-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Should companies like Rockstar be more responsible?
- Thread starter BiGBoSSMk23
- Start date
BiGBoSSMk23
A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
Also, I don't think comparing Hollywood level writing to Rockstar level writing is even worth it. American Gangster, Scarface, The Godfather and Breaking Bad had much more nuanced stories and characters (not caricatures). And the stories surrounding those characters allows them to work better in the eyes of the viewer.
Films have much better plots and characters than what Rockstar managed to string together for their game.
Nico was acceptable (Oscar worthy lol) for 2008. Six years later you'd expect Rockstar to produce something better, not worse.
Films have much better plots and characters than what Rockstar managed to string together for their game.
Nico was acceptable (Oscar worthy lol) for 2008. Six years later you'd expect Rockstar to produce something better, not worse.
"Hey Sweet, I made millions of dollars, started producing records, made a contact within the CIA, own all the property in San Andreas, learned how to fly, have connects with a Asian crime syndicate, smoked Ryder and most of the people plotting against us, AND busted you out of jail with no overhang whatsoever. We can do anything, what should we do?"
"CJ you lost your heart man, you turned your back on the hood, our family. I'm going back there and taking it back."
You then continue to become ghetto jesus and another few hundred people because Sweet says its the honest and heartfelt thing to do. Also, Enzom, if you want to imply I'm racist, just say that. Instead of passive aggressively implying I am one and not elaborating at all. Being a gangbanger makes zero sense in a world where you can earn hundreds and thousands of dollars, along with becoming a millionaire quite easily.
SolidSnakex
Member
I understand what you're saying, but you're still talking about two different approaches to characters. Max isn't intended to be bad guy. He's just someone that's really fucked up and is trying to make the best of things. The main character in GTA are bad people and that's how they're are portrayed. There's really no way of getting around how shitty they are.
How's that any different from the mob based GTA's?
CJ actually became something more than a criminal, he eventually owns a large part of an entire state. Claude was a mute nobody that didn't really have a stake in anything or any motivation. Tommy was a heartless prick who just as scummy as anybody else in that game. CJ starts with nothing, gets betrayed, and then ends up more successful and more powerful than anybody else in the game.
The only motivation for engaging in turf wars at the end is to continue to the last mission and Sweet forcing the idea onto Carl. ANYBODY that thinks Sweet's reintroduction and following motivation wasn't forced or unfitting to the actual narrative is gonna need to argue that.
John Kowalski
Banned
The fact of the matter is that Rockstar still has some of the most talented writers in the industry, and they are one of the few developers who allow that writing to permeate and shape the design of the entire game. My complaints can extend themselves to all AAA games, but Rockstar in particular seems especially capable of excelling in that area.
And no, i don't think those games have had any relevant influence in AAA games, they have legitimized the digital platforms and authorial design, but not in any other sense. I apologize if i'm forgetting something. And in any sense, it's somewhat dishonest to expect those games to have any significant influence, they aim for a particular experience and do so with a limited number of mechanics. They don't aim for worldwide fame and no one should blame them for not engaging an audience they don't intent to engage.
I love those games and always appreciate what they have to offer, but that doesn't mean that i ought to have different standards for teams that have five times the size of those little teams, and often an equally higher number of incredibly capable individuals. In fact as logic would have it my standards should be higher for those bigger teams.
BiGBoSSMk23
A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
Then why even attempt to tell a story for these characters? Why not just say "Here's three shitty people, go rob stuff and kill citizens until we run out missions"? Have you seen the ending to GTAV? Three shitty people basking in a sunset after an uninteresting crime romp of a story.
For reference.
Good for you. Nice having you participate.
SolidSnakex
Member
Tommy and Ken are the two most powerful individuals in Vice City once the game ends. He owns multiple businesses and pretty much controls the criminal underworld there.
Because they want to tell stories about terrible people. There's room for that in this industry alongside redemption stories and cute stories. Especially considering that they're pretty much the only developer telling those stories.
