Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

That....Was Disturbing. I Am Not Sure If I Enjoyed It. *SPOILERS*

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
54 replies to this topic
FilthyLittleGod
  • FilthyLittleGod

    Post Constructor

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2017
  • Canada

#1

Posted 2 weeks ago

Well, I just had to brutally torture a guy as Trevor.

And I'm not sure how I feel about it.

I was surprised that I was not given a choice to refuse torturing or another option or means to get the information.

I felt powerless.

I didn't WANT to torture him.

It was weird.

It reminded me of the ending of Last Of Us when you are in that hospital room finally saving Ellie and you HAVE to kill the three medical technicians in the room.

That was a weird experience.

I'm not going to lie, I'm kind of shaken up!

How did you guys feel about this part of the game?
  • Lioshenka and Neon_Dreaming like this

CGFforLife
  • CGFforLife

    GTA V:A Huge improvement over snore (GTA IV)

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2017
  • Indonesia

#2

Posted 2 weeks ago

Well torturing him was fun for me, hearing his scream was also really satisfying
  • BurnettVice and FilthyLittleGod like this

Neon_Dreaming
  • Neon_Dreaming

    __________

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Jul 2016
  • None

#3

Posted 2 weeks ago

It's good that you found the mission disturbing, I think that was what the game was going for. During missions and freeroam there are plenty of fatalities at the hands of Michael, Trevor, and Franklin and the player doesn't really notice anymore. Here though it is slow and brutal, it makes you think about what the mission is asking you to do, it feels nasty and uncomfortable. It shows how brutal both Trevor and Steve Hains are.

While at the same time the info you extracted apparently led to a terrorist being killed. If the rogue FIB agents were right about the terrorist Michael killed then they perhaps averted a potential terrorist attack. I'm quite criticial of V and it's story but this was a good mission. It brings to mind the black sites the US military have abroad where they torture alleged terrorists and the morality of such actions.
  • ChiroVette and FilthyLittleGod like this

StangOne50
  • StangOne50

    BEASTMODE

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 May 2013
  • United-States

#4

Posted 2 weeks ago

Just imagine its someone you really dont like. Then it becomes quite enjoyable lol

  • SmokesWithCigs and FilthyLittleGod like this

gunziness
  • gunziness

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2010
  • Argentina

#5

Posted 2 weeks ago

You can just keep switching between electrocuting him and pouring water on his face, those are the less painful ones and leave no scars or missing teeth.
  • FilthyLittleGod likes this

Cheatz_N_Trickz
  • Cheatz_N_Trickz

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2013

#6

Posted 2 weeks ago

Maybe you shouldnt be playing games like GTA or TLOU if you are this sensitive. That goes for all the people who criticised this part of the game.
  • theGTAking101, Brian_O_Malley and FilthyLittleGod like this

FilthyLittleGod
  • FilthyLittleGod

    Post Constructor

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2017
  • Canada

#7

Posted 2 weeks ago Edited by FilthyLittleGod, 2 weeks ago.

Maybe you shouldnt be playing games like GTA or TLOU if you are this sensitive. That goes for all the people who criticised this part of the game.

No, I'm good!

I'm not a wimp!

It was just...shocking.

It was like 2 in the morning.

I was exhausted / had a bad day / was quite baked (lol).

I actually applaud the game makers for being that gutsy and intense..

Was not trying to criticize!

LOVING everything about GTA5 so far!

Loved Last of Us!

A lot.

Again, NOT criticizing!

@neon_dreaming

Posted 10 hours ago
It's good that you found the mission disturbing, I think that was what the game was going for. During missions and freeroam there are plenty of fatalities at the hands of Michael, Trevor, and Franklin and the player doesn't really notice anymore. Here though it is slow and brutal, it makes you think about what the mission is asking you to do, it feels nasty and uncomfortable. It shows how brutal both Trevor and Steve Hains are.


Excellent point!

