Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Diamond Casino & Resort
      2. DLC
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Frostythakid1017

Lets be real even high honor Arthui is a scumbag terrible person

Recommended Posts

Guest Guest176525326

Getting back to the topic, let’s be real, all Arthur Morgan has going for himself is an incredible voice acting done by Roger Clark and that is easily second to none. 

 

Apart from that, he doesn’t really bring anything to the table other than constant moaning about Dutch’s stupid plans etc, yet he doesn’t do anything about it. In fact Arthur doesn’t kill anyone significant in the whole campaign!

 

And to make matters worse, he gets killed by a little rat Micah like a little pussy. Yeah sure he had black lungs blah blah blah, the fact is he is just a side kick to John Marston’s story... 

 

Edited by Guest176525326

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DoctorMike
24 minutes ago, O.Z said:

Getting back to the topic, let’s be real, all Arthur Morgan has going for himself is an incredible voice acting done by Roger Clark and that is easily second to none. 

 

Apart from that, he doesn’t really bring anything to the table other than constant moaning about Dutch’s stupid plans etc, yet he doesn’t do anything about it. In fact Arthur doesn’t kill anyone significant in the whole campaign!

 

And to make matters worse, he gets killed by a little rat Micah like a little pussy. Yeah sure he had black lungs blah blah blah, the fact is he is just a side kick to John Marston’s story... 

 

Can't agree more!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimbatron

In a world filled with scumbag terrible people the man who does a few good deeds is king.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mac-
4 hours ago, O.Z said:

Getting back to the topic, let’s be real, all Arthur Morgan has going for himself is an incredible voice acting done by Roger Clark and that is easily second to none. 

 

Apart from that, he doesn’t really bring anything to the table other than constant moaning about Dutch’s stupid plans etc, yet he doesn’t do anything about it. In fact Arthur doesn’t kill anyone significant in the whole campaign!

 

And to make matters worse, he gets killed by a little rat Micah like a little pussy. Yeah sure he had black lungs blah blah blah, the fact is he is just a side kick to John Marston’s story... 

 

Your first paragraph is spot on, the second sort of right, yes he bitched and moaned, but it was Arthur that sorted the sh*t out. It was Arthur that gave bungling John his chance at life. Arthur achieved quite a lot, as for being killed by Micah I don't know how your game ended, in mine he gave Micah a sound thrashing (from a very sick man), only too get pissed on by Dutch. Arthur died still holding on too how he lived, loyal to those close to him, not a bad way to go in my book.

 

Definitely not a sidekick in my book, John was the aside kick to Arthur in my understanding of sidekick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tonesta
17 hours ago, American Venom said:

Disagreed. He doesn't always kill without asking questions (Just look at the way he reacts when PBX asks him to kill Dwayne. He even flat out says he doesn't want to do it). There's a distinction when he's asked to kill some random thugs and someone like Dwayne who he can see a potential friendship with.

 

He does what he can to survive and lets remember Roman lied to him before he arrived in the city. He wasn't straight with the debts/trouble he was in so Niko's pretty much on the back foot as soon as the game starts. He spends the majority trying to clean up Roman's sh*t so any hope of him reaching his end goal is put on hold to deal with everything Roman causes for him. 

 

Getting sidetracked here.....but come on!

 

In 'Search and Delete', Niko kills a guy just because Brucie - a guy he has just met - asked him to.

In 'Final Interview', Niko kills a guy for Francis McCreary even though he doesn't like the guy, just for $1000

In 'Tunnel of Death', Niko kills a guy for Derrick McCreary, just to cover up the fact that he was a rat

 

Those are just three examples, but there's tonnes in the game where he's not doing 'what he can to survive'. He's killing people because he's a murdering psychopath who'll do just about anything psychotic if you ask him to and offer him money!

