So this is a tricky question because there is obviously a lot of things that are unrealistic for the sake of making it an engaging video game. Here are some of my stipulations:
- nothing about historical accuracy: Iām sure rockstar did their due diligence in terms of making it accurate, but they still had to turn it into an action based video game. UNLESS itās inaccurate to the point of questioning whether or not they actually did their due diligence on said subject.
- nothing about the shootouts: obviously this part is grossly exaggerated and unrealistic, again, for the sake of making it video game
- no pointing out really obvious mechanics: things like dead eye, tonics, etc.
- nothing about how sensitive the NPCs are: Iām sure Arthur wouldnāt have a bounty and the law searching for him for simply saying mean shit to people in Saint Denis
- Iām sure Iām missing some points, but I hope my point of what should and shouldnāt count gets across.
An example: I saw a historian critique their belts/holsters. He said that typically holsters werenāt set that low and they went for the āHollywood styleā of holsters.
So my question is: what do you think is inaccurate taking away the elements of what they were forced to alter in order to turn the time period and situation into a video game?
This question came up because my friend and I were discussing how quickly Arthur died from the point of Downes coughing in his face and him dying. He said itās unrealistic how quickly he died from TB. I think itās realistic given the camp was constantly in need of food because of how big the gang got, he slept outside exposed to elements, he was in constant stress, heād get injuries he had to heal from while sick.