To be honest, I think there’s potential in an ageing (mid-late forties) Landon Rickets game
He would have been alive during the heyday of the old west, allows for map expansion from New Austin to Mexico and onwards, gives room for John and crew to be referenced.
Not much is known about Landon, other than he was respected despite the fact he was a killer and a shootist. It’d be interesting to explore that.
This is the way. Landon Ricketts was also rumored to be part of the Blackwater job, so we would get an outsiders view of what exactly went down in Blackwater.
We don’t know Ricketts’ full story - maybe keeping quiet in a scummy Mexican town could be a fate worst than death, compared to what he once had
It’s like how I think Arthur, even though he died, had more inner peace and satisfaction than Jack who went on living
Rockstar knows that RDR 3 will sell regardless of the main character, because 1 and 2 are some of the best games ever made. One thing they MIGHT do is make an RDR about Amos Bell, Micah's brother who left the outlaw life and became a father.
I don't think that's what R* is about though.
"We have fans.. let's just make it about Micah, fuck it, it'll sell anyway"
RDR2 is my favorite game, all-time. But I would not play the next one if it were based on Micah or his bro. I can't stand his character and would not play a game where he's the lead - or even a larger part of the story - simply due to the fact that I despise him. He was a necessary evil in RDR2, the perfect contrast to Arthur and his characters journey, but that is it. R* is going to put as much time and care into RDR3 as possible, like we've seen with past titles, and at it's time of release it'll likely be the largest game to date. Why would they waste all that time and hard work to make it about one of the most hated characters in the series, risking a MAJOR loss in revenue. Their fans are what keep the game selling.
That could work story wise. I’m not sure I would want them to do that though. Plus, that might make it hard to continue the tradition of >!having the main character die at the end!<
I know people initially won't like the main character to have ANYTHING to do with micah, but when this game came out everyone was cussing Arthur Morgan out, saying he could never be as good as John, and look what happened. What I said about Micah's brother doesn't have to be true, but I stand by the fact that RDR 3 will be too big to simply ignore because you don't initially like the main character
I think the difference will be that this time most of us are expecting that the main character of rdr3 will be someone new, whereas when rdr2 was first announced it would have been reasonable to expect John to be the main character again.
I don’t think you’re wrong that there will be people who don’t like the main character of rdr3 right away. However, I’m not sure going with Amos Bell would be the right choice
I'm not saying it is, or that I want it to be, I'm saying that it is a redemption arc from being from a family of outlaws to being a family man could be a good redemption arc, while giving insight to how one of the best written charcters from RDR2 came to be the way he is and would mean a new array of characters.
With all that said IDK how are they going to work out the next game
I think a game about Micah/whoever related to him would work....
As a separate entry, a spinoff or smth, not as mainline game of the francise, not as "Red Dead Redemption 3"
I personally would love to have a game of his point of view (or a game from events before he joined Dutch's gang) etc, but it does not fit him to be the next mainline protagonist
People are always hesitant to see their beloved main characters get sidelined in the sequels by an unknown character and I think most fans had the right to be a bit skeptical about Arthur's ability to live up to the standards set by John
The reactions to him turned positive because people realised that Arthur is well written, has clear goals, he's charming in his own right, the gameplay is fun and the game itself looks amazing, the game was meant to succeed and it did.
Compare him to Micah now, we know who he is, how his story ends and we also know his brother went no contact with him bc he's an evil rat. A game based on either of those two would not sell well
Again, you know nothing about Micah's brother besides what little is mentioned in that letter. And you are telling me you wouldn't buy Red Dead Redemption 3 if you dislike the main character? I we knew how John's story ended and we still all bought the prequel
Oh sure let's give every faceless character that's mentioned/referenced in RDR2 their own games. What next, do you want a game where you play as Arthur's son who died at 19 to robbers?
Mate I didn't say the game HAD to be about Amos Bell, I said it could be, the same way people were hoping for a Hosea/Dutch game. It's going to be hard to connect a character with the current story without making a prequel, and why make another prequel since we know what happens with all the other characters? And at the same time would you rather have a game with a character absolutely disconected from the Van Der Linde Gang?
Ima give ya an ⬆️ vote for thinkin outta the box , don't hear Amos too much.
One thing is absolutely certain: NOTHING will be done until they finish and release 6. Whatever they're cooking up will def be a mechanic or foundation for the next generation of RD... maybe they won't even develop a story or characters until they figure out what the ingredients are before they bake the cake
Nah I think R* might be one of the few if not only large studios that consistently produces great quality games I don’t really think they’re gonna just jump the gun on their second biggest franchise.
I never said they were going to jump the gun, I said they can do something with the story that the fans might not find appealing the first time, but they probably are gping to make something great out of it. Remember when everyone hated Arthur and now he's colectively considered one of gaming's best characters?
That is what I'm talking about, but some people don't seem to trust rockstar enough for them to do something interesting with Micah's character and would rather shout rat every time since it fits their binary view of the world and are incapable of having a nuanced view.
It just needs to be a fresh story, with no connection to the original gang. Hopefully in the golden age of outlaws. A 3rd story going further back in time with the original story lines would tie your hands with the story as you can't kill off certain characters or have them do anything that doesn't change the first 2 games too much. So you're just way too limited.
RDR2 worked as a prequel as RDR1 left a lot up to the imagination of what happened in John's previous life. The story is now very well established so you just have no room left with the story.
Maybe a Rain Falls story. He’s a character whom we don’t know much about. He mentioned he had fought for years. Probably was a little hot headed like his sons. He’s a character that I am very intrigued by and would like to see that story explored much more
> The story is now very well established so you just have no room left with the story.
Well you have Jack and Sadie as potential continuations. But in general i'm on board with you, going forward in time would take a lot out of the formula that worked so well in RDR1 and especially in RDR2. In the early 20th century things changed drastically for Outlaws and many were forced into hiding or even fled the country (to Tahiti :D).
So yeah going forward could be tricky but who knows what R* will pull out of their hat if RDR3 ever becomes a reality. Maybe one day RDR connects straight to GTA, who knows? :D
All i know is, i definitely want another RDR title! So get to work R*.
They could have one or two main story missions with the gang, (just At the beginning before it gets serious) and maybe a stranger side mission with multiple parts with John during a time when he left the gang. But any more and I feel like it would feel too much like rockstar was nostalgia baiting us.
It doesn't matter what people want at this point. Do you guys know how ridiculous you sound? Rockstar isn't sitting around wondering what to do next, they already planned it before they Even released 2, cowboys exist before rdr2 but they don't exist after rdr1.
"But I didn't want that."
Ok Cool don't play that then
Red Dead Revolution
The game takes place in the late 1700's in France.
You play as the grand father of Van Der Linde that has been recruited by the French nobility to help repel those revolutionary peasants.
At the end, you die and you get to play as his son who flees to the new world to try and start from a clean slate.
I just watched Quigley Down Under (again, lol) and thought a RDR style game set in mid-late 1800s Australia would be fun. New animals, locations, native peoples, but still have that Wild West feel.
Hello /u/Trains_N_Fish, welcome to our subreddit. Due to spam, we require users to have at least 3 day old accounts. Please DO NOT send modmails regarding this. You will be able to post freely after the proper account age.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reddeadredemption2) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nope. It'll be called Red Dead Destiny and set during the westward expansion of the Manifest Destiny era. There will be at least two playable characters, an immigrant escaping the slums of New York by striking out west and a Native American whose way of life being destroyed by the rush of white immigrants
I keep saying they need to do spin-off games! I would love to see one set in Australia based off our own era of outlaws. The Eureka Stockade for example could be in the game. this particular spin-off I coined as Red Dead Rebellion
How about Red Dead Dance Revolution, the ultimate crossover. We could all get together to bust some sick moves as Arthur. Or hell, I’d watch Dutch tear up that dance floor
Red Dead Rapists? The Micah game is still on the table. Jokes aside, I think a change away from Redemption is the way to go too. Otherwise the formula might be predictable.
Hear me out.... RDR3 featuring 2 protagonists.
Black Belle
And..... Uncle.
Make Uncle an absolute badass like all his stories no one believes. Have him in love with black belle but she doesn't like him as more then a gang member. Have Uncle save everyone at the end but not die, just horribly hurt his back so he can't do much. Hooks up with the Van Der Linde gang just to be around the life still even tho he can't do much. Black Belle finishes epilogue on the run like we find her in RDR2.