OnimaruXLR
Member
I think this kind of thing is taking GTA more seriously than it's intended to be taken
This is the same game where I threw a sticky bomb onto a character's psychologist's car and blew it up as he tried to drive away. The violence and mayhem is kind of grim, but it's grim in a "Judge Dredd" (the comics) kind of way and not a Funny Games kind of way. I can see how it'd easily offend the sensibilities of someone who doesn't appreciate that kind of shit in anything else, but if you've ever enjoyed a movie starring reprehensible characters because they're entertaining (and not COMPELLING) on top of being reprehensible, then I don't see how you could have problems with GTA.
I thought Niko's paper-thin veneer of penitence was suuuuper lame. Don't try and sell me a story about a character who wants redemption when his response to someone having an affair with his cousin's girlfriend is to shoot him. Michael might be a pompous asshole, Trevor may be an insane psychopath, and Franklin may be a self-serving opportunist, but I found all of them much more pleasant to guide through their adventures than Niko "my hands hurt from wringing them so much" Bellic.
Besides, these are action games first and foremost. Bank heists and car chases and sweet motorcycle jumps and flying around in fighter jets and blowing stuff up with a rocket launcher is the name of the game, not wrestling with morality. Not to say that kind of thing doesn't belong in any kind of game, but to expect it from GTA makes about as much sense as expecting it from Mortal Kombat
This is the same game where I threw a sticky bomb onto a character's psychologist's car and blew it up as he tried to drive away. The violence and mayhem is kind of grim, but it's grim in a "Judge Dredd" (the comics) kind of way and not a Funny Games kind of way. I can see how it'd easily offend the sensibilities of someone who doesn't appreciate that kind of shit in anything else, but if you've ever enjoyed a movie starring reprehensible characters because they're entertaining (and not COMPELLING) on top of being reprehensible, then I don't see how you could have problems with GTA.
I thought Niko's paper-thin veneer of penitence was suuuuper lame. Don't try and sell me a story about a character who wants redemption when his response to someone having an affair with his cousin's girlfriend is to shoot him. Michael might be a pompous asshole, Trevor may be an insane psychopath, and Franklin may be a self-serving opportunist, but I found all of them much more pleasant to guide through their adventures than Niko "my hands hurt from wringing them so much" Bellic.
Besides, these are action games first and foremost. Bank heists and car chases and sweet motorcycle jumps and flying around in fighter jets and blowing stuff up with a rocket launcher is the name of the game, not wrestling with morality. Not to say that kind of thing doesn't belong in any kind of game, but to expect it from GTA makes about as much sense as expecting it from Mortal Kombat
They're still small fish in Florida as a whole. CJ tours around an entire state and controls every area in the game. CJ himself makes Tommy look smalltime when it comes to overall cash and what he accomplishes.
This is a perfect example of failing to recognize the difference between a story that contains violence, disturbing imagery but still has a moral compass and a story that rides off violence and disturbing imagery for shock and pleasure. I haven't read The Count of Monte Cristo but there is a gulf between what The Terminator films do and what GTAV is doing.
The original Terminator film sternly presents the Terminator character as the antagonist - a symbol of terror and violence when we let technology get out of hand. It's an extremely straightforward example. The sequel pits The Terminator as a hero, but one who doesn't understand the nuances or delicacies of human life so he needs a human influence to teach him. From the beginning of meeting John Connor, he immediately stops killing people - he doesn't understand why - that'll take him the duration of the film to understand, but he doesn't do it. So do you understand that just because the Terminator films are framed as violent action movies, they have a clear moral backbone that can be readily consumed without feeling like I have to take a cold shower afterwards?
Even in more harrowing, hard hitting movies like, let's just say Fight Club - a film where our protagonist is riding a very morally grey line - the film itself never falls into a moral quandary - on the contrary, it's making mature and thought provoking statements about male, animalistic desire for violence and how that can go very, very wrong. Its moral compass is in good stead.
It's not a question of censorship. It's not a question of "Think of the children!" It's a question of "Is this really the best we can do?" Is this what 'storytelling' is in video games? Is this ultimately vapid, wasteful, reckless and immature? Could we replace this schlock with something more meaningful and moral? And by no means is this exclusive to GTAV - this is an ongoing issue with the medium as a whole. There are far too many in the industry ready to hand wave the entire problem. "Video Games are made for adults! Didn't you see the R-rating on the cover?" Then make a game for adults - with the meaning, maturity and nuance an adult should expect.
prag16
Banned
Nah, they can do what they want. Even if it does kind of proceed like some demented kid's fantasy.