 

The only reason he doesn't want to kill Dwayne for PBX is because he knows and likes the guy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimbatron
16 hours ago, Mac- said:

it was Arthur that sorted the sh*t out. It was Arthur that gave bungling John his chance at life. Arthur achieved quite a lot, as for being killed by Micah I don't know how your game ended, in mine he gave Micah a sound thrashing (from a very sick man), only too get pissed on by Dutch. Arthur died still holding on too how he lived, loyal to those close to him, not a bad way to go in my book.

 

Definitely not a sidekick in my book, John was the aside kick to Arthur in my understanding of sidekick.

Amen.

 

I don't think Micah kills Arthur at all, I've played both endings, and Arthur is still breathing as Micah hobbles away. Arthur has finally succumbed to tuberculosis.

 

It's noticeable that Arthur indeed does not finish any of the primary antagonists himself. But that's entirely as it should be. Arthur's priority is to protect those around him he cares about, the Johns, Abigails, Mary-Beths and Tillys of the world, not to inflict harm on those he doesn't.

 

I don't find Arthur is complaining about Dutch at all. He sees the problems for what they are and calls them out for what they are, which is the best he can do to try to protect people. His only other alternative is fully on mutiny against Dutch which most likely would have been far more bloody. One suspects Arthur is also trying to save Dutch himself to a degree.

 

But Arthur is facing a forced checkmate situation at then end. Whatever moves he makes, he will be beaten.

 

The concept is actually quite similar to the ending of GTA IV. The message of "That Special Someone", especially if you play both options, is that revenge doesn't pay. However, the choice from "One Last Thing" also highlights that whether you pick "Deal" or "Revenge" something bad will happen, and you are powerless to prevent all of it.

 

It's always tempting in real life, when something goes badly wrong (albeit not on the same scale as this fantasy world), to think in hindsight that doing something different would be better. But actually, you can't see the outcome of the choices you didn't make, and often as I get older I've started to believe things might not have been so different in the long run regardless of the odd poor choice here and there. It is very astute writing and can't be given enough critical acclaim IMHO. 

Edited by Jimbatron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViceCityVin
54 minutes ago, Jimbatron said:

It's always tempting in real life, when something goes badly wrong (albeit not on the same scale as this fantasy world), to think in hindsight that doing something different would be better. But actually, you can't see the outcome of the choices you didn't make, and often as I get older I've started to believe things might not have been so different in the long wrong regardless of the odd poor choice here and there

An oddly profound observation in an unexpected place. I've wondered about that as well. We think we have 20/20 hindsight, but it's only because we can see the bad we did in 20/20--but that doesn't mean we should assume we can see the potential good we could've done otherwise with the same level of insight. Who knows if things would've gone better at all? We only guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grotti Vigilante
14 hours ago, O.Z said:

Getting back to the topic, let’s be real, all Arthur Morgan has going for himself is an incredible voice acting done by Roger Clark and that is easily second to none. 

 

Apart from that, he doesn’t really bring anything to the table other than constant moaning about Dutch’s stupid plans etc, yet he doesn’t do anything about it. In fact Arthur doesn’t kill anyone significant in the whole campaign!

 

And to make matters worse, he gets killed by a little rat Micah like a little pussy. Yeah sure he had black lungs blah blah blah, the fact is he is just a side kick to John Marston’s story... 

 

Arthur Morgan also has great character development and a character arc going for him. He doesn't just moan about Dutch's stupid plans, he helps your beloved John escape the gang life so he can have a normal family life. If you think that's merely a sidekick then I do wonder how hard you are to please. The fact you also disregard him having tuberculosis with a "blah blah blah" also shows a lack of knowledge on the extent of the disease. Tuberculosis in it's late stages can cause total agony because of how it's spread to other parts of the body, and Arthur had also exhausted himself running up a mountain as well as falling from a ledge and landing on solid rock. Yet despite that, he still held his own against Micah. He wasn't killed by him unless you have a bad honour ending, and even that you can't exactly call him a little pussy for being shot in the head while he lays there sick and in total pain and exhaustion. By that logic, John is a little pussy for getting shot at by men sent by a man he once worked with who took all the credit for the work John did. But then I don't think that would resonate very well with you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimbatron
4 minutes ago, Grotti Vigilante said:

Yet despite that, he still held his own against Micah. He wasn't killed by him unless you have a bad honour ending, and even that you can't exactly call him a little pussy for being shot in the head while he lays there sick and in total pain and exhaustion.

