What this game does best it does better than nearly anything else. Unfortunately, what it does best is not in the interactive department, which makes it difficult to rate as a video game. If I were to rate this by its highest moments, it would easily get a 10, as the story and characters moved me in a way few games ever have, and it is an understatement to say the world is beautiful and detailed. They managed to write a character better than John in Arthur, although some of this may be due to the game's length and increased character interaction. The beginning and ending are amazing, including the epilogue, though I could see how some would think it's too long (some missions could have been cut). For me it was an opportunity to reflect on the characters' journeys in a lived way, and a wonderful homage to its predecessor (and way better than that game's epilogue).

Another thing this game does brilliantly is spacing! I've long wished open-world games would move away from Ubisoft mentality, to Shadow of the Colossus mentality. Space things out, that the player may reflect more instead of getting distracted by the next thing. Luke Stephens has a good commentary on this, with numbers for comparison... RDR 2 is essentially twice as spaced out as nearly every other open-world game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frfvQUNbJBc

But I agree with what others have said about the gameplay, and wholly support watching the video posted here from NakeyJakey. Options for completing missions are overly limited, and they want you to complete them their way. I remember one instance in which I tried to do something different, riding around on the horse with my shotgun in the woods and blasting people close up, but the game failed me for "abandoning" the others when they were still visible, and I was actually more effective than I was on foot because of the heavy tree cover. Most of the missions are just riding to your next shooting gallery, though it helps that the game is so beautiful. There were moments I thought perhaps this is better than going out into the wilderness in reality. I also did not enjoy fishing and hunting after the first few times, and you do the same thing over and over again in the legendary hunts, which would be fine if it was fun. Robbing stagecoaches, houses, and trains isn't that fun, either, nor is it necessary.

The side missions are filled with zany characters but for the most part aren't particularly compelling, with the exception of a few that link to Arthur's character in a meaningful way. I wish Rockstar (and everyone) would learn from CD Projekt Red in their side mission design. The economy is completely broken, as others have said, which I normally don't care much about, but in this game has a huge impact because the whole plot is centered around getting enough money, and gang devilry is only needed if you actually need money. So you end up with a game where you can spend all your time on the side being a white knight to everyone and have tons of cash with little to spend it on aside from cosmetic alterations, while the main story centers around getting enough money to move, reinforcing that two-faced feeling already present in the disparity between its open-world freedom and the set pieces of the main story. They also attempted to offer some choices in this game, but these were poorly implemented and potentially at odds with what you did in the open world and the trajectory of the story.

If I were someone who weighted the gameplay more heavily in my evaluations, this would get a lower score. But I consume most media for the story, and this is a great one, being one of the few in gaming to make me cry. I do wish it was leaner, though. A third of the game's main missions could be cut with little detriment to the story's heart. I would love another prequel to this game being made, with many of the same characters, but with a major gameplay overhaul!