Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

The Identity Crisis: The Problems with V's story.

647 replies to this topic
spamtackey
  • spamtackey

    Business Socks

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

#331

Posted 12 November 2013 - 04:28 PM Edited by spamtackey, 12 November 2013 - 04:32 PM.

Very surprised at the amount of people here saying GTA V's story was short. How long did it take you all to complete it?

 

I just finished it last weekend - took me 2 months!

 

* Using only GTA games after GTA III that follow essentially the same format.*

**Gathered from GTA Wiki so it may not be 100% accurate**
 
GTA 3 - 51 Story Missions  17 Payphone Missions
GTA VC - 37 Story Missions 19 Asset Missions 5 Payphone Missions
GTA A  - 41 Story Missions
GTA SA - 105 Story Missions 
GTA LCS - 70 Story Missions
GTA VCS - 59 Story Missions
GTA IV - 88 Story Missions
GTA TLAD - 22 Story Missions
GTA TBOGT - 26 Story Missions 
GTA V - 69 Story Missions 
 
 
Even with its weaker missions, I'd say GTA V has a respectable amount of missions. Averaging these games up comes to 59 missions average (using only story missions and the asset missions for Vice City because you have to complete some of them), which I'd say GTA V probably hits even if we consider most preparation to be 'non-missions'. The only ones that truly felt too short to me were the expansions, but they are expansions and not full games for a reason I guess. 

Lucchese
  • Lucchese

    Cynical Prick

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Jun 2012

#332

Posted 12 November 2013 - 04:32 PM

V's campaign may have been much shorter than I expected (which is one of my only gripes with the game), but it had by far the best missions of any GTA so far imho.


Mr_Goldcard
  • Mr_Goldcard

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2013

#333

Posted 12 November 2013 - 04:54 PM

Are you really nikos half brother?

Official General
  • Official General

    You gotta always carry heat in these Vice City streets

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010

#334

Posted 12 November 2013 - 05:40 PM Edited by Official General, 12 November 2013 - 05:44 PM.

^Or maybe he's just somebody who enjoyed the game because he didn't require "gangsta hood" stuff to have a good experience...

 

Also, telling people to "get the f**k outta here bro" doesn't help your argument.

 

Lool I knew once I mentioned the words "gang" and "hood" that you were gonna come sniffing around, just to say once again how much you hated that stuff. Your're so predictable it's unreal. Ok, you know what ? Just to stop you b*tchin' and crying about how much you don't like "gangsta stuff" I won't mention it again in this thread. How about that b*tchboy, sound good ? Deal ?  :sneaky:

 

I meant the the f**k outta of here with regards to Stewart claiming GTA V was not short when it clearly was. How can V be over 20 missions less than GTA IV ? What bullsh*t that is. Yet he still thinks V was a very long game, yeah whatever. 

  • NinjaWJ likes this

Lucchese
  • Lucchese

    Cynical Prick

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Jun 2012

#335

Posted 12 November 2013 - 06:50 PM Edited by niko bellic half brother, 12 November 2013 - 07:09 PM.

@General 

 

Where did I claim I "hated" the hood stuff? Just because I declared I grew out of all that stuff when I reached my 20's, doesn't necessarily mean I hate it. Infact, I wouldn't complain if there was more hood action in V.

 

But the difference between you and I, is that I'm not going to whine and cry like a spoiled little kid, about the game being terrible/broken/etc, just because it didn't have an element that I worship have much prominence in the game - especially when we already had a title in the series dedicate it's entire main theme to that element.

 

We get it - you love all that gangsta stuff. I in turn have quite an interest in the mob and all that sh*t, but I'm not going to judge a whole game just because it didn't include much of my point of interest in it. That would just be silly.


B Dawg
  • B Dawg

    What exactly are we doing?

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2008
  • Bosnia-and-Herzegovina

#336

Posted 12 November 2013 - 06:57 PM

Also, telling people to "get the f**k outta here bro" doesn't help your argument.

I am an IV fanboy (lol) and I approve this message.


Official General
  • Official General

    You gotta always carry heat in these Vice City streets

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010

#337

Posted 12 November 2013 - 08:16 PM Edited by Official General, 12 November 2013 - 08:52 PM.

@General 

 

Where did I claim I "hated" the hood stuff? Just because I declared I grew out of all that stuff when I reached my 20's, doesn't necessarily mean I hate it. Infact, I wouldn't complain if there was more hood action in V.

 

But the difference between you and I, is that I'm not going to whine and cry like a spoiled little kid, about the game being terrible/broken/etc, just because it didn't have an element that I worship have much prominence in the game - especially when we already had a title in the series dedicate it's entire main theme to that element.

 

We get it - you love all that gangsta stuff. I in turn have quite an interest in the mob and all that sh*t, but I'm not going to judge a whole game just because it didn't include much of my point of interest in it. That would just be silly.

 

You keep ignoring the fact that I did not just say I wanted to see more hood and gang action. Yeah it disappointed me a lot, but I was also very disappointed that I did not see enough drug cartel, mob action too. I am disappointed that the game did not focus on gangs AND ORGANIZED CRIME IN GENERAL, NOT JUST STREET GANGS. And you also repeatedly ignore the fact that I said I don't mind a dominant corrupt cop/federal agent theme in GTA V's story, just as long as it directly related to the criminal underworld. I said all this many times. I'm tired of explaining this sh*t to you. 

 

And....This is a forum, what the f**k were you expecting here ??

 

If you don't like my whining then don't reply to my posts or read them. There is an ignore user's posts feature now, USE IT. 


mastershake616
  • mastershake616

    The Wolf of BAWSAQ

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2013

#338

Posted 12 November 2013 - 10:45 PM

 

If you only play 5 minutes a day it will last for ages, of course.

 

 

I've finished it in the first 4 weeks and wasn't playing that often. The story felt short and rushed too me. For example buying masks was a "mission" - it was like that:

- Drive to a 50 yards away store. 

- Buy 3 masks

This whole "mission" took 37 seconds. And we had lots of them. The heists itself were cool sometimes, but there weren't that much. I am absolutely disappointed by the story.

 

I mostly played 2 missions and about 3 hours a day. I am a strong believer that if you take your time playing the story, reading a book, watching a tv show, you appreciate and enjoy more what has been created. Because of that, I felt it was a wonderfully written, brilliantly acted and a hilarious plot. Most missions were original and the heists, in particular, were memorable and the most fun I have ever had in a video game.

 

For a 69 mission story, limited by the already-maxed out power GTA V was using on the current-gen consoles, it was actually a long story. It was just understandably much shorter to previous instalments.

