Join the discord! Also character analysis on Uncle is next😁. Im going to change your perspective on him… Join the discord here: discord.gg/qzwCDbt Follow me on twitter: twitter.com/CynicalGaming13 Follow me on instagram: instagram.com/cynic.the.original/ Consider supporting me on Patreon & checking out the unique perks that come with it: www.patreon.com/CynicTheOriginal

@godzillazfriction

5 ай бұрын

im confused, you expect EVERYONE to agree with you or what, the tone gave me the implication of that so let me know if im wrong... the Honor system is something that wasn't prioritised as a 'morality-like' system, it was supposed to expand the already established character of John so that means that everything you could or can do will make sense within John's established character whereas RDR2, it's way more convoluted than that because Rockstar for some reason tried to equate the Honor system to a 'morality-like' system which doesn't work for an already established character such as Arthur Morgan, the core of it is still there such as whatever Honor level you have, it will still make sense to kill, rob etc. in free roam as well as the lines that Arthur uses however there's compromises such as the rewards depending on your honor level, which the 1st game established that except for a differentiation of the Deadye that alters depending on your honor level... but the most damaging aspect to the Honor system in RDR2 is the story which is where it becomes more like a 'morality-like' system compared to the 1st game.

@CynicGTA

5 ай бұрын

@@godzillazfriction nope. I font expect everyone to agree with me at all. I dont think a good chunk of certain things in this game can be argued one way or another so by trying to come off like that would not only be smug but i think fundamentally wrong. Im sorry for coming off like that

@godzillazfriction

5 ай бұрын

@@CynicGTA no worries...

If you play with maximum low honor it's crazy how Arthur's dialogue changes. The craziest line I have seen when Arthur kiIIed a dog and said :,,Play dead boy hehe".

@ConfusedRevolutionary

5 ай бұрын

During my evil playthrough I've shot a horse in the head to prevent some rude fella fleeing. Before even dropping from the horse Arthur condescendingly tells him “You ain't going anywhere”. Felt cinematic tbh.

@theoutsiderjess4869

5 ай бұрын

Evil Arthur creeps me out

@godzillazfriction

5 ай бұрын

there's no 'honor' dialogue, Arthur still says this whatever the honor level you're on... plus there's no such thing as a 'bad' honor or an 'evil playthrough' or an 'evil arthur' since you've already been doing that since the beginning... Rockstar's problem with RDR2 is that, the Honor system is something that wasn't prioritised as a 'morality-like' system, it was supposed to expand the already established character of John so that means that everything you could or can do will make sense within John's established character whereas RDR2, it's way more convoluted than that because Rockstar for some reason tried to equate the Honor system to a 'morality-like' system which doesn't work for an already established character such as Arthur Morgan, the core of it is still there such as whatever Honor level you have, it will still make sense to kill, rob etc. in free roam as well as the lines that Arthur uses however there's compromises such as the rewards depending on your honor level, which the 1st game established that except for a differentiation of the Deadye that alters depending on your honor level... but the most damaging aspect to the Honor system in RDR2 is the story which is where it becomes more like a 'morality-like' system compared to the 1st game.

@FriendwithNoName7

5 ай бұрын

@@godzillazfriction The dialogue completly changes and he doesn't say that on high honor. I played trough the game 14 times and know everything about it. Just watch high honor vs low honor dialogue changes, the dialogues change, a few examples are the endings, the moment Dutch kiIIs the old woman in Guarma, Arthur talking about Sean's death, Arthur bumping into someone, these are a few things that change depening on honor but theee are over 2000 new dialogue options depending on honor.

@FriendwithNoName7

5 ай бұрын

@@godzillazfriction kzread.info/dash/bejne/nap7sLCKZbDTY8o.htmlsi=egxJU8Q6qL7Pxz5M

I say we all just have to accept that Arthur is obviously loved more in rdr2 (because it’s his game) and John is undoubtedly better in his rdr1 version. They are both equal in their personalities.

@consumer1073

5 ай бұрын

good take, i try to pretend rdr2 john doesnt exist

@IoannesPetrvs

5 ай бұрын

No, they are not equal in their personalities. John is a more simple-minded man, he doesn't think deeply about the actions he is taking. He prefers to act first and then reflect on the consequences. Arthur is also a man of action, but he presents deeper moral and existential dilemmas than John, you will realize this if you read the journal. Arthur is also more altruistic (I consider High Honor to be the canonical path), while John is more focused on himself and his family (Abigail, Jack and Uncle), and his compassion doesn't extend much to others outside that circle. Anyway, maybe John is a victim of the fact that RDR 1 was a less pretentious game (I played it before RDR 2), and that it intended to tell a simpler story, without so many dilemmas and long-term interactions between characters. R* couldn't just completely change his personality in RDR2, so that's why he ends up being what he is: a less complex guy than Arthur.

@oc11studiosOFFICIAL

5 ай бұрын

@@IoannesPetrvs well I mean as in they both have very good personalities

@Garland846

5 ай бұрын

jack works better as a successor to john than john does to arthur because jack is obviously very similar to his father

@nikolaithewretched8428

5 ай бұрын

​@@IoannesPetrvsgood points but you don't gotta poo on the guys point of them being equal

