3:01 - that's actually incorrect. In RDR 1 there's no mention, AT ALL, of the actual death count during the 'Blackwater Massacre'. That's just a missconception/fallacy/fan theory/urban legend that originated shortly after RDR 1's release (same thing happened with people back then thinking John was left for dead in 1906, just because a newspaper article mentioned that the last time Dutch was seen publicly was in that year. So people just wrongly assumed back them).
im gonna pin this comment because it looks like youre 100% correct. dug around after i saw it and it seems like there was a mandela effect type thing going on with that. apparently one of the first red dead wiki's posted those numbers and the internet kinda ran with it to the point that other articles/videos started saying the same thing. over the years it never got corrected and a ton of people, myself included, falsely remember seeing it in the original game too. good info.
@@SwoopGoose I just watched a movie in which a criminal set up his friends and fellow criminals in a bank heist. He was in contact with local police and tipped them off about the bank heist. The way that the law recognized the person who told the police, wore a white suit the day of the robbery, so that the law could identify and not shoot at him. Watching this movie sparked my curiosity about Rdr2. Micah is the ONLY gang member to wear a white suit the day of the Saint Denis bank robbery. Do you think this was a thought out decision by rockstar to hint to the player that Micah is the rat. Let me know what you think.
It always made sense to me that Arthur got fixated on John, Abigail, and Jack, as they represent an already existing, traditional family unit. He wanted them to have a chance at a peaceful life. He loves Jack. He loves Abigail. And through his growth, has come to forgive John, one of his oldest friends.
All of that. But in addition, John isnt just an "old friend". He was family to arthur, he even says this to hosea. They were raised and grew up together like brothers. I'd say Arthurs views toward John and his family were a little more personal than most.
I always thought that one of the main reasons why he wanted john to leave with his family is because he himself had a family but couldnt be with them because of the loyalty he had to the gang and due to the that couldnt protect them when it matters. So he wanted john to have the family he didnt have a chance to have
Yeah I agree. A lot of the gang sees dying in combat as honorable and killing an armed man that’s shooting at them as justified. Bronte was both unarmed and killed a lot more brutally than just a bullet to the head. That’s why they were shocked, because Dutch murdered an unarmed man in a very sadistic way.
I was about to comment the same thing. He didn’t just shoot Bronte he drowned him, killing him in a very personal way. It takes a lot to drown a person versus just shooting them. Same with the old woman in Guarma
ong idk if this guy rlly understands the stance the game is trying to take like all the gameplay not relating to the story that lead me to believe he never played sister caldorone which touches on all that if u gonna post a whole video understand ur topic
The reason Arthur is fixated on saving John and his family is because Arthur used to have a woman himself, and a kid. One day, he came back home and he saw two crosses outside of the front porch. That house is actually in the game, and they were shown in Trailer 3, too. Arthur, also, tries starting a family with Mary Linton afterward, but that doesn’t work out. And Arthur has a soft spot for Abigail and Jack, too. Because John has something that Arthur couldn’t have, instead of feeling jealous, he becomes selfless and makes sure that John and his family live the life that he couldn’t. I have to disagree that him coming fixated on John and his family felt rushed. For me, it made perfect sense.
Same here. I also kinda feel like the reason he focuses more on them as others leave is becuase those who left were also folks he wanted to save, but since they left he knows he doesn't have to worry about them anymore, and as a result focuses more of his energy toward helping his brother and brother's family get out. He was so fixated on helping them because unlike the other folks he wanted to help, John and Abigail actually stuck it out in spite of how awful things were, so he had to focus more on them.
I dont think john was shocked that they killed bronte, its how he was killed. it was brutal and sadistic. Dutch flew into a rage. It was unlike him and both John and Arthur noticed. This is also a silent bonding moment between arthur and john.
Yessir it's because how quick the switch flipped for Dutch. He was literally just saying that maybe they could ransom him, and that would have actually benefitted the gang at that point in time, maybe even making the bank heist largely unnecessary. But Dutch throws that all the way in a flash just because Bronte insulted him. His mental state is becoming so fragile and weak at that point that he's killing over petty insults and only John and Arthur see it. Him killing for any little reason is anything but being strong, that's why Dutch's line about his books covering weakness is extremely ironic as he's displaying it in spades.
Bronte was a great example of how lost the gang was at that point. Especially immediately after the Gray/Braithwaite failure. They rolled into Lemoyne and Dutch's ego made him think he'd be able to mastermind a plan to play both sides and walk out of Rhodes with a fat stack of (phantom) gold. But he severely underestimated the Gray's and Braithwaite's experience and skill at using people. Which both did, until they became more trouble then they were worth, and brought the weight of their local power down on them, the Grays setting up the shoot-up in Rhodes that killed Sean and the Braithwaite's in how they took Jack. They weren't as dumb as Dutch assumed. Their only downfall was not having plot armor and underestimating how brutal the game could be. Bronte would have been an easy mark for Dutch and Hosea. Simply stroke the man's ego a bit and he'd have probably opened the door to make the gang rich. Instead, Dutch let Bronte's wealth and power blind him. Instead of brushing off Bronte's insults while stroking his ego to take him down as a target, thought Bronte was being honest with the trolley station tip, even as he got called a cow fucker in the same conversation. Which leads to Dutch being embarrassed and exposed even more as a relic of a time gone by.
Really loved your bit about Milton. He really wasn't so bad compared to Ross. They are basically like Zhakaev and Makarov. One was definitely worse than the other.
Milton is the kind of person that enjoys seeing people scared and suffering. I'm not far enough in the story to know the other guy but for me, it's gonna be hard to top that
The mention of the horse dying scene feeling hollow doesn’t make sense as you need a level 4 bonding with your horse to generate the scene so if you only recently stole it I wouldn’t think you would have that. Either way vast majority of people will have the same horse from early on so I think it’s a great add on
@@fortytwo4-2 even if that was true (which it isn't) you still can't get level 3 bond in 20 minutes you can't even get level 3 bond in 2 hours it takes a while
@@fortytwo4-2 if that is true it’s probably just because u were using buell who I’m pretty sure is the only named horse Arthur can ride so if you were just on a normal level 3 horse it definitely wouldn’t have played the scene
@@fortytwo4-2 either way fact still remains in the video he said he got the horse 20 minutes before the final mission and got the death scene which is just impossible no matter how you look at it
One thing that bugs me about the Blackwater massacre is, it's seems like far more people are killed during the Cornwall shootout in Valentine, murdering the entire town of Strawberry with Micah, and after robbing the trolly station and bank in St Denis. Those 3 missions to me overshadow whatever could have happened in Blackwater.
Arthur makes mentions to his displeasure in how Strawberry was handled by Micah. On my playthroughs I only ever killed those that were necessary while breaking Micah out. On the other hand Micah kills indiscriminately. I don't think bringing Strawberry into account matters in comparison.
maybe woulda made more sense if we as players could play what happened in blackwater, or at least seen some of it in a cutscene pregame that eludes to the chaos better. However, i also like not knowing, because it A: leaves a bit of mystery about the gangs past, and B: leaves red dead open to a red dead redemption 3 (unless they dont do that at all/choose a different time to go to)
That's kinda the point of Blackwater massacre... its this big question mark floating over the narrative. Arthur wasn't there. The people who were are obtuse about recalling it. Its obviously bad.. probably the FIRST sign of cracks in dutches messiah leader complex.. That's the point. Actually KNOWING the details would contradict its narrative purpose. Its annoying to not know, sure. It is to Arthur too. Its achieving its exact purpose in the story
I think what’s unique about it is that it’s the first time the gang indiscriminately kills a bunch of people. I think strawberry is meant to parallel black water and show the at the root of the gangs mass killings is Micah’s disregard for any moral code.
Look. The point where Dutch becomes a "Monster" is in Guarma. Specifically when Dutch kills that woman. That's where Arthur starts seeing Dutch in a different light. If you're playing as High Honor Arthur. (Which should be your first playthrough before genocidal maniac run. And also the cannon ending of the game.) Arthur has a fine line he walks that keeps him "moral" High Honor Arthur kills for the gang. To save people close to him, or to help those he holds dear. Like Sean, Lenny, Jack, Javier, so many people he helped save because he deemed them as worth killing for. Arthur is the embodiment of a good man doing bad things for the ones he loves. I'm not here to say that your analysis of Arthur is wrong. But you just missed a few very key details that put the narrative together perfectly. I mean think about it. Arthur never kills out of anger. He doesn't go for petty revenge. Dutch did that on multiple occasions. Bronte, Cornwall, that woman in Guarma, his anger at the Lemoyne Raiders for quote payback for "his daddy" how he left John behind. How he left Arthur for dead and Eagle Flies saved him in place of Dutch. Arthur watched his father abandon his brothers amd sisters. He has a right to view him as a monster. But that's just my take on it. Feel free to point out anything I may be wrong about. (Keep in mind this is from the perspective of High Honor Arthur.)
@@oneask1 One could argue that was the point where Arthur started questioning Dutch. But he still had faith in the man. I mean, he did help orcastrate Jack's kidnapping.
Great take King Dtrix. This comment was a good read thank you for explaining more nuance to Arthur’s character. Honestly not only did Arthur see Dutch differently after that, but I as a player did too. Id be willing to bet a lot of players had that experience. Dutch couldn’t even come up with a decent reason for it either
It’s honestly not that hard of a analysis to miss as we see the type of killing out of necessity for those you love is used in a lot of shows and games specifically in apocalyptic settings like The walking dead and Days gone. I’m not pointing you out but rather the author of the video as like I said it’s commonly used
You say your points in a way with so much confidence and conviction that I almost end up siding with you but nah, in all, Arthur is the most sincere, redeeming, interesting and empathetic character that I have ever come across in fiction. And you threw me for a loop with the whole borderline-defending Micah thing. But interesting vid nonetheless!
@@RedVelvetBlackleatheryou're so edgy and cool I notice you have an unpopular opinion, going against the grain if you will, I'm sure everyone will notice and think you're so cool and different for forcing yourself to not agree with everyone but for letting us all know in the most gotcha way possible you really got em dude you got all of us so cool
@@mtlgrrrr How ami being edgy? Being edgy comes with some disregard of human life or making fun of a terrible situation. I’m just pointing out that because Arthur is handsome he’s misdeeds are lighten and his few charitable actions are treated like acts of God. It’s like this for most people thusly why I said Halo effect if it were Kieran doing what Arthur did he would be a much more nuance character with much less love and defense of his character.
Arthur probably notices the renewed relationship between John and his family, and is content that he's not wasting his chance like Arthur did, but is listening to Arthur.
