Red Dead Rebellion

[Secura]

 

Lightning, it's obvious you have been mislead.

Yeah sure, let's just ignore all the evidence I put forth about their drastically different personalities and their physical structure and stance are not identical.

 

 

It's more than scarring on the face, their stance, stature and even their shooting style is the same.

 

Red Dead Redemption's gunplay is far more detailed and impressive than Revolver's ever was, this isn't a dig against that game but simply the difference between a game that ran off of ten-year-old hardware and an extremely old game engine rather than RAGE and Euphoria on a machine many times stronger than the one that Revolver ran off of.

 

Marston's stance changes upon what weapon he's using and the game shows this quite authentically, hell even when running and gunning the difference in both animation and stature is unbelievable. While Red prefers to move far more robotically, Marston moves, stands, runs, jumps and guns fluidly. There is little to no comparison to be made here so I don't quite know what you're getting at.

 

Once again though if you feel compelled to argue the point that correlation = causation (which it evidently does not in this situation) then I'd refer you to my point about Niko wearing Claude's clothing and take making him the "spiritual successor" of Claude himself despite having a boatload of differences in their personalities and their physical structure.

 

 

 

The quite notable difference between Red's movements and the characters of Red Dead Redemption

 

The only real comparison that we could make with any certainty would be the characters' personalities matching up and they clearly don't. While physics engines, graphics and anything else that's visual may change the person's personality will always remain their's regardless of how they're portrayed. This is your major failing here as Red and John personality wise do not match, Red is far more of a loner then John and after having his father died I don't think he'll ever want to start a ranch and a family like John, spiritually they do not match.

 

Then there's also the issue of the setting of the game, Red Dead Revolver takes place in the 1880's not long after John's birth, John and Red are a similar age in the game despite the fact that Red's tale takes place in the 1890's and not in 1910's. John's bank robbing career ended very closely next to Red's adventure in Revolver, John can't be his spiritual successor as it were because they're a part of the same "universe".

 

Yes believe it or not Red is in fact mentioned in Red Dead Redemption, if you take a seat by one of the many campfires you'll find in your travels you might come across a conversation in which people talk about Red Harlow and how he won a dueling contest. Canonically this is part of the game, so not only is John not Red physically but he isn't him spiritually either. Yes it's true that Rockstar stated that the game was the spiritual successor of Revolver that does not mean that John is by association the successor of Red, they differ too much on an emotional, physical and mental level.

 

 

Developers have to make changes when the consumers evolve and demand something else.

Yes of course, but that's just another reason why you should support my theory based on solely on the characters' personalities and not their physical presence, once you see that you can't possibly take their shooting styles and stances into account is when you'll notice that they're different characters and not the same guy. The facial scars remain because they're a trademark of the series and I can almost guarantee you that the protagonist of the next entry in the series will retain those scars, they are less Red's and more the series'.

[josephene123]

They aren't the same people, so the Read Dead series hasn't always been about the Marstons.

[GunWrath]

 

Lightning, it's obvious you have been mislead.

Yeah sure, let's just ignore all the evidence I put forth about their drastically different personalities and their physical structure and stance are not identical.

 

 

It's more than scarring on the face, their stance, stature and even their shooting style is the same.

 

Red Dead Redemption's gunplay is far more detailed and impressive than Revolver's ever was, this isn't a dig against that game but simply the difference between a game that ran off of ten-year-old hardware and an extremely old game engine rather than RAGE and Euphoria on a machine many times stronger than the one that Revolver ran off of.

 

Marston's stance changes upon what weapon he's using and the game shows this quite authentically, hell even when running and gunning the difference in both animation and stature is unbelievable. While Red prefers to move far more robotically, Marston moves, stands, runs, jumps and guns fluidly. There is little to no comparison to be made here so I don't quite know what you're getting at.

 

Once again though if you feel compelled to argue the point that correlation = causation (which it evidently does not in this situation) then I'd refer you to my point about Niko wearing Claude's clothing and take making him the "spiritual successor" of Claude himself despite having a boatload of differences in their personalities and their physical structure.

 

 

 

The quite notable difference between Red's movements and the characters of Red Dead Redemption

 

The only real comparison that we could make with any certainty would be the characters' personalities matching up and they clearly don't. While physics engines, graphics and anything else that's visual may change the person's personality will always remain their's regardless of how they're portrayed. This is your major failing here as Red and John personality wise do not match, Red is far more of a loner then John and after having his father died I don't think he'll ever want to start a ranch and a family like John, spiritually they do not match.

