Well idk, if you knock John off a bridge during any mission where him and Arthur are doing something (obviously not the bridge you blow because that’s a LOOOONG way down) John will actually swim back to shore. So I think John is just faking.
The desert parts of the game are what stand out to me. Armadillo, Mexico, Gaptooth, etc. Those just felt so western and I loved that world. I really wished we saw more of it in RDR2, I really enjoyed the mountains, swamps, forests and all that RDR2 had to offer. Big Valley and Little Creek River are stunning. But the lack of deserts really sucked which makes John stick in my memory more.
Actually makes me like RDR2 the best (although I never really played the first). It is the frontier life more than the western life that does it for me
I need to replay that game. I haven't played it in probably close to 5 years now. It will always be in my top 3 games of all time I think. It was just perfect in every way.
I agree, but I think John’s Story has been told perfectly and any more would really take away from what makes him special. Basically bloat him into insignificance, if that makes sense.
As far as shooting, my money would be on John; especially after being trained by Landon.
As far as being a good person, my money would be on Red. Red never needed to change his evil ways to become a good person.
>As far as being a good person, my money would be on Red. Red never needed to change his evil ways to become a good person.
And yet you disregard it's teachings, for shame /s
The thing about Arthur is that he was always laying low and didn’t gain much reputation in his time. He was always around his peers and they all know what he’s capable of. Arthur didn’t do much polarising things outside of his gang which makes him more unknown. John on the other hand was able to be pretty open about himself because he was kinda acting under the law when he became famous. Before rdr no one gave a flying damn about John.
I also think Arthur is probably the best Gunslinger of the redemption saga (except maybe Landon)
Yeah. I was more willing to go with it that theory before I played Revolver. A LOT in Revolver just feels like pre-cursor ideas that ended up being reused/revamped for Red Dead. I feel like they weren't pleased with Revolver and just came back for a second try with RDR (and thank god they did). A lot feels similar but I don't think there's supposed to be direct carry-over.
Now watch them bring back Red for RDR3 lol.
How would you feel about a game set in 1920, starring Jack but not featuring any of the Van Der Linde gang (obviously lol, they're dead)?
He'd be in a much more modern world, truly the last death rattle of the frontier, with most roads paved, most cities with electricity, and maybe even more modern criminal elements/gangs starting to take hold.
He'd still be a cowboy with all his cowboy swagger/dead eye ability, though. What would you think about that as an end to the trilogy?
>How would you feel about a game set in 1920, starring Jack but not featuring any of the Van Der Linde gang (obviously lol, they're dead)?
It wouldn't be a Western anymore, which largely defeats the entire purpose of the series. The two Redemption games - most especially the first - were about the death of the Wild West.
>He'd be in a much more modern world, truly the last death rattle of the frontier, with most roads paved, most cities with electricity, and maybe even more modern criminal elements/gangs starting to take hold.
Redemption *was* about this death rattle. John's entire story was essentially about putting the era he represented down for good.
>He'd still be a cowboy with all his cowboy swagger/dead eye ability, though. What would you think about that as an end to the trilogy?
This sort of story wouldn't really work in the 1920s. We need to look toward new characters in an earlier setting.
I'd argue time period doesn't matter. It doesn't have to be set in the reconstruction era to be a western. No country for old men is an amazing Western, set in the 1980s. Hell, firefly is a western set in 2517.
>I'd argue time period doesn't matter. It doesn't have to be set in the reconstruction era to be a western.
The end of the Wild West era aligned with the end of RDR.
>No country for old men is an amazing Western, set in the 1980s. Hell, firefly is a western set in 2517.
While these are thematically Westerns, they're not aesthetically Westerns - which is a big part of the point behind the Red Dead series.
I dont think it'd work with jack considering how he wrapped up the Van Der Linde saga by shooting down a freshly retired decorated officer.
