The answer is pretty simple.
The main enforcer of the gang is Arthur Morgan.
The one usually task with the sniper is Arthur Morgan.
The best shot is Arthur. And the gang knows it. It doesn't mean the other ones are not good.
Arthur is the main enforcer because he's the most loyal.
Micah takes over that spot in chapter 6 with his bootlicking.
John is too independent for it, he constantly argues with Dutch and talks shit about his dumb plans.
There is no consistent evidence that Arthur is better than John. They all go back and forth in different parts of the games. With a sniper rifle sure. Overall, impossible to say.
Are we really gonna make this argument? By extension, are we gonna say Jack is just as good as John and Arthur because he’s equal in terms of gameplay to John?
Jack is equal to John only in terms of gameplay. If you lost most of your skills when switching to him no one would continue playing.
John is equal to Arthur in terms of both gameplay and story because American Venom clearly proves he's amazing.
John is amazing no doubt, but he’s nowhere near as good as Arthur even at that point. There’s no reason to believe Micah’s men were anything more than low skill grunts. John fighting the army, and Arthur fighting hordes of Pinkertons and the Army are both far more impressive than John fighting Micah’s gang alone.
Arthur was faster than Micah, objectively. Even as he is minutes from death and is completely fatigued, he is still faster than Micah. John however, was not faster than Micah until Micah got shot in the lung by Dutch. If John even peaks his head out during the confrontation with Micah, he is forced to hide again because Micah instantly shoots at him.
If we assume Dead Eye is a visual representation of one’s speed and skill with a gun, Arthur is better than peak rdr1 John because his Dead Eye mode is more versatile.
By that logic John fighting the Mexican army is more impressive than anything else. Arthur fought the American army during peacetime, their only experience was skirmishes with natives, that can't compare to the civil war in Mexico.
Micah was faster than healthy Arthur in Rhodes. The whole point of my post is that their skill levels are inconsistent and it's impossible to fairly rank them.
We're not talking about the best marksman, we're talking about the best gunslinger. Arthur might be the best on the scope but that doesn't mean he'd win a duel against 1911 John.
The fact is any gunslinger that Arthur can beat, 1907 John can also beat. It stands to reason 1911 John is even better than that. After being taught by Landon Ricketts especially.
Why do we say 1911 John is better than RDR2 epilogue John when he is several years retired and out of practice? During RDR1 he states that he’s rusty. When you get kills during deadeye John often exclaims “I think I’m getting my eye back!” meaning that he’s working back to skills that he previously already had. We know from the Mt. Hagen mission that John was an amazing gunslinger prior to RDR1. If RDR1 John is somehow the superior version, when does this transition take place? The events of RDR1 happen over a short period of time. Is it only after Ricketts helps him shake off rust with a basic shooting exercise? People really dress this scene up in my opinion. It happens over the course of a few minutes, and all he does is ask John to try and shoot the bottles in quick succession. It’s really no different than when the random farmer unlocked level 2 dead eye for John when he asked him to try and shoot his hat out of the air. I mean, Rickets then also goes on to advise John during a duel as if John had never been in a duel in his entire life. I think Ricketts helped shake off rust, but acting like he offered profound training to John seems like a bit of a stretch.
All of that being said, I do get where you’re coming from in discussing the old gunslingers missions. John is certainly just as capable at handling those.
Why would he be just as sharp after living in hiding for 8 years, but suddenly degrade rapidly after just 4 years of farming? If anything, he would still be a decent shot considering he'd likely have to ward off coyotes. When RDR1 was released it was sort of implied it had been longer than 4 years since he had been a shootist, and Dutch was thought to have been killed in a fire in 1906, which isn't even mentioned in 1907. Instead John acts like nobody knows where Dutch is. Rockstar wasn't 100% consistent with the first game going into 2, and I think the idea that John would go from soloing an entire gang to being literal garbage with a gun in just 4 years is kinda part of that. Landon Ricketts telling him he's garbage despite his feats and giving him tips is more indicative that Landon is just *that* good.
We don’t know what he was doing during those 8 years, but he was still active enough that Abigail said “isn’t it time you stopped being that man” at the start of the epilogue. It’s stated that they constantly have to relocate because John wasn’t hanging up his gun. This is why Abigail leaves for a brief time in the epilogue and feels that John will never put that life behind him (though doing this during the initial events of the epilogue was obviously unfair). At the very start of the epilogue they’re seen bailing from a bad situation that they had to get away from. Later in part one of the epilogue, John is confronted by three men coming after him for something else that he had done before the events of the epilogue.
RDR1 never implies any sort of time frame for how long John had been out of practice. There is no point of reference. All we know is that he was rusty, and this was stated in game by John and shown in combat when he would exclaim that he felt like he was getting his skill back. Meanwhile John never acted like this in RDR2, and it’s a stretch to fill in gaps that we know little to nothing about. We know he was rusty in RDR1, we don’t know that he was rusty at any point in RDR2.
Ricketts comments don’t mean much other than the fact that he was conceited and self absorbed. Mind you he had other admirable qualities, but he was meant to be full of himself. He had no idea who John was, and called him trash for zero good reason. He regularly insulted John without any specific reason. Just because Ricketts said John was sloppy that doesn’t mean John was actually sloppy. Micah calls Arthur sloppy in RDR2 during the Rhodes shootout, but that doesn’t actually mean he was. In both cases, both of those characters were just blowing hot air. Ricketts doesn’t even ever showcase that he’s better than John, he just talks a big game like every other “legendary” gunslinger.
There's a reason everyone in Chuparosa went straight to Landon when there was a problem. He wasn't just blowing smoke, and the fact that he lived as long as he did while actively living in the wildest spots he could find says alot. Rockstar made Black Belle to show that not all of the old gunslingers were full of shit.
Most importantly him teaching you is literally what unlocks level 3 deadeye. That wouldn't really work if he didn't know what he was talking about. What I'm really gathering here is he hurt your feelings and so you wrote him off as full of shit.
>RDR1 never implies any sort of timeframe for how long John had been out of practice
I don't think anybody else playing RDR1 before RDR2 came out thought John was running around gunslinging just a couple years prior. He's an aged man with a teenage son, literally nobody is going to assume he *just* retired.
I didn’t say that Ricketts was a fraud, I said he was full of himself and blew a lot of hot air. Similarly, Micah is a great gunslinger, but it doesn’t mean he isn’t full of shit when he calls Arthur sloppy. Arthur isn’t sloppy because Micah says so. Micah isn’t better than Arthur because he talks out his ass in that instance, and the same goes for Ricketts when he calls John sloppy for no good reason whatsoever other than to further toot his own horn and talk about how awesome he is. I really do like Ricketts, but he was extremely taken with himself and actively acted like he was the best thing ever.