 

Then there's also the issue of the setting of the game, Red Dead Revolver takes place in the 1880's not long after John's birth, John and Red are a similar age in the game despite the fact that Red's tale takes place in the 1890's and not in 1910's. John's bank robbing career ended very closely next to Red's adventure in Revolver, John can't be his spiritual successor as it were because they're a part of the same "universe".

 

Yes believe it or not Red is in fact mentioned in Red Dead Redemption, if you take a seat by one of the many campfires you'll find in your travels you might come across a conversation in which people talk about Red Harlow and how he won a dueling contest. Canonically this is part of the game, so not only is John not Red physically but he isn't him spiritually either. Yes it's true that Rockstar stated that the game was the spiritual successor of Revolver that does not mean that John is by association the successor of Red, they differ too much on an emotional, physical and mental level.

 

 

Developers have to make changes when the consumers evolve and demand something else.

Yes of course, but that's just another reason why you should support my theory based on solely on the characters' personalities and not their physical presence, once you see that you can't possibly take their shooting styles and stances into account is when you'll notice that they're different characters and not the same guy. The facial scars remain because they're a trademark of the series and I can almost guarantee you that the protagonist of the next entry in the series will retain those scars, they are less Red's and more the series'.

Being you posted videos, I'm going to assume that you in fact haven't played Red Dead Revolver, of course things aren't going to be perfectly the same between Revolver and Redemption. Look at the gap in gaming/technology.. of course they will add new elements, dynamics and movement.

 

I'm not stating spiritual successor because of my opinion, I'm stating it because even Rockstar said that about Redemption to Revolver. Of course they're the same games, it's the same exact title. Marston and Red are the same man, I'm telling you. If they would of used a completely different character, then features of Marston would not look like Red in any circumstances other than clothing perhaps due to that time-era. But not the two are going to have the same facial scarring and other identical attributes unless they are in fact the same, atleast 'spiritually'. It doesn't a take a multiple-account genius to figure that one out.

 

They do match, on several different aspects. That's not questionable, what's questionable is that you keep going against what I posted, which is Rockstar's own words that Redemption is Revolver's 'spiritual successor' and in that case, a lot of the characters will be based on characters from other games. sh*t son, haven't you ever watched movies where they base a different actor as same character in the sequels or prequels and the stories are different? Same goes with games. Some games are movies but interactive.

 

Red isn't Marston exactly but spiritually.. is the moral of this story. They had to carry on the franchise and they had to develop a new story or else an large open-world western of this generation would be sh*t without some backdrop. You have your opinion, I have mine. There's no definite answer to either.. agree to disagree is all that can happen here.

[H. León]

if you feel compelled to argue the point that correlation = causation (which it evidently does not in this situation)

Nice rhymes, gangsta.

[AceRay]

I don't think you know what Spiritual Successor means GunWrath. Bioshock is the spiritual successor to System Shock 2 and yet they are two different universes, its because they have similar gameplay and themes. Same with how Shadow of the Colossus is the spiritual successor to Ico, despite the fact that they have no overlapping characters. Its not a direct sequel, its kind of like taking its style and using it for a different story, ergo John and Red are not the same.

[GunWrath]

Dude, Red Dead Redemption is exactly what Red Dead Revolver is except for the compelling story and new dynamics of this generation technology. It is in fact, a spiritual successor in that sense.. not due to different universes, as this is the same universe as Revolver. Spiritual Successor has different levels, not just the one you're aiming at, Ace.

 

The reason being that RDR is a successor it the same 'styles' and 'themes' as Revolver, no? Dead-eye, West, Characters. It is in fact a spiritual successor. Being it doesn't involve the same story as Revolver. Not hard to understand.

Edited July 19, 2013 by GunWrath

[Flachbau]

The part I'm most excited for in the next Red Dead is the map size.

 

The map is pretty big already in Red Dead Redemption. But (since we can assume it will be on next gen) just think of the map size then. It will be 2 or 3 times the size it is now in Red Dead Redemption.

 

The second thing I'm most excited for is the campaign. Although I didn't finish the campaign myself, I've watched walk throughs and videos about each mission. I can't wait for the next game.

