Red Dead Redemption: Dead-Eye

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

This thread will perhaps be controversial, given that the heated discussions there were on this subject on the previous thread, but I think it's necessary.

I strongly disagree with treating dead-eye as a canon ability in the lore of the Red Dead universe, for two reasons:

1. Its non-existence in the lore​

This is the strongest argument for removing this ability from the pages, its existence is never mentioned in the games, not once.
Which is very odd for such a powerful ability that manipulates time, to the point where it doesn't even make sense.

If such power exists, why does Landon Ricketts never tell John about this time manipulation here, here and here? Why doesn't John tell Jack about it either?

Some will say that the dead eye is canonically mentioned in the lore via this, and this is the reason why this ability was accepted as canon lore-wise in the previous thread.

But these two screens are not lore information, they are just tutorials/tips to show us the commands to use the ability, that absolutely does not make an ability canon, especially if its existence has never been mentioned in all the lore of the games.
The top left text box also talk about gameplay mechanics, would that mean it's canon? Of course not, so why would that make the dead eye canon when it doesn't exist in the lore?

Note: If I remember correctly the term "dead eye accuracy" was already used in games, but that doesn't prove that the ability of the same name exists, because "dead eye" is a term that is used irl.

2. Time manipulation is too much​

The dead eye is never mentioned in the lore for a simple reason: it is not consistent with the context of the Red Dead games and the concept of the gunslinger.
If Red Dead characters use time manipulation to win quickdraws or during gunfights, they are not gunslingers, just time manipulators. Rockstar wanted to make a game about cowboys and guns, not about men who manipulate time.

The fact that Rockstar never mentioned the dead eye in their games is because it's just game mechanics, it just allows players to be as fast as gunslingers, that's it.

Agree: CurrySenpai, Cropfist
Disagree: Zenkaibattery1, LordGinSama, Deceived 3596, Ottavio_Merluzzo, UchihaSlayer
Neutral: DarkDragonMedeus

 

[Dalesean027]

Following

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

Point 2 is entirely an argument from disbelief "It cant be this because it doesn't make sense to me". RDR2 is about redemption and how John/Arthur develop, not specifically people shooting each other. And this is the same "cowboys and guns" game where we see time travel, an embodiment of death, robots, ghosts, zombies, etc as part of canon missions. So yeah no, for starters it isnt just about gunslingers, and just because it has the elements, it doesn't mean that it can't exist. It's fiction.

Point 1 is completely irrelevant as well. The text mentioning at the top when we first use dead eye in rdr2 exists, and the guidebooks come in to reaffirm and further strengthen what exactly it is and so falls under the canonicity standards, and this is exactly why Lephyr agreed with the ability being fine. You're going to have to change the canonicity standards if you want to do anything. Also, adding "The top left text box also talk about gameplay mechanics, would that mean it's canon?" That's really funny man, it's a game, of course it's going to tell you how to activate an ability. Gonna have to remove countless abilities from countless other verses if that's an argument against it. As an added bonus, Roger Clark has stated previously that Jack is comparable to John and Arthur in gunslinging because of Dead Eye and whenever asked mentions dead eyes time slow as a real thing. So yeah, hard disagree

 

[LordGinSama]

Point 2 is entirely an argument from disbelief "It cant be this because it doesn't make sense to me". RDR2 is about redemption and how John/Arthur develop, not specifically people shooting each other. And this is the same "cowboys and guns" game where we see time travel, an embodiment of death, robots, ghosts, zombies, etc as part of canon missions. So yeah no, for starters it isnt just about gunslingers, and just because it has the elements, it doesn't mean that it can't exist. It's fiction.

Exactly. Furthermore the Databook was made to give detailed explanation of what wasn't in the game and elaboration for missions, and abilities, officially produced by Rockstar. Dead-Eye is labeled as a ability, it doesn't need to be mentioned directly in game whenever the Databook states such and we're given various statements of what Dead-Eye does.

As Zenkai said, the OP is abusing the Appeal to Reality fallacy which is invalid here given the nature of Red-Dead. It isn't just a cowboy game, it's realistic in terms of gameplay but it isn't realistic as a verse. The verse is full of blatant supernatural themes, so using real life an an anti feat isn't valid either. All that aside the OP is also making baseless claims of Dead-Eye being a game mechanic whenever this is never stated nor implied, and has yet to provide official sources outside of personal opinion.


The OP also ignores various instances of Arthur utilizing Dead-Eye to wipe out hordes of men before they can move. (See Arthur rescuing John where it's literally apart of the story to use Dead-Eye for this sole purpose.)


