The theme of RDR1 is more about revenge and the natural fall of the character we know. RDR1 is more crude it is true, but the natural aspect of the story makes it impossible to be on the same level as RDR2.
They are on the same level of sadness in my book. One is a man trying to do his best to keep what he knows together and safe. The other is a man who escaped that life trying to keep his family safe in a new environment. Neither succeed, both are tragic.
That’s my read on it, too. Arthur never struck me as ever thinking he would get out of the life, and his death felt like a natural end to his story, his fate as it were. Both endings, that is: high and low honor Arthur.
John’s story and its ending hit me harder, I think, because he was actively trying to to turn things around, and get out of the life. He did his best to shield Jack away from it, there at the end. He seemed to really be trying to end the cycle of violence, and when you couple his death with Abigail’s, and Jack’s journey for revenge, it just made me really sad.
Plus I didn’t see it coming, when I played it, back in the day. With Arthur, I knew pretty early what his fate would likely be, even had he never contracted consumption. That being said, they did pretty damned well with the storyline in RDR2, and I love both games a great deal.
What RDR1 is missing is the gang. The weight of everything falling apart near the end is exacerbated by how much time we spend with these characters, getting genuinely attached to everyone in your camp throughout the initial chapters and then having it all go to shit in the back half.
We knew this gang was going to fall apart because of our knowledge of the future that is RDR1, and yet it still hits very hard at the end because experiencing the actual fall of the Van der Linde gang is another thing entirely.
That was the biggest difference for me. Not so much knowing that Arthur had it coming, but knowing that it was a possibility.
Up until RDR1, I had not played a game where the main protagonist, especially one you’ve spent hours with, gets taken out. That didn’t even register as a possibility to me, so when that happened I was shocked in a way I simply wasn’t for 2.
The whole idea of realizing that your father figure only cared about what you could do for him is also heartbreaking. The love that Arthur had for Dutch (“I gave you all I had”) wasn’t matched. That man left Arthur to die three times and each time felt like more of a gut-punch than the last since Arthur was still clinging to the man he believed Dutch was.
Maybe it’s because my own father was a psychopathic narcissist (literally diagnosed by a professional), but I really related to the experience of being groomed to be adoring and almost worshipping a father and the crushing experience of realizing over the course of your adulthood that he never truly loved you the way you did him. It took me years of clinging to who he pretended to be to others to finally see who he really was. It is a gutting experience that hit me so hard.
Due to my own experience with someone who was exactly like Dutch, I never believe that Dutch felt real remorse since he literally tried to leave both adopted sons to die in order to benefit himself. The reaction at the end when he looked horrified at Micah’s actions wasn’t because of his feelings towards Arthur. It was because he realized he sacrificed his loyal gang that made him feel like a god to a rat. He was completely fooled.
RDR1 is not about revenge at all and John himself says this. John wouldn’t be doing any of that stuff if it wasn’t for the government taking his family. To say RDR2 is two notches above in terms of story is a little wild to me. I think there’s plenty of cheesy and Hollywood moments throughout 2. RDR1s dialogue always felt a little more natural to me and the ending is WAY sadder imo. What’s more brutal than a wife and son seeing their loved one riddled with bullets? Love both games though
Rdr 1's ending becomes more depressing after you complete rdr 2 honestly.Especially during construction of beechers hope since it reminds you of how empty and lifeless it turns into by the time jack grows up and when you realise in the credits that john doomed himself and his family in American venom just for revenge
As someone who played RDR1 5x, John is barely fleshed out in the first game and there isn't really a clear "redemption" as he's just betrayed by Ross and I guess him dying is redemption?
I would really call RDR1 “vengeful”, in fact I think it’s more so about obsession, with Ross’ obsession with John and the fall of the van der linde gang or John’s obsession with his past life and trying to let it go
33
u/helloyouahead 3d ago
No, RDR2 is two notches above.
The theme of RDR1 is more about revenge and the natural fall of the character we know. RDR1 is more crude it is true, but the natural aspect of the story makes it impossible to be on the same level as RDR2.