It definitely is NOT a "mature" game. It's mature the same way Sasha Baron Cohen movies are "mature".
But no, I wouldn't say they're obligated to do anything a certain way.
For me, the boring, repetitive gameplay, weak stories, and crap characters are plenty to keep me away. Made serious attempts at both 4 and 5 and both bored me to tears, whenever my eyes weren't rolling out of my head.
EDIT: Great post two posts above by Dommo. Cheers.
It definitely is NOT a "mature" game. It's mature the same way Sasha Baron Cohen movies are "mature".
But no, I wouldn't say they're obligated to do anything a certain way.
For me, the boring, repetitive gameplay, weak stories, and crap characters are plenty to keep me away. Made serious attempts at both 4 and 5 and both bored me to tears, whenever my eyes weren't rolling out of my head.
EDIT: Great post two posts above by Dommo. Cheers.
Captain Zyrain
Member
I'm only a little ways into the game but I'm enjoying the story lines when I get around to doing the main missions.
They alternate between ridiculously hilarious to borderline revolting, and I like that. I don't feel that any of the GTA's have aspired to be "real life simulators" regardless how much detail they put into them.
Personally I spend the majority of the time driving around and doing random stuff, with first person mode on XB1 it really pulls you in. I've got to doing everything 1st person now, even though driving was kinda hard at first.
It makes it so when there is a cutscene I almost kind of forget the character I'm playing, since I've been playing as "me" essentially since you can't see the little guy running around. Does this make me more or less of a psychopath? Good question. I don't find myself randomly killing people.. as much.
Would I like a game that had full world permanence? Where everything you did impacted the world in some way? Abso-friggin-lutely. Chop down a sapling and it'll never grow into a tree! Kill someone's parents and the child will hunt you down years later! Etc etc. Fable was supposed to be like that and it never happened.. I don't know that we're "there" yet, but I welcome the day it's an option. I just don't think the game CAN track every detail and apply it for the rest of the game on the fly.. and/or if it'd make the game fun at all, being a GTA game.
They alternate between ridiculously hilarious to borderline revolting, and I like that. I don't feel that any of the GTA's have aspired to be "real life simulators" regardless how much detail they put into them.
Personally I spend the majority of the time driving around and doing random stuff, with first person mode on XB1 it really pulls you in. I've got to doing everything 1st person now, even though driving was kinda hard at first.
It makes it so when there is a cutscene I almost kind of forget the character I'm playing, since I've been playing as "me" essentially since you can't see the little guy running around. Does this make me more or less of a psychopath? Good question. I don't find myself randomly killing people.. as much.
Would I like a game that had full world permanence? Where everything you did impacted the world in some way? Abso-friggin-lutely. Chop down a sapling and it'll never grow into a tree! Kill someone's parents and the child will hunt you down years later! Etc etc. Fable was supposed to be like that and it never happened.. I don't know that we're "there" yet, but I welcome the day it's an option. I just don't think the game CAN track every detail and apply it for the rest of the game on the fly.. and/or if it'd make the game fun at all, being a GTA game.
BiGBoSSMk23
A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
Except, there's no room for more shitty writing and lazily conceived storytelling in gaming. And Rockstar shouldn't get a critical pass on their storytelling for leaning back on their admittedly excellent game design.
They haven't reached the same level as the movies we've mentioned, not enough to get by with a linear story that's wholly independent from player action.
I mean, that boat stealing mission and the cargo plane were borderline slapstick/spoof. Not exactly standard for a crime epic.
Going back to the point of "responsibility", I find them too lazy with their character writing. They script their game based on these crude characters for the sake of scripting a fun game, but can they not achieve the same result with better written/less offensive characters and a story that compliments them better? Or just give the player the freedom to perform all these tasks with a story that follows player action (but that's tinfoil talk apparently)
I don't know. I guess you do have to be an industry celebrity to make a point that sticks and see some change, or stop dreaming up theories and go out and make them happen instead of arguing semantics in a forum waiting to get banned. lol
Finally someone fucking gets what I'm saying. Thank you.
