What didn't you like about RDR2?

[Lemoyne outlaw]

9 hours ago, Emmi said:

Ye, that is simply stupid and immersion breaking as hell if all of a sudden you go off the horse and two rifles magically appear on Arthur's back.

it would have been better if arthur had a rifle scabbard like john does in rdr2. and you should have one on your horse too. it's so annoying when you put a rifle on your horse. and arthur just puts the rifle in an invisible spot on the horse. it's funny because bill has one for his horse. and in missions you can see his rifle sitting in it. but we as the player can't have it. that's so stupid how an npc has a feature that we don't.

 

[Dick Justice]

I think too much of RDR2's story takes place in Lemoyne, the smallest and "least-Western" of all five states. It's the state you're camped in chapter 3, 4, and half of 5. Don't get me wrong, it makes sense considering the story, but I hope in the future we get more cliched western settings like New Austin and Neuvo Paraiso. It's why I want Rockstar's game after GTA VI to be RDR3 – a western set in Western states like the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, California, Utah, Nevada and Arizona. 

[billiejoearmstrong8]

On 7/19/2024 at 2:47 AM, Dick Justice said:

I think too much of RDR2's story takes place in Lemoyne, the smallest and "least-Western" of all five states. It's the state you're camped in chapter 3, 4, and half of 5. Don't get me wrong, it makes sense considering the story, but I hope in the future we get more cliched western settings like New Austin and Neuvo Paraiso. It's why I want Rockstar's game after GTA VI to be RDR3 – a western set in Western states like the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, California, Utah, Nevada and Arizona. 

Yeah that's so weird. They should at least have made that state much bigger if they wanted to set so much of the story in it. There's tons of side missions there too.

[Crowhazard]

I'm sure it's already been said but I don't like that weird pause Arthur and John will do just before starting an animation. Like they have to be in a particular spot for it to play out properly without breaking something. I hope GTA VI's animation system is more fluid and doesn't have that weird baggage attached to it. 

Edited August 23, 2024 by Crowhazard

[Lemoyne outlaw]

On 8/23/2024 at 10:18 AM, Crowhazard said:

I'm sure it's already been said but I don't like that weird pause Arthur and John will do just before starting an animation. Like they have to be in a particular spot for it to play out properly without breaking something. I hope GTA VI's animation system is more fluid and doesn't have that weird baggage attached to it. 

can you give an example to this? i don't recall any problems with the animations. 

[Crowhazard]

21 hours ago, Lemoyne outlaw said:

can you give an example to this? i don't recall any problems with the animations. 

Not got a clip on me but for example in chapter 6 when you're blowing up the bridge with dynamite, Arthur does an unnatural 'slide' into position when he's planting each one. It's really weird. But it's not just there, a lot of the actions you take as Arthur and John as a whole have this weird sliding motion as well. 

[Lemoyne outlaw]

25 minutes ago, Crowhazard said:

Not got a clip on me but for example in chapter 6 when you're blowing up the bridge with dynamite, Arthur does an unnatural 'slide' into position when he's planting each one. It's really weird. But it's not just there, a lot of the actions you take as Arthur and John as a whole have this weird sliding motion as well. 

oh yea i think i know what you mean now. i never thought much about it. but i can see how it can be off putting. 

[Silver]

I'm currently doing another playthrough and I think the weather system is the most inconsistent I've seen from a R* game, I don't know if it's glitched somehow but I find it baffling at times.

 

I don't know why it keeps happening but there are time when the sky is bright and clear and suddenly giant clouds come out of nowhere and cover the whole sky in a matter of seconds. Weirdly enough, when it inevitably begins to rain, the rain only lasts like a minute tops, then the sky goes back to being bright and clear again as if nothing happened. It's super strange and it happens rather often, at least often enough for me to notice a pattern. I find it frustrating and immersion-breaking, especially when I want to enjoy the rain and/or the thunderstorms but the whole thing lasts barely enough for me appreciate the atmosphere. I already find in-game days to be too short so this weather behavior kinda ruins the experience a bit. It breaks my suspension of disbelief and gives me the feeling that the game is adapting its weather for me rather than changing it naturally and making the world feel more alive and real.