Edited July 19, 2013 by Antagonista

[AceRay]

Dude, Red Dead Redemption is exactly what Red Dead Revolver is except for the compelling story and new dynamics of this generation technology. It is in fact, a spiritual successor in that sense.. not due to different universes, as this is the same universe as Revolver. Spiritual Successor has different levels, not just the one you're aiming at, Ace.

 

The reason being that RDR is a successor it the same 'styles' and 'themes' as Revolver, no? Dead-eye, West, Characters. It is in fact a spiritual successor. Being it doesn't involve the same story as Revolver. Not hard to understand.

Yes, I understand.

 

But how does this prove that John and Red are the same person, oh wait, "spiritually" the same person or whatever you're trying to say.

[GunWrath]

Because John is Red's successor...if not Red himself. How is he not? Use something other than the story to lead me that he's not Red.

[Zancudo]

 

Because John is Red's successor...if not Red himself. How is he not? Use something other than the story to lead me that he's not Red.

That sounds retarded. Going by this logic, Michael is Tommy Vercetti, because hey! Other than story, how he is not?

[AceRay]

Because John is Red's successor...if not Red himself. How is he not? Use something other than the story to lead me that he's not Red.

That sounds retarded. Going by this logic, Michael is Tommy Vercetti, because hey! Other than story, how he is not?

Yeah, that's pretty stupid. By that logic, Jack in Bioshock is really the guy from System Shock 2, because its a spiritual successor.

 

Just because its a spiritual successor does not mean the characters are in any way related to each other.

[DarrinPA]

As many of you know rockstar is planning to release red dead rebellion in the future. But what would you like to see in it, what time period

I'd like it set on the west coast next to the ocean. I'd say the late 1980's so we can see who killed Brian.

 

What? It was worth a shot.

[GunWrath]

Because John is Red's successor...if not Red himself. How is he not? Use something other than the story to lead me that he's not Red.

That sounds retarded. Going by this logic, Michael is Tommy Vercetti, because hey! Other than story, how he is not?

Yeah, that's pretty stupid. By that logic, Jack in Bioshock is really the guy from System Shock 2, because its a spiritual successor.

 

Just because its a spiritual successor does not mean the characters are in any way related to each other.

And I know that.. but in this case, these two characters are definitely related, by all means prove me differently. Yeah, the stories don't line up.. but look at the them, there's no way in hell that John wasn't based off of Red.

[Grand Theft Savage]

Because John is Red's successor...if not Red himself. How is he not? Use something other than the story to lead me that he's not Red.

You've got to be kidding me... I mean, you can't seriously be thinking this, can you? If so, you are a retard.

[GunWrath]

Hahaha, I don't think y'all are understanding what I'm saying.

 

I'm not saying John Marston is Red Harlow, I'm saying that he's basically modeled after Red. If that makes more sense?

[redx165]

I like to have another Red Dead in the 1920's.

 

- You can choose between Horses and cars

- You can have older weapons and newer ones

- A proper Old City this time around then to the west it can be the "Wild West" with small towns like Armadillo

 

This can be when they're trying to force everyone to live like they do on the east.

 

[josephene123]

Hahaha, I don't think y'all are understanding what I'm saying.

 

I'm not saying John Marston is Red Harlow, I'm saying that he's basically modeled after Red. If that makes more sense?

He's not modeled after Red, the scars on his face is a nod at Red Dead Revolver, nearly everything else is different...

[Secura]

Hahaha, I don't think y'all are understanding what I'm saying.

 

I'm not saying John Marston is Red Harlow, I'm saying that he's basically modeled after Red. If that makes more sense?

I can't believe the stupidity here, the characters are drastically different at nearly every level my friend and you're doing yourself no favours trying to argue otherwise.

[Vercetti42]

@GunWrath:

 

Let's compare John and Red then shall we?

 

John:

 

 

Red:

 

 

There is a clear difference between the 2 models with the naked eye itself.

 

Edited July 19, 2013 by AceKingston

[Secura]

 

Being you posted videos, I'm going to assume that you in fact haven't played Red Dead Revolver,

Yes, because even if I had access to video capture software that could record footage from my console I wouldn't go through the trouble of doing so just to dismantle your strawman argument. Regardless I don't see how me not taking footage from a game that I myself have played proves that I do not own and have not played Revolver, you're making this too easy now lad.

 

 

of course things aren't going to be perfectly the same between Revolver and Redemption. Look at the gap in gaming/technology.. of course they will add new elements, dynamics and movement.