I'd think of it like this: Arthur is a war-weary soldier. He makes jokes or has fun with cruelty or sadness as necessary. He follows orders as necessary. He takes up tasks that he doesn't agree with, turns a blind eye to people's plights he would otherwise be compassionate for, etc. At the end of the day, he's doing what is in the best interest of his unit (The Gang) surviving. Sometimes the callousness and stress of the situation pushes him too far (say stepping on the fingers of the witness near Valentine or killing remorselessly), but his journal makes it clear that this is not what he wants in life. Moreover, his journal makes it clear that he has become awakened to the reality of the war around him, and is CYNICAL about how it's come to this. The ferry robbery is the point of no return. Arthur wishes it wasn't this way, but isn't going to let his displeasure with reality keep him from operating within it. But when offered the opportunity to sing songs, go fishing with the boys, go out on a drunk, do chores, pet dogs, etc. he absolutely will. He still sees the world as mostly good, but it stuck in a nebulous war with society that even he doesn't really believe in. Which is the soldier's plight. John is a mercenary. He's survived war and seen good men he cared about die in it time and time again. He knows something even Arthur didn't about reality: it will just continue. Which is a theme explicitly explored in RDR1. For example: "They'll just find another monster. They have to; to justify their wages." Or the fact that after the revolution is successful, the rebels become just as cruel and willing to reap the spoils as the government was, much like the French Revolution or countless others before it. So John doesn't ruminate or get emotional when women are rounded up to be slaves to the soldiers. He doesn't hesitate to kill poor Mexicans immediately. He knows that if he takes time to lament about reality, or pine for something different like Arthur did, it'll just bring him pain twofold. The pain of reality AND the hunger for something different. John knows that reality is not bound by honor, morality, or goodness. So he operates with stoic focus to get to the one thing that brings light to his world: his family. John's brutality is for the most part emotionless, unless someone does something to directly interfere with his plan or explicitly threatens people he cares about. Where Arthur is cynical about the state of the "war", John is NIHILISTIC.

@mutthouse3293

5 ай бұрын

Perfect

@weplo1597

5 ай бұрын

John and Niko are so similiar in personality wise

@wander7984

4 ай бұрын

an actually based take

@NotAGoodSalesman

3 ай бұрын

​@@weplo1597Exactly

@krypticunlimited6925

3 ай бұрын

I swear Rdr2 has the most intelligent fanbase ever

One of my favorite scenes is with Arthur and that guy sweeping the side walk telling him to go away with Arthur smacking him and saying “I wasn’t with that lady you’d be dead already” because with the way he said it mixed with who he is I believe he could be joking but just as easily do it

@bigbadwolf8114

5 ай бұрын

That is true sometimes when Arthur says things you can never fully tell some times if he is joking or not .

@JosiahCone

Ай бұрын

I believe he was fully serious there and that adds to his redemption. He even says before the kid would already be dead. It's not just bc of Mary, but also he is trying to surpress that monster by chapter IV

Actually on the train robbery mission If you don’t hit the people refusing to give up their loot after a certain amount of time John will do it

The best way to describe Arthur and John brutality is Arthur is a hammer and John knife. They both can deal a lot a damage but are specific for different situations.

I am surprised you did not talk about Arthur's fight with Tommy. I think that moment is what truly shows how far he is willing to go. He caved in a man's skull with his bare hands. Even after Downs begs him to stop and tells him he won Arthur blows him off and asks "What business is it of yours?". Of course a lot of Arthur's brutality comes from his role in the gang. He is the muscle/enforcer. His job is to scare innocents and remove threats to the gang. Funny enough he shares this role with both John and Michah. I think John and Arthur have the same approach to innocents, but John seems to hesitate on pulling the trigger more often. This may be part of the reason John left the gang for a while and why Arthur often accuses him of being dumb. Michah on the other hand kills both threats and innocents and may be a big reason why Arthur does not like him. Arthur may be a killer but he has a line he tries not to cross. And the longer Michah is around Dutch the more it seems that Dutch is willing to cross that line as well.

@godzillazfriction

5 ай бұрын

you really believe that Arthur's brutality stems from just being the muscle/gang enforcer, there's way more aspects to Arthur's character from his past aka before the events of RDR2... and that's not the reason why he dislikes Micah, where's the indication that Arthur dislikes Micah because he likes or kills innocent ppl, he literally murdered the whole town of Strawberry with Micah and was just angry at Micah because he didn't want to leave despite it grabbing loads of attention which is completely unnecessary and Micah wanted to stay longer just for his 'precious guuns' which btw those guns are very important to Micah... Arthur never questions or ridicules Micah of killing a woman who was with Skinny... there's also no indication that John is more hesitant to pull the trigger because of how John spoke of himself during RDR1 which Rockstar failed to replicate that in RDR2 itself such as John hurting innocents or killing them although there's instances where he does hurt innocent ppl like if Arthur takes too long to hurt the ppl who aren't giving up their money, btw you can also kill those ppl who don't out their money and John will actually have dialogue about Arthur killing an innocent in the train... John also killed a fella who looked at him the wrong way before the events of the epilogue to which John wrote it in Arthur's journal. im also going to mention Javier although he's not important in this discussion but originally he was going to kill a whole stagecoach family when robbing a stagecoach with Arthur, Rockstar changed this probably because of how they wanted a more drastic, spiral version of what Javier has become during RDR1 established Bill who r3pes woman and mutilates someones weiner and hanged them in barn during RDR1... plus that hanging is very reminiscent of how both Micah Bell's killed a ranch family while on the run from the law.

Arthur's humour always reminds me of the sarcastic option in Fallout 4. Brings me absolute joy

Another example is in the mission where you save the Reverend after he gets drunk at a poker game, the big man who’s fighting the Reverend, you can either shoot him or fight him, but either way a civilian sees and says “you killed him” and goes to get the law, which I think implies the developers intended for the player to shoot instead of brawl.

I’m just going to say the way I play everytime is to be bad till Arthur gets sick cause I think that’s when he truly opens his eyes to everything and he becomes good or as good as he can be cause to me the game is about redemption so I play to redeem myself

@pineappleproductions1696

5 ай бұрын

I see 😮

@Chioxii

5 ай бұрын

Arthur is a good person from the beginning of the game, Cassidy, even his own dialogues, the point is that having TB, as Cassidy says, is a curse and a gift, he can finally take good actions without limiting himself to following orders. Dutch, because during the game he questions many things but continues to pay attention to his "loyalty"

@FriendwithNoName7

5 ай бұрын

​@@Chioxiiarthur was never a good man, I dont know what you were watching or playing but Arthur was always a monster. He redeemed himself in the end by saving John and his family. The canon story is Arthur being a very bad person wich is showin in the game like the debt collection and letting kids and women die but in chapter 6 Arthur becomes honarable.

@godzillazfriction

5 ай бұрын

you can't just 'become good' like that... that's not the point of Arthur's 'redemption' at all... the basis of Arthur's 'redemption' is him suffering through the consequences of his actions via TB, you can see this with many characters such as Dante from Dante's Inferno, Kratos etc. and Arthur being as good as he can be just devalues the redemption aspect of Arthur especially when literally weeks ago, he'd kill teenagers, horses etc.