I think it’s more about personal redemption rather than actually redeeming all their past wrongs or anything like that. John redeemed himself by becoming a family man, making sure they’re safe and trying to leave his outlaw life(I wanna put more emphasis on “try”). Arthur redeemed himself by giving John a chance to live with his family, which is something that Arthur chose to walk away from with Mary in his past. What happened after doesn’t really matter. It does show that their struggles were in vain, but they’ve still personally redeemed themselves.
This is my favourite game of all time. Gameplay and story fit together perfectly. Arthur's ending is the most emotional thing I've experienced in a game, from his last ride all the way untill he sees the sun rise for the last time. brings a tear to my eye just thinking of it.
I would disagree that the gameplay is disconnected from the storyline. And I would seriously disagree with Arthur killing “thousands of innocent people”. The majority of people he killed were other gang members. And if wasn’t gang members it was cops who started shooting him first so he obviously acted in self defense. Arthur doesn’t go around killing innocent people like civilians. I don’t think there’s one scene in the story where Arthur kills an innocent by-stander. Everyone he kills started shooting at him first. Or they have his friends held hostage which in turn would make them un-innocent
Bro wtf you can’t shoot cops “in self defense” lmao. Their whole job is to enforce the law for the public. Your a gang or murderers and outcasts. Killing police isn’t self defense, it’s murder
Your idea of morality is childishly black and white. Arthur is a killer. He’s killed people outside of self-defense. He doesn’t get a pass just because his victims are gang members or whatever bs justification you want to cook up. Have you thought about why he gets “shot at first”? Because of his poor moral decisions that put him in situations where other people have to stop him.
What you asserted was Micah motive was probably to wait till the Gangs bounties were to his liking, make a lot of what he does in the game makes so much sense. Which got me thinking, oh shit that would explain why he began to slaughter everyone when we break him out of jail. He did it just so Arthur and Dutchs’ bounties would increase because they’d be blame. he was still knew to gang so he probably didn’t have a bounty on him as a member of Dutch’s gang. And members who were part of the botched ferry heist even says that it was Micah that urged him to kill that girl so they could make their escape. Dutch’s Bounty just became much larger. That makes so much sense As for why ditch killed the girl, I think he did exactly what he did to girl he took hostage and killed in RDR. Used her as human shield then when he felt like he had opportune moment to get away, pushed her toward the Lawmen and then shot her kinda slow done their pursuers.
I never play rdr1 and I'm planning on playing it but I felt the biggest reason Arthur cared more for john than other characters is because he saw himself in John Arthur had a son who was tragically killed and couldn't start a family with mary because of outlaw life He wanted John to not make the same mistake he did and John had an opportunity to have the life arthur never had. But I agree there was an missed opportunity with developing the relationship between arthur, John, Jack and Abigail
I'd say you're spot on most things in the video, but I have to disagree with you on one thing --Dutch. He absolutely changes in the end. The Dutch we meet in RDR1 isn't the same guy as in 2. In RDR2, Dutch is obsessed with making the money and "getting out" to a better life. Was that ever realistic? God no, of course not, but it's still his fantasy that he's fixated on. He grandstands, he orates, he goes on and on, and he's paranoid and narcissistic as all hell --but it's all about escaping the modern world (via himself and his gigantic ego). Dutch in RDR1 is a different animal. Gone are the fancy clothes, the fine jewelry, the meticulously groomed hair. And gone are the ideals. He has become something much worse than what he was --he's become his true self. Cruel, petty, angry, and no longer fixated on getting away from this new, developing world, but obsessed with taking revenge on it. Hurting it. He fully came into what he always at his core really was, a man who just wanted to see the world burn. He kills for sport, he gleefully mocks Abigail, all while looking more like Swanson on one of his benders than like a posh gambler. Even the people he hoodwinks into his service are different, a group of outlaw natives who aren't "outsiders looking in" to society like the old gang, but men who are not and never were of the white man's world. And who come in with very legitimate grudges against it, grudges that Dutch twists to his purpose. He does change. He gets worse. He goes from a pathological liar with a saviors' complex to what can only be described as a terrorist.
@@SwoopGoose Haha. I am, for the record, 100% with you on everything else in the video. Particularly the pacing issues and the narrative/gameplay disconnect. Good lord it's jarring. Still, on my what -6th? playthrough.
Actually the script had Javier pointing his gun at Arthur & John. But while filming the scene. The actor that played Javier (Gabriel Sloyer) said he just couldn’t point his gun at them. He’s was like, those are my bros. I can’t point my gun at them. The actors had formed such tight bond on set. They really were a family. Because of that, Rockstar allowed it. Instead of making them re shoot the scene, with Javier pointing his gun at them. I’m glad Rockstar allowed that. It’s little things like that, that make this game amazing.
Dutch wants to go to a place that doesnf exist.. back in time. The country they thrived and prospered in, it's in the past. No amount of money can take you there. Turning of the century is paramount to this entire narrative, both games. Their day is over. You can justify your death throws, but you're still dying.
I think with Bronte the issue was more that they assumed Dutch would have been more clean about killing him. Like drowning him in the swamp and feeding him to an alligator is a lot more brutal than shooting him.
I hear the comments about Arthur's push to save John being shoehorned in quite a lot from people who played RDR1 but, as someone who only played RDR2, it felt quite natural following his introspection and interactions with the nun character. I wonder if there's that internal critical drive to find holes in the plot that we often have, and that hole only shows up if you get the feeling that it's to set up RDR1. If someone doesn't have that background, however, they aren't looking for forced callbacks and, when not looking for it, it's quite natural.
I played the first one before and i def don't agree with his point on that. I think it made perfect sense for this dying man with extreme loyalty to his loved ones and Arthur's fixation on John and his family and the events of red dead 1 only make me more empathetic towards these characters. It all makes sense and sadly it's all for nothing, pretty realistic since cycles of behavior are extremely common in the real world too. Games like to roll a narrative that there is always a solution and your efforts will not be in vain but in reality it sadly is often not real and despite that we still try and should continue to try to change things and be better as people. Rdr1 and 2 explore that concept very well.
Hey Asshole, Great video. Personally my favorite scene is at the the end of the game where Arthur comes across the Nun for the last time finding out that she is on mission to Mexico. That conversation seemed like it almost flipped a switch to believe in love and how perspective is important because He sees himself as someone that cant be saved and believed to have done to much wrong and then acknowledges that every time she seen him he was smiling and helping people. It seemed this his eyes really opened and was a really touching scene.
So.. the fact that arthur wants John and Abigail to raise the boy a way his parents never could is ‘lazy writing’ and we need more reasons? Idk about that 1 chief
Especially when he failed doing so himself so he's wanting John to have the life he never has due to his own shortcomings. Honestly half of what he disses Arthur for was outright false or reading scenes wrong. It feels like he came in salty over the critiques of his last video and went in his mini rants in this one as a result
John was like a Arthur's brother. They had a rough time together at the start of part 2 but he always loved him. Also, Arthur always wanted a family to belong to. When he realized that John's family would be destroyed by the gang, he had to make a choice. Besides, most of the gang was already either dead or gone after he rescued Abigail from Milton. Charles and Sadie were save, the only one left to save was John. Their relationship was built flawlessly. You can really feel that as Arthur's life was ticking away, he had to redeem himself somehow. This was his only way and also the only way he could die peacefully. That's why the John ending makes sense and Money ending doesn't. But to each its own.
The whole Arthur critiquing Dutch for killing people argument is flawed imo. I don’t think Arthur is a hypocrite, I think it’s about a dissidence in power and authority. Arthur shames Dutch because he kills people who don’t have the power to fight back, where as Arthur reasons that he’s killing people with the ability to defend themselves. Arthur’s morale meter is a great example of this philosophy. You can look at this metric as less accurate to how people view Arthur and more so how Arthur views himself. When you do an undeniably bad thing, you’re forced to take a hit to your honour, this is most likely meant to symbolise Arthur shaming himself like how he shames Dutch. I think your arguments are well thought out but ignore this crucial detail. The story is inherently flawed when you search for flaws, you don’t see the reasons for inclusions existing when you hunt for them as flaws.
As to the relationship between John and Arthur, you fundamentally misunderstand the type of relationship they have. The things you are looking for are unsaid between them, but you would need to understand their relationship to get it. They have a brother relationship, there are things that don't need to be said. You don't have to formally make up with family.
I don't think that it was rushed between John and Arthur at all. By that point Arthur is dying. He's screwed up with Mary, and he's lost his son Isaac. He's telling John to get Abigail and Jack out and have the life that he knows that he can never have - certainly now that he's dying of TB. He's reflecting on his life at that point and wants to give John that chance that he doesn't have, basically telling John 'don't screw up like I did. ' Whether John goes for it, well that's on John.
Arthur's ending is summarized in the one quote "No greater love has a man, that he lay down his life for is friends" and you clearly missed the point of the ending. Whole vid stinks.
Red Dead 2 is one of the best games ever made, but like any game, you have to use your imagination to fill in the gaps. I love that this video is praise, but addresses the fast-paced and somewhat sloppy writing of the second half and ending of the game
this is why i always, without exception, spend a few weeks out in the wilderness doing other shit between every single mission. also, side point........ a lot of people these days seem to have lost their imagination
Thought that Bronte was technically still alive when thrown to the gator, no way he drowned just from being under for a few seconds, hence why John is disturbed by the way Dutch kills him. He wanted Bronte dead, just not in such an awful way.
I think that’s why they have Arthur’s wife and son die. Now he has a connection and sees himself in John. That’s why he’s so adamant on him leaving and getting out of the outlaw life.
Nice video I learned a lot about the game's story, but dare I say Dutch lacking "development", or not growing up, was the whole point of the character. Dutch's character development was that he isn't changing, or not developing, even after wotnessing Arthur's death and seeing things clearly, he still chose to run away from the problem. And instead blaming himself for his wrongdoing, he chose to blame Micah for all the failures he has done. He clearly stated that he was there to kill Micah as John in the epilogue. But instead killing Micah for revenge, he was to kill Micah because he thought, or convinced himself to think that it was Micah's fault that plans fell apart, while he knows it was his fault. Arthur's death and knowing Micah was the rat didn't change what he is, but let him know that he is a "monster" and he embraced the idea. That's why Dutch in the original Red Dead Redemption behaved that way.
I got back into this game shortly before this came out, it was truly my first playthrough with Arthur helping everyone he can and it made me love that hypocritical dickhead. Also you have real talent dude keep It the fuck up.
The thing I never understood was the thought process behind Arthur not being able to go to Blackwater at all in RD2 because he is immediately killed by the bounty hunters out looking for you, even though he was never in Blackwater for the ferry job , but John, who was , can go back several years later and nobody knows who he is . Plus, when you leave for Guarma as Arthur , you are wanted , but then come back and your wanted level is gone , but still wanted in Blackwater .
