TheRed Dead Redemptionfranchise has remained one of gaming’s most revered for the better part of two decades, and it’s not hard to see why. The clever, grounded, mature stories of the duology have captivated audiences around the world, weaving tales of betrayal, love, and friendship that just about anyone—cowpoke or not—can relate to on some level. But not every gamer has had the chance to check out these historic video games yet, and considering thatRed Dead Redemption 2is a prequel, such prospective players may be wondering whichRed Deadthey should play first.
ThoughRed Dead Revolverwas developed by Rockstar Games and shares the same naming convention as its successors, it has no concreteconnections to theRed Dead Redemptiongames, and is therefore not considered to be a true part of the “Redemption” series.
Unsurprisingly, many series' fans would answer this question by arguing in favor of playing the games in the order of their release. After all, this is how most fans experienced the Van der Linde Gang’s story, and it is, in a sense, the most “pure” way to engage with the franchise. But those who have yet to experience either entry are in a unique position, capable of absorbing Rockstar’s western epic in chronological order, without the context ofRed Dead Redemptioninfluencing their interpretations ofRed Dead Redemption 2. In other words, there’s an argument to be made in favor of playingRed Dead Redemption 2first.
The firstRed Dead Redemptionbegins roughly 12 years after the finale ofRed Dead Redemption 2, and follows John Marston on a journey that sees him crossing paths with a number of characters from his past. As one might expect, this narrative premise involves the reintroduction of several keycharacters fromRed Dead Redemption 2, giving a glimpse into how their lives have changed. Indeed, one of the best parts about playingRed Dead Redemption 2afterRed Dead Redemptionis getting to see how these characters, and the Van der Linde Gang as a unit, used to be.
But by that same token, there’s value in seeing these characters and organizations before theclimactic events ofRed Dead Redemption 2. The most obvious benefit to playingRed Dead Redemption 2without prior knowledge ofRed Dead Redemptionis the lack of predictability: whileRed Dead Redemptionisn’t that explicit about the events ofRDR2, the game gives enough information to form a general idea of the prequel’s ultimate outcome. Thus, by playingRed Dead Redemption 2first, players could enjoy a less predictable, more tense narrative, as there would be a sense that anything could happen.
The virtue ofRed Dead Redemption 2’s narrative being unpredictable doesn’t just come down to shock value or the immediate impact of certain twists. TheRed Deadseries is built around the moral ambiguity of turn-of-the-century America, and by lacking knowledge of the series' future, players can engage with these themes more organically, without the preconceived notions introduced bythe firstRed Dead Redemption.
Playing theRed Dead Redemptiongames in reverse order does admittedly come with a fairly large caveat: there’s a massive gulf between the games' mechanics and visuals.Red Dead Redemption 2is one of the most realistic games ever made, with stunning graphics, a detailed and diverse open world, and polished controls, whileRed Dead Redemption 1is far more archaic by comparison. It can be jarring to go from the high-fidelity, contemporaryRed Dead 2to the 360-eraRed Dead 1. But as long as newcomers are aware of these discrepancies, they could very well have a better experience by playingRDR2first.