As a side point, that's quite interesting. I've played through both ending choices to stay with John or go back for the money, but in both cases I had high honour. I didn't realise you got a slightly different outcome depending on your honour. The extra levels of detail that keep cropping up within this game are astounding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grotti Vigilante
Just now, Jimbatron said:

As a side point, that's quite interesting. I've played through both ending choices to stay with John or go back for the money, but in both cases I had high honour. I didn't realise you got a slightly different outcome depending on your honour. The extra levels of detail that keep cropping up within this game are astounding.

There's this YouTube user called Indo-J who uploads many camp interactions between characters you may have missed. It gives so much foreshadowing as well as further character development and depth to it. My favourite interactions so far have been between Hosea and Abigail. You should check out the channel. But at the risk of this post being soley advertising for a YouTube channel, I must add that the game's endings seem very varied. If you fight Micah at camp, you can cut his eye and he will have a scar in the epilogue. There is quite a bit of variation in this game to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FreeMaxB585
1 hour ago, Grotti Vigilante said:

There's this YouTube user called Indo-J who uploads many camp interactions between characters you may have missed. It gives so much foreshadowing as well as further character development and depth to it. My favourite interactions so far have been between Hosea and Abigail. You should check out the channel. But at the risk of this post being soley advertising for a YouTube channel, I must add that the game's endings seem very varied. If you fight Micah at camp, you can cut his eye and he will have a scar in the epilogue. There is quite a bit of variation in this game to say the least.

 

cuting micahs eye only happens if you have high honor and go for the money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25

Seems like the bitching period of RDR2 is slowly starting after months of appreciation like GTA V. 

 

sigh. 

 

Arthur>>>John

 

Arthur's character development is better than most of the characters I've ever seen in the industry. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest176525326
6 hours ago, Grotti Vigilante said:

Arthur Morgan also has great character development and a character arc going for him. He doesn't just moan about Dutch's stupid plans, he helps your beloved John escape the gang life so he can have a normal family life. If you think that's merely a sidekick then I do wonder how hard you are to please. The fact you also disregard him having tuberculosis with a "blah blah blah" also shows a lack of knowledge on the extent of the disease. Tuberculosis in it's late stages can cause total agony because of how it's spread to other parts of the body, and Arthur had also exhausted himself running up a mountain as well as falling from a ledge and landing on solid rock. Yet despite that, he still held his own against Micah. He wasn't killed by him unless you have a bad honour ending, and even that you can't exactly call him a little pussy for being shot in the head while he lays there sick and in total pain and exhaustion. By that logic, John is a little pussy for getting shot at by men sent by a man he once worked with who took all the credit for the work John did. But then I don't think that would resonate very well with you. 

Yet, it didn’t matter when prior to the mission I was killing random npc’s and dodging bullets right-left and centre. I took out the whole town of Van Horn ten times over with the tuberculosis, but yet when I was up against that rat Micah, I was struggling, give me a break. Simply put, my badass Arthur didn’t match the cut scene version of him, I was left well disappointed...

 

As you can gather I indeed played the game with maxed out lowest honour(the only real way to play the game imo), as Rockstar clearly wanted Arthur to be a saint, as even peeking through a window would result losing honour, what a lame system!

 

Rockstar could have have written so much better script for Arthur and RDR2, but they failed in my eyes, hell he doesn’t even kill anybody significant in the whole game, then what’s the point?!

 

He is very good with words and giving advice, but frankly, just as I said, a sidekick to John Marston’s story...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mac-
30 minutes ago, O.Z said:

As you can gather I indeed played the game with maxed out lowest honour(the only real way to play the game imo), as Rockstar clearly wanted Arthur to be a saint, as even peeking through a window would result losing honour, what a lame system!