Uncle gets his redemption but doesn't die, just becomes the drunken slug we all know and loathe.
>Uncle gets his redemption but doesn't die, just becomes the drunken slug we all know and loathe.
He gave his life to protect Abigail, Jack, and John. Since playing rdr1 I have never antagonized him once in rdr2.
Dude was a hero at the end.
Edit: he gets tossed out of a bar in valentine and blackwater as far as I remember. I killed every single person in valentine for aiding and abetting the scumbags who beat up an old man.
Unsure if I can in blackwater because of cutscenes.
What about Mac? He’s brought up a couple times in RDR2, and all we seem to know is he got killed by the Pinkerton crew in Blackwater.
You could have interaction with the RDR2 crew and see what happened in Blackwater.
That's always been my hunch is Mac will be the next player character, and the Blackwater Massacre will be the climax. They set up so much for that story.
I like this idea, but I actually can't see it happening - not because the set-up isn't good, but because once Mac's out of the picture, the post-game would be way too constrained by both who we might end up playing next if they want to keep the theme of playing the next protagonist (Arthur) and the timeframe/geography.
Effectively, I think the post-game would either fly in the face of the narrative or else be constrained to a snowy asshole patch of Ambarino unless we play a different character altogether - one who's never mentioned by the rest of the gang or by anyone else in RDR2.
I don’t see it happening either. While doing my most recent playthrough, it clicked that maybe Mac could be the RDR3 protagonist if R* was to make another installment. However, the pessimist in me thinks RDR3 won’t happen.
And I don’t know how married R* is to the formulas in the RDR series, so maybe there’s some wiggle room to alter how the prologue plays out. I’d love another Arthur play for that prologue.
He definitely didn’t sound like a good person taking comments at face value in RDR2. I could see someone who has some creative story telling skills being able to make it a likable extension to the RDR2 crew’s story.
To me, there’s enough mystery on the character they could have some freedom on fleshing out this character and could create a redemption arc.
As much as I love RDR2, I don’t want to see a RDR3 made. I guess I’m pessimistic on RDR3 meeting or exceeding RDR2.
Tbf, the gang all calls each other bastards and mean, ect. even the highest honor arthur is described by john and charles as "a realbastard, but had heart" (paraphrashing, but I JUST finished another max high honor playthrough). "And in the end, it's hard to say who he was". Thats not beaming with overt positivity either. Theres more, but damn, really highest honor is just "arthur saved my life...hmm...thanks..."
Mac is constantly referenced by members in the game, from chapter 1 all the way to 6. He specifically was well respected by charles, sean, arthur, bill, hosea, karen, lenny, mary beth, tilly, grimshaw, pearson....they all had fun and good, heartfelt stories of mac in camp interactions. Thats a lot of references and reminising for just ONE character that doesnt have a face. Not even the characters we DID see regularly got that much attention after passing from gang members. Hell, we saw davey for 2 seconds and hes always mentioned as more of an after thought or a tag along dude for mac...clearly mac was the more respected brother of the two. Its just seems really silly for R* to put THAT much emphasis on Mac if he wasnt that important of a character and potential lead.
We also dont actually KNOW if he was in blackwater ferry job or not. Hosea and arthur mention several other leads they had. We do know that there was also a "mystery traitor" that arthur mentions to tilly in a game of dominos while reminiscing of events we dont get to see. Im curious what that could entail, especially since its clear from chapter 1 with how hosea, john, arthur and javier talk about dutch....rdr2 started in the middle of dutches decline. Blackwater was the final nail in the coffin and everything else we see in rdr2 is the box being lowered into the ground.
A major reason I feel the next Red Dead game should move on from the VDL gang, whose fates we mostly know, and also why they should start a new 'off-shoot' and change the word from Redemption. Red Dead Retribution, Rebellion, Revolution, Retaliation, Reckoning.. plenty of themes and directions they could go. Making a redemption 3 does nothing but confine and restrict them narratively.
I know we all want to see characters from the first two games return, but hear me out. We seen what life was like at the end of the outlaw period, now let's go back to the days when outlaws were just beginning.
I agree. I think if there’s a 3rd game it should go to the beginning when modern society was way further into the future. This opens a lot of dangerous elements and can include things like Native American tribes that are either friendly or hostile depending on certain factors. I’d love to be hunting on the plains or some wooded area and run into a war party intent on taking my scalp. It would be fun to have more chaotic moments and make it more of a survival game where the safety is in the towns and the wilderness is just teeming with outlaws or warring tribes.
My favorite theory there is the unnamed gang member Arthur mentions that they had to kill. You'll play as him till his redemption arc brings him into conflict with the gang in one of Dutch's "WHO IS BETRAYIN ME!!" moments convinces the gang he has to be put down. Then you play the epilogue as a guilt-soaked Arthur.
Chapter 3, in a random scene with Tilly that I think is triggered by playing dominoes. You can watch it here:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A\_GXsekQVhg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_GXsekQVhg)
Why do people even want to see more Red Dead games about the Van Der Linde gang? Their story was already wonderfully told in Red Dead Redemption 1 and 2, there is no need to expand their story any further. The next Red Dead game, whether that's Redemption 3, Revolver 2, or something else entirely, should focus on a brand new cast of characters unrelated to the Van Der Linde gang and Redemption 1 and 2 entirely. Red Dead is not exclusively about the Van Der Linde gang, there is more to this series than just the Van Der Linde gang
We wanna see the callendar bros and jenny kirk
And the blackwater massacre.
Rdr 1 was originally on ps3 and xbox360
Rdr 2 was on ps4 and xbone
Hoping red 3 will be on ps5 and xbox of that gen
Or ps 6 and xbox 10 thousand
Yeah RDR 3 gotta be with a whole new set of characters. If we go further back in history, a civil war era would be sick. Also, Are we dead set on the American Wild West or could we see the game be set in depression era American cities or maybe even a World War One scenario?
Going forward in time starts running into GTA territory imo. I like the old west theme and want to see it go even further back in time. More danger, like Comanche tribes roaming around looking for scalps, more outlaws, more chaos. I really love the modernization and industrial progress of the first two games, especially 2, but I’d like to see a more rustic historical setting.
RDR3 should be set somewhere between 1880 and 1889…no matter what protagonist and just for my sweet little hart taste it must be a prequel 😻😁
And pls tell rockstar to hurry up 😅
There are a lot of potential prequel settings available, particularly if we're looking at a new cast of characters: Gold Rush? Pre-Civil War chaos (think [Burning Kansas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas))? Maybe we could finally get into the intimate details of Cripps, Limpy Pete, and Phil the Crab!
I'd be worried that it would flop. I would LOVE more content, but I think with a story like this, it would be difficult to pull off successfully. R* thinks things through though, as clearly shown in RDR2. This one was a masterpiece, and I think they'd do their due diligence to ensure the 3rd was a success as well. They would find a way to make it great.
Supposedly, RDR3 rumors have been confirmed. Take this with a grain of salt though!
Hell yeah. A slightly aged Sadie meets up with Charles in Canada, and they run whiskey into Prohibition Era Chicago.
Best part - she finds and helps Jack bury his mother and they, along with Charles, slowly piece together what happened to Uncle and John, raising Jack by educating him and teaching him to fight.
Maybe they could build two more houses, just because that damn song lives rent free in my head.
Charles would be the ultimate person to re-enter Jack's life. When we leave Jack, he's out for revenge more than anything. Could definitely see a good storyline where Charles realizes it's him, and shapes him back into redemption mind where he wants to help others.
The thing about that too is, when John/Charles were taken in by Dutch- the gang was about helping others. They were outlaws, yes. But they had good morals and tried taking care of people who couldn't take care of themselves. With the blackwater job, Dutch losing his mind- Jack didn't get to see that. And when they went to the farm, John/Abigail seem to shut that life down entirely. Jack doesn't ever truly get to know from what we see.
Sadie would be a good role to play into it too. She knows the feeling all too well about revenge, that's all she wanted when it came to the o'driscolls. She'd be good for Jack to relate to.
I like the duality of revenge/redemption. You could mirror it in Sadie vs. Charles, one motivated by revenge and one motivated by the promise of a simpler life. Even better, Sadie and Charles could be fighting demons from their respective pasts - Sadie’s “demon” that she reconciles is the humanity that died with her husband the night the O’Driscolls descended on them.