Because they cut a massive amount of content with missions in the area, and with how much of Mexico was built and abandoned, and if rumors are true, the RDR1 remake as RDR2 DLC. Rockstar decided to cancel all single-player DLC following discovering the beauty of Shark Cards and how much kids with Mommy's credit card would spend. They cancelled single-player DLC after GTA Online launched, converting the planned heist-focused DLC into online content, which happened around 2014, about halfway into RDR2's development.
46:40 it would have better if John came and the dialogue was Arthur: "What took you so long?" John: "I wasn't going to come, but Abigail said she and Jack wouldn't forgive me if I left your dumbass to rot!" Arthur: "Good, I was worried for a second that you actually gave a shit!" Playful; brotherly jabbing while showing that Abigail may have feelings for Arthur while also riding on the idea that Jack likes "Uncle Arthur" more than he likes John, considering he wasn't very worried when John was on that mountain or when Arthur and Javier manage to bring him back.
Just seems like another Arthur cuck fantasy. Everyone wants all the women to be in love with Arthur, John’s son wants Arthur to be his real dad, oh and actually, Arthur’s such a stud he fucked Abigail and jack is his actual son. Arthur is also resurrected after his death and walks on water. Give me a fuckin break y’all…🙄
For me, rdr3 should be on how Dutch recruit every characters. We could have more informations about the backstory of each members and we could finish the game with the blackwater massacre. Having young dutch as a playable character could be very cool and we would understand the whole story of how the gang as been created. We could see davey, mac and jenny too. Play with gang members who weren't that here in rdr2 ( as Sean for example ). We could even see Isaac and Eliza so I think maybe rdr3 could have this subject ( btw sorry for my bad english im french )
Sounds cool, but the only thing about RDR3 is, RDR2 started with them on the run. If you finish RDR3, how would it end and how would you free roam around the world with them already on the run?? You'll have to play as a character that wasn't mentioned in the gang but didn't died, maybe he just got away or something
Personally I think RDR3 should be about Jack and his redemption after killing Ross in RDR1. Yes, Ross deserved to be shot for what he did to John but it still calls for redemption because he shot someone. Evil or not. In the lord’s eyes it’s a sin to kill another. So to me, Red Dead 3 should be about John and his path to redemption 🖤
Imo rdr3 should be about Landon rickets and his life on the run as a gunslinger, and all the new characters and action you can see along the way. It could be really cool fleshing out this character and creating a subversive ending for him that we wouldn’t expect.
This video is golden, especially the John and Arthur section. Absolutely love it, 10/10 my friend. Best hour and a half I’ve watched. I feel like the ending, was very rushed. And I know that because there’s a lot of cut content
The way you tried picking apart Arther is strange because for one Arthur is doing the right thing according to the gang which is the gang comes first which is why law man and others get shot, and the ‘bad things’ Arthur does also tells the story of the good man losing the fight to the giant because he followed the gangs needs over the right thing, you looked at the small picture of death more then the big picture of the representation of his actions
@@smokey3504 I think that’s an inherently dishonest take tbh… I can’t help but feel like a lot of people would watch other people (especially equally “bad” people) die to protect their family.
I think the significance of the realization that Arther was actually loyal all along was not Dutch recognizing his own faults but simply that he had lost someone who really loved him. He reverted to his old ways after killing Micca because he never saw anything wrong with his own lifestyle and actions in the first place. He felt sorrow but not remorse because he did not see himself as being responsible for Arther’s death. It makes sense that he would go back to business as usual all the way to the time of RDR1 .
What annoys me about rdr2, is that I get into a fight with some guy, he pulls out his gun, aims it at me and pull mine out and shoot him in self defense and I get low honor for it. This guy pulls out his gun to shoot an unarmed man, but I pull out mine and shoot him back and suddenly I'm the bad guy?
I believe the reason Milton asked John who he was, was because he was gone for a year, during which is when the Pinkerton Detective Agency took over the hunt for the gang. I think it’s just a callback to the fact that he left, with no real significance in the story other than to show that even John is a lasting member of the gang, Milton still didn’t know who he was. He doesn’t ask who Charles or Lenny was, they intentionally made him ask John. I think it’s just a sly callback.
I disagree with what you said about Arthur and John, their bond is something you can tell (at least for me) how real it is even tho they don’t share feelings. Arthur’s final act of love was saving his brother and his family, helping him get the life he lost with Mary. Being at the face of death and deciding your life was meaningless and deciding u can’t leave like this and u need to help those that still have time on this earth is what makes his story so emotional, especially considering the person he was with the gang. Anyways, is just my opinion. Nice video :)
Coming right off your older video, it's awesome to see how much is improved from a production standpoint. I think the opinions have been top notch the whole time. Hopefully this video gathers up some more of those sweet sweet clicks, it's definitely deserved.
I think this is great, but you’re missing some very symbolic moments in your wanting more. Specifically when Arthur stands next to John after they save Jack. He felt Johns pain, he stood next to his brother until John said his peace and acknowledged the difficulty in his attempted expression. That was huge, he could’ve just walked off and joined the party. But my man stood with his brother. It’s little moments like that that make up this story, got to keep your heart open to them.
2:20 hey man in my opinion the biggest fans of things are the ones willing to point out the flaws because they see what greatness is truly possible and want the best for it. unfortunately so many comment sections devolve into angry echo chambers
In 1899 the Pinkertons weren't just 'hired mercenaries ' they were essentially the secret service/getting phased out of that role. They literally are on the level of the real US Army in many respects just with the ability to also deal with private matters that the army couldn't, or wouldn't, intervene in
i would disagree with your analysis of the perception arthur has on strauss. you can choose to not collect bounties (except for the one where he gets coughed on by the man with TB). there is a dialogue for when strauss, most certainly frustrated, leaves the gang complaining to arthur about his lack of conviction on collecting debt. arthur recognizes this and still dismisses his concerns.
This is by far the best analysis of RDR2 I have seen since its’s release and I’m 22:06 in. This is fantastic work and I had to pause to tell you how much I appreciate your efforts in the creation of this video but also your views on this game’s story and how exactly it’s characters play their role. Thank you for the work you’ve done/do.
I think its an interesting idea that micah isnt actually a rat and that agent milton made it up to further tear apart the gang. granted he probably didnt know how much of a hard time they were going through, but anyways its an interesting thought
1:04:20 Arthur was young and made mistakes when he didn’t choose his son over the gang, that’s why he was so fo focused on John so John wouldn’t make the same mistakes Arthur made
You deserve more subscribers. It always blows my mind when smaller channels take the time and effort to this long of a video and especially when this much effort has been put into it. It’s amazing that you put in so much time and work into something that you’re not even paid for. I know the hope is that you will eventually get paid and I hope you do. But for now, keep grinding, you have everything going for you, you just need to stay consistent
Love the Milton hot take :D oh yeah the guy who brought a gatling gun and opened fire on everyone knowing there was a kid in the line of fire is a "good guy". Here's a thought what if there are no good guys and bad guys but people on opposing sides, Milton himself never claims he is a good guy he only says he believes in civilization and its necessity. Your whole good guy bad guy argument really misses the mark in my view, this game is quite revisionist in that sense even poking fun at the black hat white hat symbolism of spaghetti westerns. People are complex and layered, a man that sees himself serving the law and wanting to take the high road can find himself putting a kid in the line of fire of a gatling gun, just like a man who sees himself as an outlaw out to survive for his own sake can see himself spending his last moments for the sake of a friend, its about perspective change and choices small or large. Good doesn't wash out the bad but it could still have value to another and isn't pointless. I really think you missed the forest for the trees with that one.
48:17 bro he latches on to them because he saw his self in john and what he wish he had done when he had the chance too. The Marshalls didn’t know who john was and he loved John’s son. He wanted that to be the last good thing he did,helping THEM get away as a family! Something he always wanted! The story isn’t shallow YOU are! Everybody was on their own it was no point This was the only family that was actually family in the gang
it is funny, at the part where you say, "milton isn't a typical villain or bad cop", milton's subtitle is him saying, "i killed your friends and enjoyed killing them". what is a typical villain or bad cop to you?
I completely agree that they missed several opportunities to have Arthur and John reconnect. Sometimes I think they left things out so that the player would feel more like they had a say in who Arthur was as a person, or what his motivations were. At the end of the game, you can choose to let John go it alone and go back for the money. If they spent a lot of time bonding or reconnecting, that would seem very out of place. Sometimes I wish they had put in more optional missions with the gang, so you could choose to have more set up and pay off for the ending and character you ultimately play Arthur as.
As a soldier we often had beefs with one another and we clung to pride that whatever happened we had the right opinion. However, a lot of beefs get squashed without saying a word to one another by actions. thats alway what i thought was going between john and arthur.
Thumbs up for being the only person I've seen give Andrew Milton a proper analysis. When Andrew shot Hosea he makes sure that he's looking at him first instead of shooting him in the back. Hosea has bounties in multiple states and has killed countless people, but Andrew is consistent with the nobility he has at least pretentions of.
I just came across your channel and seen this vid, so of course I had to watch since I fucking love these RDR games! The video was a really good watch, and although I didn't agree with some things I can say for sure that you have had the most unique perspective on the characters that I've seen online so far. And I've seen more RDR vids than I could hope to be able to count at this point. Personally, I find that when I don't agree with everything said I tend to find the most interesting due to the alternate perspective so I appreciate the effort that went in to this upload, good sir!
I found Arthur to be a tragic figure. Just like Lenny, it seems Arthur himself was frankly a good kid who fell in with the wrong crowd. But then again, because of having been raised by an outlaw, and having effectively grown up as a child soldier, Arthur never had a chance to learn any different. Arthur had indeed been surrounded and raised by the criminal element, but as we can clearly see with his sometimes intense moments of sympathy and compassion, that's not who he truly was deep down inside. John on the other hand, may have in fact fit more into the criminal element naturally, but was smart enough to realize that that life doesn't lead anywhere, at least not anywhere good, but who still ended up paying for his sins.
Before he spoke to the sister Calderon, Arthur helped John, Abigail & Jack because of Abigail, afterwards he helped them because he had to help 'someone', so he helped John to help all three.
I honestly disagree with your point on Milton. He didn't arrest Sadie and Abigail because he didn't want to kill them, he did that so he could lure in Arthur and kill them all. You can also see from his dialogue that he doesn't mind killing them all.