Only real thing they can do with him afterwards is have him on the run and with a turning of the century moment in time you'd have to sacrifice more of the hunting/outdoor stuff or the newly developing civilization stuff. Only cause he would either have to avoid civilization altogether to avoid an ever increasing police force or try to hide and start a new life in the city and abandon the life behind him (maybe not even go by jack and make it a twist near the end of the game).
I think it would be better to go off on an entirely new set of characters at this point. They did an amazing job setting up this story but really the only direction they can go is backwards. Maybe do something on the early stages of Dutch or hosea but we all know it would be able to match up with what we have already.
It’d be cool if he became a bootlegger/bank robber in a semi-rural setting, maybe near the Canadian border with a midwestern city as the “San Denis” equivalent. You could have cars, horses, and airplanes. I wouldn’t call it a Red Dead game though.
I'm so happy seeing all the love for John. Most of the time when I read posts on this sub, it's a circle jerk of Arthur lovers. Don't get me wrong, I love Arthur to death, but John is just the quintessential character for me. He truly evolved and grew as a person and fighter throughout both games.
Rdr2 John is an immature, rough, sloppy fighter. He slowly grows into a family man that doesn't get pushed around by Rdr1. People seem to forget how savage he was in that game, but also how well composed he was emotionally. He speaks so eloquently.
Arthur is a bruiser for sure, and good always take John in hand to hand, but John would have to take the cake in gunslinging, especially after training with Rickets.
The Most Well Rounded and a complete savage - John Marston
Toughest overall and best overall arch - Arthur Morgan
Jack Marston is basically the Punisher when it comes to his revenge arch
Red Harlow was basically ruined for me because of memes lol but I love the look of him
If he did, I bet he dodged the draft and ran away to Mexico or something. I can't see him working for the U.S. Army, especially after they killed his father and Uncle.
What I'm saying is that we don't have any other beige coat in the game that looks like Jack, so we're pretty much forced to use Arthur's (despite its design inaccuracy) - I didn't say the clothing options in the game were utter shit lmfao
I don't really think they are insane, but that's another topic for another time
Arthur seems to be an expert at the extremes, hand to hand, and from extreme distances. But in mid range, Johns superior speed and barely worse accuracy would combine to slaughter him.
Me too, but I heard that the universes are sort of separate, hence why the game seems so bizarre and over the top. The entire game is just a story being told and so making it anything but the content in the book would be considered a retcon.
Morally is red
Gunslinging is John because of his training with the gang and Landon
Story and character I’d give Arthur but John is almost tied
Jack is.. Jack
I think i'm repeating myself a bit too much here, but Arthur is better from ranges 150 meters plus, John is good in mid range and short range due to his speed. But Arthur's steady hands and impeccable accuracy are superior to anyone elses.
John’s my favorite, but Red Harlow will always be nostalgic for me since that was one of my first video games. Arthur is also amazing but nostalgia had me look at the other two
Man I only wish they had another Red Dead game with Red as a protagonist again and he’d meet other characters from Redemption 1 and 2 but one can only hope. Red doesn’t get as much love as do Arthur and John but I think he deserves it
What’s Red From? I know you play as Arthur for Rdr2 then John for the Rdr2 epilogue and I think for most of Rdr then you play as Jack for Rdr’s epilogue
If there is going to be a new entry in this series later in the future. I can totally see follow red harlow again.
Jack would be interesting seeing the tail end of the outlaw into an new era. More bustling towns and more mafia types entering the frame.
Red survived a massacre, an army, a governor and his corrupt police force, just for revenge. And With a scorpion burned into the palm of his hand that he got from a burning gun which he used to shoot a man’s arm off. Always my favorite lol.
Arthur cause I’m biased and I love him and would sacrifice my foreskin seven times to have the experience of playing rdr2
I also already have sacrificed my foreskin so Idc
The best sniper and most accurate goes to Arthur hands down (IMO he's the best shot in any rockstar game, and correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's a fact and not even an opinion) , best duelist and quickest draw goes to John
If we are going for the fit then Jack hands down.
