• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Red Dead Redemption 2 |OT2| For A Few Hours More

okayfrog

okayfrog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,968
Heckler456 said:
I mean, the end of chapter 6 is the climax of the story. You're not going to have something as gripping or profound or meaningful at the end of an epilogue.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But I feel that in retrospect, the epilogue only ends up serving to belittle the climax the climax of the game. Of course, that could be what they were going for, but I feel like they could have done it better. Abigail crying for John not to go, John going, coming back, and then Abigail being like, "Hey, you did it, yay!" just felt... lame. This may sound weird, but it felt like a video game ending, like you defeat the bad guy, and you're congratulated for it and everything's okay. Of course everything's not okay, but for now, everything is okay.
I just feel like Rockstar could have done it better.
 
Heckler456

Heckler456

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,256
Belgium
okayfrog said:
But I feel that in retrospect, the epilogue only ends up serving to belittle the climax the climax of the game. Of course, that could be what they were going for, but I feel like they could have done it better. Abigail crying for John not to go, John going, coming back, and then Abigail being like, "Hey, you did it, yay!" just felt... lame. This may sound weird, but it felt like a video game ending, like you defeat the bad guy, and you're congratulated for it and everything's okay. Of course everything's not okay, but for now, everything is okay.
I just feel like Rockstar could have done it better.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Abigail wasn't like "you did it, yay!". She was relieved John got back home safe, and that everything was over and they could start their life for real now. I mean, I don't know what to tell you, but if the juxtaposition between their temporary happiness and what you know lays looming on the horizon does nothing for you, then I'm gonna have to chalk that up as a you-problem. I don't think they could have executed it any better. Unless you have a better idea?
 
okayfrog

okayfrog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,968
Heckler456 said:
Abigail wasn't like "you did it, yay!". She was relieved John got back home safe, and that everything was over and they could start their life for real now. I mean, I don't know what to tell you, but if the juxtaposition between their temporary happiness and what you know lays looming on the horizon does nothing for you, then I'm gonna have to chalk that up as a you-problem. I don't think they could have executed it any better. Unless you have a better idea?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I guess it's a me problem. Oh well.
 
cb1115

cb1115

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,347
the act of riding from point A to B will never not be a total joy

70+ hours in and the thought of fast traveling in this game is still absurd to me
 
endlessflood

endlessflood

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
8,693
Australia (GMT+10)
okayfrog said:
How did Micah's death lead the feds to him? Honest question. It showed them investigating Micah's death, but it never outright said they found John because of that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I feel like this discussion should be in the spoiler thread. But my take on the RDR2 ending and your question (MAJOR SPOILERS):
They caused a major ruckus in Strawberry immediately prior to taking out Micah, and John could've been identified from that. So they find Micah's body, go digging in the nearest major town, and suddenly they have witnesses describing someone who has John's very distinctive scars.

Another option is that Ross was using Micah to draw out Dutch (they always said they didn't want everybody, they just wanted Dutch): Dutch and Micah seemed to go their separate ways at the end of Chapter 6 (at least in my ending), we know Micah is a rat, and Dutch's line about being there for the same reason as Marston makes me think that maybe Micah had invited him there. That makes Dutch's sudden decision to shoot Micah a lot more plausible to me. John makes a pretty terrible case during that exchange (could've been so much better) otherwise.
 
okayfrog

okayfrog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,968
endlessflood said:
I feel like this discussion should be in the spoiler thread. But my take on the RDR2 ending and your question (MAJOR SPOILERS):
They caused a major ruckus in Strawberry immediately prior to taking out Micah, and John could've been identified from that. So they find Micah's body, go digging in the nearest major town, and suddenly they have witnesses describing someone who has John's very distinctive scars.

Another option is that Ross was using Micah to draw out Dutch (they always said they didn't want everybody, they just wanted Dutch): Dutch and Micah seemed to go their separate ways at the end of Chapter 6 (at least in my ending), we know Micah is a rat, and Dutch's line about being there for the same reason as Marston makes me think that maybe Micah had invited him there. That makes Dutch's sudden decision to shoot Micah a lot more plausible to me. John makes a pretty terrible case during that exchange (could've been so much better) otherwise.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, it feels like Rockstar's intention is that
John's actions with Micah lead to his death. But it felt, I don't know, I just felt if that's how it should have been, that it could have been handled better. I don't know how they could have handled it better if that's what they were going for, though. All I know is that I felt something in most of the epilogue missions, but I didn't feel anything during the last one other than annoyance.
 
