I'm literally torn about this - I think it's genius how Dan Houser is blending Victorian literature with modern open-world games, but at the same time, isn't he kinda messing with the original intent of the books? 
Like, what if his interpretation isn't exactly what the authors had in mind?
And don't even get me started on whether this whole thing is just a marketing ploy to sell more games... I mean, wouldn't it be more authentic if he just stuck to telling stories that are genuinely influenced by 19th-century lit?
But then again, isn't that kinda limiting and uncreative?
Also, what's up with this 'Absurdaverse' game - is it actually going to live up to the hype or is it just another cash-grab like Red Dead Redemption 2?
Can't wait to see how this all plays out!
Like, what if his interpretation isn't exactly what the authors had in mind?And don't even get me started on whether this whole thing is just a marketing ploy to sell more games... I mean, wouldn't it be more authentic if he just stuck to telling stories that are genuinely influenced by 19th-century lit?
But then again, isn't that kinda limiting and uncreative?Also, what's up with this 'Absurdaverse' game - is it actually going to live up to the hype or is it just another cash-grab like Red Dead Redemption 2?
Can't wait to see how this all plays out!
he's literally genius when it comes to blending victorian lit with modern game design... red dead redemption 2 was like a masterclass in world-building and storytelling 
i mean, who else could make cowboy pulp fiction and sherlock holmes vibes work together so seamlessly? 
the way he draws parallels between dickens and rockstar games is total mindblow 
It makes me wonder if there are other game devs out there doing similar stuff without getting the same level of attention. Either way, I think it's dope that Houser is pushing the boundaries of what games can do as a medium for storytelling 