Don't write off a Red Dead Redemption 2 remake or remaster, Arthur Morgan actor says: "We've already started to see it for GTA 5 and the original"
Red Dead Redemption 2 is one of the most gorgeous games ever made. It beautifully blends realism with a subtle stylization that ensures you can still see at night and objects you can interact with are fairly obvious. It surely doesn't need a remake, but Arthur Morgan's actor, Roger Clark himself, thinks Rockstar may already be cooking one up.
"I think it's already starting to happen," Clark tells TheGamer. "What's also starting to happen is that classic games, games that did well, and games that still are able to hold on to their fandom are getting remastered now more than ever before. So, I don't know, the data isn't going anywhere, but the technology to refine its graphics is only just going to keep getting better and better."
We've seen plenty of Rockstar games get remasters or ports to modern consoles, and I'm not even talking about GTA 5. There was the GTA Trilogy remaster (that had a bunch of bugs in it) and the PC port of Red Dead Redemption, which has finally got John Marston actor Rob Wiethoff playing the game some 15 years after it first released.
"I don't think a remake of [Red Dead Redemption 2] is something that we can write off for the future, or a remaster," Clark adds. "We've already started to see it for GTA 5 and the original Red Dead Redemption. So, I think possibly it'll remain in the limelight with modern versions of the same game, because the stories are what keeps the players coming back."
Red Dead Redemption 2 doesn't even have a current-gen update and it still looks amazing, so maybe we'll at least get that patch sometime in the future. If Rockstar goes big enough, a PS5 and Xbox Series X-level modernization could very well pass for a remaster.
In the meantime, check out the Summer Game Fest 2025 schedule so you can keep up with everything that's going on over the weekend.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
2 minutes ago
- Fast Company
Beauty publishing was always a lie. But AI just broke it
Beauty magazines have been lying to readers for decades—but at least they used to start with actual humans. NewBeauty magazine's Summer/Fall 2025 issue quietly crossed that line, publishing a multipage article dedicated to the beautification of female skin that featured perfect female models who weren't real. Spotted by professional photographer Cassandra Klepac, she pointed out that each photo was labeled as AI and included the prompt used to generate them. With the advent of technology capable of synthesizing ultra-high-definition photos of realistic humans, this was bound to happen sooner rather than later. Knowing the hell that Vogue recently faced for featuring Guess advertisements with AI-generated models—sparking the rage of 2.7 million TikTok viewers and subscription cancellations—it is surprising that NewBeauty's editors decided to do the same with actual editorial content, the supposedly 'real' part of magazines. So why did the magazine—which calls itself 'the beauty authority' in its tagline—do this? 'NewBeauty features both real people and patients, alongside AI-generated images,' executive editor Liz Ritter told me via email. 'We maintain a strict policy of transparency by clearly labeling all AI content in detail in our captions, including the prompts used to create these images, so readers always know the difference.' Subscribe to the Design newsletter. The latest innovations in design brought to you every weekday Privacy Policy | Fast Company Newsletters Her nonanswer leaves us to only speculate on the reasons why. Talking about the Guess campaign, Sara Ziff—founder of the Model Alliance—said that it was 'less about innovation and more about desperation and the need to cut costs.' Given the depressed status of the print media industry, I suspect that may have played a role in the case of NewBeauty. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Cass Klepac (@ Perfectly legal . . . However you may feel about the campaign, we know that NewBeauty didn't do anything illegal. There are virtually no laws governing editorial use of AI-generated humans at this point, except to stop deceptive use in politics and in regards to the honor of individuals (something already covered by libel laws). Surprisingly, advertising is a little bit more regulated. The Federal Trade Commission can penalize deceptive advertising practices. New York's groundbreaking AI disclosure law targets advertisements, requiring 'conspicuous disclosure' when synthetic performers are used. But editorial? It exists in a regulatory wasteland, leaving it to the judgment of editors. Europe's comprehensive AI Act mandates clear labeling of AI-generated content and carries maximum fines of €35 million ($40.7 million), but it focuses on transparency, not prohibition. You can fabricate entire humans for editorial use—you just have to mention it in the caption. NewBeauty did exactly that. . . . but dangerous anyway? We also know that, despite the fact there's nothing illegal about it, this doesn't mean it is right. Using artificial intelligence feels dangerous because it is so easy and so powerful. When it spreads—and it will—many professions will be affected. This includes not only the models, photographers, makeup artists, and all the people who make real photoshoots possible, but also the Photoshop artists who retouch what comes out of the digital camera into an image that quite often has very little to do with what the sensors capture. For the past few decades, Photoshop artists have erased wrinkles, refined arms, rebuilt waistlines, adjusted eyes, and turned anything that editors deemed imperfect into whatever fantasy beauty standard the industry set. Reality has been malleable, to be generous. advertisement Remember that time Rolling Stone heavily retouched Katy Perry because they didn't think she was pretty enough? Or that Lena Dunham Vogue cover and photo feature, the one in which she was missing an arm? Duham said at the time those photos were intended as 'fantasy.' Like everything else featured in glossy pages. Those were just two high-profile examples of a practice that happens regularly for any cover of any fashion, beauty, or celebrity print magazine. In this sense, acting surprised or offended by NewBeauty's AI models