 

That being said, I totally agree with you on that masks mission! The fact R* included that as a mission made me feel cheated. It's ridiculous to think you can replay it!

 

 

Finally, a poster with some sense.

 

The "pace" of a game is dependent on the "pace" of the player. I can finish the early missions of GTA IV in less than an hour, and none of them are considerably "slow paced". Just because V's early missions see more action doesn't necessarily make the game a faster paced experience. 

 

So, yeah, instead of comparing GTA IV's pace to that of the f*cking Godfather films (hilarious, I know), pacing is subjective. 

 

Pace, pace, pace, pace, pace. There. I'm done talking about pacing. Something tells me that the majority of the kids giving their two cents on the topic don't even know the definition of the word. Diminishing attention spans have become an epidemic. 


ScottishHeist123
  • ScottishHeist123

    After 5 years on the East Coast, it's time to go home...

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Oct 2012
  • None

#339

Posted 12 November 2013 - 10:46 PM

^Or maybe he's just somebody who enjoyed the game because he didn't require "gangsta hood" stuff to have a good experience...

 

Also, telling people to "get the f**k outta here bro" doesn't help your argument.

LOL pretty much this!  :^:

 

Also, I will elaborate on my comment about the story's length to the Official General of Keyboard Warriors. As displayed by a comment above, GTA V is shorter compared to predecessors. But, as a standalone open-world title and, considering it's about 25 hours in length, it is a long story.

 

Perhaps we differ from what we consider to be a long video game story, but when you compare other open world titles (Red Dead Redemption, Mercenaries 2, Just Cause 2) and campaigns in shooters, GTA V has a satisfying story length.

 

Would it have been nice to have more missions? Of course! But with GTA V already using the max power of the current gen consoles, you get what can be given, and I think R* deliveried.


hammertime99
  • hammertime99

    Hustler

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2013

#340

Posted 12 November 2013 - 10:57 PM

did read

  • Drunken Cowboy likes this

NinjaWJ
  • NinjaWJ

    Just trying to get by

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2008

#341

Posted 12 November 2013 - 10:58 PM

But we should try to use past GTAs as a reference because i think we all agree that GTA is a lot better than most other games. We just want to discuss what can be done to make the next best GTA


NinjaWJ
  • NinjaWJ

    Just trying to get by

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2008

#342

Posted 12 November 2013 - 11:06 PM Edited by NinjaWJ, 12 November 2013 - 11:06 PM.

 

 

If you only play 5 minutes a day it will last for ages, of course.

 

 

I've finished it in the first 4 weeks and wasn't playing that often. The story felt short and rushed too me. For example buying masks was a "mission" - it was like that:

- Drive to a 50 yards away store. 

- Buy 3 masks

This whole "mission" took 37 seconds. And we had lots of them. The heists itself were cool sometimes, but there weren't that much. I am absolutely disappointed by the story.

 

I mostly played 2 missions and about 3 hours a day. I am a strong believer that if you take your time playing the story, reading a book, watching a tv show, you appreciate and enjoy more what has been created. Because of that, I felt it was a wonderfully written, brilliantly acted and a hilarious plot. Most missions were original and the heists, in particular, were memorable and the most fun I have ever had in a video game.

 

For a 69 mission story, limited by the already-maxed out power GTA V was using on the current-gen consoles, it was actually a long story. It was just understandably much shorter to previous instalments.

 

That being said, I totally agree with you on that masks mission! The fact R* included that as a mission made me feel cheated. It's ridiculous to think you can replay it!

 

 

Finally, a poster with some sense.

 

The "pace" of a game is dependent on the "pace" of the player. I can finish the early missions of GTA IV in less than an hour, and none of them are considerably "slow paced". Just because V's early missions see more action doesn't necessarily make the game a faster paced experience. 

 

So, yeah, instead of comparing GTA IV's pace to that of the f*cking Godfather films (hilarious, I know), pacing is subjective. 

 

Pace, pace, pace, pace, pace. There. I'm done talking about pacing. Something tells me that the majority of the kids giving their two cents on the topic don't even know the definition of the word. Diminishing attention spans have become an epidemic. 

 

yes...always blame the kids....


spamtackey
  • spamtackey

    Business Socks

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

#343

Posted 12 November 2013 - 11:14 PM Edited by spamtackey, 12 November 2013 - 11:16 PM.

 

 

If you only play 5 minutes a day it will last for ages, of course.

 

 

I've finished it in the first 4 weeks and wasn't playing that often. The story felt short and rushed too me. For example buying masks was a "mission" - it was like that:

- Drive to a 50 yards away store. 

- Buy 3 masks

This whole "mission" took 37 seconds. And we had lots of them. The heists itself were cool sometimes, but there weren't that much. I am absolutely disappointed by the story.

 

I mostly played 2 missions and about 3 hours a day. I am a strong believer that if you take your time playing the story, reading a book, watching a tv show, you appreciate and enjoy more what has been created. Because of that, I felt it was a wonderfully written, brilliantly acted and a hilarious plot. Most missions were original and the heists, in particular, were memorable and the most fun I have ever had in a video game.

 

For a 69 mission story, limited by the already-maxed out power GTA V was using on the current-gen consoles, it was actually a long story. It was just understandably much shorter to previous instalments.

 

That being said, I totally agree with you on that masks mission! The fact R* included that as a mission made me feel cheated. It's ridiculous to think you can replay it!

 

 

Finally, a poster with some sense.

 

The "pace" of a game is dependent on the "pace" of the player. I can finish the early missions of GTA IV in less than an hour, and none of them are considerably "slow paced". Just because V's early missions see more action doesn't necessarily make the game a faster paced experience. 

 

So, yeah, instead of comparing GTA IV's pace to that of the f*cking Godfather films (hilarious, I know), pacing is subjective. 

 

Pace, pace, pace, pace, pace. There. I'm done talking about pacing. Something tells me that the majority of the kids giving their two cents on the topic don't even know the definition of the word. Diminishing attention spans have become an epidemic. 

 

 

I'm starting to think you don't know the meaning of the word because you're applying it in a strange sense. I can read a book over a year if I want to, it doesn't mean the book is paced to my reading it. Pacing in media, to my knowledge, refers to a variety of things such as the overall length and how quickly important events happens, how it makes itself more or less interesting over time and builds up to its final moments, the length of scenes, and so on. That's how I've always seen it spoken of. 

