Why Sadie Adler deserves her own Story DLC

[MVP]

 

 

As you know we learned Sadie's story throughout the game, she went from a distressed widow to badass outlaw. Many fans of the Red Dead series including myself would like to see a Sadie spin-off story, playing as Rockstar Games first female protagonist. The Story could take place after the events of RDR2's main story or after Sadie leaves Marston Ranch at the end of the Epilogue. There could be so many great story's to be told about Sadie's bounty hunting missions, introducing new characters and returning faces like Charles or even some cameos from RDR like Irish or Nigel West Dickens that were never seen in RDR2.

 

What would you like to see in a Sadie Adler Story Expansion?

Edited March 13, 2019 by MostWantedMVP

[Cutter De Blanc]

I'd rather not see it at all, as I find Sadie to be an incredibly obnoxious character

 

Unless it ends with her dying

[Jimbatron]

I like the Sadie character and think she’d make a good protagonist. It would be refreshing to have a female character in the lead too.

 

However, it probably won’t happen. As you point out Sadie leaves the area altogether, which means you’d need a new map. And sadly I just don’t see that happening. I would be frankly amazed if they haven’t moved all their artists on to GTA VI already.

 

We might, just might, get Mexico added however, since they just need to remaster it, rather than create it from scratch. I don’t think that area is enough for a full Sadie story. However, perhaps you could start by seeing what she was doing between Chaper VI and the Epilogue (including her tracking Micah down whilst John is doing other stuff). You could then have her story moving on to Mexico - she says she might head down to South America so she’s got to go that way.

 

Thats just about viable I think but I wouldn’t get my hopes up.

[Zello]

1 hour ago, Cutter De Blanc said:

I'd rather not see it at all, as I find Sadie to be an incredibly obnoxious character

 

Unless it ends with her dying

R* likes to kill off their characters so it could be possible. If they make a DLC around her I'd be shocked if she didn't die.

Edited March 13, 2019 by Zello

[RyuNova]

I would like a Charles DLC set during the RDR2 story. When Charles goes off to help the Native Americans you see what hes does and some missions from Charles POV with Arthur as an NPC. Then have it continue after the end of the Red Dead Redemption mission.

[paperbagdude]

I'd rather see some sort of alternate ending or mid-story change in Arthur's favor.

 

Spoiler

1. Like an alternate ending where Arthur doesn't get shot in the head by traitorous Micah and miraculously recovers from his tuberculosis, maybe taking his take of the money and goes to that dry-place sanatorium which saves his life, and lets John and his family flee as in the Epilogue.

2. Arthur mentions in Chapter 2 (I believe) that he doesn't stick around the gang much longer for the sake of companionship, but rather responsibility. As Dutch progress to turn more mad and irrational, he chooses to cut his ties with Dutch and run off (maybe with Mary Linton?). In the process, he will still have to handle the Pinkertons single-handedly whom still prosecute him after turning down the offer of turning in Dutch in exchange of pardon and freedom, and maybe run into some conflicts with old gang members loyal to Dutch, who view his exit as betrayal and confront him by that.

 

All in all, I'd want to see a more ''happy'' ending for Arthur, with a story that is still action packed and full of conflicts, compared to the Epilogue where you shovel sh*t half the time.

 

[Varys]

Not a fan of her tbh. I'd rather have something with Charles, or maybe Javier in Mexico.

[burger_mike]

Nah, she feels overacted and doesn’t sit right with me. What would they do even? Oh you killed my husband im gonna go do bounties. 

Edited March 13, 2019 by Equatecurl

[Jimbatron]

1 hour ago, Varys said:

Not a fan of her tbh. I'd rather have something with Charles, or maybe Javier in Mexico.

If they do add Mexico following Javier from after Chapter VI to events just before the original RDR would be a great way to complete the gangs story.

 

How did him and Bill come to leave Dutch? And how did Bill get installed in Fort Mercer and Javier return to Mexico despite having a huge price on his head?

 

The voice actor also did Oscar in GTA V so he’s an established R* go-to.

[Target13]

I would love to see Sadie as a protagonist but I have a feeling that many people would accuse Rockstar of spreading feminist propaganda and boycott all the DLC all together.

[Lonely-Martin]

I'd love it if they did and it was intertwined with her times away from camp then leading to a small Mexico adventure too. Could be a great way to introduce the area to the game and to give more depth to the character.

