That is not bothering me too much. What´s really irritating though is the fact that Bonnie told John in RDR1 that her father built the barn when she was a little girl. As we know the barn doesn´t exist in 1907. so either Bonnie is lying or Rockstar made an oversight or was lazy.
Even though this is a blatant retcon and an oversight on Rockstar's part, I love coming up with ways in my head that this can still work. For MacFarlane's ranch and the missing barn/half the settlement, the rancher is there while the MacFarlanes are away due to the illness, or some odd reason. While they were gone, the barn somehow got destroyed and the rancher had it rebuilt without telling the family a thing
What bothers me even more so than that is the fact that John tells Jake and Bonnie that he’s never been to New Austin, yet RDR2 makes you go there to 100% complete the game. Jake: This your first time in Armadillo, Mr. Marston. John: Sure. I’ve never made it out this way before. - Bonnie: How well do you know New Austin? John: I don’t. We talked about coming down here many times but never made it. Bonnie: Whose "we?" John: Me and the folks I used to…used to work with. Yeah, New Austin, the last real outlaw country where the old ways still hold true. You do a man wrong, he’ll shoot you for it. You do a man right, well, he still may shoot you for it. But at least you have an idea of what’s right and what’s wrong down here. Bonnie: Dear oh dear, Mr. Marston. What dreadful novel did you get that romanticized drivel out of? Those days are long gone, if they were here at all. According to Pa, those days were just people shooting each other because they lost at cards. We’ll be lucky if our ranch survives another five years. Business men are the new cowboys.
@@james_fisch This would be a good explanation. There are also more inconsistencies like there are only 2 MacFarlane graves in the Coot´s Chapel cemetery although in RDR1 there are 4 graves. All of them died before 1907.
Rockstar should have made Tall Trees traversable for Arthur. Such could offer a direct passage to New Austin, which is irrealistically a "Dead or Alive" zone (since the Van Der Linde didn´t commit any recent felonies that we are acquainted of in that state).
Right? Tall trees at the very least since the lower Montana is right there, if he couldn’t be on the main road. I believe this was possible before they changed it for whatever reason.
It's a huge miss opportunity to not have Arthur in New Austin. And it sucked that Armadillo is a sick town, New Austin doesn't feel nearly as cool cause there's nowhere to go, and nothing to do.
Armadillo is a sick town because of "The Strange Man" from RDR1. You can find his cabin in RDR2 and find a map of Armadillo that says "You chose happiness or two generations. You made your choice" and this is referring to the general store owner in Armadillo, named Herbert Moon. In the cabin there is a note on the wall that says "The Moon will shine on in the Darkness", hinting that Herbert Moon (The Moon) will shine on in Darkness (a sick town) and lose his happiness (him being able to sell goods to the people of Armadillo) for 2 generations. (His daughter, and grandson hinted at in a note found in his store.) Also there is a picture of The Strange Man in the general store, basically pointing at him further more. Armadillo being a sick town is one of the coolest pieces of lore in the game and you missed it.
@@nobu6273 oh no one missed it, we just think that lore is really dumb and would much rather have one of the coolest locations from rdr1 back to the way it was.
@Nobu I didn't miss it, I know it's supposed to be a sick town. But at that point, I can care less about lore, or immersion, cause there's absolutely nothing to do there at all. It's ultimately just a waste of a town now, which makes going to New Austin kinda pointless, if it was a normal town, I can guarantee most the gamers would be going there more then any other town. All New Austin has to offer now, town wise, is Black Water, and Tumbleweed, and they are on the total opposite side of New Austin from eachother, Armadillo was the perfect middle grounds, but anymore, if your just going to visit, it's pointless. Caring about the lore can only get you so far, its not disneyland where we're gonna be excited every time we are there, or see Herbert, no, after a while its like okay, just a sick town, nothing to do, gets boring after the first few visits.
Makes me sort of emotional playing as john in rdr2, everything is so empty and shrunk to just john and his family. No gang, no heists and just memories
Rdr2 is the greatest masterpiece there is .. Rockstars 💎 but everything that is in New Austin is simply unfinished.. 1 big disappointment.. From that terrible invisible sniper to the city of Armadillo and its cholera outbreak.. How sad is all this .. There is nothing there that’s worth to revisit 😓 I was so happy that I thought I could go back to Thieves Landing, Armadillo... That maybe I could go and see Bonnie again... R* gives us this beautiful huge map but doesn't give us any reason to do anything in it with John Marston... - Building Beechers Hope and Milking Cows that’s about it 🙌🏻 😏 Ashame really
Doesn't ruin anything for me personally, but I get your point yeah. I figure it's more of a fanservice for the fans of the OG game so I loved being able to explore this old part of the map as John. Sentimental I know I know lol. Main story wise, is it only that one mission with Sadie that is set in the old map (beyond Blackwater obviously)? It's been a while since I played the epilogue. I think of the exploring you do as John outside story missions as non-canon and yeah as i said - fanservice.
Yeah its clearly fanservice... Although I'd argue it's pretty weak fanservice. I feel like they should've taken 1 more year of development for the Epilogue specifically, I mean I would've happy with waiting an extra year for the entire game had I known how much cut content RDR2 really had.
Yeaaa this was clearly intended to be an Arthur interaction. By 1899 Bonnie would’ve definitely been a little girl and it would line up more with the RDR timeline
I don't think they intended to make a second game at first and just used things that worked such as John not talking about Arthur to their advantage. So there's gonna be plot holes guys.
