Until Rockstar reveals more, though, I will keep being nervous over just what Red Dead Redemption 2 is. A lot of rumors are floating around that it’s a prequel. If it is, they could knock it out of the park, I just don’t want them relying on The Magnificent Seven to do it. Give us an American classic, something steeped in our own mythos, while keeping it fresh. Running and gunning is fun in games, but you can get that anywhere ( GTAV /any shooter ever). Let’s see a cyberpunk western tale more in truth with reality than Hollywood. There are so many other stories out there that get overlooked. If it is a prequel, the fall of John Marston's gang could be done with style. How cool would it be to build up a bandit posse only to have it all ripped away (or in Marstons case, walking away)? Usually in games where the player must form a crew ( Mafia III /GTAV), it’s to set out on some serious mayhem and succeed. To have a game where the player forms their crew only to have it taken away would be the ultimate middle finger to that style of storytelling in gaming. Especially coming from Rockstar. Not only would it flip the script, but it would show Rockstar can even go against their own grain, while not borrowing from Hollywood.

Another shot in the Read Dead Redemption 2 trailer showcases a character walking alongside a mule hauling tons of equipment. This has fans curious as to whether inventory could be shared with a trusty st

What's worth noting though is that I don't think what Rockstar has done with these ideas is really all that revolutionary by any means. No: instead, they've just leaned into these things that other developers would certainly stray away from for the reasons that I've already heard many complain about this weekend -- it ends up being too slow and too boring. However, Rockstar knew before release that Red Dead Redemption 2 would sell millions of copies no matter what they did. This notion allowed them far more experimentation and more willingness to take chances compared to what other studios might attempt. For the most part, I think it's an experiment that has worked to Red Dead Redemption 2 's benefit so far.

In the story sections that we played of Red Dead Redemption 2 , it's already clear that Arthur's relationships with the members of the Van der Linde gang will play a crucial role across the whole game, on larger and more personal levels. Right at the beginning of the demo, those relationships came into play as Arthur and the gang were preparing to rob a train under the ownership of the oil tycoon Leviticus Cornwall, which started with Arthur assisting Bill Williamson to blow up the train tracks and derail the car. Naturally, after that plan went awry, Arthur and several other members of the gang instead raced to the top of the nearby mountain path to hop on top of the train. In the midst of the action, we saw that Arthur can issue commands to the fellow gang members as they pushed towards the conductor car, making the action feel that much more involved when executing the heist alongside his other fellow gang members.

Aside from the direct ways that you can interact with characters in Red Dead Redemption 2 , there are an even wider range of ways that Rockstar is truly aiming for players to really "live" inside this world by playing as Arthur. This comes down to factors such as eating, sleeping, taking Arthur to the local town barber for a haircut and a shave (if you want his hair or beard longer, you'll have to wait until it grows out), and even down to whether Arthur enters a town armed or unarmed. Naturally, holding your weapon while striding through a town will have its citizens on edge and wary of your actions, while holstering your weapon will make for more civil engagements. As one of the Rockstar reps mentioned as we entered a town, this even extends to the way that you enter a new location on horseback -- a calm trot into town will go over much better than charging headlong into town and (potentially) running over an innocent civilian.

In a time where open-world games are a dime a dozen, my problem with most titles in the genre is that they rarely force you to engage with the world that has been laid out. Instead, developers just use the confines of an open-world to place the structure of their game inside of, because it's the normal thing to do more often than not nowadays. Simply existing in an open-world though isn't enough when you don't feel any sort of connection to the environment that you're within. Forcing you to explore and take your time in the world allows you to get to know the area which you find yourself in. This is something that I think The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild did so perfectly last year , and it's something that I think finds success here in Red Dead Redemption 2 as well.

Two of this year’s biggest hit games, Horizon: Zero Dawn and The Legend of Zelda: The Breath of the Wild , have cemented this generation as the "open-world" gaming generation, and the latter, especially, is seen as an iterative step forward for the ge