and ran worst than a game from 10 or so years ago and should not had less contents. To all companies that made games, if you don't have new contents with the game you're re-releasing then either give us a collection or don't bother at all.

As for will I buy this port for Switch, well since I don't have any history with the game and since its accessibility is now widely available, I may get it just to see how either terrible it was or how good the base game is. I don't expect a masterpiece but also don't expect to be wow either.

Well I simply appreciate being able to play this game when it comes to Switch. It’ll go on a deep sale by Christmas and I might get it then.

Rockstar is pretty late bringing RDR to the Switch. They could have done it 6 years ago, the hardware hasn’t changed and then Rockstar would have supported the Nintendo platform. But they didn’t. Probably because they feel the platform lacks the power they need for their games.
So to do this now, when 120M units are sold, there is zero risk involved. For sure you are going to make a profit on this. And that feels a bit like money-grab to me, certainly at full-price without any extra’s. It shows that this is a business decision, not a decision from the heart or even that you want to on all platforms.
Rockstar will claim that the card is more expensive than discs. But is certainly not a $10-$20 difference from a $30 price point.
Double Eleven did what Rockstar asked.
I can imagine the disappointment of a 13 year old game to be republished as premium.

I think it's the price tag.
For a simple port with no extras, 10 bucks less than a current gen new release is shady, even for Rockstar

As long as it runs fine on Switch with the way it looks, I don't think visuals will look too out of place on this platform. Maybe on others, they surely could have looked better but on Switch, you're more limited with how much further you can improve things over the PS360 generation. a bump to texture quality and reslution is usually about what you can get over PS360 (that and hitting a more consistent 30FPS)

I stand with the boycotters. I am not going to buy the game I was never going to buy.

"The original game, as is, but running on the Switch" is exactly what the GTA trilogy should have been.

I'm holding out hope that Rockstar have indeed taken the simplest path here.

No multiplayer for rockstar to just abandon like they did with RDR2, not sure how this is negative. No version has 60fps, not even the XSX version it which only has 4k resolution.

The only sticking point is the price, definitely should be cheaper. I have no doubt most people will wait for a sale like most did with GTA trilogy (after that whole mess).

How bad is it? Other than the price point?

It's really bizarre they have removed the online multiplayer? That was literally the best part of Red Dead Redemption on 360. If they add the multiplayer back in then I'd buy it, but as it is it's a no from me.

@locky-mavo no I believe they were announced at the same event and we're both rumoured for years before announcing.

I mean, it 100% is a lazy port, undoubtedly, but considering what the GTA Trilogy was like when they actually did put effort into it that's probably a good thing.

That said they are absolutely charging too much for it.

@mp_72 No way. RDR2 was 2 blu-Ray’s on ps4. That’s like 80gb.

@Serpenterror

At the time of its release it was an absolute masterpiece of both gameplay and story telling. I had it on 360.

Goes to the room and the back of the house now dedicated for this and picks out the 11,197 journal I have started page 64th and adds Rockstar to the list of companies I’m told to boycott.

Sighs. Goes to sit on the floor. I’m in trouble if I’m told I have to boycott the company that makes the journals.

This probably doesn't sting as much since the game was never available on Nintendo and they're already used to paying for overpriced ports of old games.

The only ones who really win out here are Xbox owners since they've been eating good at the start, capable of playing RDR in 4K 60FPS without having to pay a penny extra if they already owned the game.

I can remember with the gta trilogy we got many people had wished we had got just a lazy port of that since it cut out some things and added in hosts of new bugs. It’s no excuse tho, these games deserve to be handled better.

Can't grasp my head around the concept of bycott, don't like it? don't buy it, is that simple, why call for other people to do the same? Seems like a need of validation or acceptance to me, which its not only sad but lame at the same time.

I’m fine with it. We used to get ports like this all the time. Price is a bit annoying

I wish people would stop using "boycott" to refer to not buying a thing they don't want: a boycott is when you refrain for ethical reasons from buying something that you otherwise would buy. For example, I really enjoyed the original RDR and would've bought RDR2 but chose not to because of all the stories I read of crunch happening at Rockstar: that was a boycott. Not buying a game because you think it's not a good enough value is entirely fair, but calling it a boycott is overly dramatic and dilutes a perfectly useful word. For what it's worth, I've read that Rockstar has since rectified their crunch policy, so I'm open to getting this pending performance reviews, as I originally played my then-roommate's copy.