When Dutch, Hosea and Arthur go fishing, Dutch mentions that he misses being close to the sky in New Austin-if u look at the pic of the gang that Pearson has in his shop it shows the gang in a desert so I thot well clearly they have been in New Austin, went to Blackwater, over the mountains and we all know what happens next. Still a great game though. Got emotional playing John again, it was good don’t get me wrong but at the same time it was heartbreaking as we know how the story ends
@@ArmandoFloresAvila it’s sometimes used as a shorter way of using the word Thought but I just this moment realised what the word actually means so I will be saying to the people I know “so guys guess what?” 😂😂
The picture takes place in like 1895, because you can see there that Abigail is holding Jack as a newborn baby. Considering that he is four years old in 1899 it makes sense for the picture to be taken back in 1895. And yes it’s definitely in the desert but we can’t be sure if it’s in new austin or some other state out west.
@@CDTyphol No but in the old version you can climb on the sides, I used to break the windows trying to see if you can get in if you crouch but didn’t look like it worked
I think John saying he hasn't been to New Austin is not to be taken literally. For example, I had to take a joint flight in Vancouver to get to my destination. I was only in Vancouver for airport reasons. John was only in New Austin for bounty reasons, probably didn't even realize it either because he was working either out of Blackwater, Rhodes, or Strawberry. I don't say I've been to Vancouver even though I technically have. Perhaps this can be our accepted head canon for this issue. Also on top of that, John hasn't been to the ranch in any missions so I wouldn't even consider this encounter canon and it's simply fan service from Rockstar to us longtime fans. It's there for the player to enjoy, but John canonically is probably settled in the ranch life until RDR 1 happens and has never made his way into any of the towns in New Austin.
John probably didn’t pay too much thought into his time in New Austin because he didn’t have that much interaction with its residents. It was a ghost country dying from sickness and outlaws. The only person he interacted with more than once was Sheriff Freeman, and Tumbleweed is abandoned by 1911. John really has no idea what the people there were like. John learned from Dutch to judge an area by its occupants rather than its appearance, in order to keep an eye for opportunities. John didn’t know New Austin because he had little to no interaction with its inhabitants.
I came across a cut content video that included audio of the sheriff in tumbleweed calling Arthur out by name, so I’m thinking at some point Arthur was able to go to New Austin, it’s possible this interaction was made for him, but when they cut the idea of Arthur in New Austin, they might have forgot to cut a few encounters that don’t make sense while playing as John.
@@Vorticy135 oh I got ya, I wasn’t too sure, given that some of Arthur’s lines were re-worked as John depending on how far you completed certain side missions, I figured that was the same case here.
I wonder why they incorporated the New Austin map at all? I think Rockstar should have made more of new map instead of New Austin, even though I like exploring New Austin in this game. The first time I played the game I thought that Arthur would be stranded in New Austin after Guarma so that he could work his way back to the gang from there. When that didn't happen I thought he would travel there to combat his tuberculosis but he died instead. That last part were perhaps wishful thinking. But it was a missed opportunity indeed.
I think they were trying to remake 1 (no source just hunch) since there were also parts of mexico in the game if you break boundaries that were just waiting to be textured. Why it never happened, IDK
@@comicbookbacon8704 There was also the towns, POIs, coordinates for the towns, and even the actual visable map for Mexico was found in the files of the game
To my knowledge, John in RDR 1 said he wasn’t familiar with New Austin. He never said that he had never been there before, just thaf he didn’t know the area. I don’t have a problem with John very briefly going to New Austin with Sadie years before the first game. It doesn’t break any canon for me. But the barn not being there bothers me.
Given that Arthur wasn't present in the Blackwater Massacre, and that his appearance changes once you get to chapter two, with the beard and his hair have grown longer, and you can dress him in different clothing, it seems like you shouldve been able to disguise yourself and slip through Great Plains undetected, like you can in other towns where Arthur is wanted, but you change up his appearance, provided you don't get too close to lawmen where they can recognize you. Do that, and you should've been able to slip Great Plains and into New Austin, which if I'm understanding correctly, the gang hadn't committed any actual crimes beforehand, so it shouldn't have been barred like it was. Plus, it would've been cool to have interacted with a younger Bonnie as Arthur, and perhaps have some side missions with Sadie in New Austin, the latter I don't think we got near enough of, as I love the chemistry between the two.
Yeaaa this was clearly intended to be an Arthur interaction. By 1899 Bonnie would’ve definitely been a little girl and it would line up more with the RDR timeline
Arthur was present though. He just mentions a few times in Chapter 1 he wasn’t there when everything went to shit on the riverboat, but he was in town when the shootout happened, along with Hosea. Cut dialogue of Arthur saying losing his horse, Boedicia and was surrounded with Mac Callender in the battle confirms this.
I feel like a lot of stuff doesn't add up from 1907 to 1911 and it's kind of annoying. Take Thieves Landing for example: It's virtually empty in RDR 2, but is bustling in RDR 1. That kind of community growth and settlement expansion happens over 20-30 years, not 4. Also, Tumbleweed in the first game looks like it's been abandoned for WAY longer than 4 years, it should've been abandoned in RDR 2 as well. I feel like they really overestimated how much things change in 4 years, New Austin & West Elizabeth should've been virtually identical to the first game.