 

I don't know what causes this but I wonder if moving around and unintentionally crossing state borders lead to this sort of behavior. I remember recently I was about to call it a day and it began raining heavily, I decided to keep playing for a little longer and stayed where I was looking around and enjoying the moment, and surprisingly it kept raining for as long as I played until I decided to quit the game. So I know it's possible for the weather to stay as it is for longer than a minute, but like I said I was on foot and just walked around the same area I already was when it started raining so I don't know if it had an effect on it.

[Agent Edward]

3 hours ago, Legomanarthur said:

I'm currently doing another playthrough and I think the weather system is the most inconsistent I've seen from a R* game, I don't know if it's glitched somehow but I find it baffling at times.

 

I don't know why it keeps happening but there are time when the sky is bright and clear and suddenly giant clouds come out of nowhere and cover the whole sky in a matter of seconds. Weirdly enough, when it inevitably begins to rain, the rain only lasts like a minute tops, then the sky goes back to being bright and clear again as if nothing happened. It's super strange and it happens rather often, at least often enough for me to notice a pattern. I find it frustrating and immersion-breaking, especially when I want to enjoy the rain and/or the thunderstorms but the whole thing lasts barely enough for me appreciate the atmosphere. I already find in-game days to be too short so this weather behavior kinda ruins the experience a bit. It breaks my suspension of disbelief and gives me the feeling that the game is adapting its weather for me rather than changing it naturally and making the world feel more alive and real.

 

I don't know what causes this but I wonder if moving around and unintentionally crossing state borders lead to this sort of behavior. I remember recently I was about to call it a day and it began raining heavily, I decided to keep playing for a little longer and stayed where I was looking around and enjoying the moment, and surprisingly it kept raining for as long as I played until I decided to quit the game. So I know it's possible for the weather to stay as it is for longer than a minute, but like I said I was on foot and just walked around the same area I already was when it started raining so I don't know if it had an effect on it.

The weather effects of RDR2 are both beautiful and horribly implemented at the same time, everything you mentioned annoyed me since day one.

[Silver]

10 hours ago, Agent Edward said:

The weather effects of RDR2 are both beautiful and horribly implemented at the same time, everything you mentioned annoyed me since day one.

Interesting, I wasn't sure if the weather system was already like that when the game came out as I only started playing the game when it came out on PC, I just assumed recent patches had somehow messed it up. It's quite strange because I can't think of a single R* game that has a weather system this erratic, even GTA III's weather system is more natural and consistent.

 

It's not a big deal per se but once you notice it you can no longer ignore it.

[JetNormalGuy]

16 hours ago, Legomanarthur said:

I don't know what causes this but I wonder if moving around and unintentionally crossing state borders lead to this sort of behavior.

I also came to the same conclusion, everytime you enter a town/settlement or go back to camp or cross from one border to the other the weather changes, I once was able to make and stop rain 4 times in a row by running in and out of Emerald Ranch, no idea how this exactly works because its not consistent but im 100% sure that there are triggers that force the game to change the weather instantly.

[Jisoo]

On 8/27/2024 at 9:54 PM, Legomanarthur said:

I don't know what causes this but I wonder if moving around and unintentionally crossing state borders lead to this sort of behavior. I remember recently I was about to call it a day and it began raining heavily, I decided to keep playing for a little longer and stayed where I was looking around and enjoying the moment, and surprisingly it kept raining for as long as I played until I decided to quit the game. So I know it's possible for the weather to stay as it is for longer than a minute, but like I said I was on foot and just walked around the same area I already was when it started raining so I don't know if it had an effect on it.

I noticed when doing tasks for 100% like hunting for small birds, and I would walk around in circles or back and forth trying to get them to spawn/respawn. When it began to rain, it would never really stop. Or it atleast would last so long that I was done in the area before it went away. The only reason I remember it is because rain is kind of annoying when hunting small birds because it obscures the vision a bit

 

It could be something weird going on with traveling. Its not uncommon for a storm to just last a minute before going away again. That wont happen in missions since most of them are weather and/or time-locked though

[Evil.Tim]

I did a new playthrough mostly to test out my new PC and see this game in its full glory. It delivered on the graphics as expected, but I was reminded of how many little annoyances this game is filled with. I completed John's last mission just minutes ago and just in that one mission many of the things I dislike about the game came up:

