Why John Marston is Rockstar's Best Protagonist

Red Dead Redemption wields my personal favorite protagonist of all time, John Marston. Here I explain why I personally exclaim John, as my favorite character in all of gaming, and how Rockstar masterfully weaved his perfect character arc. I hope you enjoyed, and I'll see you in the next video.

[@PigeonDude]

Arthur is great, but John is on another level, especially on gunslinging. Also his development from a gang member to rancher to gunslinger to rancher again, all of his development has no holes in the plot. His development interlinks into every event he’s gone through.

[@Arm2tr0ng]

There are a few holes in the plot when it comes to timeline of events when the 2nd game came out. A newspaper in RDR 1 mentions the fall of the Van Der Linde Gang in 1906 (Where as in RDR1 it’s known as just “Dutch’s gang”) Also, it was mentioned that a ferry robbery was the botched robbery John was LEFT TO DIE ON. Originally John nor any Van Der Linde members were in the black water massacre. But, overall I agree John overall character Arch is amazing. Yes some would argue Arthur is better only due to new technology and longer time to spend making his character. Where John’s character is being developed in both games.

[@marquiseaaron5513]

Your lying arthur is a way better gunslinger 😂

[@RebirthRavenIX]

​​​​@@marquiseaaron5513No he isnt lying, if its red dead 1 John post ricketts, John shoots faster than the speed of sound, temporarily, Arthur shoots nowhere near that. His speeds are inconsistent, Johns aren't. John also has higher accuracy and his deadeye is better for combat, so hes not lying, even Jack Marston is better than Arthur , So mathematically and scientifically John is a faster gunslinger

[@RebirthRavenIX]

@@marquiseaaron5513 Nope, John is significantly faster and More Accurate, I like Arthur hes more funny than John but John is 1000% The better gunslinger out of the 2 and its already been proven, How can Arthur be a better gunslinger if hes Milliseconds slower than John and less accurate than Prime John Marston? cause hes not the better gunslinger, although Red Harlow is faster than both John and Arthur, John is still more accurate than Red and Arthur

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

@@marquiseaaron5513 1907 john has better (or as good if you prefere) moments of duelling. He has to quickdraw to already aiming outlaws at least 3 times, and near pronghorn it was against 5 dudes. Arthur's best moment is like drawing to 5 dudes turning their back to arthur aiming somewhere else in the swamps. If a john who barely used a gun for 7 years has better or as good feats as arthur, rdr1 john ( who was rusty but then quickly recovered his past skills then became even better than ever) clearly is overkilling arthur. Both are great, but prime arthur high probably couldn't draw and empty his gun to already aiming army men. In term of feats, john has better ones. Add to this that even arthur said that john always learned quicker, there's also that john used to be the great asset of the gang (so better than arthur), used to be dutch's right arm at one point. John has, gameplay wise, a better deadeye. He is more "professional", competent concerning his posture when dueling, in cinematics he draws pointing his gun to the opponent as soon as possible while arthur just grabs his gun and aims (to micah as exemple). John's gameplay posture when aiming shows that he seeks to be as accurate and solid as possible while arthur aims in a chill, not efficient way. Rdr1 john aims from a cover exposing himself way less than arthur In a nutshell, john has better feats (of quickdrawing and else), at least as good feats in 1907 after 7 years barely using a weapon. He is faster, more accurate ( even has to shoot fire bottles and dynamite sticks while driving a stage coach few weeks after taking a shot that was going to kill him (also caring about dickens and shooting ppl in the same time), on a moving raft, on a running train), he is more efficient in every ways If you find arguments to go against my sayings, tell me

[@brandawgz]

Bro is the definition of a perfect protagonist! I love Arthur as well but John is in a league of his own. Amazing video you really did the character justice

[@EternalTalksYT]

Thanks man, I appreciate it!

[@punishedwhispers1218]

People thinking Arthur is a more well developed character dont know ANYTHING about writing, Arthur's entire purpose is John's development

[@NamesPhimble]

Yes , he’s annoying in rd2 because he hasn’t matured yet he matured in rd1 it’s character development

[@zombiekiller4313]

Not really.