Nico
  • Nico

    Doctor doctor, what is wrong with me?

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2010
  • None

#8

Posted 2 weeks ago

I have played the mission only once, during my only playthrough of the game in 2015. I already had prior knowledge of the scene, I got to play the game when it was released on PC a long while after the initial release so I already had the major details of the story spoiled. It's rare, because I consider myself a sensitive person and often loud discussions like the one with Debra and Floyd, or the ones between Michael and Trevor annoyed me a bit, but the torture scene didn't bother me at all. And I didn't choose the "lighter" methods of torture, like gunziness suggested. Either way, I can understand why some people wouldn't want to play such mission.
  • FilthyLittleGod likes this

Sauce béarnaise
  • Sauce béarnaise

    best served with a juicy steak

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 May 2014
  • Fiji

#9

Posted 2 weeks ago

Couldn't give a flying f*** to be honest. I can differentiate video games and reality. This has me not shocked in the slightest, but for the sake of Kerimov I only waterboarded him 3 times. In fact I was surprised his dialogue was still pin point the same and he was mumbling when driven back to the airport though none of his teeth were pulled out.

  • Brian_O_Malley and FilthyLittleGod like this

GTAFanClub
  • GTAFanClub

    @Bully2Info

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014
  • United-States

#10

Posted 2 weeks ago

It didn't bother me because I violently shoot and run over innocent people everytime I play GTA so torturing isn't much worse.

  • Brian_O_Malley and FilthyLittleGod like this

FilthyLittleGod
  • FilthyLittleGod

    Post Constructor

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2017
  • Canada

#11

Posted 2 weeks ago

Yeah, I'm no stranger to violence in video games / films / etc by any means.

I'm not sure why exactly I found this so personally disturbing...

Sauce béarnaise
  • Sauce béarnaise

    best served with a juicy steak

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 May 2014
  • Fiji

#12

Posted 2 weeks ago

Yeah, I'm no stranger to violence in video games / films / etc by any means.

I'm not sure why exactly I found this so personally disturbing...

If you were baked it explains a lot ^^ depends what kinda high you been having your mood/feelings that day

  • FilthyLittleGod likes this

dyspoid
  • dyspoid

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2011

#13

Posted 2 weeks ago

I have to admit that if I was super baked I would probably find it kind of confronting.

Algonquin Assassin
  • Algonquin Assassin

    We're all looking for that special someone

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Most Obsessive Name Changer 2016 (My unofficial GTAF annual award)
    Biggest Fanboy 2013, 2014, 2015
    Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Member in the OGA 2012

#14

Posted 2 weeks ago

The only part that made me squint was using the wrench to smash Mr K in the balls or knee. Other than that it was pretty tame as far as "torture" goes IMO.

  • assCRACK_98, Detective Phelps and Brian_O_Malley like this

Pedinhuh
  • Pedinhuh

    Get down on it!

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jun 2014
  • Brazil

#15

Posted 2 weeks ago Edited by Pedinhuh, A week ago.

I felt like that part of the game, that specific mission, didn't add anything remotely relevant to the storyline at all.

We already knew Steve Haines was a douchebag.

We already knew Trevor was crazy.

We already knew the FIB and the IAA was corrupt.

The terrorist we kill at the end of the mission, leaves not a single repercussion to the characters at all, only a mere news article on the Internet.

And Mr. K, well he tripped down a flight of stairs and we never heard of him again...Did he fell on his neck and died? Did the FIB have found him? Did the IAAF found him? Did he managed to get to his family?
Not a single word about him later, nada.

Sure enough, the mission did its job to sell the narrative that torture is wrong, and I agree with that, but that really came out of nowhere and didn't add nothing new to story.
I could even say it was ham fisted in there, just cause 'muh social commentary'.


Also, I felt like the torture wasn't disgusting at all(it was kind of soft, really), hell I kill a lot of people with molotovs everytime I play with Trevor.