 

I actually thought Arthur was as good character as I have seen, for playing which ever way suited your style of play. I do agree with you on the honour system it's rubbish, they even created a PvP version of this game for griefers called free roam, with the honour system at it's heart, totally sh*t system that should be dropped asap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SonOfLiberty
3 hours ago, O.Z said:

Yet, it didn’t matter when prior to the mission I was killing random npc’s and dodging bullets right-left and centre. I took out the whole town of Van Horn ten times over with the tuberculosis, but yet when I was up against that rat Micah, I was struggling, give me a break. Simply put, my badass Arthur didn’t match the cut scene version of him, I was left well disappointed...

I really think this is a good example of story and gameplay segregation. It's not the game's fault if you decide to go on a killing spree just before the mission and it doesn't "match".

 

The same logic can be used for John in Red Dead Redemption. Technically before his last stand you could go on a state wide killing spree wreaking havoc and taking bullets from every direction from the law and still be alive, but he can't take more than a few bullets (in Dead Eye no less) in front of his barn and he's taken down? 

 

The "freeroam" version of John would've easily been able to handle that. Clearly in both cases it's done for dramatic effect, but the game can't anticipate when the player is going to perform these actions.

 

If Arthur's Turberculosis had more bearing in gameplay I think it would get really annoying. His energy would drain much faster and doing simple tasks like running, riding etc would be a struggle so R* obviously saw it had to be done in the right way where it wouldn't be too much of a burden. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grotti Vigilante
3 hours ago, O.Z said:

Yet, it didn’t matter when prior to the mission I was killing random npc’s and dodging bullets right-left and centre. I took out the whole town of Van Horn ten times over with the tuberculosis, but yet when I was up against that rat Micah, I was struggling, give me a break. Simply put, my badass Arthur didn’t match the cut scene version of him, I was left well disappointed...

American Venom has mostly addressed this point, but I’d like to add further that if you really want to extend the storyline to gameplay without segregation, then it is just as nonsensical that John in the first game can go on a rampage and end up not being dealt with by Ross sooner than later. In fact, why not extend it to GTA and say being shot in a gameplay gunfight should mean you can’t walk or do anything normal again? The reason this kind of thing exists is because Rockstar are making a game, not a movie. You have to segregate free roam and the story in this kind of game or you will end up not having a good time.

 

3 hours ago, O.Z said:

As you can gather I indeed played the game with maxed out lowest honour(the only real way to play the game imo), as Rockstar clearly wanted Arthur to be a saint, as even peeking through a window would result losing honour, what a lame system!

On the contrary, I fail to see how playing with low honour is the only way to play the game. It’s called Red Dead REDEMPTION, so choosing to go low honour almost negates this title and that kind of takes the general score of the game down for me. I love the variation in endings, but I don’t like how you can literally ignore the game title. If it were called Red Dead Revolution (as in the Wild West transitioning into a more civilised age) I’d be fine with it. But it’s suppose to be about redemption. It’s like following traffic laws in Grand Theft Auto in my opinion. The honour system in itself is flawed, I won’t dispute that. But that is a totally different subject.

 

3 hours ago, O.Z said:

Rockstar could have have written so much better script for Arthur and RDR2, but they failed in my eyes, hell he doesn’t even kill anybody significant in the whole game, then what’s the point?!

There’s more to a story than just someone who mindlessly murders, and there is no requirement to kill a significant character in order to get a good story. Does Arthur also not kill Colonel Favours? He also kills Fussar on Guarma and allows everyone to escape. I’d say they’re  significant characters in some way or another.

 

3 hours ago, O.Z said:

He is very good with words and giving advice, but frankly, just as I said, a sidekick to John Marston’s story...

