SPOILERS ‌Arthur Morgan vs John Marston

[TheSantader25]

So I knew someone would make this topic

sooner or later so I figured it might as well be me.

 

Who is the better protagonist for "Red Dead Redemption"?

 

I liked both of them and I didn't expect Arthur to be this good but He was better than John for me. Incredible Protagonist. 

[oCrapaCreeper]

Arthur is much better than John in my opinion. The way his story progresses, his personality, his loyalty, the way his thoughts on events reflects what the player thinks, etc. Once a certain thing happens to him, the choices he makes and the way he thinks as a result makes him even more likeable IMO.

 

I love John, don't get me wrong, but his story arc didn't really have the same effect on me as Arthur.

Edited November 4, 2018 by oCrapaCreeper

[The Wandering Hunter]

i should tell john to store a gatling gun in his barn, pointed at the door before he goes and starts the events of rdr1. maybe plant some dynomyte outside or hire a bunch of mercinaries.

 

then john can outlive arthur.

[Old Man With No Name]

I choice jack marston because his default outfit

[HockeyMike24]

When I started the game I was leaning towards dishonorable. I robbed stages for cash and killed witnesses. About halfway my playstyle was changing with the story. As Arthur started to question his own morality I started helping people more. I stopped antagonizing people and maxed out honorable. When Arthur coughed I wanted to cough.

 

I had such a strong connection to him and his story. Arthur is the first character in a video game that made me feel like I walked in his shoes. John used to be one of my favourites but in my opinion he was always dumb and never really deserves redemption. 

 

End game spoilers...

During the epilogue John couldn't put his guns away for good, which kept putting his family at risk. Even after Arthur sacrificed himself for him... Then he gets all the money from Black Water but continues to stay where he is a wanted criminal using his real name.

[Mikeol1987]

Arthur is definitely a better written western character for sure.

[infectedG636]

There’s a tiny difference I found between both characters. When you use dead eye, the sound effect is much different. Johns dead eye sound effect sounds exactly like from rdr1. 

[Cutter De Blanc]

Compared to Arthur John is a dull unlikable punk

They do a really really good job of making you feel like you are another character and not just a reskin though, i have to give them credit

[Lemoyne outlaw]

i would say Arthur. he is so badass. and has some amazing quotes.

Spoiler

and his death was a lot more impactful on me. i was very sad and depressed after he died. unlike when john died. i was upset that he died but i didint miss him nearly as much as i miss arthur.

i do like john. and he was a great protagonist. but i think arthur is a little better.

[volta2001]

Anyone figured out a way to play as Arthur in New Austin?

[oCrapaCreeper]

2 hours ago, volta2001 said:

Anyone figured out a way to play as Arthur in New Austin?

As far as people know, you get wanted after crossing into blackwater, and just auto-die a certain point after that. If there's a way to do it, it's a glitch that has yet to be discovered.

[stayprivee]

sadie adler > arthur & john

 

but arthur though, he’s more funnier and his story is more easier to understand than john

[volta2001]

19 minutes ago, oCrapaCreeper said:

As far as people know, you get wanted after crossing into blackwater, and just auto-die a certain point after that. If there's a way to do it, it's a glitch that has yet to be discovered.

Ok thanks. It’s really frustrating that there’s an entire section of the map Arthur can’t even go to. Maybe they will do a High Plains Drifter type DLC where he comes back as a ghost in Armadillo hah 

[Crm114]

Rockstars not stupid they’ve prob tested the sh*t out of this game they know we’re gonna miss Arthur. I find it highly unlikely we don’t get a dlc with him .

[oCrapaCreeper]

57 minutes ago, Crm114 said:

Rockstars not stupid they’ve prob tested the sh*t out of this game they know we’re gonna miss Arthur. I find it highly unlikely we don’t get a dlc with him .

A cheat code to swap to him would have been awesome at the very least.

[LeonVegaSuarez]

I like both as characters but Arthur's progression through the story was much, much better. He's a a really deep protagonist. I liked how you found out more about his past in the end.

[infectedG636]

If anyone still want to play as Arthur. There may be a cheat code.  Or just save a game file from each chapter to play certain points of the game.

Edited November 5, 2018 by infectedG636

[SuperKitsune]

Arthur Morgan for me. More relatable and likeable. John is still a legend though.

[Cutter De Blanc]

22 hours ago, oCrapaCreeper said:

As far as people know, you get wanted after crossing into blackwater, and just auto-die a certain point after that. If there's a way to do it, it's a glitch that has yet to be discovered.