Also failing to see how them utilizing a form of time manipulation gained by sheer gunslinging experience invalidates them being gunslingers. It's something they're able to accomplish via sheer skill, it doesn't need to align with real life, it's fiction. Gunslingers in fiction often don't abide by traditional real life standards, going by that logic Itachi and Shinobi in Naruto aren't actual ninja, Vash from Trigun isn't a gunslinger, etc.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Neutral but leaning towards agreeing with the counter arguments made by LordGin and Zenkai.

 

[Deceived3596]

Yeah, Point 1 isn't that convincing to me. The fact it's mentioned in a gamebook that deals with gameplay aspects, and it being discussed in similarity with the gameplay isn't evidence of it being non-canon. It's an ability that is shown multiple times throughout the entire series, it's actively used by the characters of said games, and it arguably has an outside context supporting its existence as well. The games are the canon for the series, it showing up in the games equates to it showing up in canon. I require evidence that isn't just separate interpretations built upon false presumptions imo.

Point 2, I actually agree with the conclusion reached, at least fundamentally. I was never convinced by the arguments for Time Manipulation. But, the argument proposed just isn't very good, to put it bluntly. The core of the series having a realistic story, atmosphere, and anything else important to its surrounding context, doesn't invalidate the existence of supernatural abilities for these characters. That's a conclusion that isn't deductively valid since the existence of a grounded series doesn't infer the disallowment of the existence of the supernatural since both aren't mutually exclusive. It's especially so in the context of RDR where you have literal supernatural beings who embody intangible ideals like death. Like above, until I see evidence that's satisfactory. I can't agree with the conclusion reached by your arguments.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

Point 2 is entirely an argument from disbelief "It cant be this because it doesn't make sense to me". RDR2 is about redemption and how John/Arthur develop, not specifically people shooting each other. And this is the same "cowboys and guns" game where we see time travel, an embodiment of death, robots, ghosts, zombies, etc as part of canon missions. So yeah no, for starters it isnt just about gunslingers, and just because it has the elements, it doesn't mean that it can't exist. It's fiction.

The supernatural stuff in Rockstar games isn't the core of their games, it's not related to the main story, it's just background to the lore. The protagonists and antagonists of their games are not supernatural beings.

Point 1 is completely irrelevant as well. The text mentioning at the top when we first use dead eye in rdr2 exists, and the guidebooks come in to reaffirm and further strengthen what exactly it is and so falls under the canonicity standards, and this is exactly why Lephyr agreed with the ability being fine. You're going to have to change the canonicity standards if you want to do anything. Also, adding "The top left text box also talk about gameplay mechanics, would that mean it's canon?" That's really funny man, it's a game, of course it's going to tell you how to activate an ability. Gonna have to remove countless abilities from countless other verses if that's an argument against it.

So the standards of canonicity here need to change. Mentioning an ability in a tutorial doesn't make it canon, otherwise all others game mechanics are.

Also failing to see how them utilizing a form of time manipulation gained by sheer gunslinging experience invalidates them being gunslingers. It's something they're able to accomplish via sheer skill, it doesn't need to align with real life, it's fiction.

Quickdraw duels are done via Dead Eye in the games, so if this ability is canon, that means they are constantly using time manipulation to win, not their sheer skills.

Yeah, Point 1 isn't that convincing to me. The fact it's mentioned in a gamebook that deals with gameplay aspects, and it being discussed in similarity with the gameplay isn't evidence of it being non-canon. It's an ability that is shown multiple times throughout the entire series, it's actively used by the characters of said games, and it arguably has an outside context supporting its existence as well. The games are the canon for the series, it showing up in the games equates to it showing up in canon. I require evidence that isn't just separate interpretations built upon false presumptions imo.

I do not consider the Dead Eye to be non-canon because it is mentioned in tutorials/tips in the guidebook and the game, I say that it is not enough to make an ability canon in the context of the Dead Eye. The Dead Eye is never mentioned and shown in the lore and in the cutscenes, how to explain that with such an ability used by gunslingers in gunfights and duels?
The only plausible explanation is because it's a game mechanic.

 

[CurrySenpai]

I agree with the OP. It really is just a game mechanic that’s been taken a bit too far as a real canon ability. Maybe if John and Arthur mentioned it somewhat in an actual capacity in the story, maybe even a “Woah, did time really just slow down for a moment?” Id be convinced.

But I’m not convinced. Point 1 makes more sense, Point 2 is a bit eh because it tries to argue Rockstar’s intent as a way to disprove the ability which is iffy.

