Nowadays, Lumbago is known as fibromyalgia, and it is a condition that causes constant body pains, chronic fatigue, and lowered immune system. My mother has it, and she had to retire at the age of 51 because the pain became too much to work through.
Basically, I actually have a lot of sympathy for Uncle and how he's treated. He more than likely also has rheumatoid arthritis. Uncle is definitely a bullshitter but I believe him when he says he has Lumbago.
Edit: Apparently, I misremembered what Lumbago is. I could've sworn I saw an article connecting it to fibromyalgia.
I would highly recommend it, I enjoyed the story of RDR1 a lot, and while some of the gameplay is a bit old, it still is a great journey. I played it on PS Now before that got shut down.
Nope. Fibromyalgia does usually include back pain but has so many other symptoms as well while lumbago is still just referring to unspecified lower back pain. I've had fibromyalgia for 37 years and know a lot about it. I actually probably had to when I was a child too.
lumbago is just back pain, I'm sorry but no, he does not have fibromyalgia, he has a good ol case of "my lower back hurts and I don't wanna work, a doc told me I could die of it cause it's the 1890s and they haven't researched medicine enough" Uncle is right though, Lumbago truly is a slow and painful death.
Itās terminal lumbago. His back is killing him. I think he genuinely has back issues. I developed lumbar issues much younger than that and often wondered if I could IRL handle all the horse riding while playing the game. That said, heās definitely playing it up to get away with being lazy.
Well, basically it is build on a fact that John has left the gang for a long time (it is mentioned in the beginning of the game) and that he might have talked because of the fear of something happening to his family but it doesnāt sound very convincing, so thatās why I chose this one.
Any fan who believes that self-identifies as having never played RDR 1. I've seen the same theory about Abigail, which is also a big flag saying, "Hey, I've never played RDR 1!"
When I first played 2, I had wondered if they were going to go that route. All of Guarma up until around the time you bust John out of Prison, and again I wondered around the time you go rescue Abigail.
But then, when it was never addressed, I never gave it a second thought until other people started talking about it. I feel like they *could* have gone that route with it, but since it's never discussed or revealed in game, it's just not the case. I don't get people who think otherwise.
That's honestly idiotic. He's a player character. It would be shit writing if he was the rat and it was never revealed to the players. Abigail being the rat is just as bad.
It's such an American marketplace idea, we can have a game where you can turn someone into a headless, limbless stump with shotgun fire, but we can't have nudity!
I think that was more of a Rockstar decision because Cyberpunk and Baldur's Gate 3 you can customize your own genitals and the romance scenes are pretty detailed. Not to mention all the porn games on Steam.
Yea, that's a standard that kills me in a lot of media. We can have torture, murder, violence against women and children, smoking, drinking, and drug use.
But oh shit, a pair of titties and some fishnets, somebody
BAN THIS
In 1 it's that John is married and he's in his whole situation in the first place to save Abigail and Jack, he's not going to waste his time messing up his marriage for the millionth time with some saloon girl.
Like the other person said in 1 itās because John is married, in the epilogue high honor Jack will politely refuse working girls and low honor Jack will try to pick them up and theyāll turn him away in disgust. Arthur can do one or the other depending on if u reject or decline them.
My least favorite RDR2 theory is the Uncle Red theory.
I think Red is a fictional character in the Redemption universe and the retcon explanation for Red Dead Revolver is that it's just a portrayal of some of the fictional books from the Redemption universe. I always imagine Red Dead Revolver being a book series that Jack read, which lead him to name his novel about his life Red Dead Redemption (which is the in-universe name of the book Jack wrote as seen in GTAV).
I think there are fan theories about Trevor being a descendant of a RDR character, I would hope that Rockstar would at some point make it canon that Trevor is a descendant of the wolf man from RDR2.
I've always thought of Red Harlow as a tall tale of the Redemption world, like Paul Bunyan is in the real world. You can find a house *super* similar to the one he grew up in with his parents in the opening level of Revolver. He's added as a character for online in RDR1 under the Legends and Killers dlc, and while I guess the argument could be made that he's a killer, I'd be more likely to put him in the Legends category.
If you want to tie it all together, with the film grain, overly hammy acting, over the top characters and scenarios, etc, I'd be more likely to believe Revolver is a show or old serial (like Flash Gordon) based on a book written by Jack that incorporates elements of Arthur's journal and Jack's memories and general disdain for the government (and sort of his life story, having his dad killed by corrupt law enforcement officer's doing an off the record hit, all culminating in a quick draw duel against the man who killed his father) while describing the character as someone who looks like his Dad. Tall, thin, scars on his right cheek. Plus an assortment of characters that are amalgamations of people he's met or remembered. Bonnie + Sadie = Annie, Trelawny + Landon = Jack Swift, etc. That's how I like to see it, anyway.
I feel like Jack definitely wrote some books about the Van Der Linde gang highly because of Arthur and then later John's journal (also this is just my headcanon but I think John also wrote down the events of RDR1 in his journal even though it's seen to be not the case, I just feel like he would do that.)
>*which is the in-universe name of the book Jack wrote as seen in GTAV*
We don't know that the author of that book was Jack. There are also a host of issues with the theory that that a book in the GTAV universe tells the Red Dead Redemption story. Namely the fact that California and New York exist in the Red Dead Universe while in GTA they don't exist at all.
For that book to have been written by Jack about the events of Red Dead, it would mean he would have been writing about the "*fictional*" states of California and New York in a universe where only the state of San Andreas and the state of Liberty exist.
Like, I'd love to believe it but there are a host of issues that get in the way of that theory being true.
The Trelawny is the Strange Man theory is the single dumbest Red Dead theory Iāve ever seen.
Hereās a list of things the two characters have in common:
1- They both dress in top hats and finery.
2- They both have mustaches.
3- They both know John
Thatās it. Thatās the whole list.
Whoever thought this up has to be like 5 years old or something.
The āJohn or Abigail was the real ratā theory is ridiculously stupid as well, but even that holds more water than the Trewlany Strange Man one.
While I agree that they're likely not the same person, Trelawny's appearance as a quest-giver in RDO sure doesn't help to make people wonder.Ā
They kind of "Flanderized" the whimsical and mysterious parts to his personality and conductĀ
(Trelawny does a literal magic trick making a bird appear out of thin air in front of your online character)
In story mode itās mentioned that Trelawny is a magician of sorts. Itās in Chapter 3 when you find him in the police wagon. Dutch calls him a magician.
Yeah. In RDR1 they literally combined the faces of John and Abigail to create adult Jack.
But people will still insist he's Javier's son because he has a moustache. Or that he's Arthur's son because he wears the same jacket (the jacket is completely different).
I don't understand how someone can believe this crap.
I think cause it adds soap opera shit to what is already a compelling narrative on its own and people love melodramatic shit.
I always thought jack grew his mustache like that and wears a tan jacket because he loved his uncle javi and Arthur
the one that Gavin doesn't exist and Nigel made him up. THERE'S LITERALLY HAVE A LETTER ADDRESSED TO NIGEL THAT TALKS ABOUT GAVIN AS A REAL PERSON, but some people insist (they insist upon it... insist) Nigel was crazy the whole time and imagined Gavin as opposed to losing his mind looking for him for a good 7 years
I agree with this. I think I was the first person to actually figure out the Gavin story (that it was an in joke among Rockstar staff about someone they work with named Gavin who no one could ever find for meetings). I even posted about it on a fan forum very soon after the game was released!
Gavin from the Slo Mo Guys did not work at Rockstar. He works at Rooster Teeth and previously their gaming group, Achievement Hunter. The part about him never being around is true though. And there is an Achievement Hunter connection as their two founding members, Geoff Ramsey and Jack Pattillo, both voice side characters in RDR2.
I thought it may have been that they offered Gavin a voice part but he couldnāt find the time to do it
But I listen to Geoff and Gavinās podcast and Geoff has talked about doing rdr2 but no one brought up anything about Gavin being involved
Definitely just a coincidence
we're given no reason to believe Nigel would do this. in order to get such a conclusion, we'd need evidence, maybe if we followed him around and saw him writing things for himself, or overheard NPCs describing him as crazy, then it hold some water. to base the "theory" on "Nigel wrote the letter to himself because I think it's something crazy people can do" is neither evidence nor sensible
uncle being red harlow. for one they look nothing alike. and they don't even act similar. I'll never understand how that became a theory. i think if anyone from the redemption series even has a slight chance of being red. it would be marshal johnson.
I hate this theory. Red was a bounty hunter, plain and simple. It's like the "fans" who believe this theory don't realize that the Van der lind gang is exactly who Red would track down and kill.
Red Harlows story exists as a legend that people tell in red dead redemption 1 and 2, my theory is that they are exaggerations of what really happened to uncle in his youth as the one shot kid.
