Where Should Red Dead Go Next? A GI Editor Roundtable

We play a lot of games at the Game Informer office, but it's pretty rare to find a game so awesome that almost every editor takes time to play through it as soon as they can after release. Meet Rockstar's latest hit, Red Dead Redemption, which has been just such a game. We've spent so many hours playing through the game and discussing it around the office, that we decided we should share some of that discussion with you.

Since we've all been digging into and wrapping up the single-player story, our most recent series of talks focused on what we'd like to see Rockstar do next with the Red Dead franchise.

Phil: Personally, I would love to see Rockstar's take on the California Gold Rush in the 1840s/50s. The state of California provides a nice variety of locales, and the game could even begin with the journey west for more variety. The events and motivation behind the Gold Rush also provide the perfect beginning point for that sharp satire on America that Rockstar has become so good at. What better way to explore the broken promises of the American dream than through the race for greed and glory during the Gold Rush?

Matt: Full disclosure: I am about one-third of the way through Red Dead Redemption by my estimate. The big question to me is whether they see the sequels as continuing the story of the first game or whether it’s like Grand Theft Auto, where each time they "reboot" with a new character. Redemption is set in 1911, so a lot of the Wild West stuff and the Gold Rush etc., would have already happened.

I think an interesting take would be for the game to travel to a large city -- at least for a part of a game -- and see how Rockstar could imagine an urban area of that period. But I would only want that for a part of the game, as contrast...then return to the Wild West. Central/South America would also be amazing. I was just reading about the writer O. Henry who worked on a ranch in Texas. Later in life, he worked at a bank and was convicted of embezzlement and fled to Honduras. Something like that could be cool.

Reiner: With so many great period pieces left untouched in video games, I can't see Rockstar offering a character-based sequel. Phil's idea on the gold rush seems like the next logical step for the series. I wouldn't mind playing as a prospector with gold fever. With that said, Rockstar latches onto storytelling just as much as it does period pieces and themes. This franchise could just as easily venture into a large urban city like New York. And I'm not talking about a game centered on the rise of the automobile. What if Rockstar latched onto a 1860s period piece similar to Gangs of New York? Anyone up for playing as The Butcher?

Kato: I'd prefer that the series not try to tackle an urban setting or go too far forward in the future. The beauty of the game is getting on your horse and just riding around doing stuff. I would think that a city setting would be too claustrophobic and just turn the game into another GTA.

Bertz: As much as I love John Marston, I hope the sequel turns back the clock a bit with a new character (maybe Landon Ricketts?) and storyline set primarily in the north country and dust bowl towns in the Midwest. Then the game could spend more time with the Native American crisis, which I think many expected to be addressed more heavily in Red Dead Redemption. I'm a huge fan of Deadwood, and I would love to work with a shady saloon owner like Al Swearengen or Sy Tolliver in the new adventure as well. You could wrap up the experience in a big coastal city like San Francisco or Portland (home of the Shanghai Tunnels) to capture the shady essence of the early American cities, something Blackwater barely touches upon.

Bryan: I think if handled right this game could take place along the Oregon Trail. You could start out in the 1860s in Omaha, Nebraska, or St. Louis as a kid moving west with your family to start a better life. Somewhere along the line you get separated from your family and they continue on. You come of age in Casper, Wyoming, and eventually get info on where they might be. This sends you through Utah, Idaho, and Oregon, where you eventually find them in Portland. The railways were up and running in the 1880s, so fast travel would be viable. Picture three or four distinct open world areas to explore and a red line traces over your path on an old-timey map as you travel between zones.

Matt: Honestly, with anything set in the 1860s, it would be hard to do that timeframe and ignore the Civil War.

Phil: Agreed, but would that be a bad thing, or do you think it could be kind of awesome? Personally, I think there’s a lot of interesting characters and ideas from the Civil War era that Rockstar could play with. The problem would be figuring out a believable way to present characters from both sides of the conflict. I don’t think they could get away with the “playing both sides” stuff that goes on in Mexico in Redemption unless they were very clever about it.

How about gameplay changes you'd like to see implemented? I know Jeff M. brought up some crazy ideas about actually being able to hang people or tie them to other structures once you’ve hogtied them, but I would personally be excited about more side stuff that builds the world up. I love riding around, breaking horses, playing Liar’s Dice, and other side tasks in Redemption...often more than the story missions themselves.

In a Gold Rush-era game, prospecting could make for an interesting mini-game.  At lunch, Joe brought up the idea of actually working through the ranks to become a sheriff rather than just hunting bounties endlessly or the idea of completing challenges actually netting you gameplay bonuses. These could be interesting concepts to build off of.

Jeff M.: Rockstar did a great job of integrating Red Dead's mini-games and random encounters into the world -- much more so than with any game in the GTA series. That said, I too would like to see a greater level of progression come from them. Red Dead's challenges are great, but they suffer from two problems. First is the lack of gameplay bonuses, as Joe pointed out. Some challenges unlock weapons in stores, but why not make every challenge have some kind of effect on gameplay? Besides unlocking new weapons or perks, Rockstar could implement more RPG elements in upgrading your character, like faster moving speed, greater damage resistance, faster cooldown time on Dead Eye, etc. Rockstar could even tap your horse for more upgrade options. I know Rockstar makes action games, not RPGs, but occasionally Red Dead reminds me of Oblivion, and it's always in a good way.

The second problem with the challenges is that they all only result in monetary gain. Hunting nets you pelts and meat, which can only be sold...which in turn is really only good for buying new weapons. The same is true of collecting flowers (not something I ever expected to do in a Rockstar game) and tracking down the buried treasure. Horse taming is even worse, since you can't sell them afterwards -- if you stick with the same horse (or buy the fastest breed), there's no reason to continue doing it. Since every mission, random encounter, and gambling game pays money too, your reward for all of these activities quickly becomes pointless.

I'd love to see Rockstar find some way to implement your earnings back into the gameplay -- perhaps you could use ingredients you collect to make your own stat-boosting medicines -- or at least develop the game's economy more, so there's more to buy with all the money you make. Buying more costumes (even if they're cosmetic), upgrading weapons, or offering more unique items like the binoculars, lasso, and campsite would make these side activities more worthwhile. Also, adding those side activities (especially gambling!) to Free Roam wouldn't be a bad thing, either.

Reiner: I'm going to disagree with all of that, Jeff. I don't want the sequel to be subtle upgrades with rewards. If Rockstar revisits this series, my hope is that they'll create a protagonist with different agendas and needs, someone who doesn't need to collect flowers or break horses. Redemption doesn't tap into the influence your character has over the world or its people. As Joe suggested, a rags-to-riches progression could be an interesting dynamic for the west. Depending on how the player uses his or her influence, the end game could be leading a gang or becoming a town's sheriff. Sheriff's don't pick flowers.

Jeff M: The idea of rising through the ranks as a sheriff is essentially what I'm talking about -- progression based on your actions. But I don't want that progression to be based solely on the story missions; it would be cool if the side distractions also had an impact on gameplay. I don't care for picking flowers either, but there's no reason that tracking down bounties or performing hunting challenges can't offer more than a simple monetary reward when most of the things you can buy are useless anyway. Red Dead already has some RPG elements in the mix. Why not flesh them out more in a sequel?

Bryan: Prospecting makes me think of mineral collecting in Mass Effect 2. This, in turn, makes me want to barf. I think the sheriff progression could be cool, but that ties you down to one town. Maybe after you prove yourself as sheriff, the feds could headhunt you to become a Marshall or maybe you could join up with Pinkerton.

Your turn! Let us know in the comments what you want from the next game in the Red Dead series, both in terms of gameplay and story.