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

Disagree FRA.

Point 2 is just a big argument for incredulity with a mix of author intent.

Point 1 is pretty much the same. Not to mention, as said by Zenkai and LordGinSama, there's multiple official and reliable sources that confirm the existence of Dead-Eye in verse,which meets the standards for canonicity of the site.

If y'all don't think it's enough, then it's simple : change the standards.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

If y'all don't think it's enough, then it's simple : change the standards.

How could this standard have been applied in the first place?

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

My thoughts are more or less the exact same as Deceived's tbh. I disagree for his reasons.

 

[KLOL506]

@Aetheric Pariah I trust your opinion regarding RDR the most so your evaluation here would be appreciated.

That being said, Deceived and Zenkai's arguments make more sense to me. Time Slow is whatever, but Dead Eye absolutely exists in the series if Charles and Landon are anything to go by.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

but Dead Eye absolutely exists in the series if Charles and Landon are anything to go by.

Charles just implied that the eagle eye exists, not the dead eye.
Landon Ricketts never mentioned the Dead Eye, I show it in my post. In these passages Landon Ricketts trains John Marston and gives him advice, and he never talks about the dead eye/time slow ability.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

Bump

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

Yeah my opinion remains unchanged. You should note and highlight the staff votes in the OP by the way. UchihaSlayer disagrees and DDM is neutral but leaning towards disagreeing with the OP, which should be noted (If that counts, then 2 staff members have disagreed and via the standards iirc this can be closed), and note that curry only agrees with point 1, not point 2. And my reply to you here will be the same reply to her.

The supernatural stuff in Rockstar games isn't the core of their games, it's not related to the main story, it's just background to the lore. The protagonists and antagonists of their games are not supernatural beings.

You're primary argument was that the game is about cowboys and pew pew therefore supernatural stuff can't exist, when I showed you it can, and while I dont plan on getting into a narrative debate, the supernatural stuff with the strange man is absolutely a core part of RDR1 because everything he says comes true (and while their words don't count the VA's believe him to be an important figure for RDR). And regardless of that you're still arguing from disbelief. "It isn't time manipulation (or an ability in general) because they are cowboys and that doesn't make sense to me". We have Roger Clark (The VA for Arthur) believing it is a real ability, in game tips, and guidebook statements (which counts as Rockstars words by the way) which are considered secondary canon against your disbelief here.

So the standards of canonicity here need to change. Mentioning an ability in a tutorial doesn't make it canon, otherwise all others game mechanics are.

This is not why it was accepted. It was accepted because it was mentioned in this way in verse and a secondary canon (guidebook) further established it. Your game mechanics argument would downgrade countless game verses. Every game has mechanics for every ability, and not all need to be explained directly if it has backing in other material.

 

[Cropfist]

I agree with original post

 

[LordGinSama]

I share the same thoughts as Zenkai.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Disagree FRA, this just seems to be a massive argument from incredulity.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

Yeah my opinion remains unchanged. You should note and highlight the staff votes in the OP by the way. UchihaSlayer disagrees and DDM is neutral but leaning towards disagreeing with the OP, which should be noted (If that counts, then 2 staff members have disagreed and via the standards iirc this can be closed), and note that curry only agrees with point 1, not point 2. And my reply to you here will be the same reply to her.

Only one staff member truly disagrees with my post. Another is in agreement (and he agrees with the most important point of my post), another is neutral and another is waiting for the opinion of another and he believes in something false (that Charles and Landon Ricketss confirm the existence of the Dead Eye).

We have Roger Clark (The VA for Arthur) believing it is a real ability

He is a voice actor, not a developer of the game, he has no authority over the canonicity of the game.

in game tips, and guidebook statements (which counts as Rockstars words by the way) which are considered secondary canon against your disbelief here.

A game tip does not make an ability canon lore-wise by itself, and the guidebook also talks about game mechanics, that doesn't make them canon.

This is not why it was accepted. It was accepted because it was mentioned in this way in verse and a secondary canon (guidebook) further established it. Your game mechanics argument would downgrade countless game verses. Every game has mechanics for every ability, and not all need to be explained directly if it has backing in other material.

A lot of abilities in other games have lore descriptions and some are even mentioned by characters and/or appear in cutscenes. The Dead Eye has none of these three.

Disagree FRA, this just seems to be a massive argument from incredulity.

No, I wrote in my post that my strongest argument is the first point. Don't ignore this argument.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

The Dead Eye is just a way to translate the shooting skills, it's a mechanic that allows players to be as skilled as a real gunslinger, that's its only purpose, this explains why it's never mentioned as a true mystical ability.