@Megame Red Dead Redemption was re-release on Switch and PS4 cause both platforms still had the biggest install base out there. Not many own PS5 and Xbox Series X/S yet and the RDR2 remastered on Steam didn't sell so well so I could see why Rockstar skipped on PC this time. RDR not coming to modern platforms yet doesn't mean it won't come, a remake or sequel could still happen next-gen.

I can understand both sides of the argument. These type of releases tend to cause a divide amongst consumers because it comes down to either the product is targeted more for one group or another. In my opinion giving how it's more of a straight port I believe the target audience is someone like me who has never played the game. I'm definitely intrigued and might add it to the never ending backlog list. To be honest the Switch has provided so many opportunities to play older games it's been a blast playing them (Call of Juarez Gunslinger is a perfect example for me. That was a straight port and I had such a blast with it). I do understand the price point being a tad high for a straight port but costs across the board have gone up.

As for the lack of multiplayer I understand why it's not included. Many people don't realize how expensive it is to run servers. Unless the money keeps rolling in its a money hemorrhage that isn't sustainable. Especially nowadays where online playerbases are so fickle and unreliable. I'm sure within the first month of release there will be some players but by 2-3 months later it will be dead (no pun intended). They know majority will go back to their Fortnites, Apex Legends, Call of Duty's or whatever online game and never look back. Especially on the Switch online communities are few and far between unless it's a Mario Kart, Smash, MH Rise, etc. tier game.

It's pretty simple to me. Either buy it or don't. There's plenty of other games to play. We all have endless backlogs that need attention anyways (I just added like 3 more in the last week or so ).

@OrtadragoonX I surely hope so, my issue with Tales of Symphonia was that a 60fps version which was the GameCube version did exist but Namco choose to remastered the PS2 version instead which was ran only at 30fps. Namco could had also give us Tales of Symphonia Chronicle which include both the 1st and 2nd game regardless of if both running at 30fps and I'll still be okay with that but to have just base vanilla TOS with no new features, no extras, not in 60fps and no added contents from the sequels is just absurd.

As for Red Dead Redemption, the original game only ran at 30fps for both PS3 and Xbox 360 anyways, not sure why people kept expecting 60fps in this one. A game that is originally 30fps can't magically become 60fps unless it's a remake, you can't expect extra frames when those extra frames doesn't exist originally, it's like asking for something that is not there. A remake could add more frames, a port doesn't. This game is a port and not a remake so people shouldn't expect more frames. The only issue this game had is the price, at $50 the price feel like a sham, at $40 maybe it could be bundle with something neat, but at $30 would had been the sweet spot.

Lol so fans want a “high effort” port like what GTA Trilogy was? No thanks. I’ll take a basic port.

Now if we can just get fallout 3 and/or new Vegas!

Its as simple as not buying the game. People have too much free time on their hands.

@Serpenterror A game that is 30fps can, in fact, magically become 60fps. You literally just have to change a number.

Of course, there can be bugs, like broken physics, or the game running too fast (see almost every Japanese game made before 2015), and that's a real problem with updating some games. But many games work flawlessly after tweaking a single number, and RDR has already been made to run at 60fps on both PS3 and Xbox 360 emulators.

I just don't understand how being 13 years old is a problem. If you've already played it, don't buy it. If you've never played it before, it's well worth the $50 (assuming it's a decent port).

@locky-mavo When a product isn't to your liking for whatever reason, there's no obligation to be grateful and thank the company. It's a product that costs money, not a gift.

It's not "self-entitled" to turn down that product, or even to voice your criticisms of it- especially if there are specific issues that the company could potentially resolve (complaining about cut content or poor performance, calling for a price drop, etc.).

And just in case it needs to be said, I'm not justifying bad behaviour (e.g., harassing the devs). But there's a place for negative opinions, and some of the talk I hear online of "entitlement" versus "gratitude" is really not fitting or healthy.

@Zuljaras Agreed! I do not understand the reason for a pre order on the switch? You don't even pay for it right away. It doesn't charge you until a few days before it's released!