@the1stassassin422

5 ай бұрын

@@FriendwithNoName7 How was Arthur always a monster? Monsters show no remorse and yet Arthur does in his journal entries. Why would he hate himself for his actions if he was a monster? In fact...why would most of the gang like him, including Mary-Beth and Jack, if he was such a monster?

Remember John killing ruthlessly in rdr1. But if we think of the worst scenerio both can antogonize the whole town or mass murder. Also both get the spare or execute option. But one thing people miss is that with both characters you start with natural honor. So thats how they have been until the few months you play as them. Its obvious cannon Arthur didnt help each women/men he finds on his way to raise honor or mass murder for fun. They are both natural honor in canon. Rdr1 John is negative honor though.

@sinjeonnie

5 ай бұрын

rdr1 John literally gets pretty much high honor after every kind of mission. He is neutral honor ngl.

@theoutsiderjess4869

5 ай бұрын

Arthur's honor level at the start was naturally higher showing he still held the ideals of what the gang started as while he is a killer it makes his action during the debt collection feel like a bigger act

@sinjeonnie

5 ай бұрын

@@theoutsiderjess4869 it's the exact same w John in the epilogue but ya all are obsessed to make him the bad guy smh.

@godzillazfriction

5 ай бұрын

​@@theoutsiderjess4869bruh that's not a 'higher' honor level since its supposed to be level 0

Hey Cynic, awesome video as always! I read through all the comments so far and it’s wild how no one has mentioned when we had to capture that criminal for “humane dispatchment”. It’s my favorite Arthur moment in the game. He literally torments that guy who did “animal husbandry” lol that was pretty brutal of him to do in my opinion.

How have people not experience the whole story at this point, even just through watching videos you should know what happens

@l1lunc1v1l

5 ай бұрын

damn near 6 years this game came out... could call it a certified classic by now.

@Starchaser124

5 ай бұрын

"W-W-WAIT!.... ARTHUR DIES?!?!?!?! 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😱😱😱😱

John literally participated in human trafficking in rdr1 despite the fact it was the benefit for his family. That was just crazy in itself.

@weplo1597

5 ай бұрын

Niko and John are so similiar in personality wise

I think we can all agree that the cut off at the beginning was perfect

Arthur was more physically violent, that is what is suggested. Not that he is a murderer of innocents. He has a short temper and is very impatient.

Nice vid idea would be if you ranked all the gunslingers in the gang by skill and how useful they are and there overall greatest strengths

My Arthur was minimal honor until the end as it was my first time playing and I found it easier to earn money this way. Next time I will try high honor

Everything John does in RDR1 is under threat of his family being held hostage. Nobody was forcing Arthur like that.

I have a few good and dramatic conversations on topic. Still, John despite being literally forced to do things by the government, he always seems to be the man doing his own decisions. Arthur often executed another people plans. I feel like he is more himself alone on long trails, observed wildlife and drawing in the journal... Only in the end, near death, he started to do things according to his true mind. This Arthur's "true" self seems to be more kind and sensitive than John ever could be. But I still prefer John's complicated nature of someone who is so good in wrongdoing and bad in doing good but choose to fight that (I don't understand so many people considered him simplier). I'm pretty aware it sparkles to me personally and also I'm aware this is affected by my playthroughs and my in game decision (and gamedesign - player must be motivated to do missions and it's a huge thing in so complex storytelling).

@godzillazfriction

5 ай бұрын

ok that's just a typical misrepresentation kf Arthur for suddenly becoming his 'true self' with the typical style of 'redemption' to help ppl and be as good as you can or could be or 'become good' that's not how that works... unfortunately

@ladypeahen8829

5 ай бұрын

@@godzillazfriction I think we misunderstood. But I'm not sure if I can explain it better. I know only basics about redemption, it's something you get, not for things you do, but for what you really are. And huge mercy is needed. If someone think he could redeem himself by actions of good without a mercy, he is very proud and very wrong.

Makes me think about a series someone did Called Dirty Arty Their goal was to make Arthur the embodiment of chaos I remember they ran around riding a donkey

I like especially in the valentine bank robbery mission Arthur can be nice and normal but when it’s needed he can switch on a dime and become the most terrifying man you ever met

there's the valentine bank heist, granted I haven't gone further than that but Arthur sounds absolutely terrifying and brutal in it

The beauty of perspective

John & Arthur are both playable characters, which ultimately means they’re as brutal as you can be playing as them….

Wrobel speaks and understands english later in the game pretty well in an optional mission.

Love your videos man! But i got to ask are you alright? cuz idk but you sound kinda sad in the video 5:42

@CynicGTA

5 ай бұрын

Lol sad? Hahaha im sorry i hope its not distracting. Im sick…again. Couldve been recovering from a cough or ive been getting random moments of being drained and dead tired. That could be a reason too. Either way im good. Thanks for checking and im sorry if it was distracting

@lolos312

5 ай бұрын

@@CynicGTA Oh well that's good to hear got me a bit worried there. Thanks again for making these awesome videos can't wait to watch another episode. And I hope you will get better soon!

I was diagnosed with conduct disorder, and I have the callous version of it... but I'm not that bad. I do enjoy helping people because I've been helped when I needed it. So I'd say arthur is a sociopath. He has some empathy, but not a lot. But im not a psychiatrist, but, hey, that's just a theory, A GAME THEORY Edit: knowing you're going to die can change you

In my first playthrough, my Arthur always had a high honor, wanted to give him a proper life and everything better for him n shi.

Video idea: what if Arthur stayed loyal to Dutch throughout the entire story such as bill and Javier

All I got to say is this if you have played the game, STOP WATCHING THESE VIDEOS!!!! It’s ridiculous how are you even watching these video and haven’t played the game! That’s on you! It’s annoying because now I have to wait til next week for this man to upload anything on a different topic!!