• When chasing Cleet in Strawberry, the lasso is "disabled". You can equip it but trying to use it on Cleet, it just goes through him. Why? Because a super cinematic setpiece needs to happen at the end of the chase where Sadie catches him so your input basically amounts to nothing. You're just holding the W key. The lasso disabling happens pretty often in missions.
• While riding up the mountain for the final showdown, I preselect the weapons I want to use in the fight. When the sniper shoots Charles and I run to cover, I discover that the weapons I selected are gone and I only have my sidearms with me. The game is constantly shuffling the weapons around with no input from the player. This system is borderline broken.
• I try to whistle for my horse so I can get my weapons back, but the whistle button is disabled for this scene and the horse has despawned.
• I restart the checkpoint but the game saved after getting off the horse, with only my sidearms equipped
• I use the console to give myself the bolt action rifle because f*ck restarting the entire mission just to get a long rifle
• I shoot the sniper, the sniper is invincible. I headshot him 10 times and the hits are registering but he is taking no damage. Why? Again, super cinematic setpiece needs to happen! The game wants you to run from cover to cover, but all my immersion is ruined at this point and I'm just rolling my eyes at the game.
• While fighting towards Micah's camp, the game takes control away from you again so that the cutscene can play out where the guy stabs Sadie. Again, another moment where the game basically plays itself.
• During the final approach to the camp several enemies are spawned behind you in areas you have already cleared. One of the guys jumps you from behind. This is supposed to raise tension but it just breaks immersion because it's obvious the guys are being spawned from thin air
• The final fight with Micah is basically just a cutscene. No challenge whatsoever, shooting him does nothing and John auto-covers and it's just yet another instance of the game playing itself.
• The standoff with Micah and Dutch with you pressing A then D then A then D is just a silly handling of controls. In a game where one of the main means of interaction is aiming your gun, it doesn't even trust you to do that and instead gives you two buttons to press in what is again basically a cutscene
• The final scene of the mission with Micah tanking headshots to kill and then still walking away a few feet after being shot in the head 6 times will never not be stupid

All of this in just one mission. Sure you could say I'm being very nitpicky with some of these, but they do add up throughout a playthrough. Some missions are far worse offenders than others, and the final mission is in my opinion particularly bad in this regard. I really hope GTAVI brings a much needed update to Rockstar's mission design. The game absolutely shines with its open world but the missions are so often disappointing because they play themselves so much of the time.

[Lemoyne outlaw]

57 minutes ago, Evil.Tim said:

I use the console to give myself the bolt action rifle because f*ck restarting the entire mission just to get a long rifle

you could have just picked up a rifle from an npc.

[Evil.Tim]

40 minutes ago, Lemoyne outlaw said:

you could have just picked up a rifle from an npc.

I had my bolt action all nice and shiny for the mission, not sure how commonly those are found on enemies, but I'd imagine it's mostly low-grade lever actions.

[Jisoo]

Theres probably some kind of scripting going on in every mission in RDR2 where Rockstar locks you out of certain actions because they want the mission to be on-rails in certain moments. 

Whats sort of ironic is that the moments they create with this scripting is what makes some of the missions really good, but youre kind of just playing out linear scenarios Rockstar made for the player

 

And yea, the weapon removal thing is really dumb and it happpens all the time.

Edited October 4, 2024 by Jisoo

[Silver]

11 hours ago, Jisoo said:

And yea, the weapon removal thing is really dumb and it happpens all the time.

I hate when the game puts your rifles on your saddle in freeroam too, especially when you enter a town or a city like Saint Denis and you have to manually select them back every single time you get off your horse or leave the area. That sh*t makes me paranoid, I constantly need to check if I have the right weapons on me while traveling in case I get attacked by a wild animal or get ambushed by a gang, it's really annoying.

 

I've never seen a game fighting against the player as much as this one for the sake of... immersion? I don't even know if that's a good enough reason when it's about something as (seemingly) minor as keeping your rifles on your back. Why would Arthur or John bother removing their weapons when entering a crowded place? Sure they may look conspicuous but they're outlaws, it's not like they'd care, and it's not like the game cares either as npcs don't react to the player carrying their rifles on their back. And when a single interaction can quickly lead to a city-wide gunfight, I think they'd rather be over-equipped than the opposite. I feel this reasoning works for both immersion and gameplay.

 

I haven't played RDR1 in a long, long time so I don't remember if that was a thing back then but I wish the game had an accessibility option to remedy this at the very least.