John coming to save Arthur after he gets captured doesn't make much sense, they have Arthur out of the middle of no where, how could John randomly show up and know where he was, don't think any of this was "lazy writing" especially for a game with 70 hrs of gameplay, thousands of hours of dialog which aren't even in the released game, this game is far from lazy, the game was showed more love from its developers than any game in recent mind (aside from online, I just mean story base)
53:00 to be kinda fair, he was sensible about not going after Bronte despite Dutch pushing for it. Realizing it was a bad idea, and how much it would screw the gang and the attention it would bring for the Pinkertons to pinpoint and expect something for the Gang’s next move to most likely rob the city bank. Similar to how the mass shooting in Rhodes that killed Sean, drew Milton attention around the area and inevitably finding their camp and Clemens Point.
Dutch: We are gonna buy a plot of land because I suspect that we’ve drawn too much from the law in Blackwater. Keep a low profile Also Dutch: Lets go rob Blackwater’s ferry If there’s ever an RDR3 I have a feeling we’d be playing as a younger John in the earlier days of the Vanderlin gang and ends with the Blackwater Massacre an finally see what the fuck happened and why Dutch murdered that girl. While our epilogue takes place just after Dutch kills Micah and we play out the events of RDR but from Dutch’s perspective and expectation what the heel he was doing that time .
Him hitting his head has to mean something other than that though it was mentioned a lot when it happened and Dutch says weird things around camp and then is oblivious afterwards
Honestly, if John looked more like he did in chapters 1-6, John would be my favorite too. Also the only reason I do high honor is for the blue ascot tie for the Whitemore outfit in chapter 4
I’ve played through this game a handful of times. Arthur is still my favorite character but I do find myself changing the story a bit in my head so it makes sense. But I spend way more time outside of missions…
I think the point of John's comment on Bronte was it was much more savage and vindictive to feed him to an alligator rather than shooting him, but still agree.
21:10 I actually do think the head bash is significant. There’s dialogue right at the end of the mission about it; Rockstar wouldn’t put that dialogue there for no reason. It’s certainly not the sole reason he went crazy but could be a contributing factor.
Ughhhhh! FINALLY someone agrees with me. normally I am not down for RUclips videos of our hour and 30+ minutes, but I enjoyed every moment of yours. I can’t think of one thing I disagreed with you on. I really enjoyed this entire video and thank you for taking the time to create it.
The fact that we get TB from a side character and in a way that no one noticed....might mean dutch went crazy with the head trauma and depression from losing everyone.
Maybe Bill knows that the difference is based on the way he "carries himself" or, more accurately, the way people unjustifiably respond differently on that basis, but doesn't accept it BECAUSE it's unjustifiable.
“Show him helping the side characters out” you mean like when we saw him help Abigail, Tilly, Jack, Trelawney, and the whole final mission was about helping John escape. As well as helping Captain Monroe, Beau Gray, and Penelope braithwaite. Arthur literally helped everyone that he could/let him.
Another comment here. Basically; I believe that the gang kills without remorse for the most part because they are the muscle, not because they find it fun or any other reason. When Arthur is being hypocritical toward John or others, it's because he's experienced it, with the relationship, he regrets not running away with Mary, with killing, he feels guilty for the times he has killed and holds it against himself, he doesn't want other people to feel the burden of taking a life. I don't think that there is a disconnect, I think that most of the kills are player-caused, not Arthur wanting to kill people. When Arthur kills, he either doesn't have a choice, or the choice is that of the player's. There's no disconnect that I've seen, it's all a matter of perspective.
1:17:20 In Arthur’s journal he was still loyal to Dutch he just says it wasn’t blind loyalty. Arthur remained with the gang because he was trying to set the others free John,Jack,Abigail,Susan,and Tilly, He also expressed leaving Dutch but only after he helped the others escape, and Arthur even said in the mission “Our Best Selves” after he helped the others escape he would go West and try to fight off his tuberculosis, he knew he didn’t have much time left anyways so he was just trying to let the others who had time to get them to leave, and that’s pretty much why he didn’t leave.
I think Arthur`s hypocrisy is intentional and the disconnect was self aware. Mainly inspired by Dutch`s own holier than thou action. The game actually pointed it out in subtle ways, if you return back to the towns after your massacre , like Rhodes gray shoot out or the Valentine one, Widows in black and NPCs will curse you. If u go after the last loan shark reason, the borrower who is a Miner died before he can repay and the foreman laughed at this late employee`s misfortune. Arthur chided the man in his holier than thou act, then the Foreman rebuked: "Hey, at least I am not goddamn loanshark." And shutdown Arthur.
I think Arthur and John sort of silently reconciling and not directly talking to each other about their past grievances is used to imply why John would never talk about Arthur in 1911. Also they were men raised in the 19th century, and were practically brothers. Siblings never apologize to each other they just start being nice to each other again.
I love the video man great job man, last red dead video was amazing too and And yeah I have to agree on the mostly everything I do wish Javier was used more long with bill and john a bit more also wish they could have done more with john and Dutch with the whole father, son thing and why john might have been Dutch’s favorite but thats a whole other thing anyways I disagree on Arthur being a better shot I would say that john has a lot more duels in the free roam then Arthur and then the Landon Rickertt’s training but that’s just me you disagree it’s understandable anyways I would also like to say if you liked the red dead games I’m pretty sure you would like the mafia games I hope you can make a video on those games one day anyways great video again man hope to see more like it in the future 👍👍👍👍
I think something you overlooked with Arthur is that he’s outlook on life changes throughly as you progress in the story. At one point yes he didn’t have it in him to be a family man. But by the end of the story he wants John to pursue what he didn’t have the guts to at the time. Arthur isn’t a good person he does a lot of things but what I think they tried to do is uniquely make him start to realize how wrong he’s been and start to try to do right before it’s too late. He’s a villain trying to redeem himself. Even if he wasn’t the worst of the bunch
Rockstar is great at making things vague. And rockstar fans are great at looking at something that’s supposed to be taken at face value. And spending months and years on end trying to find shit that ain’t there
Loved the game. Just got done with the entire game (everything you can do, I did it). I enjoyed everything in this video and the previous one. And I agree, John is a better character.
This video is well made, and you articulate your points VERY well. I commend you for that. However, I think you’re being a bit unfair with the “Arthur is a hypocrite” point. Part of the Gang’s code is “kill folks as need killing” and Dutch slowly stops following that code. As far as I know, Arthur never once kills an innocent person in a cutscene, nor does the game force you to in gameplay. The only time you can kill someone in cold blood is if the player chooses to do so. If you do, and get low honor as a result, the game actually calls you out for it. Micah says “You’re not better than me Morgan!” And Sadie says Arthur is confusing, for example. Dutch killing Bronte is a bit different. It’s not so much that he killed him, it’s that he drowned him and fed him to an alligator when he simply could’ve shot him in the head. Dutch later kills an elderly woman who poses no threat to him. This, and other reasons, are why I don’t think Arthur is being as big a hypocrite as you say.
A lot of lawmen/pinkertons get killed during the story. While it’s true, a lot of lawmen were outlaws before putting on the star…a lot of them were just, in Karen’s words “Local boys” Just some local boys doing their legal job in society.
I think people forget just how amazing John was as a protagonist in RDR1. That game was my favorite of all time before RDR2 came out, and a huge reason was because of John Marston. When it was announced that you wouldn't be playing as John in RDR2 I was beyond upset, I was livid. I thought: "How could R* possibly not let us play as one of the most intriguing and badass characters of all time? There is no way the new protagonist can come CLOSE to John. This game might actually be bad, I cannot believe they made this stupid, stupid decision." And then I played RDR2 and I became enthralled with Arthur. His character is complex and nuanced and his story woven into the gameplay well enough to really endear you to him. But John's story is better. Part of the reason I love RDR2 more as a game is because John is kind of a bumbling fool. He still has that fire, but he doesn't really have any convictions or a code. When you see him a decade later he has those things. He's a man who knows how to socialize well and his vocabulary is much better, he's had time to figure himself out and choose what is important to him. The reason I love Arthur is because he was the catalyst to that change in John and he ensured John and his family would have a future, but John is the reason I stayed for the story.
This video was fantastic. I couldnt even tell that you were just starting out with 3.5K subscribers. I'm sure your channel will blow up soon. Best of luck to you!
3:01 - that's actually incorrect. In RDR 1 there's no mention, AT ALL, of the actual death count during the 'Blackwater Massacre'.
That's just a missconception/fallacy/fan theory/urban legend that originated shortly after RDR 1's release (same thing happened with people back then thinking John was left for dead in 1906, just because a newspaper article mentioned that the last time Dutch was seen publicly was in that year. So people just wrongly assumed back them).
im gonna pin this comment because it looks like youre 100% correct. dug around after i saw it and it seems like there was a mandela effect type thing going on with that. apparently one of the first red dead wiki's posted those numbers and the internet kinda ran with it to the point that other articles/videos started saying the same thing. over the years it never got corrected and a ton of people, myself included, falsely remember seeing it in the original game too. good info.
@@SwoopGoose I just watched a movie in which a criminal set up his friends and fellow criminals in a bank heist. He was in contact with local police and tipped them off about the bank heist. The way that the law recognized the person who told the police, wore a white suit the day of the robbery, so that the law could identify and not shoot at him. Watching this movie sparked my curiosity about Rdr2. Micah is the ONLY gang member to wear a white suit the day of the Saint Denis bank robbery. Do you think this was a thought out decision by rockstar to hint to the player that Micah is the rat. Let me know what you think.
As John in the Epologue there are still folks in Blackwater talking about the massacre. Usually in the Saloon.
@@mrnobody3161 that's the epilogue of rdr2
Not rdr1
🤓
“Arthur isn’t a real person ”
And I took that personally
He's not lol
@Kakashi Ten stop riding him
@Kakashi Ten than youll never be able to think for your self
@Kakashi Ten stop being a arthur fanboy
THEY ARE REAL TO ME, STOP RUINING MY DREAM
It always made sense to me that Arthur got fixated on John, Abigail, and Jack, as they represent an already existing, traditional family unit. He wanted them to have a chance at a peaceful life. He loves Jack. He loves Abigail. And through his growth, has come to forgive John, one of his oldest friends.
All of that. But in addition, John isnt just an "old friend". He was family to arthur, he even says this to hosea. They were raised and grew up together like brothers. I'd say Arthurs views toward John and his family were a little more personal than most.
They were brothers more than old friends.
I feel like Arther also felt guilty about how he treated his own family when he had one, and he didn't want John to make the same mistakes he did.
@@AboveWaterexactly Arthur losing his own family is a huge part of why he is the way he is.
I always thought that one of the main reasons why he wanted john to leave with his family is because he himself had a family but couldnt be with them because of the loyalty he had to the gang and due to the that couldnt protect them when it matters. So he wanted john to have the family he didnt have a chance to have
they weren't shocked that Dutch killed Bronte it was how he killed him.. that's why john says about feeding a fella to a croc
It was an alligator dumb ass 😒
Yeah I agree. A lot of the gang sees dying in combat as honorable and killing an armed man that’s shooting at them as justified. Bronte was both unarmed and killed a lot more brutally than just a bullet to the head. That’s why they were shocked, because Dutch murdered an unarmed man in a very sadistic way.