Yes, but you were the one arguing that their stance and shooting styles were identical, not me. If you're going to make an argument GunWrath bring some empirical evidence to back it up with. You can clearly see from the videos that I've posted that they are not at all similar in appearance, stature or the way they shoot.

 

If you're going to bother to make such a claim that Rockstar intentionally built John's player model, from the way he shoots to the way he stands to mirror Red's I'm afraid you'd be wrong. In fact nearly every character in the game has the same basic skeleton as John, even Jack does, so the argument you tried to make there failed miserably, don't then try to lead us away from it by stating the obvious that myself and others pointed out to you after you made it.

 

 

 

I'm not stating spiritual successor because of my opinion, I'm stating it because even Rockstar said that about Redemption to Revolver.

You do realise I've already addressed this in my previous post? It's not surprising you're getting beaten so badly here, you can't even be arsed to debate properly. Due to my general laziness here I'll just quote what I've said before to save me the effort of typing something out that you clearly either can't be arsed to, or simply cannot read:

 

 

Yes it's true that Rockstar stated that the game was the spiritual successor of Revolver that does not mean that John is by association the successor of Red, they differ too much on an emotional, physical and mental level.

Glad we've gotten that out of the way, let's continue shall we?

 

 

Of course they're the same games, it's the same exact title.

I don't think I've ever heard something so stupid come out of another person's mouth. So GTA III and GTA IV are the "same game" because they share a similar title? What about Assassin's Creed, or Far Cry, or The Elder Scrolls, or Zelda, or even f*cking Mario? If this is the type of argument you're going to be throwing around I'd suggest you give up and get out of here. You could've said nothing here and your argument would've been infinitely stronger because of it, but no you had to come out with this, I just don't get it.

 

 

Marston and Red are the same man, I'm telling you. If they would of used a completely different character, then features of Marston would not look like Red in any circumstances other than clothing perhaps due to that time-era

Firstly, you don't get to "tell me" bollocks in this debate. You just said that John being the spiritual successor of Red was confirmed by Rockstar themselves and I've proved in the past that that simply wasn't the case.

 

Now, as for they "would've used a completely different character" they did. John is nothing like Red and as we've already established about a billion times over (you yourself even admitted this earlier on in this very same post) their similarities in appearance mean nothing as the games were not only made six years apart, they're also drastically different on an emotion, psychological and physical level.

 

Finally, Red and John are the same age and their original stories take place at a similar time, in the same universe since as I've already noted Red is mentioned in Red Dead Redemption which is the link that we'd need to ignore so we could assume that they are the same character. There's simply too much evidence that works against you in this case GunWrath and I'd suggest you stop arguing this absolutely moronic point.

 

 

But not the two are going to have the same facial scarring and other identical attributes unless they are in fact the same,

We've been through this already and you've been proved wrong, let's move on to something that we can actually debate shall we?

 

 

They do match, on several different aspects. That's not questionable

The sad truth is that's it's more than questionable, it is in fact highly probable that they are not the same character due to a number of canonical mentions. Red cannot be John because he exists in the Red Dead Redemption universe, you cannot have two people be the same character in the same universe, that's completely improbable especially so considering we know a fairly hefty amount of John's backstory.

 

If Red was in fact John then Abigail would've made an appearance in Revolver, John met Abigail at the age of ten so regardless of what arguments you bring up saying how some characters bare some similarities here and there it does not change the fact that John cannot be Red and Red cannot be John for this and many other issues.

 

 

Some games are movies but interactive.

Redemption isn't one of those games, a "movie" game would be something along the lines of Uncharted where it throws quite literally every cliche in the book at you. Red Dead is a western series, not a movie series and I find it hard to see why you're struggling to understand that.

 

 

You have your opinion, I have mine. There's no definite answer to either

Didn't you just say that your point wasn't questionable? That is pretty much saying that you have the definite answer to this situation and you clearly don't. In fact all the evidence points towards Red and John not being the same person, having similar scaring on their faces proves nothing other than Rockstar decided to give a little nod to Revolver and plans to make it a staple of the series, that's it.

 

Come back with an argument that works or don't bother.

[Vercetti42]

 

A PC version, I don't give 2 sh*ts about anything else.

Then gtfo out of here.

 

So I have to 'gtfo' out of here for stating something I want? The OP has made it clear that this is a wishlist topic for the next Red Dead and not a nesting place for console fanboys?

Edited July 19, 2013 by AceKingston

[GunWrath]

Hahaha, I don't think y'all are understanding what I'm saying.