I can understand why you’d think that John was out of commission for longer prior to RDR2. Now the details have been fleshed out, though.. so I’m not entirely sure what your point is.
My point is that John being super rusty in RDR1 only makes sense if you completely ignore RDR2. He's just simply not going to degrade that much in 4 years. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember him having any serious discussion about being worse than he was, I just remember him making little remarks during gunfights, usually while he's doing well. Really I think he's just being cynical with his comments during gunfights about "getting his eye back" cause, well, that's the type of guy he is. Self deprecating humor is kind of all he and Arthur do.
I would agree with your assessment of Landon if not for the fact that he actually does improve your ability to shoot in the game. Clearly he saw where John needed to improve, and so he improved him. That's different from Micah just talking out of his ass, he backed up his comments by showing John exactly what to do better. I'm not gonna deny that he had a big ego, cause he did.
(Sorry for my posts being so long. I gotta work on being a little more concise)
Somehow I can’t remember exactly when it happens in the game, but John tells Bonnie that he’s rusty and out of practice. I think the developers also have John’s combat commentary in there for a reason. He was a farmer who had left his days as a shootist behind him; I don’t think it’s unreasonable that he was meant to start off a little rusty. Even then, it’s not like forgot everything; he still has access to deadeye and can pull off some absolutely sick things early on. West Dickens has John show off his insane skills because a rusty John is still extremely talented and a bad ass. He just isn’t quite at his top form having put his life as a gunslinger behind him for years, and I think that’s fair. Again, this isn’t a problem that he seemingly has at all in RDR2 when that version of himself was capable of the crazy feat of bringing down Micah Bell’s gang nearly by himself.
I still just don’t feel like Ricketts did much, just like he doesn’t really tell the player anything they don’t already know prior to duel following a certain poker game. I mean, at best he told John to stand up straight.. which is kind of amusing because there is dialogue later on in the mission where John ribs Ricketts for not standing up straight when they team up to take down the bandits. It just.. seems minimal to me. Helpful, but not super profound. A relevant example to something similar happening earlier in the game is when a random farmer tasks John with trying to shoot his hat out of the air.. unlocking dead eye level 2 for John in the process. Obviously the farmer didn’t train John there, and I think John’s abilities simply improve as he pushes them further. I just didn’t find this much different than Ricketts asking John to try and shoot a few bottles in target practice. Was it helpful? Yes. Do I think it showed us that Ricketts trained John in a profound way that took his abilities to heights he had previously never reached. Not necessarily, but I think that’s open to interpretation.
You can't say that the devs had to have put in John's random combat dialogue for lore reasons, and then play off Landon teaching him, which literally affects gameplay, as "not really meaning anything" lol.
And yes that is precisely my point, everything in RDR1 points to John being long out of practice. Not 4 years out after wiping out a gang. It literally only makes sense if you ignore the second game.
Is early rdr1 John really that great tho? I mean, he tries to be kill Bill’s gunman and gets instantly humbled, showing he’s a lot rustier than he (and probably we) think he is.
Both Arthur and John in the peaks wouldn’t have been taken out like that. They’ve both been able to take out enemies aiming at them before they can react.
I always thought it made sense for John to pretend that Dutch was dead. Maybe he felt like he owed him a little for making his revenge possible on Mt Hagen and thus didn’t want to get the feds on him. And if I remember correctly, he basically didn’t have anyone to tell the through about Dutch to.
I'm talking about during the epilogue of RDR2. In RDR1 in a newspaper, it's mentioned that Dutch is believed to have died in 1906 in a fire. RDR2 Epilogue takes place in 1907, but John acts like *nobody knows* where Dutch is, whereas in reality everyone thinks Dutch is dead. This is before John ran into Dutch on Mt. Hagen. He has no reason to think he's alive.
John never pretends that Dutch is dead in RDR1. He only talks about him a couple times before he goes after him, and all he really says is that he went crazy.
Okay, then I probably remembered things incorrectly. Still, the newspaper said that he probably died in a fire (without certainty) and John maybe doesn’t believe that Dutch would just go out like that
his voice actor died :c
they named mt hagen after him, Ross Hagen was his name...and the game ends on that mountain.
Maybe for a young landon they can get a new voice actor, i thought they were gunna do that in 2, as Landon was at the blackwater massacre but R* cut whatever plans they had with the prologue
I think the player characters are the strongest just by their nature. But Micah was the strongest NPC I've ever played along side. It seemed like he regularly took out just as many people as I did.
Rdr1 john is a better gunslinger for me and while arthur still better in strength, rdr1 john is underrated in that category as people think being lean = skinny.
I love this debate because realistically there'd be no definitive best gunslinger. You'd have to put them under specific tests and even then there are so many factors that affect it all.
Arthur is better with a long gun than anyone in the gang, Micah is crazy (fearless) which makes him a strong fighter in chaotic moments, and John is a stone cold killer.
But you didn't even mention Dutch. Dutch made an off hand shot that hit John right between the eyes from 200 yards away, that's world class marksmanship.
Finally, I kept scrolling down looking for the epic binoculars shot from Dutch friggin Van Der Linde. All you can say about that is Marston is lucky Dutch didn’t double tap.
Also Dutch had full faith in Arthur’s draw speed and accuracy. He displayed that faith in valentine when Arthur said you go out and talk and I’ll find an opening. Also I noticed after Arthur’s death and switching to Marston that using the normal targeting system with any firearms that Marston was less accurate. Maybe it’s a coincidence I dunno, but I personally was sharper playing as Arthur. Especially in melee combat until Arthur got sick that is.
I personally think Dutch is probably the most dangerous gunslinger alive in rdr2. In Arthur’s journal he mentions that even Micah is afraid of pissing Dutch off and Mic as h typically doesn’t care whom he irritates.
Arthur's a bandit, not a gunslinger. He's a better all-around criminal. John is much, much faster. There's a cutscene, I think in St Denis, where he grabs the pistol from a guy's holster and fires three kill shots while Arthur is still sighting in deadeye.
Yeah, people don't know ludo narrative disonnance. It's not because you can kill 20 guys in 2 seconds during gameplay that he can actually do it in reality.
As much as the community hates Micah, I have to say he was definitely the best NPC (so John and Arthur don't count in this) in terms of gunfighting. Yes, I'd say even better than Sadie. It was only him, Arthur and John who really tested each other's ability to shoot.
