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. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

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

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    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 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 Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

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

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA 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

Mysterious hero

Red Dead Redemption 2 Retcons and Continuity errors

Recommended Posts

AddamHusayin
Posted (edited)
On 3/6/2019 at 6:20 PM, Jason said:

The thread isn't being locked because you disagree with somebody, so you can stop asking.

Good talk. Going to keep on trying anyway. I don't disagree with him. I'm right. First post proves it. Aside from that I'm not the one asking for it, he is by literally ignoring everything I'm saying and using semantics. Just read what he's posted. I'm just talking to a brick wall. But I'm done here anyways. Sick of all the misinterpretation and incorrectly regarding of retcons.

4 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

 

I'm not wrong about anything. But if I am wrong about something, tell me WHY I'm wrong. The only one you gave me an explanation on why I was wrong was the Ferry Robbery. The thing about the Ferry Robbery, though, is the fact that you tell me it's not a retcon. Here's the thing, it might not be a retcon from an in-universe standpoint, since these two robberies were never directly mentioned to be the same robbery. But from an out-of-universe standpoint, it was clear they changed the story. Why would R* make the Strange Man say "same one you got shot on" if it wasn't intended to be the same robbery at the time of RDR1?

 

Saying that something is not canon and for gameplay purposes isn't misinterpretation, I am literally reading what you said.

 

I could say the same to you.

 

Again, I could say the same thing to you. Here's the thing, when I claim somethings a retcon, I give out evidence. The guidebook, Missions, Dialogue, ect, ect, that you dismissed as either semantics or non-canon. I was going to put up the changed details about the Blackwater Massacre, but since I didn't have the evidence, I decided not to. What's your evidence? "Oh it's there, look it up, I assure you it's there". But sure, I'm the one who tiptoes around the truth. But if you know the lore so well, then riddle me this: When does John say that the last time he saw Dutch was when he got left behind during the robbery? And please no, "I assure you it's there" type answers.

 

Most of what I said wasn't debunked.

 

- John going out to New Austin at least twice is still true.

 

- I proved to you that John got his farm in 1908 using the guidebook, but "nope guidebook not canon lol".

 

- The Ferry Robbery, from an out-of-universe standpoint, was changed. R* made the Strange Man say "same one you got shot on" to articulate to the players that the Ferry Robbery and the robbery John got shot on were the one and the same. But since the two were never directly mentioned to be the same robbery, they decided to change that. So even if you claim that it isn't a retcon since they only imply it, at the very least that means the backstory was changed.

 

- Fine, I'll give you the one about the dialogue between John and Javier, even if I think it's a stretch.

 

So you debunked only one...Out of nine.

 

What if other's want to discuss the retcons? That's seems really inconsiderate.

 

Why are you so determined to get the mods to lock the thread?

Got to run and don't look back. This is over. Javier and John thing isn't even a stretch. I cannot wrap my head around how that doesn't fit more perfectly to you? It's inconsiderate of you to just ignore what I've stated. I proved the 3-4 years case. I proved the whole ferry incident because it wasn't the same robbery and it never was because RDR1 never said it was the same and RDR2 said it was two different ones. People saying I disagree with him when he's just wrong according to RDR2 and it didn't even retcon those facts. I couldn't convince people Rockstar messed up on the Mcfarlane barn and that Bonnie looks way too old to be a 14 year old. So what chance do I have to convince someone with even more damning evidence? Even less it seems. I give up.

Edited by AddamHusayin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason
24 minutes ago, AddamHusayin said:

Good talk. Going to keep on trying anyway. I don't disagree with him.

I'm a mod.

 

It aint being locked.

 

Good talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AddamHusayin
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Jason said:

I'm a mod.

 

It aint being locked.

 

Good talk.

Ah I figured. That's a real shame. It should be. But there's little point in arguing with you. So have a nice day.

