Red Dead Redemption 2 Needs to Avoid Hollywood Tropes

<br>The Red Dead franchise succeeds because it's playing into the most American fantasies of what the Wild West was, while keeping it grounded. It was a time were America was still getting its footing as a new nation. Things were being discovered by a people who had largely still never seen most of what the land had to offer, thus appropriately titled, the Wild West. It seemed like a hellish dreamscape where those from the east coast talked of savages and wild beast, men who idealized the same sort of lawlessness discussed among certain circles. Yet, it was none of these things, for a people having just arrived to a nation, it was much tamer than one might imagine. Instead, it was a place not overly populated and begging for people to settle its lands (I hope we see Natives in this game). The west was a place of opportunity and discovery, somewhere one could make their mark in a relatively easy way (for the time).<br><br> <br><img src="https://uploads.ungrounded.net/tmp/img/131000/iu_131119_8010581.jpg"; style="max-width:400px;float:left;padding:10px 10px 10px 0px;border:0px;" alt="" />Is the truth really out there? At least in the Red Dead Redemption universe, that seems to be the case. If you have no idea what I'm talking about, just head between the "N" and "O" of New Hanover on the map, and you'll come across an old building. Inside, you'll be met with a pretty weird scene. There are beds lining the sides of the building, with a desk at the end. On the desk lies a note, which rather cryptically hints for you to come back to the building, or stay there, until about 2<br><br> <br>There's a bit of a debate around this one. Just Northeast of Bacchus Bridge and Southeast of Donner Falls lies a hole in the ground. A somewhat familiar looking hole in the ground, for Tolkien fans. That being said, something about the whole house seems... off. Other than the obvious similarity of being a literal house in a hill, there isn't much about the house that seems like its Lord of the Rings counterpart. Style-wise, they're pretty disti<br><br>Seeing as Red Dead Redemption 2 has officially been announced to the masses, albeit with no idea what the game is about (John Marston's name is not even mentioned), I thought I’d voice some thoughts. While I wholeheartedly enjoyed both Red Dead Revolver and Red Dead Redemption, I am worried by Red Dead Redemption 2. Aside from hype, which apparently can’t be stopped, seeing as the collective internet ethos freaked the hell out, let me explain why it’s important to be cautious with something like this.<br><br>Don’t be deceived by the number at the end of the title, Red Dead Redemption 2 is a direct prequel to its predecessor. The story takes place years before our last adventure as we follow Arthur Morgan and the Van der Linde gang. If you recognize the latter name, it was the group of outlaws that John Marston rode with back in the day. As you can expect, you’ll see our loveable Marston often, who is perfectly implemented into the story. It’s not too much fan service or focus, but just enough so he’s a solid supporting role, especially in the later half of the campaign. He has his own arc, but it’s all about Arthur and his issues. The first couple of chapters in the story, Arthur is an unlikable individual. It takes him a little while to find his footing as he’s an overly serious character who never breaks a smile and plays the rough cowboy to a T. His relationship with the group, including the gang’s leader, Dutch van der Linde, is what stands out among everything else. It’s the little things around the camp; the songs, the gestures and the interactions that expand our protagonist’s likability, and you begin to better understand him. Even the most insignificant faces seem to bring out the more positive aspects out of Arthur more than the main story ever does, and it’s sad that it’s something players can completely overlook, especially considering entering the camp setting forces the player to move at a snail’s pace.<br><br>Gunslingers in the wild west have been the subject of many memorable video games such as Gun, Custer's Revenge, Lethal Enforcers II and probably another one or two are in there somewhere. What is generally considered the most celebrated is 2010's Red Dead Redemption, or Grand Theft Equine as it's commonly referred. Like one or two other Rockstar titles, Red Dead Redemption was met with near universal acclaim and is still fondly remembered almost a decade later. The upcoming sequel is one of the most anticipated titles of 2018, and with that release just around the corner it seems like a good time to look back on the tale of John Marshton.<br><br>Red Dead Redemption was a blast, with numerous side quests, activities and just a big <a href="http://Alt1.Toolbarqueries.Google.mn/url?q=http://Giggetter.com/blog/51553/learn-from-the-pros-30-things-every-league-of-legends-player-needs-to-know/">Open world game weapons</a> sandbox world to play in. Great game mechanics and design made it fun, a great story is what made it memorable. The pacing of the story doesn't ever hit any major lulls and the character of Marshton is sympathetic enough you end up rooting for him, since after all he's a good guy who just wants to be back with his family. And in trying to get back with his family he ends up being jerked around by the government. After jumping through endless hoops from the government they betray him. The ending of Red Dead Redemption is one of the sadder endings in a video game. The true ending occurs in 1914, and while there is a shot at setting things right, it ultimately feels hollow and unsatisfying. This sounds like a knock against the game, but in reality it is a testament to how powerful the narrative of Red Dead Redemption actually was.<br>