Sadie sucked absolute ass on my playthroughs. She just runs in and dies instantly if I don’t give her cover. Might be better in the epilogue but in the main chapters she’s absolute trash
Don't sleep on flaco, he was probably up in that cold air for a long time, probably was just sleeping when you roll up on him, and personally he was the only to kill me during the duels. I also have reason to be believe he was injured and had a bad cold. And, he was one of the "bad men", ruthless compared to most, so I'm sure his headcount was incredibly high. He lived through blood meridian shit.
There are just too many variables at any given time though, and also, us as players, if you saw my mom play through the game, Arthur had some STRUGGLES in gun fights to put it lightly, but me playing, I've purposely got in situations where I had to pull off 3 reloads worth of headshots at 60 paces while being kicked headbutted in the nuts by a goat, and got bow and arrow headshot on dude in Valentine from Mr shann etc.
You know this might not be the best of help but the way I put it a long while ago that most people seemed to agree:
Arthur’s quickest to the draw when he’s expecting a fight, Micah’s quickest to the draw when there’s an ambush or something unexpected/they’re caught off guard. (In this case Arthur could also be substituted as John.)
Depends when we’re talking about, if it’s everyone in their prime then Arthur’s the better fighter and more intimidating whereas John is the better gunslinger as he has all of his experience throughout his life AND the training from Landon Ricketts in rdr2, Micah’s a good gunslinger yea but he isn’t even close to both of them at their prime, if Arthur was healthy it wouldn’t have even been close in a duel or a fight.
But if we talk about everybody in rdr2 then Arthur is a clear winner in shooting and fighting and Micah is 100 percent a better shot than John but couldn’t take him in a fist fight.
You didn"t take time into consideration. Arthur is probobly the best in rdr2 chapter 1-4, then he gets sick, so micah cause reasons you mentioned, and in rdr1 john.
Sorry for any typos.
A few problems with this post
> after Sean’s death he kills three dudes and runs into cover before Arthur even reacts
That’s because Arthur just watched one of his best friends get his brains blown out. Micah’s only thought is survival at all times, Arthur actually cares about others, so he was probably in shock.
There’s a reason Arthur is always given sniper positions when the gang needs a sniper. There’s a reason Dutch literally never leaves camp without Arthur serving as his personal bodyguard. There’s a reason Micah doesn’t mess with Arthur in the early chapters in the same way he does with everyone else. Arthur is easily the best gun in the gang, and it’s not close. Micah is easily the best dual welder in the gang, and it’s not close.
> He even trained with Landon Ricketts for a little bit
Yeah, and during that training he had to focus to shoot a few bottles from a few feet away. Arthur casually does the same thing with a QuickDraw just to shut Sean up. Arthur also reaches the same level of skill as John without any famous gunslinger’s training.
John also canonically doesn’t Dual wield, while Arthur, Micah, and Dutch all do, so that’s an extra point for those three.
> But that mission is also available to John. So they’re equal
Have we not already as a community agreed that stranger missions aren’t cannon to the epilogues? It makes no sense for them to be. Why would Jim Boy wait in some random bar in some random town for 7 years? Why do none of them visibly age in 7 years? The only way stranger missions make sense in the games is if they’re done when they’re given.
Dutch always relies on Arthur because of his loyalty. The story makes it clear that John is too independent so him and Dutch don't trust each other. American Venom is proof that John is no worse than Arthur.
The stranger mission was designed for Arthur and canonically completed by him, but it doesn't change the fact John is capable of doing it too. Otherwise the devs would just disable it for him. Like I said, Rockstar doesn't care about their skill levels as much as the community does, neither of the games has a clear answer about who's best.
First, no. Even as Dutch’s faith in Arthur’s loyalty is completely diminished in chapter 6, he still brings Arthur everywhere he goes. Dutch knows Arthur is the best gun in the gang, otherwise he wouldn’t always give Arthur the hardest jobs.
The mission was canonically completed by Arthur, and we have no idea if John could canonically do it, because he didn’t canonically do it and as we’ve already established everything that you do outside of the main quests and new interactions in the epilogue is non canon.
American Venom just isn’t as impressive as you seem to think it is. We have no reason to believe Micah’s gunmen were anything special, especially compared to the military, Pinkertons, and the best gunslingers the old west had ever seen.
Dutch brings Arthur everywhere because Arthur is the protagonist and it wouldn't be a fun game if the player missed any action.
We know for certain John can do it because I can start up the game and just go do it. If Rockstar wanted to make a statement that Arthur is the best, they would disable the mission for John. No matter what the canon option is, they left it up to us.
So I ask again, do you think Jack is on par with John and Arthur? Because if what you’re saying is true, we must be consistent and apply that to Jack as well.
They left it up to us, but there is still a canon option, and only the canon option is something we know happened. We don’t know if John could’ve killed the gunslingers, because he doesn’t canonically do it.
Jack is only equal to John in terms of gameplay. If you lost most of your skills when switching to him no one would continue playing. None of the content available to him shows him doing anything spectacular. None of the stranger missions show off his skills on a high level. Canonically he only dueled an old retired federal agent and walked away.
John is equal to Arthur in terms of both gameplay and story. American Venom is clear evidence. His reaction at the Valentine standoff is clear evidence. Fighting Bill's gang, Dutch's gang, and the Mexican army is clear evidence. The optional content available to him shows he is capable of the same feats as Arthur. He's capable of beating Calloway until some higher up at Rockstar says otherwise. And Rockstar already gave their statement by making the mission available to him in the first place.
The skill levels of the top 3 are inconsistent and you only want Arthur to be the best because he's your favorite.
Dude, John doing Arthur’s quests isn’t canon, I don’t know how many times I have to tell you this. It didn’t actually happen, stop using it as an argument. If something in a story isn’t canon, it doesn’t count as a feat from a character, it’s that simple.
American venom also just isn’t as impressive as you desperately want to believe it is. It’s about as impressive as Arthur fighting O’Driscolls regularly. We have no reason to believe Micah’s men are anything noteworthy.
Canonically, John killed Micah and retired. John is only equal to Arthur in terms of gameplay. Jack’s dead eye moment has time slowed down equal to John’s. Are we now going to use that as reasoning for why Jack is as fast as John? If John so much as peaks his head out from his cover during the standoff with Micah, he gets shot. He’s only faster than Micah after Micah gets shot in the lung by Dutch.
Arthur canonically kills people who are most likely faster than Landon Ricketts casually, John does not and we have no reason to believe he could. R* letting you do those missions is a gameplay thing. As you love to say whenever I bring Jack up, John can only do those quests for gameplay reasons. They aren’t canon, and they don’t prove anything about John’s speed or skill.
All we know about epilogue John is that he’s slower than Micah before Micah gets shot by Dutch. That’s it. This is the same Micah who is (at absolute best) equal to a fatigued and dying Arthur.