You're doing a good job all on your own.
vasametropolis
Member
I actually think it is responsible. It's a satire which demands intelligence to understand that. I don't think they should pander to the lowest common denominator. I see your point, but I'm under the "It's just a video game" camp.
Johnny Cage In The Shower
Member
I get where you are coming from OP, but I think it is still a very difficult process for a video game to narrate a story under the same mature light and pacing of films...
For example, the part's that turned me off the most in GTA V campaign was when I was shooting and killing hoards of swat cops, just marching to their deaths running towards me (post major heist mission)
They kept coming by the hundreds and I kept shooting them, felt like a satirical Charlie Sheen movie satirizing 80's Chuck Norris (or Rambo) movies of incredible enemy body counts.
Then I asked myself, if they didn't have this overwhelming number of cops (enemy AI) coming at you and try to take you out, how else would this game have action game play, gun fights etc?
I feel like video game design is still at it's early stages where developers are too self conscious to make a game where it's mostly focused on dialogue and smart story, with only small spurts of (more realistic) gun battles. basically I guess what I am trying to say is, we are about a good three decades behind movies, when it comes to action oriented video games today.
On the flip side what I think GTA V does best is not only focus on one, mature responsible story but successfully mimic pop culture, social and political commentary and satire... and it does that well, and it assume the gamer is mature enough to enjoy the violence as a game and fantasy, and really IMHO if the game took it self slightly more seriously, it will probably fail in the narrative side, quite badly.
For example, the part's that turned me off the most in GTA V campaign was when I was shooting and killing hoards of swat cops, just marching to their deaths running towards me (post major heist mission)
They kept coming by the hundreds and I kept shooting them, felt like a satirical Charlie Sheen movie satirizing 80's Chuck Norris (or Rambo) movies of incredible enemy body counts.
Then I asked myself, if they didn't have this overwhelming number of cops (enemy AI) coming at you and try to take you out, how else would this game have action game play, gun fights etc?
I feel like video game design is still at it's early stages where developers are too self conscious to make a game where it's mostly focused on dialogue and smart story, with only small spurts of (more realistic) gun battles. basically I guess what I am trying to say is, we are about a good three decades behind movies, when it comes to action oriented video games today.
On the flip side what I think GTA V does best is not only focus on one, mature responsible story but successfully mimic pop culture, social and political commentary and satire... and it does that well, and it assume the gamer is mature enough to enjoy the violence as a game and fantasy, and really IMHO if the game took it self slightly more seriously, it will probably fail in the narrative side, quite badly.
I haven't played 5 yet but I have always seen GTA as a satire. Our society is fucked, like completely. Rockstar are taking all the isms present, placing them in a game and splashing it with a healthy dose of hyperbole just to make sure it's obvious that this is a satirical social commentary. The fact that it generates so much controversy in the media when so many more corrupt and fucked up things are perpetrated by the media and those that control it is down right hilarious. Rockstar are like the Always Sunny In Philly of video games. GODS.
edit; I am also someone who thinks that it is a rightful 18+ game and youngins should not be anywhere near it. Off topic, I saw in my FB feed an acquaintances' son (must be about 11-12) with an COD hoody. Like wtf?
edit; I am also someone who thinks that it is a rightful 18+ game and youngins should not be anywhere near it. Off topic, I saw in my FB feed an acquaintances' son (must be about 11-12) with an COD hoody. Like wtf?
Nose Master
Member
You're right, GTA6 should be centered around feeding the homeless and volunteering.
A lot of people spend their time in GTA mowing down civilians, too. It's a harmless outlet for negative energy.
They shouldn't have to alter the story they want to tell just because it's a video game. Do you feel the same way about books or movies?
A lot of people spend their time in GTA mowing down civilians, too. It's a harmless outlet for negative energy.
They shouldn't have to alter the story they want to tell just because it's a video game. Do you feel the same way about books or movies?
Excellent rebuttal. If we're going to make vapid and quickfire claims with no elaboration, I'm going to say you're a space banana that doesn't understand cognitive dissonance or question questionable writing/narrative. "But Niko is the definition of cognitive dissonance." Nah. Dude clearly knew he was in the wrong and wanted to change, but didn't have the actual drive to change.