Also everytime I play that mission I only hit the man once, then I drive to Chumash and kill the target without needing to torture the man any further.
  • Lioshenka, Algonquin Assassin, Cutter De Blanc and 1 other like this

ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#16

Posted A week ago Edited by ChiroVette, A week ago.

Maybe you shouldnt be playing games like GTA or TLOU if you are this sensitive. That goes for all the people who criticised this part of the game.

 

I think that lumping all people who have criticisms of this mission into the same hypersensitive category is a little myopic. There are some valid criticisms of this mission, which I will get into in a moment, that have nothing to do with being sensitive to the content.

 

 

I felt like that part of the game, that specific mission, didn't add anything remotely relevant to the storyline at all.

 

Its more than that, though, because torture, in and of itself, absolutely could have added to the story. I don't think its wrong or a bad idea to use a torture scene to elucidate what a maniac Trevor is and what a callous, unfeeling douchebag Haines is.

 

However, the mission itself is problematic for several reasons:

 

First, Trevor's little lecture at the end of the mission to Mr. K about how Torture is not an effective means of extracting information. That is an absurd urban legend based on one fact taken too far. The fact of the matter is that on 99.999% of the population, even the mere threat of physical discomfiture is enough to get them to cough up any information you may want from them. Actually going as far as to start pulling teeth, breaking bones, using electric shock, and waterboarding will easily entice most people to give you any info you want from them. It is a common thing to spit out in the media that "Torture is not an effective means of extracting information," but the problem is that most people regurgitating this little aphorism forget the second, and most important part. "Torture is not an effective means of extracting information with people who are highly trained operatives who have had extensive training in resisting advanced interrogation techniques."

 

Navy Seals, Delta Force, CIA Black Ops, Israeli Mossad, even Al Qaeda operatives who have been tortured, as part of their training, can resist being tortured. But most people are NOT in this category, and torture, would, thus, be highly effective.

 

This brings me to my second criticism of this mission, in that Mr K is not a high level Al Quaeda operative. He was whinging, crying, and begging the whole time, something an operative would never do, unless he was faking it. Which clearly he was not, given that once he was in the car with Trevor afterward, he continued blubbering and begging. He also had no Earthly idea why Trevor was saving his life by making him leave Los Santos and disappear off the grid, something any operative would have completely understood. Given all the context of both that mission and all the other encounters with Mr K, it is very clear that this guy was either exactly what he said he was, a regular guys with "dark skin" who installed home theater, and had no terrorist affiliation, but simply had some information he came across because of associates or friends. If he was an operative at all, given his personality, affect, and responses to all that was happening to him, he was very low level, and would certainly not have had the training to withstand FOUR separate torture events simultaneously, only giving it up in dips and drabs with each attack, before coughing up the information he did actually have. He would have given it much more easily, maybe a couple of punches to the face or stomach. But no way he withstands the punishment Trevor doles out before giving up the guy with the beard who chains-mokes lol.

 

He also had a wife and kids, something that if he really was a high level operative or terrorist would be a no-no. And certainly even if he had a fictitious family for cover reasons, or blending in, any operative would leave them in a minute when Trevor informed him he needed to disappear.

 

The problem with the torture scene isn't that there is torture, its that it comes off as trying too hard to be edgy and like Rockstar was so desperate to add a torture scene for, as they put it, "social commentary," that they never bothered to make the scene congruous with the rest of the story, or even with any form of narrative cohesion.

 

I also find it annoying that in a GTA game, they had to try so hard to be edgy, that they abandoned all sense of storytelling to do it. I mean, when the hell has GTA ever needed to try hard to be edgy or to use social commentary? GTA, since its inception, has lived on the edge. Even as far back as 2001, GTA III allowed players to slaughter law enforcement and innocent people, destroy ungodly amounts of public property, and be able to do it without any legal reprisals. Hot Coffee in San Andreas was edgy, and not only did they not try and put it in people's faces, like the torture scene in V, they actually hid it in the game so it would not be found by most.