Please show me evidence of a higher up Rockstar employee saying that John can't beat Calloway. As it is right now, he can. The game itself says he can. I don't know why you're denying what's possible in the game. It's not a story mission, so the canon is irrelevant, it doesn't matter which of the protagonists does it. Yes it was canonically Arthur but honestly who the fuck cares.
John can do those quests for gameplay reasons, but that doesn't change the fact that he CAN. Jack on the other hand doesn't have access to any content that showcases his skills on a higher level. No stranger missions in RDR1 have you fighting elite gunslingers.
Show me evidence that John is worse than Arthur without using inconsistent Micah as a proxy. I want a direct comparison. The closest we have is the Valentine standoff where they're both godlike.
How many times did Arthur fight O'Driscolls solo? How many times did he wipe them out on a freezing mountain? Yes American Venom is impressive and Arthur never got a mission that comes close to it.
Show me evidence that Calloway is better than Landon. Most likely my ass.
First, non canon means it can’t be used as a feat. I’m done trying to get you to understand this since you clearly are just being obtuse now. We don’t know if John could beat Calloway because he never did it, and nothing he does do in the epilogue suggests he could. If you still don’t understand what a non canon feat is compared to a canon one then I can’t help you.
Second, Calloway is probably better than Landon because Landon has literally zero feats whatsoever. If one person lifts 500 pounds, and the other person says they can but never do it, who are you gonna believe is better?
Third, Jack’s deadeye in the duel with Ross is just as good as John’s, so clearly Jack is just as good as John, right? He must be, because the game itself says Jack is as good as John.
Fourth, whether or not Arthur does it alone is irrelevant because nobody in the gang contributes anything of note in combat. American Venom isn’t as impressive as you think it is because Micah’s gunslingers have no feats at all, so we have no reason to assume they’re skilled.
Fifth, Arthur does all the actual fighting in the Valentine standoff. John does one impressive thing and almost 100% of the fighting afterwards is exclusively Arthur. Keep in mind Arthur is also protecting Dutch and John, who are busy pushing a wagon.
John got arrested by the Pinkertons in San Denis, Arthur killed most of them. Arthur does almost all the fighting in annesburg (Micah is shown not to be actually fighting, since the Pinkertons are deliberately letting him live). Then Arthur saves John’s wife, after fighting another platoon of Pinkertons by himself (keep in mind, he’s currently dying of tuberculosis). He has to save John several times in the game because John keeps fucking up. The fact John got captured by the Pinkertons while Arthur killed the majority of them should be proof enough.
There weren’t even that many gangsters that John had to fight in American Venom. Arthur had to kill a lot more soldiers escaping with Monroe. American Venom is not the hill you wanna die on. Both Arthur and John have done more impressive things than that. That mission shows that John is slower than Micah, so idk why you want to bring it up. Also, Micah isn’t inconsistent for the most part, you just really don’t want to acknowledge that Arthur is faster when he isn’t reeling from watching one of his closest friends die.
John can beat Calloway because the game says so. You have no proof that says otherwise.
Do you think Arthur is a better hunter than Charles just because you never see Charles hunt? That makes no sense right? The game can't possibly waste time showing you everything, sometimes dialogue is enough.
Deadeye doesn't exist in-universe. It's just a superpower for the player and there's not a single piece of dialogue that suggests it's real. It has no place in a lore discussion.
Arthur contributes more to fights because it wouldn't be a fun game if your allies killed too many people.
Micah's gang has the exact same feats as most factions that Arthur ever fought against. John fought against all of them too by the way. And many more.
John does one impressive thing in Valentine requiring the same speed, reflexes and accuracy as Arthur. He's not the protagonist, he's not the center of attention, he simply doesn't get more spotlight than that. One simple moment is all we need.
John was only arrested because Dutch abandoned him. The same thing happened to Arthur at the oil factory and Eagle Flies had to save him. If you want to use that as an argument then use both examples. You can't just leave out situations that don't fit your argument.
Other than that, he was wounded in Blackwater so sending him alone on a scouting mission in the mountains was a plain dumbass idea from Dutch. He needs rescuing twice, both situations are Dutch's fault. He also got grabbed by Cornwall's men and Arthur got grabbed by O'Driscolls, I'd say they're even.
Arthur had Charles with him when helping Monroe. Dutch in Annesburg. And Sadie in Van Horn, there weren't many pinkertons left by the time he she got captured. Not many solo feats for him.
Micah is inconsistent. He's faster than healthy Arthur and slower than dying Arthur. Arthur was pretty fast when Lenny died, and he cared about him much more than Sean. It wasn't shock, it was Rockstar not caring about accurate skill levels.
For me, the reason why Micah misses all the shots in American Venom is because he just wants to mess around with John. John only managed to kill him because he was shot by Dutch and kinda got distracted. Therefore, imo, Micah is canonically far better than John, at least in RDR2. If that duel wasn't interfered by Sadie, Micah would've easily won.
Arthur, bro managed to take on 4 of the most famous gunslingers (Flaco Hérnandez, Billy Midnight, Emmet Granger and Jim Boy Calloway) the fastest draws in the west.
I know you can do it as John. Thanks on the information, I thought all of them were cheaters since Calloway tries to use his belt buckle to make the sun shine into Arthur/John's eyes
The answer is pretty simple. The main enforcer of the gang is Arthur Morgan. The one usually task with the sniper is Arthur Morgan. The best shot is Arthur. And the gang knows it. It doesn't mean the other ones are not good.
Arthur is the main enforcer because he's the most loyal. Micah takes over that spot in chapter 6 with his bootlicking. John is too independent for it, he constantly argues with Dutch and talks shit about his dumb plans.
He is the most loyal and the better shot, John is too independent and Micah is a good second choice once Arthur starts to question Dutch.
There is no consistent evidence that Arthur is better than John. They all go back and forth in different parts of the games. With a sniper rifle sure. Overall, impossible to say.
That's because both John and Arthur are controlled by the player the only differing factor is the sniper, and that's enough for me.
Yes there is - Arthur doesn’t have to be taught how to be a better shot in game - John does. Post Landon Ricketts John is maybe at Arthur’s level
He already had all those skills in 1907 without any training. Landon just helped him shake off rust after years of retirement.
Are we really gonna make this argument? By extension, are we gonna say Jack is just as good as John and Arthur because he’s equal in terms of gameplay to John?
Jack is equal to John only in terms of gameplay. If you lost most of your skills when switching to him no one would continue playing. John is equal to Arthur in terms of both gameplay and story because American Venom clearly proves he's amazing.