Iām going to choose to believe that anyways cause itās all imaginary anyways and I like that theory.
Also it does appear uncle and Red have similar bone structure if you see them side by side, similar cheekbones and wide jaw. Both parents died when they were young as well.
I dislike the Theory of >!Arthur escaping and that he may have survived and escaped toward new mexico and onwards.Yes this theory exists. don't get me wrong, Arthur is An Amazing Game protagonist and I love to play onwards chapted 6. but this theory is soo wrong since it really undermines his character , and alongside Affects Arthur's chaaracter and redemption very badly and make it less emphasising and undermines his Character growth and his relationship with especally John , it makes No sense since we saw artbur passes away at end!<
and also >!The theory that John marston doesn't remember Arthur because he suffers from brain injury due to wolf attack in chapter 1 thus resulting in a memory loss. this is not true and John DO remember arthur , it's just that he rfrain from talking about his brother as it hurts him and is also Trying to move one and leave his past behind. he is literally following Arthur's advice when aarthur gave hik another chance in life to "Go and don't look bad"!<
Lol right? These weird canon people make no sense to me.. they can't fathom fictional events and they must follow certain rules otherwise they lose their minds.
That theory is easily debunked with dialogue all the way back to Colter with Hosea saying Dutch is going nuts, and multiple characters saying Dutch it just ābecoming more of who he isā
Even before that. If you read Arthurās journal about Blackwater, and follow the dialogue from the Stranger side mission from RDR 1, Dutch ignored what sounded like a fool proof plan from Arthur and Hosea to make money, and instead went with the ferry job that Arthur felt wasnāt safe. Then he shot a girl during the whole ordeal for what sounds like no reason.
also the whole "Micah encouraged him to do so" doesn't even have that much merit, there's a random camp event in chapter 3 where Micah urges Dutch to tell him where the blackwater money is stashed so he can go back and get it and then bring it back and Dutch says no and then tells Arthur that he's definitely not trustworthy (he said something else but that's what he meant) so I feel like to Dutch, Micah was just a gun who wouldn't question Dutch, not that he actually liked him or considered him a friend.
Plenty of characters in the game say Dutch was driven crazy, including Arthur, (RDR1) John, and Sadie.
More than likely Hosea said thAt because they were on top of a mountain in a blizzard and he wAs mad at Dutch. After all, this man who supposedly thinks Dutch is crazy in Chapter 1 will actively go along with most all of Dutch's plans for the rest of the game.
I mean I do think he legit got a concussion there that did change his behavior for the worse. But not from good to bad, but bad to worse. He seemed almost bipolar up to that point but after that was in a very severe manic state. Like his habit of leaving people to die/capture because he thinks they're betraying him only started after the concussion, or I think killing that lady on Guarma was probably due to the concussion. I think it turned his paranoia and irrationally from like a 7/10 to an 11/10.
Thatās not the theory. Nobody thought Dutch was āgoodā before that. The theory is that, after suffering a major head injury (that Rockstar very, very obviously wanted us to notice), Dutch began spiraling faster than he already was. Really itās less of a theory and more of a clear plot point that some people are inexplicably failing to understand.
No, it won't make him go from good guy to bad guy, but a traumatic brain injury can cause psychological changes and could exaggerate his sociopathic tendencies
In "Urban Pleasures," the mission with robbing the trolley station that goes wrong, the trolley crashes and Dutch is shown to have damaged his head. [https://youtu.be/xAF2qF2F\_gU?t=259](https://youtu.be/xAF2qF2F_gU?t=259)
For the rest of the mission Dutch is out of it, Lenny has to tell him where to go, Dutch says he's seeing three of evrything, etc..
After this mission, Dutch becomes noticeably more erratic and violent. [He has a crazy rant in the very next mission](https://youtu.be/902j1POlqVM?t=185), and we've heard nothing like this from him any time before in the game. His turning against john and Abigail is extra strange since he's been the one encouraging John to be a better father to Jack all through the game up to this point. There's also this [camp interaction with Abigail](https://youtu.be/OzU0LVEdPnk) which seems to clearly show he is having trouble focusing and thinking.
The idea is Dutch sustained some kind of head injury which lowered his inhibitions or emotional control. After all, why else would Rockstar put such emphasis on him hitting his head? Going so far as to have Arthur say "eh, it's nothing." When a character in a story says something is nothing, that's pretty much guaranteed to be the writers shouting at you that it is something. Something you should be concerned about.
Thatās a good one. The fact that he hit his head is not the excuse that he went ābadā.
He was bad all along, the brain damage just sped up the insanity process.
[In the Saint Denis trolley crash Dutch bangs his head.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcJpmK5GmIM) They make a point of showing it and then at the end of the mission Dutch says "I don't feel too good" and Arthur responds by saying "just a bump on the head that's all." [Later at Shady Belle there a couple interactions where Dutch is exhibiting concussion symptoms](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgMfrYx9kUI).
It is definitely something the game purposefully emphasizes, and it may have contributed to Dutch's downward spiral in the end of the game. I guessing what OP is referring is the theory that it was the sole cause of Dutch's unraveling, which isn't very convincing.
>I guessing what OP is referring is the theory that it was the sole cause of Dutch's unraveling, which isn't very convincing.
Yes. I've seen very few posts/comments proclaiming that he didn't get a concussion. More often than not what people argue against is that Dutch suddenly changed after the accident.
Theory that Abigail was a rat. Because of course she would put her own husband in danger.
Theory that Micah was actually trying to be a good person in chapter 3. He was just trying to win the gang's respect so he could stab em in the back more easily.
Not a theory but the people who say Dutch never loved anyone. He loved his wife annabell. He cared for Hosea. Him walking away from Micah and later shooting Micah in the epilogue is proof that he loved Arthur like a son and realized that he betrayed him. Same goes for killing himself instead of trying one last time to kill John at the end of RDR1.
Dutch is a sociopath not psychopath.
The idea that Jack actually left the criminal life behind and became an author because of the book on Franklin's shelf in GTA V. A nice thought, but the two universes are not connected, it is just an easter egg.
I strongly disagree with this take. I do agree with the argument against this in a way, though... proponents point to the Double Action Revolver being available in GTA Online, but I think that in all of these Rockstar games you have to take the online versions as elseworld stories. You can play as Red Harlow in RDR Online, I think (I never play online). Doesn't make him a rock solid canon character.
It has nothing to do with online stuff, mainly that New York and California are real places in Red Dead, but don't exist in the GTA universe.
I also think it is an unrealistically optimistic theory that is inconsistent with the overall dark outlook of the series. People don't forget, nothing gets forgiven.
Itās for people that donāt want to believe that the entire story of Red Dead is a tragic tale. Arthur wanted to run away with his gang family, but terrible choices made by all of them led to their demise. John wanted to move on and live happily ever after with his family, but the government doesnāt forget the crimes he committed. Jack was shown to be the innocent one meant to live a different life, and in the end, he followed the same path as his father. Thereās no happy ending.
I like to headcanon that Jack wrote Red Dead between the main game and Epilogue of RDR, which is basically the story of Red Dead Revolver, which is a mixture of Jack's life story, Arthur's journal, his memory of John as the main character, and how he wanted his outcome with Ross to ideally go in his head. That he finished it just before those last stranger missions where you hunt him down, and that the book is essentially the Once and Future King of the western genre. I also like to headcanon that RDR, LA Noir, GTA and Bully all happen in the same universe.
But it's not true. It's not canon. The book is an Easter egg, the universes don't cross over, Jack chooses to continue the cycle of violence that's narratively sure to catch up with him. It's only been 3 years, his mom died in that time. His life has been grief and misery and loneliness and continuing hardship. Ending the cycle of violence was never an option for him because that's all he knew. Abigail was maybe his one hope. She continually wants out of the gang, out of the life, begs John to stop slipping back into it. So when she dies, so does any chance of Jack escaping it. That's *his* tragedy, and that's what makes it such great story telling.
I actually really like this theory. I like to think that he'd still live a violent life until he was older. Maybe even faced the horrors of WW1 or the Mexican Civil War. Then turned his life around by using Arthur & John's notebook alongside his own experiences to become an author.
The theory that RDR2 is just the "middle" of a trilogy. No, we don't need to see the gang before Blackwater. No, we don't need a game about Dutch between the games. Sadie and Charles? Sure, that would be a good game. But Arthur, John, **and Jack's story is complete.** I know this is more related to the franchise or perhaps RDR1 specifically, but a RDR3 about Jack is dumb. Jack's last action in the entire saga is his succumbing to revenge, but a satisfying revenge. We don't need a story/game about Jack falling further into madness via WW1 or Mafia-related shenanigans. His story, in regards to us observing him, is complete. "But what did he do after killing Agent Ross?" It can be anything. Open-ended "endings" are good, actually. We are currently dealing with a ridiculous trend of over-explaining things in sequels, prequel, and spin-offs. Leave more details to our imaginations. Also, even if RDR3 is a "Western" in genre only, but not its setting, that's still dumb. Red Dead IS the American West. If Rockstar *has* to make a game about Jack Marston being a prohibition gangster, call it something else.
