A “reference” to Arthur in this game could be the jacket Jack wears on the epilogue, and it could canonically be Arthur’s old gunslinger jacket from 1899
There's one moment in Red Dead 2's epilogue that reveals he never forgot about Arthur. He just doesn't like talking about him, both because it hurts and because Arthur told him to not look back. (I'm aware Red Dead 1 was made first, but this is a nice in-universe explanation)
@@futurestoryteller Well, you'd think Arthur would come up in his head at least once while hunting down former members from that gang, given John wouldn't have gotten away without him.
@@VGamingJunkieVT I think people get caught up in dreamlike "story logic". It's funny too because this also represents a paradox in pop culture discourse. Since everyone (correctly) predicted that the characters of Star Wars Rogue One would die (or had to, as most annoyingly put it) because they are not seen _or talked about_ again. Which is not very logical either. And we're talking about a rebellion spanning an entire galaxy with who knows how many planets and presumably trillions of people; at least. But it was ended by a single whiny farmboy, so of course they think if you're "not important" you must be dead. Point is Arthur is the reason they got away, yeah, but a lot has happened since then. He died, but a lot of people have died. When they talk about the gang they're talking about Dutch, unless they're talking about one of the targets that's still alive. I will say if anyone were to make an offhand comment about Arthur I would actually expect it to be Ross. His inclusion in the prequel seems unnecessary, making fun of some "oaf" he remembers from his early days trying to wrangle up Dutch's gang sounds a lot like something he would do.
@@futurestoryteller I mean, being the whole reason John was able to live peacefully with his family for 12 years and being his brother? You don't think Arthur's worth remembering, for that? John still clearly remembers Dutch leaving him for dead, even in the Red Dead 1 dialogue, so I would hope he remembers Arthur giving him his hat and telling him to never look back.
@@VGamingJunkieVT Yeah, there are good reasons why they would talk about him, if they did. But they don't, and there doesn't need to be any good reason why
The scene is about the Stranger judging John for forgetting people who were harmed and killed during his gang days. Not a certain friend who's helped him like many make it out to be. Whom there would be no way John forgot unless he got a visit from an old friend amnesia.
When John says "Sometimes, it takes more strength to stay than to run, mrs. Macfarlane" is the only piece of dialogue in RDR1 that could be plausibly retconned as some reference to Arthur.
In the epilogue of RDR2, when meeting Mary Beth at the Valentine train station, John says that he thinks about Arthur all the time, but he doesn't talk about him much. This for me is all I needed. John is a quiet lone cowboy type anyway. Obviously Arthur wasn't written at the time of RDR1, but just knowing that John thinks about him, even if we never see it, that's enough for me
@maximodiaz802 because he was hellbent on killing him, even willing to lose everything to do so. As we obviously see from the events of Red Dead 1 and 2.
I don't think it's Arthur he's referring to, but literally everyone who's died for Dutch *as well* as Arthur. So many people died trying to survive or just set the gang straight. They more than likely would've sided with John, but as they all died in equally terrible fashions and were all grim reminders of his past, he never thinks or mentions them again and likely prefers it that way.
Obviously the dudes in the studio at rockstar weren’t even thinking of the idea of Arthur Morgan in 2010, but retroactively it does fit in with Arthur being one of the far more important faces forgotten
“You have forgotten far more people than me” 0:23 This relates to John and how he doesn’t talk about Arthur anymore. John would still have Arthurs hat in both games but, John decides he doesn’t want to wear it anymore and hence to the man saying john has forgotten. Since john doesn’t mention anything about Arthur in rdr1.
No, there is one mention of a character who probably became Arthur as the story for RDR2 Was being written. Early on when John is talking to Bonnie he alludes to a friend helping him get out of the gang. No names are mentioned and this is never brought up again, but it's retroactively implied to have been Arthur. This line was probably left in on the off chance that they'd make a prequel.
A lot of people are missing the mark here. He's definitely not referring to Arthur. There's 2 distinct and meaningful reasons he brings up Heide McCort and her importance. First, the direct surface reason being her death is the catalyst for everything breaking down in the Van der Linde gang and it's eventually dissolution and the deaths along the way. Everything was fine until she died then it all went sideways, the ramifications seen in RDR2. Her death is the most important one concerning the gang outside of the gang itself. Second is a more metaphysical reason in that the Strange Man is death and if John is so callous to death that he does not even remember the innocent people who've been killed by his/the gangs actions the why would he remember death himself who is not, philosophically speaking, more important than the person who died. To be honest, if the sequel wasn't all ready in the plans then the second reasoning is most likely the correct one
damn bro u pretty smart. rare to have a comment genuinely teach me something on youtube. this scene is like trying to read shakespeare alone, and you're my lit teacher explaining the connections in a seminar. i can see them independently now, but not until you pointed them out.
Yup you’re right. If you read Arthur’s journal in RDR2, at the beginning of it he mentions how he started to doubt Dutch after the fiasco in Blackwater because he witnessed him kill an innocent girl, that clearly being Heide McCort. Her murder set Dutch down the path that destroyed everyone
I also like to believe that the stranger is referring to Arthur but in reality it not only reminds him of the people that John and the gang have murdered.
