@@ThePxpe >Objectively, just bad actions all around. From Evelyn Millers "The American Inferno" you can read in game: " In the end, what has a man but his thoughts? I would postulate further, what is a man to stand for, but his thoughts? His actions, perhaps? I know precious little of actions. Lions, donkeys, hyenas. They all act. So is that what we are? No. We are more and less than the beasts. We are thoughts. We are *actions and the reflections upon those actions* . Yet, we are also not merely reflections. We are not mirrors. That is the preserve of spirits, of the gods. We are actions and the thoughts upon actions, neither one nor other. We are free neither from action, nor from thought. Our humanity can only be understood if we embrace both the animal and the god within us. As humans, we must nourish both, yet *America is a land of action*. A place fixated not on ideas, not on the redemptive power of thought but on the obliteration of the intellect. " I think this could be the games way of telling you there are certain actions you must undertake in game regardless, you can´t escape them. You do have power over thought in some manner, you can choose how Arthur interprets information and responds to people. If you choose to go High Honor Arthur becomes much more contemplative and questions Dutch´s leadership (and see´s sense) a lot more. I made a video a month ago on faith & redemption in the game, doesn´t talk specifically about Arthur but might be some stuff in there you find interesting
@@ThePxpe Arthur actions make him a bad man but What He tries in the end comfirms Hes a good man inside but that dosent change the fact that hes a bad man bc he shoot and kills and robs and dosent even care
What distinguishes Arthur in the honorable and dishonorable endings is his internal state at the time of his death. In the honorable ending, Arthur finds a sense of peace, knowing that even his small acts of goodness matter in some way, despite the pain and destruction he has caused. His final moments are marked by acceptance and a belief that his efforts to help others, however modest, hold meaning in a world full of suffering and violence. In contrast, the dishonorable ending presents a far darker perspective, emphasizing the inevitability of a life driven by violence and selfishness. Arthur's refusal-or inability-to change leads to a downfall that is devoid of hope or redemption. His death feels empty, a grim testament to the consequences of greed and vengeance, serving as a cautionary tale about the cost of living without moral growth or self-awareness. Whether Arthur is truly redeemed is a question left open to interpretation, shaped by each player's personal values, beliefs, and experiences. It's impossible to definitively say "yes" or "no" from an objective standpoint, as doing so would oversimplify the character's complexities and undermine the deeper exploration of redemption that the story so carefully presents.
I think there's a differentiation between redemption with atonement that needs to be understood. You can be redeemed, but you will likely never be able to fully atone for what you've done. Arthur was redeemed because he figured out all the evil he did was truly wrong and that he had to do what was right, and part of that was fixing what he could of what he had done previously. Once he realized he was an agent of Dutch's chaos, he could make the choice to keep doing that, or try to fix what he could with the time he had left. I think Arthur was redeemed because he chose to stop. He could never fully atone for all he did, there are too many people died, and too much wreckage from the chaos he sowed. All he could do with the people he harmed doing Strauss' collections was absolve the debts, and excise strauss out of the gang. By that point in the game you should be out-earning the rest of the gang, handily. The people he killed and robbed, that's gone, he can't bring back the dead, and most of the people he robbed are long gone: too much time and too much distance. I don't think Arthur or any of the rest of the gang could fully atone.
For me i think hes not actually redeemed however he felt remorse and tried to do the best he could (if you play at high honor after chapter 5 obv) Arthur didnt have the chance to do good for the rest of the series and all he did was just save his friend, thats not really redemption nor does it outweigh his borderline evil actions for nearly 3 decades prior
I personally don't think Arthur redeemed himself. Assuming you kill no one you ain't supposed to, he still has like 500 canonical kills. He tore apart families, killed families, etc. Love Arthur, he's an amazing character, but there's no redemption in my mind for murderers or 🍇ists.
I disagree. While it is true that arthur has murdered countless individuals, a vast majority of those he murdered in his life were other gang members, criminals, murderers, and people threatening his family or himself. I see Arthur as almost a soldier of Dutch, killing as a result of being ordered to do so. Raised and brain washed to do his bidding. I see redemption as something anyone can achieve as long as their heart and mind change. Arthur was once a killer, but truly understood his misdoings and worked as hard as he could to right his wrongs. If there is an all knowing god in rdr2, they would be able to see through arthur and understand if he really changed for unselfish reasons. If arthur only did good to escape hell or to rid himself guilt, then no he is not redeemed. If he truly changed in his heart out of compassion for those he wronged and with a drive to right his misdeeds, then he was redeemed. From my perspective, Arthur was not the same person at the beginning of RDR2 as he was at the end. He transformed into almost an angel of sorts. Protecting and providing for all he could until he took his last breath.
@@JustinFirth-t9l Easiest way he could provide for the world would be to tell the Pinkertons where the gang was and what they were doing then turn himself in. He's, like it or not, become blind to the affect of killing. He cannot live a normal life, hes done too much. Killing one innocent person, which he has, is in my opinion beyond redemption. You took it upon yourself to destroy the single most precious thing in the world frivolously. But, thats just my opinion. Agree to disagree.
great video, I agree I think his efforts to make things right in the end earned him redemption
Thanks. It was hard honestly deciding. Objectively, just bad actions all around. His efforts are what earned him, in his heart at least, redemption.
@@ThePxpe
>Objectively, just bad actions all around.
