Red Dead Redemption: The Pinnacle of Storytelling?

I just recently finished the game and really feel like some of the things it explores in the narrative are worthy of examination. This article contains MAJOR spoilers for RDR. Do not read this if you intend to play the game or are in the process of doing so.

The philosopherr Immanuel Kant wrote a lot of gobbly gook, but one easy to understand thing he did come up with was the Second Maxim of something he called the categorical imperative. (If your brave enough, hit up the wiki page for Categorical imperative). I’m oversimplifying this like crazy, but it basically says: People should never be used as a means to end, only as an end to themselves. To break it down even further, it becomes basically ; don’t use people. RDR can be seen as an example of the consequences of using people. The government is using Marston. Marston, in turn, uses practically everybody else he meets throughout the game. I could sense the frustration after every mission ended with Marston no closer to the men he chased then before it started. I found myself playing the game not as I would normally play it (I am a goody two shoes who would stop a police car mid chase to help a cat down from a tree) but as how I thought Marston would approach the situation. I consider the fact that I was immersed in the game enough to want to change my approach because I felt it fit the story better a huge success on the part of Rockstar. I consider it an even bigger success that through playing the game I came up with an opinion of how I thought John Marston would act in the first place.