Red Dead Redemption 3 hasn’t been confirmed by Rockstar Games yet but let’s be real, it’s probably going to happen given the success of the series so far.
Red Dead Redemption 2 tugged on all of our heart strings, and it did so knowing that we all knew what was coming. It was a prequel at the end of the day, so we knew going in that things weren’t going to work out.
Nevertheless, it told an emotional, action-packed story that left us wanting even more, a monumental success in every sense.
While there’s debate on if we even need a Red Dead Redemption 3, I don’t think many would grumble if we got one, though perhaps a deviation is in order like Red Dead Revolver again.
Advert
That said, some fans think a Red Dead Redemption 3 needs to happen, and if it does, it should be yet another prequel.
This idea comes from Reddit user TheMastermind729, who said in a thread that a third game set before the previous two “would be unprecedented”.
They went on to say, “It’s so hard to successfully make a prequel (you already know what’s gonna happen afterward), it’s so hard to successfully make a trilogy (making an interconnected story spanning three games is no easy feat)… but a trilogy in REVERSE??? Can you imagine if they pulled that off? It would be historic!”
Granted, they have a point, it’d be an impressive storytelling feat no doubt but other fans aren’t convinced it’s the right move.
Advert
“A game called redemption, about redemption, but you want it without redemption? Please explain,” said one commenter in response.
Another raised a good point that a reverse-trilogy could already be done by the time the game even comes out, saying: “At least 10 years down the road. Who knows what the state of video games and their players would be in 10 years.”
Red Dead Redemption 3 feels inevitable, so we’ll just have to wait and see what Rockstar Games cooks up, if it even bothers to turn on the stove.
Topics: Red Dead Redemption, Red Dead Redemption 2, Rockstar Games