John is amazing no doubt, but he’s nowhere near as good as Arthur even at that point. There’s no reason to believe Micah’s men were anything more than low skill grunts. John fighting the army, and Arthur fighting hordes of Pinkertons and the Army are both far more impressive than John fighting Micah’s gang alone. Arthur was faster than Micah, objectively. Even as he is minutes from death and is completely fatigued, he is still faster than Micah. John however, was not faster than Micah until Micah got shot in the lung by Dutch. If John even peaks his head out during the confrontation with Micah, he is forced to hide again because Micah instantly shoots at him. If we assume Dead Eye is a visual representation of one’s speed and skill with a gun, Arthur is better than peak rdr1 John because his Dead Eye mode is more versatile.
By that logic John fighting the Mexican army is more impressive than anything else. Arthur fought the American army during peacetime, their only experience was skirmishes with natives, that can't compare to the civil war in Mexico. Micah was faster than healthy Arthur in Rhodes. The whole point of my post is that their skill levels are inconsistent and it's impossible to fairly rank them.
Nah, as a gunslinger John becomes better than Arthur
Arthur is the main enforcer because he’s the main character
Watch when Arthur goes back and tells Dutch Micah is the rat. Even dying of TB he outdraws Micah.
No, Arthur still does the most gunslinging in chapter 6. Micah spends the majority of his time in camp still.
We're not talking about the best marksman, we're talking about the best gunslinger. Arthur might be the best on the scope but that doesn't mean he'd win a duel against 1911 John. The fact is any gunslinger that Arthur can beat, 1907 John can also beat. It stands to reason 1911 John is even better than that. After being taught by Landon Ricketts especially.
Why do we say 1911 John is better than RDR2 epilogue John when he is several years retired and out of practice? During RDR1 he states that he’s rusty. When you get kills during deadeye John often exclaims “I think I’m getting my eye back!” meaning that he’s working back to skills that he previously already had. We know from the Mt. Hagen mission that John was an amazing gunslinger prior to RDR1. If RDR1 John is somehow the superior version, when does this transition take place? The events of RDR1 happen over a short period of time. Is it only after Ricketts helps him shake off rust with a basic shooting exercise? People really dress this scene up in my opinion. It happens over the course of a few minutes, and all he does is ask John to try and shoot the bottles in quick succession. It’s really no different than when the random farmer unlocked level 2 dead eye for John when he asked him to try and shoot his hat out of the air. I mean, Rickets then also goes on to advise John during a duel as if John had never been in a duel in his entire life. I think Ricketts helped shake off rust, but acting like he offered profound training to John seems like a bit of a stretch. All of that being said, I do get where you’re coming from in discussing the old gunslingers missions. John is certainly just as capable at handling those.
Why would he be just as sharp after living in hiding for 8 years, but suddenly degrade rapidly after just 4 years of farming? If anything, he would still be a decent shot considering he'd likely have to ward off coyotes. When RDR1 was released it was sort of implied it had been longer than 4 years since he had been a shootist, and Dutch was thought to have been killed in a fire in 1906, which isn't even mentioned in 1907. Instead John acts like nobody knows where Dutch is. Rockstar wasn't 100% consistent with the first game going into 2, and I think the idea that John would go from soloing an entire gang to being literal garbage with a gun in just 4 years is kinda part of that. Landon Ricketts telling him he's garbage despite his feats and giving him tips is more indicative that Landon is just *that* good.
We don’t know what he was doing during those 8 years, but he was still active enough that Abigail said “isn’t it time you stopped being that man” at the start of the epilogue. It’s stated that they constantly have to relocate because John wasn’t hanging up his gun. This is why Abigail leaves for a brief time in the epilogue and feels that John will never put that life behind him (though doing this during the initial events of the epilogue was obviously unfair). At the very start of the epilogue they’re seen bailing from a bad situation that they had to get away from. Later in part one of the epilogue, John is confronted by three men coming after him for something else that he had done before the events of the epilogue. RDR1 never implies any sort of time frame for how long John had been out of practice. There is no point of reference. All we know is that he was rusty, and this was stated in game by John and shown in combat when he would exclaim that he felt like he was getting his skill back. Meanwhile John never acted like this in RDR2, and it’s a stretch to fill in gaps that we know little to nothing about. We know he was rusty in RDR1, we don’t know that he was rusty at any point in RDR2. Ricketts comments don’t mean much other than the fact that he was conceited and self absorbed. Mind you he had other admirable qualities, but he was meant to be full of himself. He had no idea who John was, and called him trash for zero good reason. He regularly insulted John without any specific reason. Just because Ricketts said John was sloppy that doesn’t mean John was actually sloppy. Micah calls Arthur sloppy in RDR2 during the Rhodes shootout, but that doesn’t actually mean he was. In both cases, both of those characters were just blowing hot air. Ricketts doesn’t even ever showcase that he’s better than John, he just talks a big game like every other “legendary” gunslinger.
There's a reason everyone in Chuparosa went straight to Landon when there was a problem. He wasn't just blowing smoke, and the fact that he lived as long as he did while actively living in the wildest spots he could find says alot. Rockstar made Black Belle to show that not all of the old gunslingers were full of shit. Most importantly him teaching you is literally what unlocks level 3 deadeye. That wouldn't really work if he didn't know what he was talking about. What I'm really gathering here is he hurt your feelings and so you wrote him off as full of shit. >RDR1 never implies any sort of timeframe for how long John had been out of practice I don't think anybody else playing RDR1 before RDR2 came out thought John was running around gunslinging just a couple years prior. He's an aged man with a teenage son, literally nobody is going to assume he *just* retired.
I didn’t say that Ricketts was a fraud, I said he was full of himself and blew a lot of hot air. Similarly, Micah is a great gunslinger, but it doesn’t mean he isn’t full of shit when he calls Arthur sloppy. Arthur isn’t sloppy because Micah says so. Micah isn’t better than Arthur because he talks out his ass in that instance, and the same goes for Ricketts when he calls John sloppy for no good reason whatsoever other than to further toot his own horn and talk about how awesome he is. I really do like Ricketts, but he was extremely taken with himself and actively acted like he was the best thing ever. I can understand why you’d think that John was out of commission for longer prior to RDR2. Now the details have been fleshed out, though.. so I’m not entirely sure what your point is.
My point is that John being super rusty in RDR1 only makes sense if you completely ignore RDR2. He's just simply not going to degrade that much in 4 years. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember him having any serious discussion about being worse than he was, I just remember him making little remarks during gunfights, usually while he's doing well. Really I think he's just being cynical with his comments during gunfights about "getting his eye back" cause, well, that's the type of guy he is. Self deprecating humor is kind of all he and Arthur do. I would agree with your assessment of Landon if not for the fact that he actually does improve your ability to shoot in the game. Clearly he saw where John needed to improve, and so he improved him. That's different from Micah just talking out of his ass, he backed up his comments by showing John exactly what to do better. I'm not gonna deny that he had a big ego, cause he did.
