>beat the shit out of a man dying of tuberculosis who's just trying to make ends meet for his family before he kicks the bucket over unpaid loan shark debts
>continue harassing the family after his death ("I'll keep her in black on your behalf")
>force his son and wife into coal-mining and prostitution to survive
>in a karmatic act of retribution end up infected with the same disease
>make half-assed attempt at making things right (not that he ever could)
>die alone and betrayed by his own people on top of a mountain
How did anyone shed a tear over his death? Sounds like he got what he deserved tbh.
That's actually the beauty of the ending. You aren't necessarily expected to shed a single tear, because as you say, he did horrible things. He was an outlaw, he murdered, he robbed, he stole, etc. However, you as the player, were following Arthur very closely on the journey. No matter how late or impossible, or clumsy his attempts to make things right was (he know it very well by the way), you were able to see that he was being genuine. He believed in trying to do what he can. Whether you appreciate it or not, forgive him or not, is up to you.
If you are the kind of person who is empathetic, understands the circumstances of his upbringing, it is possible to feel sorry for him, but it always remains a bit ambiguous how much he deserves that or not. People I think generally feel sorry for him, since he really is coming across as a good guy who was brought up and socialized in a horrible environment.
The game clearly tries to make you feel sympathetic to Arthur and I just dont care in the way I felt for John during RDR1. John is doing what he has to for his family but at the same time never deluded himself while we see him that there was any higher reason or moral aspiration to his actions. John doesnt care what side of the Mexican War he's helping because he sees through the ideological mumbo jumbo, he does whatever he thinks will get his family back. Arthur is dragged down and made unlikable because we play him and see him actually buying the self-serving BS about Dutchs gang even if he sometimes acts like a cynical xer like during the suffragette thing
I think we simply see him in the process of opening his eyes slowly.
I remember even from the beginning of the game, Dutch was giving Arthur shit for expressing his doubts, and pointing to Dutch out contradictions in what he is saying and what they are actually doing. Arthur was never that stupid. But we learn from the game that Arthur was raised by Dutch and Hosea, grew up in the gang. This was what was "normal" to him. It is the source of conflict with him and Mary as well. It's not really deluding himself, it's more that he is getting in terms with the fact that the man who raised him is a con man. A very good con man, so I can't really blame Arthur for it. And in the end he does decide to frick it, and start following what he actually thinks is right. But I can sympathise that it's complicated, and of course Arthur isn't perfect by any means.
Hindsight is 20/20, Dutch is the same man in the first game just a little more unhinged.
John is a whiner trying to sweep his past back under the rug. the gang is already broken so of course he is going to act like it was all a waste of his lifetime before and the only thing he regrets is the trouble it brought him with the law. But he WAS in the gang so it's clear at one point he did drink the kool aid, just like the native guys with Dutch at the end.
Exactly, they all drank the kool aid. Dutch was very good at what he was doing. I don't mean to say that they are 100% blameless because of it, but I think it's a lot more difficult and compicated if you grow up in an environment where you drink the kool aid every day.
It might have been worthwhile caring if the game wasn't poorly designed. Meanwhile, in between missions, you're murdering thousands of lawmen and in missions you're murdering thousands of lawmen. The whiplash of this and then Arthur going "but I was a good boah" makes it really hard to care. Also, the betrayal was shit and the second half of the game was meh. I really wanted to like it too.
On the other hand, it's a very common complaint that the game gives you negative honor any time you do something even slightly questionable. Sometimes it's silly things like killing dogs that accompany bounty hunters and lawmen that are trying to kill you. You don't get negative honor for bounty hunters but you do for their dogs.
Anyway, it's not entirely true what you are saying, because the honor system is there exactly for this reason, to drive it home that it is the player's choice to do those things and aren't forced to do that. They even have negative repercussions in the form of negative honor. I think it isn't hard to care at all. It is quite possible to feel sorry for him, but you still can think that at the same time he doesn't deserve redemption.
It bugs me that you get negative karma for killing the horses of your enemies.
Anyway, IMO none of the karma shit matters because in chapter 6 you get boosted karma so even if you have bad karma you can easily get it into good honor by the ending.