 

The idea that Rockstar has to try this hard to be edgy is ridiculous. They were the first company to truly allow the kinds of unbridled freedom to cause chaos. It may not seem edgy now, because everyone copied them from Volition to Team Soho to Avalanche and on and on, but being the first to do it was incredibly edgy.

 

Finally, the biggest problem with the torture scene is that they did it in a way that was pointless. As I said, Mr K would have given the information, since he was a tech guy and family man, not a high level operative. Moreover, Rockstar cold have used the torture of Mr K a lot more effectively and actually had players get behind it. Knowing that, unlike our normal, rampaging antics in GTA on the streets, torture is much more intimately violent and brutal, why didn't they just make Mr K exactly what he was actually accused of?

 

I mean, with the political climate and terrorism in the news every day, why not just make Mr K a high level operative and terrorist? Why not make him an Al Quaeda member, captured from a cell, detained, and tortured for information he actually had? Then it would be both believable that he resisted the first THREE tortures and only caved on the 4th with the most important info, rather than letting it out in drips and drabs, but it would also be more fun for the player than torturing an innocent guy.

 

I mean, would anyone have an objection to a fantasy torture of an actual, real-live terrorist?

  • Lioshenka, Cutter De Blanc and FilthyLittleGod like this

FilthyLittleGod
  • FilthyLittleGod

    Post Constructor

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2017
  • Canada

#17

Posted A week ago

@chirovette

Excellent post!

*standing ovation*

What did you mean about the Hot Coffee / San Andreas thing?
  • Lioshenka likes this

Cheatz_N_Trickz
  • Cheatz_N_Trickz

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2013

#18

Posted A week ago

I think that lumping all people who have criticisms of this mission into the same hypersensitive category is a little myopic. There are some valid criticisms of this mission, which I will get into in a moment, that have nothing to do with being sensitive to the content.


What valid criticisms? They're all crap and hypocritical, by stuck up idiots who just want to appear like they are speaking out for what is right.

Reminds me of the racial BS RE5 got in 2009.
  • Brian_O_Malley and FilthyLittleGod like this

FilthyLittleGod
  • FilthyLittleGod

    Post Constructor

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2017
  • Canada

#19

Posted A week ago

God forums are nightmarish on mobile devices sometimes!

Anyhoo...

@chirovette

why didn't they just make Mr K exactly what he was actually accused of?


Weren't they trying to make a point about how many perfectly innocent but "dark skinned" people have been snatched up and tortured at black sites by government employee psychopaths?

dyspoid
  • dyspoid

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2011

#20

Posted A week ago

God forums are nightmarish on mobile devices sometimes!

Anyhoo...

@chirovette

why didn't they just make Mr K exactly what he was actually accused of?

Weren't they trying to make a point about how many perfectly innocent but "dark skinned" people have been snatched up and tortured at black sites by government employee psychopaths?

This guy hit the nail on the head.

Additionally, Trevor's sentiment stands true. Torture was not needed, it was just a short sighted tactic used by Haines and carried out by Trevor. They could have spied on the guy, hacked his devices, checked the legitimacy of his claims and so on.

But no - they just picked him up on a hunch and tortured him because they thought it would be an easier way of extracting information.
  • FilthyLittleGod likes this

FilthyLittleGod
  • FilthyLittleGod

    Post Constructor

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2017
  • Canada

#21

Posted A week ago

@chirovette

I just did some San Andreas googling:

IMG_1629.jpg

ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#22

Posted A week ago Edited by ChiroVette, A week ago.

God forums are nightmarish on mobile devices sometimes!

Anyhoo...
 

@chirovette

why didn't they just make Mr K exactly what he was actually accused of?
 


Weren't they trying to make a point about how many perfectly innocent but "dark skinned" people have been snatched up and tortured at black sites by government employee psychopaths?