[@metalhandboi6681]

A lot of people who play RDR2 for the first time are usually people who haven't touched the first game I've noticed. I think it plays a huge factor in why there is a lean for Arthur over John, and why John gets so much slack. I love Arthur very much and he is an incredibly impactful character, but John will always be on top.

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

@@metalhandboi6681 totally agree Sorry, too long com ahead... There's also that most people who only played rdr2 didn't pay attention to john development during camp events, barely cared during missions, are just biased ( like saying arthur is better at planning when his plans are to go ahead and see what happens, while john made one plan during the game and it was the most working of the game, overall john is the one taking decisions and leading when both are in the mission, we're told john made plans for the gang with and without dutch in the past) And playing epilogue, most just had arthur in mind (john's story there is different, more chill and john's character is made dumb mostly) so it's understandable in a way. The whole epilogue, which is when players paid a little attention to john because no other choice, is made to show john as a goofy, often stupid and struggling to talk character. Even the end is made to "justify" why john was found by authorities by making his look back seeking revenge even if "wise" arthur asked john otherwise. But, john shouldn't be struggling to talk, seeking revenge and else, it's not how rdr1 john is nor is said to be in the past. About revengeful, even in 1899 john clearly shown he was againt it. Then john going to micah obviously wasn't just for revenge, without john charles and sasie would be dead, it even permitted john to become rich, while in 1911 they are poor and struggling with money so this money was needed. Finally, rockstar tried to justify how authorities found john, most rdr2 players just don't want to see it that way but even without going to micah john would have been found. It's the whole point of both games and mainly rdr1 that ppl don't forget, nothing gets forgiven. That john would have been found again and again because he was hunted, would never have peace... In a nutshell, i totally agree, and in the same time i think many like arthur more because rockstar changed what we were told in the first game and made john out of character most of the time making arthur being more important in the story. While it's safe to say that john was important in arthur's story, arthur realized john was right doubting dutch and his goals, john and his family gave arthur a reason to try to become a better person and made arthur feel redeemed after helping the marstons...

[@relarin952]

It's so cool to see someone who is newer to franchise as I am and experience it from a similar perspective

[@Eyejrbdysk]

I replayed red dead 1 and 2 and I’m telling you with a straight face John was just a better protagonist, and there is a lot of difference between John and Arthur. But if I could use one example of the difference between the two, I would use how they died to really showcase the difference. Arthur’s death but slow, sad, but cinematic. Johns was cruel, quick, and gritty. Not to mention, the fight music in rdr2 sucked dick, red dead 1s soundtrack stands the test in time

[@AlqhemyA]

ambience in RDR2 is ass, the RDR1 ambience is the best of all time imo

[@JesseVenturaHat]

Yes absolutely

[@warhead5225]

John Marston is my favorite rockstar protagonist. I’ve played RDR 2 through 3 times now. RDR 1 I’ve played through 4 times. There is some nostalgia there for the mechanics and gameplay and how John moves, but I feel like his first appearance is the best out of any of the other characters to this day. Rdr 1 has its own things going for it being that you are by yourself with no camp. You really get Clint Eastwood/ man with no name vibes. You have Mexico to go along with that which really makes you feel like you’re in a spaghetti western. And John Marston’s characterization fits that to a tee. John Marston is the closest character out of even most tv shows and movies, let alone games, to give me man with no name vibes without looking anything like him. And idk if it’s because RDR 2 is a lot longer and has more ground to cover, but sometimes I find the dialogue to be just good at times. Whereas I feel like RDR 1 never slips up. Both RDR 1 and GTA 4 I feel like were dark comedy gold mines. Things you felt bad for laughing at. The stereotypes. The parodies. The outlandish characters and the the crazy things they would do/say (Seth, Irish, SETH, De Santa). But if it didn’t have me laughing, it was always heartfelt conversations between John and Bonnie. John and Nigel always being at each others throats as well as Ross. The dialogue in the first game to me never stops being artistic/poetic levels of quality. Sentences and phrases that make you think sometimes. Like the ones where just you say “damn” after its said. The fact that John’s end comes at a time where he was with his family and thought he was free vs Arthur’s descent into succumbing to TB. But the TB is what helped Arthur be Ana amazing character himself, seeking redemption knowing that the end was coming. Arthur is an amazing character. But from the dialogue, the man with no name thing going on, the look, the spaghetti western feel, and a little nostalgia and John Marston is still my favorite Rockstar protagonist