The point still is, that not only none of those things like murdering thousands of lawmen between missions are forced, you are actively penalized by the system for doing it. Sure you can get it back in chapter 6 more easily, but that is because in the story that is when Arthur starts to make effort. But ultimately it's still up to the player to actually make the effort. It is the "redemption" part from the title. So it's not true that it doesn't matter.
>Arthur going "but I was a good boah"
He never claims this, it's the other people that saw his good deeds that say it.
He continuesly tell people that he's a bad man like a broken record. Anything you do not in a mission ain't exactly canon either.
>what you do free roam is not canon
Boooooring. Why play a story based open world game if you’re going to say your gameplay is fake and isn’t the story? Fact is Arthur is a maniac who sometimes tries to act normal but accidentally starts a colossal gunfight by tripping over someone and forgetting his gun is in his hand when pointing at people, but otherwise rides through and kills a bunch of people for no reason.
>in between missions, you're murdering thousands of lawmen
Only if you play like a moron but that's relevant to all rockstar games (i just killed over9000 army tanks but i'm afraid of fbi man in cutscenes)
Tbf, even in missions you kill like 6 gorillion people. One thing that is most grating about Rockstar games that kind of works in GTA because it is utter nonsense, but doesn't in RDR because it strives to be realistic, is that every mission you kill tens of people.
You gotta ask where the frick does Colm even get all the irishmen from and why is he such a b***h if he has a whole army compared to the Dutch gang of homosexuals?
>the betrayal
why does every single rockstar game have this shit in it
All their games have criminals and criminal elements in them. It’s pretty much a given
>shoots 1000 people to death in cold blood
>dies of tb
Oh noes what a heckin tragedy
all those npcs were racist bigots they deserved to die
The game is called red dead redemption for a reason
Rockstar should've called it red feminist redemption because pic rel is the biggest "yasss queen slay" character i've ever seen in a videogame
how hairy do u think her puss/b hole is???
Bonnie was a "strong women" so much better than Sadie
Got raped and almost hanged without Johns intervention. Not really what i'd call strong.
yeah idiots like you is exactly why we only get completely unrealistic mary sue characters these days. Being a strong character doesn't mean someone who never suffers and never loses to anyone, no matter how dire the circumstances.
Sadie is reckless and has a death wish you have to bail her out multiple times. The only mary sue is Charles dude literally has 0 flaws the entire game.
He's half black
>he's black
Why do you think rockstar made him a good guy?
How he's half black
A woman is less because she is raped?
And immediately joked about it after being rescued. She seems like a pretty cool guy.
>girl who runs her ranch is a "strong woman"
you /misc/cels are so insecure it's hilarious
>muh pol
sadie is cringe and your subplebbits are not private anymore
Frick of pol
I like how they're upfront about how this board is a hivemind. /misc/turds mock reddit and twitter for being over moderated safe spaces but try to cultivate the same kind of echo chamber here because they, like redditors, can't handle being contradicted or any kind of disagreement to the collective opinion.
>everyone else is le same dumb sheeple but not me i am le enlightened centrist with completely unassailable opinions (because i have none, checkmate chuds)
You're just a gay 90IQ autism-hipster.
he said while posting the coked out heeb who "invented psychology"
I don't understand how can anyone like Sadie, the sole purpose of this character is to force a "stronk wominz" figure in the game and nothing else. And how did they do it? Making a woman do men things so she appears strong and badass and whatever. Women can be strong in other areas, but making her a strong, independent bounty hunter was the easiest way to make simpletons think "woah what a strong woman!". Also her story goes NOWHERE. After working as a bounty hunter she disappears and that's it.
Genuinely frick Rockstar for ruining an otherwise great game with this shitty character. Frick Charles too, another "badass" tough guy who never faces any single consequence.
She's just in it for revenge and nothing else after that she just keeps on going because maybe one day she will get shot and die and she doesn't care. It goes nowhere because it's safe to assume between the two games she just got shot by some mexican
susan was a decent example of a strong woman
Cuckstar fans can't stop losing
I wouldn't mind the characters being awful, unlikable scum if they were at least interesting. The story could've left Arthur and Dutch's gang at any time and I really wouldn't have cared in the slightest.