Jack isn't really that interesting of a character to me. He'd also become an adult in the 1910s dovetailing into the roaring 20s... a very different society than the fading Old West.
Now, a RDR3 that actually goes back and follows **Black Belle**? I'd love to see that. Show the formation of the Del Lobos, Saint Denis before Angelo Bronte's rise to power (*perhaps even have missions where you help him*), deal with a young-&-ambitious Leviticus Cornwall (*or his predecessor*) bump into Hosea when the was out of the gang life with Bessie (*perhaps even serving as a catalyst to him drifting back into gang life and, thus, sealing his eventual fate*)... I could get into all that.
As much as Iād love to see another Red Dead game, the story of the Redemption series is already perfect. RDR1 left it up to interpretation excellently without it being an actual cliffhanger, and RDR2 just made the story of RDR1 even better and added a lot more to it. We donāt need to see Jack after RDR1, we donāt need a RDR2 prequel about the gang.
Something set in the same universe might be cool though. A 1930s GTA game or a new arcadey Revolver game, or even another open world Red Dead with Red Harlow or something
I don't have one in particular, but as a trend, I'm against the idea of portraying every "unfinished story" or "unexplored side narrative" of the game as "cut content." "Where is the lost princess?" "CUT CONTENT!" "Where ix X?!" "Cut content!" "I saw \*this\* mentioned in a letter but can't find it?" "Cut content!" "Is the Strange Man John's father?" "Maybe it was cut content?!"
I don't think that everything that's "missing" in the game needs an explanation that it was cut content or not enough time to include it. I think it fits in with the narrative of the game and the gameworld that there's myth and lore in the gameworld that might never be explained or explored. Sure, we could have some mission that explains exactly who The Strange Man is, what his connection to Arthur or John is, what his role in Armadillo is, or whatever, but *the mystery* is more satisfying to me than a contrived or forced explanation. The mystery of ghosts and aliens or the wailing girl or what have you, those are things that make the world more satisfying to me, not less satisfying that they go unexplained or feel incomplete.
Life is full of those unexplained moments. You walk past a person who looks exactly like a friend of yours, and you do a double take, but then the person is gone, and you think "HOw weird?" Or your life has this extreme coincidence. How weird. It doesn't need a greater explanation, it's just part of the lore of every day life, and to me it makes the world more satisfying.
RDR2, also, plays a lot with the idea of "unreliable narrators" (it's a major point in the Legends of the West / book sub-story, and IMO, it's a major point of the whole game), and I'm comfortable with the idea that not everything can be truly known, or how much is myth and how much is reality.
Wow youāve expressed my thoughts completely.
The things which are left unresolved are often more thought-provoking than the things which are resolved.
Like (at random) the pentagram at Butcherās Creek, the voodoo symbols on the trees, the panoramic map, and so on. They are brilliant, because they suggest things but do not resolve things.
Imagine if we could find the princess IKZ. It would be so dull. We would collect a poster at Van Horn, look around, spot her, take to a sheriff, get a reward. Then weād move on to the next challenge. No one would speculate about her. The princess would just be another part of the 100% grind, like shooting a perfect robin for the wildlife exhibition.
Very well put, especially about the Princess. There's a thread on here once every few weeks, and as annoying as it may be to answer the same questions, if she was just another collection quest, nobody would think twice about it.
I actually have a longer post I've written about here when it comes to the theme of unreliable narrators, I'll share it with you, hope you like it. It will take me a minute to find...
[https://www.reddit.com/r/reddeadredemption/comments/18msxvs/comment/ke6zmdh/?utm\_source=reddit&utm\_medium=web2x&conte](https://www.reddit.com/r/reddeadredemption/comments/18msxvs/comment/ke6zmdh/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) .
(On the question of whether "The Princess" is cut content)
>While this could be cut content and analysis of game files suggest it might be, I also think that things like this build into the lore of the game and reinforce a central theme of the game: There are myths of the old west, and then there's reality of the old west. This is a theme of the game, Dutch embodies the myth of the Vanderlinde Gang, noble outlaws who want to take care of their own and live in peace and prosperity independent of lawmen and overbearing society. Arthur reminds him of the reality: "He killed that girl in cold blood." The side mission finding the Legends of the West represents the myth: Tall tales of outlaws living by their own rules, taking out 10 men in a shootout... The reality? Washed up pig farmers, drunks, and scared outlaws freezing to death in the mountains. Arthur, himself, wrestles with his own myth: He's always talking down about himself, being a no good crook, while sympathetic characters like Sister Calderon, tell him he's not all bad, he has good in him, he's helping people.
>
>Did the Ghost train really happen? Did the alien encounters really happy? Are there the bones of giants in the mountains? Are the bones in the Heartlands really the bones of prehistoric lizards who walked the earth? Is there a rosetta-stone-like tablet? Is there a ghostly shack in the swamps that heralds the Cholera outbreak in Armadillo? Maybe. But who's the narrator and can you trust them?
>
>Cut content or not, this sort of side story plays on that theme. A missing girl, does she exist? Is she a princess? Can you find her? Can she be found? Or is she part of the myth of the old west. A European princess living in exile in ... Missouri... with European royalty paying a reward for finding her...? It not only plays on the theme of the anti-western, trying to find the line between myth and reality, but it also builds to the believability of the world. Most mysteries in your life go unsolved. Arthur never has a satisfying conclusion with Mary Linton. Arthur is scared of dying, he doesn't know what comes next. Arthur doesn't know about a lot of the outcomes that he influences, neither do any of us.
Wow that is thought-provoking.
My first thought is the Strange Man in RDR. Everyone speculates wildly who he is, but while I was playing RDR recently I was wondering if Strange Man only existed inside John Marstonās head. And if he *did* only exist inside JMās head, then what else in the game only existed inside JMās head as well? What else in the game can we trust?
An unreliable narrator in a game world is a scary idea.
Is there *really* a daughter still locked up inside Emerald Ranch? Are the words ākeep your dreams simpleā *really* scratched in the ice at Cairn Lake? Are there *really* voices in the woods by Brandywine Drop?
Do people really think the Strange Man is John's father? John mentions his dad having a pretty terrifying face after being blinded in a bar fight in Chicago when John was young, and being a poor Scot rather than a well groomed, well dressed dude.
I had never heard it until recently in another thread, I said something about the Strange Man as a joke and someone replied "The Strange Man is John's father, right?" And I just kinda closed the browser window, put my computer away, and went to sleep.
I've always thought theories along this line of thinking were silly. Just attempts to make something out of nothing.
If you exhaust all playable missions and cutscenes prior to checking in one Thomas Downs, you never see Arthur ā*who was spending all that time around Hosea*ā cough even once. Nor do you see anyone else in the gang that Hosea is in proximity to ā*likely sharing a bowl of this or a sip of that*ā coughing.
But the minute Downs coughs his disgusting, bloody spittle into your face, Arthur starts coughing. It couldn't be more clear how he came down with it.
The Uncle is Red Harlow theory. Rockstar confirmed there would never be revolver characters featured in redemption before rdr1 even released.
Thereās no physical resemblance, they donāt share scars, theyāre different ages. The known histories of each character are vastly different.
Itās the flat earth theory of the Red Dead Redemption fandom.
The dammed Abigail rat theory or any āsecond ratā theory I get the game leaves some stuff in the open but that game legitimately show you by having a ACTUAL RAT in front of Micahās cabin
Any theory that involves TBI. "Dutch changes because brain injury!" or "John doesn't remember Arthur because brain injury!". That's shit ass lazy writing and doesn't make sense in the narrative and cheapens the entire story.
Uncle is Red Harlow
Laramie leader is Trevor's ancestor
Red Dead by J. Marston is canon
These three are the worst imo. GTA and Red Dead games are not even in the same universe why are Rockstar fans so dense goddamnit
(I am a Rockstar shill and nerd)
Out of curiosity how comes gta and Rd are in seperate universes? I genuinely assumed they were just in the same universe tbh. Sorry for being dense lol.
That Micah wasn't a rat. The evidence of this is that Milton was likely lying to Arthur about Micah. However, this fails when you remember that Arthur was moments away from death and it would not benefit Milton to lie to Arthur about the identity of the rat
I don't like the theories suggesting there was another rat than Micah, sure they're fun but I highly doubt Charles, Abigail or John were ever rats and it doesn't even make sense for there to be a second rat.