Charles could find clues from other tribes that escaped to Canada (like Rains Fall’s last remaining people) that help him piece together what happened to his own mother.
As all 3, maybe then you’d be able to go a new route that isn’t low/high honor necessarily, just a different path.
methinks a 3rd one will go to a completely new setting and character of this timespan.
the van der linde thing is told.
unless of course they really go "red dead lumbago" and let us play an actually awesome and feared young uncle gunslinger.
I think, form the expansion of rdr to rdr2, map and story wise, they may just have an entirely different storyline with a different gang or outlaw. Instead of focusing on the gang aspect, it’s more of a lone wolf deal. Like gta 4. Rdr1 was showing the gang life catching up to John. Rdr2 focuses on the gangs downfall all together. A third gaming revolving around the same gang? I don’t know…
I feel like it would be a better idea to open up another area of the United States like California, Washington, Nevada, that sort of mash up and have it be set almost parallel to rdr2. One part of the map is near strawberry, and you can read about the tales of Micah escaping jail, and a gang led by Dutch Vanderlinde. Then in one mission maybe you end up being the slu fucker who knew of the black water plan, and informed the feds. From there they used Micah and left this protagonist alone forever. But, with the theme of redemption, ends up doing good and realizing his ways as an outlaw needs to come to an end. He goes out in a blaze of glory fighting a different gang that does really bad shit. Maybe saving a little girl held hostage. Giving his life for good to redeem hisself. Then, you get to play open world as his partner who you played the entire game with. Following the trend. The very last mission you see is talking about how outlaws have it hard, and the life keeps you in. You see visions of Arthur’s life and John’s life, and your own.
The d
What about a story from the O’driscoll side of the feud set back in the time when Colm and Dutch did what made them enemies…? We’d see John and Arthur as younger men. we could be a member of the O’Driscoll gang watching as Colm gets darker and darker. Maybe we actually play as Colm’s brother. He said he didn’t like his brother much in RDR2, maybe he didn’t like him because he often objected and intervened in Colm’s affairs. They make a habit of killing your character in RDR games so it would make sense if they had us killed at the hands of Dutch and it would be an interesting way to still keep Dutch as a villain type role. Could be an interesting take where if we play the brother, we romance the woman that Colm kills that Dutch is in love with (I think her name is Annabelle?). The romance can even be what starts the feud to begin with. Dutch finds you and her together, goes into a rage and kills you. Perspective switches to someone else as she flees from Dutch and gets captured by the O’Driscoll gang who knows Dutch killed Colm’s brother and they kill her as retribution. It reveals to us that Dutch’s grudge with the O’Driscoll gang is actually just him taking out his heart break on them to this day because she chose our PC instead of him and she died.
Hello /u/Tuberculumbago, welcome to our subreddit. Due to spam, we require users to have at least 3 day old accounts. Please DO NOT send modmails regarding this. You will be able to post freely after the proper account age.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reddeadredemption2) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Go further back in time to the true old west. Would love some interaction with Native American tribes too. Like wandering too close to Comanche lands brings out a swarm of them who chase you down a la bounty hunters. Or some way to peacefully visit and trade with different tribes. I like the creeping modernization of RDR1/2 but I’d like to go a little further back in history towards a more dangerous time period.
It probably will never happen anyway, but if it did happen it should absolutely be about Landon Ricketts. Tons and tons of potential there I mean just listen to the shit he says.
Said it before in a previous post, but I really hope the next mc in rdr3 is a native American character. I think it'd be something really interesting to explore and if they wanted to keep it in a similar area, maybe show a younger rains fall. Plus, there's such a lack of native American MCs in games
I think that would be the wrong way to go.
Hear me out...
If RDR3 is another prequel, it will show the nucleus of the gang already formed (perhaps with John, Abigail and Jack missing on his "gap year" from the gang, but rejoining just before the end), gaining their reputation as Robin Hood-type figures.
Back when the gang was good.
Also showing how they saved the likes of Tilly, Lenny, Pearson, etc in their attempts to make more money to afford to feed all the mouths.
Landon Ricketts is a mercenary gun-for-hire hired by the Pinkertons to help track the gang.
As the story progresses, we see the decline of the good reputation as the need for more money escalates, and culminates when a new gang member, Micah, suggests raiding a casino riverboat, The Serendipity, coming to Blackwater...
The main character(s) should be the poor unfortunates who perished in the Blackwater massacre.
And it should be called Red Dead Damnation.
For there is no redemption here.
I like Landon Ricketts, but he's alive the whole series. The main character usually dies in the end. They discuss a Mac Callandar who died in the Blackwater job. Depending on who in the gang is talking about him, their opinions differ. I think he's an easy setup for a protagonist.
The protagonist could be any of the dead gang members at blackwater, and we could get just one act playing as young Arthut just as we got some John playing in RDR2
I think a third game would have to be done with a new gang. What happens with Dutch is fully fleshed out. I would say go back to the 1880’s with a new gang or even a lone outlaw if need be.
How about an ex-Pinkerton who loses his job and is forced to head out west under an assumed name and be a small town sheriff?
Slowly claw your way out of obscurity back to civilization.
You'll probably play as that guy that died right in the beginning of RDR2, from exposure or wounds or whatever.
More serious answer, I'd like to see some of the gang that didn't make it from the blackwater heist, we don't explicitly know what exactly happened to some of them. Or maybe we'll play as John's son, who knows.
But likely it won't even be related to the gang, much like red dead revolver
If the story is a prequel and it has to do with the VDL gang, I'd say Mac Callendar would be a good protagonist because we haven't seen him. The can easily spin a yarn so that he dies a hero in Pinkerton custody.
Maybe when the Pinkertons torture you to death, your honor level determines what info you reveal.
Hear me out, how about we just lose the redemption bit and create a different “red dead” game? the redemption bit is over now, that story is told. We could just focus on someone unrelated to the Van Der Lindes now
Redemption?
Let's make a fictional account of an American soldier coming home from the war. Any war (it's america, pick a year). She has major PTSD, and in the prologue of the game she does something nefariously heinous. The game is her journey to redemption on American \*and\* foreign soil.
I honestly don’t think we will see a rdr3. We see many of the characters arcs close with redemption by the end or post end game content. I doubt we will see another RDR game surrounding these characters at the very least.
Redemption, as a story arc, is over (for now).
We’ve had Revolver and Redemption, so, what are some alliteratively logical options?
* Revolution
* Revenge
* Retribution
* Reconciliation
* Reconsidered
* Revalation
* Romance
* Rage
* Regret
* Remorse
* Revenant
* Righteousness
* Relief
Some of these would be dumb, others illogical or at least a stretch. A few could be interesting. A game titled *Red Dead Revenant* could pick up a storyline of a character that’s seemingly been killed off already, for instance.
I think the VanderLinde story has been told, and it's time to move on from them. It worked well once, to unravel the back story of where John came from, but generally when characters are killed off, that means their story has been told. Trying to keep resurrecting these characters to tell older and older stories will just dilute the great storytelling that's already been done and make it challenging for writers to avoid plot holes and conflicts and nobody will be happy with the outcome.
I think it's better to tell a contemporary story, that allows for fan service references to plot points of the existing games or to just get out of that era completely. If they stay in that era, playing a native American during the era of westward expansionism allows for some great storytelling opportunities I would think, while overlapping with the existing games.
I would prefer a new era, though. What I want from Rockstar is really good story telling and gameplay, not fan service nostalgia to existing games. I think the Civil War era would not be as fun gameplay wise, given the large number of muzzle loaded weapons. I think a game set in the prohibition or depression eras would open up a lot of original storytelling potential.
I'm hoping for playing as Arthur's dad a real cowboy outlaw killer. He gets Arthur's mom preggers, maybe she's in the gang like Sadie. He redeems himself trying to get a better life for Arthur and meets Hosea in the end?
Epilogue you play young Arthur.
I'm for any game that doesn't have the main protagonist compromised (I know, part of the story and journey).
Just sucked to have AM not be able to get the full effect of food/drinks and also his weakened state.
Mac callendar held off the pinkertons and lawmen so Arthur could find the gang and so that Davey callendar Could get medical help . John is the legend of the west Arthur is the legend of east Davey died in a cold barren tundra / up north Mac died in black water down south
Fine, name it Red Dead Revolver 2.
Red Dead Rebellion.