 

For a videogame there is also a pacing. We don't start with the Rocket Launcher in DOOM and we don't end the game by fighting the same zombie soldiers that we start the game fighting. We end the game with a BFG and Rocket Launcher and we're facing big demons in Hell. The levels also go from more futuristic space area to literally Hell. You don't start Resident Evil 4 with the PRL 412, no you start with a pistol and face standard enemies. As the game goes you face bigger and bigger bosses and set pieces until it gets to a finale where you fight the Big Bad with the best tools and inventory that you could get. 

 

"Taking it at your own pace" doesn't eliminate the element of pace in media in my opinion. You are free to disagree, but you can't say it only applies to videogames. After all, The Godfather has no pacing, heck it's not even slow burning if you watch it on fast forward.

  • Duxfever, NinjaWJ, Mr. Sleepy and 1 other like this

mastershake616
  • mastershake616

    The Wolf of BAWSAQ

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2013

#344

Posted 12 November 2013 - 11:49 PM

 

 

 

If you only play 5 minutes a day it will last for ages, of course.

 

 

I've finished it in the first 4 weeks and wasn't playing that often. The story felt short and rushed too me. For example buying masks was a "mission" - it was like that:

- Drive to a 50 yards away store. 

- Buy 3 masks

This whole "mission" took 37 seconds. And we had lots of them. The heists itself were cool sometimes, but there weren't that much. I am absolutely disappointed by the story.

 

I mostly played 2 missions and about 3 hours a day. I am a strong believer that if you take your time playing the story, reading a book, watching a tv show, you appreciate and enjoy more what has been created. Because of that, I felt it was a wonderfully written, brilliantly acted and a hilarious plot. Most missions were original and the heists, in particular, were memorable and the most fun I have ever had in a video game.

 

For a 69 mission story, limited by the already-maxed out power GTA V was using on the current-gen consoles, it was actually a long story. It was just understandably much shorter to previous instalments.

 

That being said, I totally agree with you on that masks mission! The fact R* included that as a mission made me feel cheated. It's ridiculous to think you can replay it!

 

 

Finally, a poster with some sense.

 

The "pace" of a game is dependent on the "pace" of the player. I can finish the early missions of GTA IV in less than an hour, and none of them are considerably "slow paced". Just because V's early missions see more action doesn't necessarily make the game a faster paced experience. 

 

So, yeah, instead of comparing GTA IV's pace to that of the f*cking Godfather films (hilarious, I know), pacing is subjective. 

 

Pace, pace, pace, pace, pace. There. I'm done talking about pacing. Something tells me that the majority of the kids giving their two cents on the topic don't even know the definition of the word. Diminishing attention spans have become an epidemic. 

 

 

I'm starting to think you don't know the meaning of the word because you're applying it in a strange sense. I can read a book over a year if I want to, it doesn't mean the book is paced to my reading it. Pacing in media, to my knowledge, refers to a variety of things such as the overall length and how quickly important events happens, how it makes itself more or less interesting over time and builds up to its final moments, the length of scenes, and so on. That's how I've always seen it spoken of. 

 

For a videogame there is also a pacing. We don't start with the Rocket Launcher in DOOM and we don't end the game by fighting the same zombie soldiers that we start the game fighting. We end the game with a BFG and Rocket Launcher and we're facing big demons in Hell. The levels also go from more futuristic space area to literally Hell. You don't start Resident Evil 4 with the PRL 412, no you start with a pistol and face standard enemies. As the game goes you face bigger and bigger bosses and set pieces until it gets to a finale where you fight the Big Bad with the best tools and inventory that you could get. 

 

"Taking it at your own pace" doesn't eliminate the element of pace in media in my opinion. You are free to disagree, but you can't say it only applies to videogames. After all, The Godfather has no pacing, heck it's not even slow burning if you watch it on fast forward.

 

 

You're an idiot because you don't understand that the term takes on different meaning from medium to medium. Gaming is unlike any other, because you're in control of the story. You're writing the book. 

 

"In media..." is a gross overgeneralization that only tells me that your artistic disposition is narrow-minded and biased; you see all as one, and that's your biggest mistake. A movie is not the same as a video game. A book is not the same as a movie. 

 

If you put a book down for two weeks, the story isn't halted. It's still there, on paper. If you rewind a film, the events aren't occurring backwards. When you f*ck around in free mode or turn a game off, the story has been halted. The things that happen aren't going to happen unless you initiate the events. And if said events are to be initiated, how you go about completing the events and the rate in which you do them is up to you, not scripted in any particular way.

 

You cannot change the way the Godfather is told. You cannot manipulate the events of the story. You can't kill Holden at the end of Catcher in the Rye. If I rewind the latest episode of SVU on my DVR, the detectives aren't solving a case and then releasing the suspect to go rape again. 

 

If I let Michael get shot in the head in the first mission and never return to the game again, that's that. Michael's dead and that's how the story ends. This shouldn't be news to YOU, an outspoken proponent of, uh, "experience." You felt dirty after killing one of the McCreary brothers, no? Some don't feel that way; some don't care at all; some killed Derrick so that they may reap the benefits of using Francis to clear wanted levels. The time that it takes one to finish a game, a mission, or whatever the f*ck it may be is as subjective as the reactions they have to the events of the story. 


spamtackey
  • spamtackey

    Business Socks

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

#345

Posted 12 November 2013 - 11:59 PM

 


 

 

You're an idiot because you don't understand that the term takes on different meaning from medium to medium. Gaming is unlike any other, because you're in control of the story. You're writing the book. 

 

"In media..." is a gross overgeneralization that only tells me that your artistic disposition is narrow-minded and biased; you see all as one, and that's your biggest mistake. A movie is not the same as a video game. A book is not the same as a movie. 

 

If you put a book down for two weeks, the story isn't halted. It's still there, on paper. If you rewind a film, the events aren't occurring backwards. When you f*ck around in free mode or turn a game off, the story has been halted. The things that happen aren't going to happen unless you initiate the events. And if said events are to be initiated, how you go about completing the events and the rate in which you do them is up to you, not scripted in any particular way.

 

You cannot change the way the Godfather is told. You cannot manipulate the events of the story. You can't kill Holden at the end of Catcher in the Rye. If I rewind the latest episode of SVU on my DVR, the detectives aren't solving a case and then releasing the suspect to go rape again. 

 

If I let Michael get shot in the head in the first mission and never return to the game again, that's that. Michael's dead and that's how the story ends. This shouldn't be news to YOU, an outspoken proponent of, uh, "experience." You felt dirty after killing one of the McCreary brothers, no? Some don't feel that way; some don't care at all; some killed Derrick so that they may reap the benefits of using Francis to clear wanted levels. The time that it takes one to finish a game, a mission, or whatever the f*ck it may be is as subjective as the reactions they have to the events of the story. 