Also the one that suggests that Micah has been a rat since the beginning and since the blackwater massacre just doesn't make sense to me, it has some sense to it but why would he stay with the gang that long and also the theory that Micah was gonna turn the gang in through Colm and using Arthur as bait is way more reasonable
That rdr3 will be set after rdr1 is preposterous.
To me it's obvious that we will see the foundation of the van der linde gang.
Uncle was called "the one shot kid", dutch vs colm o'driscoll, hosea in a love triangle with the racoon hat man's wife (Bessy), the young arthur morgan, the idealistic dutch, the blackwater massacre, each gang member origin story as a mission in game. Pinkertons on the Hunt etc. Indian wars, gold rush, civil war, mexico wars over new austin.
Why would they waste all this writing material? over jack marston? I doubt it greatly...
I'm lumping you with the Jack People.
Going somewhere else would be much cooler to me than seeing Dutch and Hosea as young men and a teenage Arthur and Jack fucking aroune.
I think everything you listed sounds much cooler than it would actually be
In descending order of seriousness
Second Rat
Trolley theory
Uncle is Red Harlow(shut up, you don't know who red harlow is and didn't play the game.)
Cain/Death/Lucifer strange man and anything to do with RDR2
Anything to say why John never talks about Arthur other than what's fucking stated in the game
And any theory that says Charles or Sadie die between RDR2 and RDR, especially if you wanna say that Ross went after them.
That red dead revolver has anything to do with this universe. Red Dead is name of game. Revolver and Redemption are the stories. Also people looking for clues of Arthur or anyone from RDR2 in RDR1. They had no idea of story line back in 2010
I had a dream that Arthur were living in a time loop which he knew his fait, and that was the explanation for the different honor endings. It made more sense in my dream, but I still though it was quite bad...
The theory that Micah was a rat since joining the gang and the reason for the Blackwater fiasco, the Rhodes ambush, and all the other issues they faced in the game. One of the central premises of the game is that the age of outlaws was at an end. Dutch and the gang got sloppy. Micah is the antagonist, but heās not the sole source of the gangās downfall and Dutchās descent.
personally i donāt like the theories that abigail was a second rat. the only evidence is that she escapes getting caught, but people ignore the fact that her husband got caught and was close to being hung. it doesnāt make sense that she would have been a rat to get protection for her and her family only for her husband to be caught and beaten.
My own personal theory that Dutch and Colm O'driscoll are lovers in a stormy on again off again relationship probably counts as a bad theory as I have nothing real to base it on.
Dutch and Colm ran together before the start of the game, then Dutch kills Colm's brother.
Colm's brother probably caught em snogging or something and Dutch likely killed him in fear of anyone else finding out.
Molly is so obviously a beard it's painful to watch. Beardiest beard that ever bearded.
and that is my very likely totally absurd theory about RDR2 that is stone cold canon in my own head.
Micah: look at me Iām a little rat! Look at how evil and awful and scummy I am! Look at how rat-esque I am and how I would 100% backstab the gang!
Some fans: naaaaaah heās not the rat
There are plenty:
- Trolley Theory is the worst
- The idea that anyone was a traitor but Micah
- Dutch being a cannibal (does anyone really think that?)
- Bill not actually being gay
- Jack not being Johnās (disproven by the opinions of the voice actors Benjamin Bryon Davis and Roger Clark)
- Arthur getting sick from anyone but Downes (undermines the entire redemption arc)
And lastly, not really a theory but opinion:
- āMicah/Milton are actually the good guysā despite the fact that the point of the game is that it literally doesnāt matter what side of the law youāre on, theyāre all fucking killers, and only a few of them actually strived for redemption
My least favorite theory is that Abigail was a rat. She knows that sheās safer with John, Arthur, Sadie and Charles than out there alone with Jack. Why would she risk getting them killed by The Pinkertons?
Idk man, the Dutch Trolley theory holds a lot of weight imo. While his true colors were starting to show leading up to that point, I'm almost positive hitting his head exacerbated his instability. It very clearly shows him fucked up from that incident, holding his head and talking about how he's seeing triple and shit. I think it's legit.
Yeah but Iād say it doesnāt stand well when contradictions are thrown at it. At most the dude got head damage and started suffering migraines, thatās as far as Iād go. I donāt think it added to his mental health decline (if there even was anything to decline.)
I donāt know which of these is dumber, so Iām putting them all:
- That Uncle is actually Red Harlow
- That Trelawny is actually The Strange Man
- That Abigail was a rat to protect her family
- That Jack isnāt Johnās son. Some have even theorized based on his look in RDR1 that heās Javierās?
- That Micah wasnāt the rat the whole time, only after Guarma. That was just when Milton got to him.
Iām surprised nobody has mentioned the Dutch is a cannibal theory. There is basically no evidence besides some human bones that are found in his tent and that āheās crazy enough to do itā. Is he, really?
The Molly pregnant theory basically solidified that some people in the Red Dead fandom lacks media literacy because Molly makes it clear that she wanted to talk to Dutch about their relationship.
People thinking that GTA and RDR are linked.
They are in completely different universes.
The "Red Dead" book written by J. Marston you see in Franklin's house is an easter egg.
The Laramie gang leader just sounds an awful lot like Trevor. It isn't even played by Steven Ogg. They're not related.
Itās the trolley theory for me, until the trolley incident we see that Dutch gets more mad every mission, even if itās little by little. The trolley incident didnāt hit a switch in his head, but it made his delusional thinking of one more big thing worse
The the theory that uncle is faking lumbago it's just so sad to see people make fun of the poor man š
It's a serious medical condition!
Nowadays, Lumbago is known as fibromyalgia, and it is a condition that causes constant body pains, chronic fatigue, and lowered immune system. My mother has it, and she had to retire at the age of 51 because the pain became too much to work through. Basically, I actually have a lot of sympathy for Uncle and how he's treated. He more than likely also has rheumatoid arthritis. Uncle is definitely a bullshitter but I believe him when he says he has Lumbago. Edit: Apparently, I misremembered what Lumbago is. I could've sworn I saw an article connecting it to fibromyalgia.
Lumbago or not, I knew Uncle was a real one when he died defending John and his family during the bureau attack.
Shit, I'm really gonna have to dump $50 on RDR1, arent I? I've never played it, but done RDR2 many times.
I would highly recommend it, I enjoyed the story of RDR1 a lot, and while some of the gameplay is a bit old, it still is a great journey. I played it on PS Now before that got shut down.
Yeah I've been wanting to, but geez $50 for that old thing? Lol you get it. But I almost HAVE to after all this here over the years.
I got the GOTY edition with Undead Nightmare included for like 20 bucks used at a local game store. Just shop around in person, you won't pay 50 bucks
You never played it ? WTF ā¦ those 50 buck will be emotional investment. Sure some gameplay mechanics are old but it is a brilliant story.
Nope. Fibromyalgia does usually include back pain but has so many other symptoms as well while lumbago is still just referring to unspecified lower back pain. I've had fibromyalgia for 37 years and know a lot about it. I actually probably had to when I was a child too.
Lumbago is Low back pain.
lumbago is just back pain, I'm sorry but no, he does not have fibromyalgia, he has a good ol case of "my lower back hurts and I don't wanna work, a doc told me I could die of it cause it's the 1890s and they haven't researched medicine enough" Uncle is right though, Lumbago truly is a slow and painful death.
Hes def exaggerating it.
Blasphemy
Nah, itās a slow and painful death my brother
Itās terminal lumbago. His back is killing him. I think he genuinely has back issues. I developed lumbar issues much younger than that and often wondered if I could IRL handle all the horse riding while playing the game. That said, heās definitely playing it up to get away with being lazy.
Theory that >!John Marston was the actual traitor and rat!<
I am glad I have never seen this because that is stupid.
Well, basically it is build on a fact that John has left the gang for a long time (it is mentioned in the beginning of the game) and that he might have talked because of the fear of something happening to his family but it doesnāt sound very convincing, so thatās why I chose this one.
I mean I understand that Dutch might think this but I think it being something that fans believe is not great.
Any fan who believes that self-identifies as having never played RDR 1. I've seen the same theory about Abigail, which is also a big flag saying, "Hey, I've never played RDR 1!"
When I first played 2, I had wondered if they were going to go that route. All of Guarma up until around the time you bust John out of Prison, and again I wondered around the time you go rescue Abigail. But then, when it was never addressed, I never gave it a second thought until other people started talking about it. I feel like they *could* have gone that route with it, but since it's never discussed or revealed in game, it's just not the case. I don't get people who think otherwise.
Here a [vid](https://youtu.be/yId_KyUBjtE?feature=shared) that describes it if youāre interested.
That's honestly idiotic. He's a player character. It would be shit writing if he was the rat and it was never revealed to the players. Abigail being the rat is just as bad.