feels hollow, albeit understandable—due to a fear of the damage that AI tools will bring to the industry. It's been a ruse forever The hard reality is that photographers have used lighting and filtering tricks to make things look more beautiful than they are in real life since the advent of the medium. Then, the editorial and advertising industries have been breaking every taboo in digital manipulation since Photoshop was invented. Today, AI is democratizing the deception once again—to the point where a single art director for some random magazine can actually create a high-resolution print spread full of beautiful people who don't exist, simply by using a short prompt and spending a couple of dollars. I get it. It's tempting to tweak reality, sometimes rearranging it completely, to tell a compelling narrative. This summer I went to the Robert Capa museum in Budapest—highly recommended—and stared for a while at that famous Spanish Civil War photo of a Republican 'miliciano' being shot. I considered its terrible beauty and the effect it had on the public in an era in which the specter of Nazism and fascism was rising in Europe. I also considered the fact that some experts believe that the photo may have been staged (while others vehemently disagree) and pondered on what is real and what's not, on the effects of perceived reality versus 'real reality' versus manipulated reality. These are questions we constantly face as journalists. If Capa really staged that photo, perhaps it was the right thing to do at the time. Perhaps not. But I digress. I don't pretend to hold NewBeauty to the same fact-checking standards that governed news media back in the time of Capa. Beauty, fashion, cars, and luxury magazines are all part of that aspirational world in which reality easily gets bent to tell a fantasy. I would say that, by clearly labeling the AI images, NewBeauty is being way more honest than the editors of fashion and beauty magazines have been in years and decades past. Those magazines never labeled their photos, 'THIS CELEB IS PHOTOSHOPPED! THIS AIN'T REAL, STEPHANIE! STOP DIETING! LOL!' Yet all covers and many interior shots were digitally altered and many times reconstructed beyond recognition, sometimes pathetically so. Indeed, the beauty industry was already constructed on visual lies, but in the age of AI, the powers that be won't stop here. Will it be problematic? Yes. Will it cause real economic and personal damage? Most definitely. But we will get more and more used to it until we stop questioning the practice at all. I hate to tell you I told you so, but I told you so. It's the destruction of reality as we know it.
Geek Tyrant
2 minutes ago
- Geek Tyrant
New Rumor Claims THE BATMAN PART II Will Not Be Welcoming Back an Expected Star — GeekTyrant
Fans had a long wait from the time Matt Reeves's The Batman was announced to when it actually hit the screen, and right now we are looking at a five year gap between the first film, and its follow-up, The Batman: Part II . There was no news on the sequel for quite a while, but this past June, it was announced that the script had been finished, and the film would be on the shooting schedule for next spring, about a year and a half out from the movie's scheduled release date. Slow and steady, but headed in the right direction. Now, a new rumor has surfaced that puts a small damper on the long-awaited film, and that is the possible non-return of one actor from the first movie that was well-received by the fans - Zoë Kravitz, who played Selina Kyle, aka Catwoman. On the podcast The Hot Mic , industry insider Jeff Sneider shared that publicists at the junket for the upcoming film Caught Stealing (which stars Kravitz) asked media members to refrain from asking the actress questions about The Batman Part II . The reasoning given was 'she's not in it and doesn't know anything.' Sneider himself notes this isn't officially confirmed. This could have just been a way to get press to focus on the project at hand, and who knows? Filming is still so far off, maybe Kravitz's contract just hasn't been fully negotiated for her return. We will just have to wait and see, but I do hope to see her character return.
Associated Press
3 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Music Review: Jon Batiste opts for chill vibe on stripped-down album, 'Big Money'
On 'Big Money,' Super Bowl-sized singer Jon Batiste opts for a surprisingly intimate sound. The just over 32-minute, nine-song set will be released Friday, and it's not nearly as loud as the New Orleans' jazzman's eye-popping wardrobe. The stripped-down, mostly acoustic arrangements create a chill vibe. Simplicity somehow only intensifies the songs' swing and sway. Batiste pairs lyrics about devotion, values, angels and ecology with music that mixes folk and funk, gospel and the blues. The range is such that Batiste even plays a little fiddle and mandolin, but he shines brightest on two songs featuring his solo piano. The first is a wonderful duet with Randy Newman, another piano man with New Orleans roots, who in recent years has been slowed by health issues and kept a low profile. They cover Doc Pomus' 'Lonely Avenue,' and Newman's legendarily froggy tenor provides a comical contrast to Batiste's vocal sheen. 'I could die, I could die, I could die,' Newman sings. 'It sounds like I'm dying.' Also stellar is 'Maybe,' a ballad filled with thick chords and questions about the big picture. 'Or maybe we should all just take a collective pause,' Batiste sings, before launching into a keyboard exploration worthy of Jelly Roll Morton. The bouncy 'Lean on My Love' draws from Prince, Sly Stone and the Spinners as Batiste sings in unison with Andra Day. The equally buoyant title cut rhymes 'money' and 'dummy' in a strummy sing-along that includes backing vocals by the Womack Sisters, granddaughters of soul singer Sam Cooke. 'Pinnacle' chooses a similar tempo to kick up Delta dust around a delightful word salad. 'Hop scotch/Double Dutchie jumping rope/Twistin' it and ya wobble it/And let it go,' he sings on one verse. Batiste's gospel influences are most evident on the closing reggae tune 'Angels' and the ballad 'Do It All Again,' a love song that could be interpreted as secular or spiritual. 'When I'm happy, it's your shine,' Batiste sings. As always, he makes joy sound genuine. ___ More AP reviews:
