KyoZz
Tag, you're it.
Imagine believing Elliot & Abby have something on Arthur Morgan.
...
dude thats a major spoiler. I am yet to play the game.. wtf
EDIT.. spoiler thread.. FML
I'm sorry for you
Last edited:
Imagine believing Elliot & Abby have something on Arthur Morgan.
dude thats a major spoiler. I am yet to play the game.. wtf
EDIT.. spoiler thread.. FML
Exactly this for meThe last of us 2 story was a mess. To bad cause it was a well put together game other wise. It’s like they knew it was fucked so they chopped it up and made you play it out of order to try and hide the fact that it didn’t make sense.
RDR was just great.
The manner of Arthur's death was really tragic for me, as I got the "bad ending" and I just couldn't believe that R* would let that piece of shit Micah win. Got to give R* major props for doing that. Brought a tear to my eye, no cap.
The leaks killed Joel's death. If that happened in game we'd be talking about it completely differently.
I agree with this. Guarma stuff was horrendous and I almost dropped the game at that point.Arthur's character is the only thing that made me push through RDR2's uninspiring gameplay.
I disagree with this. I felt playing as John was completely unnecessary. My feelings on this would be different if we got to kill Micah as John instead of Dutch *really* killing him / having a proper Micah boss fight. For R* to take that away from the player was a terrible thing. In truth though, after Arthur's death, I'd have been ok had the game ended there with that sledgehammer to the heart. Would have made for a truly shocking and memorable ending.When he finally dies and you take over as John it was amazing. In fact I thought the whole ending and setup for Red Dead Redemption 1 was done so well. It was amazing. Incredible game.
I agree with this. Guarma stuff was horrendous and I almost dropped the game at that point.
I disagree with this. I felt playing as John was completely unnecessary. My feelings on this would be different if we got to kill Micah as John instead of Dutch killing him. For R* to take that away from the player was a terrible thing. In truth though, after Arthur's death, I'd have been ok had the game ended there with that sledgehammer to the heart. Would have made for a truly shocking and memorable ending.
It's completely different.
From a writing perspective, Arthur's arc is very straightforward. It's the story you've seen told countless times, and gives Arthur the promised redemption in the title, a redemption paid in blood. The only twist here is that instead of Arthur being forced down the redemption path because an external factor, in the case of Joel it's a young girl (also predictable), it's a terminal disease that leads him to confront the man he his and his deeds. He can hear Death's clock ticking, and must choose what kind of man he is willing to be in the final moments of his life. So his death is romanticized, and even though Arthur and John have a very thin relationship as presented in the game story, we the audience are tricked into putting more weight on it on the back that John is the main protagonist of Read Dead Redemption, and we the audience already have a relationship there.
Joel's arc is also very straightforward. Becomes a waste of a man, a shell of his former self, after losing his daughter. Ellie gives him a second lease, an opportunity to become the loving father he once was and redeem himself. Except the twist here is that at the end there's no redemption, no blood sacrifice of his own. Instead a man is unwilling to lose his daughter twice, and he is willing to take "innocent" lives to "save" her, and lie to her about it. It's not that he is wrong in what he does, because there's really no right or wrong there. There are only questions. His death is more powerful, because he is stripped of everything we've come to know about him, he is made defenseless and we the player are made powerless to stop what we know is coming. His death hurts, it doesn't make us sad or filled with pity, it pisses us off and makes us mad and wanting to revolt, to seek revenge.
Joel's death is symbolic of the world he lives in while Arthur's death is a romanticized idea that even a bad man can redeem himself at the end, even through violence. Personally I think TLOU2 did something that is more ambitious, bolder, with more impact. Truer even.
What a joke comparison.
It's like a cooking competition where you compare a rock to a meal.
Tlou2 is not even edible, or palatable.
Killing the main character at the beginning is largely unheard of, and just so they can pander to identity politics is retarded.
That's not story telling, but just a vehicle to promote Neil's/ND politics.
I have no interest in such propaganda.
The final mission with Arthur when he goes back to say thank you to his horse hit like a ton of bricks. Joel’s death was fine but Arthur’s just...damn
RDR2 left me in tears.
TLoU2 left me frustrated.