What would the gang members say if they knew jack became a gunslinger?

i think arthur would be kinda pissed

Attached: jack.jpg (1280x720, 142.81K)

Arthur would be pissed, dutch would recruit him, john may be proud

They'd all be disappointed, except Dutch.

This. John should have introduced him to the MacFarlanes. Maybe give him a shot at an honest life.

he didnt age well since his dad was kill

is he really a gunslinger though? sure he put the bandolier on, but jack is a soft pussy ass bitch in contrast to John or Arthur. not all even comparable to a gunslinger, more or less just an angry kid who missed his father enough to hunt the man that killed and betrayed him.

John kept shitting on his reading and writing hobbies he secretly wanted Jack to be like him it was Abigail who was against it

We don't know if he did though. The only thing we know he canonically did was kill Ross, that's that.

John would be pissed too. His number 1 goal was to prevent jack from having to go through what he did and to give jack a normal life

did you guys forget that the original RDredemption was a thing or...?

Jack hunting down and killing Ross was really based and high-test. He wanted revenge on one man, that's it. A now old and insignificant man. He didn't make the same mistake Dutch made by pissing off multiple extremely powerful people at the same time. He was even rather polite to Ross's family when tracking him down, which is more than could be said about how Ross treated him and his mother.

Arthur was a belligerent tool who taught a disease and then had a deathbed change of heart. He might have been built like an ox and extremely deadly, but he never understood honor. Ironic given the morality system in the game. His weakness was taken advantage of by Micah, who despite being a little rat only good for scheming and shooting, totally outplayed Arthur at every turn.

John on the other hand was a fairly normal man who eventually owned up to his shortcomings and did the honorable thing. He's only doing everything he does in RDR1 for his family, not revenge. And avenging Arthur was still the right thing to do. He owed that man his life, so even if it would cost him his own, he had to avenge his death.

Revenge is only a fool's game if played by a fool.

>john may be proud
Jack became the exact opposite of what John wanted for him
He'd be pissed, especially since he gave his life to accomplish this

Kind of hard to do that after getting gunned down out of nowhere

RDR3 should be set in 1920 with Jack as the protagonist

>Jack became the exact opposite of what John wanted for him
You all always act as if Jack became a full blown outlaw when we only know he killed Ross and that's that.
>He'd be pissed, especially since he gave his life to accomplish this
Kind of like how John wasted Arthur's final wish by going to kill Micah, which mind you would've happened regardless (maybe Charles and Sadie would've died but¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

nope fuck moving further forward. fresh cast of characters in peak wild west rather than the end is the way.

Why not both

rdr2 should have been that. a lot of people don't know that many old west outlaws turned to bootlegging in the 20s

that's been explored so many times though in other media. what about doing something that hasn't been done before and show an old west outlaw's transition into the world of organized crime and bootlegging. the whole world didn't suddenly change in the 20s, it was still very much the wild west, but with different motivations

That was simple banter, autist.

> the whole world didn't suddenly change in the 20s
ha

his mom would disown him, arthur would shit on him every chance he gets, his dad would support him.

This. Set it a few decades back. True western Kino.

Based post

Maybe could have told him and Abigail to go to them before getting sending them off

I like how this Denim Trucker Jacket style wasn't invented until 1967 by Levi's, yet they still put it in the artworks.

Attached: John Marston.jpg (539x960, 185.19K)

you're right. i'm talking about how the theme of rdr was that the old west was dying and dead. that world didn't change much in the 20s

>work ya damn nag

Attached: images.jpg (499x614, 28.75K)

yep nothing was different after ww1, sure.

Society only really changed after contraceptive pills were invented, which caused the 1960s sexual revolution.

Congratulations
You understand why the game had "redemption" in it's name.

My understanding of canon would be that he avenged his father's death and then went straight, ending the violence with the man who robbed his father of a peaceful life.
Since you can finish every side mission as Jack optionally, but the one where he shoots Ross is his alone, I think it means that revenge is as far as he went.
GTA V has this admittedly lazy easter egg where a book called "Red Dead" was written by a J. Marston. Think about how obsessed with books they show Jack to be.
He didn't become a gunslinger. He became an author.

"That would make a good book... 'The day John Marston stopped shooting'."

Attached: easteregg.jpg (1920x1080, 122.59K)

I agree. But we can still have a 1920s game with Jack having to defend himself and the community from ruthless gangsters.

>that's been explored so many times though in other media.
Such a stupid thing to bring up. You don't think the themes of a group who are at their end haven't been explore to death before? Themes of revenge by necessity?

MUH UNORIGINAL STORY couldn't matter less, it's the way it's done and how tastefully it's done that counts. RDR1 took a very, very boring base plot that sounds dull on paper and made it very entertaining and interesting for instance.

That said, if they are to do another RDR game the way is back, not forward. The story we've been told here is done, let's move on to something new already. I don't want to see Landon Ricketts (although him in his prime could be cool), I don't want to see Dutch. I just want a new story in a new location with new characters set in the prime of the era, full spaghetti western.

this, but desu i would be fine even if we never got another rdr, im fully satisfied with all 3 games. all 3 bring a different kind of flavor to the genre and i love em all.
and i would honestly rather see rockstar do a new IP at this point, them going back from gta to rdr then gta then rdr again seems kinda boring.