I don't get it honestly. If you don't like it then don't buy it. There, boycott lol.
And people who don't mind spending the money can get it.
Yay, choices.

@BetaRabbit64 Welcome to the age of entitlement. I partly blame social media, gen z, and some millennials for allowing themselves to get caught up in this new age of entitlement.

Not everything needs to cater exactly to you (in the general sense) and your wants, or else, outrage.

What in tarnation do people think is wrong with this port? From what I've seen, it looks like a faithful port of the original, albeit with slightly different lighting and a 21:9 aspect ratio filter. Which considering how making massive changes broke GTA 3, it's probably a good thing that they're mostly leaving it alone. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and that appears to be the case. As for me, I've been waiting for this port for a long time. And seeing as I still don't have a Switch yet, by the time I'm able to make use of the cartridge, any bugs that may exist should be squashed.

If it runs ok and looks decent on switch Ill be buying it October when it releases physical. Don't wanna spent my time being mad. 🙏

A lot of people might just have a Switch and haven't been able to play this, I include myself in this group. So calls of it being a lazy port is daft, I'm looking forward to playing as I don't have any other consoles, they call it a lazy port, I just call it a port!

The Xbox 360 backward compatible version is better, and still has online.

@Elitepatriot while I’m a bit puzzled why it isn’t coming to PC, I get why it’s coming to the Switch. It has a bigger player base than the PS4 and it’s an engaged audience that actively buying games more than any other platform. Price point hasn’t been an issue for many games on the system. Developers have been very happy with their software sales on the system, so I get why Rockstar did it. When you combine the Switch and PS4/PS5, that eclipses Steam and Epic store user counts since it’d be about 222 million active users (114 on Switch and 108 on PSN). Steam has about 62 million and Epic has about 60-68 million active users.

@smoreon
Yeah i definitely agree that there is no excuse for doing things such as harassment or threats but criticism is perfectly fine, and it does feel like there are those who throw terms such as "entitled" or "whining" towards any criticism.

@GrailUK
Ideally in these situations a none botched remaster would have been the best outcome, something like the Metroid Prime remaster which was generally well received.
Though in some cases they have had it where switch got a port while the other systems got remastered versions which at a glance sounds like a bad deal but tbh i would be fine with a great port than one of those remasters where the switch version runs worse than the original.

in the end though as long as its a good port and doesn't introduce issues that weren't in the original im more than happy with these re-releases, in the end it makes it so that these games are available on modern systems without needing to resort to emulation or online service/cloud etc.

@Bizzyb Greatest Generation said the same things about the Baby Boomers and Gen X too.

Yeah definitely a cash grab like every other "let's release the same fckin game!" that silly little sheeple seem to love to throw their money at.

@Mgalens Yeah, I have to agree. A good game is a good game. I can imagine folk spending hundreds of pounds on a next gen console being a bit peeved, but I'm not losing sleep over it.

I leaned my lesson with the GTA Trilogy, and while I eventually considered that a worthwhile purchase for the Switch, there is a good reason why I never bought it on a different platform. As for RDR, I simply have no desire to play it on the go, it's not the kind of game that stands out as something I would want to have on a handheld. This port seems typically lazy for Rockstar these days, and I already got the game with it's DLC on a Xbox One X where they gave it some 4K enhancement.

@GrailUK
With things like PS4 games being played on ps5 they do at least have benefits such as faster load times and whatnot (i played the base ps4 version of FFXIV on ps5 and it was really nice having far shorter load times and not having really bad stutter when lots of players were in the same area)

i imagine series X/S does something similar but i do know that some of the backwards compatible games on xbox one had upgrades to them, a big one being sonic unleashed which felt like a big upgrade on xbox one, was almost like a mini remaster without needing to rebuy the game.

though with some ps4/xboxone games which are ported to ps5/series X you end up being able to download the "next gen" version also without having to rebuy.

hoping this kind of thing is embraced with the "switch 2" (things like backwards compatibility, performance improvements and cross-buy)

Will wait for at least 50% off sale. If that doesn't happen then oh well. Never played it. But want too

@Windy I’ve always wanted to try it but I don’t really like GTA so that’s put me off buying it in the past. Maybe that’s silly I don’t know

Wait a minute, can you boycott a product or service you weren’t using in the first place? If you decide not to buy something because the features are lackluster for the price, that’s just a matter of being a reasonable consumer.