 

[LordGinSama]

The Dead Eye is just a way to translate the shooting skills, it's a mechanic that allows players to be as skilled as a real gunslinger, that's its only purpose, this explains why it's never mentioned as a true mystical ability.

Okay let me cut to the point but this is literally bullshit. This is never once stated nor implied to be the case by any official sources from Rockstar.


Provide evidence of your claim of it being solely game mechanics or stop using this argument. So far you haven't posted any actual evidence for Dead-Eye being a game mechanic like Aim-Assist. Furthermore if it were a game mechanic you'd be able to disable it, similarly to how you can disable actual game mechanics in the game.



Last but not least again, if it were just a game mechanic Rockstar would have said so, they even go as far as to literally force the usage of Dead-Eye in missions along with John in Red Dead 1 gaining Dead-Eye and afterwards stating he got his "eyes back" after being temporarily blinded.

He is a voice actor, not a developer of the game, he has no authority over the canonicity of the game.

A game tip does not make an ability canon lore-wise by itself, and the guidebook also talks about game mechanics, that doesn't make them canon.

Now let's go over this because you've unfortunately just contradicted your own counter argument. Using your own logic you have literally zero authority yourself to determine what is canon here. Rockstar made the tip screen, along with the Databook being made for the sole intent of providing more information for the verse along with it being created by an official source.


you quite literally cannot sit here and say that these aren't canon whenever they're made by official sources while providing zero official sources for your claims in the OP.

 

[LordGinSama]

Only one staff member truly disagrees with my post. Another is in agreement (and he agrees with the most important point of my post), another is neutral and another is waiting for the opinion of another and he believes in something false (that Charles and Landon Ricketss confirm the existence of the Dead Eye).

This isn't it either fam, CurrySenpai is a FC/OC staff member only to my knowledge not apart of the vs battle staff. DarkDragon is leaning towards agreeing with me and Zenkai, Uchiha Slayer disagrees and KLOL also disagrees.


Don't try to manipulate the votes here. Right now no staff are in favor of your arguments, and you have 2 against it along with the 3rd staff member leaning towards disagreeing with your OP.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

Okay let me cut to the point but this is literally bullshit. This is never once stated nor implied to be the case by any official sources from Rockstar.

The fact that the Dead Eye is never mentioned in the lore, dialogues and cutscenes proves this. No one has yet given a reason as to why such an ability is never referenced lore-wise in the game, your only argument for making this canon is a game tips/tutorial, which is ridiculous.

Now let's go over this because you've unfortunately just contradicted your own counter argument. Using your own logic you have literally zero authority yourself to determine what is canon here. Rockstar made the tip screen, along with the Databook being made for the sole intent of providing more information for the verse along with it being created by an official source.


you quite literally cannot sit here and say that these aren't canon whenever they're made by official sources while providing zero official sources for your claims in the OP.

Lmao what?
I'm just saying that there is no evidence that the Dead Eye exists in the lore, not that I am a source of authority on what is and isn't canon in the Red Dead universe.

And yes Rockstar made the tip screen and the guidebook, but does that mean that the game mechanics mentioned in it are canon? Of course not, so why would that be the case for an ability that still hasn't been proven to exist in lore?

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

This isn't it either fam, CurrySenpai is a FC/OC staff member only to my knowledge not apart of the vs battle staff.

Where is it written in the rules that the votes of staff members who are also part of this wiki do not count?

DarkDragon is leaning towards agreeing with me and Zenkai

It just means that this opinion may change and be the same as yours, not that he currently agrees with you.

Uchiha Slayer disagrees

I know

KLOL also disagrees.

He literally mentioned someone to get his opinion, and what he said is already debunked in this thread.

 

[LordGinSama]

The fact that the Dead Eye is never mentioned in the lore, dialogues and cutscenes proves this.

It happens is various cutscenes. The Cornwall situation, John's Death, multiple times while being rushed before a mission, etc. There are various times in the game where the game quite literally forces you to utilize Dead-Eye, amongst John stating he got his eye-sight back after being temporarily blinded and trained by Landon.

No one has yet given a reason as to why such an ability is never referenced lore-wise in the game, your only argument for making this canon is a game tips/tutorial, which is ridiculous.

First of all, it isn't a tutorial. It's just a loading screen that tells you what the ability does, similarly to how they do with items in Skyrim during the loading screen. Last but not least it has been referred in the story a few times, if you wanna ignore them that's on you.