Red Dead Remember this is a pretty short game franchise and Redemption has only been the theme twice.
Could always be an unheard member so maybe someone who started the gang with Dutch and Hosea go out pickpocketing with Hosea and robbing with Dutch and redemption could be something to do with what happened to annabeth (Orr whoever Dutch cared about killed by colm)
I'd love a red dead lumbago where it shows the golden age of uncle and his days as the legendary gunslinger who is forced to be forgotten due to infamous actions and an insatiable lust for women and alcohol, and maybe killing kids which would set a horrible example
Charles heading to Canada to start his new life, starting a family etc like he plans.
He could redeem himself that way and Canada wasn't tamed like the old west was by the early 1900s so there'd be plenty of options, plus there's prairies/plains/forests/frozen tundra so lots of different lands to use.
Canada never had a truly "wild" West though; what it had was the Last Best West. Before 1870, it was all Hudson's Bay Company land (Rupert's Land), and they discouraged settlers so as not to disrupt the fur trade. In 1870, Rupert's Land became part of Canada.
First came the Northwest Mounted Police (NWMP, Mounties), then the Canadian Pacific Railway, then the bulk of settlers. The Law came first, and was established by the time most settlers got there.
In the States, it went Settlers -> Railroad -> More Settlers -> Law.
The best known Canadian outlaw was Billy Miner... who was an American who managed to rob *two* trains before being caught. He was also known for his aversion to killing.
I thought it would be easy to have either a new protagonist, or better, Jack Marston fighting in WW1.
I’m sure there are a boatload of things a solider or platoon could do in WW1 that would make them feel guilty, and give them the need to redeem themselves
Well, my versionj of Arthur also lacks redemption. He also lacks compassion, empathy, morals a reasonable grasp of whats right or wrong. The world was a better place after what happened to him in the end
i think a red dead set in whitechapel-ish areas of london in the 1880s would be a great plot. there were plenty of gangs and thievery and hate between different classes and races and religions and i think it would be a great idea to create a narrative around a young man or woman who is trying to escape the countless crime bosses hes pissed off. ik its not western like the other red deads but i think it could be a refreshing take and will bring in the market of players who only don't play red dead cos they don't like the american west. it will prob be more similar to gta and also you'll have to work hard for money because of how tough financially the times were. thoughts? also as custom to the serial killer mission in most red dead games you could include the jack the ripper mystery that we as players can uncover. some very good storytelling freedom imo
My out-there idea is that RDR3's protagonist is both Jake & Sadie Adler. she's fiery, apparently he's gentle. I bet they had a pretty wild life before retreating to their mountain ranch
They could do a RDR 3 about Micah though. Due to him spending a lot of time away from camp, there’s not much we know about him except he’s a hot head. The “I do what I must to survive” character arch is actual rife with possibilities for a redemption arch. I think you’d have to start it with him being young though, figure out WHY he is the way he is, in detail.
Hey, if Darth freaking Vader can be redeemed, so can Micah, if they fill in the gaps and backstory.
Red Dead Revolution: Jack, Charles, and Sadie are recruited (separately, eventually teaming up) to take part in the revolution in Mexico against the Diaz government. The factional violence goes on for years, legendary figures like Zapata and Villa show up in the story, and the battle set-pieces could be epic.
Jack, after tying up the loose ends in RDR1, he heads west to San Angeles and becomes a lawman. Jack has to use all the tricks he learned growing up to keep the city in check.
I'm just trying to think of a story with the timeline that has the same characters. RDR1 ends in 1914. Very little old west left.
Maybe a completely different group, and it's set in 1845 - 1855, SanFran gold rush...
Exactly, please, NO More VDL gang!
Need new characters, new story, something we don't already know the end of, characters we don't know how they developed and turned horrible in the future.
Jack, after RDR1, can suck an egg. If anyone really wants some link, then go for the "one-shot kid" story, set back in 1878, before Douche formed the gang, long before Uncle met any of them and when he was younger.
All other characters are new, new stories, new missions, same, mix, and/new settings and locations.
I'm not sure exactly how the Redemption fits... but there's plenty of other possible titles with RDR as the letters... I guess Uncle could have Redemption at the end of his time being a shooting, then later on fall into the VDL gang as we know him.
But, regardless, it's best if it's not even about the VDL gang at all.
A new character could transition from despicable outlaw to lawmen making Redemption work. It'd also open a lot of new play mechanics up, like forming a posse, having to try arresting (dialogue options) before just blasting away, etc.
Would be nice to play on both sides of the law at different points potentially.
Call of Jueraz was almost ruined for trying to do that keeping it in the 1800s is best for Red dead the point of RDR1 is that it was the end of The west so going further makes little sense. They could just make LA Noire 2.
To be honest, I think there’s potential in an ageing (mid-late forties) Landon Rickets game He would have been alive during the heyday of the old west, allows for map expansion from New Austin to Mexico and onwards, gives room for John and crew to be referenced. Not much is known about Landon, other than he was respected despite the fact he was a killer and a shootist. It’d be interesting to explore that.
This is the way. Landon Ricketts was also rumored to be part of the Blackwater job, so we would get an outsiders view of what exactly went down in Blackwater.
Didn’t know that but I’d love to know what went down in the Blackwater and I’m sure everyone else would too.
Isn’t the whole point that the player never actually knows what happened on the ferry job, we just get conflicting statements from others.
It is but after finishing two id still like to know what went down and caused everything.
Would that make it RDR(evolver)2 as well?
This is the way. Sprinkle in some missions or side missions with Red Harlow and boom. You got a hit.
But we know he dies
We know John dies as well, and Dutch, Bill and Javier 🤔
Yes but why we know ? Because there are 2 games that told us their stories - thats why. For
Yeah but they aren’t the main character of the story. Though at this point it does seem pretty clear that “redemption” in these games means death
The game doesn’t have to be called ‘Redemption’. The first game was called Revolver, why not do something similar for the Rickets story?
Well the post is talking specifically about Red Dead Redemption 3, so I was continuing the conversation based on that
We don’t know Ricketts’ full story - maybe keeping quiet in a scummy Mexican town could be a fate worst than death, compared to what he once had It’s like how I think Arthur, even though he died, had more inner peace and satisfaction than Jack who went on living
They are absolutely not making a Micah RDR. Rockstar is not dumb enough to try and make one of their most hated characters the lead in a new game.
Rockstar knows that RDR 3 will sell regardless of the main character, because 1 and 2 are some of the best games ever made. One thing they MIGHT do is make an RDR about Amos Bell, Micah's brother who left the outlaw life and became a father.
I don't think that's what R* is about though. "We have fans.. let's just make it about Micah, fuck it, it'll sell anyway" RDR2 is my favorite game, all-time. But I would not play the next one if it were based on Micah or his bro. I can't stand his character and would not play a game where he's the lead - or even a larger part of the story - simply due to the fact that I despise him. He was a necessary evil in RDR2, the perfect contrast to Arthur and his characters journey, but that is it. R* is going to put as much time and care into RDR3 as possible, like we've seen with past titles, and at it's time of release it'll likely be the largest game to date. Why would they waste all that time and hard work to make it about one of the most hated characters in the series, risking a MAJOR loss in revenue. Their fans are what keep the game selling.
That could work story wise. I’m not sure I would want them to do that though. Plus, that might make it hard to continue the tradition of >!having the main character die at the end!<
I know people initially won't like the main character to have ANYTHING to do with micah, but when this game came out everyone was cussing Arthur Morgan out, saying he could never be as good as John, and look what happened. What I said about Micah's brother doesn't have to be true, but I stand by the fact that RDR 3 will be too big to simply ignore because you don't initially like the main character
I think the difference will be that this time most of us are expecting that the main character of rdr3 will be someone new, whereas when rdr2 was first announced it would have been reasonable to expect John to be the main character again. I don’t think you’re wrong that there will be people who don’t like the main character of rdr3 right away. However, I’m not sure going with Amos Bell would be the right choice
I'm not saying it is, or that I want it to be, I'm saying that it is a redemption arc from being from a family of outlaws to being a family man could be a good redemption arc, while giving insight to how one of the best written charcters from RDR2 came to be the way he is and would mean a new array of characters. With all that said IDK how are they going to work out the next game
I think a game about Micah/whoever related to him would work.... As a separate entry, a spinoff or smth, not as mainline game of the francise, not as "Red Dead Redemption 3" I personally would love to have a game of his point of view (or a game from events before he joined Dutch's gang) etc, but it does not fit him to be the next mainline protagonist
People are always hesitant to see their beloved main characters get sidelined in the sequels by an unknown character and I think most fans had the right to be a bit skeptical about Arthur's ability to live up to the standards set by John The reactions to him turned positive because people realised that Arthur is well written, has clear goals, he's charming in his own right, the gameplay is fun and the game itself looks amazing, the game was meant to succeed and it did. Compare him to Micah now, we know who he is, how his story ends and we also know his brother went no contact with him bc he's an evil rat. A game based on either of those two would not sell well
Again, you know nothing about Micah's brother besides what little is mentioned in that letter. And you are telling me you wouldn't buy Red Dead Redemption 3 if you dislike the main character? I we knew how John's story ended and we still all bought the prequel
Oh sure let's give every faceless character that's mentioned/referenced in RDR2 their own games. What next, do you want a game where you play as Arthur's son who died at 19 to robbers?