Since there’s talks about Arthur being able to go to New Austin, I kinda think that Armadillo having a plague and Tumbleweed not being a ghost town yet actually makes a lot more sense. It would take place in 1899, not 1907. That’s 12 years instead of 4.
the difference of new york city from 2019 to 2021 (middle of covid) is a massive change. I think you'd underestimate the change that could happen in thieves landing and armadillo though I do agree about Tumbleweed though. Natural decay takes much longer. If a large amount of people move to an area and they all work hard you'd be surprised how quickly a place improves.
Tumbleweed was attacked sometime later after you've done all the bounty missions in Tumbleweed as John. Not saying that you can witness it in-game but just a small oversight many players have missed. It's already said in-game that the Del Lobo's are gonna burn Tumbleweed down which might have led to the Town looking like it aged a whole lot longer than 4 years, probably because it was burned.
@@RedsDeadBaby I would've loved to have met drew atleast in online since Bonnie is aged 16-19 in 1898 so it doesn't make sense for her to be handing out kill orders
Would it really be so hard for Rockstar to just add a massive expansion using the same dialogue from RDR1. Considering they already have Mexico rendered pretty well for something they don't even use would it be so hard to just include the story of the first game as an expansion I would be willing to pay $60 or so dollars for it
Technically, all of this is non canon to John. Anything the player does outside of the main story that doesn't affect it is non canon. The only thing canon about John being in "New Austin" and Hennigan's Stead areas were the missions with Sadie.
I kept waiting for when Arthur would be able to go back through blackwater when I first played the game and was disappointed when I realized that was never gonna happen
The Guarma chapter was not needed an unnecessary instead we should have been able to go to New Austin after the bank heist in Saint Denis and explore the map as Arthur Morgan The giant map of New Austin felt like wasted space serving no purpose other tha one mission with Sadie Adler
Make a video on The Strange Man and the town of Armadillo if you haven't already. Seems like a lot of people missed that part of the lore in this game!
Bruh if ur ass don’t stop acting like u found it on your own. Mans watched a UA-cam video and suddenly thinks he’s one of the few who pays attention to details in a game.
Would have been cool to be in New Austin as Arhur, all of that state is blocked off by Pinkertons, and the lower half of West Elizabeth, where Blackwater is, yet the upper half isn't where Strawberry is, but in the game, bounties are statewide and it's just cities on lockdown.
Something I noticed is that in rdr1 she tells John the barn has been their since she was just a little girl but in 1907 it's still not their in rdr2 so she lied or rockstar just forgot Abt her saying that but still a mistake
I believe something had to do with a grave error that ended up hurting the production time and making Arthur's interaction in New Austin being cut to the game and pretty much any other cut content like the rest of Guarma and so on. That interaction with the McFarlane i believe could be a brain mistake where the writers completely forget to check the lore of MacFarlane ranch in RDR1. Oh well, there's always gotta be something like these where it just doesn't make sense for a content to be cut but they got their own reason
It's not really bothering me but I still think you got a point there. I would've loved it more to explore New Austin with Arthur this time and not being able to explore the south west part of the map with John because of some reason.
If you have any problem with the epilogue being any more than tie-ups and fan service after the 30/40 hour+ main story then there's some issue. I wouldn't use online as a fair comparison either given when it was released and the way that GTA online never functioned as canon for the story until it was essentially re-written years after and I'd have more of a problem with that happening to Red Dead than I would the way it was intended.
It’s clearly the 1899 Mcfarlane ranch. This is essentially what it would’ve looked like if Arthur was able to go there. It should’ve been updated for 1907 epilogue but it wasn’t. Take this with a grain of salt, because everything after American Venom is not canon
Doesn’t bother me too much, just wish the barn was there. What does bother me though is that you can find a letter for Bonnie on a guy who has washed up ashore as either John or Arthur & you can’t give it to her. I wish they made it so you can only find the letter as Arthur & you can go to New Austin to give the letter to her as Arthur.
Thers another mistake Officer Marshall John says he has been working to hunt criminals in Armadillo for last 15 years But in 1907 Armadillo was a ghost town full of cholera outbreak
Originally the map was cut off at West Elizabeth so you couldn't go to new austin and I would have preferred that because new austin is empty and lonely and I'd rather the effort was spent giving the lesser used gang members more to do and maybe adding activities to do with the old gang members you meet again in the epilogue
I don’t think it’s canon in red dead redemption John tells Bonnie that he’s never been to new Austin, Arthur was originally going to be their their a lot of hidden dialogue, sad Rockstar cut it it would of made way more since.
It doesn’t matter because this and all of new Austin isn’t canon To be honest I don’t know why they Evan added it when John states in rdr1 that he never been to new Austin
All of this issues wouldn't have happened if they just stick with remaking Blackwater and Beacher's Hope. I dont see the point on making the entire RDR1 map when in the story mode is barely used.
It doesn’t have to be canon most of these encounters and stranger missions aren’t they need to add something to new Austin it would be completely empty then
yeah it makes no sense lmao arthur should've been the one to explore new austin and mexico rockstar should've released an undead nightmare dlc for the fans just have it take place in its own universe like have it happen either after the blackwater massacre or velentine
But what is he ruining? edit: Later saying he's never been there before? It's not underheard of to not remember having visited a location before, especially if the people there have changed and it wasn't important the first time.
I don't really care tbh. it's nice to see new austin even if its empty. also arthur cannot be able to be in new austin because of him being wanted and His TB being an important story piece. The barn was built when Bonnie was a little girl. so in 1907 she wouldve been at least 13. the barn could have also been built even in 1899 when she was five. that qualifies.