Lmao what?
I'm just saying that there is no evidence that the Dead Eye exists in the lore, not that I am a source of authority on what is and isn't canon in the Red Dead universe.

Uh no, you quite literally are saying the thing they made isn't canon.

And yes Rockstar made the tip screen and the guidebook, but does that mean that the game mechanics mentioned in it are canon?

Again don't ignore the point here. Point being that you haven't proved it's a game mechanic, and if it were you'd be able to disable Dead-Eye like how you can do with the rest of the game mechanics such as Auto-Aim. Again provide actual official sources of Rockstar stating Dead-Eye to be a game mechanic because otherwise this is a conclusion you've reached yourself.

Of course not, so why would that be the case for an ability that still hasn't been proven to exist in lore?

It's been shown and mentioned in the missions a few times.

Where is it written in the rules that the votes of staff members who are also part of this wiki do not count?

CurrySenpai isn't Vs Battles staff. He's FC/OC staff. He doesn't have any legitimate authority in threads on this website, again he isn't a staff member.

It just means that this opinion may change and be the same as yours, not that he currently agrees with you.

It's pretty much self evident that DDM isn't buying your points.

I know.

Then why didn't you count him....?

He literally mentioned someone to get his opinion, and what he said is already debunked in this thread.

Ser you haven't debunked anything. You seriously need to drop this whole "My interpretations are the only correct ones!" attitude. Secondly, Landon teaches John an advanced form of Dead-Eye. Quite literally after training with him John unlocks a new form of Dead-Eye, it doesn't require a PHD to see the blatant Causation there.

 

[LordGinSama]

Also the OP is incorrect about the guidebook not providing any lore. The whole point is to provide elaboration for lore, the setting of the game and the entire world of Red-Dead. Over half of it literally gives character lore lol.

Guidebook directly states Dead-Eye to be a "special skill."

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

It happens is various cutscenes. The Cornwall situation, John's Death, multiple times while being rushed before a mission, etc. There are various times in the game where the game quite literally forces you to utilize Dead-Eye, amongst John stating he got his eye-sight back after being temporarily blinded and trained by Landon.

These are all gameplay phases, not cutscenes. We never see Arthur or John slowing down time in the cutscenes.

First of all, it isn't a tutorial. It's just a loading screen that tells you what the ability does, similarly to how they do with items in Skyrim during the loading screen. Last but not least it has been referred in the story a few times, if you wanna ignore them that's on you.

In this case show them. Show me characters who mention the Dead Eye, a cutscene where it is used and where we see time slow down.

Uh no, you quite literally are saying the thing they made isn't canon.

Because there's no evidence that it is, lore-wise.

Again don't ignore the point here. Point being that you haven't proved it's a game mechanic, and if it were you'd be able to disable Dead-Eye like how you can do with the rest of the game mechanics such as Auto-Aim. Again provide actual official sources of Rockstar stating Dead-Eye to be a game mechanic because otherwise this is a conclusion you've reached yourself.

Burden of proof fallacy.
The Dead Eye has never been mentioned lore-wise, so it's up to you to prove that it's not a gameplay mechanic.

A game mechanic does not need to be deactivatable/activatable to be one.
The maximum weight a player can carry or characters who can carry a hundred items on them is a game mechanic, and you can remove it.

It's been shown and mentioned in the missions a few times.

So prove it

Then why didn't you count him....?

Because I forgot it

Ser you haven't debunked anything. You seriously need to drop this whole "My interpretations are the only correct ones!" attitude. Secondly, Landon teaches John an advanced form of Dead-Eye. Quite literally after training with him John unlocks a new form of Dead-Eye, it doesn't require a PHD to see the blatant Causation there.

That still doesn't explain why Landon Ricketts never mentions time manipulation to John.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

Also the OP is incorrect about the guidebook not providing any lore. The whole point is to provide elaboration for lore, the setting of the game and the entire world of Red-Dead. Over half of it literally gives character lore lol.

Guidebook directly states Dead-Eye to be a "special skill."

A gameplay guide doesn't prove that an ability that doesn't exist in the lore is canon.

 

[LordGinSama]

These are all gameplay phases, not cutscenes. We never see Arthur or John slowing down time in the cutscenes.

John in the cutscene quite literally looked over to Arthur with Morgan nodding to activate Dead-Eye. That's the only thing that could have saved him, without it you also fail the mission. It's crucial to John's survival.

In this case show them. Show me characters who mention the Dead Eye, a cutscene where it is used and where we see time slow down.