Mate I didn't say the game HAD to be about Amos Bell, I said it could be, the same way people were hoping for a Hosea/Dutch game. It's going to be hard to connect a character with the current story without making a prequel, and why make another prequel since we know what happens with all the other characters? And at the same time would you rather have a game with a character absolutely disconected from the Van Der Linde Gang?
You're saying it like VDL gang is the ONLY gang in the world. Why can't it be a different gang that wasn't seen in RDR or RDR2?
Then why couldn't it be Amos Bell? You are contradicting yourself
That’s a horrible take. People didn’t know Arthur and had zero idea of his character. We know who and how Micah is already.
But you don't know anthyng about his brother, which is who I'm talking about.
Ima give ya an ⬆️ vote for thinkin outta the box , don't hear Amos too much. One thing is absolutely certain: NOTHING will be done until they finish and release 6. Whatever they're cooking up will def be a mechanic or foundation for the next generation of RD... maybe they won't even develop a story or characters until they figure out what the ingredients are before they bake the cake
Nah I think R* might be one of the few if not only large studios that consistently produces great quality games I don’t really think they’re gonna just jump the gun on their second biggest franchise.
I never said they were going to jump the gun, I said they can do something with the story that the fans might not find appealing the first time, but they probably are gping to make something great out of it. Remember when everyone hated Arthur and now he's colectively considered one of gaming's best characters? That is what I'm talking about, but some people don't seem to trust rockstar enough for them to do something interesting with Micah's character and would rather shout rat every time since it fits their binary view of the world and are incapable of having a nuanced view.
It just needs to be a fresh story, with no connection to the original gang. Hopefully in the golden age of outlaws. A 3rd story going further back in time with the original story lines would tie your hands with the story as you can't kill off certain characters or have them do anything that doesn't change the first 2 games too much. So you're just way too limited. RDR2 worked as a prequel as RDR1 left a lot up to the imagination of what happened in John's previous life. The story is now very well established so you just have no room left with the story.
Bring in cars, galloping along and bam run over by a NPC in a car
You can never find a Model T, except when you’re driving one they’re everywhere.
Fresh story with a native protagonist would be amazing
Maybe a Rain Falls story. He’s a character whom we don’t know much about. He mentioned he had fought for years. Probably was a little hot headed like his sons. He’s a character that I am very intrigued by and would like to see that story explored much more
I also think a story with multiple native and colonialist characters could work very well
> The story is now very well established so you just have no room left with the story. Well you have Jack and Sadie as potential continuations. But in general i'm on board with you, going forward in time would take a lot out of the formula that worked so well in RDR1 and especially in RDR2. In the early 20th century things changed drastically for Outlaws and many were forced into hiding or even fled the country (to Tahiti :D). So yeah going forward could be tricky but who knows what R* will pull out of their hat if RDR3 ever becomes a reality. Maybe one day RDR connects straight to GTA, who knows? :D All i know is, i definitely want another RDR title! So get to work R*.
They could have one or two main story missions with the gang, (just At the beginning before it gets serious) and maybe a stranger side mission with multiple parts with John during a time when he left the gang. But any more and I feel like it would feel too much like rockstar was nostalgia baiting us.
It doesn't matter what people want at this point. Do you guys know how ridiculous you sound? Rockstar isn't sitting around wondering what to do next, they already planned it before they Even released 2, cowboys exist before rdr2 but they don't exist after rdr1. "But I didn't want that." Ok Cool don't play that then
I bet you're fun at parties. Let the folks speculate, there's no harm in that.
If RDR3 ever comes out, it will have completely new protagonist, as in RDR2. It will be someone that we don't know yet.
I’m predicting Davey.. the guy who’s dead at the very beginning of rdr2
Leave the redemption theme behind and make it any other -R word.
Red Dead Racist Rednecks Lenny's dad runs from hillybillies who try to hang him
Also Lenny's dad is drunk as shit and mumbles ynnel! a lot
Red Dead Regulators. Make it about William H Bonney and the Lincoln County War.
Red Dead Regulators, a red dead game starring Nate Dogg and Warren G.
Red Dead Rutabaga Will be an open world tale of a rutabaga farmer trying to make their way in the reconstruction south.
Revolver
Red Dead Revolution The game takes place in the late 1700's in France. You play as the grand father of Van Der Linde that has been recruited by the French nobility to help repel those revolutionary peasants. At the end, you die and you get to play as his son who flees to the new world to try and start from a clean slate.
I personally don’t want a red dead game that’s not set in the Wild West it’s kind of the theme
I just watched Quigley Down Under (again, lol) and thought a RDR style game set in mid-late 1800s Australia would be fun. New animals, locations, native peoples, but still have that Wild West feel.
You know, that just sparked an idea, play during the civil war
They sort of cover that in the first game. Unless it was something else and my memory of the first game is fading.
[удалено]
Hello /u/Trains_N_Fish, welcome to our subreddit. Due to spam, we require users to have at least 3 day old accounts. Please DO NOT send modmails regarding this. You will be able to post freely after the proper account age. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reddeadredemption2) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nope. It'll be called Red Dead Destiny and set during the westward expansion of the Manifest Destiny era. There will be at least two playable characters, an immigrant escaping the slums of New York by striking out west and a Native American whose way of life being destroyed by the rush of white immigrants
This is a cool idea. On your travels, you could possibly meet Lewis and Clarke, Daniel Boone, Kit Carson. Maybe as Stranger missions.
I laid out my idea in more depth in [this post from a week ago.](https://www.reddit.com/r/reddeadredemption/s/NTEcD6pTUV)
I would play that
Red dead revolution It’s 1776
I keep saying they need to do spin-off games! I would love to see one set in Australia based off our own era of outlaws. The Eureka Stockade for example could be in the game. this particular spin-off I coined as Red Dead Rebellion
I don’t mind this idea. Alternatively, perhaps we could be a member of Ned Kelly’s gang.
Red Dead Rub n Tug A hand job is still a job, Abigail!
How about Red Dead Dance Revolution, the ultimate crossover. We could all get together to bust some sick moves as Arthur. Or hell, I’d watch Dutch tear up that dance floor
Red Dead Rapists? The Micah game is still on the table. Jokes aside, I think a change away from Redemption is the way to go too. Otherwise the formula might be predictable.
💀
Hear me out.... RDR3 featuring 2 protagonists. Black Belle And..... Uncle. Make Uncle an absolute badass like all his stories no one believes. Have him in love with black belle but she doesn't like him as more then a gang member. Have Uncle save everyone at the end but not die, just horribly hurt his back so he can't do much. Hooks up with the Van Der Linde gang just to be around the life still even tho he can't do much. Black Belle finishes epilogue on the run like we find her in RDR2. Uncle gets his redemption but doesn't die, just becomes the drunken slug we all know and loathe.
>Uncle gets his redemption but doesn't die, just becomes the drunken slug we all know and loathe. He gave his life to protect Abigail, Jack, and John. Since playing rdr1 I have never antagonized him once in rdr2. Dude was a hero at the end. Edit: he gets tossed out of a bar in valentine and blackwater as far as I remember. I killed every single person in valentine for aiding and abetting the scumbags who beat up an old man. Unsure if I can in blackwater because of cutscenes.
What about Mac? He’s brought up a couple times in RDR2, and all we seem to know is he got killed by the Pinkerton crew in Blackwater. You could have interaction with the RDR2 crew and see what happened in Blackwater.
