# The most powerful moment in Red Dead Redemption | Dan Houser and Lex Fridman

*Lex Clips* · https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwTWuINeK1U

## Summary

Dan Houser explains how Red Dead Redemption One's ending, killing protagonist John Marston, came from a meeting with designer Christian around late 2008 or early 2009. He describes the technical risk of breaking the open-world rule that the avatar survives to finish side content, and how continuing as Jack kept the game playable. He also credits the actors and the director Rod for making the sparse final dialogue land, and reflects on what games can achieve through world-building and changing avatars.

## Key points

- Dan Houser proposed killing John Marston in a meeting with designer Christian around late 2008 or early 2009.
- Christian initially objected that games can't work if the protagonist is dead, then figured out how to make it technically viable.
- Houser felt the ending broke a golden rule of open-world design: freeing the player's avatar to finish side content after the story.
- The player instead continues as Jack, John's son, so the game still functions mechanically.
- Houser credits the strength of the actors and the director Rod with making the ending's short, punchy dialogue land rather than sound cheesy.
- Houser had wanted to kill Niko at the end of GTA IV but felt the game didn't work that way.
- He found both endings for Jack interesting, escaping or being dragged back into violence, but says the game had to work as a game first.
- Houser sees the power of games in combining world-building with narrative adventures, and in the moment of changing avatars.

## Notes

### Deciding the ending
- Around late 2008 or early 2009, Dan Houser told designer Christian "I think he's gotta die" for the end of Red Dead Redemption One.
- Christian initially said it couldn't work because games need the avatar alive to wrap up side content, then worked out how to make it technically possible and pushed for the idea.

### Why the ending was risky
- It was Houser's fourth, fifth, or sixth open-world game, and it broke a golden rule: at the end you normally free the character so players can finish side stories and play forever.
- Instead, John Marston dies and the player continues as his son Jack, betting the narrative would be compelling enough that players wouldn't mind.
- Houser describes it as a big technical risk full of fear that worked out, leaving people upset but moved.

### The barn dialogue
- John's final words to his wife are minimal, making it seem he'll see her and his son shortly, and Lex Fridman calls it a masterclass in "less is more."
- Houser says the actor was so good at reading short, punchy lines that he knew the moment would land.
- He credits the actors and director Rod with making the game come alive; otherwise it would have sounded cheesy.

### Jack's ending and game mechanics
- Houser isn't sure Jack's revenge ending was the best pure storytelling choice, but the game had to work: players need an avatar to run, shoot, rob, ride horses and complete the world.
- He found both options interesting, Jack escaping violence or being dragged back, and notes both Red Deads change avatars.

### What games can achieve
- Houser wanted to kill Niko at the end of GTA IV but felt that game didn't allow it.
- He sees the medium's power in world-building plus narrative, and in the strange moment when a character who is and isn't you becomes someone else.

## Transcript

[00:02] child that he left behind, even though you didn't know them. - When did you know how you were going to end Red Dead Redemption One? - I remember I did a meeting with Christian, the designer. I can't remember what year. Probably some point late 2008, early 2009, and we were discussing the last bit and, and, and said, "I think he's gotta die." And he leapt on the idea and went, "That's... Yes, yes. No, no, wait, no, it can't work. Games can't work like that. It can't work if he's dead." You know, began to think through, well, if we... Just technically it doesn't work because you have to be able to finish all the stuff up, and then began to think through, "Actually, I think we can make it work if we do it this

[00:36] way." And so he then really pushed for that idea, and it seemed to... I was like, "Ah," and I was still torn. I thought it was clever narratively but I was torn if it was gonna work technically as a piece of game design, but I think it did. - Yeah, and spoiler alert, of course, how do we tell the story of that? Well, so he goes through a lot. He does all the... John does all the dirty work of hunting down his old gang and he finally is able to go home and be with his family, be on the ranch, and then the government betrays him and sends troops to kill him. And there is dialogue. I mean, that just, I think the two times I shed a tear in video game history for me is that dialogue. I think John talking to his wife,