Edited by AddamHusayin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason

Absolutely nothing wrong with the topic of discussion at hand and OP has shown a willingness to discuss and debate it so no it shouldn't be locked. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AddamHusayin
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Jason said:

Absolutely nothing wrong with the topic of discussion at hand and OP has shown a willingness to discuss and debate it so no it shouldn't be locked. 😉

Honestly if debate to you is splitting hairs, semantics, twisting what other people said, and just ignoring clear evidence as the OP did earlier then sure that's alright by me. 😂

 

I mean it's like that in other places I go where logic doesn't get to people. People can argue that he didn't do that (he did).

 

But my evidence stands when it comes to John's literally explaining in RDR1 what happened with Javier and Dutch leaving him, the whole 3 years farming, him only going to Pike's Basin and not the rest of New Austin, and the bank robberies being 2 separate occasions as confirmed by RDR2 and never explicitly stated as one by RDR1. But it doesn't matter if I have the evidence apparently.

 

Not arguing with you, just stating why I think it should be locked even though nothing is going to change.

Edited by AddamHusayin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeyThereFriend
3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

Honestly if debate to you is splitting hairs, semantics, twisting what other people said, and just ignoring clear evidence as the OP did earlier then sure that's alright by me. 😂

 

I mean it's like that in other places I go where logic doesn't get to people. People can argue that he didn't do that (he did).

 

But my evidence stands when it comes to John's literally explaining in RDR1 what happened with Javier and Dutch leaving him, the whole 3 years farming, him only going to Pike's Basin and not the rest of New Austin, and the bank robberies being 2 separate occasions as confirmed by RDR2 and never explicitly stated as one by RDR1. But it doesn't matter if I have the evidence apparently.

 

Not arguing with you, just stating why I think it should be locked even though nothing is going to change.

John 100% explored all of New Austin before the events of RDR1. I know, I did it with John recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AddamHusayin
4 minutes ago, HeyThereFriend said:

John 100% explored all of New Austin before the events of RDR1. I know, I did it with John recently.

Yeah hehe and I 100% explored it with Arthur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeyThereFriend
8 minutes ago, AddamHusayin said:

Yeah hehe and I 100% explored it with Arthur.

Yes but you did so with a glitch which wasn't intended. I did it with John as the developers intended therefore, canon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Equatecurl
On 2/22/2019 at 6:25 PM, Cutter De Blanc said:

How couldn't they make it right? John's trip to Pike's Basin feels completely shoehorned into the story, that bounty guy could have been anywhere

Its just fan service, I was kinda hoping wed go to new austin in one mission at least

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysterious hero
3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

It's inconsiderate of you to just ignore what I've stated.

I've never ignored what you stated.

 

3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

I proved the 3-4 years case.

When? All you said was how 3-4 years wasn't a big difference. I showed you the guidebook saying it was three years and you say it's most likely non-canon.

 

3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

I proved the whole ferry incident because it wasn't the same robbery and it never was because RDR1 never said it was the same and RDR2 said it was two different ones.

RDR1 never directly said that they were the same robbery, you are correct on that. But they were clearly intending it to be the same robbery when R* was writing RDR1. Why would R* make the Strange Man say "same one you go shot on" if it wasn't to articulate to the audience that this was the same robbery. When R* finally got the chance to properly flesh out the backstory, the made the Ferry Robbery a different heist and made the robbery John got shot on a train heist.

 

3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

Bonnie looks way too old to be a 14 year old.

Bonnie does look a little older than 14. But back in those times people aged quicker because they had harder lives. Like how Arthur is in his mid 30's but looks like he's in his early 40's. It's not implausible that Bonnie is 14 but looks like she 18-24.

 

3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

So what chance do I have to convince someone with even more damning evidence? Even less it seems.

 

What evidence do you have?

2 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

Honestly if debate to you is splitting hairs, semantics, twisting what other people said, and just ignoring clear evidence as the OP did earlier then sure that's alright by me.

 

I'm not splitting hairs. I'm not arguing semantics. I'm not twisting words, I read what you say word for word. Ignoring clear evidence? What? How is "It's probably non-canon" or "You're arguing semantics" or "Look it up on the internet" evidence? Because those are the extent of what your evidence is. My evidence? The RDR1 guidebook, Missions, Dialogues.