Rdr2 is the greatest masterpiece there is 🔝 Rockstars gem 💎 but everything that is in New Austin is simply unfinished.. 1 big disappointment.. From that terrible invisible sniper to the city of Armadillo and its cholera outbreak.. How sad is all this .. There is nothing there that’s worth to revisit 😓 I was so happy that I thought I could go back to Thieves Landing, Armadillo... That maybe I could go and see Bonnie again... R* gives us this beautiful huge map but doesn't give us any reason to do anything in it with John Marston... - Building Beechers Hope and Milking Cows that’s about it 🙌🏻 😏 Ashame really
Is it just me or do you also hate playing as John? I start a new play through and stay in chapter 2/3 for months just to avoid the end and having to play as John
I can't use the word laziness to describe anything that has to do with the production of Red Dead 2. These folks worked their tales off and created a living breathing work of art with 0s and 1s. Any time I have picked up the controller through thousands of hours of game play, I have been impressed by something.
It’s clearly the 1899 Mcfarlane ranch. This is essentially what it would’ve looked like if Arthur was able to go there. It should’ve been updated for 1907 epilogue but it wasn’t. Take this with a grain of salt, because everything after American Venom is not canon
It’s clearly the 1899 Mcfarlane ranch. This is essentially what it would’ve looked like if Arthur was able to go there. It should’ve been updated for 1907 epilogue but it wasn’t. Take this with a grain of salt, because everything after American Venom is not canon
That is not bothering me too much. What´s really irritating though is the fact that Bonnie told John in RDR1 that her father built the barn when she was a little girl. As we know the barn doesn´t exist in 1907. so either Bonnie is lying or Rockstar made an oversight or was lazy.
That has always bothered me as well. I feel a lot of these “plot holes” are just laziness on their part .
Even though this is a blatant retcon and an oversight on Rockstar's part, I love coming up with ways in my head that this can still work.
For MacFarlane's ranch and the missing barn/half the settlement, the rancher is there while the MacFarlanes are away due to the illness, or some odd reason. While they were gone, the barn somehow got destroyed and the rancher had it rebuilt without telling the family a thing
What bothers me even more so than that is the fact that John tells Jake and Bonnie that he’s never been to New Austin, yet RDR2 makes you go there to 100% complete the game.
Jake: This your first time in Armadillo, Mr. Marston.
John: Sure. I’ve never made it out this way before.
-
Bonnie: How well do you know New Austin?
John: I don’t. We talked about coming down here many times but never made it.
Bonnie: Whose "we?"
John: Me and the folks I used to…used to work with. Yeah, New Austin, the last real outlaw country where the old ways still hold true. You do a man wrong, he’ll shoot you for it. You do a man right, well, he still may shoot you for it. But at least you have an idea of what’s right and what’s wrong down here.
Bonnie: Dear oh dear, Mr. Marston. What dreadful novel did you get that romanticized drivel out of? Those days are long gone, if they were here at all. According to Pa, those days were just people shooting each other because they lost at cards. We’ll be lucky if our ranch survives another five years. Business men are the new cowboys.
@@james_fisch This would be a good explanation. There are also more inconsistencies like there are only 2 MacFarlane graves in the Coot´s Chapel cemetery although in RDR1 there are 4 graves. All of them died before 1907.
I wish they had the barn in rdr2. Am I the only one that used to ragdoll in there and try to hit the rafters?
Rockstar should have made Tall Trees traversable for Arthur. Such could offer a direct passage to New Austin, which is irrealistically a "Dead or Alive" zone (since the Van Der Linde didn´t commit any recent felonies that we are acquainted of in that state).
Right? Tall trees at the very least since the lower Montana is right there, if he couldn’t be on the main road. I believe this was possible before they changed it for whatever reason.
Also, Arthur was barely in the Blackwater massacre anyways.
@@nicwo did you know landon rickets was directly involved with the Blackwater massacre it says so in a newspaper after his death
@@isaaccarter9007 I knew he was kind of involved but I thought he just fled the scene that’s kinda cool.
i don’t think they wanted arthur on the rdr1 map
It's a huge miss opportunity to not have Arthur in New Austin.
And it sucked that Armadillo is a sick town, New Austin doesn't feel nearly as cool cause there's nowhere to go, and nothing to do.
Armadillo is a sick town because of "The Strange Man" from RDR1. You can find his cabin in RDR2 and find a map of Armadillo that says "You chose happiness or two generations. You made your choice" and this is referring to the general store owner in Armadillo, named Herbert Moon.
In the cabin there is a note on the wall that says "The Moon will shine on in the Darkness", hinting that Herbert Moon (The Moon) will shine on in Darkness (a sick town) and lose his happiness (him being able to sell goods to the people of Armadillo) for 2 generations. (His daughter, and grandson hinted at in a note found in his store.)
Also there is a picture of The Strange Man in the general store, basically pointing at him further more.
Armadillo being a sick town is one of the coolest pieces of lore in the game and you missed it.
I know others may not agree and that’s cool and all but I feel the same honestly
That's why there supposed to be mexica
@@nobu6273 oh no one missed it, we just think that lore is really dumb and would much rather have one of the coolest locations from rdr1 back to the way it was.
@Nobu I didn't miss it, I know it's supposed to be a sick town.