Heckler456

Heckler456

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,256
Belgium
okayfrog said:
I already said previously.
John decides to stay at home and you play as Sadie during the mission to take down Micah. I, myself, would have been way more pumped for that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But that would be completely against his character though, wouldn't it? Him staying at home. It's been established throughout the entire epilogue that he just is that kind of person. Even in the very beginning, you hear Arthur's voice going "You need to pick being one person or the other. You can't be both at once.", or something to that effect. The entire epilogue is about the struggle between those two desires. One winning out over the other furthermore sets up the sequel to the game.

I don't think they could have done it any other way. And that they did it this way is proof to me that, yes, they purposefully meant for Arthur's sacrifice to ultimately be meaningless. Which, again, I'm pretty sure is the point of the entire thing: meaningless redemption wrought in blood and death.
 
okayfrog

okayfrog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,968
Heckler456 said:
But that would be completely against his character though, wouldn't it? Him staying at home. It's been established throughout the entire epilogue that he just is that kind of person. Even in the very beginning, you hear Arthur's voice going "You need to pick being one person or the other. You can't be both at once.", or something to that effect. The entire epilogue is about the struggle between those two desires. One winning out over the other furthermore sets up the sequel to the game.

I don't think they could have done it any other way. And that they did it this way is proof to me that, yes, they purposefully meant for Arthur's sacrifice to ultimately be meaningless. Which, again, I'm pretty sure is the point of the entire thing: meaningless redemption wrought in blood and death.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's been a while, but isn't it set up at the beginning of RDR that John's been laying low for the past few years, not being an outlaw, going out killing, nothing like that? It kinda feels like a retcon in a way. Thematically, this whole idea of being unable to escape who one was is what the second game is about, but it doesn't feel like it's what the first game is about, you know? Everything Arthur does in the end is his choice, and he kinda does escape who he was at the end. Then there's this Micah business and it's like, "Oh know, we're throwing that out the window." It just doesn't sit well with me. It didn't work for me. It wasn't effective for me.

EDIT:
That penultimate mission where John takes Abigail on a date and propose hit me good. I remember feeling gut-punched when trying to have Arthur wrap his arm around Mary. Then seeing John successful with it, using Arthur's ring to marry Abigail, ugh. All for nothing.
 
Last edited:
Heckler456

Heckler456

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,256
Belgium
okayfrog said:
It's been a while, but isn't it set up at the beginning of RDR that John's been laying low for the past few years, not being an outlaw, going out killing, nothing like that? It kinda feels like a retcon in a way. Thematically, this whole idea of being unable to escape who one was is what the second game is about, but it doesn't feel like it's what the first game is about, you know? Everything Arthur does in the end is his choice, and he kinda does escape who he was at the end. Then there's this Micah business and it's like, "Oh know, we're throwing that out the window." It just doesn't sit well with me. It didn't work for me. It wasn't effective for me.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There is 4 years between the Feds finding John and them actually using him. So nah, no retcon.

That theme is absolutely what the first game is about as well. John thought he would go hunt down Javier, Bill, and Dutch, and then just move on with his life. That didn't happen though, because he himself was another loose string for the Feds to tie up. His past caught up with him.

Arthur escapes through (impending) death. He doesn't really seek absolution, or to run away from who he was or is. He is forced to accept the consequences of his actions.

As for the "Micah" business, it is the literal instigation of the beginning of the end. A delayed fuse. Not to mention the culmination of everything that went before it. I get that it didn't work for you, but it does work. It makes sense both in a plot perspective, as well as a thematic perspective.
 
okayfrog

okayfrog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,968
Heckler456 said:
There is 4 years between the Feds finding John and them actually using him. So nah, no retcon.

That theme is absolutely what the first game is about as well. John thought he would go hunt down Javier, Bill, and Dutch, and then just move on with his life. That didn't happen though, because he himself was another loose string for the Feds to tie up. His past caught up with him.