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

@@warhead5225 just to add, john and abigail had doubts about finally being free to live a peaceful life. Both talked about possibly not being able to just get out of their past crimes (or john's past crimes). But mostly john tried to think it was over, he had doubts but forced himself to have hope

[@chipotlesnumber1stan]

I feel like johns character is just a bit more complex than arthurs but maybe thats just me.

[@Eyejrbdysk]

He is, arthur is a man who once got sick, truly tries to redeem himself and slowly gets vulnerable and we realize he is a genuinely good man. John is someone who is TOLD that he needs to do certain things to redeem himself, but he himself doesn’t believe. Truth be told arthur started doing good after his morality confronted him, John did supposedly good things after having a gun pointed at his and his family’s head. Arthur is a good man who does bad things, John is a bad man who does good things.

[@anthonylombardo4829]

@@Eyejrbdysk lol no. Arthur is the more evil man between the two. Arthur was afriad and started to change because his death was near. John was always fearless

[@robertbarnes1828]

Lol I love the level of debate these two protagonists cause. I've only ever played Red Dead Redemption 2. I love Arthur and his story. I think Arthur was definitely a man who wanted to be a good man, run off with Mary, have a family, and be a law abiding citizen. However he was raised by two outlaws who taught him otherwise. Arthur truly believed what he was doing in the gang was good, and because he was sold a bill of goods, he missed out on his dreams. John was also raised by outlaws and held the same beliefs; however unlike Arthur he had a family early on by accident. John wanted to the outlaw life and took his family for granted. In Red Dead Redemption 2 there are two things that finally changed John's mind. When Jack is kidnapped, John realizes what he has and regrets taking his family for granted. Seeing Dutch murder Bronte for revenge also opens up John's eyes on the kind of life they lead. He too is a good man, and starts to really try to change. Unfortunately both Arthur and John were raised in such a way, that changing was hard for them both. Arthur made a greater leap at the end because he knew he was doomed. John likely still somewhat gravitated towards his occasionally sin like we all do, because he wasn't faced with his own mortality. Both men were the same in my opinion, just dealt different hands.

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

@@robertbarnes1828 john wanted to leave his outlaw life years before 1899, when he left, it partly was because he wanted to change. Though, during rdr2, he stay loyal to the gang till the end of it. There's conversations between abigail and john before jack's kidnapping about john going to try to be a descent husband, and going to try to not be an aweful father to jack. Basically, john considere never having a good parental figure, and john shown how much he has a low opinion about himself. If he didn't want to be a father, it wasn't because he wanted to be an outlaw, but thzt he was convinced he would be an aweful father and husband, he said he is dumb, ugly, and can't do anything except killing. 1899 john loves abigail and care about jack enough to look at what jack is doing in chap2 before jack going near john so john leaves. It's also in chap2 that john says to abigail that she should find someone else better for them. What i say isn't not well said, but to point that john hates himself while caring about abi and jack, partly the reason why he doesn't want to be an horrible father and husband. And that 1899 john is made depressive and having lost faith since a while, not wanting to keep being an outlaw but struggling with his loyalty to the gang