I already provided links and sources unlike a certain someone.

Because there's no evidence that it is, lore-wise.

Again read above, there is evidence you yourself are just refusing to accept them. They don't need to mention time being manipulated whenever it's shown visually and stated by Rockstar dozens of times.

Burden of proof fallacy.

This is really funny coming from you considering the burden of proof is on you to provide evidence of Dead-Eye being a game mechanism which you havent done outside of personal opinion while simultaneously enforcing your own "wiki standard."

The Dead Eye has never been mentioned lore-wise, so it's up to you to prove that it's not a gameplay mechanic.

Again stop ignoring things. I provided evidence unlike you, who has yet to provide any shred or inkling of evidence for your claim.

A game mechanic does not need to be deactivatable/activatable to be one.

A game mechanic is something you can disable.

The maximum weight a player can carry or characters who can carry a hundred items on them is a game mechanic, and you can remove it.

In most games you can bypass weight limit features later on by increasing it Infinitely or within the difficulty / HUD / GUI settings.

So prove it

Sounding like a broken record there which is funny because there's nothing stopping me from doing the same. Don't be so demanding of evidence whenever you yourself aren't even posting evidence outside of personal opinion.

Because I forgot it.

Sure.

That still doesn't explain why Landon Ricketts never mentions time manipulation to John.

Landon doesn't need to scream about time being slowed. We already have the creators saying it slows down time several times, with the Guidebook reflecting lore that wasn't in the first games.

 

[LordGinSama]

Anyway I'm not gonna go back and forth with you. I'll just wait to see what the rest of the staff here think.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

John in the cutscene quite literally looked over to Arthur with Morgan nodding to activate Dead-Eye. That's the only thing that could have saved him, without it you also fail the mission. It's crucial to John's survival.

He doesn't use it at all in a cutscene + that still doesn't mean he can canonically manipulate time. The pure skill of a gunslinger can get you out of this situation, no need to slow down time, that doesn't confirm the existence of the Dead Eye. You just still don't understand the fact that this ability just translates the speed and precision of a real gunslinger for the gameplay.

I already provided links and sources unlike a certain someone.

Again read above, there is evidence you yourself are just refusing to accept them. They don't need to mention time being manipulated whenever it's shown visually and stated by Rockstar dozens of times.

This is really funny coming from you considering the burden of proof is on you to provide evidence of Dead-Eye being a game mechanism which you havent done outside of personal opinion while simultaneously enforcing your own "wiki standard."

Again stop ignoring things. I provided evidence unlike you, who has yet to provide any shred or inkling of evidence for your claim.

It's not my fault you don't know what a cutscene is

A game mechanic is something you can disable.

Yes, I never said the opposite, I just said that it's not necessarily the case.
Mario who can be injured by goombas is a game mechanic, and yet you can remove it, the same for the maximum weight.

In most games you can bypass weight limit features later on by increasing it Infinitely or within the difficulty / HUD / GUI settings.

"Most" yes.
You can't infinitely increase the maximum weight you can carry in all games. And Arthur who can carry hundreds of objects in his little bag is also a game mechanic.

Landon doesn't need to scream about time being slowed. We already have the creators saying it slows down time several times, with the Guidebook reflecting lore that wasn't in the first games.

Landon Ricketts according to you: "I'm going to teach him to aim and shoot better without teaching him to manipulate time better, I'll let the game's tips teach him"

Maybe Red Dead characters can break the fourth wall

 

[LordGinSama]

He doesn't use it at all in a cutscene + that still doesn't mean he can canonically manipulate time.

He's literally forced to use it within that mission. Again it doesn't need to be in a cutscene for it to be canon whenever you need to use Dead-Eye to pass said mission.

The pure skill of a gunslinger can get you out of this situation, no need to slow down time, that doesn't confirm the existence of the Dead Eye.

No amount of skill in gunslinging is gonna let you save a hostage that's being held down by dozens of men. Skill and experience can only get you so far.

You just still don't understand the fact that this ability just translates the speed and precision of a real gunslinger for the gameplay.

I'm not "understanding" because this is again a point you have yet to legitimately prove. All these are just words without any actual evidence for their claims.

Yes, I never said the opposite, I just said that it's not necessarily the case.
Mario who can be injured by goombas is a game mechanic, and yet you can remove it, the same for the maximum weight.

Then going by your own logic then you should be able to disable Dead-Eye if it were a game mechanic, similarly to how you can disable auto target in Rdr2 which is a game mechanic.