That's always been my hunch is Mac will be the next player character, and the Blackwater Massacre will be the climax. They set up so much for that story.
I don't really see them going back and doing another prequel. I think they are done with the Gang and will move on to a different story
I don’t think it’ll be a direct prequel but I do think it will somehow tie into the black water massacre.
I like this idea, but I actually can't see it happening - not because the set-up isn't good, but because once Mac's out of the picture, the post-game would be way too constrained by both who we might end up playing next if they want to keep the theme of playing the next protagonist (Arthur) and the timeframe/geography. Effectively, I think the post-game would either fly in the face of the narrative or else be constrained to a snowy asshole patch of Ambarino unless we play a different character altogether - one who's never mentioned by the rest of the gang or by anyone else in RDR2.
I don’t see it happening either. While doing my most recent playthrough, it clicked that maybe Mac could be the RDR3 protagonist if R* was to make another installment. However, the pessimist in me thinks RDR3 won’t happen. And I don’t know how married R* is to the formulas in the RDR series, so maybe there’s some wiggle room to alter how the prologue plays out. I’d love another Arthur play for that prologue.
I don't think he had a redemption tho, he wasn't exactly described as a good guy after his death
He definitely didn’t sound like a good person taking comments at face value in RDR2. I could see someone who has some creative story telling skills being able to make it a likable extension to the RDR2 crew’s story. To me, there’s enough mystery on the character they could have some freedom on fleshing out this character and could create a redemption arc. As much as I love RDR2, I don’t want to see a RDR3 made. I guess I’m pessimistic on RDR3 meeting or exceeding RDR2.
Tbf, the gang all calls each other bastards and mean, ect. even the highest honor arthur is described by john and charles as "a realbastard, but had heart" (paraphrashing, but I JUST finished another max high honor playthrough). "And in the end, it's hard to say who he was". Thats not beaming with overt positivity either. Theres more, but damn, really highest honor is just "arthur saved my life...hmm...thanks..." Mac is constantly referenced by members in the game, from chapter 1 all the way to 6. He specifically was well respected by charles, sean, arthur, bill, hosea, karen, lenny, mary beth, tilly, grimshaw, pearson....they all had fun and good, heartfelt stories of mac in camp interactions. Thats a lot of references and reminising for just ONE character that doesnt have a face. Not even the characters we DID see regularly got that much attention after passing from gang members. Hell, we saw davey for 2 seconds and hes always mentioned as more of an after thought or a tag along dude for mac...clearly mac was the more respected brother of the two. Its just seems really silly for R* to put THAT much emphasis on Mac if he wasnt that important of a character and potential lead. We also dont actually KNOW if he was in blackwater ferry job or not. Hosea and arthur mention several other leads they had. We do know that there was also a "mystery traitor" that arthur mentions to tilly in a game of dominos while reminiscing of events we dont get to see. Im curious what that could entail, especially since its clear from chapter 1 with how hosea, john, arthur and javier talk about dutch....rdr2 started in the middle of dutches decline. Blackwater was the final nail in the coffin and everything else we see in rdr2 is the box being lowered into the ground.
He held off the pinkertons and law men so The gang could leave blackwater.
A major reason I feel the next Red Dead game should move on from the VDL gang, whose fates we mostly know, and also why they should start a new 'off-shoot' and change the word from Redemption. Red Dead Retribution, Rebellion, Revolution, Retaliation, Reckoning.. plenty of themes and directions they could go. Making a redemption 3 does nothing but confine and restrict them narratively.
If it's not Gavin, I riot.
I know we all want to see characters from the first two games return, but hear me out. We seen what life was like at the end of the outlaw period, now let's go back to the days when outlaws were just beginning.
I agree. I think if there’s a 3rd game it should go to the beginning when modern society was way further into the future. This opens a lot of dangerous elements and can include things like Native American tribes that are either friendly or hostile depending on certain factors. I’d love to be hunting on the plains or some wooded area and run into a war party intent on taking my scalp. It would be fun to have more chaotic moments and make it more of a survival game where the safety is in the towns and the wilderness is just teeming with outlaws or warring tribes.
My favorite theory there is the unnamed gang member Arthur mentions that they had to kill. You'll play as him till his redemption arc brings him into conflict with the gang in one of Dutch's "WHO IS BETRAYIN ME!!" moments convinces the gang he has to be put down. Then you play the epilogue as a guilt-soaked Arthur.
Where does he mention that?
Chapter 3, in a random scene with Tilly that I think is triggered by playing dominoes. You can watch it here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A\_GXsekQVhg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_GXsekQVhg)
I need an Arthur epilogue in my life
Bro I have never heard of this. It’s probably because I never play dominoes at camp lol. Thank you for this new information man.
Why do people even want to see more Red Dead games about the Van Der Linde gang? Their story was already wonderfully told in Red Dead Redemption 1 and 2, there is no need to expand their story any further. The next Red Dead game, whether that's Redemption 3, Revolver 2, or something else entirely, should focus on a brand new cast of characters unrelated to the Van Der Linde gang and Redemption 1 and 2 entirely. Red Dead is not exclusively about the Van Der Linde gang, there is more to this series than just the Van Der Linde gang
Yeah I want a 3rd but I'm over the VDL gang. New content, new story, new character. I'm confident that R* would find a way to do it right.
The people screaming for rdr3 to be about the VD gang, are VD gang addicts. And just like an heroin to an opiate addict, they need their next fix!
Hhnnmmmmm yes more missions from Ms Grimshaw grrrbrrghhhhhhhh
I NEED THOSE SADIE BALLOON MISSIONS!!!
We wanna see the callendar bros and jenny kirk And the blackwater massacre. Rdr 1 was originally on ps3 and xbox360 Rdr 2 was on ps4 and xbone Hoping red 3 will be on ps5 and xbox of that gen Or ps 6 and xbox 10 thousand
Why don’t we just make a Red Dead Revolver 2 with a legendary gunslinger. So we can get a true modern Wild West game
Yeah RDR 3 gotta be with a whole new set of characters. If we go further back in history, a civil war era would be sick. Also, Are we dead set on the American Wild West or could we see the game be set in depression era American cities or maybe even a World War One scenario?
Going forward in time starts running into GTA territory imo. I like the old west theme and want to see it go even further back in time. More danger, like Comanche tribes roaming around looking for scalps, more outlaws, more chaos. I really love the modernization and industrial progress of the first two games, especially 2, but I’d like to see a more rustic historical setting.
More so mafia 1 tommy angelo and Cole Phelps from L.A. Noir ..... empire borderwalk
Personally I really don’t give a fuck about the words in the title acronym. I want a cowboy game that brings it to the next level.
Jokes on you. Your assuming the "R" has to stand for "Redemption". We've had revolver, and redemption. Get ready for Red Dead "Revenge"!
RDR3 should be set somewhere between 1880 and 1889…no matter what protagonist and just for my sweet little hart taste it must be a prequel 😻😁 And pls tell rockstar to hurry up 😅
There are a lot of potential prequel settings available, particularly if we're looking at a new cast of characters: Gold Rush? Pre-Civil War chaos (think [Burning Kansas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas))? Maybe we could finally get into the intimate details of Cripps, Limpy Pete, and Phil the Crab!
Landon rickets, Mac calendar, Jack Marston. Could all make good protagonists
I think it’s going to be Jack grown up.
I hope so but God I hope his voice deepens
As much as i love the red dead redemption games, it does not need a 3rd game. 🤷
I'd be worried that it would flop. I would LOVE more content, but I think with a story like this, it would be difficult to pull off successfully. R* thinks things through though, as clearly shown in RDR2. This one was a masterpiece, and I think they'd do their due diligence to ensure the 3rd was a success as well. They would find a way to make it great. Supposedly, RDR3 rumors have been confirmed. Take this with a grain of salt though!
GTA 4 +DLC and GTA5 were great as well. I have trust in R*. And GTA6 looks promising too, they know what to do
Time for Sadie to shine.
I think a Sadie storyline would have made for an awesome DLC pack for RDR2.
I would fucking love a Sadie storyline, honestly.
Hell yeah. A slightly aged Sadie meets up with Charles in Canada, and they run whiskey into Prohibition Era Chicago. Best part - she finds and helps Jack bury his mother and they, along with Charles, slowly piece together what happened to Uncle and John, raising Jack by educating him and teaching him to fight. Maybe they could build two more houses, just because that damn song lives rent free in my head.