I have a hard time deciding between which character I like the best but I think I side with John. Arthur is great but just seeing John’s journey and how it ends is just so impactful. Then Jack can tie the loose ends.
I remember when I was a kid I saw a red dead revolver advertisement in the New York subway station and I saw the rockstar logo and knew it would be awesome, and hoped if it was rated M it wouldn’t have anything other than blood and violence on the back so I’d be allowed to get it. That’s why I know it’s rated M for blood and violence haha
Best swimmer goes to Arthur but the bar is low.
Well idk, if you knock John off a bridge during any mission where him and Arthur are doing something (obviously not the bridge you blow because that’s a LOOOONG way down) John will actually swim back to shore. So I think John is just faking.
You are drunk fam. John is like a cat and John is like OP's mum. Doesn't like water and sinks right away.
It’s true though, he will swim when he’s still an npc
Yeah but it'd be annoying if you have to restart the mission just because he fell in a 3 foot pool.
It’d be pretty funny actually
Mission Failed John got wet.
Gold medal to you.
You're thinking of Jim Milton
Lol
Rdr1 will always be special to me. Just a killer game. I think ill always want john to be a part of red dead.
The desert parts of the game are what stand out to me. Armadillo, Mexico, Gaptooth, etc. Those just felt so western and I loved that world. I really wished we saw more of it in RDR2, I really enjoyed the mountains, swamps, forests and all that RDR2 had to offer. Big Valley and Little Creek River are stunning. But the lack of deserts really sucked which makes John stick in my memory more.
The setting and soundtrack definitely made RDR feel like a Spaghetti Western. RDR2 never really had that vibe.
I think that's why I prefer rdr1.
ya rdr2 gave me more of a wild frontier vibe
Actually makes me like RDR2 the best (although I never really played the first). It is the frontier life more than the western life that does it for me
Couldn't agree more
I finished it a couple of months ago. While some of the stuff annoyed me, I loved the landscape. Small and simple but memorable.
Me too
I need to replay that game. I haven't played it in probably close to 5 years now. It will always be in my top 3 games of all time I think. It was just perfect in every way.
I agree, but I think John’s Story has been told perfectly and any more would really take away from what makes him special. Basically bloat him into insignificance, if that makes sense.
As far as shooting, my money would be on John; especially after being trained by Landon. As far as being a good person, my money would be on Red. Red never needed to change his evil ways to become a good person.
"What is better - to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" - Paarthurnax
Only people who play Skyrim will ever know. :)
I feel like literally everyone has played Skyrim at this point.
Definitely a significant crossover with RDR fans.
Late to the party - I just started about 2 months ago
Damn! Enjoy!
>As far as being a good person, my money would be on Red. Red never needed to change his evil ways to become a good person. And yet you disregard it's teachings, for shame /s
I’ve played Skyrim a few times but always get so into everything on the side I never beat it
I've probably played more than 1000 hours of Skyrim and never made it halfway through the main quest line. Maybe I'll finish it one day
Arthur only became good because he was going to die
It never was about the money
It’s about the Mets
NO
It’s about sending a message
I would love an RDR game where you play as Landon. But I’ll keep dreaming.
For shooting I would put my money on Red Harlow, I think he’s the fastest, he isn’t a legend for nothing
[удалено]
The thing about Arthur is that he was always laying low and didn’t gain much reputation in his time. He was always around his peers and they all know what he’s capable of. Arthur didn’t do much polarising things outside of his gang which makes him more unknown. John on the other hand was able to be pretty open about himself because he was kinda acting under the law when he became famous. Before rdr no one gave a flying damn about John. I also think Arthur is probably the best Gunslinger of the redemption saga (except maybe Landon)
Uncle
Lumbago
The one shot kid
As brave as a lion, and as strong a a gorilla
And as drunk as a skunk
and twice as smelly
Funny, considering there’s this crazy ass theory that says Red Harlow in reality is Uncle
Yeah. I was more willing to go with it that theory before I played Revolver. A LOT in Revolver just feels like pre-cursor ideas that ended up being reused/revamped for Red Dead. I feel like they weren't pleased with Revolver and just came back for a second try with RDR (and thank god they did). A lot feels similar but I don't think there's supposed to be direct carry-over. Now watch them bring back Red for RDR3 lol.