2 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

But my evidence stands

Or lack thereof. But you know what's interesting? You claim that if you believed me then you would be believing In false information despite the fact that I have strong evidence. Yet you claim that John stated that he last saw Dutch when he was left for dead, yet that is obviously false. I know it's false because you keep ignoring the question or only give me non- answers like "look it up" and "it's there I assure you". You know that if you confessed that you were false, then your whole argument would fall flat, since you claimed it was a retcon with no evidence, meaning I would be believing in false info, which would make you a hypocrite.

 

3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

the whole 3 years farming thing

The GOTY guidebook, which there is zero reason to believe it is non-canon, says John has been farming for three years which would mean 1908. Yet John got his farm four years ago which would mean 1907. With John own admission you could say that he was just rounding out or estimating how many years he's been farming, but the guidebook is from a omnipotent point of view, meaning it wouldn't get things wrong.

 

3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

him only going to Pike's Basin and not the rest of New Austin

He goes to Rio Bravo with Jeremy Gill. Even if you say that particular side mission is non-canon, it's still a retcon regardless. When Bonnie asks John if he knows the area, he doesn't say "Not really" or "sorta kinda", but instead he says "I don't", meaning he has never stepped foot in New Austin.

 

3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

the bank robberies being 2 separate occasions as confirmed by RDR2 and never explicitly stated as one by RDR1.

They weren't bank robberies, so that's a typo on your part. I've already stated why the Ferry Raid was implied and originally intended to be the same robbery John got shot on before they changed it in RDR2. R* made the Strange Mans dialogue infer that they were originally the same robbery. And no, I doubt R* wrote it to being a robbery John got shot on, but not THE robbery John got left behind on.

 

3 hours ago, AddamHusayin said:

just stating why I think it should be locked even though nothing is going to change.

That's really cruel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AddamHusayin
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, HeyThereFriend said:

Yes but you did so with a glitch which wasn't intended. I did it with John as the developers intended therefore, canon.

He says he's never been to New Austin in RDR1. Going to Pike's Basin (although in New Austin) is like saying I've been to Mexico when I've only spent a few minutes in Tijuana. Plus I went to Fort Mercer. And he says he doesn't even know where Fort Mercer is in RDR1. We all know being able to free roam in New Austin is just fan service especially since people would be complaining all over the place if you still got shot by snipers at that point. I robbed trains, massacred whole towns, and stole wagons all across the states as John when he's reformed from a life of crime and laying low. Is that canon too?

Edited by AddamHusayin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeyThereFriend
15 minutes ago, AddamHusayin said:

He says he's never been to New Austin in RDR1. Going to Pike's Basin (although in New Austin) is like saying I've been to Mexico when I've only spent a few minutes in Tijuana. Plus I went to Fort Mercer. And he says he doesn't even know where Fort Mercer is in RDR1. We all know being able to free roam in New Austin is just fan service especially since people would be complaining all over the place if you still got shot by snipers at that point. I robbed trains, massacred whole towns, and stole wagons all across the states as John when he's reformed from a life of crime and laying low. Is that canon too?

Easy way to explain that is he lied. If you did all those things as John, then yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AddamHusayin
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, HeyThereFriend said:

Easy way to explain that is he lied. If you did all those things as John, then yes.

I know you're playing. But in all seriousness that's really reaching. He isn't lying when he says that. You're just contorting it to fit your narrative so whatever sinks your battleship. It's just taken at face value. It would make no sense if John was massacring entire towns and committing crimes across all the states after the epilogue lol

Edited by AddamHusayin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeyThereFriend
24 minutes ago, AddamHusayin said:

I know you're playing. But in all seriousness that's really reaching. He isn't lying when he says that. You're just contorting it to fit your narrative so whatever sinks your battleship. It's just taken at face value. It would make no sense if John was massacring entire towns and committing crimes across all the states after the epilogue lol

I personally wouldn't have John do those things because it doesn't fit the canon. I don't do things in any game unless I feel it fits canon. However I believe whatever individual wants to consider canon is up to them. Yes that is exactly what I'm doing, making it fit my narrative because it's a hell of a lot better than just not going to New Austin and exploring it or to feel like anything I'm doing in New Austin is meaningless and didn't actually happen in John's story.