But at that point, I can care less about lore, or immersion, cause there's absolutely nothing to do there at all.
It's ultimately just a waste of a town now, which makes going to New Austin kinda pointless, if it was a normal town, I can guarantee most the gamers would be going there more then any other town.
All New Austin has to offer now, town wise, is Black Water, and Tumbleweed, and they are on the total opposite side of New Austin from eachother, Armadillo was the perfect middle grounds, but anymore, if your just going to visit, it's pointless.
Caring about the lore can only get you so far, its not disneyland where we're gonna be excited every time we are there, or see Herbert, no, after a while its like okay, just a sick town, nothing to do, gets boring after the first few visits.
Makes me sort of emotional playing as john in rdr2, everything is so empty and shrunk to just john and his family. No gang, no heists and just memories
I feel the same thing playing as Jack after the end of rdr1.
Being in the gang was such and honor up until chapter 6
Funny thing is if you use mods to get to RDR1 map as Arthur he does have Dialogue, he talks to the people with Cholera in Armadilo.
That’s the point, that’s how John feels. He’s happy to have his family, but he can’t let go of the memories of his old family
Rdr2 is the greatest masterpiece there is .. Rockstars 💎
but everything that is in New Austin is simply unfinished.. 1 big disappointment.. From that terrible invisible sniper to the city of Armadillo and its cholera outbreak.. How sad is all this .. There is nothing there that’s worth to revisit 😓
I was so happy that I thought I could go back to Thieves Landing, Armadillo... That maybe I could go and see Bonnie again... R* gives us this beautiful huge map but doesn't give us any reason to do anything in it with John Marston... - Building Beechers Hope and Milking Cows that’s about it 🙌🏻 😏 Ashame really
Doesn't ruin anything for me personally, but I get your point yeah. I figure it's more of a fanservice for the fans of the OG game so I loved being able to explore this old part of the map as John. Sentimental I know I know lol. Main story wise, is it only that one mission with Sadie that is set in the old map (beyond Blackwater obviously)? It's been a while since I played the epilogue. I think of the exploring you do as John outside story missions as non-canon and yeah as i said - fanservice.
Well said
And yet according to RDR2 15 Year old Bonnie was already married to an old man found on the lake shore...
Yeah its clearly fanservice... Although I'd argue it's pretty weak fanservice.
I feel like they should've taken 1 more year of development for the Epilogue specifically, I mean I would've happy with waiting an extra year for the entire game had I known how much cut content RDR2 really had.
Yeaaa this was clearly intended to be an Arthur interaction. By 1899 Bonnie would’ve definitely been a little girl and it would line up more with the RDR timeline
@@zer0deaths862 yeah, that shit made no fucking sense
I don't think they intended to make a second game at first and just used things that worked such as John not talking about Arthur to their advantage. So there's gonna be plot holes guys.
Hey just made red dead redemption iceberg video, would be awesome if you checked it out!
Nope, no excuse.
When Dutch, Hosea and Arthur go fishing, Dutch mentions that he misses being close to the sky in New Austin-if u look at the pic of the gang that Pearson has in his shop it shows the gang in a desert so I thot well clearly they have been in New Austin, went to Blackwater, over the mountains and we all know what happens next. Still a great game though.
Got emotional playing John again, it was good don’t get me wrong but at the same time it was heartbreaking as we know how the story ends
You thot? Lmao
@@ArmandoFloresAvila it’s sometimes used as a shorter way of using the word Thought but I just this moment realised what the word actually means so I will be saying to the people I know “so guys guess what?” 😂😂
That's not New Austin. John made it clear in the first game that the gang never went to New Austin.
John has left the gang for few years. So it is possible that Dutch and Arthur went there while John not.
The picture takes place in like 1895, because you can see there that Abigail is holding Jack as a newborn baby. Considering that he is four years old in 1899 it makes sense for the picture to be taken back in 1895. And yes it’s definitely in the desert but we can’t be sure if it’s in new austin or some other state out west.
House is completely different too. I spent alot of time climbing Bonnie's house in RDR 1 so I noticed that right away.
Hey just made red dead redemption iceberg video, would be awesome if you checked it out!
Trying to peep on her, I am familiar with your game
@@CodPatrol She's a handsome woman.
@@CodPatrol Wait what you can do that?
@@CDTyphol No but in the old version you can climb on the sides, I used to break the windows trying to see if you can get in if you crouch but didn’t look like it worked
I think John saying he hasn't been to New Austin is not to be taken literally. For example, I had to take a joint flight in Vancouver to get to my destination. I was only in Vancouver for airport reasons. John was only in New Austin for bounty reasons, probably didn't even realize it either because he was working either out of Blackwater, Rhodes, or Strawberry. I don't say I've been to Vancouver even though I technically have. Perhaps this can be our accepted head canon for this issue.
Also on top of that, John hasn't been to the ranch in any missions so I wouldn't even consider this encounter canon and it's simply fan service from Rockstar to us longtime fans. It's there for the player to enjoy, but John canonically is probably settled in the ranch life until RDR 1 happens and has never made his way into any of the towns in New Austin.
So how’d you like Vancouver?
@@jarrodhall3686 It was raining
@@NukaDud lmao
That's what I was thinking. Hennigan's Stead doesn't look like the rest of New Austin, so John might've not even realized he was in the state once.