Calling someone racist for questioning a game's motivation is some petty shit.
BiGBoSSMk23
A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
Apples and oranges.
When they manage to make a fun sanbox game with the same caliber writing as the gangster movies they're inspired by then I'll quit criticizing them.
But they keep writing with their tongues sitting comfortably in their cheeks because the gaming press keeps calling them Oscar worthy writers.
I agree that the characters are written horribly. In GTA V, there are so many out of character moments for the main characters. Niko at least had some morals (and a brain) in GTA IV, but these guys in GTA V were completely stupid and nonsensical. They rushed the relationship between the 3 as well IMO.
XANDER CAGE
Member
GTAV being tongue in cheek is what makes its wonton destruction and violence so much fun. GTAIV had a huge problem with tone because it was so goddamn deadly serious all the time in cutscenes, but had the body count of an 80s action flick and the same goofy jokes GTA usually has. It was kind of a mess, in retrospect.
GTAV's tone is more in line with a dark comedy, which serves it far better.
BiGBoSSMk23
A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
I'm sure if they scripted that sequence where you keep killing SWAT teams in a impossible to win way that ends in some inevitably pretentious cutscene depicting a Hollywood style surrender/defeat then the gaming press and gamers would have lost their marbles over it. I can almost see the accolades.
I don't think game devs are too self-conscious to tell a good story, they're just too busy trying to emulate Hollywood seriousness in a fun interactive way. It just results in phenomenons like ludonarrative dissonance and flat, boorish characters/stories that we love to point out to sound smart. But it's true. They'll eventually hit a point by which they'll have to evolve the medium radically to be effective. Miyamoto was saying something similar earlier. You have to let your games tell your story for you and quit playing film director. Stop spoonfeeding it to us and just let us play it. It's not some pipe dream. It's the future of the art form.
That was mostly on you, the player, wasn't it? Yes, there's mission design that dictates killing but those weren't ignored in cutscenes. I remember Nico being visibly upset every time he got caught in a fire fight he had little or no stake in.
Also, GTAV is cynical, in a "Cards Against Humanity" kind of way. I think that's worse, personally.
This is a point that gets lost in the argument. Their games do offer social commentary, but is that enough? Are you supposed to be content with the equivalent of a raunchy SNL sketch ridiculing social media, adultery, etc?
I thought GTA was your favorite game because you can brutally murder cops.
axisofweevils
Holy crap! Today's real megaton is that more than two people can have the same first name.
Game producers should be free to tell the story they want. Equally, however, people should be allowed to criticise problematic elements of that story.
You knew what you were getting into so stop whining. This game is rated M for mature audiences. Plus, it's fucking GRAND THEFT AUTO.
With that out of the way, all of the characters are scumbags. Michael is a killer with a family and bangs prostitutes. Trevor is a psychopath that's deadly for a multitude of reasons fleshed out in the game. Franklin is a killer who wants to change his life. Every character is despicable.
Part of the charm of GTA games is taking out behaviors you would never do in real life. You can't manipulate the stock market in real life to the point that you make $300 million in two hours in real life as you work in retail. You can't walk into a local gun store and buy a grenade launcher. I could go on and on but the fact remains that Rockstar is not responsible for the content of their games. Next gen consoles have parental locks that account for situations like this......
I think this all a ploy to give us pause to put down the controller and go out into the world. In other words, these characters are so fucked that maybe we should take actions to avoid their fate.
With that out of the way, all of the characters are scumbags. Michael is a killer with a family and bangs prostitutes. Trevor is a psychopath that's deadly for a multitude of reasons fleshed out in the game. Franklin is a killer who wants to change his life. Every character is despicable.
Part of the charm of GTA games is taking out behaviors you would never do in real life. You can't manipulate the stock market in real life to the point that you make $300 million in two hours in real life as you work in retail. You can't walk into a local gun store and buy a grenade launcher. I could go on and on but the fact remains that Rockstar is not responsible for the content of their games. Next gen consoles have parental locks that account for situations like this......