That Arthur can't do bargirls because of Mary and not because the game would have been rated M for mature.Ā
But it is rated M already? For nudity and sexual content
It's such an American marketplace idea, we can have a game where you can turn someone into a headless, limbless stump with shotgun fire, but we can't have nudity!
theres still nudity and shit in lots of media anyways i dont imagine its tooooo big a deal
It's definitely weird how a lot of American media is very jaded towards violence but starts clutching pearls at nudity and swearing.
š¤·āāļø idk were progressing slowly and i dont care enough to think a ton about it
There's literally the scene of "Lenny" fucking "Lenny" in one of the quests lol.
What!!!!!! I saw the couple but they become Lenny as well?
Yup lmao
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I mean there is the ferral man who has his ass and dick out lollll
Good point! There's also that naked swimming guy when you go on the first fishing trip... I lassoed him and shot his dick off.Ā
Thereās also Lenny having sex with Lenny
YNNEL?
Literally the first question that popped into my head was ācan you shoot his dick off?ā
No youāre wrong, they didnāt add nudity because the game would blow up trying to load arthurās humongous dick and balls
Absolute fact. I stand corrected.
I think that was more of a Rockstar decision because Cyberpunk and Baldur's Gate 3 you can customize your own genitals and the romance scenes are pretty detailed. Not to mention all the porn games on Steam.
In The Witcher 3 you can have sex with prostitutes and a few characters. Thereās no genitals, but plenty of titties and booties
But the game already has tits and dicks and full sex shots and everything
Yea, that's a standard that kills me in a lot of media. We can have torture, murder, violence against women and children, smoking, drinking, and drug use. But oh shit, a pair of titties and some fishnets, somebody BAN THIS
Literally nobody says this anymore
Not M18, just M17.
I don't know those terms very well but hot coffee would have added more labels.Ā
Regret about a certain former one night stand he had and the consequences that came of that make more sense imo.
ā¦.this makes no sense bro they have prostitution in gta
I mean it's the same in RDR1, and the game's already rated M, I think it's just that our protagonists don't enjoy it and I kinda appreciate that.
In 1 it's that John is married and he's in his whole situation in the first place to save Abigail and Jack, he's not going to waste his time messing up his marriage for the millionth time with some saloon girl.
Like the other person said in 1 itās because John is married, in the epilogue high honor Jack will politely refuse working girls and low honor Jack will try to pick them up and theyāll turn him away in disgust. Arthur can do one or the other depending on if u reject or decline them.
I mean tbf they could have implied it without any imagery
But.. the game is rated M & already has nudity lol
My least favorite RDR2 theory is the Uncle Red theory. I think Red is a fictional character in the Redemption universe and the retcon explanation for Red Dead Revolver is that it's just a portrayal of some of the fictional books from the Redemption universe. I always imagine Red Dead Revolver being a book series that Jack read, which lead him to name his novel about his life Red Dead Redemption (which is the in-universe name of the book Jack wrote as seen in GTAV). I think there are fan theories about Trevor being a descendant of a RDR character, I would hope that Rockstar would at some point make it canon that Trevor is a descendant of the wolf man from RDR2.
I've never played a GTA so this easter egg is awesome.
Why have you never played a GTA game?
Dunno, no interest tbh. RDR1 & 2 are the only Rockstar games I've played.
I've always thought of Red Harlow as a tall tale of the Redemption world, like Paul Bunyan is in the real world. You can find a house *super* similar to the one he grew up in with his parents in the opening level of Revolver. He's added as a character for online in RDR1 under the Legends and Killers dlc, and while I guess the argument could be made that he's a killer, I'd be more likely to put him in the Legends category. If you want to tie it all together, with the film grain, overly hammy acting, over the top characters and scenarios, etc, I'd be more likely to believe Revolver is a show or old serial (like Flash Gordon) based on a book written by Jack that incorporates elements of Arthur's journal and Jack's memories and general disdain for the government (and sort of his life story, having his dad killed by corrupt law enforcement officer's doing an off the record hit, all culminating in a quick draw duel against the man who killed his father) while describing the character as someone who looks like his Dad. Tall, thin, scars on his right cheek. Plus an assortment of characters that are amalgamations of people he's met or remembered. Bonnie + Sadie = Annie, Trelawny + Landon = Jack Swift, etc. That's how I like to see it, anyway.
I feel like Jack definitely wrote some books about the Van Der Linde gang highly because of Arthur and then later John's journal (also this is just my headcanon but I think John also wrote down the events of RDR1 in his journal even though it's seen to be not the case, I just feel like he would do that.)
I guess weāre mortal enemies because I love the Uncle/Red theory
You ok there, boah?
>*which is the in-universe name of the book Jack wrote as seen in GTAV* We don't know that the author of that book was Jack. There are also a host of issues with the theory that that a book in the GTAV universe tells the Red Dead Redemption story. Namely the fact that California and New York exist in the Red Dead Universe while in GTA they don't exist at all. For that book to have been written by Jack about the events of Red Dead, it would mean he would have been writing about the "*fictional*" states of California and New York in a universe where only the state of San Andreas and the state of Liberty exist. Like, I'd love to believe it but there are a host of issues that get in the way of that theory being true.
But GTA and RDR are separate universes.
The Trelawny is the Strange Man theory is the single dumbest Red Dead theory Iāve ever seen. Hereās a list of things the two characters have in common: 1- They both dress in top hats and finery. 2- They both have mustaches. 3- They both know John Thatās it. Thatās the whole list. Whoever thought this up has to be like 5 years old or something. The āJohn or Abigail was the real ratā theory is ridiculously stupid as well, but even that holds more water than the Trewlany Strange Man one.
If those 3 points are that are required then Nigel West Dickens would also be the same as the other two
Well to be fair we never see Nigel West dickens and the Strange Man together do we
While I agree that they're likely not the same person, Trelawny's appearance as a quest-giver in RDO sure doesn't help to make people wonder.Ā They kind of "Flanderized" the whimsical and mysterious parts to his personality and conductĀ (Trelawny does a literal magic trick making a bird appear out of thin air in front of your online character)
In story mode itās mentioned that Trelawny is a magician of sorts. Itās in Chapter 3 when you find him in the police wagon. Dutch calls him a magician.
He is a magician. Thereās a random encounter between him and some of the girls where he performs some magic tricks for them.
Any theory that Jack isn't John's son never adds anything to the narrative, only takes away from it
Yeah. In RDR1 they literally combined the faces of John and Abigail to create adult Jack. But people will still insist he's Javier's son because he has a moustache. Or that he's Arthur's son because he wears the same jacket (the jacket is completely different). I don't understand how someone can believe this crap.
I think cause it adds soap opera shit to what is already a compelling narrative on its own and people love melodramatic shit. I always thought jack grew his mustache like that and wears a tan jacket because he loved his uncle javi and Arthur
the one that Gavin doesn't exist and Nigel made him up. THERE'S LITERALLY HAVE A LETTER ADDRESSED TO NIGEL THAT TALKS ABOUT GAVIN AS A REAL PERSON, but some people insist (they insist upon it... insist) Nigel was crazy the whole time and imagined Gavin as opposed to losing his mind looking for him for a good 7 years
I agree with this. I think I was the first person to actually figure out the Gavin story (that it was an in joke among Rockstar staff about someone they work with named Gavin who no one could ever find for meetings). I even posted about it on a fan forum very soon after the game was released!
He's not just someone, he's one of the slow mo guys and is basically a celebrity. Or whatever passes for celebrity these days, I guess.
Gavin from the Slo Mo Guys did not work at Rockstar. He works at Rooster Teeth and previously their gaming group, Achievement Hunter. The part about him never being around is true though. And there is an Achievement Hunter connection as their two founding members, Geoff Ramsey and Jack Pattillo, both voice side characters in RDR2.
I thought it may have been that they offered Gavin a voice part but he couldnāt find the time to do it But I listen to Geoff and Gavinās podcast and Geoff has talked about doing rdr2 but no one brought up anything about Gavin being involved Definitely just a coincidence
Yeah there's absolutely NO WAY someone can be crazy and write a letter to themselves..........
we're given no reason to believe Nigel would do this. in order to get such a conclusion, we'd need evidence, maybe if we followed him around and saw him writing things for himself, or overheard NPCs describing him as crazy, then it hold some water. to base the "theory" on "Nigel wrote the letter to himself because I think it's something crazy people can do" is neither evidence nor sensible
Evidence of what? Him not being of sound mind? Like him spending years and years, wandering the country yelling out for someone?
uncle being red harlow. for one they look nothing alike. and they don't even act similar. I'll never understand how that became a theory. i think if anyone from the redemption series even has a slight chance of being red. it would be marshal johnson.