John probably didn’t pay too much thought into his time in New Austin because he didn’t have that much interaction with its residents. It was a ghost country dying from sickness and outlaws. The only person he interacted with more than once was Sheriff Freeman, and Tumbleweed is abandoned by 1911. John really has no idea what the people there were like. John learned from Dutch to judge an area by its occupants rather than its appearance, in order to keep an eye for opportunities. John didn’t know New Austin because he had little to no interaction with its inhabitants.
I came across a cut content video that included audio of the sheriff in tumbleweed calling Arthur out by name, so I’m thinking at some point Arthur was able to go to New Austin, it’s possible this interaction was made for him, but when they cut the idea of Arthur in New Austin, they might have forgot to cut a few encounters that don’t make sense while playing as John.
@@Vorticy135 oh I got ya, I wasn’t too sure, given that some of Arthur’s lines were re-worked as John depending on how far you completed certain side missions, I figured that was the same case here.
Arthur was originally supposed to explore all these Areas not John so this encounter would have been with Arthur.
That’s exactly why im replaying the game on version 1, cant wait to get arthur into new austin
I wonder why they incorporated the New Austin map at all? I think Rockstar should have made more of new map instead of New Austin, even though I like exploring New Austin in this game.
The first time I played the game I thought that Arthur would be stranded in New Austin after Guarma so that he could work his way back to the gang from there. When that didn't happen I thought he would travel there to combat his tuberculosis but he died instead. That last part were perhaps wishful thinking.
But it was a missed opportunity indeed.
I think they were trying to remake 1 (no source just hunch) since there were also parts of mexico in the game if you break boundaries that were just waiting to be textured. Why it never happened, IDK
@@comicbookbacon8704 Even though the game is so long it still feels like there are things missing.
@@comicbookbacon8704 There was also the towns, POIs, coordinates for the towns, and even the actual visable map for Mexico was found in the files of the game
So def not a hunch that they were gonna at least put Mexico into the game
i'm 100% confident that it was made for RDOnline
To my knowledge, John in RDR 1 said he wasn’t familiar with New Austin. He never said that he had never been there before, just thaf he didn’t know the area. I don’t have a problem with John very briefly going to New Austin with Sadie years before the first game. It doesn’t break any canon for me. But the barn not being there bothers me.
He did mention never going there, specifically at the mission you drive Bonnie to Armadillo.
@@sulkii9437then again Eastern New Austin looks nothing like the west so he might’ve not have known, it’s not like he had a gps.
@@sulkii9437 He says he isn't familiar with New Austin, not that he has never been there before
@@LonelyGothGirl He says he never went there in the armadillo mission with Bonnie.
Given that Arthur wasn't present in the Blackwater Massacre, and that his appearance changes once you get to chapter two, with the beard and his hair have grown longer, and you can dress him in different clothing, it seems like you shouldve been able to disguise yourself and slip through Great Plains undetected, like you can in other towns where Arthur is wanted, but you change up his appearance, provided you don't get too close to lawmen where they can recognize you.
Do that, and you should've been able to slip Great Plains and into New Austin, which if I'm understanding correctly, the gang hadn't committed any actual crimes beforehand, so it shouldn't have been barred like it was.
Plus, it would've been cool to have interacted with a younger Bonnie as Arthur, and perhaps have some side missions with Sadie in New Austin, the latter I don't think we got near enough of, as I love the chemistry between the two.
Yeaaa this was clearly intended to be an Arthur interaction. By 1899 Bonnie would’ve definitely been a little girl and it would line up more with the RDR timeline
Arthur was present though. He just mentions a few times in Chapter 1 he wasn’t there when everything went to shit on the riverboat, but he was in town when the shootout happened, along with Hosea.
Cut dialogue of Arthur saying losing his horse, Boedicia and was surrounded with Mac Callender in the battle confirms this.
@@magiccookies420 - Never did hear that.
I feel like a lot of stuff doesn't add up from 1907 to 1911 and it's kind of annoying. Take Thieves Landing for example: It's virtually empty in RDR 2, but is bustling in RDR 1. That kind of community growth and settlement expansion happens over 20-30 years, not 4. Also, Tumbleweed in the first game looks like it's been abandoned for WAY longer than 4 years, it should've been abandoned in RDR 2 as well. I feel like they really overestimated how much things change in 4 years, New Austin & West Elizabeth should've been virtually identical to the first game.
Since there’s talks about Arthur being able to go to New Austin, I kinda think that Armadillo having a plague and Tumbleweed not being a ghost town yet actually makes a lot more sense. It would take place in 1899, not 1907. That’s 12 years instead of 4.
the difference of new york city from 2019 to 2021 (middle of covid) is a massive change. I think you'd underestimate the change that could happen in thieves landing and armadillo though I do agree about Tumbleweed though. Natural decay takes much longer. If a large amount of people move to an area and they all work hard you'd be surprised how quickly a place improves.
i’ve had the exact same thoughts about tumbleweed and thieves landing
@@millerrepin4452 was there a global pandemic in this time? absolutely not and 8 million people still lived in nyc at the time
Tumbleweed was attacked sometime later after you've done all the bounty missions in Tumbleweed as John. Not saying that you can witness it in-game but just a small oversight many players have missed. It's already said in-game that the Del Lobo's are gonna burn Tumbleweed down which might have led to the Town looking like it aged a whole lot longer than 4 years, probably because it was burned.
I would’ve gladly waited another year or two if that’s what it would take for Rockstar to polish the epilogue better
I had a few problems with the epilogue in this one. I just wish I could give the Letter to Bonnie.