[01:35] if I vaguely remember. I think he said, "I love you." But he said very little. He didn't... He made it seem like he's going to see her and his son shortly. That dialogue was masterfully done, like a definition of like less is more. It was just so crisp, that and... And, of course, the other one is again, from memory, Arthur riding his horse and the music is playing. It's very hard not to shed a tear during that. Anyway, the dialogue of John talking to his wife at the end when he's in a barn and is about to walk out. to face certain death. Do you remember writing that? - Oh, yeah. Yeah. But it just... Again, I went... The actor was so good and we've already seen a bunch of his work by then. He had such a good... He was so good at reading those lines that I knew he

[02:32] could give us... that you could feel at that point, like- …I think those lines are best when they're really short and punchy. So I knew— - Got it. - I knew he'd be able to make that line sound good. - So you were imagining his voice. You were just- - And I think all of those actors on Red Dead Redemption One were so strong that they really brought that game to life. If them and Rod, the director, hadn't done such a good job, it would have sounded cheesy as hell. - You've said that the ending of RDR1 is one of the best things you've been a part of creating. Why is that ending so powerful to you? What does it represent? - I think because for the story to work, just from a technical challenge, for the story to work, he had to

[03:24] die. But for a game to work, it felt like a challenge to make him die. It was probably the fourth, fifth, or sixth open-world game I'd worked on, and I'd spent all these years before that working out how these stories worked. How to make them work technically, how to make them feel right, how they interacted with the open-form gameplay as best I could. And suddenly we're going to break one of our golden rules, which was, at the end of the game, you're freeing the character to go and wrap up all the side stories, to play forever. You're not going to be able to do that in this game because the guy's going to be dead, and we're going to have you play as a different character, and the narrative is going to

[04:04] be compelling enough, if we've done a good job, where you're not going to care about that. Or you're going to be upset that he's dead, but you can actually have this emotional moment. So I think it was a big risk from a technical perspective for us to do that, and then it worked. So I think that was something that was very… full of fear, and it worked out okay. And I think people were really upset and angry at us for doing it because they didn't think it was going to happen, but I think they also had that kind of experience you're describing, which is that kind of creative moment where, you know, a transcendent moment with characters in a piece of fiction, which is what we've always aspired to giving people.

[04:39] - I mean, it's incredible because I don't think… I don't remember a single video game that has done that before. - Well, I would like to have, at the end of GTA IV, killed Niko, but you couldn't do it. You know, the game doesn't work like that. So it was this thing where we hadn't done it, thought about doing it, hadn't done it, and then going, "Let's do it. Let's take the risk and do it. We can't do it. Let's try." And it worked. - Yeah, what about the decision with the son? You know, John gives so much effort to make sure that Jack doesn't end up in a life of violence. I mean, it's very Godfather-like. It's— …he's dragged back into it through revenge. - That was also, the game still had to work as a game. Whether that was the right

[05:21] ending, 100% the best ending from a pure storytelling perspective, I don't know. But I know that we had to make the game work. - Oh, interesting. - So it was... I think it kind of worked in that way where Jack can't escape, but I always also wanted a version of it where Jack did escape, but that wasn't... Both were interesting to me. - Can you just dig in a little deeper? What do you mean about for the game to work? It's such a direct... It's like Kubrick talking about for this movie to work, it has to have... From my perspective, I just think about the story. What's the technical aspect for the game to work? - It's just the mechanical experience is you have an avatar you control, and you know, the games don't really end.

[06:04] You have to be able to wander around the world and do stuff. So at the end of the game, you have to be able to wander around with your fairly limited set of features, which is you can run up to someone and punch them or shoot them or rob them, or talk to them. And that's kind of... or jump on a horse or do all this other stuff. In order for the game still to be fun and people to get this full 360-degree experience with it, they had to, if they wanted to 100% the game as opposed to just finishing the story, you have to have an avatar to do that stuff with. So that was the sort of challenge of Jack's character, wrapping up the story as Jack. - Oh, there's real power for the avatar to end, the finiteness.

[06:52] - Yeah. Both the Red Deads, you obviously change avatars. Which we did, and then did it again. I think there's something interesting about that moment when you change from one character to another, because they are you and they're not you, you know, and then suddenly you're someone else. - Mm-hmm. I mean, I was really shaken by that experience, but it's a beautiful experience. It's like an unforgettable experience. What else can video games possibly reach for? You know, to create that experience, that's what great films do, that's what great, great books do. - It's that. I mean, it's that and the world building in games. I think the experience of being in this fake place and then taking on these narrative

[07:31] adventures, when that combines, you've got the amazing experience.