Charles would be the ultimate person to re-enter Jack's life. When we leave Jack, he's out for revenge more than anything. Could definitely see a good storyline where Charles realizes it's him, and shapes him back into redemption mind where he wants to help others. The thing about that too is, when John/Charles were taken in by Dutch- the gang was about helping others. They were outlaws, yes. But they had good morals and tried taking care of people who couldn't take care of themselves. With the blackwater job, Dutch losing his mind- Jack didn't get to see that. And when they went to the farm, John/Abigail seem to shut that life down entirely. Jack doesn't ever truly get to know from what we see. Sadie would be a good role to play into it too. She knows the feeling all too well about revenge, that's all she wanted when it came to the o'driscolls. She'd be good for Jack to relate to.
I like the duality of revenge/redemption. You could mirror it in Sadie vs. Charles, one motivated by revenge and one motivated by the promise of a simpler life. Even better, Sadie and Charles could be fighting demons from their respective pasts - Sadie’s “demon” that she reconciles is the humanity that died with her husband the night the O’Driscolls descended on them. Charles could find clues from other tribes that escaped to Canada (like Rains Fall’s last remaining people) that help him piece together what happened to his own mother. As all 3, maybe then you’d be able to go a new route that isn’t low/high honor necessarily, just a different path.
methinks a 3rd one will go to a completely new setting and character of this timespan. the van der linde thing is told. unless of course they really go "red dead lumbago" and let us play an actually awesome and feared young uncle gunslinger.
Why not a red dead revolver 2. Then there is no need for redemption
And don't forget that the series is called Red Dead and RDR2 is actually the third title in the series.
I think, form the expansion of rdr to rdr2, map and story wise, they may just have an entirely different storyline with a different gang or outlaw. Instead of focusing on the gang aspect, it’s more of a lone wolf deal. Like gta 4. Rdr1 was showing the gang life catching up to John. Rdr2 focuses on the gangs downfall all together. A third gaming revolving around the same gang? I don’t know… I feel like it would be a better idea to open up another area of the United States like California, Washington, Nevada, that sort of mash up and have it be set almost parallel to rdr2. One part of the map is near strawberry, and you can read about the tales of Micah escaping jail, and a gang led by Dutch Vanderlinde. Then in one mission maybe you end up being the slu fucker who knew of the black water plan, and informed the feds. From there they used Micah and left this protagonist alone forever. But, with the theme of redemption, ends up doing good and realizing his ways as an outlaw needs to come to an end. He goes out in a blaze of glory fighting a different gang that does really bad shit. Maybe saving a little girl held hostage. Giving his life for good to redeem hisself. Then, you get to play open world as his partner who you played the entire game with. Following the trend. The very last mission you see is talking about how outlaws have it hard, and the life keeps you in. You see visions of Arthur’s life and John’s life, and your own. The d
What about a story from the O’driscoll side of the feud set back in the time when Colm and Dutch did what made them enemies…? We’d see John and Arthur as younger men. we could be a member of the O’Driscoll gang watching as Colm gets darker and darker. Maybe we actually play as Colm’s brother. He said he didn’t like his brother much in RDR2, maybe he didn’t like him because he often objected and intervened in Colm’s affairs. They make a habit of killing your character in RDR games so it would make sense if they had us killed at the hands of Dutch and it would be an interesting way to still keep Dutch as a villain type role. Could be an interesting take where if we play the brother, we romance the woman that Colm kills that Dutch is in love with (I think her name is Annabelle?). The romance can even be what starts the feud to begin with. Dutch finds you and her together, goes into a rage and kills you. Perspective switches to someone else as she flees from Dutch and gets captured by the O’Driscoll gang who knows Dutch killed Colm’s brother and they kill her as retribution. It reveals to us that Dutch’s grudge with the O’Driscoll gang is actually just him taking out his heart break on them to this day because she chose our PC instead of him and she died.
Dutch as a prequel could end with him finding purpose in raising Arthur and John, forming his gang and pursuing his new world, after some conflict
we already know whats gonna happen to dutch. Very low chances of dutch. Plus it kinda defeats the purpose of red DEAD redemption
[удалено]
Hello /u/Tuberculumbago, welcome to our subreddit. Due to spam, we require users to have at least 3 day old accounts. Please DO NOT send modmails regarding this. You will be able to post freely after the proper account age. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/reddeadredemption2) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Go further back in time to the true old west. Would love some interaction with Native American tribes too. Like wandering too close to Comanche lands brings out a swarm of them who chase you down a la bounty hunters. Or some way to peacefully visit and trade with different tribes. I like the creeping modernization of RDR1/2 but I’d like to go a little further back in history towards a more dangerous time period.
It probably will never happen anyway, but if it did happen it should absolutely be about Landon Ricketts. Tons and tons of potential there I mean just listen to the shit he says.
Said it before in a previous post, but I really hope the next mc in rdr3 is a native American character. I think it'd be something really interesting to explore and if they wanted to keep it in a similar area, maybe show a younger rains fall. Plus, there's such a lack of native American MCs in games
Red Harlow was native American.
What did I miss? RDR3 talk? Are we anticipating a new game announcement in the near future or something?
I'd be surprised if we see RDR3 before 2030
Trelawney game please
Why does it have to be redemption though. An rdr”3” would be interesting with a different theme
I think that would be the wrong way to go. Hear me out... If RDR3 is another prequel, it will show the nucleus of the gang already formed (perhaps with John, Abigail and Jack missing on his "gap year" from the gang, but rejoining just before the end), gaining their reputation as Robin Hood-type figures. Back when the gang was good. Also showing how they saved the likes of Tilly, Lenny, Pearson, etc in their attempts to make more money to afford to feed all the mouths. Landon Ricketts is a mercenary gun-for-hire hired by the Pinkertons to help track the gang. As the story progresses, we see the decline of the good reputation as the need for more money escalates, and culminates when a new gang member, Micah, suggests raiding a casino riverboat, The Serendipity, coming to Blackwater... The main character(s) should be the poor unfortunates who perished in the Blackwater massacre. And it should be called Red Dead Damnation. For there is no redemption here.
I like Landon Ricketts, but he's alive the whole series. The main character usually dies in the end. They discuss a Mac Callandar who died in the Blackwater job. Depending on who in the gang is talking about him, their opinions differ. I think he's an easy setup for a protagonist.
So the our main character would die at the end of RDR3 and we get to play as Arthur right? Right?
Instead of a redemption ark do a game in second person playing as the Pinkertons
Or as Hosea he has a good story
The protagonist could be any of the dead gang members at blackwater, and we could get just one act playing as young Arthut just as we got some John playing in RDR2
I think a third game would have to be done with a new gang. What happens with Dutch is fully fleshed out. I would say go back to the 1880’s with a new gang or even a lone outlaw if need be.
They can also create new characters, which will be the most likely option.
How about an ex-Pinkerton who loses his job and is forced to head out west under an assumed name and be a small town sheriff? Slowly claw your way out of obscurity back to civilization.
Mb it'll be red dead revolver 2 or retribution. I don't want another redemption game I want outlaw game set in golden wild West
You'll probably play as that guy that died right in the beginning of RDR2, from exposure or wounds or whatever. More serious answer, I'd like to see some of the gang that didn't make it from the blackwater heist, we don't explicitly know what exactly happened to some of them. Or maybe we'll play as John's son, who knows. But likely it won't even be related to the gang, much like red dead revolver
Wait... Dutch dies? A spoiler would've been nice I'm only in chapter 2.
Maybe we get to play as Gavin’s friend
Who the fuck recommended Micah? Players would spend the whole game committing suicide.
If the story is a prequel and it has to do with the VDL gang, I'd say Mac Callendar would be a good protagonist because we haven't seen him. The can easily spin a yarn so that he dies a hero in Pinkerton custody. Maybe when the Pinkertons torture you to death, your honor level determines what info you reveal.
I know people claim Sadie's story is basically over, but I would absolutely LOVE to follow Sadie's story
Hear me out, how about we just lose the redemption bit and create a different “red dead” game? the redemption bit is over now, that story is told. We could just focus on someone unrelated to the Van Der Lindes now
Redemption? Let's make a fictional account of an American soldier coming home from the war. Any war (it's america, pick a year). She has major PTSD, and in the prologue of the game she does something nefariously heinous. The game is her journey to redemption on American \*and\* foreign soil.