Why the fuck would John be proud when he was trying to get out of the life as well?

Look at Jack's face compared to John's. Jack is clearly Javier's son

He's got a bit of Javier and a bit of Dutch. Everyone knows Dutch is a ladies' man so it makes since if Dutch got a few spunks in there.

I think they would all understand the circumstances that led him to this and make the best of it.

>i would be fine even if we never got another rdr
Not me, kiddo. I demand TEN more games and I will pirate every single one of them. Now go to work, dev wagies! The Neet is getting bored.

>GTA V has this admittedly lazy easter egg where a book called "Red Dead" was written by a J. Marston
Where is it? Michael's house?

Microchimerism, son

Attached: redpillw.png (2278x968, 390.57K)

A GTA game set in the 20s with Jack as a cameo would be neat, but a sequel would ruin the allure of the old west.
I agree with this. Call it Red Dead Revolution and set it in Mexico. Rockstar can be masturbatory sometimes, so a third story about this gang would be overkill.
Pretty much anywhere with a bookshelf, but yeah.

Attached: JavierEscuella-Redemption.png (480x480, 245.43K)

>a sequel would ruin the allure of the old west
The old west never died

Attached: Hell or High Water.jpg (2764x4096, 2.01M)

>Call it Red Dead Revolution and set it in Mexico.

when you have red and revolution in the game title, you can do crazy cool shit like the russian october revolution or spanish civil war.

>He was even rather polite to Ross's family when tracking him down
I wasn't. No witnesses.

john marston invented it first

Too bad you can't RAPE people in the game

I'm not saying it can't be done, but I am saying that it would be ill-advised.

Attached: coj.jpg (500x700, 84.93K)

Exactly. I sprayed his wife's brains across the cabin

we aren't getting another red dead anytime soon, but when we do and if we do, the ideal game would be a spaghetti western set in the 1860s in a desert without any ties with the van der linde gang arc except a few easter eggs here and there (like a random fag in a saloon telling you about a gang lead by a dutch feller in the east or a newspaper article about a bank robbery in fucking montana or some shit) about a psycho spic outlaw robbing shit and killing people in the desert, escaping jail and then getting involved with a gang of fellow spic psychos to do big bank and train robberies. a very light story like gta 5's.
overall i liked rdr2 but a thing i really disliked was that the game almost didn't feel like a western at all you know.
a sequel in the 20s is a dumb idea because at that point it wouldn't be a western anymore but a gangster game and a prequel would just fuck up the overall story and making it too detailed takes the fun out of it

Attached: Eli-Wallach-Clint-Eastwood-The-Good-the.jpg (1600x1267, 180.27K)

you guys are missing the big one for "wild west yet coming of new era" that is Redemption's theme

Just after the civil war, reconstruction era, formation of Dutch's gang/ Dutch's predecessor (Family/foster/"parental" figure)

i gotta take a shit otherwise id add more ideas

> anons dreaming of Red Dead 3
> Dan Houser gone

Turns out lotta people know fuck-all about turn of the century fashion. Every time I see some yahoo online running around outdoors in nothing but a shirt, vest, and slacks I wanna spit. If you're not wearing a hat you're fucking naked.

Nah, it should be about young dutch and hosea and the rise of the gang.

what the fuck is this schizoid incel nonsense

>john may be proud

Congratulations, you missed the whole point of the game.

>You all always act as if Jack became a full blown outlaw when we only know he killed Ross and that's that.
True, but I think his personality and attitude seem to point to him being kind of a little shit by that point in his life. I think it's easy to argue he falls into a criminal lifestyle after he kills Ross and Ross' wife.

It was more of a late 19th century adventure novel like 20,000 leagues under the sea or heart of darkness, it had that storybook vibe to it.

There's also a genre called Neo Western

Attached: 1582447989893.jpg (1866x271, 306.66K)

nah he is certified crazy. he is only 19 in the rdr epilogue but his quotes make him appear like some junior micah bell.

Attached: yikes.png (497x492, 486.93K)

(you)

How about an "End of PIRATE era, Beginning of Cowboy era" theme

Attached: galveston.jpg (600x923, 101.41K)

Doesn't he go on to become a published author? There's a book in GTAV written by him about his father.

>spanish civil war

jack joining the lincoln brigade would be pretty dope

>More prequels
Fuck you and anyone who thinks that's ever a good idea. We know how the story ends and by God, is it a depressing fucking story.

That should be a new game. A prohibition era GTA wouldn't be called Red Dead, probably wouldn't be called GTA either

>GTA game set in the 20s
>GTA
Of what, a Model T?

>

Attached: 128AF82C-C64F-4CEA-A615-85554149A7F9.jpg (758x644, 63.77K)

It absolutely did, that's a movie you fucking idiot.

From GTA5 we know he became an author.

Fuck off.

Plenty of criminals have written books, I think. Or at least some have. I don't see why the two have to be mutually exclusive.

When did he ever mention wanting anything related to a prequel?

Well let's define 'criminal'. Spider-Man is a criminal by vigilantism, so it doesn't necessary denote anything bad depending on the actual crime. Like one user before said, it could involve Jack defending himself from actual bad people, doing things that make him into a criminal but without becoming an outlaw.