 

 

 

Yes, but what makes it so poorly thought out is that this Mr K, after being abducted, threatened, brutally beaten and detained at FIB headquarters was then transferred to an abandoned warehouse to be tortured for information, and my contention is the fact that he was innocent BUT had the information that the FIB wanted made it ridiculous that he held out so long before giving up the information. What makes the mission dumb isn't even that they tortured an innocent guy. As you said, they can be explained as you elucidated. But you really have to ask yourself why a terrified, beaten, detained, blubbering  family man would not have simply given the information a lot sooner. The answer is, he would have rendering the torture mission moot.

 

The only information he had was that the target was a bearded, chain-smoking guy in a Chumash party. That's what makes the mission so dumb. He would have given that up long before that mission. He would have told them at FIB headquarters just to make them stop abusing him. He would not have had to be dragged, bound and gagged to a warehouse to be tortured was my point.

 

That's why this is such a dumb mission. Because clearly Rockstar was tripping all over themselves trying to appear edgy and show how socially conscious they are.

 

 

 

I think that lumping all people who have criticisms of this mission into the same hypersensitive category is a little myopic. There are some valid criticisms of this mission, which I will get into in a moment, that have nothing to do with being sensitive to the content.


What valid criticisms? They're all crap and hypocritical, by stuck up idiots who just want to appear like they are speaking out for what is right.

Reminds me of the racial BS RE5 got in 2009.

 

 

Valid criticisms like I laid out. I agree that the hypocrites in the media are, as always, full of sh*t when it comes to content, and the overly sensitive gamers you refer to simply shouldn't be playing a game like GTA in the first place, and problem solved. But there are legitimate criticisms of the mission itself that have NOTHING whatsoever to do with sensitivity. I, for instance, think it was a poorly designed and dumb way to introduce torture into the game. There is no reason a GTA game can't deal with torture, rape, racism, or whatever. But I see the torture scene as wasted opportunity to have a good torture scene, all because Rockstar was so desperate to put it in there, they implemented it in a lackluster manner.

 

So, while you can freely disagree with my assertion, I proved that not every critic of that mission is "hypersensitive," which was your original allegation.

  • Cutter De Blanc and Galehaut like this

FilthyLittleGod
  • FilthyLittleGod

    Post Constructor

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2017
  • Canada

#23

Posted A week ago

@chirovette

Ah, I understand now, thanks for the excellent reply.

Cheatz_N_Trickz
  • Cheatz_N_Trickz

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2013

#24

Posted A week ago

So, while you can freely disagree with my assertion, I proved that not every critic of that mission is "hypersensitive," which was your original allegation.


I said OP was maybe sensitive. But hypersensitive? Why you've put that in quote marks as though it came from me, when it actually came from you, is puzzling. There is a big difference between those words.

I never said that every criticism of this mission was related to sensitivity, that is just you arriving at conclusions, you proved nothing. When I say that it goes for everyone who criticised that part of the game right after suggesting (not accusing) OP was a bit sensitive, it should be obvious that the latter part of my comment is regarding criticisms stemming from the aforementioned sensitivity issues. Not criticisms such as yours, which are seperate and relate more to the creative reasoning behind the mission. I shouldn't need to make that distinction.

You said there were valid criticisms, but these are just your own personal issues which are frankly completely irrelevant. I was referencing the criticisms in the media, and they are as I said, all hypocritical and crap. No media criticises the mission or Rockstar for the reasons you do (at least, I havent seen that).

ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#25

Posted A week ago

 

So, while you can freely disagree with my assertion, I proved that not every critic of that mission is "hypersensitive," which was your original allegation.


I said OP was maybe sensitive. But hypersensitive? Why you've put that in quote marks as though it came from me, when it actually came from you, is puzzling. There is a big difference between those words.