Also, Rockstar should stop trying to write stories about morality or with morality systems. They're either too dumb, don't care or they genuinely don't have functioning moral compasses. I'm leaning towards they don't care.
He was a really thoughtful moron and I actually enjoyed playing as the type of idiot who does asinine violent shit and then opines on it like it’s his struggle
hundreds of hours of "gameplay" (cinematic horse travel) later and all I remember is "Yennl" in the bar, and the feminist movement kicking off in the 1800s.
and maybe that bit where the psycho one butchers a town. and dutch never had a real plan.
also my friend was more pissed off that arthurs horse was killed too cause he spent the entire game reloading saves to keep it alive and getting unreasonably pissed off when it died due to bullshit and the save option being locked in combat after not saving in hours.
It was 1899
>the feminist movement kicking off in the 1800s
They sort of existed as suffragettes in the latter 1800s but they were more about women being able to vote without being put on the draft. Also they were vocal supporters for eugenics movement, which is funny since the Youtuber bait eugenicist in the city probably agrees with a lot of what the feminists think.
Arthur's whole story is that he was bad person with enough conscience and tries to change his way at the end and ultimately sacrifices himself so John could have a chance at a straight life. you didn't get filtered do you?
I think the emotional part of the story is when sick Arthur figures out he cant escape this life and sacrifices his own so john can live alright with his family
>sacrifices himself for John and his family
>not mentioned once by John in rdr
what a cuck
>now son, Abigail, we have to promise never to mention Arthur again. We have to honor him by not breaking the timeline. If we bring up Arthur again anywhere in our lives, we’re gonna cause a time paradox and our two games won’t be canon to eachother
the price of making a prequel, at least they tried giving a reason
>who's just trying to make ends meet for his family before he kicks the bucket over unpaid loan shark debts
I don' really blame you because it is all easy to miss, but people should play chapter 2 again. Mr. Downes was doing no such thing. They actually put him right in your face twice before then.
Downes is one of the local preachers. When you go with Uncle into town he is right there next to the general store, collecting donations to build the homeless shelter in Valentine. The shelter that just broke ground recently and started being built just a couple weeks after the gang(and Straus) get into town? All that money he borrowed went into the shelter and he knew day 1 he would be dead before he could pay it back. Straus was right in his description of him and saying not to listen to any nonsense.
Yeah, he did this big altruistic thing, but it also ruined his fricking family's future. He was still going to die and leave them penniless whether Arthur beat the shit out of them or not. He pretty much spit in Arthur's face on purpose. Read between the lines and he is not so great a guy for all the good he is trying to do
Also he is the dude who stops the Arthur in the fight but that isn't so related.
>He pretty much spit in Arthur's face on purpose
I agree with your overall point but can you really blame him? He's a defenseless and dying man getting his ass handed to him over unpaid debts.
Not really. It's a karmic moment for both of them.
I’d rather cry over how underwhelming this game was
>go in expecting Blood Meridian
>go out having played Brokeback Mountain, but even more pozzed
Arthur's moral homosexualry is unbearable and I don't appreciate him as a character. The whole Van Der Linde gang is a bunch of buttfrick pirates.
I really don't understand Arthur problem with Strauss work at the end. Like people took the money and then it's bad to take our own money back? I even robbed that dude with pregnant wife and felt good about it.
Post nose
I hate how railroady the game is in that scene. I was going out of my way NOT to beat up the TB guy, even before I knew about the twist, because I didn't want to be a shithead.
But then Morgan spergs out for no reason and starts beating up the guy anyway even if I kept picking the peaceful options.
GTA IV suffers from the same narrative issue and yet it's jerked off constantly here
Nico doesnt die, yes I can be sad about beeg american breasts death, it wasnt his fault.
GTA 4 suffers from the same problem but it's not as nearly as pronounced because Niko's struggle makes sense. He does it for money, he's not ashamed to say it and he has no problems doing it. He doesn't try to preach "le no roicism, sexism and homophobia in my group", he's just trying to get by. There's no overt political statements made by him (aside from him shitting on capitalism which is realistic given where Niko comes from)
Nico performs every type of extremist, political and nonsense violence while complaining about each of them the whole time. It makes sense he does it all for money, it just makes him the guy who says shooting up a parade is bullshit while he does it
I would describe Niko as a pure nihilist. He obviously dislikes what he is doing, but as he says himself in the game - that's the only thing he is good at and it earns him money. So he doesn't enjoy it, he finds most of his contracts annoying on a personal level, but he doesn't try to moral homosexual his way out of things. He makes some sarcastic remarks towards Playboy, McReary, Ray and the others he personally dislikes, but I don't remember him ever trying to "educate" me on things.