If you choose to believe, there's actually at least 3 references to Arthur! 1) This one in the video ("You've forgotten far more important people than me"). This is not to say John has completely forgotten Arthur, but vaguely refers to his past with the gang and John's decision to not talk about them often, including Arthur 2) On the first trip to Armadillo with Bonnie, she'll tell John about how she sometimes thinks of leaving the ranch life, to which John ambiguously replies "In my experience, it takes more stay than to run Miss MacFarlane". One could say he is thinking of Arthur's sacrifice in this moment 3) Before Dutch jumps off the cliff, he repeats almost verbatim some dialogue that he spoke in RDR2 alongside Arthur. It's oddly specific. Because the words would mean little to John, since he was not present to hear them the first time, it can be deduced that Dutch was reflecting on his friend Arthur one final time. The quote is "We can't always fight nature. We can't fight change, we can't fight gravity" Comparison of the scenes: ruclips.net/video/3HwF6lcsyWk/видео.html&ab_channel=BrotherFoller Hope someone finds all these possibilities as interesting as I do I love this franchise
@@TastyMeat8675well yeah obviously. But one of the main purposes of a prequel (especially a good prequel) is to recontextualize and bring new meaning and weight to things/moments in the original work
Regarding number 3, the first time Dutch said it, he was just using it as a means to buy time for him and Arthur to escape, but when he said it as his final words, he actually meant it
I honestly hope they make a proper remake to RDR 1 and the throw some real references to Arthur in the game, it kinda sucks how no one ever talks about Arthur in the original game, i know the entire Arthur character was made after the release of RDR 1 but he had such an impact in so many people's lives that you would think any of them would name drop him at least once in the entire game
Personally they should just more accurately phase RDR1 from RDR2, like another person said, Javier needs to be written like he was in RDR2. Maybe add a few bits of people reflecting on the old life now that we know how it was, Dutch referencing Hosea, and absolutely a much more open world with maybe some of new Hanover added in.
@@Doatello1991Javier did change IMMENSELY from what he used to be. From Revolutionary on the run to Cold blooded killer working for a corrupt government. The complete 180 of what Dutch preached over and over again 😭
Rockstar does plan ahead with events and characters like *Heide McCort* here. And they also do it in RDR2 in a very subtle way most people seem to forget with *Mac and Davey Challander* the brothers are mentioned quite alot through-out the story. They mysteriously die before RDR2 really starts as perhaps a perfect setup for future games perhaps even as main-characters like you can play multiple main-characters in GTA V. With members like Bill and others mentioning how much he misses them and that they were great, and members like Charles remembering them as pure outlaws and terrible people most likely having to do with the honor system every RDR game has.
Makes sense but I'm hoping we get a completely new gang or he'll just a lone outlaw it's best to close the book on the vanderind gang, though if it was set in the same period as John leaving after the gang fell apart then it'd be cool to see dutchs decent to madness in the papers.
@@whereami7586you could always have a lone wolf outlaw game and then final chapter is meeting your new gang with the final mission running away with them
If you ever see a dude in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the night, dressed in a fancy suit with a top hat, and no mode of transportation, i suggest you greet him respectfully lol
As headcanon, it's fine imo. But presenting it as a straight-up mention when Arthur wasn't even thought of and the Stranger isn't even talking about former gang members but the people John and the gang killed is one of my issues with the community.
If your talking about rdr2 and the timeline, no. RDR2 is a Prequel of RDR1 meaning the events of RDR2 happen BEFORE RDR1. If you mean that RDR1 was made before RDR2 and the devs had no thoughts about RDR2 then, yes.
I think the rdr2 epilogue did a really good job of explaining why John just doesn’t like talking about Arthur instead of chalking it up to John forgetting Arthur
The actual closest reference to Arthur would be when John tells Bonnie that an old friend helped him get out, though he doesn’t mention him by name Edit: video link ruclips.net/video/h4hu6IAUZTI/видео.htmlsi=5BvTQzLhTm46-jk2
I think most people would remember someone if they rode together for well over a decade, this same someone saving his life 2 or 3 times, also saving his wife, his son and the family overall
Yeah but Arthur and John were essentially brothers and I think it would be a little hard to forget a brother and Jack tells John in the epilogue that he remembers Arthur teaching him how to fish so even if they did "forget" about Arthur he still held a heavy spot in everyone's heart and uncle for sure still remembers Arthur cause he abused him every second he could😂 but i truly think that they all still remember Arthur they just have moved on with their lives and aren't stuck in their past wondering what could've been
My assumption was that he was referring to "God" when he said he'd "forgotten people far more important than him", as I always viewed the Strange Man as Lucifer, or maybe a Loki trickster-type entity. Because unfortunately the character of Arthur Morgan didn't exist when they wrote that line.
@@RadioStar_Music You just said "You can find it in a documentary created about the second game that came out years after the first" Please tell us where they mention ANYTHING about an Arthur/Savior from the backstory told in RDR1 before they made RDR2. You can't. Sorry, son.
If you really think about it probably not the case but it is a nice touch, Jack Marston in the epilogue wears a light brown jacket and in rdr 2 Arthur wears a light brown jacket perhaps John had access to Arthur’s clothes after his death same as how in gameplay you can dress as Arthur while playing as John in rdr 2 and with John Gone it goes to Jack and in the end when he faces Edgar Ross he dresses like a mix to both John Martson and Arthur Morgan.
How could this possibly be a reference to Arthur. Aside from rockstar not having thought of Arthur yet, the previous line clearly indicates the 'important people' he's forgotten are all of the innocent people he and his gang have hurt or killed.
Arthur Morgan is literally name dropped in a newspaper that talks about Dutch's old gang. They literally built Red Dead 2's story around that newspaper. It mentions Pinkertons killing Hosea and Arthur Morgan exactly by name, and that Dutch has been spotted still active in the mountains.
@@invaderhemp Yeah, because it's actually really obvious that Red Dead 2 has no direct relationship to the first game. None of what we're told about them lines up with what we see. I don't need there to be references to Arthur in the first game, but the two are like alternate universes, frankly
@@futurestoryteller Bruh what, it's literally a prequel. What do you mean no direct relationship? Have you actually played the games? It's literally sets up the first game, including the characters who survive to be in the first game. The "redemption" in Red Dead Redemption is John avenging Arthur, and then Jack avenging John.
this game does something strange... its like red dead 1 story was written with the backstory of red dead 2 in mind, but at the same time it wasnt... its strange, because you have moments in rdr1 where you can think "oh, he is thinking about arthur", but he isnt mentioned in the whole game, but other events are like the ferry in blackwater, its like if rdr2 was meant to make us think "wait, are they talking about (insert event or character from rdr2)?"