I think this all a ploy to give us pause to put down the controller and go out into the world. In other words, these characters are so fucked that maybe we should take actions to avoid their fate.
abstract alien
Member
No. I hate GTA(though 5 isn't that bad), but why should they be responsible for you? It's not their job to watch over your moral code for others. People need to be responsible for themselves.
Love Deterrence
Member
Yup. No point in talking about what something should have been or what it isn't. Appreciating things for what they are is a lost art. This is a medium of entertainment. If one doesn't find something entertaining, they should simply move on. Too many people are trying to legitimize video games as an art form, while others, who are actually playing and enjoying games, appreciate it for what it is - whether that be art or whatever they make it out to be.
Stuggernaut
Grandma's Chippy
So many posts assuming the thread title was going a diff direction.
Anyway. Maybe if there was more story, character dev, i would play a GTA game longer. Never finished one. Looking forward to try again with V on pc next year
Anyway. Maybe if there was more story, character dev, i would play a GTA game longer. Never finished one. Looking forward to try again with V on pc next year
Surface of Me
I'm not an NPC. And neither are we.
Perhaps the game isn't for you OP, but there are 30 million other people who quite enjoy it, so it wont likely change, nor should it. The onus is on another developer to create as grand and enthralling experience as GTA with the context you want, not on Rockstar to change the foundation of their own grand and enthralling experience.
MrCunningham
Member
Rockstar wouldn't be Rockstar if they were responsible.
Two things;
Firstly, I don't quite know what you consider the "context" of Hollywood level productions, but I can think of plenty of high profile, high budget, high production value, extremely popular series in both television and film that have exactly the same failings in intent you attribute to GTA (and some even more than GTA).
Pointing to Breaking Bad or Heat or the Godfather as some sort of normalcy in those mediums in terms of the sophistication of their themes and depictions of violence is extremely unrepresentative. There's tons of big budget schlock in Hollywood that handles things as badly, if not worse. That's not to excuse GTA V, but it is to say that Rockstar's vision for the series isn't some unfathomably low bar because vidja games and immaturity; it's honestly quite common outside the medium too.
Secondly, Rockstar's intent for GTA doesn't have to be the arbiter of serious video games storytelling, just because it's popular and has impressive production design. That doesn't imbue any responsibility for them to tell any sort of story they don't want to tell. There are other developers, franchises and games that can handle that. Hell, I'd argue it's not even the arbiter of Rockstar's serious video games storytelling, see Read Dead Redemption for that, a game which has a lot more to say about the corrupting influence of violence and control.
Just tired of people trying to decide what is responsible or not based on their personal values and unique combination of things they find offensive.
You have money, you can choose to spend it elsewhere.
Oh, and actually I thought the writing in V was pretty good in places, the Michael was an interesting character.
You have money, you can choose to spend it elsewhere.
Oh, and actually I thought the writing in V was pretty good in places, the Michael was an interesting character.
oneils
Member
The word "responsible" seems to be bothering people. Rockstar doesn't have to do anything it doesn't want to do.
However, I would appreciate that they aim higher in their story telling. I thought they did that with Red Dead Redemption. To me, the story in GTA V felt like a step backwards.
It is tough, though, to create a story where the protagonist wrecks stuff up without being some sort of sociopath. I'm not quite sure how they create such a setting.
However, I would appreciate that they aim higher in their story telling. I thought they did that with Red Dead Redemption. To me, the story in GTA V felt like a step backwards.
It is tough, though, to create a story where the protagonist wrecks stuff up without being some sort of sociopath. I'm not quite sure how they create such a setting.
There's a lack of reading comprehension in this thread or people just read the (poorly worded) thread title and made a reply about how the game has a M rating and can do whatever it wants.
In defense of GTA, I don't know if I've ever played an open world game with a competently told story. Films like Heat and Goodfellas have the benefit of telling a finite story that is told the same way each time and the audience has no control over. Open world games have to be 40 hours long, and any story is bound to go off the rails at some point, especially since any fucking around/murder rampages that the player participates in do happen in that world. I think with GTA V Rockstar just figured that ludonarrative dissonance is par for the course in open world games and just made a world and story that accepted that. Is the plot of of GTA just some child's bank robber fantasy? Yes, but most people playing GTA just live out childish criminal fantasies anyway.