 

Of course, like many I don't expect anything further added to story mode. But in that 8 years in creating this, they could have something up their sleeve. It'd be amazing to see a DLC at all but a Sadie one would be good for me.

[Grotti Vigilante]

I am of the (possibly) unpopular opinion that Sadie Adler isn’t worthy of her own DLC. I think a character that is separate from the main game would be better. Since Landon Ricketts wasn’t in RDR2, I think he should have his own DLC set before the main game that ends at the Blackwater robbery. It should also be set mostly in New Austin since he’s a legendary gunslinger, and that land wasn’t tamed by the events of the second game. Not to mention it was severely under-utilised in the main game.

[Tonesta]

It seems likely that Rockstar severely curtailed Sadie's role in the RDR2 story quite late in the development process.

 

In the early trailers, she was clearly involved with the gang's activities much earlier on in the story - there's one shot in particular of her striding into Valentine alongside Arthur & Sean (and others). She was highlighted in a lot of the marketing materials.

 

But then, in the end, she's basically barely involved in the story until post-Guarma - and she's a fairly one note character. Angry and vengeful is all we really get from her.

 

I don't expect to get SP DLC at all, but if we did, and it was centred on Sadie, then I'd hope they write a much deeper, more nuanced character than appeared in the main game.

[Middle Class Roadman]

Cant really understand why so many people on here dislike Sadie, seems quite Incel-ish. I thought she was a great character but a DLC with her would literally just be chasing bounties, cant see what other angle they could do with her. At this point it seems the only plausible SP DLC (IF we get one) would be another Undead Nightmare type thing.

[Leviath4n]

11 hours ago, paperbagdude said:

Prefiero ver algún tipo de final alternativo o cambio a mitad de la historia a favor de Arthur.

 

  Ocultar contenidos

1. Como un final alternativo donde Arthur no recibe un disparo en la cabeza por Micah traidor y se recupera milagrosamente de su tuberculosis, tal vez toma su dinero y se dirige al sanatorio de lugar seco que salva su vida, y permite que John y Su familia huye como en el epílogo.

2. Arthur menciona en el Capítulo 2 (creo) que no se queda mucho tiempo en la pandilla por el bien de la compañía, sino por la responsabilidad. A medida que los holandeses progresan para volverse más locos e irracionales, elige cortar sus lazos con los holandeses y escapar (¿quizás con Mary Linton?). En el proceso, todavía tendrá que manejar a los Pinkerton sin ayuda, quienes aún lo procesarán después de rechazar la oferta de entregar el holandés a cambio de perdón y libertad, y tal vez enfrentarse a algunos conflictos con viejos pandilleros leales a los holandeses, quienes Ve su salida como traición y enfréntalo con eso.

 

En general, me gustaría ver un final más "feliz" para Arthur, con una historia que aún está llena de acción y conflictos, en comparación con el Epílogo en el que te pierdes la mitad de las veces.

 

I agree with the happy ending for Arthur, but without Mary (she is a bad person)

But the problem is that I do not see how Arthur heals from TB without a deus ex machina.

Maybe it would be better if, depending on the decisions Arthur makes (No hitting Thomas Downes), avoid becoming infected with the disease.

[Cutter De Blanc]

3 hours ago, Dark Rosewood Varnish said:

Cant really understand why so many people on here dislike Sadie, seems quite Incel-ish. 

I stated pretty clearly why I don't. You don't need to be insulting.

[Middle Class Roadman]

16 minutes ago, Cutter De Blanc said:

I stated pretty clearly why I don't. You don't need to be insulting.

 

Well your comment about only wanting to see one if she dies was a little strange.

[Gray-Hand]

1 hour ago, Leviath4n said:

I agree with the happy ending for Arthur, but without Mary (she is a bad person)

But the problem is that I do not see how Arthur heals from TB without a deus ex machina.

Maybe it would be better if, depending on the decisions Arthur makes (No hitting Thomas Downes), avoid becoming infected with the disease.

Plenty of people survive contracting TB.  Arthur probably infected other gang members with it.  

Arthur probably would have survived it, but his immune system was compromised by getting captured by Colm O’Driscoll and later by being shipwrecked on Guarma.