You can't infinitely increase the maximum weight you can carry in all games. And Arthur who can carry hundreds of objects in his little bag is also a game mechanic

1: Skyrim.
2: That's not a game mechanic. That's just a gameplay feature, two different things and in Arthur's case it's literally just him lifting those items around.

Landon Ricketts according to you: "I'm going to teach him to aim and shoot better without teaching him to manipulate time better, I'll let the game's tips teach him"

John already knew how to use Dead-Eye, all Landon did was teach John how to mark various targets on bodies while in Dead-Eye. The guidebook came out years after both the games, so characters failing to mention time is irrelevant since the guidebook tells us that and it's much more recent information than what the games have provided.

 

[Robo432343]

disagree FRA

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

No, I wrote in my post that my strongest argument is the first point. Don't ignore this argument.

Oh, I acknowledged it. It’s still incredulous.

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

He's literally forced to use it within that mission. Again it doesn't need to be in a cutscene for it to be canon whenever you need to use Dead-Eye to pass said mission.

Because the Dead Eye is just gunslinger weapon skill, lore-wise it's not slow time, it's never shown or mentioned in a cutscene or dialogue.

No amount of skill in gunslinging is gonna let you save a hostage that's being held down by dozens of men. Skill and experience can only get you so far.

It's fiction, superhuman skill exists.

I'm not "understanding" because this is again a point you have yet to legitimately prove. All these are just words without any actual evidence for their claims.

What do I have to prove? That Dead Eye is a mechanical game? But I've already done it, it doesn't exist in the lore.

Then going by your own logic then you should be able to disable Dead-Eye if it were a game mechanic, similarly to how you can disable auto target in Rdr2 which is a game mechanic.

What ? I said that a game mechanic is not defined by whether it can be deleted or not. I literally said that a game mechanic can't be removed sometimes, which still makes sense with my argument about Dead Eye being just a game mechanic.

1: Skyrim.

What's your point in quoting Skyrim? I said that not all games have the ability to remove this mechanic from the game, citing one does not contradict my argument.

2: That's not a game mechanic. That's just a gameplay feature, two different things and in Arthur's case it's literally just him lifting those items around.

It is:

"Game Mechanics refers to the abilities shown in games (usually video games) that are determined by the rules of the game (examples include hit points, levels, statistics, world map crossing in seconds outside of cinematics, etcetera) and are not necessarily indicative of a character's or entity's actual abilities."

Arthur's bag which can contain a hundred objects is an ability which is determined by the rules of the game, that's why we don't give dimensional storage to Arthur for that, because it's just a game mechanic.

John already knew how to use Dead-Eye, all Landon did was teach John how to mark various targets on bodies while in Dead-Eye. The guidebook came out years after both the games, so characters failing to mention time is irrelevant since the guidebook tells us that and it's much more recent information than what the games have provided.

But if John already knows how to slow down time in the first place, why does he need to learn to aim at multiple targets when using this ability? Any gunslinger can shoot multiple targets, if he slows down time it should be even easier for him to do that. And with time slowing down, even if you're not the best shot you still have time to aim for several targets, so why does a Dead Eye user need to shoot better when he manipulates time itself? The explanation is simple, because the Dead Eye does not exist.

Again, the guide also talks about game mechanics, does that mean it's canon? No

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

Oh, I acknowledged it. It’s still incredulous.

In this case explain

 

[Ser_Hakim_Dayne]

• The Dead Eye is never mentioned by a character nor shown in a cutscene. Nothing in the lore proves its existence, the characters act like it doesn't exist.
• John Marston can manipulate time but he still has to train to be able to aim at several targets even though he should already be able to do it easily when he slows down time. That does not make any sense.
• John and Arthur can slow down time but they still manage to get killed when they should solo all the other gunslingers and fighters in the verse thanks to time manip.

Despite that:
"The Dead Eye is mentioned in a game tip and in a guidebook that helps us play, so it's canon lore-wise"

Seriously.

 

[LordGinSama]

Because the Dead Eye is just gunslinger weapon skill, lore-wise it's not slow time, it's never shown or mentioned in a cutscene or dialogue.

Again provide evidence, not your own personal statement. That's your major issue here.

It's fiction, superhuman skill exists.

You just said it yourself. It's fiction, Dead-Eye doesn't need to align with real life standards. They can be shooting lasers and it wouldn't impact anything since it's fiction.

What do I have to prove? That Dead Eye is a mechanical game? But I've already done it, it doesn't exist in the lore.

