Rockstar's habit of destroying the endgame of both Red Dead Redemption games [SPOILERS]

[Emmi]

I think we all agree that playing as Jack in RDR1 and John in RDR2, because of the stupid and for me still yet inexplicable decision with the hair design, absolutely sucks and really hampers all enjoyment I'd otherwise have had with the amazing Epilogue parts of RDR2 in specific. They have the real John model with his iconic hair in the mission thumbnails in the final retail game and yet they somehow decided to make a last second decision and changed his hair/appearance to absolute disgust.

I just don't get it. John was perfect and I was excited to play as him but as soon as I saw his face and hair in the Epilogue I knew I hated him and Rockstar for that.

Why??? Why???

[Badman_]

I'll admit I hated playing as Jack in RDR1. I stopped playing as soon as I took my revenge on Ross. There was no incentive for me to keep going.

 

However, I loved the Epilogue of RDR2 and playing as John afterwards. I know they kind of messed up the model and the hair (and believe me, I really disliked that...), but it didn't ruin the experience for me. John is such a likeable character that the sole fact of being able to play with him once again was more than enough IMO.

Edited May 10 by Badman_
English.

[Emmi]

I loved the Epilogue of RDR2 as well and think its one of the two best parts of the entire game but as soon as the credits rolled I had to stop because I couldn't stand John's face and hair any longer beginning with the Epilogue part. Sad that Rockstar just didn't let us play with John's NPC model from Chapter 1-6.

[cp1dell]

It does suck how they cut corners for his appearance. PC is a different story, but on console I found Length 6 to be close enough to his RDR1 hair in the meantime.

[LeonVegaSuarez]

I refused to play as Jack in RDR1 and I wouldve prefered to play as Arthur, maybe fake his death or something, and be able to go west to New Austin than playing as John again.

[solitudinarian]

16 hours ago, Badman_ said:

I'll admit I hated playing as Jack in RDR1. I stopped playing as soon as I took my revenge on Ross. There was no incentive for me to keep going.

 

However, I loved the Epilogue of RDR2 and playing as John afterwards. I know they kind of messed up the model and the hair (and believe me, I really disliked that...), but it didn't ruin the experience for me. John is such a likeable character that the sole fact of being able to play with him once again was more than enough IMO.

 

Yeah same! My fav aspects of the game is the horse riding/horses in general, fishing, foraging, hiking, sightseeing etc. So for me, just hopping on my horse and going out to simply relax is a very nice experience. Maybe I will grow tired (Lets hope there will be a DLC someday) but for now, it's my fav game to simply relax with. 

[TheOriginalGunslinger]

Jack grew on me over the years. Hated him at first but decided to save some Stranger missions for him after the events of Red Dead Redemption.

 

During my playthroughs I end up turning Jack into a murderous character. The stuff John and Abigail worried about him being when he got older.

[billiejoearmstrong8]

I think it's understandable with Jack in RDR1 as it's an older game and the first time they had you switching to a new protagonist, and having some similarities/shared parts of the character model is more acceptable in comparison to the level of detail in the rest of the game. Plus there was no existing adult Jack in that game or any other to use or base it on. And you don't have any real missions as him or play as him for a significant amount of the story, so it's more understandable to devote less time to his development.

 

In RDR2 it's unforgivable though. With the level of detail in the rest of the game and already having a version of John you played as in RDR1 and a version of him already in RDR2 before the epilogue to work off, there's really no excuse for them creating his model so poorly as "Arthur Marston".

 

On 5/11/2022 at 8:20 PM, TheOriginalGunslinger said:

Jack grew on me over the years. Hated him at first but decided to save some Stranger missions for him after the events of Red Dead Redemption.

 

During my playthroughs I end up turning Jack into a murderous character. The stuff John and Abigail worried about him being when he got older.

 

His voice annoys me but it makes sense from a story perspective for him to be angry like that so I deal with it, and definitely helps to save some stranger missions and other tasks for him to do.

 

I like to do the same thing! Play with perfect honour as John but once Jack kills Ross he snaps and goes on rampages and takes revenge on every lawman in the US. Has minimum honour and racks up a nice big US bounty then hides out in Mexico where he behaves himself. When he visits the US his home is Thieves' Landing and he goes across the map on the low honour "Dark Horse" causing more trouble and fighting the marshals and bounty hunters that come after him before heading back to Mexico to hang out playing poker and liars dice. Suits Jack well to be low honour and it's a nice contrast to playing as John that way.

 

Another option is to go even more legitimate than John and just become a full time hunter, collecting loads of valuable meat and skins in West Elizabeth and travelling to Mexico to sell them (I'm a big fan of hunting in this game so I enjoy that). Either way you get a bit of a different experience to playing as John and it makes the Jack part worthwhile.

Edited May 13 by billiejoearmstrong8

[Looser3241]

I do agree that playing as Jack sucked. Mostly cause i'm not a big fan of his V.A, like, he was fine as teenager jack, but it feels really off in grown up Jack (yes, i know only 3 years passed, but still). 

 

Even though I wanted to play as Arthur in the epilogue, and yes, they really botched John's model (Arthur Marston/John Morgan) I absolutely love how the epilogue ties in both game's stories. Also, there's ton of content for John that gives him being a playable character meaning. 2 Full chapters and stranger missions, something that was lacking for Jack. My final reason is that i can live with Abigail and Jack as a family in red dead 2, something that you're denied in the first rdr.

