Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Executions: Obligatory or optional?

16 replies to this topic

Poll: If story mission executions make a return, do you think they should be obligatory or optional? (30 member(s) have cast votes)

If story mission executions make a return, do you think they should be obligatory or optional?

  1. Obligatory (6 votes [23.08%])

    Percentage of vote: 23.08%

  2. Optional (20 votes [76.92%])

    Percentage of vote: 76.92%

Vote Guests cannot vote
AtchooMatchew
  • AtchooMatchew

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2013

#1

Posted 23 June 2013 - 04:54 PM

I just recently restarted GTAIV and reached the "Uncle Vlad" mission. Having made a lot of changes in my perception about games since the last time I played the story, I found myself offended by the fact that I had to execute Vlad. I'm not an opponent of aggression and even killing things in video games; I've been raised up on games and know the two go comfortably hand-in-hand. And I know full well that GTA by its nature is about being a criminal in your own kind of way. But something turned me off about the execution. It's one thing to enter into a shoot out and spray twenty no-name grunts with lead. It's entirely another to enter into a brutal cut-scene, upon pressing the right trigger, in which your character holds the gun right up to the other character's head and shoot him in the eye. IDK. Maybe I'm being a bit dramatic, but it seems to me like these things should be optional. Certainly, they shouldn't be removed from the game, for those players who would enjoy them, but I don't like that sort action being imposed on the character I'm playing.

TheDeaconBosco
  • TheDeaconBosco

    A car so nice, they've named it twice

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2012

#2

Posted 23 June 2013 - 05:05 PM

Aren't they already optional?

Anyway, might as well be optional for the people that find them offensive like you...

austinkopeck
  • austinkopeck

    Meth Cook

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2012

#3

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:31 AM

Executions ARE optional. You just have to use something other than a pistol. I've ended him by running him over and blowing his nuts off with a shotty. I like getting creative with my kills.

SonOfLiberty
  • SonOfLiberty

    Yokel

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Serbia

#4

Posted 24 June 2013 - 05:48 AM

The Darko execution is optional as you can shoot him or let him live. I think with Vlad why we have to kill him in some way is alot of story unfolds because of that event. If we never killed him we never would've worked for Faustin and Dimitri.

At the time R* were only touching on the consequences of decisions made, but I think some instanes only work when the character has to die. IMO it would've been stupid after all the sh*t with Vlad, Roman and Mallorie if we could just let him walk away.

Mr.Mordecai
  • Mr.Mordecai

    To be, or not to be. That is the question.

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2012

#5

Posted 24 June 2013 - 08:41 AM

Not ALL of them should be optional for obvious reasons, but I want more options unlike IV. Aiden O'Mally is a perfect example. I would have let him go.

ExtremoMania
  • ExtremoMania

    Just a dose of metal everyday

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2012
  • Philippines

#6

Posted 24 June 2013 - 09:46 AM

Executions are optional as you can choose to let them live or die no matter what's your decision. The only thing about this is that it does affect overall storyline though not much that it can bear as it might yield good outcomes at the end. It's also better to think twice before doing the execution move, whether a person who has done something bad should let be live or just kill him for the sake of something.

The thing about that stupid pr*ck why does he have to die is because of the trouble he bear to Roman and Mallorie's relationship, and so forth must be killed.

SonOfLiberty
  • SonOfLiberty

    Yokel

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Serbia

#7

Posted 24 June 2013 - 12:51 PM

QUOTE (ExtremeLimitations @ Monday, Jun 24 2013, 20:46)
Executions are optional as you can choose to let them live or die no matter what's your decision. The only thing about this is that it does affect overall storyline though not much that it can bear as it might yield good outcomes at the end. It's also better to think twice before doing the execution move, whether a person who has done something bad should let be live or just kill him for the sake of something.

The thing about that stupid pr*ck why does he have to die is because of the trouble he bear to Roman and Mallorie's relationship, and so forth must be killed.

Yeah that's what I said before. In certain situations choosing to let a character live or die works, but others it doesn't. From a story perspective why would Niko have let Vlad live? Think about when CJ fronts Ryder aswell in SA. That would never work as a choice.

Claude4Catalina
  • Claude4Catalina

    being a fag since '07

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 May 2007

#8

Posted 24 June 2013 - 05:28 PM

I interpret the original post as a complaint about forcing the player to use Executions, simple answer is to free aim at the enemy rather than lock on, half hold the left trigger and kill them however you please if you wish to use a pistol, or use a different weapon to avoid the cutscene.

Zugzwang
  • Zugzwang

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2013

#9

Posted 25 June 2013 - 06:04 AM

Why would you be playing Grand Theft Auto if you felt uncomfortable about killing people via execution? It's not exceptionally graphic or gratuitous or anything like that so I find your objection quite puzzling.

AtchooMatchew
  • AtchooMatchew

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2013

#10

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:03 PM Edited by AtchooMatchew, 26 June 2013 - 05:07 PM.

QUOTE (Zugzwang @ Tuesday, Jun 25 2013, 06:04)
Why would you be playing Grand Theft Auto if you felt uncomfortable about killing people via execution? It's not exceptionally graphic or gratuitous or anything like that so I find your objection quite puzzling.

Assuming, of course, that executions have always been in the GTA series...

I should clarify: As mentioned above, I don't necessarily have a problem with killing people. I don't even have a problem with executions being a feature. What I have a problem with is being forced into a scenario in which I have to kill a known character up-close and personal. There are characters that I have no problems doing this with. It's the fact that I must in a majority of scenarios. There are more forced executions than there are optionals. And I'm not merely talking about pulling out your pistol. I'm talking about being told by the game that I must kill this character, hopeless as he/she often is, or fail the mission. In previous games, you never had a problem killing characters because the game fed you with a moment-to-moment feeling of needing to kill these boss-type characters in the given scenarios.

