Red Dead Redemption 2 has well and truly established itself as a monumental, monolithic video game, destined to be imitated and measured against for years to come. The 2018 release still runs circles around almost any game released since, at least in terms of attention to detail and narrative crafting, if not meat-and-potatoes game design. Indeed, the closest we will likely get to a Red Dead 2 Redemption 2-level experience is Red Dead Redemption 3, which still hasn’t been confirmed by Rockstar.
But the game probably will be confirmed by Rockstar, at some point or another, and former Rockstar writer and co-founder Dan Houser seems to think so as well. Reflecting on his legacy with Rockstar on the Lex Friedman podcast last year, Houser said it would be sad if Rockstar were to move forward with Red Dead “because it was a cohesive two-game arc,” which distinguishes it from the more episodic GTA series. At the same time, he acknowledged that the threequel “will probably happen” at some point. And while Houser was speaking in a personal capacity as the lead writer of these seminal works, his comments are telling: it would, in fact, be sad if Red Dead Redemption 3 were to come out, and not just because Dan Houser would no longer be involved.
The Case Against Red Dead Redemption 3
The gaming community at large has clamored for more Red Dead Redemption, but it might be best to let the series rest, at least for a while.
Rockstar Will Almost Certainly Bring Back Red Dead Redemption, but Should It?
Houser’s suspicions that Red Dead Redemption 3 will be released at some point could be the result of insider knowledge, but they probably aren’t. In the words of Arthur Morgan actor Roger Clark, “I [don’t] have any insider information whatsoever, but of course there’s going to be another Red Dead. It sold over 60 million copies!” But while Red Dead’s near-instant brand recognition may look like a plump hen, harvesting it might not actually be the best idea.
Find all 10 pairs
Find all 10 pairs
Dan Houser is right about at least one thing: Red Dead Redemption and Red Dead Redemption 2 form one strong, cohesive whole, and they don’t leave much room for further development. Although RDR2 is a prequel, it feels like a very natural one, as the first Red Dead Redemption is focused squarely on John and the Van der Linde Gang’s history. Rockstar was positioned to deliver a worthwhile continuation of the Red Dead Redemption world, in a way that it isn’t in the wake of Red Dead Redemption 2.
Naturally, there have been countless theories about what a potential Red Dead Redemption 3 might look like: it could follow Jack Marston, it could recount Sadie Adler’s bounty hunting adventures, it could be another prequel, and so on. These could, in theory, be interesting stories, but I feel they would spark an inevitable question: what’s the point? Red Dead Redemption is not like Marvel or DC Comics—there shouldn’t be this expectation that every single character and plot point be exhaustively explored. If anything, Rockstar should probably quit while it’s ahead. Everyone can think of a beloved franchise that was pushed beyond its limits, souring its broader legacy.
But while Red Dead’s near-instant brand recognition may look like a plump hen, harvesting it might not actually be the best idea.
For better or worse, Rockstar is absolutely going to keep milking the Red Dead label; the only question is what form this will take. In my opinion, making another prequel, which is an idea that’s been tossed around by the Red Dead fanbase for quite some time now, is probably the worst possible route Rockstar could take: going further back in the Red Dead timeline would undermine so much of the subjectivity and mystery established by the first two games, potentially reducing the IP from dignified and nuanced to cheap and prolific. It would be robbed of its magic. Following an already established character like Sadie or John wouldn’t be much better, for the same reasons.
What Would Be the Best Way to Bring Red Dead Redemption Back?
John, Jack, Abigail, Sadie, Charles, and the rest of the Dutch Van der Linde Gang should never come back into the fray—that’s just for starters. Going back to Houser’s comment about cohesion, the series’ characters were written, across both entries, to completion; their stories are over now. We don’t need to follow every single character from the cradle to the grave, and in fact, we shouldn’t. There’s a reason why so many great stories only focus on a period of a character’s life, not the entirety of it.
Maybe Rockstar should go back to basics and make an entirely different type of Red Dead game. It’s easy to forget, but Red Dead Redemption 2 is actually the third game in the Red Dead series, with Red Dead Revolver released in 2004 and being effectively severed from the story of John, Arthur, and Dutch. If Rockstar’s developers have a compelling idea for another western story, then tying it to the Red Dead label makes sense from a marketing perspective, but not from any other. The next Red Dead, if it indeed does come to fruition, should be a Red Dead in name only, lest it adulterate, minimize, or otherwise spoil the emotional impact of the previous two Redemption games.
- Released
-
October 26, 2018
- ESRB
-
M for Mature: Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Nudity, Sexual Content, Strong Language, Use of Drugs and Alcohol