[ribon]

A couple of things.

• Weapon removal when on horse. Very annoying to hop off the horse thinking you have a rifle equipped, only to realise you only have the revolver when you're already in the middle of the fight.
• Slow crafting/cooking. I mean, I know you can't exactly cook an entire pig on such a small fire, but cooking every piece of meat 1 after 1? Come on.
• Stupid horse who would trip on a pebble if given the chance.
• Not revealing what the gold requirements are for each mission BEFORE or DURING the mission, but only AFTER you have completed it (and, of course, failed the gold requirements).
• Sadie. I tried. I really, really, really tried. Hard. But that character is just unlikeable, annoying and generally unbelievable. The strong "Mary Sue" vibes and the forced southern accent are really off-putting.
• Gambler challenge. Because nothing is more challenging than having to rely completely and solely on luck.
• Too long animations when looting corpses.
• Unskippable long travel on horse.

[Jisoo]

I feel like the challenges were made in one day by some random dude at the office. Some are pretty cool, some are extremely easy, others are unfairly hard and some are just straight up frustrating randomness. Gambler 8 is definitely the worst one there. Atleast with the other gambler challenges you can cheese them, like always go all-in during poker over and over, or quit the game to keep the winning streak in dominoes when you notice you can lose the game

 

Having to keep track of what kind of plants youre missing in a notepad or something for the "pick all plants" challenge is kinda dumb

 

The ones that make you do things you normally wouldnt in the game is cool though. Crafting different ammo types, sell stolen horses and season meat is rarely done, but you have to in other to get 100% and I dont mind that

Edited October 12, 2024 by Jisoo

[Lemoyne outlaw]

7 hours ago, ribon said:

A couple of things.

• Slow crafting/cooking. I mean, I know you can't exactly cook an entire pig on such a small fire, but cooking every piece of meat 1 after 1? Come on
• Sadie. I tried. I really, really, really tried. Hard. But that character is just unlikeable, annoying and generally unbelievable. The strong "Mary Sue" vibes and the forced southern accent are really off-putting.

the crafting thing was amended in red dead online. you can cook 3 meats at once. too bad they didn't add it to singleplayer though.

 

yes i also tried to like sadie. she does have some good moments in the game. but they are few and far between. (most of them are in the epilogue.)  it's so obvious that she was added because of all the complaints about rockstars female characters being weak stereotypical women. even though that is the furthest from the truth. when she saw colm hang. that wasn't enough for her. she had to kill more Odriscoll's. she even got arturo the hot air balloon guy killed. and she has no development. she goes from crying and being sad one day. the next day she's threatening pearson and wanting to act tough. she feels like bonnie macfarlane mixed with micahs love for killing. which is funny since she hates micah. yet she does exactly what micah is hated for which is killing. she is one of the worst rockstar characters ever. i really hope lucia from gta 6 will be nothing like sadie.

[ribon]

13 hours ago, Lemoyne outlaw said:

the crafting thing was amended in red dead online. you can cook 3 meats at once. too bad they didn't add it to singleplayer though.

 

yes i also tried to like sadie. she does have some good moments in the game. but they are few and far between. (most of them are in the epilogue.)  it's so obvious that she was added because of all the complaints about rockstars female characters being weak stereotypical women. even though that is the furthest from the truth. when she saw colm hang. that wasn't enough for her. she had to kill more Odriscoll's. she even got arturo the hot air balloon guy killed. and she has no development. she goes from crying and being sad one day. the next day she's threatening pearson and wanting to act tough. she feels like bonnie macfarlane mixed with micahs love for killing. which is funny since she hates micah. yet she does exactly what micah is hated for which is killing. she is one of the worst rockstar characters ever. i really hope lucia from gta 6 will be nothing like sadie.

 

See, this is what I don't get. "Weak" in what way exactly? In RDR2 alone you've got Susan Grimshaw who, let's face it, is alone responsible for the functioning of a very dysfunctional camp that's always on the run and low on provisions. Her voice is hard, firm, and her very character is exactly what you would expect from a leader. Without a character like that, that camp would have fallen to pieces in the mountains already. Not to mention her actions when Tilly was abducted in Shady Belle.

 

Then there's Black Belle, another female character whose leadership skills are evident in the first ten seconds alone.