 

At this point I don't think there is any harm in everyone making up their own canon completely as we will likely never see an RDR Remake/Remaster or RDR2 Story DLC. I also expect RDR3 will not feature any of the characters from RDR 1 or 2. So basically I don't think we'll ever get a clear answer from Rockstar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AddamHusayin
3 minutes ago, HeyThereFriend said:

I personally wouldn't have John do those things because it doesn't fit the canon. I don't do things in any game unless I feel it fits canon. However I believe whatever individual wants to consider canon is up to them. Yes that is exactly what I'm doing, making it fit my narrative because it's a hell of a lot better than just not going to New Austin and exploring it or to feel like anything I'm doing in New Austin is meaningless and didn't actually happen in John's story.

 

At this point I don't think there is any harm in everyone making up their own canon completely as we will likely never see an RDR Remake/Remaster or RDR2 Story DLC. I also expect RDR3 will not feature any of the characters from RDR 1 or 2. So basically I don't think we'll ever get a clear answer from Rockstar.

Head canon does not equal canon. As much as I want John to tend to his farm with his family forever by not completing the final mission in RDR1 the story isn't over until I get past that mission and the Stranger mission with Jack. Same way some people leave Micah in the jail forever. In their head canon everyone lives happily ever after sort of. If we go by head canon then I can just make up whatever I want and nothing matters. But I'm not going to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DirtCheap

By the end of RDR2, John can:

  • use Eagle Eye
  • use the highest level of Dead Eye
  • skin any creature perfectly
  • grow a beard within a few days
  • duel wield
  • use a bow
  • travel to 3 1/2 more states
  • fish 
  • row a boat

 

Yet in 4 years time, he is unable to do any of those things, with no explanation given.

 

Oh, and let's not forget the fact he trades in Arthur's iconic black hat for a musty-ass grey cap with a feather, and forgets everything Arthur did to save him (what an ungrateful piece of sh*t).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BurnettVice

We never get any more info on John's daughter! I was hoping she would get mentioned at least once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darealbandicoot

The Frontera Bridge in Rio Bravo is mentioned by Jeremy Gill yet the bridge doesn't appear at all in the game. The Frontera Bridge is the railway bridge that connects Mexico to New Austin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysterious hero
On ‎3‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 6:27 PM, DirtCheap said:

By the end of RDR2, John can:

  • use Eagle Eye
  • use the highest level of Dead Eye
  • skin any creature perfectly
  • grow a beard within a few days
  • duel wield
  • use a bow
  • travel to 3 1/2 more states
  • fish 
  • row a boat

 

Yet in 4 years time, he is unable to do any of those things, with no explanation given.

 

Oh, and let's not forget the fact he trades in Arthur's iconic black hat for a musty-ass grey cap with a feather, and forgets everything Arthur did to save him (what an ungrateful piece of sh*t).

Eagle eye is just a gameplay mechanic.

Same with Dead Eye. If you want a story reason, John used his guns less frequently after killing Micah in 1907, by 1911 he got more sloppy with a gun.

He skins creatures perfect in RDR1.

He shaves off-screen.

Perhaps he dislikes dual wielding. Same with the bow.

He has no business going to New Hanover, Ambarino, or Lemoyne in RDR1.

His family is his priority, he doesn't have time to fish.

He rides a raft to Mexico, so there's that

 

It was very disappointing how John got his hat. I know not every item needs to have an elaborate backstory, but the fact that he gets his hat because it was apart of the outfit Abigail bought for him is pretty anti-climactic. I always assumed that he wore his iconic hat when he was in the gang, since it looked rugged and old.

 

It was lazy on R* part to make Arthur a big part of John's story. People started guessing the twist the minute the second trailer came out. I personally didn't care for Arthur. I knew that he was most likely gonna die, so why care for him?

4 hours ago, BurnettVice said:

We never get any more info on John's daughter! I was hoping she would get mentioned at least once.