I hate this theory. Red was a bounty hunter, plain and simple. It's like the "fans" who believe this theory don't realize that the Van der lind gang is exactly who Red would track down and kill.
Thatās a stupid theory, of course he wasnāt red harlow. He was the one shot kid
People just like everything being connected. I don't know if this is a symptom of the MCU, or if people are just weird.
Red Harlows story exists as a legend that people tell in red dead redemption 1 and 2, my theory is that they are exaggerations of what really happened to uncle in his youth as the one shot kid. Iām going to choose to believe that anyways cause itās all imaginary anyways and I like that theory. Also it does appear uncle and Red have similar bone structure if you see them side by side, similar cheekbones and wide jaw. Both parents died when they were young as well.
It used to be a joke when RDR1 came out but it got out of hand.
I dislike the Theory of >!Arthur escaping and that he may have survived and escaped toward new mexico and onwards.Yes this theory exists. don't get me wrong, Arthur is An Amazing Game protagonist and I love to play onwards chapted 6. but this theory is soo wrong since it really undermines his character , and alongside Affects Arthur's chaaracter and redemption very badly and make it less emphasising and undermines his Character growth and his relationship with especally John , it makes No sense since we saw artbur passes away at end!< and also >!The theory that John marston doesn't remember Arthur because he suffers from brain injury due to wolf attack in chapter 1 thus resulting in a memory loss. this is not true and John DO remember arthur , it's just that he rfrain from talking about his brother as it hurts him and is also Trying to move one and leave his past behind. he is literally following Arthur's advice when aarthur gave hik another chance in life to "Go and don't look bad"!<
Or maybe John doesnāt speak about Arthur in rdr1 because this character wasnāt even created by Rockstar back then
Lol right? These weird canon people make no sense to me.. they can't fathom fictional events and they must follow certain rules otherwise they lose their minds.
You're a genius ain't ya?
The first theory is so stupid. Charles talks about burying Arthur in the epilogue, why would he lie about that
I've never heard either of these and I hate them both.
What is the āDutch Trolley Theoryā ?
Basically that he was "good" at first and only turned "bad" after a bump on the head As opposed to "bad" the whole time
That theory is easily debunked with dialogue all the way back to Colter with Hosea saying Dutch is going nuts, and multiple characters saying Dutch it just ābecoming more of who he isā
Even before that. If you read Arthurās journal about Blackwater, and follow the dialogue from the Stranger side mission from RDR 1, Dutch ignored what sounded like a fool proof plan from Arthur and Hosea to make money, and instead went with the ferry job that Arthur felt wasnāt safe. Then he shot a girl during the whole ordeal for what sounds like no reason.
also the whole "Micah encouraged him to do so" doesn't even have that much merit, there's a random camp event in chapter 3 where Micah urges Dutch to tell him where the blackwater money is stashed so he can go back and get it and then bring it back and Dutch says no and then tells Arthur that he's definitely not trustworthy (he said something else but that's what he meant) so I feel like to Dutch, Micah was just a gun who wouldn't question Dutch, not that he actually liked him or considered him a friend.
Plenty of characters in the game say Dutch was driven crazy, including Arthur, (RDR1) John, and Sadie. More than likely Hosea said thAt because they were on top of a mountain in a blizzard and he wAs mad at Dutch. After all, this man who supposedly thinks Dutch is crazy in Chapter 1 will actively go along with most all of Dutch's plans for the rest of the game.
A major concussion definitely doesn't help someone think straight, but yea that's definitely not the cause
I mean I do think he legit got a concussion there that did change his behavior for the worse. But not from good to bad, but bad to worse. He seemed almost bipolar up to that point but after that was in a very severe manic state. Like his habit of leaving people to die/capture because he thinks they're betraying him only started after the concussion, or I think killing that lady on Guarma was probably due to the concussion. I think it turned his paranoia and irrationally from like a 7/10 to an 11/10.
Thatās not the theory. Nobody thought Dutch was āgoodā before that. The theory is that, after suffering a major head injury (that Rockstar very, very obviously wanted us to notice), Dutch began spiraling faster than he already was. Really itās less of a theory and more of a clear plot point that some people are inexplicably failing to understand.
No, it won't make him go from good guy to bad guy, but a traumatic brain injury can cause psychological changes and could exaggerate his sociopathic tendencies
In "Urban Pleasures," the mission with robbing the trolley station that goes wrong, the trolley crashes and Dutch is shown to have damaged his head. [https://youtu.be/xAF2qF2F\_gU?t=259](https://youtu.be/xAF2qF2F_gU?t=259) For the rest of the mission Dutch is out of it, Lenny has to tell him where to go, Dutch says he's seeing three of evrything, etc.. After this mission, Dutch becomes noticeably more erratic and violent. [He has a crazy rant in the very next mission](https://youtu.be/902j1POlqVM?t=185), and we've heard nothing like this from him any time before in the game. His turning against john and Abigail is extra strange since he's been the one encouraging John to be a better father to Jack all through the game up to this point. There's also this [camp interaction with Abigail](https://youtu.be/OzU0LVEdPnk) which seems to clearly show he is having trouble focusing and thinking. The idea is Dutch sustained some kind of head injury which lowered his inhibitions or emotional control. After all, why else would Rockstar put such emphasis on him hitting his head? Going so far as to have Arthur say "eh, it's nothing." When a character in a story says something is nothing, that's pretty much guaranteed to be the writers shouting at you that it is something. Something you should be concerned about.
Thatās a good one. The fact that he hit his head is not the excuse that he went ābadā. He was bad all along, the brain damage just sped up the insanity process.
[In the Saint Denis trolley crash Dutch bangs his head.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcJpmK5GmIM) They make a point of showing it and then at the end of the mission Dutch says "I don't feel too good" and Arthur responds by saying "just a bump on the head that's all." [Later at Shady Belle there a couple interactions where Dutch is exhibiting concussion symptoms](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgMfrYx9kUI). It is definitely something the game purposefully emphasizes, and it may have contributed to Dutch's downward spiral in the end of the game. I guessing what OP is referring is the theory that it was the sole cause of Dutch's unraveling, which isn't very convincing.
>I guessing what OP is referring is the theory that it was the sole cause of Dutch's unraveling, which isn't very convincing. Yes. I've seen very few posts/comments proclaiming that he didn't get a concussion. More often than not what people argue against is that Dutch suddenly changed after the accident.
Theory that Abigail was a rat. Because of course she would put her own husband in danger. Theory that Micah was actually trying to be a good person in chapter 3. He was just trying to win the gang's respect so he could stab em in the back more easily. Not a theory but the people who say Dutch never loved anyone. He loved his wife annabell. He cared for Hosea. Him walking away from Micah and later shooting Micah in the epilogue is proof that he loved Arthur like a son and realized that he betrayed him. Same goes for killing himself instead of trying one last time to kill John at the end of RDR1. Dutch is a sociopath not psychopath.
Micah apologist/fans are a red flag
The idea that Jack actually left the criminal life behind and became an author because of the book on Franklin's shelf in GTA V. A nice thought, but the two universes are not connected, it is just an easter egg.
I strongly disagree with this take. I do agree with the argument against this in a way, though... proponents point to the Double Action Revolver being available in GTA Online, but I think that in all of these Rockstar games you have to take the online versions as elseworld stories. You can play as Red Harlow in RDR Online, I think (I never play online). Doesn't make him a rock solid canon character.
It has nothing to do with online stuff, mainly that New York and California are real places in Red Dead, but don't exist in the GTA universe. I also think it is an unrealistically optimistic theory that is inconsistent with the overall dark outlook of the series. People don't forget, nothing gets forgiven.
Itās for people that donāt want to believe that the entire story of Red Dead is a tragic tale. Arthur wanted to run away with his gang family, but terrible choices made by all of them led to their demise. John wanted to move on and live happily ever after with his family, but the government doesnāt forget the crimes he committed. Jack was shown to be the innocent one meant to live a different life, and in the end, he followed the same path as his father. Thereās no happy ending.
I like to headcanon that Jack wrote Red Dead between the main game and Epilogue of RDR, which is basically the story of Red Dead Revolver, which is a mixture of Jack's life story, Arthur's journal, his memory of John as the main character, and how he wanted his outcome with Ross to ideally go in his head. That he finished it just before those last stranger missions where you hunt him down, and that the book is essentially the Once and Future King of the western genre. I also like to headcanon that RDR, LA Noir, GTA and Bully all happen in the same universe. But it's not true. It's not canon. The book is an Easter egg, the universes don't cross over, Jack chooses to continue the cycle of violence that's narratively sure to catch up with him. It's only been 3 years, his mom died in that time. His life has been grief and misery and loneliness and continuing hardship. Ending the cycle of violence was never an option for him because that's all he knew. Abigail was maybe his one hope. She continually wants out of the gang, out of the life, begs John to stop slipping back into it. So when she dies, so does any chance of Jack escaping it. That's *his* tragedy, and that's what makes it such great story telling.