I was about to comment the same thing. He didn’t just shoot Bronte he drowned him, killing him in a very personal way. It takes a lot to drown a person versus just shooting them. Same with the old woman in Guarma
@@Michael.js117drowning is also one of the most painful deaths. it was personal and vengeful.
ong idk if this guy rlly understands the stance the game is trying to take like all the gameplay not relating to the story that lead me to believe he never played sister caldorone which touches on all that if u gonna post a whole video understand ur topic
The reason Arthur is fixated on saving John and his family is because Arthur used to have a woman himself, and a kid. One day, he came back home and he saw two crosses outside of the front porch. That house is actually in the game, and they were shown in Trailer 3, too. Arthur, also, tries starting a family with Mary Linton afterward, but that doesn’t work out. And Arthur has a soft spot for Abigail and Jack, too.
Because John has something that Arthur couldn’t have, instead of feeling jealous, he becomes selfless and makes sure that John and his family live the life that he couldn’t. I have to disagree that him coming fixated on John and his family felt rushed. For me, it made perfect sense.
I agree. Of all the plot lines in this game to call rushed, this might be the last one I’d use as an example
Arthur also loved Abagale
But he left with Mery so in a way he wanted his brother and sister to be happy
Cuz Arthur grew to respect vs love Abagale
Awwoawa wowahwowahuhuh
Same here. I also kinda feel like the reason he focuses more on them as others leave is becuase those who left were also folks he wanted to save, but since they left he knows he doesn't have to worry about them anymore, and as a result focuses more of his energy toward helping his brother and brother's family get out. He was so fixated on helping them because unlike the other folks he wanted to help, John and Abigail actually stuck it out in spite of how awful things were, so he had to focus more on them.
Well also they were the only ones with a kid in the matter.
I dont think john was shocked that they killed bronte, its how he was killed. it was brutal and sadistic. Dutch flew into a rage. It was unlike him and both John and Arthur noticed. This is also a silent bonding moment between arthur and john.
Yessir it's because how quick the switch flipped for Dutch. He was literally just saying that maybe they could ransom him, and that would have actually benefitted the gang at that point in time, maybe even making the bank heist largely unnecessary. But Dutch throws that all the way in a flash just because Bronte insulted him. His mental state is becoming so fragile and weak at that point that he's killing over petty insults and only John and Arthur see it. Him killing for any little reason is anything but being strong, that's why Dutch's line about his books covering weakness is extremely ironic as he's displaying it in spades.
Bronte was a great example of how lost the gang was at that point. Especially immediately after the Gray/Braithwaite failure. They rolled into Lemoyne and Dutch's ego made him think he'd be able to mastermind a plan to play both sides and walk out of Rhodes with a fat stack of (phantom) gold. But he severely underestimated the Gray's and Braithwaite's experience and skill at using people. Which both did, until they became more trouble then they were worth, and brought the weight of their local power down on them, the Grays setting up the shoot-up in Rhodes that killed Sean and the Braithwaite's in how they took Jack. They weren't as dumb as Dutch assumed. Their only downfall was not having plot armor and underestimating how brutal the game could be.
Bronte would have been an easy mark for Dutch and Hosea. Simply stroke the man's ego a bit and he'd have probably opened the door to make the gang rich. Instead, Dutch let Bronte's wealth and power blind him. Instead of brushing off Bronte's insults while stroking his ego to take him down as a target, thought Bronte was being honest with the trolley station tip, even as he got called a cow fucker in the same conversation.
Which leads to Dutch being embarrassed and exposed even more as a relic of a time gone by.
Bronte deserved it
In regards to Dutchs Bounty, $1000 in 1899 has the purchasing power of around $35,758 today, Arthur's $5k bounty would equate to $178,790
omg
"Can I turn myself in?" 😅
Really loved your bit about Milton. He really wasn't so bad compared to Ross. They are basically like Zhakaev and Makarov. One was definitely worse than the other.
Yeah, ross should be the antagonist in the sequel. And the ultimate bad guy.
Oh.. wait..
Milton is the kind of person that enjoys seeing people scared and suffering. I'm not far enough in the story to know the other guy but for me, it's gonna be hard to top that
@@ticket2space at least with him there was a out, or temporary out.
The mention of the horse dying scene feeling hollow doesn’t make sense as you need a level 4 bonding with your horse to generate the scene so if you only recently stole it I wouldn’t think you would have that. Either way vast majority of people will have the same horse from early on so I think it’s a great add on
You can get it with lvl 3 bonding too. on my second playthrough I had Buell but didn't have enough time to fully bond and got the scene
@@fortytwo4-2 even if that was true (which it isn't) you still can't get level 3 bond in 20 minutes you can't even get level 3 bond in 2 hours it takes a while
@@jamescrain4452 I got Buell a few hours before the last mission, and I barely got lvl 3 bonding but I did get the scene
@@fortytwo4-2 if that is true it’s probably just because u were using buell who I’m pretty sure is the only named horse Arthur can ride so if you were just on a normal level 3 horse it definitely wouldn’t have played the scene
@@fortytwo4-2 either way fact still remains in the video he said he got the horse 20 minutes before the final mission and got the death scene which is just impossible no matter how you look at it
One thing that bugs me about the Blackwater massacre is, it's seems like far more people are killed during the Cornwall shootout in Valentine, murdering the entire town of Strawberry with Micah, and after robbing the trolly station and bank in St Denis. Those 3 missions to me overshadow whatever could have happened in Blackwater.
Arthur makes mentions to his displeasure in how Strawberry was handled by Micah. On my playthroughs I only ever killed those that were necessary while breaking Micah out. On the other hand Micah kills indiscriminately. I don't think bringing Strawberry into account matters in comparison.
Even Bill says "this is worst than Blackwater!" In the bank of Saint denis
maybe woulda made more sense if we as players could play what happened in blackwater, or at least seen some of it in a cutscene pregame that eludes to the chaos better. However, i also like not knowing, because it A: leaves a bit of mystery about the gangs past, and B: leaves red dead open to a red dead redemption 3 (unless they dont do that at all/choose a different time to go to)
That's kinda the point of Blackwater massacre... its this big question mark floating over the narrative. Arthur wasn't there. The people who were are obtuse about recalling it. Its obviously bad.. probably the FIRST sign of cracks in dutches messiah leader complex..
That's the point. Actually KNOWING the details would contradict its narrative purpose. Its annoying to not know, sure. It is to Arthur too. Its achieving its exact purpose in the story
I think what’s unique about it is that it’s the first time the gang indiscriminately kills a bunch of people.
I think strawberry is meant to parallel black water and show the at the root of the gangs mass killings is Micah’s disregard for any moral code.
A lot of the issues you have with the game can be boiled down to “I did immersion breaking things and then my immersion was broken”
Look. The point where Dutch becomes a "Monster" is in Guarma. Specifically when Dutch kills that woman. That's where Arthur starts seeing Dutch in a different light. If you're playing as High Honor Arthur. (Which should be your first playthrough before genocidal maniac run. And also the cannon ending of the game.) Arthur has a fine line he walks that keeps him "moral" High Honor Arthur kills for the gang. To save people close to him, or to help those he holds dear. Like Sean, Lenny, Jack, Javier, so many people he helped save because he deemed them as worth killing for. Arthur is the embodiment of a good man doing bad things for the ones he loves. I'm not here to say that your analysis of Arthur is wrong. But you just missed a few very key details that put the narrative together perfectly. I mean think about it. Arthur never kills out of anger. He doesn't go for petty revenge. Dutch did that on multiple occasions. Bronte, Cornwall, that woman in Guarma, his anger at the Lemoyne Raiders for quote payback for "his daddy" how he left John behind. How he left Arthur for dead and Eagle Flies saved him in place of Dutch. Arthur watched his father abandon his brothers amd sisters. He has a right to view him as a monster. But that's just my take on it. Feel free to point out anything I may be wrong about. (Keep in mind this is from the perspective of High Honor Arthur.)
he feeds bronte to an alligator earlier than that
@@oneask1 One could argue that was the point where Arthur started questioning Dutch. But he still had faith in the man. I mean, he did help orcastrate Jack's kidnapping.
Great take King Dtrix. This comment was a good read thank you for explaining more nuance to Arthur’s character. Honestly not only did Arthur see Dutch differently after that, but I as a player did too. Id be willing to bet a lot of players had that experience. Dutch couldn’t even come up with a decent reason for it either
It’s honestly not that hard of a analysis to miss as we see the type of killing out of necessity for those you love is used in a lot of shows and games specifically in apocalyptic settings like The walking dead and Days gone. I’m not pointing you out but rather the author of the video as like I said it’s commonly used
You say your points in a way with so much confidence and conviction that I almost end up siding with you but nah, in all, Arthur is the most sincere, redeeming, interesting and empathetic character that I have ever come across in fiction. And you threw me for a loop with the whole borderline-defending Micah thing. But interesting vid nonetheless!
Pretty boy privilege. Halo effecting Arthur is Essentially a war criminal and cry baby but ya ride him so hard.
@@RedVelvetBlackleatheryou're so edgy and cool I notice you have an unpopular opinion, going against the grain if you will, I'm sure everyone will notice and think you're so cool and different for forcing yourself to not agree with everyone but for letting us all know in the most gotcha way possible you really got em dude you got all of us so cool
@@mtlgrrrr
How ami being edgy? Being edgy comes with some disregard of human life or making fun of a terrible situation. I’m just pointing out that because Arthur is handsome he’s misdeeds are lighten and his few charitable actions are treated like acts of God. It’s like this for most people thusly why I said Halo effect if it were Kieran doing what Arthur did he would be a much more nuance character with much less love and defense of his character.
@@mtlgrrrrtry again next time
@@gorkaaustin5306 damn, you gonna dck ride your whole life?
Arthur probably notices the renewed relationship between John and his family, and is content that he's not wasting his chance like Arthur did, but is listening to Arthur.
I think it’s more about personal redemption rather than actually redeeming all their past wrongs or anything like that.
John redeemed himself by becoming a family man, making sure they’re safe and trying to leave his outlaw life(I wanna put more emphasis on “try”).
Arthur redeemed himself by giving John a chance to live with his family, which is something that Arthur chose to walk away from with Mary in his past.
What happened after doesn’t really matter. It does show that their struggles were in vain, but they’ve still personally redeemed themselves.
This is my favourite game of all time. Gameplay and story fit together perfectly. Arthur's ending is the most emotional thing I've experienced in a game, from his last ride all the way untill he sees the sun rise for the last time. brings a tear to my eye just thinking of it.