There is a small allusion to her in the epilogue, other than that not much else.

 

17 minutes ago, Darealbandicoot said:

The Frontera Bridge in Rio Bravo is mentioned by Jeremy Gill yet the bridge doesn't appear at all in the game. The Frontera Bridge is the railway bridge that connects Mexico to New Austin. 

They were likely intending for Nuevo Paraiso to be playable, due to how much detail there is when you glitch into Mexico.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darealbandicoot
7 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

 

It was very disappointing how John got his hat. I know not every item needs to have an elaborate backstory, but the fact that he gets his hat because it was apart of the outfit Abigail bought for him is pretty anti-climactic. I always assumed that he wore his iconic hat when he was in the gang, since it looked rugged and old.

 

 

Abigail didn't buy him the hat. He already had it in the chest with his weapons and cowboy outfit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dognuts

Abigail bought his rancher outfit. His classic cowboy attire is in the chest during Jim Milton Rides, Again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darealbandicoot
22 minutes ago, dognuts said:

Abigail bought his rancher outfit. His classic cowboy attire is in the chest during Jim Milton Rides, Again?

Abigail bought him the shirt only. John already had everything else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DirtCheap
Posted (edited)

Nvm, double post

Edited by DirtCheap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DirtCheap
11 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

Eagle eye is just a gameplay mechanic.

Same with Dead Eye. If you want a story reason, John used his guns less frequently after killing Micah in 1907, by 1911 he got more sloppy with a gun.

 

He shoots like a pro by 1907, despite spending 8 years with his family in Yukon, most likely gun-free, so I don't think he got that sloppy with his gun by 1911.

 

11 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

He skins creatures perfect in RDR1.

 

It's hard to explain, but in RDR, he has the skin within seconds, but in RDR2 we actually see him drag the skin off the creature, and take any necessary bits e.g. horn

 

11 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

He shaves off-screen.

 

That's a plausible reason, but like I said in my original post, he can grow a beard within minutes, so he'd be shaving every 3 seconds in RDR to look the way he is.

 

12 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

Perhaps he dislikes dual wielding. Same with the bow.

 

I don't know how he can hate duel-wielding (which is very useful, not to mention badass), or bows for that matter (which are fantastic hunting weapons). Doesn't make sense.

 

12 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

He has no business going to New Hanover, Ambarino, or Lemoyne in RDR1.

 

Fair point, but they don't really give any explanation to why you can't cross into north West Elizabeth in RDR. despite explaining in the newspaper why there's no bridge to Mexico in RDR2.

 

12 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

His family is his priority, he doesn't have time to fish.

 

Yet he still has time to play Poker, Blackjack, Liar's Dice, Five Finger Fillet and Horseshoes? Not to mention hunting?

And what says he can't go fishing once he returns back to Beecher's Hope?

 

12 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

He rides a raft to Mexico, so there's that

 

No, I'm talking about rowing a boat, not simply sitting in one.

 

12 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

It was very disappointing how John got his hat. I know not every item needs to have an elaborate backstory, but the fact that he gets his hat because it was apart of the outfit Abigail bought for him is pretty anti-climactic. I always assumed that he wore his iconic hat when he was in the gang, since it looked rugged and old.

 

Yeah, I agree with that, he simply got the hat from the chest and that's it. There's no backstory behind it either, which isn't the case with Arthur's hat as you can see a picture in the camp of Arthur's father Lyle wearing the hat, meaning that Arthur inherited the hat from his father.

 

12 hours ago, Mysterious hero said:

I personally didn't care for Arthur. I knew that he was most likely gonna die, so why care for him?

 

What's wrong with you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BurnettVice

@Mysterious hero Really they do? I must of missed it. I'll have to keep an eye out for it during my second playthrough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysterious hero
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, DirtCheap said:

 

He shoots like a pro by 1907, despite spending 8 years with his family in Yukon, most likely gun-free, so I don't think he got that sloppy with his gun by 1911.