 

 

You completely lost any credibility in the last paragraph. There is a canon to videogames and the story they tell. If I fall in lava and turn off Metroid that does not make it so that the canon of Metroid is "Samus went to Zebes and died." No, the canon is whatever the developer and the writer decide. The story is already written and you have to experience it. Michael doesn't die in the first mission and you would be laughed at quite heavily if you seriously tried to discuss GTA V as if that is what happened. No, the story of GTA V is that Michael lives until at least the choice ending. That input does not mean that there is not a story written or that we can change the events. 

 

Let me put it this way: If i turned the Godfather off after Vito got shot, I would be laughed out of any movie discussion for saying "When Vito was shot and died." Videogames have interactivity, but they are still limited. Maybe in the future your desire for a videogame where we decide how the story goes will be possible, but it isn't right now. You're just taking interactivity out of context to dismiss the idea of pacing. Even then the interactivity itself is paced. As I said, we don't get the rocket launcher when the game starts because they want to pace it. GTA V didn't start with us shooting down a private army with attack choppers because it decided when we gained access to various elements. 

 

Let me put it like you put it for my examples:

When you get shot in a videogame it doesn't effect the story. Idiot. 

  • NinjaWJ, Mr. Sleepy and Drunken Cowboy like this

NinjaWJ
  • NinjaWJ

    Just trying to get by

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2008

#346

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:16 AM Edited by NinjaWJ, 13 November 2013 - 12:20 AM.

 

 

 

 

If you only play 5 minutes a day it will last for ages, of course.

 

 

I've finished it in the first 4 weeks and wasn't playing that often. The story felt short and rushed too me. For example buying masks was a "mission" - it was like that:

- Drive to a 50 yards away store. 

- Buy 3 masks

This whole "mission" took 37 seconds. And we had lots of them. The heists itself were cool sometimes, but there weren't that much. I am absolutely disappointed by the story.

 

I mostly played 2 missions and about 3 hours a day. I am a strong believer that if you take your time playing the story, reading a book, watching a tv show, you appreciate and enjoy more what has been created. Because of that, I felt it was a wonderfully written, brilliantly acted and a hilarious plot. Most missions were original and the heists, in particular, were memorable and the most fun I have ever had in a video game.

 

For a 69 mission story, limited by the already-maxed out power GTA V was using on the current-gen consoles, it was actually a long story. It was just understandably much shorter to previous instalments.

 

That being said, I totally agree with you on that masks mission! The fact R* included that as a mission made me feel cheated. It's ridiculous to think you can replay it!

 

 

Finally, a poster with some sense.

 

The "pace" of a game is dependent on the "pace" of the player. I can finish the early missions of GTA IV in less than an hour, and none of them are considerably "slow paced". Just because V's early missions see more action doesn't necessarily make the game a faster paced experience. 

 

So, yeah, instead of comparing GTA IV's pace to that of the f*cking Godfather films (hilarious, I know), pacing is subjective. 

 

Pace, pace, pace, pace, pace. There. I'm done talking about pacing. Something tells me that the majority of the kids giving their two cents on the topic don't even know the definition of the word. Diminishing attention spans have become an epidemic. 

 

 

I'm starting to think you don't know the meaning of the word because you're applying it in a strange sense. I can read a book over a year if I want to, it doesn't mean the book is paced to my reading it. Pacing in media, to my knowledge, refers to a variety of things such as the overall length and how quickly important events happens, how it makes itself more or less interesting over time and builds up to its final moments, the length of scenes, and so on. That's how I've always seen it spoken of. 

 

For a videogame there is also a pacing. We don't start with the Rocket Launcher in DOOM and we don't end the game by fighting the same zombie soldiers that we start the game fighting. We end the game with a BFG and Rocket Launcher and we're facing big demons in Hell. The levels also go from more futuristic space area to literally Hell. You don't start Resident Evil 4 with the PRL 412, no you start with a pistol and face standard enemies. As the game goes you face bigger and bigger bosses and set pieces until it gets to a finale where you fight the Big Bad with the best tools and inventory that you could get. 

 

"Taking it at your own pace" doesn't eliminate the element of pace in media in my opinion. You are free to disagree, but you can't say it only applies to videogames. After all, The Godfather has no pacing, heck it's not even slow burning if you watch it on fast forward.

 

 

You're an idiot because you don't understand that the term takes on different meaning from medium to medium. Gaming is unlike any other, because you're in control of the story. You're writing the book. 

 

"In media..." is a gross overgeneralization that only tells me that your artistic disposition is narrow-minded and biased; you see all as one, and that's your biggest mistake. A movie is not the same as a video game. A book is not the same as a movie. 

 

If you put a book down for two weeks, the story isn't halted. It's still there, on paper. If you rewind a film, the events aren't occurring backwards. When you f*ck around in free mode or turn a game off, the story has been halted. The things that happen aren't going to happen unless you initiate the events. And if said events are to be initiated, how you go about completing the events and the rate in which you do them is up to you, not scripted in any particular way.

 

You cannot change the way the Godfather is told. You cannot manipulate the events of the story. You can't kill Holden at the end of Catcher in the Rye. If I rewind the latest episode of SVU on my DVR, the detectives aren't solving a case and then releasing the suspect to go rape again. 

 

If I let Michael get shot in the head in the first mission and never return to the game again, that's that. Michael's dead and that's how the story ends. This shouldn't be news to YOU, an outspoken proponent of, uh, "experience." You felt dirty after killing one of the McCreary brothers, no? Some don't feel that way; some don't care at all; some killed Derrick so that they may reap the benefits of using Francis to clear wanted levels. The time that it takes one to finish a game, a mission, or whatever the f*ck it may be is as subjective as the reactions they have to the events of the story. 

 

 I think you just contradicted yourself. The story is still there in the book if you stop reading, but a video game story is also still there when you stop playing! Initiating the events through playing a video game is like the same thing as turning the pages in the book. The story is on the pages just like how a game's story is stored on the disc. I think you are talking about pace in terms of how the user interacts with the product. Spamtackey is referring to how the product interacts with the user. What if GTAV gave you a rocket launcher in the first mission of the game, how about if you murder Steve Haines in the opening cutscene? Yeah its true that YOUR pace of the game is slow if you only play for like 1 hour a week, but that doesn't stop the game's pace being dictated TO YOU! You will still get the RPG in the first mission, or robbing the Union Depository in the first mission.