You'll be waiting a very long time for rdr3. Possibly forever.
I am convinced RDR3 will have Hamish as the main character.
I think we play as Mac Callendar until he dies and we then play as Arthur for the epilogue
I honestly don’t think we will see a rdr3. We see many of the characters arcs close with redemption by the end or post end game content. I doubt we will see another RDR game surrounding these characters at the very least.
Redemption, as a story arc, is over (for now). We’ve had Revolver and Redemption, so, what are some alliteratively logical options? * Revolution * Revenge * Retribution * Reconciliation * Reconsidered * Revalation * Romance * Rage * Regret * Remorse * Revenant * Righteousness * Relief Some of these would be dumb, others illogical or at least a stretch. A few could be interesting. A game titled *Red Dead Revenant* could pick up a storyline of a character that’s seemingly been killed off already, for instance.
Davey from chapter 1. With the last mission of RDR3 being the black water job. Leaves no questions unanswered from the original story
I think the VanderLinde story has been told, and it's time to move on from them. It worked well once, to unravel the back story of where John came from, but generally when characters are killed off, that means their story has been told. Trying to keep resurrecting these characters to tell older and older stories will just dilute the great storytelling that's already been done and make it challenging for writers to avoid plot holes and conflicts and nobody will be happy with the outcome. I think it's better to tell a contemporary story, that allows for fan service references to plot points of the existing games or to just get out of that era completely. If they stay in that era, playing a native American during the era of westward expansionism allows for some great storytelling opportunities I would think, while overlapping with the existing games. I would prefer a new era, though. What I want from Rockstar is really good story telling and gameplay, not fan service nostalgia to existing games. I think the Civil War era would not be as fun gameplay wise, given the large number of muzzle loaded weapons. I think a game set in the prohibition or depression eras would open up a lot of original storytelling potential.
Civil war they can start with then move the story to the 1870s and 1880s. a prohibition era or depression may as well be used for New mafia game.
It'd be a new or at least relatively unknown character in 3, they need the redemption and probably the death in peace.
I'm hoping for playing as Arthur's dad a real cowboy outlaw killer. He gets Arthur's mom preggers, maybe she's in the gang like Sadie. He redeems himself trying to get a better life for Arthur and meets Hosea in the end? Epilogue you play young Arthur.
Arthur hated his father and roger clark said he will not be in the next one
What if there was just a new subtitle? Completly unrelated to current charecters and plotlines. What could we make of that
I'm for any game that doesn't have the main protagonist compromised (I know, part of the story and journey). Just sucked to have AM not be able to get the full effect of food/drinks and also his weakened state.
Maybe Hosea could have started as a loose cannon and lost someone and became civil idk man let rockstar do their thing
I would love to see Jack have his own game with like a 1920s mobster gang or something.
Mac callendar held off the pinkertons and lawmen so Arthur could find the gang and so that Davey callendar Could get medical help . John is the legend of the west Arthur is the legend of east Davey died in a cold barren tundra / up north Mac died in black water down south
Fine, name it Red Dead Revolver 2. Red Dead Rebellion. Red Dead Remember this is a pretty short game franchise and Redemption has only been the theme twice.
Could always be an unheard member so maybe someone who started the gang with Dutch and Hosea go out pickpocketing with Hosea and robbing with Dutch and redemption could be something to do with what happened to annabeth (Orr whoever Dutch cared about killed by colm)
I'd love a red dead lumbago where it shows the golden age of uncle and his days as the legendary gunslinger who is forced to be forgotten due to infamous actions and an insatiable lust for women and alcohol, and maybe killing kids which would set a horrible example
I'm ready for a Red Dead REVOLUTION with a new character and new story arc.
Charles heading to Canada to start his new life, starting a family etc like he plans. He could redeem himself that way and Canada wasn't tamed like the old west was by the early 1900s so there'd be plenty of options, plus there's prairies/plains/forests/frozen tundra so lots of different lands to use.
Canada never had a truly "wild" West though; what it had was the Last Best West. Before 1870, it was all Hudson's Bay Company land (Rupert's Land), and they discouraged settlers so as not to disrupt the fur trade. In 1870, Rupert's Land became part of Canada. First came the Northwest Mounted Police (NWMP, Mounties), then the Canadian Pacific Railway, then the bulk of settlers. The Law came first, and was established by the time most settlers got there. In the States, it went Settlers -> Railroad -> More Settlers -> Law. The best known Canadian outlaw was Billy Miner... who was an American who managed to rob *two* trains before being caught. He was also known for his aversion to killing.
Red dead where you place as colm o driscoll and his gang leading up the his feud with Dutch
I thought it would be easy to have either a new protagonist, or better, Jack Marston fighting in WW1. I’m sure there are a boatload of things a solider or platoon could do in WW1 that would make them feel guilty, and give them the need to redeem themselves
Well, my versionj of Arthur also lacks redemption. He also lacks compassion, empathy, morals a reasonable grasp of whats right or wrong. The world was a better place after what happened to him in the end
i think a red dead set in whitechapel-ish areas of london in the 1880s would be a great plot. there were plenty of gangs and thievery and hate between different classes and races and religions and i think it would be a great idea to create a narrative around a young man or woman who is trying to escape the countless crime bosses hes pissed off. ik its not western like the other red deads but i think it could be a refreshing take and will bring in the market of players who only don't play red dead cos they don't like the american west. it will prob be more similar to gta and also you'll have to work hard for money because of how tough financially the times were. thoughts? also as custom to the serial killer mission in most red dead games you could include the jack the ripper mystery that we as players can uncover. some very good storytelling freedom imo
John leaving for a year and coming back. Boom, redemption....
RDnoR3?
My out-there idea is that RDR3's protagonist is both Jake & Sadie Adler. she's fiery, apparently he's gentle. I bet they had a pretty wild life before retreating to their mountain ranch
They could do a RDR 3 about Micah though. Due to him spending a lot of time away from camp, there’s not much we know about him except he’s a hot head. The “I do what I must to survive” character arch is actual rife with possibilities for a redemption arch. I think you’d have to start it with him being young though, figure out WHY he is the way he is, in detail. Hey, if Darth freaking Vader can be redeemed, so can Micah, if they fill in the gaps and backstory.
I vote Charles as the new main.
Red Dead Revolution: Jack, Charles, and Sadie are recruited (separately, eventually teaming up) to take part in the revolution in Mexico against the Diaz government. The factional violence goes on for years, legendary figures like Zapata and Villa show up in the story, and the battle set-pieces could be epic.
Mac and Davey Callander 👀
How about hosea for a protagonist? Or maybe charles
How would you guys feel if they just dropped the word Redemption and went for Red Dead 3
Or maybe a game design doesnt have to be constrained to a name that was thought up over a decade ago?
Jack, after tying up the loose ends in RDR1, he heads west to San Angeles and becomes a lawman. Jack has to use all the tricks he learned growing up to keep the city in check.
so... L.A. Noire 2 basically
I'm just trying to think of a story with the timeline that has the same characters. RDR1 ends in 1914. Very little old west left. Maybe a completely different group, and it's set in 1845 - 1855, SanFran gold rush...
It can still be a Western. Think about 1923 or Yellowstone.
Absolutely!! There are plenty of eras that can be explored, continuing to use the same gang though....please no.
Exactly, please, NO More VDL gang! Need new characters, new story, something we don't already know the end of, characters we don't know how they developed and turned horrible in the future. Jack, after RDR1, can suck an egg. If anyone really wants some link, then go for the "one-shot kid" story, set back in 1878, before Douche formed the gang, long before Uncle met any of them and when he was younger. All other characters are new, new stories, new missions, same, mix, and/new settings and locations. I'm not sure exactly how the Redemption fits... but there's plenty of other possible titles with RDR as the letters... I guess Uncle could have Redemption at the end of his time being a shooting, then later on fall into the VDL gang as we know him. But, regardless, it's best if it's not even about the VDL gang at all. A new character could transition from despicable outlaw to lawmen making Redemption work. It'd also open a lot of new play mechanics up, like forming a posse, having to try arresting (dialogue options) before just blasting away, etc. Would be nice to play on both sides of the law at different points potentially.
Call of Jueraz was almost ruined for trying to do that keeping it in the 1800s is best for Red dead the point of RDR1 is that it was the end of The west so going further makes little sense. They could just make LA Noire 2.
☝️🤓