 

 

It's hard to explain, but in RDR, he has the skin within seconds, but in RDR2 we actually see him drag the skin off the creature, and take any necessary bits e.g. horn

 

 

That's a plausible reason, but like I said in my original post, he can grow a beard within minutes, so he'd be shaving every 3 seconds in RDR to look the way he is.

 

 

I don't know how he can hate duel-wielding (which is very useful, not to mention badass), or bows for that matter (which are fantastic hunting weapons). Doesn't make sense.

 

 

Fair point, but they don't really give any explanation to why you can't cross into north West Elizabeth in RDR. despite explaining in the newspaper why there's no bridge to Mexico in RDR2.

 

 

Yet he still has time to play Poker, Blackjack, Liar's Dice, Five Finger Fillet and Horseshoes? Not to mention hunting?

And what says he can't go fishing once he returns back to Beecher's Hope?

 

 

No, I'm talking about rowing a boat, not simply sitting in one.

 

 

Yeah, I agree with that, he simply got the hat from the chest and that's it. There's no backstory behind it either, which isn't the case with Arthur's hat as you can see a picture in the camp of Arthur's father Lyle wearing the hat, meaning that Arthur inherited the hat from his father.

 

 

What's wrong with you?

He wasn't completely gun free. According to Abigail, every time they find a place to live, John always get himself into trouble. It's a big plot point in the epilogue.

 

Nah he skins perfectly fine in RDR1. It's just we don't see the process of skinning in that game due to limitations.

 

Bit of a hyperbole. Shave every few minutes? Probably not. Shave every few days? Probably.

 

Badass, but impractical. It would be hard to aim, it would be hard to reload, you would need to be strong enough to carry both weapons, and strong enough to stand the recoil. As for the bow, while it's a useful weapon, it is hard to use. Even Charles says that it takes a lifetime to master using a bow.

 

Perhaps the river current connecting Great Plains and Big Valley is too strong to pass through.

 

Yeah I know, it's a stretch. Maybe he didn't feel like fishing at the time?

 

I know, I was just joking. Where would he be rowing a boat to story wise? Gameplay wise, it's just a limitation.

 

I think it would have been better if he had his hat while he was in the gang.

 

Arthur was bland to me, I don't know why. Maybe it was his voice? Sometimes it sounds great and realistic, other times it can get stereotypical and cartoonish. He didn't have much of a personality or unique character quirks, except constantly being snarky and cynical, which got old fast.  His character design was very uninspired and not as distinctive as John's. While John looked like a veteran outlaw turned bounty hunter, Arthur just looks like an everyman rather than a senior outlaw. His backstory was quickly brushed over. His parents died when he was a kid and he was taken in by Dutch. That's it. Literally the same backstory John has. The only interesting part of Arthur"s backstory is his implied love/hate relationship with his father, Lyle.

14 hours ago, BurnettVice said:

@Mysterious hero Really they do? I must of missed it. I'll have to keep an eye out for it during my second play through.

John tells Abigail "It would be nice to have someone new to knit for some day".

Edited by Mysterious hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PapasHota

I think it would be better if Dutch was the playable character in chapter 1-6 arthur would work much better as a supporting character because he isnt interesting enouch to carry the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysterious hero
Posted (edited)

Hey guys, I have been replaying Red Dead Redemption 1 and found some interesting tid bits of dialogue:

 

-In "This is Armadillo, USA", Bonnie mentions that she is 27 years old.

 

-In "We Shall be Together in Paradise", John and Irish both admit that they can't swim.

 

-In "A Continual Feast", Uncle mentions that he always liked to drink with Dutch and Bill before they died. John tells Uncle that they only kept him around because he was entertaining. Interestingly, John claims that Uncle barely knew Dutch and Bill, yet if you play RDR2, that clearly isn't true.

 

-In "Wolves, Dogs, and Sons" John mentions that Uncle was old even when he was a kid. This means uncle joined the gang at least by 1885.

 

-In "An Appointed Time" Bill mentions that he had sexual intercourse with Abigail. Steve J Palmer, the voice actor for Bill, mentioned in an interview that Bill was jealous that Abigail loved John instead of him, explaining his hatred of John. This is seemingly ignored in the prequel and that game even implies that Bill is homosexual.