So the idea of Arthur’s choices killing him doesn’t have to be decided by what he does with Thomas Downes, but rather by later decisions.  For example, rather than his capture or the shipwreck occurring as a result of events he couldn’t Control, have them (or something similar) occur as a result of moral choices Arthur makes - eg, a selfish or cruel act results in Arthur making some money, or killing a hated enemy, but being injured in doing so, whereas a selfless or gracious act results in escaping the sickness.

[Cutter De Blanc]

She's a bloodthirsty murderer, arguably worse than John Marston,  if she gets to get away and have a happy ending without any repercussions for her own actions, I don't know how else to put it, but that would be stupid. Her and Charles don't have to pay for their actions because they're "cool"

49 minutes ago, Dark Rosewood Varnish said:

 

Well your comment about only wanting to see one if she dies was a little strange.

And your comment about other forum goers' sex lives was strange too, not sure how one thing has anything to do with the other

[Grotti Vigilante]

20 hours ago, Dark Rosewood Varnish said:

Cant really understand why so many people on here dislike Sadie, seems quite Incel-ish.

Doesn't sound like you're used to criticism of female characters. Otherwise you wouldn't associate dislike of Sadie with being an Incel. But regardless, it's not like I personally don't like Sadie, it's just I don't see why she's so beloved. She's barely developed throughout any of the game, and she is totally reckless and lacking in strength and self-restraint. If she had any ounce of either, she wouldn't have gone all out on the O'Driscoll's when Colm got hanged and compromised the whole mission. I understand that she may have had a hard time getting over the death of her husband, but in the story she did nothing but undermine Arthur's philosophy that revenge was an idiot's game by trying to always get revenge.

 

Colm being hanged just wasn't enough for her, so she had to go all out on an O'Driscoll camp because of her lust for what? It's not like we see her have any other attitude in the game either. She's always the same and she's such a tiring being at times. I sometimes ask if she'd have been better just copping herself off after her husband's death if she was so reliant on him that she becomes unhinged at his permanent absence. But I can tell you this, her being female doesn't matter at all with my criticisms. I don't hate her, but she is poorly written for Red Dead standards. She's not my least favourite female character in media either. That (dis)honour goes to Rey from Star Wars by a light year. Nevertheless, I still stand by Sadie being overrated.

 

15 hours ago, Gray-Hand said:

Plenty of people survive contracting TB.

Today they might, because we have modern medicine and health products to treat the disease. Back in 1899 though that was pretty much like being told you have cancer. Arthur could've helped himself if he got somewhere warm and dry, but that doesn't guarantee that he would've lived in the end. Going to Guarma, a tropical island with hot weather and high humidity would've been perfect for the bacteria to spread, but having spent a considerable amount of time in Lemoyne and the southwest, where it is still humid, Arthur wasn't really going to live in the end. George Orwell died of Tuberculosis in 1950, so treatment is only a recent thing. Arthur in 1899 wouldn't have survived either way in my opinion.

Edited March 14, 2019 by Grotti Vigilante

[Gray-Hand]

5 hours ago, Grotti Vigilante said:

...

Today they might, because we have modern medicine and health products to treat the disease. Back in 1899 though that was pretty much like being told you have cancer. Arthur could've helped himself if he got somewhere warm and dry, but that doesn't guarantee that he would've lived in the end. Going to Guarma, a tropical island with hot weather and high humidity would've been perfect for the bacteria to spread, but having spent a considerable amount of time in Lemoyne and the southwest, where it is still humid, Arthur wasn't really going to live in the end. George Orwell died of Tuberculosis in 1950, so treatment is only a recent thing. Arthur in 1899 wouldn't have survived either way in my opinion.

Nah, latent TB is and was extremely common.  About a quarter of the world’s population is infected with latent TB today. It was probably higher in 1899 America. 

Latent TB is very survivable without modern medicine.  Only 10 percent or so of latent TB cases turn into active TB which is deadly.  Latent TB is much more likely to turn into active TB if you have a weak immune system.

 

So Arthur being infected at first instance by Downes was probably no big deal because he was fit as an ox.  It was getting banged up by the O’Driscolls that would have turned his latent TB into active TB and then Guarma pretty much finished him.

[feckyerlife]

On 3/13/2019 at 2:43 PM, Tonesta said:

It seems likely that Rockstar severely curtailed Sadie's role in the RDR2 story quite late in the development process.