There was a more direct reference to Arthur, in the second mission with the strange man, he sits somewhere in mexico and reads grave plates, and then states "Arthur! What a coincedence..." It's pretty much possible that RDR 2 is one of those fanfics turned into the game
For all these chodes saying “nuh uh” its implied that Rdr1 John ought to remember Arthur and the events of Rdr2 in some form, obviously its a stretch since OBVIOUSLY rdr2 wasn’t planned at the time of rdr1’s release but for the sake of imagination this IS a reference to Arthur. Immerse yourself in the canon and imagine a canon sequence of events where John wouldn’t mention Arthur because that was a big loss to him and many years have passed hence the strange man “you’ve forgotten far more important people than me” you unimaginative smooth brains
Arthur isn't mentioned in this game because he wasn't even written into rdr until the second game came out. They then at the end of rdr2 explain that John doesn't like to talk about Arthur. Why people are looking for Arthur Morgan references in rdr1 is so beyond me.
RDR takes place over one year, in 1911. That means John was 38 years old when he died in the original Red Dead Redemption. Since RDR2 begins in 1899, John would have been 26 years old during the game's opening scenes
I guess people would see Arthur as "Far more important" than the Stranger. Just like any other character in the RDR-Verse.... So yea.. It could say "Karen" and it would be the same thing.
Even though Arthur was in Blackwater during the massacre, he was with Hosea Matthew’s who found an easier job that wouldn’t attract a lot of attention. Arthur and Hosea arrived later to when Dutch and the others were barely holding out against the law, bounty hunters and pinkertons
I think he was referring to Arthur's words. It was John not remembering Arthur's words that led him to die. His fate was sealed in 1907 when he went after Micah Bell, out of pretty revenge Arthur would've been against.
Dutch's last words: "Our time is passed, John." Arthur throughout RDR2: "Our time...has pretty much passed", "Maybe, time for folk like us has passed", "I mean this whole thing is pretty much done" Dutch did listen to Arthur, in the very end..
They didn’t plan on having Arthur in their story when they made the first game. But the way they connect the two games so seamlessly, is really beautiful
This guy represents death, notice how he talked about the girl that Dutch killed or how he reminds John of Arthur and he appears on multiple occasions in the second game and just disappears instantly
@@NaimedclaimingRDR1 was made before RDR2 was even entering pre production, Arthur wasn't supposed to be a character until the development of RDR2 began
I dont think this is a reference to Arthur. I don't think John forgot about Arthur. He doesn't talk about him, because I'd assume talking about what is his essentially his dead big brother is probably painful tho. But nah this ain't it
Players have searched all over for any definitive reference to Arthur in RDR1 and there really does not seem to be any at all as the character had not yet been thought of nor did Rockstar have the foresight to leave some dangling plot threads to set up a potential prequel. (The references to the Callander Brothers in RDR2 appear to be loose threads to allow for a prequel to RDR2. RDR 1 does not appear to have anything of this sort, outside of broad references to the van der Linde gang's exploits, particularly as pertains to the gangmates you specifically end up killing.) Rather than putting the onus on the player to find some explanation for why Arthur Morgan is never mentioned or even alluded to (definitively), Rockstar really should've included something in Arthur's arc or within the epilogue of the game to explain why John never mentions Arthur. In an otherwise largely perfect game it's really bizarre that this bit of the narrative was completely skipped over but ultimately, it was. And I think we're simply stuck with that. I don't think there's a way to reconcile the narrative gap between the two games in this respect. They didn't plan ahead and they couldn't find a good solution after the fact. Rockstar is phenomenal, but even they're not perfect.
Arthur as acharacter was an idea during red dead redemption one he wasn’t a full character until the earliest beginning stages of red dead redemption twos story.
I'm pretty positive they didn't have Arthur in mind at the time but something also tells me theres a reason they made him say that almost like they setup so that way they could include certain characters, like Arthur.
Arthur wasn't a defined character when they wrote RDR. They did it retroactively as well as they could. I am guessing RDR2 wasn't even in their plans at the time.
For those who are left thinking that there’s no allusion to Arthur at all. Ashwin is implying that The Strange Man is implying that Arthur is one of those important people that John has forgot. Even though John specifically mentions in the epilogue of 2 that he never forgot and The Strange Man is talking about all the people John has contributed to the death of.
Canonically it's more of a memory that's too painful to talk about, not a forgetting important people kinda thing. At least that's how rdr2 epilogue explains it.
Idl if this was intentional. But I like how the “mysterious man” is dressed in 1900s industrial age clothing. Possibly representing the future; which is usually associated with death, consequences, and something ending.
He never “forgot” Arthur. John is a very secretive person. He doesn’t like to speak of his past. Arthur was such a huge part of his past & he died, just like John’s daughter who he has only ever mentioned once. He doesn’t talk about people who have died in his past. He just remembers them.
Arthur is an unanticapated marvel of a character rockstar created. when i played RDR years before i loved John but when Arthur came in he instantly became my favorite of the two.
The reference is you’ve forgotten far more important people than me which lines up perfectly with John forgetting all Arthur wanted was for John to just live peacefully and remember “revenge is a fools game”
If Arthur wasnt sick and killed Micah and Survived and was on the first game alot of things would be different.he would be like 48 years old since hes 36 in 1899 but he'll still wipe out most of people as John but John was a beast in 1911 best Rockstar main Characters.