I would disagree that the gameplay is disconnected from the storyline. And I would seriously disagree with Arthur killing “thousands of innocent people”. The majority of people he killed were other gang members. And if wasn’t gang members it was cops who started shooting him first so he obviously acted in self defense. Arthur doesn’t go around killing innocent people like civilians. I don’t think there’s one scene in the story where Arthur kills an innocent by-stander. Everyone he kills started shooting at him first. Or they have his friends held hostage which in turn would make them un-innocent
Bro wtf you can’t shoot cops “in self defense” lmao. Their whole job is to enforce the law for the public. Your a gang or murderers and outcasts. Killing police isn’t self defense, it’s murder
Your idea of morality is childishly black and white. Arthur is a killer. He’s killed people outside of self-defense. He doesn’t get a pass just because his victims are gang members or whatever bs justification you want to cook up.
Have you thought about why he gets “shot at first”? Because of his poor moral decisions that put him in situations where other people have to stop him.
Most the lawmen he kills are innocent or just doing their jobs too
@@plimbo2.0 Arthur himself wouldn't do that. You force him to as the player.
So if I rob a bank and police start shooting at me I can just kill them? And I’ll be in the right? Nice to know
What you asserted was Micah motive was probably to wait till the Gangs bounties were to his liking, make a lot of what he does in the game makes so much sense. Which got me thinking, oh shit that would explain why he began to slaughter everyone when we break him out of jail. He did it just so Arthur and Dutchs’ bounties would increase because they’d be blame. he was still knew to gang so he probably didn’t have a bounty on him as a member of Dutch’s gang. And members who were part of the botched ferry heist even says that it was Micah that urged him to kill that girl so they could make their escape. Dutch’s Bounty just became much larger. That makes so much sense
As for why ditch killed the girl, I think he did exactly what he did to girl he took hostage and killed in RDR. Used her as human shield then when he felt like he had opportune moment to get away, pushed her toward the Lawmen and then shot her kinda slow done their pursuers.
I never play rdr1 and I'm planning on playing it but I felt the biggest reason Arthur cared more for john than other characters is because he saw himself in John
Arthur had a son who was tragically killed and couldn't start a family with mary because of outlaw life
He wanted John to not make the same mistake he did and John had an opportunity to have the life arthur never had.
But I agree there was an missed opportunity with developing the relationship between arthur, John, Jack and Abigail
Johns death is not canon if you dont play RDR1 :), i will never play that game because i refuse to believe john dies. i will happily live in ignorance
@@peepeetrain8755 play it but stop at the 56th mission
Arthur wasn’t even on the ferry job. Him and Hosea were planning on carrying out their own scheme afterwards.
I'd say you're spot on most things in the video, but I have to disagree with you on one thing --Dutch.
He absolutely changes in the end. The Dutch we meet in RDR1 isn't the same guy as in 2. In RDR2, Dutch is obsessed with making the money and "getting out" to a better life. Was that ever realistic? God no, of course not, but it's still his fantasy that he's fixated on. He grandstands, he orates, he goes on and on, and he's paranoid and narcissistic as all hell --but it's all about escaping the modern world (via himself and his gigantic ego).
Dutch in RDR1 is a different animal. Gone are the fancy clothes, the fine jewelry, the meticulously groomed hair. And gone are the ideals. He has become something much worse than what he was --he's become his true self. Cruel, petty, angry, and no longer fixated on getting away from this new, developing world, but obsessed with taking revenge on it. Hurting it. He fully came into what he always at his core really was, a man who just wanted to see the world burn. He kills for sport, he gleefully mocks Abigail, all while looking more like Swanson on one of his benders than like a posh gambler. Even the people he hoodwinks into his service are different, a group of outlaw natives who aren't "outsiders looking in" to society like the old gang, but men who are not and never were of the white man's world. And who come in with very legitimate grudges against it, grudges that Dutch twists to his purpose.
He does change. He gets worse. He goes from a pathological liar with a saviors' complex to what can only be described as a terrorist.
cant disagree with that one bit. wish i wrote that into the script for this video lol.
@@SwoopGoose Haha. I am, for the record, 100% with you on everything else in the video. Particularly the pacing issues and the narrative/gameplay disconnect. Good lord it's jarring.
Still, on my what -6th? playthrough.
L h gknjùlllllllllp wooooo
Actually the script had Javier pointing his gun at Arthur & John. But while filming the scene. The actor that played Javier (Gabriel Sloyer) said he just couldn’t point his gun at them. He’s was like, those are my bros. I can’t point my gun at them. The actors had formed such tight bond on set. They really were a family. Because of that, Rockstar allowed it. Instead of making them re shoot the scene, with Javier pointing his gun at them. I’m glad Rockstar allowed that. It’s little things like that, that make this game amazing.
Dutch wants to go to a place that doesnf exist.. back in time. The country they thrived and prospered in, it's in the past. No amount of money can take you there. Turning of the century is paramount to this entire narrative, both games. Their day is over. You can justify your death throws, but you're still dying.
I think with Bronte the issue was more that they assumed Dutch would have been more clean about killing him. Like drowning him in the swamp and feeding him to an alligator is a lot more brutal than shooting him.
I hear the comments about Arthur's push to save John being shoehorned in quite a lot from people who played RDR1 but, as someone who only played RDR2, it felt quite natural following his introspection and interactions with the nun character. I wonder if there's that internal critical drive to find holes in the plot that we often have, and that hole only shows up if you get the feeling that it's to set up RDR1. If someone doesn't have that background, however, they aren't looking for forced callbacks and, when not looking for it, it's quite natural.
I played the first one before and i def don't agree with his point on that. I think it made perfect sense for this dying man with extreme loyalty to his loved ones and Arthur's fixation on John and his family and the events of red dead 1 only make me more empathetic towards these characters. It all makes sense and sadly it's all for nothing, pretty realistic since cycles of behavior are extremely common in the real world too. Games like to roll a narrative that there is always a solution and your efforts will not be in vain but in reality it sadly is often not real and despite that we still try and should continue to try to change things and be better as people. Rdr1 and 2 explore that concept very well.
@@katiekaliber It's not "All for nothing" though.
Jack Marston survives. John gets to live a while longer, though he continues to experience strife.
Hey Asshole, Great video. Personally my favorite scene is at the the end of the game where Arthur comes across the Nun for the last time finding out that she is on mission to Mexico. That conversation seemed like it almost flipped a switch to believe in love and how perspective is important because He sees himself as someone that cant be saved and believed to have done to much wrong and then acknowledges that every time she seen him he was smiling and helping people. It seemed this his eyes really opened and was a really touching scene.
(I called you Asshole in regards to the beginning of the video)
So.. the fact that arthur wants John and Abigail to raise the boy a way his parents never could is ‘lazy writing’ and we need more reasons? Idk about that 1 chief
Especially when he failed doing so himself so he's wanting John to have the life he never has due to his own shortcomings.
Honestly half of what he disses Arthur for was outright false or reading scenes wrong.
It feels like he came in salty over the critiques of his last video and went in his mini rants in this one as a result
John was like a Arthur's brother. They had a rough time together at the start of part 2 but he always loved him. Also, Arthur always wanted a family to belong to. When he realized that John's family would be destroyed by the gang, he had to make a choice. Besides, most of the gang was already either dead or gone after he rescued Abigail from Milton. Charles and Sadie were save, the only one left to save was John.
Their relationship was built flawlessly. You can really feel that as Arthur's life was ticking away, he had to redeem himself somehow. This was his only way and also the only way he could die peacefully. That's why the John ending makes sense and Money ending doesn't. But to each its own.
The whole Arthur critiquing Dutch for killing people argument is flawed imo. I don’t think Arthur is a hypocrite, I think it’s about a dissidence in power and authority. Arthur shames Dutch because he kills people who don’t have the power to fight back, where as Arthur reasons that he’s killing people with the ability to defend themselves. Arthur’s morale meter is a great example of this philosophy. You can look at this metric as less accurate to how people view Arthur and more so how Arthur views himself. When you do an undeniably bad thing, you’re forced to take a hit to your honour, this is most likely meant to symbolise Arthur shaming himself like how he shames Dutch. I think your arguments are well thought out but ignore this crucial detail. The story is inherently flawed when you search for flaws, you don’t see the reasons for inclusions existing when you hunt for them as flaws.
As to the relationship between John and Arthur, you fundamentally misunderstand the type of relationship they have. The things you are looking for are unsaid between them, but you would need to understand their relationship to get it. They have a brother relationship, there are things that don't need to be said. You don't have to formally make up with family.
I don't think that it was rushed between John and Arthur at all. By that point Arthur is dying. He's screwed up with Mary, and he's lost his son Isaac. He's telling John to get Abigail and Jack out and have the life that he knows that he can never have - certainly now that he's dying of TB. He's reflecting on his life at that point and wants to give John that chance that he doesn't have, basically telling John 'don't screw up like I did. '
Whether John goes for it, well that's on John.
Arthur's ending is summarized in the one quote "No greater love has a man, that he lay down his life for is friends" and you clearly missed the point of the ending. Whole vid stinks.
Red Dead 2 is one of the best games ever made, but like any game, you have to use your imagination to fill in the gaps. I love that this video is praise, but addresses the fast-paced and somewhat sloppy writing of the second half and ending of the game
this is why i always, without exception, spend a few weeks out in the wilderness doing other shit between every single mission. also, side point........ a lot of people these days seem to have lost their imagination
@@skyhawkslcb18 People really don’t know how to fill in the blanks
Thought that Bronte was technically still alive when thrown to the gator, no way he drowned just from being under for a few seconds, hence why John is disturbed by the way Dutch kills him. He wanted Bronte dead, just not in such an awful way.
Micah and Dutch were making frequent trips to Brokeback Mountain. That's why Dutch turned a blind eye. Micah and Dutch were playing butt darts.
im dead
when Dutch was rambeling in Lakay and sorta chokes on his own breath when "Oh i miss Hosea" kinda got me
I think that’s why they have Arthur’s wife and son die. Now he has a connection and sees himself in John. That’s why he’s so adamant on him leaving and getting out of the outlaw life.
Nice video I learned a lot about the game's story, but dare I say Dutch lacking "development", or not growing up, was the whole point of the character. Dutch's character development was that he isn't changing, or not developing, even after wotnessing Arthur's death and seeing things clearly, he still chose to run away from the problem. And instead blaming himself for his wrongdoing, he chose to blame Micah for all the failures he has done. He clearly stated that he was there to kill Micah as John in the epilogue. But instead killing Micah for revenge, he was to kill Micah because he thought, or convinced himself to think that it was Micah's fault that plans fell apart, while he knows it was his fault. Arthur's death and knowing Micah was the rat didn't change what he is, but let him know that he is a "monster" and he embraced the idea. That's why Dutch in the original Red Dead Redemption behaved that way.