 

-In the same mission, John mentions that Bill left him to die. Another continuity error.

 

-In "The Gates of El Presidio" Javier says "Go back to your farm, John" meaning Javier somehow knew John was living on a farm.

 

-In the same mission, John tells Javier "Abigail always thought you was a creep". In RDR2, Javier is obviously not the creep, Micah takes that title.

 

-Yet again in the same mission, Javier says "You don't understand what happened, it wasn't like you thought it was" and "It was Bill not me". This, along with Bill's comments, suggest that the incident where John got shot and left for dead was a much more complex situation then what RDR2 depicts.

 

-I think I may have determined Landon Ricketts's age. In "The Gunslinger's Tragedy" Landon mentions that he thought he would've died in a shootout by age 30, implying that he started his career as a gunslinger sometime before his 30's. In "The Mexican Wagon Train" he mentions that he spent his time as a known gunslinger killing men for 25 years, but is now a low rent would-be messiah. The last time it in was known that he alive was back in 1902. 1902-25=1877. 1877 matches up perfectly to what John says about hearing stories about Landon when he was a boy. If Landon was at least 29 in 1877, then he would be 63 at the oldest in 1911.

Edited by Mysterious hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DoctorMike
Posted (edited)

Abigail in RDR1 talks about how she’s been “cooking the same thing for 15 years in the hope of poisoning John”

Yet in RDR2, it’s Pearson who does the cooking

 

Hosea is literally the Co-leader of the van der Linde gang but he never gets mentioned in RDR1 or even referred to, much like Arthur, Susan Grimshaw, Sean, Lenny, Micah and the rest of the ‘new’ gang members from RDR2

Edited by DoctorMike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LorshZontek
On 3/7/2019 at 5:03 PM, Mysterious hero said:

 

I'm not wrong about anything. But if I am wrong about something, tell me WHY I'm wrong. The only one you gave me an explanation on why I was wrong was the Ferry Robbery. The thing about the Ferry Robbery, though, is the fact that you tell me it's not a retcon. Here's the thing, it might not be a retcon from an in-universe standpoint, since these two robberies were never directly mentioned to be the same robbery. But from an out-of-universe standpoint, it was clear they changed the story. Why would R* make the Strange Man say "same one you got shot on" if it wasn't intended to be the same robbery at the time of RDR1?

 

Saying that something is not canon and for gameplay purposes isn't misinterpretation, I am literally reading what you said.

 

I could say the same to you.

 

Again, I could say the same thing to you. Here's the thing, when I claim somethings a retcon, I give out evidence. The guidebook, Missions, Dialogue, ect, ect, that you dismissed as either semantics or non-canon. I was going to put up the changed details about the Blackwater Massacre, but since I didn't have the evidence, I decided not to. What's your evidence? "Oh it's there, look it up, I assure you it's there". But sure, I'm the one who tiptoes around the truth. But if you know the lore so well, then riddle me this: When does John say that the last time he saw Dutch was when he got left behind during the robbery? And please no, "I assure you it's there" type answers.

 

Most of what I said wasn't debunked.

 

- John going out to New Austin at least twice is still true.

 

- I proved to you that John got his farm in 1908 using the guidebook, but "nope guidebook not canon lol".

 

- The Ferry Robbery, from an out-of-universe standpoint, was changed. R* made the Strange Man say "same one you got shot on" to articulate to the players that the Ferry Robbery and the robbery John got shot on were the one and the same. But since the two were never directly mentioned to be the same robbery, they decided to change that. So even if you claim that it isn't a retcon since they only imply it, at the very least that means the backstory was changed.

 

- Fine, I'll give you the one about the dialogue between John and Javier, even if I think it's a stretch.

 

So you debunked only one...Out of nine.

 

What if other's want to discuss the retcons? That's seems really inconsiderate.

 

Why are you so determined to get the mods to lock the thread?

its so petty they want the thread locked where no one can talk about this its like the kid in class who gets the whole class punished when they did nothing wrong 

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.

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.