For everyone saying Arthur wasn’t thought of at this time of RDR1. Dan Houser had Arthur thought of during the production of RDR1, but went with Marston since the family dynamic would add so much more the RDR1’s story.
Remembering Arthur who helped him get out of certain death would traumatize him. Traumatic memories are often hidden away similar to how Ezio and Christina memories were hidden away in the animus because they were far too traumatic to remember.
I love this interpretation of death, in the form that John can understand but still so alien and foreign. Never one to waste words, a gentleman really.
lets just accept it, they didnt plan on having a charcter called arthur during the first game. theres nothing wrong with that.
Literally, this dude is coping so hard with this video
I mean it true Arthur never existed in Rdr1
@@brobequietjust because he interpreted it this way doesn’t mean he’s “coping”
@@AdriCr4fthe’s interpreted wrong he wasn’t even on the ferry he was running a real estate scam with Hosea
@@AdriCr4ftkinda like religion
I like the part where Arthur wasn't mentioned anywhere
“You’ve forgotten for more important people than me, friend”
@@bradlee6868still no mentioning of arthur
@@bradlee6868 well, that's heidi mccourt not arthur
@@GokuPlayss he's talking about Heide smartass
@@GokuPlayss arthur was never an idea durring this game believe what you want but theres no signs of him in rdr1
A “reference” to Arthur in this game could be the jacket Jack wears on the epilogue, and it could canonically be Arthur’s old gunslinger jacket from 1899
That is what I choose to believe
@@B1_1_9_7_5 this is what I also choose to believe I mean c'mon the jacket is almost identical
Same with the satchel too
except its not
It’s not the same jacket
There's one moment in Red Dead 2's epilogue that reveals he never forgot about Arthur. He just doesn't like talking about him, both because it hurts and because Arthur told him to not look back. (I'm aware Red Dead 1 was made first, but this is a nice in-universe explanation)
It's really insane that people think they need an explanation for characters not talking about anybody who's been dead for over a decade.
@@futurestoryteller
Well, you'd think Arthur would come up in his head at least once while hunting down former members from that gang, given John wouldn't have gotten away without him.
@@VGamingJunkieVT I think people get caught up in dreamlike "story logic".
It's funny too because this also represents a paradox in pop culture discourse. Since everyone (correctly) predicted that the characters of Star Wars Rogue One would die (or had to, as most annoyingly put it) because they are not seen _or talked about_ again. Which is not very logical either. And we're talking about a rebellion spanning an entire galaxy with who knows how many planets and presumably trillions of people; at least. But it was ended by a single whiny farmboy, so of course they think if you're "not important" you must be dead.
Point is Arthur is the reason they got away, yeah, but a lot has happened since then. He died, but a lot of people have died. When they talk about the gang they're talking about Dutch, unless they're talking about one of the targets that's still alive.
I will say if anyone were to make an offhand comment about Arthur I would actually expect it to be Ross. His inclusion in the prequel seems unnecessary, making fun of some "oaf" he remembers from his early days trying to wrangle up Dutch's gang sounds a lot like something he would do.
@@futurestoryteller
I mean, being the whole reason John was able to live peacefully with his family for 12 years and being his brother? You don't think Arthur's worth remembering, for that? John still clearly remembers Dutch leaving him for dead, even in the Red Dead 1 dialogue, so I would hope he remembers Arthur giving him his hat and telling him to never look back.
@@VGamingJunkieVT Yeah, there are good reasons why they would talk about him, if they did. But they don't, and there doesn't need to be any good reason why
The scene is about the Stranger judging John for forgetting people who were harmed and killed during his gang days. Not a certain friend who's helped him like many make it out to be. Whom there would be no way John forgot unless he got a visit from an old friend amnesia.
why are you in every f*cking comment section of every f*cking video on the whole f*cking platform
Used To Be Hey Retcons Exist Arthur Said Don't Look Back And John Kept His Promise
When John says "Sometimes, it takes more strength to stay than to run, mrs. Macfarlane" is the only piece of dialogue in RDR1 that could be plausibly retconned as some reference to Arthur.
No, he was talking about arthur. Stop being such a bore. Learn to be more charismatic you empty tasted bastard
@@lucasludwig2347 its not lol its just him talking
In the epilogue of RDR2, when meeting Mary Beth at the Valentine train station, John says that he thinks about Arthur all the time, but he doesn't talk about him much. This for me is all I needed. John is a quiet lone cowboy type anyway. Obviously Arthur wasn't written at the time of RDR1, but just knowing that John thinks about him, even if we never see it, that's enough for me
If you ask me, it usually takes more strength to stay than to run, Ms MacFarlane.
@@TheButtonMashGamerentonces por qué John cazo a Micah?
@@maximodiaz802I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand how your comment relates to theirs?
@maximodiaz802 because he was hellbent on killing him, even willing to lose everything to do so. As we obviously see from the events of Red Dead 1 and 2.
Red Dead Redemption, not RDR1..
I awear every fucking video has people like you calling it Red Dead Redemption 1!
I don't think it's Arthur he's referring to, but literally everyone who's died for Dutch *as well* as Arthur. So many people died trying to survive or just set the gang straight.
They more than likely would've sided with John, but as they all died in equally terrible fashions and were all grim reminders of his past, he never thinks or mentions them again and likely prefers it that way.
"You all venerate savegery, and you will you die savagely.."
Obviously the dudes in the studio at rockstar weren’t even thinking of the idea of Arthur Morgan in 2010, but retroactively it does fit in with Arthur being one of the far more important faces forgotten
ARTHUR DIES?!
