Yeah, interesting. John and Archer Fordham are about the same height in the first game (so both are a lot taller than Edgar Ross), but Fordham and Ross seem to be roughly the same in the first game. Also, Ross and Milton are about the same.
John is depicted as being quite tall in RDR 1, but in RDR 2, almost all male characters are the same height. John is therefore average height, instead of tall.
Subtitles reveal it. She basically finds them annoying and calls them weaklings.
While Gloria herself didn’t exactly mean much to Arthur, I think the thing which he found shocking was how Dutch killed her so mercilessly and without hesitation. The old Dutch he knew would have perhaps shown a bit more compassion and restraint.
Arthur doesn’t get betrayed personally - the gang does collectively. It’s actually John who gets betrayed on a personal level.
While I think that John’s death is more iconic as it symbolisms the “those who live by guns die by guns” lifestyle of the west and may even symbolise the government personally exterminating the last of the outlaws in the west, I think that Arthur’s is slightly sadder because he’s a more likeable character and changes so much as a result of discovering his imminent death by Tuberculosis.
In that particular instance, I think that it was Micah who was responsible. It’s quite possible that he gave them the location, or even persuaded to Bill to ask people until he found them. Plus, most of the people who Bill asked may not have even known who the Van der Linde gang are or where they’re holed up.
^^ I’d rather an update to single player where the PC exclusives are put on console.
Well, he’s not. He’s buried in Grizzlies East, Ambarino, in a remote place. Nowhere near Great Plains or Tall Trees. I personally do NOT want another Undead Nightmare. They’ve done that now, and I didn’t enjoy the original anyway.
It’s certainly true that Micah never really had the gang’s best interests at heart. However, whether he had the Pinkertons’ best interests at heart prior to his betrayal isn’t necessarily the case either.
To be fair, Micah wasn’t with the gang when the Scarlett Meadows train robbery took place. He was at his encampment in Big Valley, so he wouldn’t have known about it. If so, it can’t have been him. Furthermore, it’s only speculation that it was a set up. It may have been, it may not have been. Even if it was, it may have been a set up from the beginning. Whatever the case, it isn’t Micah’s fault this time.
His wish to approach the O’Driscolls is a bit suspicious, especially as they had contact with the Pinkertons, but this one can probably be put down to the possibility that Micah, as he always does, wanted an opportunity for a shootout, or to risk Arthur’s life.
Micah wearing a white suit in the Saint Denis bank robbery is not proof or even evidence that he was with the Pinkertons, but it is interesting. It does seem as though Rockstar we’re trying to tell us something. Even if they’re not telling us that he is a rat, it could be used to foreshadow his betrayal.
Micah can certainly be accused of leaving a trail, bit whether this is with the intention of gathering Pinkerton attention is debatable. In most cases, I would lean against such a judgement, and mainly put it down to him being irresponsible and selfish. Still, it’s an interesting consideration.
I won’t lie, I wasn’t exactly upset when Gloria died.
> But how do you explain the bank robbery?
I mentioned this in an earlier reply. Just because the Pinkertons knew about it, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they were told by a gang member. They are resourceful enough to find out via other means. I’ll explain.
With the trolley station set-up and the raid on Bronte’s mansion, the gang had caused quite the commotion in Saint Denis, so it’s only natural that the Pinkertons would be on high alert. Additionally, Bronte appeared to be in contact with Pinkertons, or at least the city’s law enforcement (this would indirectly link to the Pinkertons), so he would have likely told them all about Dutch and his plans. As a result, they could find out where the gang are and what they’re doing via the use of undercover agents, which could have led them to where Hosea and Abigail were (remember that Micah probably didn’t know where this was, which is a crucial flaw to the argument that he grassed it to the Pinkertons). In all chapters, it appears that the gang are being watched more closely than they think, and this is very plausible in chapter 4.
On a final note, I think it’s important to emphasise that not all of the gang’s problems are caused by Micah. The whole theme of the game is that the West is dying and forces in support of civilisation (i.e. the Pinkertons) are getting stronger.
Why would Milton be reluctant to say that Micah was responsible for the bank robbery? What’s done is done, and it makes no difference to how Micah’s true loyalties could remain secret, as Milton had Arthur (who was dying anyway) at gunpoint? Why would he not want Arthur to know that Micah was a rat from the start? Why would it need to be a secret anymore?
There’s no real reason why, in the context of the conversation, Milton would lie about it or want to keep secrets. For me, that makes it likely that Micah betrayed the gang after returning from Guarma, as Milton stated.
Some pretty good arguments there, to be fair.
I think that, although Milton’s character isn’t exactly moral, he wouldn’t lie about it. He wanted to torment Arthur about Micah being the rat before killing him, so he would give him the full details of it. In essence, why would he lie? Also, just for gameplay reasons, Rockstar want players to know the circumstances of Micah’s defection, so they would make it correct.