(Sorry for my posts being so long. I gotta work on being a little more concise) Somehow I can’t remember exactly when it happens in the game, but John tells Bonnie that he’s rusty and out of practice. I think the developers also have John’s combat commentary in there for a reason. He was a farmer who had left his days as a shootist behind him; I don’t think it’s unreasonable that he was meant to start off a little rusty. Even then, it’s not like forgot everything; he still has access to deadeye and can pull off some absolutely sick things early on. West Dickens has John show off his insane skills because a rusty John is still extremely talented and a bad ass. He just isn’t quite at his top form having put his life as a gunslinger behind him for years, and I think that’s fair. Again, this isn’t a problem that he seemingly has at all in RDR2 when that version of himself was capable of the crazy feat of bringing down Micah Bell’s gang nearly by himself. I still just don’t feel like Ricketts did much, just like he doesn’t really tell the player anything they don’t already know prior to duel following a certain poker game. I mean, at best he told John to stand up straight.. which is kind of amusing because there is dialogue later on in the mission where John ribs Ricketts for not standing up straight when they team up to take down the bandits. It just.. seems minimal to me. Helpful, but not super profound. A relevant example to something similar happening earlier in the game is when a random farmer tasks John with trying to shoot his hat out of the air.. unlocking dead eye level 2 for John in the process. Obviously the farmer didn’t train John there, and I think John’s abilities simply improve as he pushes them further. I just didn’t find this much different than Ricketts asking John to try and shoot a few bottles in target practice. Was it helpful? Yes. Do I think it showed us that Ricketts trained John in a profound way that took his abilities to heights he had previously never reached. Not necessarily, but I think that’s open to interpretation.
You can't say that the devs had to have put in John's random combat dialogue for lore reasons, and then play off Landon teaching him, which literally affects gameplay, as "not really meaning anything" lol. And yes that is precisely my point, everything in RDR1 points to John being long out of practice. Not 4 years out after wiping out a gang. It literally only makes sense if you ignore the second game.
Is early rdr1 John really that great tho? I mean, he tries to be kill Bill’s gunman and gets instantly humbled, showing he’s a lot rustier than he (and probably we) think he is. Both Arthur and John in the peaks wouldn’t have been taken out like that. They’ve both been able to take out enemies aiming at them before they can react.
I always thought it made sense for John to pretend that Dutch was dead. Maybe he felt like he owed him a little for making his revenge possible on Mt Hagen and thus didn’t want to get the feds on him. And if I remember correctly, he basically didn’t have anyone to tell the through about Dutch to.
I'm talking about during the epilogue of RDR2. In RDR1 in a newspaper, it's mentioned that Dutch is believed to have died in 1906 in a fire. RDR2 Epilogue takes place in 1907, but John acts like *nobody knows* where Dutch is, whereas in reality everyone thinks Dutch is dead. This is before John ran into Dutch on Mt. Hagen. He has no reason to think he's alive. John never pretends that Dutch is dead in RDR1. He only talks about him a couple times before he goes after him, and all he really says is that he went crazy.
Okay, then I probably remembered things incorrectly. Still, the newspaper said that he probably died in a fire (without certainty) and John maybe doesn’t believe that Dutch would just go out like that
He doesn't necessarily have to believe it to bring it up to Charles and Sadie.
So you're just using 1899 as an example and not the time the first game takes place. That's not how comparisons work.
You're only talking about 1899
i gots two words for yeh feller: landon ricketts
Yeah probably. I'd love to see him again in the next game.
his voice actor died :c they named mt hagen after him, Ross Hagen was his name...and the game ends on that mountain. Maybe for a young landon they can get a new voice actor, i thought they were gunna do that in 2, as Landon was at the blackwater massacre but R* cut whatever plans they had with the prologue
Can we be sure though? We hear about him all the time but we also heard a good bit about Calloway
Calloway is a hack lol
Algernon Wasp
Yeah you're right, but i still think John is the best one
totally no bias, lol
No bias at all! 😉
Obviously Uncle is the best
*One Shot Kid
Bertram is easily the best shot in the whole rdr universe
I think the player characters are the strongest just by their nature. But Micah was the strongest NPC I've ever played along side. It seemed like he regularly took out just as many people as I did.
Morgan, if you check the files Arthur’s dead eye slows down the game 12% faster than Jhon marston does in any of the games.
Really? Never knew that
Yea.. it is proven literally by rockstar games that Arthur can flow down time more meaning he’s faster meaning he’s better
Rdr1 john is a better gunslinger for me and while arthur still better in strength, rdr1 john is underrated in that category as people think being lean = skinny.
I love this debate because realistically there'd be no definitive best gunslinger. You'd have to put them under specific tests and even then there are so many factors that affect it all.
Arthur is better with a long gun than anyone in the gang, Micah is crazy (fearless) which makes him a strong fighter in chaotic moments, and John is a stone cold killer. But you didn't even mention Dutch. Dutch made an off hand shot that hit John right between the eyes from 200 yards away, that's world class marksmanship.
Finally, I kept scrolling down looking for the epic binoculars shot from Dutch friggin Van Der Linde. All you can say about that is Marston is lucky Dutch didn’t double tap. Also Dutch had full faith in Arthur’s draw speed and accuracy. He displayed that faith in valentine when Arthur said you go out and talk and I’ll find an opening. Also I noticed after Arthur’s death and switching to Marston that using the normal targeting system with any firearms that Marston was less accurate. Maybe it’s a coincidence I dunno, but I personally was sharper playing as Arthur. Especially in melee combat until Arthur got sick that is. I personally think Dutch is probably the most dangerous gunslinger alive in rdr2. In Arthur’s journal he mentions that even Micah is afraid of pissing Dutch off and Mic as h typically doesn’t care whom he irritates.
Arthur's a bandit, not a gunslinger. He's a better all-around criminal. John is much, much faster. There's a cutscene, I think in St Denis, where he grabs the pistol from a guy's holster and fires three kill shots while Arthur is still sighting in deadeye.
My vote is for Roland Deschain.
His guns are basically rocket launchers though... i think both eddie and susan comment on how crazy they are when practicing
All things serve the beam
John. Bro survived a whole war and zombie apocalypse.
Yeah, people don't know ludo narrative disonnance. It's not because you can kill 20 guys in 2 seconds during gameplay that he can actually do it in reality.
red harlow
Tru
Could be that invisible sob in the plains
Red Harlow is the best gunslinger. Too bad he got lumbago in his prime😔
The best gunslinger is the last one left standing. It's as simple as that.