Drunken Cowboy
  • Drunken Cowboy

    A Young Filipino Boy Playing Hands-Free Catch-the-Quarter

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013
  • United-States
  • Best Topic 2013 "The Identity Crisis: The Problems with V's story."

#347

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:50 AM

 

 

 

 

 

I think It's prudent to take into account the install base of the consoles when the respective games were released. San Andreas was released when the PS2 was already out for four years, plenty of time to create an install base. GTA IV was released way earlier in the console cycle than San Andreas. Thus, it would have been impossible for the game that essentially built the install base which allowed GTA V to sell so many copies in one day. RDR didn't have Grand Theft Auto in the title, so it's a given it wouldn't sell NEARLY as well. It's a game of name recognition and install base. I'm sure the next in the Red Dead series will sell more than RDR (if there is a comparable install base as to when RDR was released. Also worth noting RDR didn't release on PC; San Andreas and GTA IV were). It's more a game of brand recognition than actual content (See: Call of Duty). I think Rockstar could very rightly anticipated they would make a sizable profit on GTA V regardless of what direction they went with. They WANTED to appease the players; they didn't HAVE to. I hope this made some sense. Have a great day!

 

 

I think it's definitely something to take into consideration. I do wonder what the current numbers were for the new consoles in 2008 because it wasn't near the launch of the systems, but it wasn't very far into their lives either. I also wonder what their estimated sales were and if they did or didn't meet their expectations. I wonder if it had any hand in the large marketing budget, which I have heard took up at least half of the 250 million budget. 

 

Honestly, I wish Rockstar would do something like those "Making of" documentaries that movies get. A lot of people might not watch it, but I'd spare several hours to see an in-depth look at the challenge of bringing games like GTA IV, RDR, and GTA V to life. To hear concepts that were cut and to see some beta materials and to hear about issues that arose and how it changed the game. There's so much stuff that goes into making these titles that we probably don't realize. 

 

I agree. Unfortunately that's not Rockstar's thing, letting us into their processes. 

 

 If there's one thing I hate about five, it's how NIko's fate is left ambiguous. Johnny's ending gave closure to his story. There is no closure with Niko; just the odd reference here and there. 

 

 

Closure isn't necessary, but if you're gonna add it... do it right.

Basically, the ending of TLaD was exactly how Johnny's story should have ended. Looking at the end of the other GTA's, he really didn't get a happy ending; and I supposed that meant he was truly "lost and damned". 

 

But, why would he just COMPLETELY reassemble himself and his gang, clear out the west coast of their huge rival that caused them so many problems in the Lost's home territory of Liberty, and then just collapse into a drug junkie? Hey, five years is a long time, we COULD have this explained, but it's very doubtful R* will give enough of a f*ck. Again, they're just pushing for sales numbers, and I guess they're not wrong to do that. But hey, a comic book even? They did it with Max Payne. That was very brief, yet it eluded to a lot of the events in 3 and made the rest of 1 and 2 more clear.

 

Niko also had a concrete yet open enough ending, I feel. He has the benefit of having been a lot more admired and beloved character than Johnny; mainly because he was in the main game which is meant to pander to a lot less niche of an audience. His revelations at the end of IV were enough to realize his revenge quest and journey up the criminal ladder were fruitless. But what of him now? Is he going to continue to be a contract killer? Or is he gonna sell handbags with Hossan? I think that's a lot better of an option than CJ being the straight, millionaire rap-producer with a reunited and harmonious family, or Tommy just... like... having killed everyone and everything from Vice City to Liberty to be King Coke, and DEFINITELY better than Johnny having his head stomped in by a tweaked out piece of sh*t psychopath. 

 

I don't care if Johnny died. I don't think he should have been brought back from IV, but if they did, they could have handled either his appearance OR his death a lot better. 

And especially Terry and Clay. They were dynamic characters, and all we were forced to do was just PIT maneuver them and kill them. Very bullsh*t.

  • nobum62 likes this

Drunken Cowboy
  • Drunken Cowboy

    A Young Filipino Boy Playing Hands-Free Catch-the-Quarter

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013
  • United-States
  • Best Topic 2013 "The Identity Crisis: The Problems with V's story."

#348

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:09 AM

 

Very surprised at the amount of people here saying GTA V's story was short. How long did it take you all to complete it?

 

I just finished it last weekend - took me 2 months!

 

* Using only GTA games after GTA III that follow essentially the same format.*

**Gathered from GTA Wiki so it may not be 100% accurate**
 
GTA 3 - 51 Story Missions  17 Payphone Missions
GTA VC - 37 Story Missions 19 Asset Missions 5 Payphone Missions
GTA A  - 41 Story Missions
GTA SA - 105 Story Missions 
GTA LCS - 70 Story Missions
GTA VCS - 59 Story Missions
GTA IV - 88 Story Missions
GTA TLAD - 22 Story Missions
GTA TBOGT - 26 Story Missions 
GTA V - 69 Story Missions 
 
 
Even with its weaker missions, I'd say GTA V has a respectable amount of missions. Averaging these games up comes to 59 missions average (using only story missions and the asset missions for Vice City because you have to complete some of them), which I'd say GTA V probably hits even if we consider most preparation to be 'non-missions'. The only ones that truly felt too short to me were the expansions, but they are expansions and not full games for a reason I guess. 

 

 

 

But this was THE game. One of the longest-developed GTA games. I'm not sure about other people, (probably the minority here AGAIN), but I appreciate a good single-player more than the multiplayer.

 

The only mission counters it out-does is the Stories and the Episodes. Rockstar never advertised the Stories games as full-fledged, just more-or-less nice additions... which they were. Hell, they've almost COMPLETELY forgotten about the Stories today. 

 

The Episodes, I think it's pretty damn amazing we regard them with such high honor as to even call them their own games. They were DLC, they were released on the PSN and XBOX Marketplace, unlike the Stories games that retailed in stores.

 

The fact that twenty-some missions gave TLaD and TBoGT such following shows you how capable Rockstar is to tell an amazing story with dynamic characters in such a small window, let alone integrate them so well into IV. Given my endless posting on the topic, and profile picture, and signature, blah blah blah, it's no doubt I relished TLaD's story more than V's, but I would even put Gay Tony up there above V. Gay Tony was the "screw it. We made two serious stories for the IV era, let's just have fun with this one." Which is what Gay Tony presented itself as, and I appreciated it for that. All the missions were action-packed and over the top stupid fun.