@Specifically1936 you poor poor child
Oh god Sorry for the spolier just play rdr2 you will Be rewarded even if seens no sorte worth
Its not a reference to Arthur bro, arthurs character wasnt even thought of yet
some of these AshinY type rdr2 youtubers having some forced overreaching videos now
Talking about the story
Where is your faith, partner?
Bruh I know this is weird but rdr1 is actually after rdr2 not before
@@AdoptMefan1557You have a minute to rethink that useless statement
“You have forgotten far more people than me” 0:23 This relates to John and how he doesn’t talk about Arthur anymore. John would still have Arthurs hat in both games but, John decides he doesn’t want to wear it anymore and hence to the man saying john has forgotten. Since john doesn’t mention anything about Arthur in rdr1.
Are we really gonna try that hard to justify a clickbait video?
Uh, no. It’s referring to the girl. You know, the one he’s talking about. HELLO. wtf are you even talking about. 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Are you special?
I like to think that John lose the hat in american venom (because it really happens)
Arthur wasn't even a concept or a thought at Rockstar when RDR1 came out.
He was a concept he wasn’t a full character. You can literally learn this by going to the RDR two documentary because they talk about it.
@@RadioStar_Music Read my earlier reply to your dumb comment above.
That way I don't need to copy paste bullshit like you do.
It make me so mad bro
@@RadioStar_Musicno.
No, there is one mention of a character who probably became Arthur as the story for RDR2 Was being written. Early on when John is talking to Bonnie he alludes to a friend helping him get out of the gang. No names are mentioned and this is never brought up again, but it's retroactively implied to have been Arthur. This line was probably left in on the off chance that they'd make a prequel.
This isn't a reference to Arthur. The implication is that John should not have forgotten the result of the life he lived with the gang.
No, its arthur
@@justice_of_RUclipsno
@@justice_of_RUclips It's literally not. He wasn't even a concept when this was released.
@@juancifuentes1467 yes
@@HollowBagel a concept? Rdr 1 takes place after rdr 2 genius. Storywise hes talking about arthur. Learn to use your brain
A lot of people are missing the mark here. He's definitely not referring to Arthur. There's 2 distinct and meaningful reasons he brings up Heide McCort and her importance. First, the direct surface reason being her death is the catalyst for everything breaking down in the Van der Linde gang and it's eventually dissolution and the deaths along the way. Everything was fine until she died then it all went sideways, the ramifications seen in RDR2. Her death is the most important one concerning the gang outside of the gang itself. Second is a more metaphysical reason in that the Strange Man is death and if John is so callous to death that he does not even remember the innocent people who've been killed by his/the gangs actions the why would he remember death himself who is not, philosophically speaking, more important than the person who died. To be honest, if the sequel wasn't all ready in the plans then the second reasoning is most likely the correct one
That’s a damn long comment but I understand it somehow
damn bro u pretty smart. rare to have a comment genuinely teach me something on youtube. this scene is like trying to read shakespeare alone, and you're my lit teacher explaining the connections in a seminar. i can see them independently now, but not until you pointed them out.
@yigit-nh2vnwhat are you talking about?
Yup you’re right. If you read Arthur’s journal in RDR2, at the beginning of it he mentions how he started to doubt Dutch after the fiasco in Blackwater because he witnessed him kill an innocent girl, that clearly being Heide McCort. Her murder set Dutch down the path that destroyed everyone
Yeah ever since the blackwater massacre happened the whole gang slowly started to go to shit over the chapters
0:04 John before RDR2 exists
John after rdr2
He sounds a lot like Charles at 0:34
OH MY GOD HE DOES
the strange man isnt trelawny its charles this whole time 😱😱
I also like to believe that the stranger is referring to Arthur but in reality it not only reminds him of the people that John and the gang have murdered.
If you choose to believe, there's actually at least 3 references to Arthur!
1) This one in the video ("You've forgotten far more important people than me"). This is not to say John has completely forgotten Arthur, but vaguely refers to his past with the gang and John's decision to not talk about them often, including Arthur
2) On the first trip to Armadillo with Bonnie, she'll tell John about how she sometimes thinks of leaving the ranch life, to which John ambiguously replies "In my experience, it takes more stay than to run Miss MacFarlane". One could say he is thinking of Arthur's sacrifice in this moment
3) Before Dutch jumps off the cliff, he repeats almost verbatim some dialogue that he spoke in RDR2 alongside Arthur. It's oddly specific. Because the words would mean little to John, since he was not present to hear them the first time, it can be deduced that Dutch was reflecting on his friend Arthur one final time. The quote is "We can't always fight nature. We can't fight change, we can't fight gravity"
Comparison of the scenes:
ruclips.net/video/3HwF6lcsyWk/видео.html&ab_channel=BrotherFoller
Hope someone finds all these possibilities as interesting as I do
I love this franchise
You can’t reference something that hasn’t been thought of yet
@@TastyMeat8675well yeah obviously. But one of the main purposes of a prequel (especially a good prequel) is to recontextualize and bring new meaning and weight to things/moments in the original work
Regarding number 3, the first time Dutch said it, he was just using it as a means to buy time for him and Arthur to escape, but when he said it as his final words, he actually meant it
@@TastyMeat8675 he means that john probs thought of arthur in that moment we know that arthur wasnt a thing yet
arthur sacrifises himself?!?!
Now I'm trying to image how arthur's 3d model would look in rdr1.
Very skinny like Dutch and Bill lol
he would be as skinny as a skull: ☠️
I honestly hope they make a proper remake to RDR 1 and the throw some real references to Arthur in the game, it kinda sucks how no one ever talks about Arthur in the original game, i know the entire Arthur character was made after the release of RDR 1 but he had such an impact in so many people's lives that you would think any of them would name drop him at least once in the entire game
I hope they will accurate to Rdr1 though mention Arthur but dont make Rdr1 around him
@rainyeyesparty And I think Javier’s character in a remake of RDR1 needs to be written to better reflect the evolution of his character from RDR2.