@Max_the_German Not so much a boycott, more ‘stuck in my backlog/wishlist/neither for a period of time yet* to be determined’.

• read: highly unlikely.

@RobynAlecksys lemmings!

rockstar is getting bashed not only because of the lack of a remaster but for the outrageous price of this old port..

I'll do a Girlcott instead. If i don't get what i want i'll just scream like a 12 year old girl. That usually works right?

I'm amazed at the lack of insight here. The original RDR on 360/PS3 was a coding nightmare. The engineers were quite astonished it ran at all. The game would quite literally have to be rebuilt with a rough outline. You think 2K is going to touch that with a ten-foot pole? I'll wait for a sale on the cartridge and hope it's all on it without a download required. Otherwise it's Back-compat on my Xbox anyway.

@Serpenterror

It could be done. On both Xenia and RPCS3 you can unlock the frame rate for the respective 360 and PS3 versions. The PS3 version is a very taxing game so you need a beefy rig and there’s a lot of errors when the frame rate is unlocked. But on the right rig (RTX 4080) it can hit 60.

The 360 version on Xenia actually runs great unlocked. Very few bugs or issues and you can get it up to 120fps on the right PC build.

@Krysus

I would believe that if not the results on Xenia with the 360 version. It runs shockingly well at higher frame rates.

Now the PS3 version is a different story. It’s a mess and you need a really powerful rig to get it to 60fps, much less above that.

@Nintendo_Thumb i disagree a very old game that is not remastered is worth 50 bucks..

Where's the lie, though?

I don’t go for the shooty bang bang games (which admittedly eliminates about 52% of the market), but I can understand why fans of the series would be sceptical

Meh, I never played RDR myself anyway.

@johnedwin why is that? If you've never played it before, what is the difference between this and a new game selling for full price? The graphical difference looked much better on Switch compared to PS3 in the side-by-side video, it's hardly any different than when Katamari Damacy (a game with no extra content) came out on Switch and I don't remember anyone complaining about the price for that. It was older than RDR and a much shorter game and the same price it was when it was new, nearly 2 decades ago.

The people moaning and saying they won’t buy will be the same people who moaned and said they wouldn’t buy the latest Pokémon game … and we all know how that ended up

One of the comments on that subreddit made me laugh. Someone said they thought that even though it was never announced as a remake or remaster, Rockstar might have done “something nice for their fans”. The response:

“Why the f*** would anything nice ever happen?“

I don't think it's a boycott at all when it's just not buing a product I am disatisfied with. E.g. It's not like I am boycotting seed oils. I just think they are bad for me, and avoid buying them.
Boycotts to me is when I am not buying something I would otherwise appreciate, but want to pressure the seller to make a decision unrelated to the purchase, or to make a statement to other decision makers.

People are moaning about paying $50 for a 13 year old 360 game.

But will have no problems paying same for a 27 year old snes game which has Mario in it.

@Baler I think exactly the same way. But I do love the old west and western movies. Maybe I can get by the GTA play. Still going to hold out for a sale before I buy. I have wanted to play this for a while

I mean its a great thing for switch to have this classic join its library of titles, its sits very happily next to the ports of Crisis, Skyrim, Assassins Creed, Bioshock, arkham tril, etc etc
So for switch I think its a straight up sweet thing the only issue being the price. £35 would've been perfect but hey it'll go down if nobody buys it at £50 and if people do buy it then the price tag is justified

However with all that said, the ps4 port is without a doubt lazy. Sure it's great that you can play the game on ps4/5 , disappointing its just a port but oh well, BUT they shouldn't be making a big song and dance about it and it should be super cheap because there's zero effort that has gone in to making that work on ps4, it would be a basic file dump and a new case, "bam! £50 please"

"For that I give you $1!"
-Dunkey

Damn, compare this to the Quake II re-release. $10 (or free for current owners on Steam) gets you a game with slightly updated graphics, online multiplayer crossplay, both expansions plus a new one.

I do wanna play this game, but I'm tempted to just buy the 360 disc at $30 and break out the old console.

On the other hand, I'm glad they didn't butcher it like the GTA trilogy. I may get it on switch once it discounts, or if, god forbid, the game is complete on the cartridge.