 

Back to the "identity crisis". V presented itself as a bit more of a serious game. Michael would be the bourgeois bank-robber, Franklin the street gangster, and Trevor the back-woods psycho-path. But no. In those 69 missions, what did we get? Going to stores and buying masks. About 10 missions TOTAL of BOTH Trevor and Franklin doing their respective missions in their settings, and just throwing them into the robbery mix with Michael. Then we had the over-the-top missions, like the Splinter Cell world-terrorism chemical f*cking thing or whatever, which technically wasn't even a "heist" mission this game was themed around. It would have been nice if at least the side-activities were the over-the-top whacko missions, while the story kept a serious tone.

 

But no. Engaging in triathlons with bitchy feminists. Tailing celebrities with obnoxious California-esc douches. Towing cars FIVE TIMES with that insufferable Tonya. A lot of these characters, Mary-Ann, Tonya, Dom, Beverly, Josh, they weren't interesting or giving reasons to sympathize with them. I didn't even "love to hate" them. They were just irritating and insipid, like the missions they provided. The more interesting missions were Trevor's back-country buddies, like Maude, Cletus, and Nigel, but Franklin's were just awful. And again, MICHAEL HAS NO SIDE MISSIONS LOL, excluding the Epsilon Program (no real explanation why Michael would engage in cult practice, would have made more sense if it was given to someone like Trevor) and the ones given to other characters. 

  • NinjaWJ and nobum62 like this

Crewnordin
  • Crewnordin

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012

#349

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:13 AM

You're are the type of people I certainly do not want to go with watching a movie. I know a good youtube channel for you annoying people.

http://www.youtube.c...JyetJ5e52-b95PM

 

Btw: I can actually see a lot of you people judge things like on that youtube vid.


Drunken Cowboy
  • Drunken Cowboy

    A Young Filipino Boy Playing Hands-Free Catch-the-Quarter

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013
  • United-States
  • Best Topic 2013 "The Identity Crisis: The Problems with V's story."

#350

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:18 AM

You're are the type of people I certainly do not want to go with watching a movie. I know a good youtube channel for you annoying people.

http://www.youtube.c...JyetJ5e52-b95PM

 

Btw: I can actually see a lot of you people judge things like on that youtube vid.

 

 

So if we perceive things as inadequate, we can't take a moment to point out and question those flaws EVEN WHEN we supply proper evidence to an argument?

 

You don't like criticism or negativity? Whoa boy, the world's gonna be a hard place for you, man.


nobum62
  • nobum62

    Douchebag who owns a chromed Furore GT

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013
  • Canada

#351

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:25 AM Edited by nobum62, 13 November 2013 - 01:26 AM.

You're are the type of people I certainly do not want to go with watching a movie. I know a good youtube channel for you annoying people.

http://www.youtube.c...JyetJ5e52-b95PM

 

Btw: I can actually see a lot of you people judge things like on that youtube vid.

you're on a motherf*cking forum. if you don't like opinions, then as that south park skier said, you're gonna have a bad time on this forum

  • Drunken Cowboy likes this

Crewnordin
  • Crewnordin

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012

#352

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:29 AM

 

You're are the type of people I certainly do not want to go with watching a movie. I know a good youtube channel for you annoying people.

http://www.youtube.c...JyetJ5e52-b95PM

 

Btw: I can actually see a lot of you people judge things like on that youtube vid.

 

 

So if we perceive things as inadequate, we can't take a moment to point out and question those flaws EVEN WHEN we supply proper evidence to an argument?

 

You don't like criticism or negativity? Whoa boy, the world's gonna be a hard place for you, man.

 

 

Have you even seen the video I posted. Have you even seen the channel. I was trying to proof a point that EVERY highly rated movie had flaws in them. Every goddamn story in gta, or any games in particular has flaws. Because without the flaws, you could not make a good story. Yeah,, maybe killing Johnny was a little bit over the top,, but you know what,, it worked cause it got people talking about Trevor and his character.


nobum62
  • nobum62

    Douchebag who owns a chromed Furore GT

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013
  • Canada

#353

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:32 AM

 

 

You're are the type of people I certainly do not want to go with watching a movie. I know a good youtube channel for you annoying people.

http://www.youtube.c...JyetJ5e52-b95PM

 

Btw: I can actually see a lot of you people judge things like on that youtube vid.

 

 

So if we perceive things as inadequate, we can't take a moment to point out and question those flaws EVEN WHEN we supply proper evidence to an argument?

 

You don't like criticism or negativity? Whoa boy, the world's gonna be a hard place for you, man.

 

 

Have you even seen the video I posted. Have you even seen the channel. I was trying to proof a point that EVERY highly rated movie had flaws in them. Every goddamn story in gta, or any games in particular has flaws. Because without the flaws, you could not make a good story. Yeah,, maybe killing Johnny was a little bit over the top,, but you know what,, it worked cause it got people talking about Trevor and his character.

 

yes every movie or game has flaws, but this isn't really relevant

  • Drunken Cowboy likes this

spamtackey
  • spamtackey

    Business Socks

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

#354

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:37 AM

 

 


 

But this was THE game. One of the longest-developed GTA games. I'm not sure about other people, (probably the minority here AGAIN), but I appreciate a good single-player more than the multiplayer.

 

The only mission counters it out-does is the Stories and the Episodes. Rockstar never advertised the Stories games as full-fledged, just more-or-less nice additions... which they were. Hell, they've almost COMPLETELY forgotten about the Stories today. 

 

The Episodes, I think it's pretty damn amazing we regard them with such high honor as to even call them their own games. They were DLC, they were released on the PSN and XBOX Marketplace, unlike the Stories games that retailed in stores.

 

The fact that twenty-some missions gave TLaD and TBoGT such following shows you how capable Rockstar is to tell an amazing story with dynamic characters in such a small window, let alone integrate them so well into IV. Given my endless posting on the topic, and profile picture, and signature, blah blah blah, it's no doubt I relished TLaD's story more than V's, but I would even put Gay Tony up there above V. Gay Tony was the "screw it. We made two serious stories for the IV era, let's just have fun with this one." Which is what Gay Tony presented itself as, and I appreciated it for that. All the missions were action-packed and over the top stupid fun.

 

Back to the "identity crisis". V presented itself as a bit more of a serious game. Michael would be the bourgeois bank-robber, Franklin the street gangster, and Trevor the back-woods psycho-path. But no. In those 69 missions, what did we get? Going to stores and buying masks. About 10 missions TOTAL of BOTH Trevor and Franklin doing their respective missions in their settings, and just throwing them into the robbery mix with Michael. Then we had the over-the-top missions, like the Splinter Cell world-terrorism chemical f*cking thing or whatever, which technically wasn't even a "heist" mission this game was themed around. It would have been nice if at least the side-activities were the over-the-top whacko missions, while the story kept a serious tone.