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

@@Eyejrbdysk except that john wanted to change, tried and did change before rdr2, before coming back to the gang by loyalty But even if we're told john suffered for doing bad stuff when being in the gang (to bonnie in rdr1), john thinks the only thing he can do right is killing in cold blood, and he's ready to do bad things if it can help having his family back Not that arthur enjoys threatening, beating people, insulting gang members. Arthur beats unecessarily downes and still threats his wife and son two times because. Dutch's gang always did bad stuff, arthur always wanted and loved being in the gang ( even left his wife and son to enjoy his outlaw life). All the moments of arthur threatening and being violent, fighting are what arthur liked, then with tb and understanding that john' was right about dutch and else, arthur started to want peace for the gang Again, john started to want to leave this outlaw, violent life before rdr2 (arthur is a good man doing bad things, john is a good man doing bad things and tried to change) Plus, john risked his life between 1899 and 1907 to save and help people in need. Even going to micah is not for himself

[@martinford4553]

I love Arthur but you really miss the tragedy of both characters (and more) if you don't play both red dead redemptions. However to view Arthur's story you need 1 game to view johns you need two and that's what holds John up in a sense. To me john is my preferred character but to many they may have never played 1 or its been so long, recency bias can still change the majorities opinion. I remember not wanting to hit the final mission on rdr just as much as rdr2, and I know I wasn't alone there.

[@nate1735]

I didn't like rockstar making john an idiot to make Arthur great in rdr

[@HeyMomonia]

I actually wanted to see the ending of rdr2 because i knew I'd play as john lol. I was also too invested in the story to not play through it.

[@HeyMomonia]

​@@nate1735Yeah they kinda misrepresented john's character if i'm being honest. He doesn't act the way we would expect him from the stories he told in rdr1 or the way he acts in rdr1. Not even in the epilogue which is only 4 years the events of rdr1. He's not as well spoken, violent or badass as you'd expect him to be which a shame. And i feel like they did it to push arthur. It worked but at what cost?

[@Bullevue]

John Marston and Niko Bellic are rockstars best characters

[@Eyejrbdysk]

John can’t fight who he is, he can’t “fight nature” as Dutch would put it. John could never outrun his past, and it kept catching up and soon, it caught him. So John gets brutally murdered while saving his family. John’s death was quick, and cruel. But Arthur, is doing the opposite, Arthur is fighting who he is before he dies, and eventually does get his redemption. His death was slow, and cinematic. But I think it’s the fact john is led to believe he got his redemption that makes it all the better.

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

@@Eyejrbdysk indeed, john just couldn't escape his past. People don't forget, nothing gets forgiven

[@VincentAnthonyValentine]

I'm glad to see more people coming around. I remember being the only one praising john after rdr2 but now that's Arthur has become a legend in his own right people can see the two as individuals in their own right.

[@standwatiesson]

John is a badass

[@angelnobody7137]

What bothers me is that John Marston was nerfed in rdr2 and his original characteristics were given to Arthur. Those who said Arthur is the best protagonist is because they didn't play rdr1 first and saw by first hand that John had a lot of Arthur since the beginning.

[@angelnobody7137]

@sideswipe3023 nope. It seems the writer is not the same

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

​@sideswipe3023you didn't play nor watch rdr1 : it's said how john was during his gang years Also, john is way more witty than arthur and got his sarcasm from dutch. The biggest diff between both about their education is that john was told by dutch how the world is but he still made his own opinion about it while arthur didn't thought as much by himself as john

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

Yes they gave arthur many john's traits to arthur for him to shine more because rdr1 john behavior was loved by players. Then they wanted john to be more in the background, to be "just" the dude who doubts. That brought many plotholes, uncoherences... in rdr2 compared to what was said in rdr1 Overall, john is still the first to doubt dutch and the gang goal, made one plan way better than all dutch's plans during rdr2 story, arthur was very impressed. John had a moment where he was wiser than hosea in a conversation between both when he says his "people don't forget, nothing gets forgiven ( i mean john was right while hosea wrong). Overall, arthur has more flaws ( jealous, gets easily angry, threaten a lot, less smart, wise and less good at sarcasm/ironic compared to rdr1 john) Arthur has a good development, but the fact they made him like rdr1 john but worse is sad for arthur's character and obviouly for john's fans. Rdr2 could have been better if r* knew how to write better a younger john in his gang years with xhat we were told in rdr1

[@zombiekiller4313]

​@@nightmarepegasus4141Don't forget about the hypocrisy as well.John was a bit of a hypocrite through out the story but arthur is worse at times.Im kinda surprised people don't mention that time in the sheep mission where arthur is butting heads with john over his bad parenting and tells him not to be 2 people at once but he does the exact same thing with everybody he comes across.