I never said that every criticism of this mission was related to sensitivity, that is just you arriving at conclusions, you proved nothing. When I say that it goes for everyone who criticised that part of the game right after suggesting (not accusing) OP was a bit sensitive, it should be obvious that the latter part of my comment is regarding criticisms stemming from the aforementioned sensitivity issues. Not criticisms such as yours, which are seperate and relate more to the creative reasoning behind the mission. I shouldn't need to make that distinction.

You said there were valid criticisms, but these are just your own personal issues which are frankly completely irrelevant. I was referencing the criticisms in the media, and they are as I said, all hypocritical and crap. No media criticises the mission or Rockstar for the reasons you do (at least, I havent seen that).

 

 

When you said sensitive, you are really saying hypersensitive, BUT that is irrelevant, because the context of the two are the same, even though I misread your word as hypersensitive, my point is the same. Because either way, you are referring to sensitivity to this issue, and as I already said, I agree that anyone sensitive (or hypersensitive lol) enough to be disturbed by that scene should probably not be playing GTA games in the first place. Regardless of whether they are sensitive or hypersensitive.

 

This, on the other hand, is the only thing I was calling you on:

 

 

Maybe you shouldnt be playing games like GTA or TLOU if you are this sensitive. That goes for all the people who criticised this part of the game.

 

Its not my fault if your initial statement made it sound like every single person who has any criticism of that mission or, as you said, "that part of the game" gets painted with the same brush. Sorry, but that one's on you. The difference between you and I is at least I can admit I inadvertently mis-spoke when I accidentally interchanged "hypersensitive" with "sensitive" even though, in this context, in essence, the two words really mean the same thing. But you are the one who made it sound like no matter what the reason was, anyone who criticized this part of the game is "this sensitive," which was a bizarre assertion, as I proved.

 

Because there are criticisms of this mission that have nothing to do with sensitivity.


FilthyLittleGod
  • FilthyLittleGod

    Post Constructor

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2017
  • Canada

#26

Posted A week ago Edited by FilthyLittleGod, A week ago.

So...uh...should I be playing Grand Theft Auto 5 or not?

😊😭🤣😇

@chirovette @cheatz_n_trickz

Cheatz_N_Trickz
  • Cheatz_N_Trickz

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2013

#27

Posted A week ago Edited by Cheatz_N_Trickz, A week ago.

When you said sensitive, you are really saying hypersensitive,

No, I mean sensitive. It is your fault if you assume I mean every single criticism based off of a sentence that was in direct context with the previous one, which was entirely related to the OP and his apparent sensitivity because that is what his OP came off as.

I said it goes for all who criticised that part of the game: Yes, Chiro, what I said to OP about being sensitive to the violence of games like GTA and TLOU goes the same to all who criticised that part of the game....for the exact same reason I just said to the OP.

You straw manning your way to conclusions is your fault.

HaRdSTyLe_83
  • HaRdSTyLe_83

    ☆★RIP Open IV★☆

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2014
  • None

#28

Posted A week ago

 

Maybe you shouldnt be playing games like GTA or TLOU if you are this sensitive. That goes for all the people who criticised this part of the game.

No, I'm good!

I'm not a wimp!

It was just...shocking.

It was like 2 in the morning.

I was exhausted / had a bad day / was quite baked (lol).

I actually applaud the game makers for being that gutsy and intense..

Was not trying to criticize!

LOVING everything about GTA5 so far!

Loved Last of Us!

A lot.

Again, NOT criticizing

 

 

how cinical of you, how have you been playing so far in the game? you robbed, murdered and all other vicious crimes, yet you feel that torture was shocking.

it seems this days everyone wants to find a reason to be outraged about something in life


ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#29

Posted A week ago Edited by ChiroVette, A week ago.

 

When you said sensitive, you are really saying hypersensitive,

No, I mean sensitive. It is your fault if you assume I mean every single criticism based off of a sentence that was in direct context with the previous one, which was entirely related to the OP and his apparent sensitivity because that is what his OP came off as.