Personally they should just more accurately phase RDR1 from RDR2, like another person said, Javier needs to be written like he was in RDR2. Maybe add a few bits of people reflecting on the old life now that we know how it was, Dutch referencing Hosea, and absolutely a much more open world with maybe some of new Hanover added in.
@@Doatello1991Javier did change IMMENSELY from what he used to be.
From Revolutionary on the run to Cold blooded killer working for a corrupt government. The complete 180 of what Dutch preached over and over again 😭
Not the entirety, loose ideas had came about during RDR’s development the gave the Ideas a name, Arthur.
Rockstar does plan ahead with events and characters like *Heide McCort* here. And they also do it in RDR2 in a very subtle way most people seem to forget with *Mac and Davey Challander* the brothers are mentioned quite alot through-out the story. They mysteriously die before RDR2 really starts as perhaps a perfect setup for future games perhaps even as main-characters like you can play multiple main-characters in GTA V. With members like Bill and others mentioning how much he misses them and that they were great, and members like Charles remembering them as pure outlaws and terrible people most likely having to do with the honor system every RDR game has.
Makes sense but I'm hoping we get a completely new gang or he'll just a lone outlaw it's best to close the book on the vanderind gang, though if it was set in the same period as John leaving after the gang fell apart then it'd be cool to see dutchs decent to madness in the papers.
@@whereami7586you could always have a lone wolf outlaw game and then final chapter is meeting your new gang with the final mission running away with them
@@jrwfilms5228or lone wolf for the first half and falling in with a gang as things heat up in the second half
The Callanders didn't redeem themselves though. They died shortly after massacring Blackwater.
You forgot Jenny.
Davey is most likely the protagonist because you see him in the prologue.
If you ever see a dude in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the night, dressed in a fancy suit with a top hat, and no mode of transportation, i suggest you greet him respectfully lol
Can’t be a reference to him cause he didn’t exist yet
As headcanon, it's fine imo. But presenting it as a straight-up mention when Arthur wasn't even thought of and the Stranger isn't even talking about former gang members but the people John and the gang killed is one of my issues with the community.
If your talking about rdr2 and the timeline, no. RDR2 is a Prequel of RDR1 meaning the events of RDR2 happen BEFORE RDR1. If you mean that RDR1 was made before RDR2 and the devs had no thoughts about RDR2 then, yes.
@Darkwear-vr8bi emo boy wafflin smh
Agree but Strange man's Line "You've forgotten far more important people than me" It can be anyone like old gang members
@@AshwinYcould be, but I hardly doubt John would have forgotten Arthur after what he did
There is no way in hell John would have forgotten about Arthur. The were pretty much brothers.
I think the rdr2 epilogue did a really good job of explaining why John just doesn’t like talking about Arthur instead of chalking it up to John forgetting Arthur
" Sure, I'll talk about him It's just.. what is there to say? "
The actual closest reference to Arthur would be when John tells Bonnie that an old friend helped him get out, though he doesn’t mention him by name
Edit: video link
ruclips.net/video/h4hu6IAUZTI/видео.htmlsi=5BvTQzLhTm46-jk2
When does he say that?
@@guillegarcia7146 on the wagon ride with bonnie
This doesn’t happen
No it's the newspaper that literally name drops Arthur Morgan and Hosesa, mentioning them being killed by Pinkertons.
@@invaderhemp Thats false. You’re thinking of a newspaper in rdr2 you can get in the epilogue. Arthur wasn’t thought of during the first game
He doesn’t talk about Arthur, but he thinks of him.
Most people in real life can’t even remember most of their friends or coworkers the last time they met 12 years ago…
true tho, i spend 12 years in school with mostly the same people and havent seen them since 2018 now i cant recognize half of them
I think most people would remember someone if they rode together for well over a decade, this same someone saving his life 2 or 3 times, also saving his wife, his son and the family overall
Yeah but Arthur and John were essentially brothers and I think it would be a little hard to forget a brother and Jack tells John in the epilogue that he remembers Arthur teaching him how to fish so even if they did "forget" about Arthur he still held a heavy spot in everyone's heart and uncle for sure still remembers Arthur cause he abused him every second he could😂 but i truly think that they all still remember Arthur they just have moved on with their lives and aren't stuck in their past wondering what could've been
Yeah but Arthur was supposed to be so important to John tho lol
Even though it isn't an Arthur reference it does feel like Foreshadowing in a way to Arthur
Arthur's existence was never planted in RDR1 so ur wrong. He basically does not even exist until RDR2
My assumption was that he was referring to "God" when he said he'd "forgotten people far more important than him", as I always viewed the Strange Man as Lucifer, or maybe a Loki trickster-type entity. Because unfortunately the character of Arthur Morgan didn't exist when they wrote that line.
Crazy how they referenced a character they didn’t even come up with yet
They did come up with him. They just didn’t implement him. You can literally find this information by the RDR two documentary.
@@RadioStar_Music You just said "You can find it in a documentary created about the second game that came out years after the first"
Please tell us where they mention ANYTHING about an Arthur/Savior from the backstory told in RDR1 before they made RDR2.
You can't. Sorry, son.
Its interesting that Arthur most likely wasnt planned in the first game but in the second made him so significant to John’s story
The strange man is a symbol of death showing John he doesn't have much time left it's a reference in rdr2 in one of the easter eggs
If you really think about it probably not the case but it is a nice touch, Jack Marston in the epilogue wears a light brown jacket and in rdr 2 Arthur wears a light brown jacket perhaps John had access to Arthur’s clothes after his death same as how in gameplay you can dress as Arthur while playing as John in rdr 2 and with John Gone it goes to Jack and in the end when he faces Edgar Ross he dresses like a mix to both John Martson and Arthur Morgan.