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

@@zombiekiller4313 yes, you're right Reminds me that, in this same mission, arthur says about john "can't swim, can't herd... " while john was doing a better herding than arthur. And arthur's fanboys just assume john can't do anything properly just because arthur said it. Arthur is the kind to insult and criticize what he can criticize, while he makes several mistakes in the game (john being respectful and polite enough to not talk about this) like wrongly pluging a detonator to an explosive (while being in a gang that often uses explosives), heading without thinking then having to be saved by charles, sending lenny ahead resulting in lenny taking a shot...

[@AlqhemyA]

I like Arthur, but John’s wit and character in RDR1 just blow Arthur out of the water.

[@TheRealBaylock]

i think john is much more of an effective protagonist for portraying a specific narrative whilst Arthur is more relatable and human because you have more dynamic freedom with him, you YOURSELF are more or less Arthur because you choose what kind of person he is and john is more so constructed with the intention of being badass and enduring, which, i like more. But if we are looking through an objective lens, it's really hard to put John or any other video game protagonist or even video game character up against Joel Miller as a contender, especially in the context of depth, goals, and relatability. Joel is a VERY human protagonist who makes questionable decisions that impact the world, His environment, and most importantly his story. Joel has a wavery and unpredictable set of moral standards, and acts on instinct as a means to survive, all this mixed with Joels internal battle on coming to terms with his daughters death and troy bakers voice acting makes for an unquestionably great and ruthless character, i honestly believe that Joel is up there with some of the best fictional characters Alongside Walt, bojack, Arthur, and even potentially Anakin

[@theceoofcrackcocaineandamp5961]

Who is joel miller?

[@theceoofcrackcocaineandamp5961]

How did John turn into joel miller I must have missed that character development is it from undead nightmare when he becomes zombie John is that joel miller? Or is joel miller just an even worse version of Jim Milton who doesn’t work or rob anyone? Joel miller is truly one of the gaming protagonists of all time

[@TheRealBaylock]

what are you going on about?@@theceoofcrackcocaineandamp5961

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

​@@theceoofcrackcocaineandamp5961joel miller is the protagonist of the last of us

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

Perso, i feel like john is more relatable to me, especially because arthur as too much flaws imo : is too much insulting to everyone, impatient, threatening or yelling easily, jealous, at some points mourning but not acting. Arthur is a character i really like and sympathize to, but i have to say that even when i try to be more friendly as arthur, he's still the kind of "person" i find annoying At least, john has manners, is respectful and polite until he gets a lack of respect then goes threaten but witty or violent

[@phil7144]

John Marston isn't just my favorite game protagonist. He's my favorite western protagonist of all time

[@63tpa]

i totally agree with this. i became way more attached to john than arthur. i started playing rdr2 a month ago and i am on epilogue and will get rdr1 and red dead revolver. oh and also javiers story is very sad

[@jennajewel5148]

I got so attached to John Marston, even as a woman. I love his character, way more than Arthur. Red Dead is such a classic amazing game. I think that it had such an impact because it was one of the first games I played on my Xbox 360. I hadn’t had a gaming system since I was a kid.

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

Rdr1 is probably the first game that impacted me that much, i like john a lot because he's respectful until he gets annoyed, he talks about his personal life harsly and to trustful people like bonnie...

[@prska]

i'd say arthur is a better character while john is a better protagonist

[@ultimate.spidey]

I'd say John had a more developed character were as Arthur had a more impact full one. Btw you just earned yourself a subscriber your contet is awesome!