@El.portero_13

5 ай бұрын

Facts bro!💯 the game has been out since 2018 and still worried about spoiler alert

@CynicGTA

5 ай бұрын

Next week? Nah, gotta character analysis on Uncle tomorrow. And Dutch’s manipulation of the Indians….wait, next week is in 3 days lol. Yea you right, might be next week😭. I just want it to be good…

@theneweraofmusic5578

5 ай бұрын

@@CynicGTA much love bro!🙏🏽💯

@El.portero_13

5 ай бұрын

@@CynicGTA god has spoken to us!!

@CynicGTA

5 ай бұрын

@@El.portero_13 😂

Also my favourite brutal arthur moment is killing brooks and favourite brutal john moment is beating de santa

11:03 is it me or does he sound a lot like Dutch here? Refers to helping a mother and children finds their father/husband a goose chase and the whole “we got bigger things to worry about”. Talk about redemption

8:34 if you wait long enough John'll get impatient and do it himself

My Arthur with Max Honor watching this Video from Heaven: My John with Lowest Honor watching this Video from Beechers Hope:

@FriendwithNoName7

5 ай бұрын

For me it's the other way around

@LuunieTuunie

5 ай бұрын

Heaven? Lmao bro definitely in hell high or low honor

@RayAkuma

5 ай бұрын

@@LuunieTuunie he confessed his sins to a priest tho ;)

@Rin-gh9fx

5 ай бұрын

@@LuunieTuuniearthur is in no way in hell - unless changing and becoming a good man who helps others is all irrelevant unless you choose to believe into a certain religion lol. arthur’s change during ch. 6 is literally the definition of a good man lol

@Joch2009

3 ай бұрын

@@RayAkumaconfessing you sins to a priest does not mean you go to heaven the only way to heaven is accepting Jesus into your heart as your lord and savior

Arthur is like Johhny from Gta 4 he's loyal and cares about his gang

I feel like the entire idea of the style of game makes it so that their exact scruples are defined by what you are willing to do, not predetermined.

What's Arthur Morgan's favorite part of a beach? The shore 😇

Arthur is pretty brutal. I did feel like Arthur getting TB gave him a reality check and changed him as a character

A thing to point out, to further prove the point made at 2:00, neither men are actually able/willing to have sex at the brothels or kill children. Something that shows they wouldn’t do so in cannon and can’t be made to by the player

As a gamer who grew up playing RDR, Arthur is more notorious than John. John needs to be tough and he lived up to it, while Arthur is naturally a tough guy

Not triying to be correcting but in pouring 4th oil if you wait john hits them

The valentine robbery shows arthurs brutality

I think Molly actually did rat on the gang about the saint Dennis bank robbery because she knew Milton and ross’ names at beaver hollow.

@georgeball710

5 ай бұрын

Ross and Milton had already visited the camp in chapter 3 and chapter 5 so she probably knew their names from that

@gavinferguson2938

5 ай бұрын

Did agent milton not clarify that it was micah that ratted and not Molly. They said they picked her up but she didnt say anything apparently. Idk maybe im wrong.

@poweringthesupremacy

5 ай бұрын

I think it was Abigail, because she is the one in the gang that actually has a child to loose so

You don’t have to beat them on the train robbery mission

Makes me realize that Charles was important in showing Arthur the value of life. Funny cuz he wanted him the kill one of the poachers, but he has his own code. The innocent live. The guilty die.

Arthur is brutal in the way that he is apathetic, tries to avoid politics & diplomacy and jumps straight for confrontation/threats (he does so even in the early Reverend poker game mission), he can also put himself first and can hold contempt about what happens to others, most of the time he does. (until later game) John is brutal in the way that he is or was a merciless killer probably 80% of the time, at least if you stood in his way. He doesn't speak much or have a way with words as much as Arthur did. Dutch basically told John (so did Arthur) that the law was never going to stop hunting them down until they were all dead, if anyone didn't expect John to die and was hoping for a happy ending after RDR1 (before RDR2 was released and playing it for the first time) you should have seen the inevitable coming. Personally, I believe people like Arthur more because his story is truly about redemption, he wanted to be a better man and to correct his wrongdoings after he got sick whereas John's story was about retribution for his time with the gang and was used like a pawn, of course this is all my opinion. I also enjoyed your video and wish you all the best growing your channel :)

@lepersonnage371

5 ай бұрын

RDR1 John speaks a lot and has a good way with words, in almost every scene in RDR1 he gives some smart, philosophical or witty comments. And John talks a lot more during gameplay, he has a lot a lot more voice lines

@jessebailey5962

4 ай бұрын

Either you never played Rdr1 or you're completely ignoring what happened in the game. John was way better with his vocabulary than Arthur. He helped people throughout the whole game and he did most of it for nothing. And he didn't chase the gang down because of his retribution. His wife and child were kidnapped and he was forced to either catch the gang or watch his wife and kid be executed and him as well. He says throughout the game that even though he doesn't like them anymore that he would rather not be dealing with them at all. If they would have just arrested John then John would have just died. But they knew that so they took his family and gave him an easy choice. Kill the guys that left you for dead or watch your family die and lose everything

@Outlaw1856-8

3 ай бұрын

​@@jessebailey5962 in rdr1 john is more of a robot his only goal is to rescue his family It doesn't matter who gets in his way he will fo everything to save his family Even if it was arresting or killing people he once considered brothers, despite his hatred for them, he still had some feelings for them ,yeah he helped people without a cost some times, but hi brutality His brutality lies in his indifference to the harm that may befall others if it is at the expense of his family and aldo he is kinda cold and don't talk so much but his word have a lot of meanings

I don't think Arthur is more brutal, but he's definitely more terrifying...

"There would be a system that penalize acting out of character like that " umm what thats what the honor system is.

I think it’s the causality Arthur uses, like it’s almost fun for him. When Colm O’Driscoll is being hanged and looks to one of his men on the rooftop that Arthur killed, thwarting any rescue attempt. Colm was a bad guy sure, but dude is literally staring death in the face and Arthur WAVES at him.

