Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I'm simultaneously glad to see many others having the same opinion of RDR2 as I did, that it's probably the most over hyped game of the past 5-10 years, but disheartened to see 99% of "critics" and game/entertainment related web sites gush embarrassingly over it and claim it's a "Masterpiece" and "the best RPG of this generation consoles." Fist of all... NO, it's NOT a masterpiece. Not by a long shot. Yes the game is beautifully rendered and realistic but at the same time, it's bleak and barren; yes I suppose there's a lot of quests to do but so far they're VERY repetitive. I've played about 15 hours so far and it took forever to get through the intro and the main tutorials. The story so far is really a snooze fest and I'm having a hard time feeling any bonding with any characters and any drive to continue this story. There are way too many cut scenes and dialogues are way too long and just meaningless fluff. I agree with many who say the map is just massive... but this is not a good thing like it is in Witcher 3: Wildhunt or God of War or Horizon: Zero Dawn. It literally takes forever to get from one main story interaction to another on your horse. In between is a beautiful landscape but completely void of anything interesting which makes it tedious. Yes there are some side quests to find and places to discover off the main route but from what I've experienced so far a LOT of the map is simply nothing... just pretty landscape. Yes, I realize I've only played about 15 hours but that's more than enough time for a game to grab my attention, get me interested in the game, the story, the controls and gameplay and start to have emotional investment in it AND especially the characters. RDR2 does none of that and I frankly don't want to wait around to see if that happens. I've decided there exists a massive disconnect with these so-called "critics" and actual, TRUE gamers definition of a "masterpiece" gaming experience. For critics it appears... especially with RDR2... all they seem to care about is a beautiful, realistic landscape, anticipation with waiting years for a previously fantastic game to come out with a sequel and more story and cut scenes than actual game play. This is more like an interactive movie, not a game. I've concluded either Rockstar paid off a LOT of reviewers to give RDR2 10/10 ratings or most of them simply aren't true gamers and don't fully understand what most gamers want and respect out of a game and what really constitutes a masterpiece. Sorry but a beautiful landscape that looks absolutely real isn't enough to give a game a great score. Games have been rendered amazingly realistic for years now and it's almost expected. This seems to be the main accolade for most of the reviews I've read online. You know what an RPG Masterpiece is? God of War. Horizon: Zero Dawn. And what I consider to be the best game ever made: The Witcher 3, Wild Hunt. The Witcher has a massive map and sometimes takes you a while to get from one quest point to another but in between is not only the most realistic landscape you can imagine but stuff to explore and discover at every step of the way, under every rock and behind every bush. Not only that, CD Projekt Red was somehow able to create the most dynamic and LIVE world I've ever seen in a game. Cities are flowing with real side interactions, voices, sounds and animations. I sometimes think the sounds in the game are coming from outside my house. The towns, cities and open space in The Witcher 3 is ALIVE... more alive than any game I've ever played. RDR2 doesn't even come close. Hell, I liked Assassin's Creed: Origins way better than this borefest. I'm giving this game one star because the review of it here on Amazon should reflect what the game is really like and because it is NOTHING like what so many critics are saying. It's honestly a 6/10 for me. I doubt I'll even finish it. I'd rather get Assassin's Creed: Odyssey or Spiderman with my limited available gaming time. I'm just glad I didn't get the Special or Ultimate editions.