Yes, Arthur is instantly killed upon stepping into New Austin, regardless of wanted status you'll see a few shots being fired from an unknown location that miss and then one will hit you in the head and you will die, no matter how much health you have left.

[SmileyBandito]

I still like John more because of nostalgia and I've spent more time with him. I like playing as him in RDR1 a lot more than in RDR2, though. RDR2 John isn’t the same to me for some reason. 

 

I think Arthur is more badass and cooler to play as, his story is more tragic in a way and he’s more developed because of the choices he has to make. In a way he has more layers to him. 

 

I feel like John, and RDR1 in general, has the edge in terms of writing though. Probably because the script is smaller, tighter and more focused. The writing was sharper and more memorable, but again, nostalgia.  

 

I have a feeling Arthur will be my favorite the more I play and replay RDR2. His fate is definitely more heartfelt and emotional than John’s.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Vinewood Villain

[Wiseguy94]

RDR1 John and Arthur Morgan are tied IMO. I can't pick one over the other. I like both. Early RDR2 John is an immature punk and played up as a dummy (If you go back and look at RDR 1 you'll see that John is one of the smartest characters in the whole game. He understands how things will play out and the bigger picture better than his peers do.). Endgame RDR 2 John feels like a rusty Rob Wiethoff out of practice as the mature version. He took years off in retirement and it shows in his performance. Rockstar should have let him retire in peace and omitted John or made him too small for a speaking role. Just my opinion. 

[HockeyMike24]

26 minutes ago, Wiseguy94 said:

RDR1 John and Arthur Morgan are tied IMO. I can't pick one over the other. I like both. Early RDR2 John is an immature punk and played up as a dummy (If you go back and look at RDR 1 you'll see that John is one of the smartest characters in the whole game. He understands how things will play out and the bigger picture better than his peers do.). Endgame RDR 2 John feels like a rusty Rob Wiethoff out of practice as the mature version. He took years off in retirement and it shows in his performance. Rockstar should have let him retire in peace and omitted John or made him too small for a speaking role. Just my opinion. 

John young and old is dumb. Look what happened when he went after Bill. Again in Mexico he played both sides of a war and nearly died. Arthur says it best when he mentions that John is dumb but he's lucky and good at getting out of the bad situations he puts himself in. Even the Pinkertons tricked John into doing all their work and when he finished, they killed him. I like John too, but he's not smart.

[Wiseguy94]

40 minutes ago, HockeyMike24 said:

John young and old is dumb. Look what happened when he went after Bill. Again in Mexico he played both sides of a war and nearly died. Arthur says it best when he mentions that John is dumb but he's lucky and good at getting out of the bad situations he puts himself in. Even the Pinkertons tricked John into doing all their work and when he finished, they killed him. I like John too, but he's not smart.

They didn't trick him. They forced him to do it and Edgar Ross was a con man for the ages. On my first playthrough I didn't expect him to return for blood either. And the whole Mexico thing was a clusterf*ck. If you found yourself in a country at war and had to find two men in the entire region, what would you do? 

John has outsmarted numerous people in Red Dead 1 such as Captain De Santa. Just listen to their dialogues. He has a better sense of government than the guys in charge do. He has a better sense of anthropology than MacDougal does. He probes Abraham Reyes for his life goals because he knows he's gonna become a tyrant. He refuses to be blindly used by West Dickens (as a dumb character would be) and calls him out constantly, only working with him begrudgingly. Older John isn't dumb, he's too trusting. Younger John is dumb and brash. They feel like night and day. 

[Pocket Fox]

I prefer Arthur... I'm actually both depressed and annoyed that I can no longer play his character and have to be John.

I feel very sad for Arthur, and almost wish a DLC or fan-fiction could give him a happier ending.

 

But his voice, manner and moustache did it for me. He just felt... western.

 

I don't much care for John sadly. I hope for the PC version there's some way (mod) to unlock the whole map, all the guns and play as Arthur.

[HockeyMike24]

21 minutes ago, Wiseguy94 said:

They didn't trick him. They forced him to do it and Edgar Ross was a con man for the ages. On my first playthrough I didn't expect him to return for blood either. And the whole Mexico thing was a clusterf*ck. If you found yourself in a country at war and had to find two men in the entire region, what would you do? 

John has outsmarted numerous people in Red Dead 1 such as Captain De Santa. Just listen to their dialogues. He has a better sense of government than the guys in charge do. He has a better sense of anthropology than MacDougal does. He probes Abraham Reyes for his life goals because he knows he's gonna become a tyrant. He refuses to be blindly used by West Dickens (as a dumb character would be) and calls him out constantly, only working with him begrudgingly. Older John isn't dumb, he's too trusting. Younger John is dumb and brash. They feel like night and day. 