Hey Cynic, side note: I'm sure I'm speaking for atleast 90% of ur audience in saying, if u ever run out of RDR topics, u are more than welcome to expand to any other games that u have similar in-depth knowledge of, personally I'd listen to ur interesting takes on just about any story focused 1 player game like this lol

Arthur is angrier in Chapter 1, because he also lost his favourite horse, that he had for years and two of his friends (Callanders)

I think a big way of comparing the two is: John’s motives and actions are always his own. He wants to protect his family, he wants to escape the life he left behind. He is acting on his own accord for his idea of a good ending. He believes in the morality of his choices. Arthur doesn’t have any motives of his own other than loyalty. His acts of terror are often simply because he doing dutches or someone else’s bidding. He is like a trained soldier shooting when his leader says shoot. He doesn’t concern himself with the morality of the order. It is not until he is confronted with his own inevitable death that he begins acting for himself and doing what HE believes. This change is when we see the true Arthur (besides his journals)

Woah don't forget Arthur had a kid and he died to bandits

I'm not sure John would have been kinder with that foreign family. at that point in the game, he's still denying Jack is his son, so he may not be any more kind at that juncture.

John is way more brutal or at least doesn’t values life in the slightest right before the epilogue the reason he is running with his family is because he shot a guy who just looked at him Arthur would never do something like that he might scare or hit people who disrespected him but not like that

I think the difference really is whether you like your brutality served hot or cold.

I find Arthur more ruthless with comebacks and the way he does things if Arthur and John fight to the death Arthur wins he is a no nonsense type of outlaw who is to be feared and doesn’t care about almost anybody except for the gang and mary

Arthur, much like Vincent Vega and Jules Winfield in Pulp Fiction, and many people who have had to interact with a s hit world full of immoral persons we don't like and that could harm us, would "get into character" when interacting with people toward ends involving collecting loan repayment, dealing with O'Driscoll members, etc. etc. etc. Obviously it would be inconsistent for Arthur to have really believed his threats to the wife and son of Mr. Downes, and his disregard for the matter of the latter having died. It was just a means to avoid being taken advantage of.

I'm a certified psychopath in that I enjoy all three protagonists of Redemtion. Yes, even Jack. I think they all work together for one story, and it's done beautifully. I'll always prefer John in the same way I prefer pizza to hotdogs, I love them both, and sometimes I'd prefer the hotdog, but when I'm asked, my favorite its the pizza. Dumb as hell comparison maybe, but the best way I can think of putting it. As far as their brutality, I dont necessarily think Arthur is worse than John, but I do think that John gets a bad wrap. Yeah, John can sound the part, Im fairly certain he threatens Nigel WD no less than 5 times but when he is being detained in Blackwater, John stands up for him. With absolutely zilch to benefit from it. Hell, he demands it from the man that is holding his family hostage. I think John is just as much a mean sounding softie as Arthur but he's abls to bark just a bit fiercer.

Now i do not know much about Johm outside RDR 2 but i think, Arthur is the most morally conflicted person between the two. John might be silly at times but he always had a heart. Arthur in the other hand was more of a brute and blindly loyal to the gang, which costed him the woman he loved in contrast to John. Arthur had a CHANGE of heart. Otherwise he was but a great iron-willed enforcer puppet of Dutch's charisma. John in the other hand saw through most of the crap Dutch was throwing out and came back mostly to protect and save his wife and child. Sure he rejected at first but could not just ignore them. Arthur in his place wouldn't care much. If Dutch would order him to distance himself from his own family to avoid "weakness" , then he would most likely would do. He is a very pragmatic person who grew to become a critical thinker himself. Otherwise he would be a fool to go through with everything Dutch would say. To me , both characters are golden. But John is a golden hearted person by default. Arthur in the other hand was a misled person with the potential to be better. So by default Arthur is more of a brute. In the end , if John was more brutish then he would be respected more in the gang. The fact he is holding back his capability of evil is what makes John a good and better person than Arthur. In the end, its all about our individual morality and view of the world. I will end it with a great quote of a certain another video game character. Philosophical in its nature. Let me know if you got the refference. 👍 "Which is better? To be born good? Or to subdue your evil nature with great effort?"

Very good video exposing a fundamental part of the bad actions that Arthur took in pursuit of the Gang, but I still think that Jhon, when he had to save his Family, was too Brutal to the point of helping Revolutions and a Dictator to massacre innocent people to achieve their objective . It got to the point that a Legendary gunslinger like Landon warned him about the dangers that loom over those who play both sides.

I absolutely don’t think john would be kinder than arthur to the german family. John left his own family prior to that, and at this point in time still doesn’t consider jack as his son. He doesn’t care about that yet. I believe john to be narcissistic and not arthur, as john just think of himself and his wishes; second game he came back after leaving everyone that loved and needed him while still doing nothing for his family, first game now that he learned to care about them, he absolutely don’t care about anyone else than them. Hence his very mess up actions, like for the mexican women sent in h*man trafficking. Arthur was acting for loyalty and was putting his emotions aside, John really just do what his own self wants to do.

@jessebailey5962

5 ай бұрын

Sounds like a bunch of excuses for an Arthur fanboy. Mostly because John helped plenty of people for nothing in RDR1. But you're probably just simple minded.

@channel45853

5 ай бұрын

​@@jessebailey5962the only fanboy here is you, for insulting someone for no reason just cause they have a different opinion to you.

@jessebailey5962

5 ай бұрын

@@channel45853 awwww it's okay you get offended by KZread comments lmao.

@markmagician2471

5 ай бұрын

To be fair Charles forced Arthur to help them without Charles there Arthur I doubt helps them

@WellKnownBee

5 ай бұрын

@@markmagician2471yes, like said many times and simplified by Mary, there’s a good version of a man hiding in arthur, but he’s wrestling with a giant. Arthur is good and finally desire to do good, but it doesn’t come naturally because he has been conditioned to be brutal and not do the thinking. He is motivated by loyalty, John is motivated by selfishness.

Going back to the debtors, although I don’t agree with beating people or anything; it’s kinda their fault. The guy who takes you to the cave to get the cougar pelt says “paying back at those rates are near impossible” meaning these people know exactly what they’re getting into. I think a lighter hand could’ve been used for the Downes family but ultimately these people have signed a contract for loans and are obligated to pay them back. They shouldn’t be taking money they can’t pay back. Plain and simple. In today’s time we’d simply take them to small claims court but I highly doubt that existed during that time period and if it did, you’d more than likely have to track them down and drag them to court which was probably hours away for the average person. I think as the game progressed Arthur learned who to be aggressive with and who to take a lighter or at least passive approach with. He’s a bad man who’s done bad things but he’s not completely evil or bad. He’s not beyond Redemption

Which would beat John Dutton in his prime? For real though has anyone binged the Yellowstone universe? A lot of similar stuff going on. Hard to articulate what exactly I mean. I’m afraid it may take more wit than I’ve been blessed with.