Arthur is a very stark contrast on that and his hypocrisy is off the charts, even though the game is trying to portray him as in the right.
Game doesn’t really portray Arthur as right, just as scrambling to do what he can to make a difference or be good after he’s screwed up his whole life being immoral
>How did anyone shed a tear over his death? Sounds like he got what he deserved tbh.
Because he never had a chance to be normal. His real dad was an alcoholic frickup, and by the time he realized his adopted father figure was a delusional narcissist, it was too late. He'd given his entire life to the gang. He lost two loves of his life because of it, not to mention a child of his own. And all he had to show for it was a short life of blood on his hands.
It's not about shedding a tear over his death (although many have) and it's not about him making perfect decisions (going along with Sadie while she slaughters her rapist.) It's about him doing the best he can in the very short time he has left to live. He's trying to squeeze in being normal and whatever "good" means into a narrow window. It's significant because a lot of us still have a chance to redeem ourselves for however shitty we've ever been, and we have years...
It's impossible to talk about the game on this website because it was super popular when it was relevant and Ganker is contrarian to the core. Even now when all the normalgays have finished and forgotten about it you get daily threads crying about it. I said my piece.
This constant bickering about whether Arthur deserved it or was a "good guy" in the end or not—which, granted, is the same few people on Ganker trolling and resorting to same or similar copypasta—has had me thinking. IF Rockstar (and that's a big IF, since nu-Rockstar seems intent to only work on GTA and shark card stores for the rest of our lives) makes another Red Dead installment with a morality system, they need to abandon the "fallen thug" trope. Instead, they should borrow from/rip off Josey Wales. Have the main protagonist this time be a grizzled Civil War vet headed West right after the war, putting the Reconstruction mess and his shattered past behind him. That way, you have him venturing into unexplored and dangerous territory instead of it being "The Wild West is dying" again. It would be peak Wild West instead, and you determine what type of person he goes down in history as. Your choices from early on will make it harder to pull the reputation system up later, so you can't just do a "howdy, ma'am!!!" 300 times and become a white hat.
I don't think they want "peak wild west" just like nothing about GTA has been about portraying "peak America"
Yes, and the other problem is Twitter would get mad at any instance of trying to tell that story (>excuse me? did you just portray someone who fought to preserve slavery as the HERO? >excuse me? did you just? make Apache raiders into bad guys?) And Rockstar isn't Warhorse Studios. They're a billions dollar company at the forefront of every headline. But I was trying to be optimistic, so I didn't want to mention that part of it.
>try to act honorable from the very beginning
>Arthur still chimps out and gets tb
the whole honor mechanic should've just been scraped
You don't have to choose the redemption ending, there's always the "frick all of you you I'm going back for the gold" ending that goes the same way. If you chose the redemption ending it's because you wanted it.
Played this game until I got out of the snowy area. Found the story bits slow and tedious. If I don't give a shit about the story and just wanna dick around in the world, am I better off just playing the story or online mode?
Once you set up camp at the beginning of chapter 2, the world is open and you can ignore the story, though some of those chapter 2 quests give you open world equipment and hunting maps and such
Offline world is more alive you can find some interesting fellas during your travels but online gives you more incentive for hunting, collecting treasures or catching criminals.
>I beat the tutorial then stopped playing
lol moron
Online is a shitty grind you have to grind micro currency just to get one of the classes and strips most of the interesting things off the map.
Chapter 1 is a bit of a slog but it's short and you are already through. Some stuff is progress blocked like stronger weapons in the catalog, or getting the off hand sidearm holster.
>stronger weapons
what even is the point if the starting pistol kills everyone in one headshot?
Because a semi automatic pistol or higher grade repeaters hold more bullets, fire faster, and reload quicker so you can get more headshots? And stronger rifles have a better range?