 

But no. Engaging in triathlons with bitchy feminists. Tailing celebrities with obnoxious California-esc douches. Towing cars FIVE TIMES with that insufferable Tonya. A lot of these characters, Mary-Ann, Tonya, Dom, Beverly, Josh, they weren't interesting or giving reasons to sympathize with them. I didn't even "love to hate" them. They were just irritating and insipid, like the missions they provided. The more interesting missions were Trevor's back-country buddies, like Maude, Cletus, and Nigel, but Franklin's were just awful. And again, MICHAEL HAS NO SIDE MISSIONS LOL, excluding the Epsilon Program (no real explanation why Michael would engage in cult practice, would have made more sense if it was given to someone like Trevor) and the ones given to other characters. 

 

 

I think they were hoping to pull a Vice City with it. Vice City has fewer main story missions than GTA III, and then we really pick and choose which property to buy (except the required ones like Print Works) and go from there. In V we have fewer story missions but quite a few of the Strangers and Freaks. The main story was mostly about Michael so they gave Franklin and Trevor more side missions. It ends up having a solid length to it where it's not super-short like some people exaggerate, but it's not quite as long as we would like or it could be. I wonder how much they ended up cutting out of the game of the original script.

 

Speaking of Tonya, is it just me or does almost every character in Franklin's story criticize him for not being gangsta enough? Tonya does it, Lamar does it, Stretch does it, even Franklin's aunt does it. Tanisha kinda does the opposite I guess and the guy they kidnap never brings it up... Uhh Simeon I guess doesn't... uhh who else is in Franklin's story... uhh I can't remember anyone else. It just seems a little overdone to me. They did it in SA too with Sweet at the end of the game. Is that the only way Rockstar knows how to write gangsta stuff? 


mastershake616
  • mastershake616

    The Wolf of BAWSAQ

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2013

#355

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:38 AM

 

 


 

 

You're an idiot because you don't understand that the term takes on different meaning from medium to medium. Gaming is unlike any other, because you're in control of the story. You're writing the book. 

 

"In media..." is a gross overgeneralization that only tells me that your artistic disposition is narrow-minded and biased; you see all as one, and that's your biggest mistake. A movie is not the same as a video game. A book is not the same as a movie. 

 

If you put a book down for two weeks, the story isn't halted. It's still there, on paper. If you rewind a film, the events aren't occurring backwards. When you f*ck around in free mode or turn a game off, the story has been halted. The things that happen aren't going to happen unless you initiate the events. And if said events are to be initiated, how you go about completing the events and the rate in which you do them is up to you, not scripted in any particular way.

 

You cannot change the way the Godfather is told. You cannot manipulate the events of the story. You can't kill Holden at the end of Catcher in the Rye. If I rewind the latest episode of SVU on my DVR, the detectives aren't solving a case and then releasing the suspect to go rape again. 

 

If I let Michael get shot in the head in the first mission and never return to the game again, that's that. Michael's dead and that's how the story ends. This shouldn't be news to YOU, an outspoken proponent of, uh, "experience." You felt dirty after killing one of the McCreary brothers, no? Some don't feel that way; some don't care at all; some killed Derrick so that they may reap the benefits of using Francis to clear wanted levels. The time that it takes one to finish a game, a mission, or whatever the f*ck it may be is as subjective as the reactions they have to the events of the story. 

 

 

Let me put it this way: If i turned the Godfather off after Vito got shot, I would be laughed out of any movie discussion for saying "When Vito was shot and died." 

 

 

You're an idiot because you don't understand that the term takes on different meaning from medium to medium. Gaming is unlike any other, because you're in control of the story. You're writing the book. 

 

Reading is key. 

 

 

 Maybe in the future your desire for a videogame where we decide how the story goes will be possible, but it isn't right now. 

 

You've gotta be kidding me. Any shred of credibility you may have had (personally, I've yet to discover one) disappears with another one of your moronic misfires. You even mentioned Metroid in your argument-- the f*cking game that gave birth to the concept of sequence breaking and experiencing the story in an entirely unique perspective. The last two GTA titles have given the player the power of choice several times throughout the story. 

 

You write your own story; the fate is in the hands of the player. What happens next has to unlocked, earned. If you don't have the skill or the will to advance, that's where YOUR story comes to an end. This applies to games, and, I dunno, those f*cking "Choose Your Own Adventure" books? 

 

Learn how to properly articulate your points, numbnuts. Suddenly your "overly" long take isn't looking so bad...


Crewnordin
  • Crewnordin

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012

#356

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:43 AM

@Nobum

 

Yes it is relevant because you annoying pointdexters keep telling us that this story is not good because it had flaws. But it need flaws otherwise it would be boring. Do you really think they could rob a store three times and not get caught? Like, come on give me a break. Just accept how it is. By your logic, The dark night is not a good movie.


NinjaWJ
  • NinjaWJ

    Just trying to get by

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2008

#357

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:46 AM

@Nobum

 

Yes it is relevant because you annoying pointdexters keep telling us that this story is not good because it had flaws. But it need flaws otherwise it would be boring. Do you really think they could rob a store three times and not get caught? Like, come on give me a break. Just accept how it is. By your logic, The dark night is not a good movie.

 well not everyone has to agree that dark knight was a good movie


NinjaWJ
  • NinjaWJ

    Just trying to get by

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2008

#358

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:50 AM

 

 

 


 

 

You're an idiot because you don't understand that the term takes on different meaning from medium to medium. Gaming is unlike any other, because you're in control of the story. You're writing the book. 

 

"In media..." is a gross overgeneralization that only tells me that your artistic disposition is narrow-minded and biased; you see all as one, and that's your biggest mistake. A movie is not the same as a video game. A book is not the same as a movie. 

 

If you put a book down for two weeks, the story isn't halted. It's still there, on paper. If you rewind a film, the events aren't occurring backwards. When you f*ck around in free mode or turn a game off, the story has been halted. The things that happen aren't going to happen unless you initiate the events. And if said events are to be initiated, how you go about completing the events and the rate in which you do them is up to you, not scripted in any particular way.

 

You cannot change the way the Godfather is told. You cannot manipulate the events of the story. You can't kill Holden at the end of Catcher in the Rye. If I rewind the latest episode of SVU on my DVR, the detectives aren't solving a case and then releasing the suspect to go rape again. 