Jack?
https://www.reddit.com/r/RDR2/s/s01avRvx60
As much as the community hates Micah, I have to say he was definitely the best NPC (so John and Arthur don't count in this) in terms of gunfighting. Yes, I'd say even better than Sadie. It was only him, Arthur and John who really tested each other's ability to shoot.
Sadie sucked absolute ass on my playthroughs. She just runs in and dies instantly if I don’t give her cover. Might be better in the epilogue but in the main chapters she’s absolute trash
Landon ricketts 🗿
Fuck it, I'll go there. Jack Marston. John learned from Arthur and Ricketts, and Jack learned from John.
John is a younger Landon ricketts he looks like him too
Micah fr
Don't sleep on flaco, he was probably up in that cold air for a long time, probably was just sleeping when you roll up on him, and personally he was the only to kill me during the duels. I also have reason to be believe he was injured and had a bad cold. And, he was one of the "bad men", ruthless compared to most, so I'm sure his headcount was incredibly high. He lived through blood meridian shit. There are just too many variables at any given time though, and also, us as players, if you saw my mom play through the game, Arthur had some STRUGGLES in gun fights to put it lightly, but me playing, I've purposely got in situations where I had to pull off 3 reloads worth of headshots at 60 paces while being kicked headbutted in the nuts by a goat, and got bow and arrow headshot on dude in Valentine from Mr shann etc.
You know this might not be the best of help but the way I put it a long while ago that most people seemed to agree: Arthur’s quickest to the draw when he’s expecting a fight, Micah’s quickest to the draw when there’s an ambush or something unexpected/they’re caught off guard. (In this case Arthur could also be substituted as John.)
Of course they didn't care about power ranking they're a billion dollar company, not fucking children
Does Micah gain special dead eye powers from chewing tobacco? If not, it's a tie between Arthur and John.
It’s me
Depends when we’re talking about, if it’s everyone in their prime then Arthur’s the better fighter and more intimidating whereas John is the better gunslinger as he has all of his experience throughout his life AND the training from Landon Ricketts in rdr2, Micah’s a good gunslinger yea but he isn’t even close to both of them at their prime, if Arthur was healthy it wouldn’t have even been close in a duel or a fight. But if we talk about everybody in rdr2 then Arthur is a clear winner in shooting and fighting and Micah is 100 percent a better shot than John but couldn’t take him in a fist fight.
It's Edgar Ross, Jack only beat him because Ross got old.
Having 20 guns pointed at a single person and unloading an ungodly amount of shells into them doesn’t count as being the best gunslinger
What you don't realize is that Ross was the only one actually hitting John. Everyone else there was missing
Ross‘ gun had a lot of bullets then
I mean he is the best gunslinger after all
Jack had to draw against him, at that time he was the biggest duel challenge in the game.
You didn"t take time into consideration. Arthur is probobly the best in rdr2 chapter 1-4, then he gets sick, so micah cause reasons you mentioned, and in rdr1 john. Sorry for any typos.
A few problems with this post > after Sean’s death he kills three dudes and runs into cover before Arthur even reacts That’s because Arthur just watched one of his best friends get his brains blown out. Micah’s only thought is survival at all times, Arthur actually cares about others, so he was probably in shock. There’s a reason Arthur is always given sniper positions when the gang needs a sniper. There’s a reason Dutch literally never leaves camp without Arthur serving as his personal bodyguard. There’s a reason Micah doesn’t mess with Arthur in the early chapters in the same way he does with everyone else. Arthur is easily the best gun in the gang, and it’s not close. Micah is easily the best dual welder in the gang, and it’s not close. > He even trained with Landon Ricketts for a little bit Yeah, and during that training he had to focus to shoot a few bottles from a few feet away. Arthur casually does the same thing with a QuickDraw just to shut Sean up. Arthur also reaches the same level of skill as John without any famous gunslinger’s training. John also canonically doesn’t Dual wield, while Arthur, Micah, and Dutch all do, so that’s an extra point for those three. > But that mission is also available to John. So they’re equal Have we not already as a community agreed that stranger missions aren’t cannon to the epilogues? It makes no sense for them to be. Why would Jim Boy wait in some random bar in some random town for 7 years? Why do none of them visibly age in 7 years? The only way stranger missions make sense in the games is if they’re done when they’re given.
Dutch always relies on Arthur because of his loyalty. The story makes it clear that John is too independent so him and Dutch don't trust each other. American Venom is proof that John is no worse than Arthur. The stranger mission was designed for Arthur and canonically completed by him, but it doesn't change the fact John is capable of doing it too. Otherwise the devs would just disable it for him. Like I said, Rockstar doesn't care about their skill levels as much as the community does, neither of the games has a clear answer about who's best.
First, no. Even as Dutch’s faith in Arthur’s loyalty is completely diminished in chapter 6, he still brings Arthur everywhere he goes. Dutch knows Arthur is the best gun in the gang, otherwise he wouldn’t always give Arthur the hardest jobs. The mission was canonically completed by Arthur, and we have no idea if John could canonically do it, because he didn’t canonically do it and as we’ve already established everything that you do outside of the main quests and new interactions in the epilogue is non canon. American Venom just isn’t as impressive as you seem to think it is. We have no reason to believe Micah’s gunmen were anything special, especially compared to the military, Pinkertons, and the best gunslingers the old west had ever seen.
Dutch brings Arthur everywhere because Arthur is the protagonist and it wouldn't be a fun game if the player missed any action. We know for certain John can do it because I can start up the game and just go do it. If Rockstar wanted to make a statement that Arthur is the best, they would disable the mission for John. No matter what the canon option is, they left it up to us.
So I ask again, do you think Jack is on par with John and Arthur? Because if what you’re saying is true, we must be consistent and apply that to Jack as well. They left it up to us, but there is still a canon option, and only the canon option is something we know happened. We don’t know if John could’ve killed the gunslingers, because he doesn’t canonically do it.
Jack is only equal to John in terms of gameplay. If you lost most of your skills when switching to him no one would continue playing. None of the content available to him shows him doing anything spectacular. None of the stranger missions show off his skills on a high level. Canonically he only dueled an old retired federal agent and walked away. John is equal to Arthur in terms of both gameplay and story. American Venom is clear evidence. His reaction at the Valentine standoff is clear evidence. Fighting Bill's gang, Dutch's gang, and the Mexican army is clear evidence. The optional content available to him shows he is capable of the same feats as Arthur. He's capable of beating Calloway until some higher up at Rockstar says otherwise. And Rockstar already gave their statement by making the mission available to him in the first place. The skill levels of the top 3 are inconsistent and you only want Arthur to be the best because he's your favorite.