[@Stuart267]

*My personal favourite Protagonist would have to be Lee Everett from Telltales The Walking Dead Season 1. To this day I haven't been so emotionally attached to a videogame character & that frigging ending man, Yes I was weeping like a big baby.*

[@idk_do_you]

Great video this vid needs more likes

[@BloodDragon-rp4xc]

Arthur is a good character, but hes also very skin deep despite what people think. he is an extremely safe, very classic depiction of a good guy. John is so beyond the complexity of most characters, with so much development, values AND flaws, a refreshingly unique morality and mannerisms. and for everyone who jumps to the immersion of rdr2 as grounding for arthur, well john and i both run the same, we dress similar, i have a scar from a big dog and he a wolf, and shit neither of us can swim. hes immersive too, and trust me, especially in rdr2, looking at a very slim river that's just barely too deep to walk across, and knwing im going to have to ride my horse or ven walk around, is EXTREMELY personal to me. John is easily the best character in any western for me.

[@doubledragon98x79]

Bro says human so much like is he an alien

[@synergy76]

I will say that Arthur Morgan is my favorite protagonist, but John Marston is definitely the best protagonist. I’m honestly glad I played RDR2 first because while I still would have love John if I play Rdr1, playing the second then to the first one feel satisfying because I get see a man who went from wanting to run away from his responsibilities to becoming a badass, awesome, and determined character who will stop at nothing.

[@joaqincastro5613]

I played RDR and RDR2, and I admire Arthur but I want to be like John

[@VincentAnthonyValentine]

And since you asked, I also love Tommy Angelo as a protagonist. Vito is the man but becoming a dad and leaving a certain seedier life style behind me has only solidified John & Tommy as my favorites.

[@arshadabeer02]

Arthur's redemption arc is a lot more sentimental and cuts deep whereas john is an absolute badass the GOAT cowboy

[@shauna9713]

Speak those truth bomb. John definitely one of the best. Both him and Arthur are leagues better than any Rockstar protagonist, imo.

[@HeyMomonia]

Yeah the funny part is that i played gta games before rdr games. Yet john, arthur and dutch are easily part of my favorite rockstar characters by far. I know a lot of people are big fans of niko bellic but to me john's just the best without any hesitation. He has more depth and is more consistent.

[@WhiteBoyEvil]

Arthur made Bad and Good ways but He’s not my most favorite character but i do respect that character. my 2 Favorite red dead characters would have to be Red Harlow and John Marston both are awesome to me.

[@orbakun]

I disagree I still think it’s Arthur but the fact that 2 games managed to create 2 protagonist that so many agree are some of the greatest protagonist of all time is fucking amazing rdr has one of the greatest character stories and greatest stories as a whole.

[@themadtitan7603]

Eh, I agree about Arthur but I don't think the games managed to create these 2 lovable protagonists that are equally beloved and constantly compared the way you say it. They could've, if RDR2 portrayed John consistently, but he was clearly mischaracterized for Arthur's sake...and it worked. Because half the reason Arthur is as beloved as he is today other than the great performance and writing, is that they gave him a lot of John's defining traits but thus, downgraded John and made him see like a dull character in comparison to many, especially newer fans. The reason John is still beloved and revered today because of RDR1 and its fans fondness of it. But most of the fanbase haven't played it, and saw John as...sort of a cool but boring replacement to Arthur. He's fundamentally changed from a writing and even performance perspective.

[@aidanmahoney9865]

Arthur’s story is better, but John’s character is so much better, and he’s way more badass (which makes red dead 1 more enjoyable to replay than 2 for me)

[@EternalTalksYT]

I think I have to agree, but Arthur does have like 3x the screentime of John in the series

[@tammykolu1242]

John marston feel more like a western protagonist he got thst vlint eastwood swag few words more action

[@AvalancheGameArt]

Don't forget about Niko bro.

[@Re-Bourne]

Honestly red dead in my opinion has the best protagonists even jack was a really good character. All of them just feel down to earth you know? All 3 of them are so understable you really can't hate any of them.