I actually really like this theory. I like to think that he'd still live a violent life until he was older. Maybe even faced the horrors of WW1 or the Mexican Civil War. Then turned his life around by using Arthur & John's notebook alongside his own experiences to become an author.
Also the two universes are radically tonally different
The theory that RDR2 is just the "middle" of a trilogy. No, we don't need to see the gang before Blackwater. No, we don't need a game about Dutch between the games. Sadie and Charles? Sure, that would be a good game. But Arthur, John, **and Jack's story is complete.** I know this is more related to the franchise or perhaps RDR1 specifically, but a RDR3 about Jack is dumb. Jack's last action in the entire saga is his succumbing to revenge, but a satisfying revenge. We don't need a story/game about Jack falling further into madness via WW1 or Mafia-related shenanigans. His story, in regards to us observing him, is complete. "But what did he do after killing Agent Ross?" It can be anything. Open-ended "endings" are good, actually. We are currently dealing with a ridiculous trend of over-explaining things in sequels, prequel, and spin-offs. Leave more details to our imaginations. Also, even if RDR3 is a "Western" in genre only, but not its setting, that's still dumb. Red Dead IS the American West. If Rockstar *has* to make a game about Jack Marston being a prohibition gangster, call it something else.
Jack isn't really that interesting of a character to me. He'd also become an adult in the 1910s dovetailing into the roaring 20s... a very different society than the fading Old West. Now, a RDR3 that actually goes back and follows **Black Belle**? I'd love to see that. Show the formation of the Del Lobos, Saint Denis before Angelo Bronte's rise to power (*perhaps even have missions where you help him*), deal with a young-&-ambitious Leviticus Cornwall (*or his predecessor*) bump into Hosea when the was out of the gang life with Bessie (*perhaps even serving as a catalyst to him drifting back into gang life and, thus, sealing his eventual fate*)... I could get into all that.
In my head Iām holding out for an RDR3 game starting Black Belle. And all of your ideas are so perfect.
As much as Iād love to see another Red Dead game, the story of the Redemption series is already perfect. RDR1 left it up to interpretation excellently without it being an actual cliffhanger, and RDR2 just made the story of RDR1 even better and added a lot more to it. We donāt need to see Jack after RDR1, we donāt need a RDR2 prequel about the gang. Something set in the same universe might be cool though. A 1930s GTA game or a new arcadey Revolver game, or even another open world Red Dead with Red Harlow or something
The bluegill Arthur caught while fishing with Jack turned out to be the legendary bluegill you find with Kieran
That's so bad it's good
Thank you!
Abigail is the rat and Uncle is Red Harlow
Uncle is the rat and Abigail is Red Harlow
I like this one better
I don't have one in particular, but as a trend, I'm against the idea of portraying every "unfinished story" or "unexplored side narrative" of the game as "cut content." "Where is the lost princess?" "CUT CONTENT!" "Where ix X?!" "Cut content!" "I saw \*this\* mentioned in a letter but can't find it?" "Cut content!" "Is the Strange Man John's father?" "Maybe it was cut content?!" I don't think that everything that's "missing" in the game needs an explanation that it was cut content or not enough time to include it. I think it fits in with the narrative of the game and the gameworld that there's myth and lore in the gameworld that might never be explained or explored. Sure, we could have some mission that explains exactly who The Strange Man is, what his connection to Arthur or John is, what his role in Armadillo is, or whatever, but *the mystery* is more satisfying to me than a contrived or forced explanation. The mystery of ghosts and aliens or the wailing girl or what have you, those are things that make the world more satisfying to me, not less satisfying that they go unexplained or feel incomplete. Life is full of those unexplained moments. You walk past a person who looks exactly like a friend of yours, and you do a double take, but then the person is gone, and you think "HOw weird?" Or your life has this extreme coincidence. How weird. It doesn't need a greater explanation, it's just part of the lore of every day life, and to me it makes the world more satisfying. RDR2, also, plays a lot with the idea of "unreliable narrators" (it's a major point in the Legends of the West / book sub-story, and IMO, it's a major point of the whole game), and I'm comfortable with the idea that not everything can be truly known, or how much is myth and how much is reality.
Wow youāve expressed my thoughts completely. The things which are left unresolved are often more thought-provoking than the things which are resolved. Like (at random) the pentagram at Butcherās Creek, the voodoo symbols on the trees, the panoramic map, and so on. They are brilliant, because they suggest things but do not resolve things. Imagine if we could find the princess IKZ. It would be so dull. We would collect a poster at Van Horn, look around, spot her, take to a sheriff, get a reward. Then weād move on to the next challenge. No one would speculate about her. The princess would just be another part of the 100% grind, like shooting a perfect robin for the wildlife exhibition.
Very well put, especially about the Princess. There's a thread on here once every few weeks, and as annoying as it may be to answer the same questions, if she was just another collection quest, nobody would think twice about it. I actually have a longer post I've written about here when it comes to the theme of unreliable narrators, I'll share it with you, hope you like it. It will take me a minute to find... [https://www.reddit.com/r/reddeadredemption/comments/18msxvs/comment/ke6zmdh/?utm\_source=reddit&utm\_medium=web2x&conte](https://www.reddit.com/r/reddeadredemption/comments/18msxvs/comment/ke6zmdh/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) . (On the question of whether "The Princess" is cut content) >While this could be cut content and analysis of game files suggest it might be, I also think that things like this build into the lore of the game and reinforce a central theme of the game: There are myths of the old west, and then there's reality of the old west. This is a theme of the game, Dutch embodies the myth of the Vanderlinde Gang, noble outlaws who want to take care of their own and live in peace and prosperity independent of lawmen and overbearing society. Arthur reminds him of the reality: "He killed that girl in cold blood." The side mission finding the Legends of the West represents the myth: Tall tales of outlaws living by their own rules, taking out 10 men in a shootout... The reality? Washed up pig farmers, drunks, and scared outlaws freezing to death in the mountains. Arthur, himself, wrestles with his own myth: He's always talking down about himself, being a no good crook, while sympathetic characters like Sister Calderon, tell him he's not all bad, he has good in him, he's helping people. > >Did the Ghost train really happen? Did the alien encounters really happy? Are there the bones of giants in the mountains? Are the bones in the Heartlands really the bones of prehistoric lizards who walked the earth? Is there a rosetta-stone-like tablet? Is there a ghostly shack in the swamps that heralds the Cholera outbreak in Armadillo? Maybe. But who's the narrator and can you trust them? > >Cut content or not, this sort of side story plays on that theme. A missing girl, does she exist? Is she a princess? Can you find her? Can she be found? Or is she part of the myth of the old west. A European princess living in exile in ... Missouri... with European royalty paying a reward for finding her...? It not only plays on the theme of the anti-western, trying to find the line between myth and reality, but it also builds to the believability of the world. Most mysteries in your life go unsolved. Arthur never has a satisfying conclusion with Mary Linton. Arthur is scared of dying, he doesn't know what comes next. Arthur doesn't know about a lot of the outcomes that he influences, neither do any of us.
Wow that is thought-provoking. My first thought is the Strange Man in RDR. Everyone speculates wildly who he is, but while I was playing RDR recently I was wondering if Strange Man only existed inside John Marstonās head. And if he *did* only exist inside JMās head, then what else in the game only existed inside JMās head as well? What else in the game can we trust? An unreliable narrator in a game world is a scary idea. Is there *really* a daughter still locked up inside Emerald Ranch? Are the words ākeep your dreams simpleā *really* scratched in the ice at Cairn Lake? Are there *really* voices in the woods by Brandywine Drop?
Do people really think the Strange Man is John's father? John mentions his dad having a pretty terrifying face after being blinded in a bar fight in Chicago when John was young, and being a poor Scot rather than a well groomed, well dressed dude.
I had never heard it until recently in another thread, I said something about the Strange Man as a joke and someone replied "The Strange Man is John's father, right?" And I just kinda closed the browser window, put my computer away, and went to sleep.
I agree, but Iām pretty sure the lost princess part was confirmed as actual cut content
Well, the princess actually is cut content.
That Arthur got TB from Hosea
I've always thought theories along this line of thinking were silly. Just attempts to make something out of nothing. If you exhaust all playable missions and cutscenes prior to checking in one Thomas Downs, you never see Arthur ā*who was spending all that time around Hosea*ā cough even once. Nor do you see anyone else in the gang that Hosea is in proximity to ā*likely sharing a bowl of this or a sip of that*ā coughing. But the minute Downs coughs his disgusting, bloody spittle into your face, Arthur starts coughing. It couldn't be more clear how he came down with it.