 

With Sadie it feels like I'm looking at a 10 year old spoiled brat who didn't get any attention as a child and now wants to play "pew pew" to prove to the grown-ups that she is not a child anymore. Even though she was (supposedly) a farmhand who shared all tasks with her husband before he died, it's just unbelievable and unrealistic that a person, male or female, goes from a simple farmhand to one of the best gunslingers in the West in just a couple of months. I mean, come on. Her screeching and downright childish voice contributes a lot to this, and the fake southern accent and constant shouting for no reason whatsoever just make everything worse.

 

By far the best female character for me is Charlotte Balfour. When we meet her, she is grieving her husband's death as she suddenly becomes a widow (just like Sadie did at the start of the game). However, unlike Sadie who overnight and out of nowhere suddenly received superpowers and could shoot guards with pinpoint accuracy hundreds of meters away, Charlotte is a down to earth character who obviously doesn't have the first clue about hunting and shooting. She progressively learns those skills as the game progresses and is finally able to hold her own. Not nearly one of the best gunslingers in the West (because this would have taken any person years to master, male or female), but skillful enough to be independent in the wild.

 

But yes, with these modern games you can't shake the feeling they're adding all these "strong" women in there just to satisfy an agenda, completely oblivious to the fact there's a very fine line between being "strong" and being "annoying". Sadie's character is most definitely annoying and far from being strong.

[Lemoyne outlaw]

27 minutes ago, ribon said:

 

See, this is what I don't get. "Weak" in what way exactly? In RDR2 alone you've got Susan Grimshaw who, let's face it, is alone responsible for the functioning of a very dysfunctional camp that's always on the run and low on provisions. Her voice is hard, firm, and her very character is exactly what you would expect from a leader. Without a character like that, that camp would have fallen to pieces in the mountains already. Not to mention her actions when Tilly was abducted in Shady Belle.

 

Then there's Black Belle, another female character whose leadership skills are evident in the first ten seconds alone.

 

With Sadie it feels like I'm looking at a 10 year old spoiled brat who didn't get any attention as a child and now wants to play "pew pew" to prove to the grown-ups that she is not a child anymore. Even though she was (supposedly) a farmhand who shared all tasks with her husband before he died, it's just unbelievable and unrealistic that a person, male or female, goes from a simple farmhand to one of the best gunslingers in the West in just a couple of months. I mean, come on. Her screeching and downright childish voice contributes a lot to this, and the fake southern accent and constant shouting for no reason whatsoever just make everything worse.

 

By far the best female character for me is Charlotte Balfour. When we meet her, she is grieving her husband's death as she suddenly becomes a widow (just like Sadie did at the start of the game). However, unlike Sadie who overnight and out of nowhere suddenly received superpowers and could shoot guards with pinpoint accuracy hundreds of meters away, Charlotte is a down to earth character who obviously doesn't have the first clue about hunting and shooting. She progressively learns those skills as the game progresses and is finally able to hold her own. Not nearly one of the best gunslingers in the West (because this would have taken any person years to master, male or female), but skillful enough to be independent in the wild.

 

But yes, with these modern games you can't shake the feeling they're adding all these "strong" women in there just to satisfy an agenda, completely oblivious to the fact there's a very fine line between being "strong" and being "annoying". Sadie's character is most definitely annoying and far from being strong.

yes exactly. rockstar has proven time and time again that they can make strong women characters. without the need to be crazy over the top. off the top of my head we have elizabeta torres, michelle/karen, bonnie macfarlane, luisa fortuna, and of course the ones you mentioned. and not every woman in the world is built to live that way either. so it's realistic to have some damsel in distress types in the games too. but in this day and age. it seems like so many games and movies have to have so many of these tough burly women for some stupid reason. abby from the last of us is even more proof. 