Same. But as Arthur. I would have LOVED for him to meet her or Drew.
@@RedsDeadBaby It was definitely inteded for Arthur to go there instead of John. So this might've been too.
@@RedsDeadBaby I would've loved to have met drew atleast in online since Bonnie is aged 16-19 in 1898 so it doesn't make sense for her to be handing out kill orders
@@RedsDeadBaby back in 1899, bonnie would be way too young to meet arthur no?
@@Baobao-qf3wv Shes in rdo and appears late teens and gives you missions so she is def old enough to have had some invovlement with athur.
Would it really be so hard for Rockstar to just add a massive expansion using the same dialogue from RDR1. Considering they already have Mexico rendered pretty well for something they don't even use would it be so hard to just include the story of the first game as an expansion I would be willing to pay $60 or so dollars for it
I’d be willing to sell my own wife for that
@@RedsDeadBaby if it's anything like my last six year relationship I can understand why
@@RedsDeadBaby seriously though could you just imagine how beautiful that game would look what's the same mechanics of rdr2
Yes, it would. An expansion will never sell as much as a new game.
please!!!
Technically, all of this is non canon to John. Anything the player does outside of the main story that doesn't affect it is non canon. The only thing canon about John being in "New Austin" and Hennigan's Stead areas were the missions with Sadie.
I kept waiting for when Arthur would be able to go back through blackwater when I first played the game and was disappointed when I realized that was never gonna happen
Maybe RS considers post story gameplay non canon ? Just a thought.
Hey just made red dead redemption iceberg video, would be awesome if you checked it out!
The Guarma chapter was not needed an unnecessary instead we should have been able to go to New Austin after the bank heist in Saint Denis and explore the map as Arthur Morgan
The giant map of New Austin felt like wasted space serving no purpose other tha one mission with Sadie Adler
Rdr 1 feels like a whole other universe now cause of rdr2 and the Inconsistency it has
It’s entirely possible that John would’ve forgotten this encounter, especially if he was just passing through.
Plot twist: This is Gavin and he's been at Macfarlane Ranch this entire time.
I love how this game has the most attention to detail the gaming community has ever seen, and yet we still somehow find a hole in the story.
People will find plot holes IRL
They're just finding reasons to hate Rockstar. As if killing RDO and GTA 5 isn't enough
Oh no, a game has flaws. What a nightmare.
@@sulkii9437 Exactly. NOTHING is perfect.
@@MariusBoss11458RDO y GTAONLINE is ruined singleplayer.
Make a video on The Strange Man and the town of Armadillo if you haven't already. Seems like a lot of people missed that part of the lore in this game!
I did months ago. It was super surprising John actually had dialogue for it when he spots it
Bruh if ur ass don’t stop acting like u found it on your own. Mans watched a UA-cam video and suddenly thinks he’s one of the few who pays attention to details in a game.
I think there was supposed to be a 1907 version of New Austin but was scrapped Rockstar wanted to release the game earlier.
Would have been cool to be in New Austin as Arhur, all of that state is blocked off by Pinkertons, and the lower half of West Elizabeth, where Blackwater is, yet the upper half isn't where Strawberry is, but in the game, bounties are statewide and it's just cities on lockdown.
Something I noticed is that in rdr1 she tells John the barn has been their since she was just a little girl but in 1907 it's still not their in rdr2 so she lied or rockstar just forgot Abt her saying that but still a mistake
I believe something had to do with a grave error that ended up hurting the production time and making Arthur's interaction in New Austin being cut to the game and pretty much any other cut content like the rest of Guarma and so on. That interaction with the McFarlane i believe could be a brain mistake where the writers completely forget to check the lore of MacFarlane ranch in RDR1. Oh well, there's always gotta be something like these where it just doesn't make sense for a content to be cut but they got their own reason
We’ll it’s because John is mysterious
I wouldn’t tell a stranger I just met I’m a ruthless gunslinging maniac
It's not really bothering me but I still think you got a point there. I would've loved it more to explore New Austin with Arthur this time and not being able to explore the south west part of the map with John because of some reason.
What about the guy in the boat that is half dead and gives you the letter thats written for Bonnie?
Bonnie says in RDR 1 that the barn was built when she was a little girl.. Well.. She ain't so little in RDR online..
How does this ruin it?
Hey would you mind telling me what clothes (especially the shirt) you are wearing in the thumbnail? :)
I have no idea why Rockstar did this. This was an encounter meant for Arthur.
If you have any problem with the epilogue being any more than tie-ups and fan service after the 30/40 hour+ main story then there's some issue. I wouldn't use online as a fair comparison either given when it was released and the way that GTA online never functioned as canon for the story until it was essentially re-written years after and I'd have more of a problem with that happening to Red Dead than I would the way it was intended.
Bonnie: my father built that barn when I was a little girl.
RDR2: *no barn*
Everyone: 😶
They ran out of time so arthur in new austin was cut along with 5 hours of content including mexico
It’s clearly the 1899 Mcfarlane ranch. This is essentially what it would’ve looked like if Arthur was able to go there. It should’ve been updated for 1907 epilogue but it wasn’t. Take this with a grain of salt, because everything after American Venom is not canon
Doesn’t bother me too much, just wish the barn was there. What does bother me though is that you can find a letter for Bonnie on a guy who has washed up ashore as either John or Arthur & you can’t give it to her. I wish they made it so you can only find the letter as Arthur & you can go to New Austin to give the letter to her as Arthur.
how exactly did this ruin it?