And ain't no redemption for old Dutch
A lil nitpick, Dutch didn't cut bill or Javier loose, they both left on their own terms
In another video about rdr2 someone said you cant do bad things and expect a happy ending and i feel thats the whole story of red dead
I got back into this game shortly before this came out, it was truly my first playthrough with Arthur helping everyone he can and it made me love that hypocritical dickhead. Also you have real talent dude keep It the fuck up.
There is actual proof that Arthur is a better marksman than John in game. Arthur keeps both eyes open when aiming his guns whereas John closes one eye
And? Does this matter to the story and characters?
@@MrYogurtExists since he talked about their marksmanship for about five whole minutes I’d say yes it does
@@azraelwolfsblood2902 Time stamp please?
@@MrYogurtExists 1:31:18
And Arthur keeps his back straight, while in rdr1, John is still slouched over even after a lesson with landon ricketts
The thing I never understood was the thought process behind Arthur not being able to go to Blackwater at all in RD2 because he is immediately killed by the bounty hunters out looking for you, even though he was never in Blackwater for the ferry job , but John, who was , can go back several years later and nobody knows who he is . Plus, when you leave for Guarma as Arthur , you are wanted , but then come back and your wanted level is gone , but still wanted in Blackwater .
My guess for Blackwater is he’s probably guilty for association. Or even confused him and John in the heat of the Chaos. I don’t know though
Because they cut a massive amount of content with missions in the area, and with how much of Mexico was built and abandoned, and if rumors are true, the RDR1 remake as RDR2 DLC. Rockstar decided to cancel all single-player DLC following discovering the beauty of Shark Cards and how much kids with Mommy's credit card would spend.
They cancelled single-player DLC after GTA Online launched, converting the planned heist-focused DLC into online content, which happened around 2014, about halfway into RDR2's development.
@@mrFiiSKiiSRDR2 is an amazing game, but it pains me knowing it could’ve been so much more, same goes for GTA5.
46:40 it would have better if John came and the dialogue was
Arthur: "What took you so long?"
John: "I wasn't going to come, but Abigail said she and Jack wouldn't forgive me if I left your dumbass to rot!"
Arthur: "Good, I was worried for a second that you actually gave a shit!"
Playful; brotherly jabbing while showing that Abigail may have feelings for Arthur while also riding on the idea that Jack likes "Uncle Arthur" more than he likes John, considering he wasn't very worried when John was on that mountain or when Arthur and Javier manage to bring him back.
Just seems like another Arthur cuck fantasy. Everyone wants all the women to be in love with Arthur, John’s son wants Arthur to be his real dad, oh and actually, Arthur’s such a stud he fucked Abigail and jack is his actual son. Arthur is also resurrected after his death and walks on water. Give me a fuckin break y’all…🙄
I thought this was a video covering the storylines of both games and character development?
It's basically a psych evaluation of Micah.
For me, rdr3 should be on how Dutch recruit every characters. We could have more informations about the backstory of each members and we could finish the game with the blackwater massacre. Having young dutch as a playable character could be very cool and we would understand the whole story of how the gang as been created. We could see davey, mac and jenny too. Play with gang members who weren't that here in rdr2 ( as Sean for example ). We could even see Isaac and Eliza so I think maybe rdr3 could have this subject ( btw sorry for my bad english im french )
Sounds cool, but the only thing about RDR3 is, RDR2 started with them on the run. If you finish RDR3, how would it end and how would you free roam around the world with them already on the run?? You'll have to play as a character that wasn't mentioned in the gang but didn't died, maybe he just got away or something
Personally I think RDR3 should be about Jack and his redemption after killing Ross in RDR1. Yes, Ross deserved to be shot for what he did to John but it still calls for redemption because he shot someone. Evil or not. In the lord’s eyes it’s a sin to kill another. So to me, Red Dead 3 should be about John and his path to redemption 🖤
Imo rdr3 should be about Landon rickets and his life on the run as a gunslinger, and all the new characters and action you can see along the way. It could be really cool fleshing out this character and creating a subversive ending for him that we wouldn’t expect.
This video is golden, especially the John and Arthur section. Absolutely love it, 10/10 my friend. Best hour and a half I’ve watched.
I feel like the ending, was very rushed. And I know that because there’s a lot of cut content
The way you tried picking apart Arther is strange because for one Arthur is doing the right thing according to the gang which is the gang comes first which is why law man and others get shot, and the ‘bad things’ Arthur does also tells the story of the good man losing the fight to the giant because he followed the gangs needs over the right thing, you looked at the small picture of death more then the big picture of the representation of his actions
Viewing the deaths of hundreds as the "small picture" is a big picture issue
@@smokey3504 I think that’s an inherently dishonest take tbh… I can’t help but feel like a lot of people would watch other people (especially equally “bad” people) die to protect their family.
I think the significance of the realization that Arther was actually loyal all along was not Dutch recognizing his own faults but simply that he had lost someone who really loved him. He reverted to his old ways after killing Micca because he never saw anything wrong with his own lifestyle and actions in the first place. He felt sorrow but not remorse because he did not see himself as being responsible for Arther’s death. It makes sense that he would go back to business as usual all the way to the time of RDR1 .
What annoys me about rdr2, is that I get into a fight with some guy, he pulls out his gun, aims it at me and pull mine out and shoot him in self defense and I get low honor for it. This guy pulls out his gun to shoot an unarmed man, but I pull out mine and shoot him back and suddenly I'm the bad guy?
I believe the reason Milton asked John who he was, was because he was gone for a year, during which is when the Pinkerton Detective Agency took over the hunt for the gang. I think it’s just a callback to the fact that he left, with no real significance in the story other than to show that even John is a lasting member of the gang, Milton still didn’t know who he was. He doesn’t ask who Charles or Lenny was, they intentionally made him ask John. I think it’s just a sly callback.
I disagree with what you said about Arthur and John, their bond is something you can tell (at least for me) how real it is even tho they don’t share feelings. Arthur’s final act of love was saving his brother and his family, helping him get the life he lost with Mary. Being at the face of death and deciding your life was meaningless and deciding u can’t leave like this and u need to help those that still have time on this earth is what makes his story so emotional, especially considering the person he was with the gang. Anyways, is just my opinion. Nice video :)
Coming right off your older video, it's awesome to see how much is improved from a production standpoint. I think the opinions have been top notch the whole time. Hopefully this video gathers up some more of those sweet sweet clicks, it's definitely deserved.
I think this is great, but you’re missing some very symbolic moments in your wanting more. Specifically when Arthur stands next to John after they save Jack. He felt Johns pain, he stood next to his brother until John said his peace and acknowledged the difficulty in his attempted expression. That was huge, he could’ve just walked off and joined the party. But my man stood with his brother. It’s little moments like that that make up this story, got to keep your heart open to them.
2:20 hey man in my opinion the biggest fans of things are the ones willing to point out the flaws because they see what greatness is truly possible and want the best for it. unfortunately so many comment sections devolve into angry echo chambers
In 1899 the Pinkertons weren't just 'hired mercenaries ' they were essentially the secret service/getting phased out of that role. They literally are on the level of the real US Army in many respects just with the ability to also deal with private matters that the army couldn't, or wouldn't, intervene in
i would disagree with your analysis of the perception arthur has on strauss. you can choose to not collect bounties (except for the one where he gets coughed on by the man with TB). there is a dialogue for when strauss, most certainly frustrated, leaves the gang complaining to arthur about his lack of conviction on collecting debt. arthur recognizes this and still dismisses his concerns.
This is by far the best analysis of RDR2 I have seen since its’s release and I’m 22:06 in. This is fantastic work and I had to pause to tell you how much I appreciate your efforts in the creation of this video but also your views on this game’s story and how exactly it’s characters play their role. Thank you for the work you’ve done/do.
I think its an interesting idea that micah isnt actually a rat and that agent milton made it up to further tear apart the gang. granted he probably didnt know how much of a hard time they were going through, but anyways its an interesting thought
1:04:20 Arthur was young and made mistakes when he didn’t choose his son over the gang, that’s why he was so fo focused on John so John wouldn’t make the same mistakes Arthur made
You deserve more subscribers. It always blows my mind when smaller channels take the time and effort to this long of a video and especially when this much effort has been put into it. It’s amazing that you put in so much time and work into something that you’re not even paid for. I know the hope is that you will eventually get paid and I hope you do. But for now, keep grinding, you have everything going for you, you just need to stay consistent
Love the Milton hot take :D oh yeah the guy who brought a gatling gun and opened fire on everyone knowing there was a kid in the line of fire is a "good guy". Here's a thought what if there are no good guys and bad guys but people on opposing sides, Milton himself never claims he is a good guy he only says he believes in civilization and its necessity. Your whole good guy bad guy argument really misses the mark in my view, this game is quite revisionist in that sense even poking fun at the black hat white hat symbolism of spaghetti westerns. People are complex and layered, a man that sees himself serving the law and wanting to take the high road can find himself putting a kid in the line of fire of a gatling gun, just like a man who sees himself as an outlaw out to survive for his own sake can see himself spending his last moments for the sake of a friend, its about perspective change and choices small or large. Good doesn't wash out the bad but it could still have value to another and isn't pointless. I really think you missed the forest for the trees with that one.
You missed how Lenny opened Arthur’s eyes on race relation as they went to Shady Bell
48:17 bro he latches on to them because he saw his self in john and what he wish he had done when he had the chance too.
The Marshalls didn’t know who john was and he loved John’s son. He wanted that to be the last good thing he did,helping THEM get away as a family!
Something he always wanted!
The story isn’t shallow YOU are!
Everybody was on their own it was no point
This was the only family that was actually family in the gang
I feel like a proper companion mechanic could have benefited the games loose telling of Arthur’s relationships with other gang members
The random killing during gameplay is just Arthur have violent fantasies lol
it is funny, at the part where you say, "milton isn't a typical villain or bad cop", milton's subtitle is him saying, "i killed your friends and enjoyed killing them". what is a typical villain or bad cop to you?
Probably someone who does the exact same thing, but just not for the U.S. government
I completely agree that they missed several opportunities to have Arthur and John reconnect. Sometimes I think they left things out so that the player would feel more like they had a say in who Arthur was as a person, or what his motivations were. At the end of the game, you can choose to let John go it alone and go back for the money. If they spent a lot of time bonding or reconnecting, that would seem very out of place. Sometimes I wish they had put in more optional missions with the gang, so you could choose to have more set up and pay off for the ending and character you ultimately play Arthur as.
As a soldier we often had beefs with one another and we clung to pride that whatever happened we had the right opinion. However, a lot of beefs get squashed without saying a word to one another by actions. thats alway what i thought was going between john and arthur.