Honestly if you just play to the end of chapter 2 you get both the dual wield and the sniper rifle. that would probably be the most meaningful shit you can get from playing the story missions. I don't know whether you need to do the bank robbery in ch3 before you can rob banks in free roam.
>Because a semi automatic pistol or higher grade repeaters hold more bullets, fire faster, and reload quicker so you can get more headshots? And stronger rifles have a better range?
on paper it sounds great but there are no encounters in the game that can't be easily completed with a starting revolver.
online sucks, i played for 2 days and ran into 4 different cheaters.
> "Ever since we landed on these parts, we've always done things by the will of the rich white men of Washingtown and look where that has got us.
> I guess what I am saying is... perhaps it's HER turn this election cycle."
>How did anyone shed a tear over his death
I've been asking myself that question since the day I beat this shitty game, believe you me. This game's attempts at forcing me to warm up to a pack of roadside bandits made my skin crawl. Leave it to muttstar (and mutts in general) to romanticize and lionize thieves and criminals.
>romanticize and lionize
>lionize
Having such a severe lack of empathy just means you yourself are an evil person. Arthur basically puts a mirror to your own soul and what you are seeing is disgusting and hateful, so you hate him because you hate what you see in yourself.
>Having such a severe lack of empathy
I'm more empathetic than you are, the difference between us is that I have a working moral compass unlike you. My eyes are on the people Dutch's gang extorts, attacks and kills. You on the other hand, somehow find it easier to empathize with a violent dude who went around torturing and killing people to force them to pay back their loans. Don't talk to me about empathy or evil, dude, you lack the former, and while you are not necessarily evil, you're still dumb, gullible and naïve as frick with your infantile emotions.
>Arthur basically puts a mirror to your own soul and what you are seeing is disgusting and hateful
sorry I don't smell my own farts enough to think on your wavelength, but I never ever viewed Arthur as some kind of introspective device nor does he seem like he's designed to be one. I hate Arthur because he's despicable and I hated him even more as the game kept trying to get me to like him.
you are Arthur though. Aside from a couple of story missions that force you into certain decisions, you play him exactly how you want to play. I know you are not a christian and you probably never read the Bible, but the concept of redemption is at the very core of western civilization. so yes, Arthur was a bad man, but he also tried his hardest to make up for his mistakes the best he could.
I admire his attempt to make things right but it was far too late and hundreds of people die even when he is trying to make things right. How many families and communities are torn apart because of him?
>My eyes are on the people Dutch's gang extorts, attacks and kills
>You on the other hand, somehow find it easier to empathize with a violent dude who went around torturing and killing people to force them to pay back their loans
Weak empathize with the weak, strong emphasize with the strong
I felt empathy for John. I can understand gritting your teeth and doing what you have to do to rescue your family and could see myself in a situation like that. If its the life of my son or the life of some strangers and I absolutely have to choose then the choice is pretty obvious.
Arthur just does it for money and utopian nonsense which somehow entails loansharking the very lower class common family man thats oppressed by the centralized mercantilistic bureacratic elite your ideology is supposedly against. Hes a terrible garbage human being.
your right op
that's why i install 50 mods so i can enjoy the game for real as a old time Supply runner, hunter, and carriage driver, and get payed for it to
I do like the desperate forceful attempts at redemption
> He may have started caring for the lambs, but he still killed every wolf! He didn't earn his redemption!
Every homosexual on here. You don't get it.
as with every red dead game, the government is the real bad guy and they prove it at the end every single time
arthur did nothing wrong, they lived in a society.
Arthur literally dies because he is a violent dumbass for usury.
you can just not do the missions for the "german" that way, and give the camp untold riches you got from bandits and they still don't appreciate it at all.
which is to say, not in my playthrough he wasn't.
It's fiction
the trick is to never andvance the story past chapter two
just stay in the comfy homestead and howdy forever
>"The way i see it, white folk really have been keepin them there colored folk down all these years..."
>"Bout time we be givin them reparations i reckons"
Woah... Rockstar does it again... masterpiece...
"What if the black feller has a big ol' pecker and my ol' lady enjoys it more, who am I to judge?"