In defense of GTA, I don't know if I've ever played an open world game with a competently told story. Films like Heat and Goodfellas have the benefit of telling a finite story that is told the same way each time and the audience has no control over. Open world games have to be 40 hours long, and any story is bound to go off the rails at some point, especially since any fucking around/murder rampages that the player participates in do happen in that world. I think with GTA V Rockstar just figured that ludonarrative dissonance is par for the course in open world games and just made a world and story that accepted that. Is the plot of of GTA just some child's bank robber fantasy? Yes, but most people playing GTA just live out childish criminal fantasies anyway.
BiGBoSSMk23
A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
So many posts assuming the thread title was going a diff direction.
Anyway. Maybe if there was more story, character dev, i would play a GTA game longer. Never finished one. Looking forward to try again with V on pc next year
Thread is a dead end by now but there was good discussion.
A lot of prophetic gibberish on my part about what's to become of games when they evolve their methods of storytelling.
It'll be fun to come back and read this thread in 10 or so years. Lol
maneil99
Member
Funny how you find that morally unacceptable but literally wished death upon police officers. Some of the things you said about police are disgusting and I believe you are a disgusting human being because of them. "Anygame that lets me kill pigs is a game I want" was something you said yet a game that has any humor or satire of society's look upon women is unacceptable?
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
I think the reason GTA bothers many people is that its brand of satire is so completely nihilistic to the core. GTA presents a world in which, ultimately, nothing is redeemable or worth anything. It doesn't "make ya think" with its biting social commentary, it just cynically reaffirms the viewpoint "yeah, this sure points out how everything and everyone is shit. Fuck everything."
This is why Red Dead Redemption is often held up to contrast GTA. RDR sure has Rockstar's brand of satire and witticism. Yet not every character is presented as a pathetic sad sack akin to a 17 year old's petulant view of humanity. This is why GTA has, for example, a problem with how it portrays women. Everyone in GTA is dysfunctional, outcast, or some form of failure, sure. But since the women aren't player characters, they don't have protagonist agency to grant a veneer of competency. So all that's left is the default negative attributes, usually culled from suspiciously misogynist cliches about all the ways women are terrible creatures that exist mainly to make men miserable.
This is why Red Dead Redemption is often held up to contrast GTA. RDR sure has Rockstar's brand of satire and witticism. Yet not every character is presented as a pathetic sad sack akin to a 17 year old's petulant view of humanity. This is why GTA has, for example, a problem with how it portrays women. Everyone in GTA is dysfunctional, outcast, or some form of failure, sure. But since the women aren't player characters, they don't have protagonist agency to grant a veneer of competency. So all that's left is the default negative attributes, usually culled from suspiciously misogynist cliches about all the ways women are terrible creatures that exist mainly to make men miserable.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
I'm not entirely sure if the OP is talking about being responsible in the sense of simply having writing and characters that match the quality of everything else or responsible in the sense of setting a better moral standard to its audience.
Considering the main appeal of the games I can't agree with the latter interpretation.
Considering the main appeal of the games I can't agree with the latter interpretation.
"It is just a videogame" is a fucking lazy handwave. Noone approaches the "Transformers" movies with they are just movies. GTA is one the biggest, most well known IPs in the videogame industry. It is an award winning, extremely hyped franchise, with huge impact on our culture. It is part of our culture.
CosmicQueso
Member
The TLOU: Left Behind DLC probably does what you're hoping for the best, yeah?
I dunno, seems like there's a ton of great artistic expression going on. GTA isn't that, however. That's not in its DNA.
BiGBoSSMk23
A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
It's the former.
But people love to assume it's always the latter to push that Rockstar are virtually untouchable/don't owe anybody anything/etc because they're regarded as some game design deity.
EDIT:
Which is all the more reason to expect better efforts from them to make the "M" on their game boxes actually stand for "Maturity". As it stands they're ambitious in their designs and not much else. The medium remains as technically impressive and as immature as ever. A child's toy. But they keep chasing that Hollywood carrot!
XANDER CAGE
Member
So... it's the former and the latter.