From Evelyn Millers "The American Inferno" you can read in game:
" In the end, what has a man but his thoughts? I would postulate further, what is a man to stand for, but his thoughts? His actions, perhaps? I know precious little of actions. Lions, donkeys, hyenas. They all act. So is that what we are? No. We are more and less than the beasts. We are thoughts. We are *actions and the reflections upon those actions* . Yet, we are also not merely reflections. We are not mirrors.
That is the preserve of spirits, of the gods. We are actions and the thoughts upon actions, neither one nor other. We are free neither from action, nor from thought. Our humanity can only be understood if we embrace both the animal and the god within us. As humans, we must nourish both, yet *America is a land of action*. A place fixated not on ideas, not on the redemptive power of thought but on the obliteration of the intellect. "
I think this could be the games way of telling you there are certain actions you must undertake in game regardless, you can´t escape them. You do have power over thought in some manner, you can choose how Arthur interprets information and responds to people. If you choose to go High Honor Arthur becomes much more contemplative and questions Dutch´s leadership (and see´s sense) a lot more.
I made a video a month ago on faith & redemption in the game, doesn´t talk specifically about Arthur but might be some stuff in there you find interesting
Arthur is a bad man with a good heart
But is a man truly bad if he has a good heart
@@ThePxpe Arthur actions make him a bad man but What He tries in the end comfirms Hes a good man inside but that dosent change the fact that hes a bad man bc he shoot and kills and robs and dosent even care
What distinguishes Arthur in the honorable and dishonorable endings is his internal state at the time of his death. In the honorable ending, Arthur finds a sense of peace, knowing that even his small acts of goodness matter in some way, despite the pain and destruction he has caused. His final moments are marked by acceptance and a belief that his efforts to help others, however modest, hold meaning in a world full of suffering and violence.
In contrast, the dishonorable ending presents a far darker perspective, emphasizing the inevitability of a life driven by violence and selfishness. Arthur's refusal-or inability-to change leads to a downfall that is devoid of hope or redemption. His death feels empty, a grim testament to the consequences of greed and vengeance, serving as a cautionary tale about the cost of living without moral growth or self-awareness.
Whether Arthur is truly redeemed is a question left open to interpretation, shaped by each player's personal values, beliefs, and experiences. It's impossible to definitively say "yes" or "no" from an objective standpoint, as doing so would oversimplify the character's complexities and undermine the deeper exploration of redemption that the story so carefully presents.
I think there's a differentiation between redemption with atonement that needs to be understood. You can be redeemed, but you will likely never be able to fully atone for what you've done.
Arthur was redeemed because he figured out all the evil he did was truly wrong and that he had to do what was right, and part of that was fixing what he could of what he had done previously. Once he realized he was an agent of Dutch's chaos, he could make the choice to keep doing that, or try to fix what he could with the time he had left. I think Arthur was redeemed because he chose to stop.
He could never fully atone for all he did, there are too many people died, and too much wreckage from the chaos he sowed. All he could do with the people he harmed doing Strauss' collections was absolve the debts, and excise strauss out of the gang. By that point in the game you should be out-earning the rest of the gang, handily. The people he killed and robbed, that's gone, he can't bring back the dead, and most of the people he robbed are long gone: too much time and too much distance. I don't think Arthur or any of the rest of the gang could fully atone.
For me i think hes not actually redeemed however he felt remorse and tried to do the best he could (if you play at high honor after chapter 5 obv)
Arthur didnt have the chance to do good for the rest of the series and all he did was just save his friend, thats not really redemption nor does it outweigh his borderline evil actions for nearly 3 decades prior
Towards the end Arthur tried his best to be the man Dutch was not willing to be. To me he was redeemed.
The general consensus I’ve seen amongst ppl who play the game. Not mad at it
Let's goo?
The question mark is hilarious
I personally don't think Arthur redeemed himself. Assuming you kill no one you ain't supposed to, he still has like 500 canonical kills. He tore apart families, killed families, etc. Love Arthur, he's an amazing character, but there's no redemption in my mind for murderers or 🍇ists.
I disagree. While it is true that arthur has murdered countless individuals, a vast majority of those he murdered in his life were other gang members, criminals, murderers, and people threatening his family or himself. I see Arthur as almost a soldier of Dutch, killing as a result of being ordered to do so. Raised and brain washed to do his bidding. I see redemption as something anyone can achieve as long as their heart and mind change. Arthur was once a killer, but truly understood his misdoings and worked as hard as he could to right his wrongs. If there is an all knowing god in rdr2, they would be able to see through arthur and understand if he really changed for unselfish reasons. If arthur only did good to escape hell or to rid himself guilt, then no he is not redeemed. If he truly changed in his heart out of compassion for those he wronged and with a drive to right his misdeeds, then he was redeemed. From my perspective, Arthur was not the same person at the beginning of RDR2 as he was at the end. He transformed into almost an angel of sorts. Protecting and providing for all he could until he took his last breath.
@@JustinFirth-t9l Easiest way he could provide for the world would be to tell the Pinkertons where the gang was and what they were doing then turn himself in. He's, like it or not, become blind to the affect of killing. He cannot live a normal life, hes done too much. Killing one innocent person, which he has, is in my opinion beyond redemption. You took it upon yourself to destroy the single most precious thing in the world frivolously. But, thats just my opinion. Agree to disagree.
Congratulations you're not able to tell fantasy from reality. Enjoy the ride.
@@bbb462cid It was a rational question.
@@AmbroseTG.A I did not comment on the question. You are supporting my conclusion by making a straw man.
YUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHH
YUHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Arthur Morgan was the best but the worst man ever
Agreed. The perfect protagonist in my eyes
Tuff vid
Ty ty🙏🏽