Edited May 13 by Looser3241

[TheOriginalGunslinger]

6 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Another option is to go even more legitimate than John and just become a full time hunter, collecting loads of valuable meat and skins in West Elizabeth and travelling to Mexico to sell them (I'm a big fan of hunting in this game so I enjoy that). Either way you get a bit of a different experience to playing as John and it makes the Jack part worthwhile.

Definitely gonna do another playthrough and do this. 

[Deadman2112]

I wasn't a fan of playing as Jack in rdr1 because it seemed to directly contradict the person they portrayed him to be. Jack and John clearly had a difference of opinion when it came to such things as morality and worldviews but I also understand that it was done so we could continue playing and exploring beyond the story.

It certainly would not have fallen within the definition of "Open World" had it not offered this.

 

But then again maybe Dutch's story is a testament to this.

Meaning people are either not who they portray themselves as or perhaps circumstances drive them to become what they become.

 

With that said, I really had no issues playing as John in rdr2 and could honestly care less about his hair, because he was wanted by the law. I always kind of felt like it was more of a disguise.

It seems to me that people in that era truly believed they could just vanish and become someone else.

John was clearly under this delusion to an extent.

Maybe it had more to do with Abigail delusion than John's but John obviously tried to appease this ideology.

 

But at the same time I will say that it obviously worked for some.

Take Otis Miller for example.

It seems that very few even realize that we the players killed him, and his son.

 

More info in the spoiler tags if you're interested.

Spoiler

(If your not sure what I'm referring to, you can find the answers in this video.)

 

 

(If you need a more detailed explanation of why he is definitely Otis Miller. And why the Campfire Song doesn't contradict this but actually strengthens this argument. Then you can find that in the comments section of that video. In a nutshell The Campfire Song is basically telling you that yes Charles Tatum killed Otis but only 

in a metaphorical sense because Otis changed his name to Charles Tatum)

 

It is rather ironic though, that out of that entire bunch of Outlaws we kill, the only one we don't put a bullet in is Black Belle.

I still wonder why that is?

I don't remember seeing her in rdr1.

 

Unless LOL she ended up being the old lady near the church just outside of Armadillo. But if that were true then it would mean the guy she was looking for named Pet was actually Frank Heck AKA Frank Miller. Otis's brother.

(Not sure what I mean about black Bell and

Frank heck? Info can be found in the Penny Dreadful book.

Not sure what I mean by Frank hack being Frank Miller. You can find Clues to his identity in the newspaper article about Otis Miller Jr)

 

The side mission I'm referring to from rdr1 was titled let no man put asunder.

Or something close to that.

 

I will say she certainly has the same hair style.

 

But that voice and the lack of accent.

I don't know.

...that might be a bit of a stretch.

Especially when you consider how accurate they've been with everything.

 

I mean when you truly see the truth behind it 

you recognize how genius all of this is and I still say that in spite of the flaws.

 

Not trying to come off as a fanboy but...

Hats off Rockstar.

Truly an amazing story and far deeper than most comprehend.

And that's truly saying a lot because the story itself has obviously reached people with the amazing character building you folks have done.

 

Edited May 25 by Deadman2112

[GettinMeMallet1810]

the fact that they went through the effort to shrink my horses testicles but couldnt even give John his own puking voice file (which is already in the game) is so baffling. They focus their energy on the dumbest things 

[Drimes]

4 hours ago, GettinMeMallet1810 said:

the fact that they went through the effort to shrink my horses testicles but couldnt even give John his own puking voice file (which is already in the game) is so baffling. They focus their energy on the dumbest things 

I found out about that a few days ago. I ate common bulrush as John and his throwing up audio was Arthurs. I was like ''what the hell?''. I think John Marston in the epilogue was severely rushed. However, I think that the alleged next gen port of RDR2 will fix this. There's also talk about a RDR remake, they can just take the John Marston from that and put it in the RDR2 epilogue. But then again, these projects are rumors for now. Here's hoping for the best.

[GettinMeMallet1810]

11 hours ago, Drimes said:

I found out about that a few days ago. I ate common bulrush as John and his throwing up audio was Arthurs. I was like ''what the hell?''. I think John Marston in the epilogue was severely rushed. However, I think that the alleged next gen port of RDR2 will fix this. There's also talk about a RDR remake, they can just take the John Marston from that and put it in the RDR2 epilogue. But then again, these projects are rumors for now. Here's hoping for the best.

we shouldnt even be waiting on some unconfirmed port just for rockstar to show one of its best characters some respect. But hey, modern rockstar gunna rockstar

[Edward RDRIII]

19 hours ago, Drimes said:

I found out about that a few days ago. I ate common bulrush as John and his throwing up audio was Arthurs. I was like ''what the hell?''. I think John Marston in the epilogue was severely rushed. However, I think that the alleged next gen port of RDR2 will fix this. There's also talk about a RDR remake, they can just take the John Marston from that and put it in the RDR2 epilogue. But then again, these projects are rumors for now. Here's hoping for the best.

Hopefully they do that, poor John is waiting almost half a decade already now to be fixed.