[@chancemahon4047]

God and Jesus loves everybody so much and if you are going though something hard in your life God and Jesus will always be there for you always no matter what God Bless everybody

[@OldKingCole927]

I absolutely cannot agree, Arthur in my opinion is a superior character

[@dangollapalli5113]

John is the perfect balance between realism and dumb hero worship

[@ItsYaBoiV]

John is cool and all, but I got way more attached to Arthur.

[@EternalTalksYT]

Why do you think that is?

[@ItsYaBoiV]

@EternalTalks Many small details. I feel like John appealed to me more when I was younger, the way a lot of edgy or badass protags do when you want to be cool and tough. I am currently about the same age as Arthur in game, and so he is easier to relate to in terms of feeling like I'm too old and beat down to change, or that I wasted my youth chasing ideals that weren't my own. A good comparison is original vs new Kratos. When I was young, the idea of an angry man being a slave to fate until he fought back appealed to a teenage version of me who wanted to break out of lifes day-to-day slog. But now older Kratos is the more appealing because we have to struggle with being a parent, coming to terms with our own mortality, and accept our flaws.

[@nate1735]

​@@ItsYaBoiV Jonh is good man Arthur turn in a good man after gets Tb

[@AlqhemyA]

@@ItsYaBoiV”When a man with a sing-song voice tells me to fuck off, it always concerns me, boyo.”

[@HeyMomonia]

​@@ItsYaBoiVI feel like you're reducing john's character to cool edits we see of him. In rdr1 he has a lot of dialogue to that are not during combat or threats where we get to learn about him and how he changed as a man because he had to for his family. How he went from a violent outlaw to a farmer, husband and father. I think it's a beautiful story to be told. Of course the game is also about how the past can get you back and how it's hard to change as a person. But until the end he did because he believed in it. I'm in my late twenties and also like characters with more depths. But i feel like john is so far away from those edgy badass protagonists.

[@AlexanderCano369]

You can't compare Joel and John

[@SIEGTHEGOATFRFR]

John is way better written

[@codyjean4567]

And here is why you’re wrong… just kidding… sort of

[@kpik5083]

Max Payne best rockstar protagonist

[@HeyMomonia]

Technically he was created by remedy But i agree max is such an amazing character. I felt so sad when i heard that James McCaffrey (max's voice actor) died of cancer. Rest in peace to him. He was truly one of the best voice actor i had the chance to hear

[@nightmarepegasus4141]

​@@HeyMomoniaoh, thanks for telling, i didn't even know 😥 I was hoping/waiting another max payne game, but that's a bit more complicated than i expected. Great games with awesome mechanics than i really want to see again ( before rdr2 released, i wished we could dive in deadeye as in max payne)

[@slopy8bitretogamer-252]

Talking Ben>John martson

[@gyyfvgh9682]

marston leg> you

[@AlqhemyA]

buffalo soldier> arthur morgan

[@slopy8bitretogamer-252]

@@gyyfvgh9682nah I solo

[@StefanWinchester]

Arthur morgan is just one step ahead of john in my opinion and 90% of the things you say make john better can be applied to arthur too. It seems you prefer johns story but there is a difference between a characters story and the characters themselves. I believe john has the more epic and tragic story by a slight bit i see arthur as a more complex character overall

[@HeyMomonia]

I prefer john's personality overall. The way he reacts to what's happening around him. The way he deals with problem. The way he speaks. He also feels more like a flawed character compared to arthur. He's more naive in the way he believes people will give their words and not betray him the way he would. He can't swim or draw well. He's not the most intelligent character but not the dumbest either. His best asset is gunslinging and yet he tries to stay away from it for his family. I could go on and on about what i like about that character. It's not just his epic story. The epic story is the cherry on top of an amazingly written character.

[@JesseVenturaHat]

Arthur is a mary sue character. Stealing all the shine from John. Also Arthur is such a one dimensional character, made to appeal to everyone (which is why he says nothing controversial or politically incorrect even though that would be accurate of the time period)

[@damien2359]

i think arthur is better than john

[@EternalTalksYT]

Why do you think that is?

[@Zklin_]

FINALLY SOMEONE IS FUCKICNG CORRECT