It is clear you won’t ever see Arthur on his own merits and always think of him as a sidekick to John Marston’s story. I won’t try to change your mind, but I will say that I think you’re very mistaken. Arthur might have helped set up John’s story, but he also has his own. The Redemption games as a whole are about the taming of the old west, with the Van der Linde being one of it’s last remnants that are hanging by a thread. John Marston and Arthur Morgan are all a part of this one big story.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimbatron
4 hours ago, O.Z said:

Rockstar could have have written so much better script for Arthur and RDR2, but they failed in my eyes, hell he doesn’t even kill anybody significant in the whole game, then what’s the point?!

 

He is very good with words and giving advice, but frankly, just as I said, a sidekick to John Marston’s story...

As per my post above, I have to disagree with the first part.

 

It is entirely the point that Arthur doesn’t kill any of the key antagonists.

 

It wouldn’t fit with his view that revenge doesn’t pay. Ensuring John, Abigail, Jack, Mary-Beth, Tilly, Hell even Uncle, Trelawny and Swanson all get out alive - those are his victories. It was a fine line between some or all of those ending up like Susan. Finishing Cornwall, Milton and Colm (although he has a hand in the latter) aren’t his priorities.

 

Its totally fair to say that personally you’d have preferred a more aggressive protagonist who goes around killing anyone standing in their way - if that’s what you wanted. But the whole point of the story is about some one in a morally dubious life who is trying to use their last few days to make things better. Hence the word Redemption in the game title and Arthur’s final mission.

 

I think therefore it’s lacking objectivity to say “what’s the point” or it’s badly written on the grounds in the quote, but totally fair to say it’s not the type of story you wanted, if that’s how you feel.

 

I also don’t agree Arthur is a side kick. Some of Johns behaviour around camp early in the game is verging on immature although he grows up a lot during the course of the story. And it’s very clear that Arthur was a huge influence on the philosophical thinker that the Marston we know from the original game is.

 

You could argue though that the story is all about Jack. He’s the one that finally gets the opportunity at a fresh start, as a result of Arthur and then Johns actions.

 

 

Edited by Jimbatron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SonOfLiberty
2 hours ago, Grotti Vigilante said:

On the contrary, I fail to see how playing with low honour is the only way to play the game. It’s called Red Dead REDEMPTION, so choosing to go low honour almost negates this title and that kind of takes the general score of the game down for me. I love the variation in endings, but I don’t like how you can literally ignore the game title. If it were called Red Dead Revolution (as in the Wild West transitioning into a more civilised age) I’d be fine with it. But it’s suppose to be about redemption. It’s like following traffic laws in Grand Theft Auto in my opinion. The honour system in itself is flawed, I won’t dispute that. But that is a totally different subject.

Funnily enough with my second play through I had every intention to play through the story with the lowest honour possible because I had maxed out high honour the first time around, but I just can't do it. It has nothing to do with the title for me. I just can't do it.

 

i might do something dishonourable every now and then, but to play through the game literally as the biggest piece of garbage possible you would have to basically not care about the story and ignore the majority of encounters, strangers etc which seems like it dilutes the experience for someone who cares about that.

 

It just doesn't feel right to me. Maybe it's because I'm so used to playing GTA IV in a similar way (I rarely just kill people for the hell of it). Arthur goes through a genuine transformation by the end so I don't think having maxed out low honour makes that much sense really if you're going to follow the story closely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gonnaenodaethat

All R* protagonists are alway pure bawbags.

 

If thir no stealing yer motor, robbing yer house or taking oot the local bobbies thir ayeways always moaning aboot how life's delt them aw the boagie cairds.

 

Sorry Arthur but if the lurgy hud goat ye earlier it widnae hae been a great loss as aw you left wis a big pile o misery and carnage so ye did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimbatron
2 minutes ago, gonnaenodaethat said:

All R* protagonists are alway pure bawbags.

 

If thir no stealing yer motor, robbing yer house or taking oot the local bobbies thir ayeways always moaning aboot how life's delt them aw the boagie cairds.

 

Sorry Arthur but if the lurgy hud goat ye earlier it widnae hae been a great loss as aw you left wis a big pile o misery and carnage so ye did.

You sound like that family at Chez Porter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.