When it comes to doing bad things Arthur is more hot blooded and brutal in an emotional way, he will some times do bad things and laugh about it, he was a true menace. John on the other hand is Cold blooded, way less emotional, he doesn't need to feel angry at someone to kill him, He's a devil in human form.

My take on the RDR community as I see it. No one is happy and everyone will always be right in their own mind. If you have an opinion that someone even mildly disagrees with you'll be torn to shreds. Arthur and John are both badasses, and great characters in their respective stories, neither is better than the other

Let me get a look at ya tough guy

@Conky88

3 ай бұрын

You look like you wouldn't say boo to a goose

1:45 he literally said 💀

In my playthrough, Arthur talked alot of sh!+ to some people just to piss them off, then ran when the shooting started so the sheriff wouldn't shoot him at the same time. Then did it again, again, & again because he thought it was funny. So yeah, he was a pretty cold cat.

I love being Arthur more then being John tbh i wish when you beat Rd2 it was a mode where you can pick between playing Arthur or John.

@ClaytonTheCracker

5 ай бұрын

If it was the real Marson id be fine with the epilogue

@baggmansosa6154

5 ай бұрын

@@ClaytonTheCracker Yea i agree with you but idk i just love playing as Arthur he’s one of rockstar best characters in my opinion.

@ClaytonTheCracker

5 ай бұрын

@@baggmansosa6154 mine as well ofc, idk about you but I played the first one, and I'd be nice to atleast look a bit like him and not Johns skin stitched onto arthurs skull

@baggmansosa6154

5 ай бұрын

@@ClaytonTheCracker Hell yea i agree forsho

Low honor Arthur is more evil than low honor John, high honor Arthur is more good than high Arthur John. In their natures John is a colder person imo, that doesn't mean he can't be a decent man because in Rd1 he is when hes high honor and is left alone to live his life like he wants.

@josephstalin2606

5 ай бұрын

This is the most reasonable take i’ve seen so far. I think everyone agrees on this but let their own biases take over and then it becomes a conversation on who’s better, not who’s more brutal. Also u said “high Arthur John” I thought that was funny 😂

@Drexzzz4

5 ай бұрын

​@@josephstalin2606Arthur and John are the same but I'll say Arthur because he literally tried to send the kids off and didn't care John would have at least tried to help

@josephstalin2606

5 ай бұрын

@@Drexzzz4 John doesn’t always help either, Landon is the one that forced him to save Luisa in Mexico, before that all he can say to her brother is “sorry” and was gonna go off on his way. Even in the final Mexico chapter John just casually walks by rebels he fought alongside getting executed in the streets and doesn’t bother helping, he only helps Reyes so Reyes can help him get Bill. Overall everything John does is for himself and his family situation, Arthur does the same but for the gang which is way more people which makes Arthur just a little less selfish. Plus by the end Arthur actually goes out his way to help people for free while John more or less stays the same, making the ultimate sacrifice for only his family

@Drexzzz4

5 ай бұрын

@@josephstalin2606 ye both are brutal tho but if it's chapter 2 Arthur is a devil because he doesn't care about anything just like John he is only out to survive

@theoutsiderjess4869

5 ай бұрын

Arthur is a more Empathic and introverted/introspective person he is always reflecting on what he has done unlike John

I killed every single thing I could find an this game

Hes brutal but after everything that just happend to him in a short time.. hes probably mot thinking straight.

So you’re actual wrong about the train heist. If you don’t hit the ppl on the train that refuse John will hit them himself

John actually hits a person during the train robbery if you wait for too long

Then by that logic all GTA characters went on a random killing spree you got to look at things they did chronologically within their story that's tied to missions and view both their kills and exploits as straight up out of necessity or in relation to their actions or circumstances think about it like this John in his game had no reason to be a thief because of him being a rancher but yet still you can still kill people or in GTA vcs you start of as a soldier and have no reason to kill anyone but yet I killed of a bunch of soldiers for their assault rifles doing so would cause Vic to comment negatively about his actions rdr and GTA gives us freedom to do as we see fit because they mirror each other rdr is basically GTA but with horses where as Bully and L.A noire has completely different themes one being a student and the other being a detective argo it makes sense why a student that's a teenager won't be portrayed in that way as being a homicidal maniac even tho he could R* won't do that because of controversy and Cole being a member of law enforcement can't go on a killing spree because his job is to literally solve crimes argo it would be counter productive for him to solve crimes whilst simultaneously commiting them now let's look at ghost recon Wildlands you play as soldiers you could kill civilians although after you kill a certain amount it's a game over is it a common practice for soldiers from any civilized county to kill civis indiscriminately? No it's not but yet the game allows it to an extent either to compensate for splash damage e.i explosives rockets and so on or getting in the way of Targets but guess what you could also aim at civis specifically and take them out wait until you get the notification warning you that the game will be over then fast travel to another side of the map and continue rinse and repeat GTA is a crime simulator rdr is a crime simulator set in different times the reasons and motives for the protagonist of both games are different even within the same series Arthur does what he does for his gang John for his family Niko for revenge CJ for himself his family and revenge Trevor for himself and because he's crazy for his mom and so on now out of all these characters I stated who's the most brutal ?. If your answer is Trevor you are correct Trevor is a freaking serial killer a rapist a sodomite a cult affiliate and a freaking cannibal that's in his story and lore but guess what all the other protagonist I stated aren't bind by limitations like Trevor and could easily go on a rampage but at the end why Trevor wins on the degeneracy scale is because of his story and lore and the things he's seen or mentioned doing i.e killing Wade's friends off screen killing a traveling jeweler off screen the potential murder of his brother Brian to eating human stew which was seen it's in his writing and sometimes programming when you switch to him now back to ghost recon Wildlands you could basically do the same things as in GTA just to a lesser degree even tho chronologically you're supposed to be a soldier minus killing children you could kill civis in a different ways you could car jack and so on so does that mean because nomad could do such things that he's automatically in the same class as every GTA and rdr protagonist?. No because the game just chooses to give you the same freedoms as for your point towards assassin's Creed it falls flat because that game takes place in the past from the perspective of the future so everything that the protags of each A.C game does would be pre scripted because it's pulling from a chain of historical events and the assassins didn't kill indiscriminately it wasn't in their character because we literally are forced to see things through their lens which is forced.