 

If I let Michael get shot in the head in the first mission and never return to the game again, that's that. Michael's dead and that's how the story ends. This shouldn't be news to YOU, an outspoken proponent of, uh, "experience." You felt dirty after killing one of the McCreary brothers, no? Some don't feel that way; some don't care at all; some killed Derrick so that they may reap the benefits of using Francis to clear wanted levels. The time that it takes one to finish a game, a mission, or whatever the f*ck it may be is as subjective as the reactions they have to the events of the story. 

 

 

Let me put it this way: If i turned the Godfather off after Vito got shot, I would be laughed out of any movie discussion for saying "When Vito was shot and died." 

 

 

You're an idiot because you don't understand that the term takes on different meaning from medium to medium. Gaming is unlike any other, because you're in control of the story. You're writing the book. 

 

Reading is key. 

 

 

 Maybe in the future your desire for a videogame where we decide how the story goes will be possible, but it isn't right now. 

 

You've gotta be kidding me. Any shred of credibility you may have had (personally, I've yet to discover one) disappears with another one of your moronic misfires. You even mentioned Metroid in your argument-- the f*cking game that gave birth to the concept of sequence breaking and experiencing the story in an entirely unique perspective. The last two GTA titles have given the player the power of choice several times throughout the story. 

 

You write your own story; the fate is in the hands of the player. What happens next has to unlocked, earned. If you don't have the skill or the will to advance, that's where YOUR story comes to an end. This applies to games, and, I dunno, those f*cking "Choose Your Own Adventure" books? 

 

Learn how to properly articulate your points, numbnuts. Suddenly your "overly" long take isn't looking so bad...

 

 I think you just contradicted yourself. The story is still there in the book if you stop reading, but a video game story is also still there when you stop playing! Initiating the events through playing a video game is like the same thing as turning the pages in the book. The story is on the pages just like how a game's story is stored on the disc. I think you are talking about pace in terms of how the user interacts with the product. Spamtackey is referring to how the product interacts with the user. What if GTAV gave you a rocket launcher in the first mission of the game, how about if you murder Steve Haines in the opening cutscene? Yeah its true that YOUR pace of the game is slow if you only play for like 1 hour a week, but that doesn't stop the game's pace being dictated TO YOU! You will still get the RPG in the first mission, or robbing the Union Depository in the first mission.

 

 

But a video game has canon too..... sure you are interacting with the video game, but arnt you interacting with the book by turning its pages?


spamtackey
  • spamtackey

    Business Socks

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

#359

Posted 13 November 2013 - 02:09 AM Edited by spamtackey, 13 November 2013 - 02:12 AM.

 

 

 

You're an idiot because you don't understand that the term takes on different meaning from medium to medium. Gaming is unlike any other, because you're in control of the story. You're writing the book. 

 

Reading is key. 

 

 

 Maybe in the future your desire for a videogame where we decide how the story goes will be possible, but it isn't right now. 

 

You've gotta be kidding me. Any shred of credibility you may have had (personally, I've yet to discover one) disappears with another one of your moronic misfires. You even mentioned Metroid in your argument-- the f*cking game that gave birth to the concept of sequence breaking and experiencing the story in an entirely unique perspective. The last two GTA titles have given the player the power of choice several times throughout the story. 

 

You write your own story; the fate is in the hands of the player. What happens next has to unlocked, earned. If you don't have the skill or the will to advance, that's where YOUR story comes to an end. This applies to games, and, I dunno, those f*cking "Choose Your Own Adventure" books? 

 

Learn how to properly articulate your points, numbnuts. Suddenly your "overly" long take isn't looking so bad...

 

 

We're not talking about "oh I can do what I want in the gameplay." The developer still has intentions and they still create the game intending for certain things to happen at certain moments. We can sequence break in Metroid but the developer doesn't design it to be a "Go where you want to find what you want" kind of game (maybe the first one but even then I assume they set things up to be found in a certain order). Usually, they make it so we search to find the tool they hid for us to find so we can open the next area. We can't find the key for Area 5 in Area 1 unless they place it there or unless we break way from what the game intends. It's akin to reading a book backwards and considering the final chapter to be chapter 1 in reality.  

 

There are games that let you choose the story but it's still not our story. I can't make Niko shoot Dimitri and have the end credits roll with a happily ever after ending. We're still on rails. We still meet Brucie at the same point in the story. We still have to go on a date with Michelle. Ending the game early and claiming it is canon is the same thing as ending a movie early and considering it canon. No matter what they have a beginning middle and end and it's still there waiting for you to come back to it once you gain the skill to get past whatever challenge is holding you off. You can't go into a story discussion about a game series and use your experience as the actual canon for the game. My storyline for GTA IV is not canon it's only a possible canon. If Rockstar validated the Revenge ending as canon I could say nothing about it. It's their story. I can't change their story. I can't change their game. I can't unlock the second island in Vice City or the other cities in San Andreas early. It's their choice when these things come into play and that has an element of pacing to it. 

 

"Oh Samus never killed a boss because I skipped it in my sequence break". No, in-canon she killed the boss. You broke the game and avoided the boss just like I can skip a chapter on the Godfather DVD if I don't want to watch a character die. It doesn't stop them from dying. Even in the choose your adventure books and visual novel games, which are based entirely around choice, we are still at the mercy of the writers and what they decide. A choice we make may have completely different consequences because the writer's interpretation of the choice is different. I played a horrible Visual Novel once where every choice I made the character ended up warping to some kind of depressing story until they lost every friend they had despite my attempting to keep the friends and look on the bright side. The writers had different ideas. These choices were positive when I picked them, things like taking the advice of a friend wishing me well, but the character would take that and turn it around in a way I didn't want to when I made the choice.

 

There will always be an interactive element to the game, but you're giving it more credit than it deserves. A lot of what you're saying can be done with games can be done in other mediums too. It's called Fan Fiction. Only instead of blowing small paragraphs and descriptions or small scenes in movies out of proportion to mean something that they didn't mean so you can ignore the story, you're using the gameplay of the game to ignore the story. 

  • Drunken Cowboy likes this

nobum62
  • nobum62

    Douchebag who owns a chromed Furore GT

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013
  • Canada

#360

Posted 13 November 2013 - 02:11 AM

@Nobum

 

Yes it is relevant because you annoying pointdexters keep telling us that this story is not good because it had flaws. But it need flaws otherwise it would be boring. Do you really think they could rob a store three times and not get caught? Like, come on give me a break. Just accept how it is. By your logic, The dark night is not a good movie.

gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. gta 5's story kinda sucked. 

 

dude, discussing about gta 5's story (or any story) is fun





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users