Thers another mistake Officer Marshall John says he has been working to hunt criminals in Armadillo for last 15 years
But in 1907 Armadillo was a ghost town full of cholera outbreak
I bet you there's dialogue in the game files for this conversation as Arthur
Originally the map was cut off at West Elizabeth so you couldn't go to new austin and I would have preferred that because new austin is empty and lonely and I'd rather the effort was spent giving the lesser used gang members more to do and maybe adding activities to do with the old gang members you meet again in the epilogue
"I wish whiskey grew on trees"
How did they ruin it?
I put it in the description
The only ranchers in the game that isn’t a total basterd
Why the hell is it ruined ??
I don’t think it’s canon in red dead redemption John tells Bonnie that he’s never been to new Austin, Arthur was originally going to be their their a lot of hidden dialogue, sad Rockstar cut it it would of made way more since.
I think this voiceline is for Arthur mainly since he was supposed to go to new Austin
It doesn’t matter because this and all of new Austin isn’t canon
To be honest I don’t know why they Evan added it when John states in rdr1 that he never been to new Austin
All of this issues wouldn't have happened if they just stick with remaking Blackwater and Beacher's Hope. I dont see the point on making the entire RDR1 map when in the story mode is barely used.
It doesn’t have to be canon most of these encounters and stranger missions aren’t they need to add something to new Austin it would be completely empty then
yeah it makes no sense lmao
arthur should've been the one to explore new austin and mexico
rockstar should've released an undead nightmare dlc for the fans
just have it take place in its own universe like have it happen either after the blackwater massacre or velentine
Well rockstar games is rockstar games so they will unfortunately never release an undead nightmare.
This might explain why they met in the train in RDR1
But what is he ruining?
edit: Later saying he's never been there before? It's not underheard of to not remember having visited a location before, especially if the people there have changed and it wasn't important the first time.
0:31 "Wish whiskey grew on trees"
What is the problem with this encounter ?
The game is awesome but New Austin feel as empty as the soul of Assassin's Creed NPC
Love these videos
Thanks :)
I mean the epilogue of rdr2 happened 3 years before rdr 1 so whats the problem
Well it's a game made by rockstar after all
/:
Rockstar killed RDR..... with RDR2
How??
I don't really care tbh. it's nice to see new austin even if its empty. also arthur cannot be able to be in new austin because of him being wanted and His TB being an important story piece. The barn was built when Bonnie was a little girl. so in 1907 she wouldve been at least 13. the barn could have also been built even in 1899 when she was five. that qualifies.
Bonnie says she’s 27 in the first game so she’s 23 in 1907 not 13
@@user-hx6gs9rq7u i mean 23. misspelled haha.
Rdr2 is the greatest masterpiece there is 🔝
Rockstars gem 💎
but everything that is in New Austin is simply unfinished.. 1 big disappointment.. From that terrible invisible sniper to the city of Armadillo and its cholera outbreak.. How sad is all this .. There is nothing there that’s worth to revisit 😓
I was so happy that I thought I could go back to Thieves Landing, Armadillo... That maybe I could go and see Bonnie again... R* gives us this beautiful huge map but doesn't give us any reason to do anything in it with John Marston... - Building Beechers Hope and Milking Cows that’s about it 🙌🏻 😏 Ashame really
Is it just me or do you also hate playing as John? I start a new play through and stay in chapter 2/3 for months just to avoid the end and having to play as John
These encounters aren't canon, you aren't really supposed to go there
Boy explain me about that barn in the miniature...
We need remaster rdr1
No wonder she was so intelligent
0:26 that looks so bad why haven’t they fixed John
So all in all what is this implying to the story? Anyone?
Quit being whiny. It's unbecoming of a gunslinger.
I can't use the word laziness to describe anything that has to do with the production of Red Dead 2.
These folks worked their tales off and created a living breathing work of art with 0s and 1s.
Any time I have picked up the controller through thousands of hours of game play, I have been impressed by something.
You're making me "This guy is trying to make us hate Rockstar" now of course. GTA 5 was enough but not RDR2
How? It’s a good encounter bozo😂😂😂
want a autograph?
The entire epilogue, besides the very main story part of it, is mediocre at best. And very buggy.
RDR2 contradicted so much of RDR1 it’s unbelievable.
It’s what made me stop caring near the end of the story mode.
The only thing that ruins this game is Arthur should have lived and killed Micha himself and found Marry an run off with her
ZACH TREY
You mean rdr2
Honestly I didn’t like rdr1 to begin with
your opinion doesn’t matter
@@ReviewCart69 exactly, it’s just a opinion, so don’t get all ape shit about it
I hate they did this
Ruined is a strong word. Idk why people are complaining about small errors
Boo hoo
I agree
I get why they included it but it would have been better had they saved this encounter for Arthur if he could have traveled to New Austin
@@RedsDeadBaby yes
First
Howdy
It’s clearly the 1899 Mcfarlane ranch. This is essentially what it would’ve looked like if Arthur was able to go there. It should’ve been updated for 1907 epilogue but it wasn’t. Take this with a grain of salt, because everything after American Venom is not canon
It’s clearly the 1899 Mcfarlane ranch. This is essentially what it would’ve looked like if Arthur was able to go there. It should’ve been updated for 1907 epilogue but it wasn’t. Take this with a grain of salt, because everything after American Venom is not canon