 

In the early trailers, she was clearly involved with the gang's activities much earlier on in the story - there's one shot in particular of her striding into Valentine alongside Arthur & Sean (and others). She was highlighted in a lot of the marketing materials.

 

But then, in the end, she's basically barely involved in the story until post-Guarma - and she's a fairly one note character. Angry and vengeful is all we really get from her.

 

I don't expect to get SP DLC at all, but if we did, and it was centred on Sadie, then I'd hope they write a much deeper, more nuanced character than appeared in the main game.

Well they said they cut out the story of Arthurs other love interest out of the game, which i believe was Sadie. which makes sense as  why you see so much of her in the trailer and so little of her in the game. 

 

I would not want a SP DLC featuring Sadie, Sadie pre epilogue is fine, but once it his the epilogue she becomes highly annoying and so obnoxious they completely ruined her character.

Edited March 19, 2019 by feckyerlife

[LoneWolf260]

I would like a sadie adler dlc or a undead nightmare2, rdr1 remake (with undead nightmare)

[~INDIO~]

I honestly don't get the hype about Sadie or Charles. Sadie was the worst character of the gang IMO.

Her ridiculous "one woman army" rampages reminded me of Trevor Phillips Cringe.

 

I don't mind Charles so much, but that mission in Chapter 1 where he's teaching you how to use a bow was just f*cking annoying.

I don't need someone on my shoulder constantly pecking at my head every 3 seconds

 

I'd much prefer a DLC with Arthur

[Countryfried]

I would prefer a DLC with Landon Ricketts, focusing on his pursuit of the gang. Then we would get to play the Blackwater massacre and explore New Austin (and later Mexico).

[killahmatic]

When I completed RDR2, I thought about what else they could do in this universe. To be honest, aside from following a completely unrelated story, there isn't much left to tell. You could potentially follow Sadie's story. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, but I personally think the ideal way to wrap things up is to fast forward to 1914 and finish Jack's story. People hated playing as Jack in RDR, trust me, I get it... but he could be portrayed much differently this time, and they could find a better voice actor. He's the last main piece to this story, and I'd like to see how it ends. Both Arthur and John tried everything they could to give Jack a better life. We know how things go for Jack, but we don't know where it ends. I don't expect Rockstar's next Red Dead game to be another "Redemption". I believe they'll move on to an entirely new story with a new location, so before that happens, which is easily more than a decade away, I'd like to see them wrap up Jack's story in a DLC. 

 

[gregsbrews]

I wouldn't mind a prequel story for Sadie that takes place before the events of RDR2, because it seems like her and her husband outlaws of some sort. 

 

I like Sadie a lot as a character. Yeah she's a bit crazy and trigger happy, which is possibly influenced by PTSD, but she proves to be more loyal than most of the gang (ironically since she just tagged along) when she helps rescue John from prison, and Abigail from the Pinkertons, and later helps John out in the epilogue. I think there's more potential of what they can do with her character. 

 

[UnexpectedParole]

I don't think Sadie and her husband, Jake read as outlaws of some sort. She said they shared all the work. Fieldwork. Animals. Farming. They were homesteaders.

 

Not outlaws. She was only with outlaws once Dutch and the gang picked her up. And she only stayed with them since she had no-where else to go.

 

When getting to chapter 3 she got fed up with camp life and started venturing out to pull her weight for her adoptive 'family'. Pulling your own weight in a gang of outlaws and having rage and vengeance issues leads to falling into the outlaw life.

 

Eventually she bonded with folks like Abigail and some-what Arthur and stepped up with Charles to take a lead in the group while the boys vacationed in Guarma. Sadie would be an outlaw then for sure, especially while waging her war on the O'Driscolls.

 

But as soon as the train robbery went badly, she dropped that like a bad habit and started lawful employment as a Bounty Hunter.

 

Sadie was barely an outlaw in my mind, and Jake was no-where near close. my pence worth

[LoneWolf260]

I would like a rdr1 remake AND an undead nightmare 2. Am I dreaming too much?

[LittleJesus]

I would like 3 mini horror fantasy campaigns:

1. Cowboys v Aliens with Arthur 

2. Undead Nightmare II with John

3. Werewolf/Vampires with Sadie 

 

Sadly nothing related to single player is going to happen...