The irony is, I didn't NEED to kill Vlad. I didn't NEED to kill Faustin, as far as the story AND the set-up of the missions were concerned. But I was forced to. Even more ironic is that ten minutes after killing Vlad for maybe-screwing Roman's not-girlfriend, Niko told Dimitri, in no uncertain terms, "I have no problem sparing lives." That's very poor internal logic on the part of the writers.

Claude4Catalina
  • Claude4Catalina

    being a fag since '07

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 May 2007

#11

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:33 PM

eh, I think Niko killing Vlad made sense, as he bit off a bit more than he could chew there, which set it up perfectly for working for the Russians, however I think it would have been awesome to have the real game-changing choice of siding with Faustin or Dimitri, such a hard choice that early in the game where the player and Niko would be pretty premature, and make bad choices, kill Faustin and the game remains the same, side with him however and take down Dimitri could lead up to a Russian gang war and a whole other slew of missions, still resulting in working for UL Paper through Michelle and then Gravelli, culminating in the Darko choices and somehow working Pegorino into the story, changing Pest Control to if you killed Dimitri, Ray was the target and if you killed Faustin, Phil became the target (like the beta).

DarrinPA
  • DarrinPA

    Orange Grove Member

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2009
  • None

#12

Posted 26 June 2013 - 11:45 PM

QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Monday, Jun 24 2013, 07:51)
QUOTE (ExtremeLimitations @ Monday, Jun 24 2013, 20:46)
Executions are optional as you can choose to let them live or die no matter what's your decision. The only thing about this is that it does affect overall storyline though not much that it can bear as it might yield good outcomes at the end. It's also better to think twice before doing the execution move, whether a person who has done something bad should let be live or just kill him for the sake of something.

Yeah that's what I said before. In certain situations choosing to let a character live or die works, but others it doesn't. From a story perspective why would Niko have let Vlad live? Think about when CJ fronts Ryder aswell in SA. That would never work as a choice.

This brings up a good point. What if you could let Vlad and Ryder live BUT you would be aware that the game difficulty would increase? Knowing that they are still on the streets and are aiding your enemies would make sense if you want a bigger challange. After all, GTA doesn't have a difficulty level choice, this would be an interesting way to implement one.

I personally wanted to let Vlad live. As an enemy, I felt as if he was an opponent that was worth having around. He could be used to your advantage, where as Dimitri was just a thorn in my side.

MyDog
  • MyDog

    FC BARCELONA

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2009

#13

Posted 27 June 2013 - 07:45 AM

QUOTE (AtchooMatchew @ Wednesday, Jun 26 2013, 17:03)
QUOTE (Zugzwang @ Tuesday, Jun 25 2013, 06:04)
Why would you be playing Grand Theft Auto if you felt uncomfortable about killing people via execution? It's not exceptionally graphic or gratuitous or anything like that so I find your objection quite puzzling.

Assuming, of course, that executions have always been in the GTA series...

I should clarify: As mentioned above, I don't necessarily have a problem with killing people. I don't even have a problem with executions being a feature. What I have a problem with is being forced into a scenario in which I have to kill a known character up-close and personal. There are characters that I have no problems doing this with. It's the fact that I must in a majority of scenarios. There are more forced executions than there are optionals. And I'm not merely talking about pulling out your pistol. I'm talking about being told by the game that I must kill this character, hopeless as he/she often is, or fail the mission. In previous games, you never had a problem killing characters because the game fed you with a moment-to-moment feeling of needing to kill these boss-type characters in the given scenarios.

The irony is, I didn't NEED to kill Vlad. I didn't NEED to kill Faustin, as far as the story AND the set-up of the missions were concerned. But I was forced to. Even more ironic is that ten minutes after killing Vlad for maybe-screwing Roman's not-girlfriend, Niko told Dimitri, in no uncertain terms, "I have no problem sparing lives." That's very poor internal logic on the part of the writers.

Maybe you didn't need to kill Vlad, but Niko didn't have a choice when it came to Faustin. Had he refused, Kenny Petrovic would have killed him.

Valenta
  • Valenta

    True hope is swift.

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jan 2013
  • Scotland

#14

Posted 27 June 2013 - 09:59 AM

QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Monday, Jun 24 2013, 05:48)
The Darko execution is optional as you can shoot him or let him live. I think with Vlad why we have to kill him in some way is alot of story unfolds because of that event. If we never killed him we never would've worked for Faustin and Dimitri.

At the time R* were only touching on the consequences of decisions made, but I think some instanes only work when the character has to die. IMO it would've been stupid after all the sh*t with Vlad, Roman and Mallorie if we could just let him walk away.

Fully agree with the last part.

GTAKid667
  • GTAKid667

    Change is Coming...

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 24 May 2010
  • United-Kingdom

#15

Posted 28 June 2013 - 10:32 PM

I think that murders should be optional except for one or two which would fit in the story

Claude4Catalina
  • Claude4Catalina

    being a fag since '07

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 May 2007

#16

Posted 29 June 2013 - 08:17 AM

the whole idea with Niko was to make him a dehumanised gun for hire, he came to Liberty City scarred but still relatively optimistic about finding Darko, but by the end he's had to do so much killing for other people that he begins to doubt whether it was worth it. it wouldn't have to same effect if we were given the choice to spare everyone.

MacAshford
  • MacAshford

    /x/ lurker

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2013
  • United-Nations

#17

Posted 29 June 2013 - 03:44 PM

There should be more types of executions, like with different weapons.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users