Arthur is brutal because his job is to be scary, he is an enforcer, and he makes sure everyone in his path will come out dead or terrified. John is a man who is willing to do whatever he needs to do to help his family, in 1, hes extremely brutal to his enemies due to the fact that the goverment has his family in custody, and he will not fuck around when it comes to finishing the job

John is brutal all the time and only got soft spot for his wife. Arthur just goes with the flow most of the time, but he can be way more brutal than John if someone wrongs or pisses him off, or if you play him with low honor, the tongue on the man, ouch, and he's got gunslinger skills and raw physical power(even when he's sick) to back up his trashtalking.

The only reason people think John is more brutal than Arthur: there’s more brutal scenes of John and more time with John is seen in the games

It always felt like Arthur had a much stronger preference for using intimidation over violence. That being said I think John was more brutal than Arthur, especially in RDR1. Though it could be argued that in RDR1, he was never brutal to anyone who didn't deserve it.

they fucked up john because he inexplicably gets more verbose, stoic and threatening in rdr1 compared to 2 where hes more sniveling, and in not enough time to justify him suddenly becoming so much more verbally witty let alone forget the girl dutch shot on the boat too big of a difference in character to be written off as an intentional or well executed development between games. 3 years after prologue or whatever and he's RDR1 john, but from 1899 to prologue he's an overreacting little weasel. lame

@146zigzag3

5 ай бұрын

I don't think he forgot the girl, I think he was being coy cause he didn't know who the strange man nor his intentions. For all John knew the strange man was the girls relative coming for revenge.

@charlessmith9753

5 ай бұрын

I mean it’s about 3 years since the events of rdr2 spent doing nothing but ranch work, reminiscing about the past, contemplating life choices and reading. I’d say that’s enough time to develop a more structured speech pattern. Also he’s a lot calmer in general during those eloquent conversations with Bonnie or the doc. But even in rdr2, he has good vernacular.

@jessebailey5962

5 ай бұрын

​@@charlessmith9753yeah it's a cool game. It could have been better if they kept the actual story from Rdr1 going. They should have cut Sadie, Charles, Arthur, Micah and hosea. Focused on the main group. Because it makes no sense now why John wouldn't have ran into Sadie in Mexico or seen Pearson at a store. They just completely humbled the stories so it doesn't connect well at all. It just has good graphics and immersive gameplay. But the story was pretty trash.

@IoannesPetrvs

5 ай бұрын

​@@jessebailey5962​ Sadie go to South America (probably Brazil, Bolivia or Argentina), Mexico is North America. Pearson is living in Rhodes, far east from New Austin or West Elizabeth.

@consumer1073

5 ай бұрын

@@charlessmith9753 in 3 years he suddenly has totally different speech patterns and stands out because of his brevity? where as in the longer period between the main game of rdr2 and the epilogue he's identical? bad writing and that's ignoring that they just made him use arthur's dialogue in the epilogue for anything you didn't do as him. even changed his damn appearance

I have beet the game 5 times

The beating of passengers on the train in my view does not reflect anything particular at all about the brutality of Arthur or John or any other outlaw. They are robbing a train. It's a job. There is a step-by-step procedure for doing it. It must be executed quickly or the risk of consequence skyrockets. Rifle butt is an intimidation technique. It isn't done to be brutal. it is done to keep the schedule of the job from falling behind. It is a tool used to accomplish a job and that's all it is. If the passengers delay, the risk of catastrophic failure goes up...quickly. Rifle butt keeps the procedure from being delayed. The O'Driscolls hit a train outside of Valentine very early in the game. Because they take too long, Arthur is able to stumble across it and thwart their plan. And there are plenty of other witnesses to it happening nearby too. Intimidation is a tool they use throughout the game to entice compliance, not a ruler for measuring brutality. Yes, it is a brutal act, but it is not at all uniquely or especially brutal. If Arthur doesn't do it, John will. If not John, it'll be Bill or Sean or Javier doing it. And in precisely the same manner, with precisely the same mindset and urgency. So, why aren't those guys in the brutality contest too? It's just a technique that every gang and every gang member employs. Part of the procedure for robbing a train, or a bank, or a stage...like wearing a mask is. I think it's a mistake to try and use intimidation as a measuring stick to decide who is the most brutal. It's no different than observing Arthur wears a mask more than John, and therefore concluding he is more brutal. To answer this, look instead to those instances when Arthur and John are most uniquely brutal, or unnecessarily brutal, or brutal despite it not getting them any advantage or purpose. Unplanned and emotional rather than coldly executed as part of a scheme. Arthur is not angry at the train passengers he hammers, he only pretends to be for the sake of the job. You can't determine an actor's morals based upon the roles they play on stage, regardless of how convincing they are at it.

How brutal are John and Arthur? Both of them in Canon: 😇⚖️😡 When I play them: 👺⚖️👹

I see Arthur more like the gangs enforcers he does all the dirty work for the gang what other members wouldn’t do he clearly tells stratus can’t one the boys do it but stratus says I tried but they lack your Vegar also every mission the gangs trust Arthur with their life Arthur apart of every act the gangs does after the black water massacre even bills says in the cutscene of the valentine robbery we just need to bring you along for insurance policy so I see Arthur more a big brother who get the jobs dones more that a brute

They both was wild as fuck and wasn’t a saint that’s it that’s all lol

I'd say Arthur is more ruthless until Clemens Point, not brutal.

8:26 if you take your time robbing people john will hit them with his rifle instead of you doing it.