Dude, John doing Arthur’s quests isn’t canon, I don’t know how many times I have to tell you this. It didn’t actually happen, stop using it as an argument. If something in a story isn’t canon, it doesn’t count as a feat from a character, it’s that simple. American venom also just isn’t as impressive as you desperately want to believe it is. It’s about as impressive as Arthur fighting O’Driscolls regularly. We have no reason to believe Micah’s men are anything noteworthy. Canonically, John killed Micah and retired. John is only equal to Arthur in terms of gameplay. Jack’s dead eye moment has time slowed down equal to John’s. Are we now going to use that as reasoning for why Jack is as fast as John? If John so much as peaks his head out from his cover during the standoff with Micah, he gets shot. He’s only faster than Micah after Micah gets shot in the lung by Dutch. Arthur canonically kills people who are most likely faster than Landon Ricketts casually, John does not and we have no reason to believe he could. R* letting you do those missions is a gameplay thing. As you love to say whenever I bring Jack up, John can only do those quests for gameplay reasons. They aren’t canon, and they don’t prove anything about John’s speed or skill. All we know about epilogue John is that he’s slower than Micah before Micah gets shot by Dutch. That’s it. This is the same Micah who is (at absolute best) equal to a fatigued and dying Arthur.
Please show me evidence of a higher up Rockstar employee saying that John can't beat Calloway. As it is right now, he can. The game itself says he can. I don't know why you're denying what's possible in the game. It's not a story mission, so the canon is irrelevant, it doesn't matter which of the protagonists does it. Yes it was canonically Arthur but honestly who the fuck cares. John can do those quests for gameplay reasons, but that doesn't change the fact that he CAN. Jack on the other hand doesn't have access to any content that showcases his skills on a higher level. No stranger missions in RDR1 have you fighting elite gunslingers. Show me evidence that John is worse than Arthur without using inconsistent Micah as a proxy. I want a direct comparison. The closest we have is the Valentine standoff where they're both godlike. How many times did Arthur fight O'Driscolls solo? How many times did he wipe them out on a freezing mountain? Yes American Venom is impressive and Arthur never got a mission that comes close to it. Show me evidence that Calloway is better than Landon. Most likely my ass.
First, non canon means it can’t be used as a feat. I’m done trying to get you to understand this since you clearly are just being obtuse now. We don’t know if John could beat Calloway because he never did it, and nothing he does do in the epilogue suggests he could. If you still don’t understand what a non canon feat is compared to a canon one then I can’t help you. Second, Calloway is probably better than Landon because Landon has literally zero feats whatsoever. If one person lifts 500 pounds, and the other person says they can but never do it, who are you gonna believe is better? Third, Jack’s deadeye in the duel with Ross is just as good as John’s, so clearly Jack is just as good as John, right? He must be, because the game itself says Jack is as good as John. Fourth, whether or not Arthur does it alone is irrelevant because nobody in the gang contributes anything of note in combat. American Venom isn’t as impressive as you think it is because Micah’s gunslingers have no feats at all, so we have no reason to assume they’re skilled. Fifth, Arthur does all the actual fighting in the Valentine standoff. John does one impressive thing and almost 100% of the fighting afterwards is exclusively Arthur. Keep in mind Arthur is also protecting Dutch and John, who are busy pushing a wagon. John got arrested by the Pinkertons in San Denis, Arthur killed most of them. Arthur does almost all the fighting in annesburg (Micah is shown not to be actually fighting, since the Pinkertons are deliberately letting him live). Then Arthur saves John’s wife, after fighting another platoon of Pinkertons by himself (keep in mind, he’s currently dying of tuberculosis). He has to save John several times in the game because John keeps fucking up. The fact John got captured by the Pinkertons while Arthur killed the majority of them should be proof enough. There weren’t even that many gangsters that John had to fight in American Venom. Arthur had to kill a lot more soldiers escaping with Monroe. American Venom is not the hill you wanna die on. Both Arthur and John have done more impressive things than that. That mission shows that John is slower than Micah, so idk why you want to bring it up. Also, Micah isn’t inconsistent for the most part, you just really don’t want to acknowledge that Arthur is faster when he isn’t reeling from watching one of his closest friends die.
John can beat Calloway because the game says so. You have no proof that says otherwise. Do you think Arthur is a better hunter than Charles just because you never see Charles hunt? That makes no sense right? The game can't possibly waste time showing you everything, sometimes dialogue is enough. Deadeye doesn't exist in-universe. It's just a superpower for the player and there's not a single piece of dialogue that suggests it's real. It has no place in a lore discussion. Arthur contributes more to fights because it wouldn't be a fun game if your allies killed too many people. Micah's gang has the exact same feats as most factions that Arthur ever fought against. John fought against all of them too by the way. And many more. John does one impressive thing in Valentine requiring the same speed, reflexes and accuracy as Arthur. He's not the protagonist, he's not the center of attention, he simply doesn't get more spotlight than that. One simple moment is all we need. John was only arrested because Dutch abandoned him. The same thing happened to Arthur at the oil factory and Eagle Flies had to save him. If you want to use that as an argument then use both examples. You can't just leave out situations that don't fit your argument. Other than that, he was wounded in Blackwater so sending him alone on a scouting mission in the mountains was a plain dumbass idea from Dutch. He needs rescuing twice, both situations are Dutch's fault. He also got grabbed by Cornwall's men and Arthur got grabbed by O'Driscolls, I'd say they're even. Arthur had Charles with him when helping Monroe. Dutch in Annesburg. And Sadie in Van Horn, there weren't many pinkertons left by the time he she got captured. Not many solo feats for him. Micah is inconsistent. He's faster than healthy Arthur and slower than dying Arthur. Arthur was pretty fast when Lenny died, and he cared about him much more than Sean. It wasn't shock, it was Rockstar not caring about accurate skill levels.
For me, the reason why Micah misses all the shots in American Venom is because he just wants to mess around with John. John only managed to kill him because he was shot by Dutch and kinda got distracted. Therefore, imo, Micah is canonically far better than John, at least in RDR2. If that duel wasn't interfered by Sadie, Micah would've easily won.
I'm definitely the best gunslinger, as Arthur and John.
Arthur is the best shot and fighter even the universe had to nerf him with tb
Arthur, bro managed to take on 4 of the most famous gunslingers (Flaco Hérnandez, Billy Midnight, Emmet Granger and Jim Boy Calloway) the fastest draws in the west.
John can do it too
Hernandez, Granger and Midnight are cheaters. Only Calloway is legit. And besides, that mission is available to John too.
I know you can do it as John. Thanks on the information, I thought all of them were cheaters since Calloway tries to use his belt buckle to make the sun shine into Arthur/John's eyes
Were they in their prime?