Thumbs up for being the only person I've seen give Andrew Milton a proper analysis. When Andrew shot Hosea he makes sure that he's looking at him first instead of shooting him in the back. Hosea has bounties in multiple states and has killed countless people, but Andrew is consistent with the nobility he has at least pretentions of.
I just came across your channel and seen this vid, so of course I had to watch since I fucking love these RDR games! The video was a really good watch, and although I didn't agree with some things I can say for sure that you have had the most unique perspective on the characters that I've seen online so far. And I've seen more RDR vids than I could hope to be able to count at this point. Personally, I find that when I don't agree with everything said I tend to find the most interesting due to the alternate perspective so I appreciate the effort that went in to this upload, good sir!
I found Arthur to be a tragic figure. Just like Lenny, it seems Arthur himself was frankly a good kid who fell in with the wrong crowd. But then again, because of having been raised by an outlaw, and having effectively grown up as a child soldier, Arthur never had a chance to learn any different.
Arthur had indeed been surrounded and raised by the criminal element, but as we can clearly see with his sometimes intense moments of sympathy and compassion, that's not who he truly was deep down inside.
John on the other hand, may have in fact fit more into the criminal element naturally, but was smart enough to realize that that life doesn't lead anywhere, at least not anywhere good, but who still ended up paying for his sins.
Nah Abigail just found the one easiest to play
Before he spoke to the sister Calderon, Arthur helped John, Abigail & Jack because of Abigail, afterwards he helped them because he had to help 'someone', so he helped John to help all three.
I honestly disagree with your point on Milton. He didn't arrest Sadie and Abigail because he didn't want to kill them, he did that so he could lure in Arthur and kill them all. You can also see from his dialogue that he doesn't mind killing them all.
John coming to save Arthur after he gets captured doesn't make much sense, they have Arthur out of the middle of no where, how could John randomly show up and know where he was, don't think any of this was "lazy writing" especially for a game with 70 hrs of gameplay, thousands of hours of dialog which aren't even in the released game, this game is far from lazy, the game was showed more love from its developers than any game in recent mind (aside from online, I just mean story base)
53:00 to be kinda fair, he was sensible about not going after Bronte despite Dutch pushing for it. Realizing it was a bad idea, and how much it would screw the gang and the attention it would bring for the Pinkertons to pinpoint and expect something for the Gang’s next move to most likely rob the city bank. Similar to how the mass shooting in Rhodes that killed Sean, drew Milton attention around the area and inevitably finding their camp and Clemens Point.
Imma just whip up the San Andreas npc quote " opinions are like assholes, everyone got one and they all stink"
especially this guys opinion lol
Your accent definitely sounds like Philly, south jersey area🤔😂🔥
he's definitely ordered from a couple wawas.
Dutch: We are gonna buy a plot of land because I suspect that we’ve drawn too much from the law in Blackwater. Keep a low profile
Also Dutch: Lets go rob Blackwater’s ferry
If there’s ever an RDR3 I have a feeling we’d be playing as a younger John in the earlier days of the Vanderlin gang and ends with the Blackwater Massacre an finally see what the fuck happened and why Dutch murdered that girl. While our epilogue takes place just after Dutch kills Micah and we play out the events of RDR but from Dutch’s perspective and expectation what the heel he was doing that time .
@Cairo Lee Go forward where? In the 1920s you got the mafia. No outlaws and riding a horse anymore.
Him hitting his head has to mean something other than that though it was mentioned a lot when it happened and Dutch says weird things around camp and then is oblivious afterwards
Honestly, if John looked more like he did in chapters 1-6, John would be my favorite too.
Also the only reason I do high honor is for the blue ascot tie for the Whitemore outfit in chapter 4
I’ve played through this game a handful of times. Arthur is still my favorite character but I do find myself changing the story a bit in my head so it makes sense. But I spend way more time outside of missions…
I think the point of John's comment on Bronte was it was much more savage and vindictive to feed him to an alligator rather than shooting him, but still agree.
I did not expect a HAMMER DAHN reference in an RDR2 video, TYFYS
21:10
I actually do think the head bash is significant. There’s dialogue right at the end of the mission about it; Rockstar wouldn’t put that dialogue there for no reason. It’s certainly not the sole reason he went crazy but could be a contributing factor.
Ughhhhh! FINALLY someone agrees with me. normally I am not down for RUclips videos of our hour and 30+ minutes, but I enjoyed every moment of yours. I can’t think of one thing I disagreed with you on. I really enjoyed this entire video and thank you for taking the time to create it.
The fact that we get TB from a side character and in a way that no one noticed....might mean dutch went crazy with the head trauma and depression from losing everyone.
Maybe Bill knows that the difference is based on the way he "carries himself" or, more accurately, the way people unjustifiably respond differently on that basis, but doesn't accept it BECAUSE it's unjustifiable.
“Show him helping the side characters out” you mean like when we saw him help Abigail, Tilly, Jack, Trelawney, and the whole final mission was about helping John escape. As well as helping Captain Monroe, Beau Gray, and Penelope braithwaite. Arthur literally helped everyone that he could/let him.
Another comment here. Basically; I believe that the gang kills without remorse for the most part because they are the muscle, not because they find it fun or any other reason. When Arthur is being hypocritical toward John or others, it's because he's experienced it, with the relationship, he regrets not running away with Mary, with killing, he feels guilty for the times he has killed and holds it against himself, he doesn't want other people to feel the burden of taking a life. I don't think that there is a disconnect, I think that most of the kills are player-caused, not Arthur wanting to kill people. When Arthur kills, he either doesn't have a choice, or the choice is that of the player's. There's no disconnect that I've seen, it's all a matter of perspective.
1:17:20 In Arthur’s journal he was still loyal to Dutch he just says it wasn’t blind loyalty. Arthur remained with the gang because he was trying to set the others free John,Jack,Abigail,Susan,and Tilly, He also expressed leaving Dutch but only after he helped the others escape, and Arthur even said in the mission “Our Best Selves” after he helped the others escape he would go West and try to fight off his tuberculosis, he knew he didn’t have much time left anyways so he was just trying to let the others who had time to get them to leave, and that’s pretty much why he didn’t leave.
I think Arthur`s hypocrisy is intentional and the disconnect was self aware.
Mainly inspired by Dutch`s own holier than thou action.
The game actually pointed it out in subtle ways, if you return back to the towns after your massacre , like Rhodes gray shoot out or the Valentine one, Widows in black and NPCs will curse you. If u go after the last loan shark reason, the borrower who is a Miner died before he can repay and the foreman laughed at this late employee`s misfortune.
Arthur chided the man in his holier than thou act, then the Foreman rebuked:
"Hey, at least I am not goddamn loanshark." And shutdown Arthur.
I think Arthur and John sort of silently reconciling and not directly talking to each other about their past grievances is used to imply why John would never talk about Arthur in 1911. Also they were men raised in the 19th century, and were practically brothers. Siblings never apologize to each other they just start being nice to each other again.
I love the video man great job man, last red dead video was amazing too and And yeah I have to agree on the mostly everything I do wish Javier was used more long with bill and john a bit more also wish they could have done more with john and Dutch with the whole father, son thing and why john might have been Dutch’s favorite but thats a whole other thing anyways I disagree on Arthur being a better shot I would say that john has a lot more duels in the free roam then Arthur and then the Landon Rickertt’s training but that’s just me you disagree it’s understandable anyways I would also like to say if you liked the red dead games I’m pretty sure you would like the mafia games I hope you can make a video on those games one day anyways great video again man hope to see more like it in the future 👍👍👍👍
I think something you overlooked with Arthur is that he’s outlook on life changes throughly as you progress in the story. At one point yes he didn’t have it in him to be a family man. But by the end of the story he wants John to pursue what he didn’t have the guts to at the time. Arthur isn’t a good person he does a lot of things but what I think they tried to do is uniquely make him start to realize how wrong he’s been and start to try to do right before it’s too late. He’s a villain trying to redeem himself. Even if he wasn’t the worst of the bunch
Rockstar is great at making things vague. And rockstar fans are great at looking at something that’s supposed to be taken at face value. And spending months and years on end trying to find shit that ain’t there
To be fair, Arthur is so fixated on getting John and Abigail out is because John has the chance to live a life away from crime, something Arthur lost
Loved the game. Just got done with the entire game (everything you can do, I did it). I enjoyed everything in this video and the previous one. And I agree, John is a better character.
Absolutely incredible retrospective.
I love RDR2 video essays
This video is well made, and you articulate your points VERY well. I commend you for that.
However, I think you’re being a bit unfair with the “Arthur is a hypocrite” point. Part of the Gang’s code is “kill folks as need killing” and Dutch slowly stops following that code.
As far as I know, Arthur never once kills an innocent person in a cutscene, nor does the game force you to in gameplay. The only time you can kill someone in cold blood is if the player chooses to do so. If you do, and get low honor as a result, the game actually calls you out for it. Micah says “You’re not better than me Morgan!” And Sadie says Arthur is confusing, for example.
Dutch killing Bronte is a bit different. It’s not so much that he killed him, it’s that he drowned him and fed him to an alligator when he simply could’ve shot him in the head. Dutch later kills an elderly woman who poses no threat to him.
This, and other reasons, are why I don’t think Arthur is being as big a hypocrite as you say.
a lot of his points were clearly wrong
A lot of lawmen/pinkertons get killed during the story. While it’s true, a lot of lawmen were outlaws before putting on the star…a lot of them were just, in Karen’s words “Local boys” Just some local boys doing their legal job in society.
I think people forget just how amazing John was as a protagonist in RDR1. That game was my favorite of all time before RDR2 came out, and a huge reason was because of John Marston. When it was announced that you wouldn't be playing as John in RDR2 I was beyond upset, I was livid. I thought:
"How could R* possibly not let us play as one of the most intriguing and badass characters of all time? There is no way the new protagonist can come CLOSE to John. This game might actually be bad, I cannot believe they made this stupid, stupid decision."
And then I played RDR2 and I became enthralled with Arthur. His character is complex and nuanced and his story woven into the gameplay well enough to really endear you to him. But John's story is better.
Part of the reason I love RDR2 more as a game is because John is kind of a bumbling fool. He still has that fire, but he doesn't really have any convictions or a code. When you see him a decade later he has those things. He's a man who knows how to socialize well and his vocabulary is much better, he's had time to figure himself out and choose what is important to him. The reason I love Arthur is because he was the catalyst to that change in John and he ensured John and his family would have a future, but John is the reason I stayed for the story.
This video was fantastic. I couldnt even tell that you were just starting out with 3.5K subscribers. I'm sure your channel will blow up soon. Best of luck to you!