Ross tricked him by making John believe him and his family would be safe when he captured Bill. It was hardly a con. Ross's mission was clear. Eliminate the Van Der Linde gang. John being one of the main members.

 

I don't see how he out smarted De Santa. My memory is a little fuzzy with him but I do remember he was used by the Mexican army then they sent him into a trap. Which he walked right into... Classic Marston.

 

MacDougal was pretty ignorant of the west. He thought everyone was savages and was a major coke head. So of course John would know more about the land and people he grew around. Where MacDougal doesn't get out of the city much.

 

Reyes showed his intentions pretty clearly in how little he actually cared about his people and West Dickens was a horrible con man. Even someone as dumb as John can see through his scams.

 

Being too trusting is being dumb when you're an outlaw. I would agree that he does have "street smarts" and he even gains some wisdom with age but I still think he's dumb overall.

[Gallows]

Still prefer Arthur, but have to admit I really enjoy the epilogue, playing as John. It’s great

[BlondieandTuco]

Arthur is written to be a better character due to the fact the revenge we take on Micah is the sole reason Ross finds John and his family, John was basically off the radar till he hunted Micah in revenge for Arthur and Ross found out he was still in the territory. Arthur being such a great character is ultimately what leads to Johns death, Johns love for Arthur makes him disregard Abigails pleas to not hunt Micah and sets up the events for the first game, this shouldn't be a contest as it was technically intended. Not to mention John was still fairly young and in a time period where things were changing at a rapid pace, Arthur grew up in the last prime years of the wild west, hell John Marston rode in a godamn car, I specifically remember the post office attendant saying to Arthur at one point that if they ever made a horseless carriage his job would be done for, and they both have a laugh over how absurd that sounds. John was basically one of the last living relics of his time and he was sent to hunt the other few remaining relics, "You don't send a saint to catch a sinner."

Edited November 6, 2018 by BlondieandTuco

[Doublepulse]

I love them both, but bonus points go to Arthur Morgan. I plan on making a full discussion video on which I think was the better protagonist, but I will paraphrase my thoughts here.

Arthur Morgan made John want to change who he was. They share similar traits as well, but I feel as if John looked up to Arthur as the role model and that is why we end up liking John Marston as well. He was meant to encompass Arthur Morgan after his death, which is why when I started playing as John in the epilogue, I wasn't upset. I feel like John was mean to take the place and Arthur passed the torch to him at the end. 

I feel like they really fixed that issue from RDR 1 with the epilogue playing as Jack. You don't know much about Jack to really care about playing as him as much as John. Because we already know John Marston very well, it's absolutely perfect we play as him in the epilogue.  

I don't want to sound like a "know it all" but I did have a bit of a feeling that we would be playing John Marston again, I just expected the epilogue to be closer in time to the events of RDR1. 

How much time does Marston have before he is tasked to go after the gang and face Bill Williamson? 

[BlondieandTuco]

1 minute ago, Doublepulse said:

I love them both, but bonus points go to Arthur Morgan. I plan on making a full discussion video on which I think was the better protagonist, but I will paraphrase my thoughts here.

Arthur Morgan made John want to change who he was. They share similar traits as well, but I feel as if John looked up to Arthur as the role model and that is why we end up liking John Marston as well. He was meant to encompass Arthur Morgan after his death, which is why when I started playing as John in the epilogue, I wasn't upset. I feel like John was mean to take the place and Arthur passed the torch to him at the end. 

I feel like they really fixed that issue from RDR 1 with the epilogue playing as Jack. You don't know much about Jack to really care about playing as him as much as John. Because we already know John Marston very well, it's absolutely perfect we play as him in the epilogue.  

I don't want to sound like a "know it all" but I did have a bit of a feeling that we would be playing John Marston again, I just expected the epilogue to be closer in time to the events of RDR1. 

How much time does Marston have before he is tasked to go after the gang and face Bill Williamson? 

We see in the end credits that Ross finds John only because John choose to hunt Micah down disregarding Abigails begging, the love we and John have for Arthur is ultimately what leads to his death. There's still a few years before Ross tracks down Bill, Javier, and Dutch and sends John to finish what he started.

[Rafae]

Epilogue takes place in 1907 and the agents capture Marston's family in 1911 so four years. Wonder why they took that long if they already found John's ranch in 1907.