How could this possibly be a reference to Arthur. Aside from rockstar not having thought of Arthur yet, the previous line clearly indicates the 'important people' he's forgotten are all of the innocent people he and his gang have hurt or killed.
Arthur Morgan is literally name dropped in a newspaper that talks about Dutch's old gang. They literally built Red Dead 2's story around that newspaper. It mentions Pinkertons killing Hosea and Arthur Morgan exactly by name, and that Dutch has been spotted still active in the mountains.
My mistake that was actually in the ending of Red Dead 2
@@invaderhemp Yeah, because it's actually really obvious that Red Dead 2 has no direct relationship to the first game. None of what we're told about them lines up with what we see. I don't need there to be references to Arthur in the first game, but the two are like alternate universes, frankly
@@futurestoryteller Bruh what, it's literally a prequel. What do you mean no direct relationship? Have you actually played the games? It's literally sets up the first game, including the characters who survive to be in the first game. The "redemption" in Red Dead Redemption is John avenging Arthur, and then Jack avenging John.
@@invaderhemp LOL
K
I was tallking about something way more nuanced than "it's a prequel dog"
@@futurestoryteller "But the two are like alternate universes" dude what do you even mean
this game does something strange... its like red dead 1 story was written with the backstory of red dead 2 in mind, but at the same time it wasnt... its strange, because you have moments in rdr1 where you can think "oh, he is thinking about arthur", but he isnt mentioned in the whole game, but other events are like the ferry in blackwater, its like if rdr2 was meant to make us think "wait, are they talking about (insert event or character from rdr2)?"
What if they like remastered the first game gave it rdr 2 graphics and added some stuff to make it better connected that would be cool
Some people are enough delulu to imagine writers to put information about a game that will be released in a decade..
Trelawny: Arthur saved your life! John: who?
You mean.. ArthUUUR!
i love complete clickbaits where there is nothing to reference about arthur
he just said things about the gang, not arthur himself
There was a more direct reference to Arthur, in the second mission with the strange man, he sits somewhere in mexico and reads grave plates, and then states "Arthur! What a coincedence..."
It's pretty much possible that RDR 2 is one of those fanfics turned into the game
Isn't it strange that, he, likely an embodiment of death, considers john a friend, perhaps he enjoys that john makes his " accounting " easier 😉
People dream about that. Arthur is not canon. The prequel was a excuse to bring John back.
For all these chodes saying “nuh uh” its implied that Rdr1 John ought to remember Arthur and the events of Rdr2 in some form, obviously its a stretch since OBVIOUSLY rdr2 wasn’t planned at the time of rdr1’s release but for the sake of imagination this IS a reference to Arthur. Immerse yourself in the canon and imagine a canon sequence of events where John wouldn’t mention Arthur because that was a big loss to him and many years have passed hence the strange man “you’ve forgotten far more important people than me” you unimaginative smooth brains
Arthur isn't mentioned in this game because he wasn't even written into rdr until the second game came out. They then at the end of rdr2 explain that John doesn't like to talk about Arthur. Why people are looking for Arthur Morgan references in rdr1 is so beyond me.
I still don't get how this clip could even be a reference at all
RDR takes place over one year, in 1911. That means John was 38 years old when he died in the original Red Dead Redemption. Since RDR2 begins in 1899, John would have been 26 years old during the game's opening scenes
I get this isn't an actual reference to Arthur but I fail to see how this connects to him in any way shape or form.
I guess people would see Arthur as "Far more important" than the Stranger.
Just like any other character in the RDR-Verse....
So yea.. It could say "Karen" and it would be the same thing.
Even though Arthur was in Blackwater during the massacre, he was with Hosea Matthew’s who found an easier job that wouldn’t attract a lot of attention. Arthur and Hosea arrived later to when Dutch and the others were barely holding out against the law, bounty hunters and pinkertons
There is no reference to Arthur. Arthur wasn’t even a idea until at least after the game got GOTY
They weren't planning on Arthur when RDR1 was made.
0:22 God this shot is great during night
arthur wasnt even an idea when this was filmed
Clickbait. Nothing here mentions Arthur in any way.
Trelawny's being silly
I think he was referring to Arthur's words. It was John not remembering Arthur's words that led him to die. His fate was sealed in 1907 when he went after Micah Bell, out of pretty revenge Arthur would've been against.
In my guts I was hoping that's Trelawny.🤔
Dutch's last words: "Our time is passed, John."
Arthur throughout RDR2: "Our time...has pretty much passed", "Maybe, time for folk like us has passed", "I mean this whole thing is pretty much done"
Dutch did listen to Arthur, in the very end..
He has to be Josiah
Brickhead
They didn’t plan on having Arthur in their story when they made the first game. But the way they connect the two games so seamlessly, is really beautiful
Nice clickbait bruh, you and many other people here probably just discovered that this game exists recently
its weird to forget someone in 12 years, especially if that someone had an impact on your life
A super easter egg Arthur Is the strange man😂
This guy represents death, notice how he talked about the girl that Dutch killed or how he reminds John of Arthur and he appears on multiple occasions in the second game and just disappears instantly
I still perceive Trelawney as a strange man. Perhaps he really had his own secrets.
Brickhead
I thought I was the only one
“Hey man, how you know all this?”
-Carl Johnson
Arthur doesn't exist in RDR1.