You haven't proven anything like that. Again do you have a official source stating its just a game mechanic? It doesn't need to be stated explicitly in the lore, we accept the entire game to be canon. If it were a game mechanic you'd be able to disable it or at least there'd be a section about it within the game settings.

What ? I said that a game mechanic is not defined by whether it can be deleted or not.

Game Mechanics can be disable and are shown in game settings.

I literally said that a game mechanic can't be removed sometimes, which still makes sense with my argument about Dead Eye being just a game mechanic.

"Sometimes." this isn't the case here. Within Red Dead you can disable game mechanics.

What's your point in quoting Skyrim? I said that not all games have the ability to remove this mechanic from the game, citing one does not contradict my argument.

Because your argument makes no sense. Your claiming it's just a game mechanic whenever this isn't the case as Rockstar never made such a statement, It's not in the section with the rest of the game mechanics such as auto aim, etc.

It is:

"Game Mechanics refers to the abilities shown in games (usually video games) that are determined by the rules of the game (examples include hit points, levels, statistics, world map crossing in seconds outside of cinematics, etcetera) and are not necessarily indicative of a character's or entity's actual abilities."

Cool fortunately for me Arthur isn't doing any of those things here.

Arthur's bag which can contain a hundred objects is an ability which is determined by the rules of the game, that's why we don't give dimensional storage to Arthur for that, because it's just a mechanic game.

Arthur's bag being a game mechanic =/= Dead-Eye being a game mechanic. Secondly it can't hold hundreds of items either, the limit is vastly below that number.

But if John already knows how to slow down time in the first place, why does he need to learn to aim at multiple targets when using this ability?

Because his actual accuracy was lacking, hence why Landon taught him to how aim better while in Dead-Eye.

Any gunslinger can shoot multiple targets.

Not every Gunslinger has Dead-Eye and thats not the case either. Not any Gunslinger can shoot multiple targets several times over.

if he slows down time it should be even easier for him to do that.

Not really, just because you can slow down time doesn't give you perfect accuracy.

And with time slowing down, even if you're not the best shot you still have time to aim for several targets, so why does a Dead Eye user need to shoot better when he manipulates time itself? The explanation is simple, because the Dead Eye does not exist.

This is much easier said than done. You obviously don't have any experience with firearms do you? You still need to be skilled enough to get a shot in, even if you could slow down time you'd still need to be able to aim properly and know what your doing. That's a pretty shitty "simple explanation." you concluded yourself.

Again, the guide also talks about game mechanics, does that mean it's canon? No

The Guidebook isn't talking about mechanics, again this is a conclusion you yourself made. The Guidebook doesn't talk about mechanics, it talks about abilities, characters and weapons.


ultimately your arguments rely heavily on Incredulity, appeal to reality fallacies, hand waving canon Guides, blatant dismissal of evidence and headcanon to assert your opinion as if it were fact.

 

[LordGinSama]

• The Dead Eye is never mentioned by a character nor shown in a cutscene.

Expect for the game literally forcing you to trigger it in missions and cutscenes.

• Nothing in the lore proves its existence, the characters act like it doesn't exist.

Read above.

• John Marston can manipulate time but he still has to train to be able to aim at several targets even though he should already be able to do it easily when he slows down time. That does not make any sense.

Time Manipulation =/= accuracy.

• John and Arthur can slow down time but they still manage to get killed when they should solo all the other gunslingers and fighters in the verse thanks to time manip.

Arthur died because of TB and John was gunned down despite Dead-Eye because of the number of men and having limited weapons himself.

Despite that:
"The Dead Eye is mentioned in a game tip and in a guidebook that helps us play, so it's canon lore-wise"

Seriously.

Again you really need to stop pretending you're the one who gets to determine things like that here. Your interpretation is not the only interpretation.

Just because you repeat your points doesn't make them legit. The fact that your getting visually upset over your argument getting no agreements only makes you look bad.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

The Dead Eye is never mentioned by a character nor shown in a cutscene. Nothing in the lore proves its existence, the characters act like it doesn't exist.

Doesn’t exactly matter here, the game acknowledges its existence in numerous instances.

John and Arthur can slow down time but they still manage to get killed when they should solo all the other gunslingers and fighters in the verse thanks to time manip.

Because it is, shockingly, a game first before a feat sanctuary. Arthur is the same person who can fight off a bear in a story mandated cutscene, yet struggled to fight off a knife and needed Eagle Flies to save him. Concessions must be made for the sake of a game.

John Marston can manipulate time but he still has to train to be able to aim at several targets even though he should already be able to do it easily when he slows down time. That does not make any sense.

Again, a game.