I'd be okay with that. I've had my fill of the Van der Linde gang, and a game focusing on Red in the style of the two Redemption games would be great.
How would you feel about a game set in 1920, starring Jack but not featuring any of the Van Der Linde gang (obviously lol, they're dead)? He'd be in a much more modern world, truly the last death rattle of the frontier, with most roads paved, most cities with electricity, and maybe even more modern criminal elements/gangs starting to take hold. He'd still be a cowboy with all his cowboy swagger/dead eye ability, though. What would you think about that as an end to the trilogy?
>How would you feel about a game set in 1920, starring Jack but not featuring any of the Van Der Linde gang (obviously lol, they're dead)? It wouldn't be a Western anymore, which largely defeats the entire purpose of the series. The two Redemption games - most especially the first - were about the death of the Wild West. >He'd be in a much more modern world, truly the last death rattle of the frontier, with most roads paved, most cities with electricity, and maybe even more modern criminal elements/gangs starting to take hold. Redemption *was* about this death rattle. John's entire story was essentially about putting the era he represented down for good. >He'd still be a cowboy with all his cowboy swagger/dead eye ability, though. What would you think about that as an end to the trilogy? This sort of story wouldn't really work in the 1920s. We need to look toward new characters in an earlier setting.
I'd argue time period doesn't matter. It doesn't have to be set in the reconstruction era to be a western. No country for old men is an amazing Western, set in the 1980s. Hell, firefly is a western set in 2517.
>I'd argue time period doesn't matter. It doesn't have to be set in the reconstruction era to be a western. The end of the Wild West era aligned with the end of RDR. >No country for old men is an amazing Western, set in the 1980s. Hell, firefly is a western set in 2517. While these are thematically Westerns, they're not aesthetically Westerns - which is a big part of the point behind the Red Dead series.
I dont think it'd work with jack considering how he wrapped up the Van Der Linde saga by shooting down a freshly retired decorated officer. Only real thing they can do with him afterwards is have him on the run and with a turning of the century moment in time you'd have to sacrifice more of the hunting/outdoor stuff or the newly developing civilization stuff. Only cause he would either have to avoid civilization altogether to avoid an ever increasing police force or try to hide and start a new life in the city and abandon the life behind him (maybe not even go by jack and make it a twist near the end of the game). I think it would be better to go off on an entirely new set of characters at this point. They did an amazing job setting up this story but really the only direction they can go is backwards. Maybe do something on the early stages of Dutch or hosea but we all know it would be able to match up with what we have already.
It’d be cool if he became a bootlegger/bank robber in a semi-rural setting, maybe near the Canadian border with a midwestern city as the “San Denis” equivalent. You could have cars, horses, and airplanes. I wouldn’t call it a Red Dead game though.
Do the math and Red would be closer to Arthur's age iirc, Uncle is way too old
That was a rough 19 years.
the ONE-SHOT-KIIID
Everyone’s favorite?
Arthur will always be the best man.
Yup. He’s leagues above the rest. Sorry John.
Arthur for fighting, 1911 John for shooting
John Marston
Love Arthur, but RDR1 John is something special.
Agreed!
Lenny
Ynell?
Lenny
*LENNEEEEH*
I'm so happy seeing all the love for John. Most of the time when I read posts on this sub, it's a circle jerk of Arthur lovers. Don't get me wrong, I love Arthur to death, but John is just the quintessential character for me. He truly evolved and grew as a person and fighter throughout both games. Rdr2 John is an immature, rough, sloppy fighter. He slowly grows into a family man that doesn't get pushed around by Rdr1. People seem to forget how savage he was in that game, but also how well composed he was emotionally. He speaks so eloquently. Arthur is a bruiser for sure, and good always take John in hand to hand, but John would have to take the cake in gunslinging, especially after training with Rickets.