Arthur escapes through (impending) death. He doesn't really seek absolution, or to run away from who he was or is. He is forced to accept the consequences of his actions.

As for the "Micah" business, it is the literal instigation of the beginning of the end. A delayed fuse. Not to mention the culmination of everything that went before it. I get that it didn't work for you, but it does work. It makes sense both in a plot perspective, as well as a thematic perspective.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean a retcon in the sense that you get the feeling at the beginning of RDR (again, it's been eight years, I could be wrong) that John has done no wrong since leaving Dutch's group, that he has been an honest man and that his past -- his time with Dutch's group -- has caught up with him. Instead, it turns out that it wasn't his time with Dutch's group that caught up with him. It was what he did after that caught up with him.

And please don't say that it's objective as to whether or not it does work; no need to try and shut down what I have to say. I felt it didn't work. You felt it does. We can both feel differently on this subject and that's okay.
 
Heckler456

Heckler456

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,256
Belgium
okayfrog said:
I mean a retcon in the sense that you get the feeling at the beginning of RDR (again, it's been eight years, I could be wrong) that John has done no wrong since leaving Dutch's group, that he has been an honest man and that his past -- his time with Dutch's group -- has caught up with him. Instead, it turns out that it wasn't his time with Dutch's group that caught up with him. It was what he did after that caught up with him.

And please don't say that it's objective as to whether or not it does work; no need to try and shut down what I have to say. I felt it didn't work. You felt it does. We can both feel differently on this subject and that's okay.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You've stated it didn't work for you "because you didn't feel anything but "you dumbass, John" when going to kill Micah. That doesn't really say anything whatsoever about the validity of the that plot point in terms of whether or not it works in a plot sense or a thematic sense. Something not resonating with an individual isn't really proof-positive of something not working.

And as to your first paragraph: He hadn't done anything wrong since leaving Dutch. Killing Micah, killing those skinners, getting those bounties, killing those guys attacking that ranch: all internally justified. And killing Micah is part of his past catching up with him as well. The point is that it would have always happened. You say that "he should have stayed home and lived happily ever after". But would he? How can you be sure when any number of things could have gone wrong? The point isn't really in which specific way his past caught up to him. It's that it did.
 
okayfrog

okayfrog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,968
Heckler456 said:
You've stated it didn't work for you "because you didn't feel anything but "you dumbass, John" when going to kill Micah. That doesn't really say anything whatsoever about the validity of the that plot point in terms of whether or not it works in a plot sense or a thematic sense. Something not resonating with an individual isn't really proof-positive of something not working.

And as to your first paragraph: He hadn't done anything wrong since leaving Dutch. Killing Micah, killing those skinners, getting those bounties, killing those guys attacking that ranch: all internally justified. And killing Micah is part of his past catching up with him as well. The point is that it would have always happened. You say that "he should have stayed home and lived happily ever after". But would he? How can you be sure when any number of things could have gone wrong? The point isn't really in which specific way his past caught up to him. It's that it did.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It isn't "proof-positive," but nothing really is. It's all subjective. There's no objective proof. That's all there is to that one. Again, I'm looking at it like, "What does Rockstar want me to feel here?" and I guess the answer is I'm supposed to feel pumped up to take out Micah. But it didn't work that way. So we work backwards. Why didn't it work that way? Well that's because everything so far has established that John has changed, that Arthur had an effect on him. Hell, I could even save Micah's friend beforehand only for him to get taken out by Sadie (which, in retrospect, was a really dumb option -- I mean, John would have 100% killed him in that situation, going by what happens next). I still thought at that point that I'd have the option to turn around, and I didn't. I'm supposed to let Arthur's endeavors be in vain. Now, you can argue that's what RDR1 was about at the end, but it was more effective, imo.

As for "it would have always happened," well yeah, John is destined to die, we know that. But there's a difference between the catalyst for that being him killing Micah and him running with Dutch's gang.
 