[Jisoo]

My annoyance with Sadie is her being extremely irrational at some points, like not going inside the house when Odriscolls attack Shady Belle and endanger Arthur who has to step outside to check in on her, or making a mess in Saint Denis when Colm is hanged, and also indirectly killing the air ballon dude. As in, Im guessing part of why Sadie can be disliked is not because shes a woman (although theres some people who just hates women as a default, Ive first hand experience there), but because her actions are pretty dumb. The same would be said if you swapped her for Davey or another guy. You can make arguments against any character who is flawed in the game though so while its very reckless, I dont see it as bad or forced writing. It depends on what each player likes and appreciate I suppose. Sadie being kind of insane adds to her charm for me, sort of how Bill being dumb is something I dont mind, and how Micahs evilness is a trait the game benefits a lot from

 

I think Rockstar just wanted a girl to be a very important part of the game and one who can actually really fight. Black Belle is the obvious exception here in terms of the "fighting part" but her role is so small, and I would have loved to see more of her

 

Kind of rambling here but it got me thinking about the other girls. Karen has a weapon and only fires it during the Valentine bank robbery, and Susan shoots at the dudes who kidnapped Tilly during the chase + stabs a dude. Then obviously kills Molly. Thats it, unless Im forgetting something. Hell, they bring Mary Beth with them to rob a coach and she doesnt even get a weapon to defend herself.

 

Maybe having Sadie as an integral part of the gang from prior to the game would be "better" in some way, maybe how Jenny was, but Sadie isnt really some random ranch hand either who has no experience with weapons as is seen in Online and the way she talks of her time prior to 1899. If suddenly Mary decided to go ham on a bunch of people in chapter 6 then yea, it would be very out of place

 

 

Edited October 13, 2024 by Jisoo

[ribon]

45 minutes ago, Jisoo said:

My annoyance with Sadie is her being extremely irrational at some points, like not going inside the house when Odriscolls attack Shady Belle and endanger Arthur who has to step outside to check in on her, or making a mess in Saint Denis when Colm is hanged, and also indirectly killing the air ballon dude. As in, Im guessing part of why Sadie can be disliked is not because shes a woman (although theres some people who just hates women as a default, Ive first hand experience there), but because her actions are pretty dumb. The same would be said if you swapped her for Davey or another guy. You can make arguments against any character who is flawed in the game though so while its very reckless, I dont see it as bad or forced writing. It depends on what each player likes and appreciate I suppose. Sadie being kind of insane adds to her charm for me, sort of how Bill being dumb is something I dont mind, and how Micahs evilness is a trait the game benefits a lot from

 

I think Rockstar just wanted a girl to be a very important part of the game and one who can actually really fight. Black Belle is the obvious exception here in terms of the "fighting part" but her role is so small, and I would have loved to see more of her

 

Kind of rambling here but it got me thinking about the other girls. Karen has a weapon and only fires it during the Valentine bank robbery, and Susan shoots at the dudes who kidnapped Tilly during the chase + stabs a dude. Then obviously kills Molly. Thats it, unless Im forgetting something. Hell, they bring Mary Beth with them to rob a coach and she doesnt even get a weapon to defend herself.

 

Maybe having Sadie as an integral part of the gang from prior to the game would be "better" in some way, maybe how Jenny was, but Sadie isnt really some random ranch hand either who has no experience with weapons as is seen in Online and the way she talks of her time prior to 1899. If suddenly Mary decided to go ham on a bunch of people in chapter 6 then yea, it would be very out of place

 

 

 

I've no problem with her being a woman. I've a problem with the execution of her character. Like I said, her accent is obviously forced and a huge annoyance, and her character development is just not believable. At all. And I wouldn't call her insane, more like tryharding at acting all grown up with a child-like mind.

 

Yes, R* apparently wanted to have an important female role, and this is where most companies screw up big time. Instead of focusing on the actual character, their only focus is that the character needs to be a woman. That's their only priority, everything else is meh.

 

Personally, her terrible voiceover (forced accent) kills it for me. This is partly why I can't for the love of me watch Inglorious Basterds until the end, I just can't stand Brad Pitt's forced accent.

Edited October 13, 2024 by ribon

[Silver]

I don't mind Sadie too much but I agree that her character going from a mourning rancher to a bloodthirsty killer wasn't handled super well.

 

If anything I think we needed more scenes with her, like Arthur and others teaching her how to shoot, how to hunt, then to rob and get her own scores, y'know, stuff that'd make her a proper member of the gang. Arthur training Charlotte is what I would've liked to see for Sadie but on a bigger scale.