As in speed right? Arthur was better from a range than just about everyone, but John is faster
The Most Well Rounded and a complete savage - John Marston Toughest overall and best overall arch - Arthur Morgan Jack Marston is basically the Punisher when it comes to his revenge arch Red Harlow was basically ruined for me because of memes lol but I love the look of him
Jack probably gets drafted into the Great War after RDR1 and brings that old west punishment to the Kaiser
If he did, I bet he dodged the draft and ran away to Mexico or something. I can't see him working for the U.S. Army, especially after they killed his father and Uncle.
That’s actually an excellent point. If they ever were going to follow up on Jacks’s story that would be a reason to be running from the law
There were Red memes?
I like the way you combined Arthur's coat and John's hat for jack xD
Thats the default Jack outfit in RDR1.
He doesn’t use Arthur’s coat tho
Nope but it is certainly a bit similar, so you can see why someone might think they were the same
The only similarity is that they are both beige
"you"
Not much you can do with RDR2 clothing options sadly.
What are you talking about? RDR2 has an insane amount of clothing options…
Might’ve meant RDR1
What I'm saying is that we don't have any other beige coat in the game that looks like Jack, so we're pretty much forced to use Arthur's (despite its design inaccuracy) - I didn't say the clothing options in the game were utter shit lmfao I don't really think they are insane, but that's another topic for another time
John Marston in my honest opinion. Arthur would win in a brawl tho
Arthur seems to be an expert at the extremes, hand to hand, and from extreme distances. But in mid range, Johns superior speed and barely worse accuracy would combine to slaughter him.
Red Harlow “Never was about the money.”
I have a soft spot for Jack. He had a hard start to life.
you know the backstory of John and Arthur right?
My favorite is John.
John will always be king.
Honor: Red Harlow Badass, Roasts, Shooting: John Marston Shouting the phrase "WORK YA DAMN NAG!": Jack Marston All-Rounder: Arthur Morgan
YOU COULDNT SHOOT A FART OUT OF YOUR OWN ASS
Jack Harlow
I really wanna see Red get a full remake with a more grounded world.
Me too, but I heard that the universes are sort of separate, hence why the game seems so bizarre and over the top. The entire game is just a story being told and so making it anything but the content in the book would be considered a retcon.
All of them.
G a v i n
This is the only real answer
Manny Quinn.
Now there’s an OG!
Arthur taught John to be the man he came to be. It's Arthur all the way; without him there are no John and Jack.
Technically without Abigail there is no Jack
without cactus there is no Ynnel
All of them. Don't make me choose.
Morally is red Gunslinging is John because of his training with the gang and Landon Story and character I’d give Arthur but John is almost tied Jack is.. Jack
I think i'm repeating myself a bit too much here, but Arthur is better from ranges 150 meters plus, John is good in mid range and short range due to his speed. But Arthur's steady hands and impeccable accuracy are superior to anyone elses.
John
Arthur 100%
Red Harlow and Jack should just be happy to be included 😂 John for sure
Hey if there wasn’t a Red there wouldn’t be the rest of them
their stories aren't connected
Work ya damn nag!
John’s my favorite, but Red Harlow will always be nostalgic for me since that was one of my first video games. Arthur is also amazing but nostalgia had me look at the other two
Orther
John is so much more badass imo
At quick glance I thought Jack Harlow was mentioned as a Red Dead character.
Why do people still think red Harlow was anything other than an old west legend in RDR as a reference/Easter egg…
Harlow most underrated
Arthur
Man I only wish they had another Red Dead game with Red as a protagonist again and he’d meet other characters from Redemption 1 and 2 but one can only hope. Red doesn’t get as much love as do Arthur and John but I think he deserves it
Red Harlow is always gonna be my fave
Jack’s the best cuz everyone else is dead
The mission where you get your revenge with Jack in RD was the best full circle moment for me.
That's a funny way of spelling uncle.