As for Micah’s actions in the game, not all of them point to being a rat. Admittedly, the Blackwater ferry robbery is perhaps a cause for suspicion regarding his true loyalties, but it could perhaps be because it would be such a big take and that it may result in a massive shootout, which Micah always enjoys.
Micah’s actions in Strawberry actually suggest that he wasn’t a rat at that time. He got into trouble in the first place by killing two people in a bar fight, after seeing some people who he knew. At no point does Lenny say that he was turned or that the people he met were Pinkertons - undercover or not. Just Micah being Micah. Next, the actual massacre would definitely suggest that he wasn’t working with the law. Considering how Micah committed mass murder (arguably the most major crime of all), why would they keep him around? He’d be more trouble than he’s worth. The Pinkertons themselves are careful not to break laws (as revealed in their conversation with Leviticus Cornwall), and having someone like this working for them would therefore be illogical. Even if Micah was working for them, they would never agree to anything like that and they’d probably kill or severely punish him.
Micah is seen with a wanted poster for Dutch. However, a Pinkertons and private bounty hunting are not the same. If Micah works for the Pinkertons and turns Dutch in, he wouldn’t get the reward for it. The Pinkertons as a whole would be paid. Micah’s poster was for private bounty hunting, where he would work alone to turn Dutch in, work alone, and be paid alone. Basically, it’s nothing to do with Pinkertons. It does, however, reveal his thoughts or hidden desire to betray the gang at some stage, but crucially, it does not mean that he was working with the Pinkertons at that stage.
While the robbery of the banking coach and the resulting attack from O’Driscolls is an incident not pertaining to whether Micah may be a rat, a case could be made, as you have done, for the Saint Denis bank robbery’s failure bring because of Micah’s allegiance to Pinkertons. It’s never actually revealed how the Pinkertons found out about it. While Molly admits to it, Milton indirectly denies this by not mentioning her betrayal at all. It is possible that Micah told them, but this goes against what Milton told Arthur, and there are other explanations. In all chapters of the game, it always appears that the gang were being watched more closely than they think. With the trolley robbery and the raid on Bronte’s mansion, it’s very likely that they were on high alert. Let’s also remember that Bronte, who was perhaps in contact with the Pinkertons (or at least the city police, albeit in a corrupt manner) would have informed them that Dutch was in the area. When the gang were robbing the Saint Denis bank, the Pinkertons were ready for them, and with undercover agents telling them where Hosea and Abigail had got to (which, importantly, may not have been known to Micah anyway as he wasn’t there), the Pinkertons arrestee Hosea and it went from there.
That’s my take on it, anyway - that Micah betrayed the gang after coming back from Guarma. There’s also an interesting argument for Micah not being a rat at all which @Equivalent-Ambition made at some point. While I don’t personally endorse it, it’s still something to think about. On a final note, I just wanted to say that any ideas about Micah working for the Bureau in 1907 are nonsense. There’s no reason why he’d work with them or why they’d want to employ him.
Which outfit do you mean? Their default clothes when they’re playable in each game?
He was always? Where’s the evidence for that? Milton himself contradicts this.
Janus is right - according to Milton, he became a rat after returning from Guarma.
Why did he become a rat? Well, that’s a bit more complex. The Pinkertons approach the gang’s camp at the end of chapter 3 and offer the gang a deal. While the rest of the gang brush it off, Micah may have kept it in mind, knowing that it might come in useful one day.
By the time the five gang members had returned from Guarma, it was clear that Dutch was going mad and that the gang was on its last legs. Micah would have been aware of the gang’s impending doom and the high chance of death which would come along with it, so being the “survivor” who will do anything it takes to survive, he decided to betray the gang to save himself. Furthermore, it had reached the point where Dutch placed full trust in him, so there would be little chance of being discovered.
An interesting question, but please remember to attach a “SPOILER:” prefix to the title, as PC players on here may have had it spoilt for them.
Choking someone occurs if you hold Y (or the PS4 equivalent). Just pressing it allows you to grab them. When you have them grabbed, press B (or the PS4 equivalent) to punch them.
Does the search bar not work? As an alternative method, you can usually find it via a link from most pages with information pertaining to RDR 2. Anyway, it’s below.
SPOILER: My absolute favourite is Micah, but there’s a few others who I really like: Javier, Arthur, Eagle Flies, Colonel Favours, and Rains Fall.
That money was actually from the Blackwater Massacre, but your point still stands - Micah managed to find the Blackwater money, stashed it safely, and became the most feared outlaw in the area by 1907 (even surpassing Dutch). In summary, Micah was a very successful outlaw, in terms of money made, how long he lasted, and how much influence/terror he exerted on the region.
No, I hate them.
No, but then again I haven’t really looked. My Xbox updated RDR 2 recently, but I haven’t noticed any changes in single player so far (and I haven’t played Online at all, so I wouldn’t notice a change there precisely because of that).