So I bought Red Dead Redemption last Tuesday, and it's been an engrossing experience. My wife has been annoyed with the late night shootouts in Pikes Basin, my students have been jealous of my achievement whoring (me and a few students have an ongoing achievement contest), and I've--well--I've been lulled into John Marston's world, and I'm just waking from this week-long slumber.

But now that the single player campaign is over and I've hung my poncho on the coat rack, I've been thinking about the ending of the game (no spoilers I promise). I've come to the conclusion that the final "boss" encounter was very appropriate. It seems that many games--Mass Effect 2 and Bioshock come to mind--have final bosses that don't fit the ebb and flow of the game. While I love both Mass Effect 2 and Bioshock, the final bosses felt like they were trying to match what consumers want from a final encounter. Apparently, we all want big bosses and epic encounters even if they don't sensibly fit into the story. These types of encounters seem to be disconnected with the process that built to the end of the game.

Luckily, Red Dead Redemption doesn't fall into that trap. The end encounter (it doesn't really have a singular boss per se) matches the game's sense of climax. And that is where Red Dead Redemption hits all the right note--its gives the player great highs and good lows. Red Dead Redemption gives the player a chance to sit back and let things sink in. I was never given that false sense of "hurry or the world will end" that many games resort to. The worst part of that scenario is that it's almost always a lie. Normally, I see these moments and decide that I'm going to finish up all my sidequests before beating the game. Red Dead Redemption doesn't have to do this because, like a good essay or movie, you have an idea that the end is looming, you feel it coming. And while you don't want it to end, you know it has to.

" Apparently, we all want big bosses and epic encounters even if they don't sensibly fit into the story. These types of encounters seem to be disconnected with the process that built to the end of the game. "

I concur dear sirs.
Well put.

I agree as well. But for Mass Effect 3, I do want to see epic boss battles for the dramatic conclusion to the trilogy.

It was an amazing experience RDR continues to climb my list of favourite games ever, months after I have put it down.

" It was an amazing experience RDR continues to climb my list of favourite games ever, months after I have put it down. "

" @rhacer63 said:

" It was an amazing experience RDR continues to climb my list of favourite games ever, months after I have put it down. "

Easily #1 if all the multiplayer DLC was in at launch. "

" @Icil said:

" @rhacer63 said:

" It was an amazing experience RDR continues to climb my list of favourite games ever, months after I have put it down. "

Easily #1 if all the multiplayer DLC was in at launch. "

Funny thing, I would put it up there without the multiplayer component at all. I've still barely touched the MP and yet the game still speaks to me. "

" @Icil said:

" @rhacer63 said:

" It was an amazing experience RDR continues to climb my list of favourite games ever, months after I have put it down. "

Easily #1 if all the multiplayer DLC was in at launch. "

Funny thing, I would put it up there without the multiplayer component at all. I've still barely touched the MP and yet the game still speaks to me. "

I liked the ending, though I felt the rest of the story was pretty boring in comparison. It was way too slow and you could probably do away with half of the missions and it wouldn't affect the story in any way.
 
Though I agree about the last parts of the game being very fitting. It's not something I'd like to see more of, since there's nothing more satisfying than beating a tough boss in order to get to the ending, but it was a nice change of pace regardless.

I thought the ending of RDR was very fitting for the game. I just don't like the gauntlet style of play developers throw at you during games, wave after wave of enemies. RDR had this, Dragon Age Origins, Assassin's Creed was fucking ridiculous with its end game gauntlet. It's like the only way developers can give you a challenge is to increase the number of enemies. I'm not a fan of big boss fights either. Maybe I'm just looking for more in my games, not sure.

I loved the pacing. My only problem with it is I felt where you were at the end of the game should've been a bit further off the map. Felt a bit too close.

I've actually felt that "bosses" have been severely outdated since Halo 1. That game showed me that you can have a totally satisfying and intense conclusion to game without having to slay some large enemy with an even larger health bar. I'm a little sad that we're almost to 2011 and developers still put bosses in games that totally don't need them.