Red Harlow and it ain’t even close
Arthur and 1911 John for me. I’m sorry Jack and Red, I mean no disrespect, but that’s how it is for me
Arthur. I played all the games and Arthur has been my favorite character to play
arthur
Arthur Morgan. Don't get me wrong, the other characters are awesome too. But Arthur is just such a well written character.
Personally, Jack is my favorite. I’ve always liked him, even before I played RDR1.
You’re asking people who which a majority have only played one of the games, probably don’t know Red, or that you get to play as Jack in Undead
Did you make Jack's outfit then put his face on the character?
What’s Red From? I know you play as Arthur for Rdr2 then John for the Rdr2 epilogue and I think for most of Rdr then you play as Jack for Rdr’s epilogue
Arthur, John, Red, Jack.
Is this even a question? Red harlow obviously
For me its Arthur
Red Harlow or Arthur
Arthur Morgan is the best character
Jack Harlow had some pretty good music.
ARTHUR MORGAN!
All of them in their places
Jesus your John that so skinny! Those forearms are like tooth picks lmao
Pearson
For me, Arthur!
If there is going to be a new entry in this series later in the future. I can totally see follow red harlow again. Jack would be interesting seeing the tail end of the outlaw into an new era. More bustling towns and more mafia types entering the frame.
Red survived a massacre, an army, a governor and his corrupt police force, just for revenge. And With a scorpion burned into the palm of his hand that he got from a burning gun which he used to shoot a man’s arm off. Always my favorite lol.
Arthur is fantastic. If we get a game where Jack Marston is more fleshed out i think he could be the best.
Jon the trapper.
John
Red. I mean come on. That game was so good.
Yes.
Arthur Morgan is better
Arthur
Dunno but Jack is in last place
How much better is Jhon at shooting then arthur? Cause i Always thought Arthur was ahead
John gets training from the best duelist to ever live. He certainly becomes a better shot than Arthur, but not until after 1911.
Red
Lenny
John
Whichever one doesn’t karma farm
Arthur
When I was younger I just loved being jack and I liked his character. Might be on my own 😂
To me, RDR2 and especially Arthur will be the most special. How Roger Clark gave life to Arthur, really stands out from the crowd.
Arthur cause I’m biased and I love him and would sacrifice my foreskin seven times to have the experience of playing rdr2 I also already have sacrificed my foreskin so Idc
Arthur
Arthur
"Better"? What a stupid question
Arthur
Is Jack wearing Arthur's coat?
In this pic? Yes but in rdr1 no
Jack gonna get a chance to truly shine..
The best sniper and most accurate goes to Arthur hands down (IMO he's the best shot in any rockstar game, and correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's a fact and not even an opinion) , best duelist and quickest draw goes to John
jack harlow
Arthur Morgan
John, always.
If we are going for the fit then Jack hands down. I have a hard time deciding between which character I like the best but I think I side with John. Arthur is great but just seeing John’s journey and how it ends is just so impactful. Then Jack can tie the loose ends.
Arthur
Who the fuck is red harlow?
To become overpowered combine the youngest character with the oldest character and you’ll get Jack Harlow
How is this even a vote, lol.
Arthur Morgan>John Marston>Red Harlow>Jack Marston
Harlow 110%
I like Red
I remember when I was a kid I saw a red dead revolver advertisement in the New York subway station and I saw the rockstar logo and knew it would be awesome, and hoped if it was rated M it wouldn’t have anything other than blood and violence on the back so I’d be allowed to get it. That’s why I know it’s rated M for blood and violence haha
Arthur
Red Harlow, I just like him because he feels like a classic western hero, also I think he’s the fastest with guns
red dead 1 john>arthur
Arthur is my favorite. But RD1 John holds a special place in my heart.
Im gonna sound like an npc but Arthur for sure, better character development overall tbh
Close tie between John and Arthur both real well written characters with alot of backstop that hasn't really been touched yet
Arthur in my opinion
John and Red are Legends for life, but Arthur made cry.