I'm sorry to say it Arthur but I think John's more brutal because it took one Pinkerton to kill you but it took a whole group of bounty hunters and pinkerton's to kill John but both of you are good

There's no legitimate debate as to who is more brutal. The problem is that this world has fostered the matter of all manner of totally invalid, bulls hit "ideas" being entertained which do not hold water in the least. All that's necessary to determine the reality of which is more brutal is to determine what each of them has done, if that is possible and then to quantify the brutality of each on the basis of the ACTUAL definition of it, but all the weaselly s hit in the world LOVES to create false ambiguity so that things are never addressed and dealt with.

Personally I play Arthur like an anti hero. John I’m more merciless. Idk what that holds to your argument but there’s that lol.

Both are just as brutal; John is more of an extremist and is morally damned in the first game. As Arthur still had a modicum of morality, which expanded after finding out his sickness.

I think that Arthur is a good man and has more morals than John. John fought in the Mexican civil war, survived zombie apocalypse and had a bare minimum reaction to it all. John will do anything to protect his family. Like anything.

How brutal is Arthur? Depends on how you play!

Arthur Never gave a fuck about human life until he got sick where John has cared for other people and his family yeah Arthur is more Brutal than John hands down.

@anthonyfernandez82

5 ай бұрын

That's just not true though

@jessebailey5962

5 ай бұрын

​@@anthonyfernandez82that's true. Arthur didn't care about anything until he got sick and got scared of his fate. John helped people all the time without expecting anything. People all around actually liked John for him being himself and a good guy. Arthur helped a few people at the end because he was hoping it made it up for his life of killing and stealing.

@anthonyfernandez82

5 ай бұрын

@@jessebailey5962 He would certainly abuse the shit out of some innocent people, but if he genuinely didn't care about human life, the story would be a lot darker. He also wasn't hoping his good deeds would make up for the bad. He knew that was impossible. He just had new founded clarity that people were more important than his unquestioning loyalty to Dutch

@channel45853

5 ай бұрын

John helped the Mexican army, making him way less caring of human life because of all the things he helped them do. John did care about some people, but like Arthur, the family came first, and that mentality left John to do many things that were bad. And arguing that a mass murder cares about human life is kinda weird in itself.

@jessebailey5962

5 ай бұрын

@@channel45853 both sides of the Mexican revolution were trash. John killed both because he had to find Bill and Javier or his wife and kid would die. Arthur killed people for owing $10 to a guy he didn't even like. If Arthur was so important to the gang he would have told Straus and Dutch to stick it he wasn't there errand boy. 2 totally different circumstances. John was 26 in rdr2 and had already seen through Dutch's bullshit. Arthur was damn near 40 and still was Dutch's errand boy. And Arthur had a real dad until he was like 16 which back then was an adult.

I love how u put clips showing how damn funny Arthur is written, whoever the story and dialog writers for this game are, need to go write all the movies lol

The read dead community is in shambles, but the real question is, how brutal is CynicGTA? 🤔

I think one of the reasons that further proves Arthur was more brutal is when John himself told the O'Driscoll (Kieran) that if he treats his friends that way, imagine how he treats his enemies. Arthur was the baddest of the bunch, but he found redemption cause of his disease.

@jackbluehq6653

5 ай бұрын

I think rdr1 John was a more cold blooded man but he wasn't as bloodthirsty as Arthur sometimes is presented What I mean is, when John arrives into Mexico 3 Mexicans try to rob him. John trys to his best to be peaceful and walk away letting them live, even using high intelligent words showing how wise and intelligent he really is in rdr1, but despite this it gets to the point that he has no other choice. So he pretends to cooperate letting them fall into a false sence of security, and then he immediately draws his gun and swiftly murders them. Letting the last one beg for his life and he shoots him in the chest letting him blead out to death. John did this all with no regrets and no emotion, he tried to be peaceful as he doesn't wanna spill unnecessary blood and cause unwanted attention but in the end he murders them with no resource in the slightest. If Arthur was in the same situation he would have immediately gotten angry and defensive and killed them all and probably looked back on it with regret, John is far more cold blooded and in my opinion that makes him more brutal. John also participated in human trafficking with the army just to find Bill and Williamson, and while he certainly wasn't told that's what would happen and he obviously doesn't wanna be apart of it, he also shows no remource for this or really care. He just accepts it and moves on. While Arthur would have surely put up much more of a distain against this act by the army and would reflect on it alot, John just doesn't really care and has no regret over it. And that's why to me John is more brutal to me. Both men kill with ease and are incredibly violent, but one seems to run alot more on emotion and regret while the other has no regrets to what he does and displays little emotion when it comes to the acts of violence he does

@VICTORIASAYERS2040

5 ай бұрын

@@jackbluehq6653 your referring to RDR1 which is technically part 2. John changed a lot after Arthur's death, but like you said, Arthur would have got angry and shown no mercy, whereas John was trying to make peace.

@jackbluehq6653

5 ай бұрын

@VICTORIASAYERS2040 yes I'm referring to rdr1 John What does that prove? And also yes John tried to make peace but that's only cause he didn't want any unwanted attention, when he did kill them he held no remource and no emotion. Arthur would have gotten angry running on emotion and killed them, then later regret it or think of how much of a fool he is. John? Didn't care. He shot them, left and held no remource. He also shows more manipulative tactics by making the 3 Mexicans fall into a false sence of security, which I think adds to his cold blooded nature. John is just more ruthless to me. He gave no shit to anyone except his family, even when he was held at gunpoint he had no fear or emotion and was completely cold not caring if he died. He's far more cold blooded than Arthur and will do anything if it means saving his family. And that's why he's more "brutal" to me

@VICTORIASAYERS2040

5 ай бұрын

@@jackbluehq6653 Arthur always came off as being more brutal in my humble opinion, but we can agree to disagree.

@jackbluehq6653

5 ай бұрын

@VICTORIASAYERS2040 I get that and I agree he's a very brutal guy Basically murdered an innocent guy by beating him to death for afew bucks and gladly beat other innocents for money. The reason I find John more brutal is because, while yes Atthur did these things he grew to regret them and clearly hated himself for it. But John never did cause he truly doesn't care. But yes I agree I respect your opinion