Heckler456

Heckler456

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,256
Belgium
okayfrog said:
It isn't "proof-positive," but nothing really is. It's all subjective. There's no objective proof. That's all there is to that one. Again, I'm looking at it like, "What does Rockstar want me to feel here?" and I guess the answer is I'm supposed to feel pumped up to take out Micah. But it didn't work that way. So we work backwards. Why didn't it work that way? Well that's because everything so far has established that John has changed, that Arthur had an effect on him. Hell, I could even save Micah's friend beforehand only for him to get taken out by Sadie (which, in retrospect, was a really dumb option -- I mean, John would have 100% killed him in that situation, going by what happens next). I still thought at that point that I'd have the option to turn around, and I didn't. I'm supposed to let Arthur's endeavors be in vain. Now, you can argue that's what RDR1 was about at the end, but it was more effective, imo.

As for "it would have always happened," well yeah, John is destined to die, we know that. But there's a difference between the catalyst for that being him killing Micah and him running with Dutch's gang.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Gonna stop you right there, because you're completely objectively wrong on that front. Everything so far has established that John HASN'T changed, and won't ever change. They entered Strawberry with Abigail complaining about John finally settling down instead of acting the tough guy all the time, and that's seven years after they've left the gang behind them. Throughout the entire epilogue, they show that he just can not manage it. Even after buying Beechers hope, he still goes out with Sadie on morally grey mission to kill some rival bounty hunter and shit.
 
RandomSeed

RandomSeed

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,690
Unlocked a robbery in Saint Denis and gave that a go (played "good" first playthrough). They did a good enough job that I felt bad doing it. Just pistol whipping the shit out of everyone, knocking them out, and stealing everything. Going to be awkward shopping there next time.
Funny part is I used fucking dynamite and took my sweet time and not a single alert from the law or anything. Using harsh words to someone on the street causes them to run to the cops, but here nothing.
I also chased, beat up, dragged, and drowned the eugenics racist, and nobody cared.
 
okayfrog

okayfrog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,968
Heckler456 said:
Gonna stop you right there, because you're completely objectively wrong on that front. Everything so far has established that John HASN'T changed, and won't ever change. They entered Strawberry with Abigail complaining about John finally settling down instead of acting the tough guy all the time. Throughout the entire epilogue, they show that he just can not manage it. Even after buying Beechers hope, he still goes out with Sadie on morally grey mission to kill some rival bounty hunter and shit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Okay, well, I don't believe I'm objectively wrong. I believe I'm subjectively right. I believe that while the epilogue does show him doing those things, it also shows him no longer doing those things. By the time of the final mission, it seems like it's been a while since he last went out bounty hunting with Sadie, and it's been a while since he's shot up some Skinners. The mission with the proposal makes it seem like it has all changed, and ends with him on the fence, pondering. Then there's the final mission where he goes out, not caring about what his wife has to say. It didn't feel right at all to me.
 
Heckler456

Heckler456

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,256
Belgium
okayfrog said:
Okay, well, I don't believe I'm objectively wrong. I believe I'm subjectively right. I believe that while the epilogue does show him doing those things, it also shows him no longer doing those things. By the time of the final mission, it seems like it's been a while since he last went out bounty hunting with Sadie, and it's been a while since he's shot up some Skinners. The mission with the proposal makes it seem like it has all changed, and ends with him on the fence, pondering. Then there's the final mission where he goes out, not caring about what his wife has to say. It didn't feel right at all to me.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Alright, well, at this point, agree to disagree. I think you're blatantly misinterpreting the story. It was also established, from the very beginning, that they wanted Micah dead as revenge for Arthur. That he didn't spend 3 weeks doing bounties for Sadie in between the proposal and the Micah mission doesn't change that.
 
okayfrog

okayfrog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,968
Heckler456 said:
Alright, well, at this point, agree to disagree. I think you're blatantly misinterpreting the story. It was also established, from the very beginning, that they wanted Micah dead as revenge for Arthur. That he didn't spend 3 weeks doing bounties for Sadie in between the proposal and the Micah mission doesn't change that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Agreeing to disagree sounds good with me.
 
Fjordson

Fjordson

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,014
Man the idea of someone just mainlining the story in this makes me sad. There are so many unbelievably cool / bizarre / scary / interesting things out in the world that I'm finding through exploration. Some great stranger missions also.

R* really upped their game when it comes to easter eggs / random encounters. All their past games pale in comparison.
 