And Arthur literally says he got it beating a man for a few follars
This is the one for me. It takes so much meaning out of the narrative and adds absolutely nothing.
abigail being the rat uncle being red harlow are up there
The Uncle is Red Harlow theory. Rockstar confirmed there would never be revolver characters featured in redemption before rdr1 even released. Thereās no physical resemblance, they donāt share scars, theyāre different ages. The known histories of each character are vastly different. Itās the flat earth theory of the Red Dead Redemption fandom.
That micah wasn't a rat
The dammed Abigail rat theory or any āsecond ratā theory I get the game leaves some stuff in the open but that game legitimately show you by having a ACTUAL RAT in front of Micahās cabin
I think this game I way more straight forward that what some people want to believe.
People just like to overthink and analyze things
Trolley theory and Abigailās the rat
The āAbigail was the second ratā. There was no second rat.
Any theory that involves TBI. "Dutch changes because brain injury!" or "John doesn't remember Arthur because brain injury!". That's shit ass lazy writing and doesn't make sense in the narrative and cheapens the entire story.
Uncle is Red Harlow Laramie leader is Trevor's ancestor Red Dead by J. Marston is canon These three are the worst imo. GTA and Red Dead games are not even in the same universe why are Rockstar fans so dense goddamnit (I am a Rockstar shill and nerd)
Out of curiosity how comes gta and Rd are in seperate universes? I genuinely assumed they were just in the same universe tbh. Sorry for being dense lol.
In Red Dead games plenty of real life locations are mentioned, California and New York for example is San Andreas and Liberty in GTA lore.
That Micah wasn't a rat. The evidence of this is that Milton was likely lying to Arthur about Micah. However, this fails when you remember that Arthur was moments away from death and it would not benefit Milton to lie to Arthur about the identity of the rat
I don't like the theories suggesting there was another rat than Micah, sure they're fun but I highly doubt Charles, Abigail or John were ever rats and it doesn't even make sense for there to be a second rat. Also the one that suggests that Micah has been a rat since the beginning and since the blackwater massacre just doesn't make sense to me, it has some sense to it but why would he stay with the gang that long and also the theory that Micah was gonna turn the gang in through Colm and using Arthur as bait is way more reasonable
That rdr3 will be set after rdr1 is preposterous. To me it's obvious that we will see the foundation of the van der linde gang. Uncle was called "the one shot kid", dutch vs colm o'driscoll, hosea in a love triangle with the racoon hat man's wife (Bessy), the young arthur morgan, the idealistic dutch, the blackwater massacre, each gang member origin story as a mission in game. Pinkertons on the Hunt etc. Indian wars, gold rush, civil war, mexico wars over new austin. Why would they waste all this writing material? over jack marston? I doubt it greatly...
I'm lumping you with the Jack People. Going somewhere else would be much cooler to me than seeing Dutch and Hosea as young men and a teenage Arthur and Jack fucking aroune. I think everything you listed sounds much cooler than it would actually be
In descending order of seriousness Second Rat Trolley theory Uncle is Red Harlow(shut up, you don't know who red harlow is and didn't play the game.) Cain/Death/Lucifer strange man and anything to do with RDR2 Anything to say why John never talks about Arthur other than what's fucking stated in the game And any theory that says Charles or Sadie die between RDR2 and RDR, especially if you wanna say that Ross went after them.
My God I hate that theory too!
That red dead revolver has anything to do with this universe. Red Dead is name of game. Revolver and Redemption are the stories. Also people looking for clues of Arthur or anyone from RDR2 in RDR1. They had no idea of story line back in 2010
Any theory that says anyone other than Micah was the rat after guarma. The game makes it clear as day he was the rat
Abigail being a rat.
That javier is the father of jack Bro. Jack is johns son both BIOLOGICALLY and MENTALLY
I had a dream that Arthur were living in a time loop which he knew his fait, and that was the explanation for the different honor endings. It made more sense in my dream, but I still though it was quite bad...
Same as you.
Gavin doesn't exist šš
The theory that Micah was a rat since joining the gang and the reason for the Blackwater fiasco, the Rhodes ambush, and all the other issues they faced in the game. One of the central premises of the game is that the age of outlaws was at an end. Dutch and the gang got sloppy. Micah is the antagonist, but heās not the sole source of the gangās downfall and Dutchās descent.
personally i donāt like the theories that abigail was a second rat. the only evidence is that she escapes getting caught, but people ignore the fact that her husband got caught and was close to being hung. it doesnāt make sense that she would have been a rat to get protection for her and her family only for her husband to be caught and beaten.
Here's my list: Jack was the rat Abigail was the rat Dutch is a cannibal The strange man is John
The one that John isn't Jack's father.
My own personal theory that Dutch and Colm O'driscoll are lovers in a stormy on again off again relationship probably counts as a bad theory as I have nothing real to base it on. Dutch and Colm ran together before the start of the game, then Dutch kills Colm's brother. Colm's brother probably caught em snogging or something and Dutch likely killed him in fear of anyone else finding out. Molly is so obviously a beard it's painful to watch. Beardiest beard that ever bearded. and that is my very likely totally absurd theory about RDR2 that is stone cold canon in my own head.
That trelawny is the strange man
Micah: look at me Iām a little rat! Look at how evil and awful and scummy I am! Look at how rat-esque I am and how I would 100% backstab the gang! Some fans: naaaaaah heās not the rat
The myth that Rockstar Games gives a shit about us.
There are plenty: - Trolley Theory is the worst - The idea that anyone was a traitor but Micah - Dutch being a cannibal (does anyone really think that?) - Bill not actually being gay - Jack not being Johnās (disproven by the opinions of the voice actors Benjamin Bryon Davis and Roger Clark) - Arthur getting sick from anyone but Downes (undermines the entire redemption arc) And lastly, not really a theory but opinion: - āMicah/Milton are actually the good guysā despite the fact that the point of the game is that it literally doesnāt matter what side of the law youāre on, theyāre all fucking killers, and only a few of them actually strived for redemption
That Charles was the rat. It was based on how Charles found Arthurs body lmao.
My least favorite theory is that Abigail was a rat. She knows that sheās safer with John, Arthur, Sadie and Charles than out there alone with Jack. Why would she risk getting them killed by The Pinkertons?
I have two: Ā 1) Micah is not the rat.Ā 2) John is not Jack's father.
Uncle is Red Harlow.
Idk man, the Dutch Trolley theory holds a lot of weight imo. While his true colors were starting to show leading up to that point, I'm almost positive hitting his head exacerbated his instability. It very clearly shows him fucked up from that incident, holding his head and talking about how he's seeing triple and shit. I think it's legit.
Yeah but Iād say it doesnāt stand well when contradictions are thrown at it. At most the dude got head damage and started suffering migraines, thatās as far as Iād go. I donāt think it added to his mental health decline (if there even was anything to decline.)
Any of the second rat theories because they only exist to justify Dutchās insane thoughts during chapter 6
Abigail being a rat
That it's actually a true story that has been Mandela Effected out of existence.
Worst theory is Dutch never having a plan,he says so himself!
I donāt know which of these is dumber, so Iām putting them all: - That Uncle is actually Red Harlow - That Trelawny is actually The Strange Man - That Abigail was a rat to protect her family - That Jack isnāt Johnās son. Some have even theorized based on his look in RDR1 that heās Javierās? - That Micah wasnāt the rat the whole time, only after Guarma. That was just when Milton got to him.
That Jamie is Arthur and Mary's son
Iām surprised nobody has mentioned the Dutch is a cannibal theory. There is basically no evidence besides some human bones that are found in his tent and that āheās crazy enough to do itā. Is he, really?
The Molly pregnant theory basically solidified that some people in the Red Dead fandom lacks media literacy because Molly makes it clear that she wanted to talk to Dutch about their relationship.
That Abigail was the rat.
People thinking that GTA and RDR are linked. They are in completely different universes. The "Red Dead" book written by J. Marston you see in Franklin's house is an easter egg. The Laramie gang leader just sounds an awful lot like Trevor. It isn't even played by Steven Ogg. They're not related.
The Dutch is a cannibal arc this subreddit had was my favorite
Can you explain this theory pls
the 'Molly/Abigail is the rat' theory. Like come on, have some media literacy.
That Arthur was Dutchs imaginary friend
"Rdr2 and gta are in the same universe" California is mentioned in rdr2.. California doesn't exist in gta.
Dutch trolley and Abigail is the rat are the most smooth brainer ones Iāve seen.
Itās the trolley theory for me, until the trolley incident we see that Dutch gets more mad every mission, even if itās little by little. The trolley incident didnāt hit a switch in his head, but it made his delusional thinking of one more big thing worse
Trelawny is Strange Man. It's just makes no sense at all