 

I'm not saying John Marston is Red Harlow, I'm saying that he's basically modeled after Red. If that makes more sense?

I can't believe the stupidity here, the characters are drastically different at nearly every level my friend and you're doing yourself no favours trying to argue otherwise.

I'm glad I got under Narrow's skin

 

@Joseph

 

He's not modeled after Red, the scars on his face is a nod at Red Dead Revolver, nearly everything else is different...

 

Thank you for proving my point of it being the spiritual successor. The scars are modeled after Red.

 

@Ace, well no kidding little man, of course they look different to the naked eye, one game is a decade old, while Redemption is only 3. A lot of graphical changes inbetween those years, mate. But yes, there are some clear differences that aren't same. But I'm not saying that Red = John, only afew aspects of Red are in John, as Joseph said, a 'nod off' to the man.

[Secura]

 

Thank you for proving my point of it being the spiritual successor. The scars are modeled after Red.

 

 

You mentioned the entire character, not just the scars.

 

You acted as though the character's were identical on every level which they clearly weren't. Go home.

[GunWrath]

 

You acted as though the character's were identical on every level which they clearly weren't. Go home.

 

I am home, that's how I'm typing to you. But because you took my talking as 'acting' isn't my fault, you should of known better. I said the characters share aspects and are each other 'spiritually', that doesn't mean they are identical nor the same pixels. Just John is a part of the series and they throw in qualities to a character so keep the image and 'spirit' of it's predecessor alive and within the game. Simple mathematics, they didn't teach that at Cambridge?

 

Anyways, back on topic for once. After some thought, at first I wanted pre-Revolver days for a new game. To play as the young John first coming of age and into the 'outlaw' ways. But I was thinking, maybe a Red Dead Hatfields & McCoys type deal. Not sure a proper name for it.. which that time takes place right after the Civil War, but since it's a game, location and time could be changed a little bit.

[Secura]

 

I am home, that's how I'm typing to you. But because you took my talking as 'acting' isn't my fault, you should of known better. I said the characters share aspects and are each other 'spiritually', that doesn't mean they are identical nor the same pixels.

 

 

Stories may be conflicting but the characters are exactly the same.

Uh huh.

[Strength]

 

Hahaha, I don't think y'all are understanding what I'm saying.

 

I'm not saying John Marston is Red Harlow, I'm saying that he's basically modeled after Red. If that makes more sense?

I can't believe the stupidity here, the characters are drastically different at nearly every level my friend and you're doing yourself no favours trying to argue otherwise.

 

I'm glad I got under Narrow's skin 

 

@Joseph

 

He's not modeled after Red, the scars on his face is a nod at Red Dead Revolver, nearly everything else is different...

 

Thank you for proving my point of it being the spiritual successor. The scars are modeled after Red.

 

@Ace, well no kidding little man, of course they look different to the naked eye, one game is a decade old, while Redemption is only 3. A lot of graphical changes inbetween those years, mate. But yes, there are some clear differences that aren't same. But I'm not saying that Red = John, only afew aspects of Red are in John, as Joseph said, a 'nod off' to the man.

 

Is everyone too f*cking lazy to post Red Harlow player model from RDR multiplayer and see what the man is trying to say?

 

 

Edited July 19, 2013 by Strength

[Vercetti42]

 

RDR Multiplayer

Sorry we are talking about Red Dead Revolver and GW made it pretty clear he was talking about Red from Red Dead Revolver.

 

@GW: I don't understand man, you first said that the model was based on Red and now you say the scars? Does that make any sense mate?

[epicluca]

A red dead game that illustrates how the west carried on and didn't die out after all.

"Red Dead Preservation"

[Quackerz Gamerz]

- Set around 1870 - 1890.

- Either playing through John Marston's early days as an outlaw, or a completely new character.

- A full ranching side activity; from buying and raising cattle, to growing crops and selling them to merchants.

- Opportunity to create outlaw gangs in SP by recruiting people similar to what has been said to be in V.

- More clothes customization; not just set outfits like in Redemption.

- More activities like Bounty Hunting and Treasure Hunting.

- Lots of easter eggs referencing famous wild west films and such, like Back to the Future Pt III. Redemption was really lacking in EEs tbh.

 

Not sure if these have been said before, but I haven't read through the whole topic yet.

[Homemade Dynamite]

Red Dead Retribution is a better title.