No, we don't need Red Dead Redemption 3, we need to learn that too much of a good thing will ultimately ruin it

There's something in the air again – see here: winter – and if you're like me, you're probably retreating to your comfort games. Red Dead Redemption 2 is on everybody's lips once again, whether because you're in the middle of a replay or you're reading up on what Rockstar's co-founder has said about it this time.

After reading Dan Houser's comments on how sad he'd be if a Red Dead 3 were to be made, I was surprised to read so many comments in staunch disagreement. Yes, Arthur Morgan's gripping journey is one of the best open world games of all time, with one of the most memorable storylines and casts of characters in the biz. But that's exactly it: Red Dead is, as Houser describes it, "a cohesive two-game arc", and a third game purely for profit and popularity's sake risks diminishing how special it is.

Easy, there

There's probably another, more technically precise name for it, but I call it the Buffy Effect. It's a common enough phenomenon in television; a popular show is so popular that showrunners don't know how to quit while they're ahead.

Look at Supernatural (a show intended for a five-season run that carried on for 10 more) or Glee (peaked in season three only to pick up just in time for the final, seventh season) or Buffy the Vampire Slayer (d'uh), and they all have one thing in common. They were huge shows with massive followings that slowly fell apart over time – or in the case of Grey's Anatomy's 22 seasons and counting, are continuing in doing so.

The desperate desire to milk a cash cow – despite having no idea where to take it next – isn't exclusive to television producers. We've seen it happen time after time in video games, too. Saints Row never did regain the traction it developed in its first few instalments, even after a series reboot in 2022. Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed franchise is still a critical and commercial success, but you only need to look at how much its DNA has changed over the years to see what an identity crisis the stealth-action series has been through. It's a far cry (pardon the pun) from what it used to be, and while I'm happy to keep rolling with the changes, Houser's worries about a narrative-heavy game being drawn out past its prime ring in my ears.

The immense pressure to serialize a popular video game is something I don't envy developers. A lot of the time, it's a brilliant idea – but all too often, the attempt can leave a series in a weird state of flux that could have been avoided if the temptation had been avoided in the first place. Look at the state of Mass Effect 5, for example, sitting in a limbo of unknown quantities while fans like our very own Heather Wald dream of it taking notes from Dragon Age: Origins' player-made characters. The same can be said of Fallout 5, which still has a huge question mark over it and hasn't even been formally announced yet.

Less is more

The consequences of pushing for a sequel (or threequel, or whatever number-quel) without a clear vision for it are severe. Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines 2 is the latest proof of that.

The game was forced into existence despite seemingly every manner of divine intervention standing in its way, a fanged hot potato that eventually fell into the palms of The Chinese Room who had to simply make do with the scraps of Hardsuit Labs' original concept and fashion it into something new-ish. I hated having to give it such a low score in my Bloodlines 2 review, but I stand by my words: "this isn't a case of great ideas with poor implementation. Rather, it's a fundamentally flawed experience from conception to execution that has me wondering why it was made in the first place."

Except I don't need to think too hard when I wonder why it was made, actually. It all boils down to the elephantine memory of the zeitgeist, the cult classic charm of the original, and a desire to make a buck off all of the above. If there's one thing I don't want for Red Dead, it's to follow in those same doomed footsteps.

Yes, I'd play a Red Dead Redemption 3 if one came about – I'm not a monster – but I'm much happier being left to my daydreams than I would be with the prospect of seeing it crash and burn beyond recognition. Arthur's legacy deserves more than that. I think we all know it.

These games like Red Dead Redemption 2 will scratch that wild west itch