Arthur wasn’t even on the drawing board when this came out
How do u know
I heard rdr2 was already in development before rdr1 was out. But who knows. 🤔
@@Naimedclaiming development started in late 2010, after this game came out
@@NaimedclaimingRDR1 was made before RDR2 was even entering pre production, Arthur wasn't supposed to be a character until the development of RDR2 began
He was an idea at the time. They mentioned this in the RDR two documentary. He was an idea they had but never did anything with.
arthur was thought of for rdr1, but got scrapped due to other things like lack of voice actors or other things hence why this couldn’t be him
Where did you hear this
@@user-hx6gs9rq7u red dead 1 was always bound to have a prequel, that's probably why
Fake
You literally just made that up
Y’all just be making shit up 😭
woah i didn’t know that the girl that dutch shot was canon in rdr1
I dont think this is a reference to Arthur. I don't think John forgot about Arthur. He doesn't talk about him, because I'd assume talking about what is his essentially his dead big brother is probably painful tho. But nah this ain't it
I wouldn't be surprised if Strange Man knows Arthur
Players have searched all over for any definitive reference to Arthur in RDR1 and there really does not seem to be any at all as the character had not yet been thought of nor did Rockstar have the foresight to leave some dangling plot threads to set up a potential prequel. (The references to the Callander Brothers in RDR2 appear to be loose threads to allow for a prequel to RDR2. RDR 1 does not appear to have anything of this sort, outside of broad references to the van der Linde gang's exploits, particularly as pertains to the gangmates you specifically end up killing.)
Rather than putting the onus on the player to find some explanation for why Arthur Morgan is never mentioned or even alluded to (definitively), Rockstar really should've included something in Arthur's arc or within the epilogue of the game to explain why John never mentions Arthur. In an otherwise largely perfect game it's really bizarre that this bit of the narrative was completely skipped over but ultimately, it was. And I think we're simply stuck with that. I don't think there's a way to reconcile the narrative gap between the two games in this respect. They didn't plan ahead and they couldn't find a good solution after the fact. Rockstar is phenomenal, but even they're not perfect.
Rockstar literally did in the epilogue. Abigail explains to Jack why John doesnt talk about Arthur.
You’ve forgotten far more important people than me. John forgetting everyone he isn’t hunting
Arthur did not exist as a concept during the development of rdr1. There may have been gang members as his background but not to this extent.
Arthur was an afterthought. But it’s cool that some of his character is based off some of these small moments from Red Dead 1.
Arthur Morgan wasn't invented as a character until after this game was released.
He was an idea at the time. They mentioned this in the RDR two documentary. He was an idea they had but never did anything with.
The title is misleading because Arthur wasn’t mentioned and Arthur had no idea what happened on that Boat he asked but wasn’t given an answer.
I always thought the "You've forgotten far more important people than me" Line was a call forward in this case to Arthur.
Arthur wasn’t even thought off when they made Rdr1 it’s when they made RDR2 they decided to add Arthur Morgan to the Red Dead universe
Arthur as acharacter was an idea during red dead redemption one he wasn’t a full character until the earliest beginning stages of red dead redemption twos story.
I'm pretty positive they didn't have Arthur in mind at the time but something also tells me theres a reason they made him say that almost like they setup so that way they could include certain characters, like Arthur.
They definitely didn’t have Arthur in mind, although they did have the Arthur character as an idea at this point.
Arthur wasn't a defined character when they wrote RDR. They did it retroactively as well as they could. I am guessing RDR2 wasn't even in their plans at the time.
I like how Arthur impacted the fanbase so much that they will look for anything, the SMALLEST thing, in red dead 1 to tie to him
For those who are left thinking that there’s no allusion to Arthur at all. Ashwin is implying that The Strange Man is implying that Arthur is one of those important people that John has forgot. Even though John specifically mentions in the epilogue of 2 that he never forgot and The Strange Man is talking about all the people John has contributed to the death of.
Yup true
“No more DUTCH,
No more ARTHUR,
_and no more YOU!”_
Canonically it's more of a memory that's too painful to talk about, not a forgetting important people kinda thing. At least that's how rdr2 epilogue explains it.
He didn't forget Arthur; he just doesn't like to talk about him because it's painful.
If you look closely, you can see Arthur swimming in the water..
Idl if this was intentional. But I like how the “mysterious man” is dressed in 1900s industrial age clothing. Possibly representing the future; which is usually associated with death, consequences, and something ending.
“It seems it’s harder to stay than to run ms McFarland.” I think that’s a reference
He never “forgot” Arthur. John is a very secretive person. He doesn’t like to speak of his past. Arthur was such a huge part of his past & he died, just like John’s daughter who he has only ever mentioned once. He doesn’t talk about people who have died in his past. He just remembers them.
Arthur is an unanticapated marvel of a character rockstar created. when i played RDR years before i loved John but when Arthur came in he instantly became my favorite of the two.
Arthur wasn’t mentioned once just the black water robbery that went wrong.
The reference is you’ve forgotten far more important people than me which lines up perfectly with John forgetting all Arthur wanted was for John to just live peacefully and remember “revenge is a fools game”
Honestly I think a better question would be, did Rockstar intentionally choose to make the Mysterious Stranger and Trelawny look similar
If Arthur wasnt sick and killed Micah and Survived and was on the first game alot of things would be different.he would be like 48 years old since hes 36 in 1899 but he'll still wipe out most of people as John but John was a beast in 1911 best Rockstar main Characters.
There are no references as much as I’d love one, it’s complete coincidence.
For everyone saying Arthur wasn’t thought of at this time of RDR1. Dan Houser had Arthur thought of during the production of RDR1, but went with Marston since the family dynamic would add so much more the RDR1’s story.
Remembering Arthur who helped him get out of certain death would traumatize him.
Traumatic memories are often hidden away similar to how Ezio and Christina memories were hidden away in the animus because they were far too traumatic to remember.
I love this interpretation of death, in the form that John can understand but still so alien and foreign.
Never one to waste words, a gentleman really.
you've forgotten far more important people than me