Dr Doom

Dr Doom

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,026
Holy shit this game is so uptight no air passes it's ass
Call out twice - CRIME REPORTED
Someone executed by hanging....touches legs...CRIME REPORTED
 
TheChuggernaut

TheChuggernaut

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,218
Zefah said:
I think I ran into a bit of sequence breaking for the first time with Edith Downes.
I finished her side quests in Annesburg before officially starting Chapter VI and having the main story take me there. After she had supposedly left with her son, I start Chapter VI and see her about to walk into a house with some man who had hired her as a prostitute. Her and Arthur's reaction make it seem like this was the first time they had ran into each other since St. Denis.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Had the same thing happen. I just kind of laughed when I noticed it. Something got fucked up there.
 

Deleted member 1726

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,661
My console is being exchanged because it's faulty but I have a question.

I did the gold glitch to get unlimited gold, but will this exploit carry over to my new console when I reinstall the game? Or will the gold bar be gone??
 
Akai

Akai

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,047
Why is there no Trinket (or Upgrade) that gets rid of Horse brushing or significantly reduces the need for it? Definitely one of the most annoying mechanics, especially now in my end game clean up.

Daffy Duck said:
My console is being exchanged because it's faulty but I have a question.

I did the gold glitch to get unlimited gold, but will this exploit carry over to my new console when I reinstall the game? Or will the gold bar be gone??
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If your savefile is stored in the cloud, then you are good to go. If not, you lose your entire savefile/progress anyway and it would mean that you have to start from the beginning again.
 

Deleted member 1726

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,661
Akai said:
Why is there no Trinket (or Upgrade) that gets rid of Horse brushing or significantly reduces the need for it? Definitely one of the most annoying mechanics, especially now in my end game clean up.



If your savefile is stored in the cloud, then you are good to go. If not, you lose your entire savefile/progress anyway and it would mean that you have to start from the beginning again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Awesome, thanks, my save file is backed up
 
Glass

Glass

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,244
Epilogue encounter -
On a hunch went to visit Charlotte, the woman Arthur taught to hunt , no quest marker just in the map , just to see if anything happens , and sure enough she's there and John mentions he knew of her from the journal. Goddamn. How many other things are there to check up on!? This game y'all.
 

Deleted member 14649

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,524
Stage 4 of the exotics quest is taking the piss - 30 plumes? If I hadn't already devoted time to this I would be uninstalling already.
 
Foffy

Foffy

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
16,395
Question about Chapter 5 stuff.

I know the animals here don't count for much but I want a full compendium, so what's a good, consistent guide on getting these animals quickly?
 
Glass

Glass

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,244
Okay just completed the 'perfect animal carcass' quest line in my epilogue. Worth every damn moment I spent hunting those damn things.
 

Deleted member 10795

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,302
Story progress request, for part way through Chapter 6;

Ive just done the mission in Saint Denis where Colm O'Driscoll is hanged.

How far off the end am I, roughly?

I've been powering through the story missions since the back end of Chapter 3. I'm torn between not being in a rush, having some stuff I want to do before the story ends, and wanting to see how all this plays out.
 
Mido

Mido

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,686
After one of the ch 6 missions I'm looting the remaining bodies by myself somewhere remote in the forest and I get wanted. Lmao.
 
Glass

Glass

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,244
Credits finally rolling.

This game

It's just on another level. Game of the generation for me.
 
Stewarto

Stewarto

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,217
Just seen Gavin's friend again

Since this is years later and he's still looking, this dude is either completely insane or the best friend ever.

Gavin is certainly dead either way... Wonder if you can find the body lol
 
AndrewGPK

AndrewGPK

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,829
Any good tips on landing big/legendary fish. Felt like it took me an hour to land the legendary gar the other night. The bigger fish pull out my line, don't feel like I'm reeling fast enough.


How do you prevent them from taking out your line without breaking the line? And can you reel faster? I pull down L and start reeling. It's painful on the hands after a while too.


Any tips?
 
Wolfe

Wolfe

Banned
Sep 3, 2018
871
I haven't had a chance to test it yet myself but someone posted that holding R3 in while the fish is fighting will prevent it from pulling the line back out, if true then it will definitely help resolve my dislike if the fishing a bit lol.

Edit: meant to quote, this is in response to the part above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.