this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
62 points (87.8% liked)
Games
16406 readers
1473 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Protagonist doesn't mean good guy, or smart guy. He's just the main character.
Problem is the game tries to paint him as either a good guy or a bad guy based on the honor system, but he’s not a good guy or a bad guy or complex guy either. He’s not much of a guy at all. His only driving force in the entire game is a blind trust in his father figure. The only internal conflict he has in the entire game is the extremely late realization in his forties that his “dad” isn’t an all-knowing benevolent entity, but is a flawed, self-serving human just like everyone else, and that he needs to learn to think for himself for once. And once he reaches the stage of independent thought, we’re already done playing as him lol.
I think his character would be much more compelling if Arthur made this transition after the first act, and not the final hour of gameplay. An RDR2 where Arthur has been freed of his entirely being’s reliance on Dutch and a conflict with Dutch taking a bigger role in the plot.
Agreed. The writing and acting of RDR2 are amazing, but as a whole, the story of the game kind of felt empty in the end. I think I might revisit the game later to see if I'll enjoy it more, but I just don't see Arthur as that great of a character from a narrative viewpoint. After the first couple times Dutch's "plans" failed I started to really question why Arthur, or any of the other gang members really, would continue trusting him so blindly. I think that may have broken my immersion even more than the restrictive mission design where I also murdered like a thousand people.
Yeah like the interactions between the side characters that you get to hear at camp or on missions were far more interesting than anything Arthur had going on. Dutch was a stand out as well. If you think about it, and given the context of the first game, RDR2 is really about Dutch. He might not be the protagonist but he’s more of a main character than Arthur was, and had a more compelling character arc, even if the “character growth” was the inverse of what you’d expect.
The only plot line with Arthur that actually portrayed any interesting development was the side plot of the mother and son whose father you basically killed. That plot line, and more like it should have been part of the main plot.
He is the protagonist because the story revolves around him as the main character. I'm not saying you should like the game or the character. Him being the protagonist is independent on whether you like him as a character or the game. Protagonist literally means main character of a story, which he objectively is.
I don’t think that Arthur being the protagonist of the game is in question here fella. He’s in the cover of the game.
Well, you were before you edited your comment
Incorrect lol. I never said Arthur wasn’t the protagonist. That would be silly.