 

She's kind of a wasted character in my opinion. She spends the entirety of Chapter 2 mourning her husband then once you go get groceries in Chapter 3 she's now become the expert marksman (markswoman?) that we see for the remainder of the game. Not to mention that she's kinda just there, she guards the camp, wants to kill O'Driscolls and that's pretty much it. Not counting her role in the Epilogue, she's not really involved in anything meaningful other than Colm's hanging and John and Abigail's rescues. She doesn't seem to have much opinion on Dutch's descent into madness either, instead when the time comes, she's automatically by Arthur's side which I kinda get but at the same time it feels like she's on the good side at the end only because she has to, for some reason. I don't know, she becomes a member of the gang from the very beginning of the game but at the same time she seems oddly uninvolved in it if that makes any sense.

 

A part of me wishes they had done something else with her character. With Arthur and John we know they've been part of the gang for a long time and are loyal to Dutch from the start of the game, but the point of Arthur's story is how he slowly becomes disillusioned with Dutch's antics and the life he's led. How interesting would it have been to see from Arthur's perspective how someone new and easily impressionable like Sadie, joining the gang after experiencing intense trauma, ends up becoming a fervent believer in Dutch's cause right around the time he's actually becoming more and more reckless? Her being at her lowest point would be the perfect opportunity for Dutch to advantage of, showing her only his good side by taking her under his wing, making her a part of this tight-knit family, and having her do his bidding all the while older and wiser members like Arthur and Hosea start noticing the cracks in his persona. I think there's an interesting parallel to be found here between the old and the new guard in a time when the outlaw lifestyle becomes increasingly more perilous.

 

By the end she could've stayed in Dutch's camp and opposed Arthur and John or leave the gang altogether, her story could've gone any other direction and feel much more relevant that it does now if she had a proper role in it to begin with.

[Mysterious hero]

The problem I have with Sadie is that she lacks flaws.

 

"But what are you talking about? She does have flaws! She's reckless, she's always angry, she's sad, etc"

 

The problem is, those don't actually affect the characters in any negative way. They're fake flaws. At most, there's short-term consequences like her getting stabbed (which she quickly heals from), starting a shootout (that only last for a few minutes and doesn't burden the rest of the gang with heat from law enforcement), or getting a innocent man killed (with Arthur criticizing her and her just shrugging it off being framed in somewhat darkly comedic manner).

There's no tangible, long-term consequences for her actions.

 

As a simple example, if her behavior during Further Questions of Female Suffrage (lunging at Pearson, reading his mail while mocking him, almost robbing the store, verbally abusing the worker) actually caused Arthur to dislike her, that would be something. But instead, after this mission, Arthur refers to her in his journal as a "fine, good hearted woman". 

He clearly wrote that with one hand down his britches, but that's besides the point. 

 

Not only is Sadie treated as infallible by the characters, but by the game's mechanics as well. If you refuse to help her with her revenge of Mrs. Sadie Adler, Widow, you get negative karma... despite the game telling you that revenge is a fool's game.

People have come up with lame excuses like "She was going to get herself killed without Arthur's help" or "Revenge is a fool's game, but her revenge was justified!"

 

But what I think happened is that the creators really liked her character and did not want to force anymore hardships on her after her husband was killed. The quality of writing, however, suffered as a result. 

[ribon]

Well I'm now playing the epilogues and is it me or has the voiceover got even worse? She pronounces John as "Jauhn", every third word is pronounced through the teeth... Where in the world did they find her voice actor???

[Zeta87]

I've been disappointed that the only two options for the avances of prostitutes were 'decline' and 'reject.' This whole thing about Arthur never accepting the prostitutes' offers because he was always thinking of Mary never really convinced me, and it feels more like a joke. It's not a real choice: 'Decline' or 'Reject' - pick between no and no, really?

[The-Ghost]

I echo what was said above about Sadie's accent, it always sounded very fake to me.

Here's Black Belle, she's badass without having to force an accent.

[suika_]

On 10/16/2024 at 8:05 AM, Zeta87 said:

I've been disappointed that the only two options for the avances of prostitutes were 'decline' and 'reject.' This whole thing about Arthur never accepting the prostitutes' offers because he was always thinking of Mary never really convinced me, and it feels more like a joke. It's not a real choice: 'Decline' or 'Reject' - pick between no and no, really?

Arthur accepting prostitutes offers' would be wildly out of character, that's why. Not only has he not moved on from Mary, but there's also Eliza to consider. His time with Eliza resulted in his personality changing massively as a result of what happened, him risking that same situation again would be kind of contradictory. I think that's pretty solid reasoning, personally. He's just not that type of person anymore.