I said it goes for all who criticised that part of the game: Yes, Chiro, what I said to OP about being sensitive to the violence of games like GTA and TLOU goes the same to all who criticised that part of the game....for the exact same reason I just said to the OP.

You straw manning your way to conclusions is your fault.

 

 

 

LMAO You are too much!

 

Okay forget quibbling over sensitive versus hypersensitive. Because I already admitted I misread your original use of the word. So I am not sure why you are harping on that, unless you are trying to deflect from your mistake, when a plain text reading of your post yields and OBVIOUS meaning, you cannot accuse me of building a straw man.

 

Let's try this again (lol unless you want to keep talking about my use of hypersensitive versus sensitive to try and unsuccessfuly distract me);

 

You said this:

 

 

Maybe you shouldnt be playing games like GTA or TLOU if you are this sensitive. That goes for all the people who criticised this part of the game.

 

 

You simply cannot accuse me of a straw man argument when you, yourself, said, in perfectly clear wording, that your criticism of sensitivity applies to all people who criticize that mission. Particularly after I clearly delineated how I am in NO WAY sensitive to torture, nor are my criticisms of that scene in ANY WAY relevant to "sensitivity."

 

Seriously, can't you just admit that you misspoke and move on? Are you so desperate to "win" that you simply have no intrinsic ability to admit that a rational interpretation of your own words could lead someone to explain to you that not all criticisms of that part of the game are due to sensitivity? Are you really that obdurate?

  • slimeball supreme likes this

ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#30

Posted A week ago Edited by ChiroVette, A week ago.


 

how cinical of you, how have you been playing so far in the game? you robbed, murdered and all other vicious crimes, yet you feel that torture was shocking.

it seems this days everyone wants to find a reason to be outraged about something in life

 

 

First off, to the OP's credit, he did say he wasn't criticizing, which is valid. I think that you, and others in this thread, are harping on him expressing personal "distaste" and conflating that with him saying Rockstar was wrong for putting it in, a sentiment which I am well aware a lot of people have expressed. The problem you guys are having is that you are taking what FilthyLittleGod is saying waaaay too seriously. If he was one of the people actually complaining that this was a bad thing to put in the game, I would understand all of your points a lot more. 

 

All this guy did was start  discussion asking how others felt about this mission. Moreover, saying that he "wasn't sure how to feel about it" is not the same as saying that Rockstar was wrong or that the mission was bad. Also suggesting that he felt bad and lamented Rockstar not offering the player a way out of torturing is not even a criticism of the mission. All he is doing is expressing his personal tastes and that he has certain lines he draws in a game.

 

By the way, everyone is making a great deal about all the acts of debauchery that a player can commit in this game, but you are forgetting one, little thing: Torture is up close and personal. Whereas when you run around, really fast, rampaging through the streets, the carnage and damage you cause are at a distance, and this can easily desensitize the player to the actual damage they are causing (in the game, of course)

 

But if you cannot see how some people, maybe even a lot of people, would have more difficulty than you in making that leap from "hurting people from a distance" to doing it up close and intimately breaking bones and causing suffering, then maybe you should think about it a little more.

 

 

It isn't that you are wrong and he is right. Objectively, killing people is killing people, and you could actually make the argument that it is more brutal to slaughter dozens of people from a bit of a distance without any care than it is to actually torture someone. And you would be right. BUT what you are not factoring in is that there is a more in-your-face component to the brutality of torturing someone that is not there when you are taking up a siege against law enforcement. The point he was bringing out was not that there was any moral issue with the scene being in the game, like some people in the media have said, BUT that he personally found it more disturbing.

 

Also, NOT ONCE did he say that he stopped playing the game, would not play anymore GTA games, that Rockstar was wrong for adding it in the way they did, or that he would no longer send Dan Houser any Christmas cards because of this. All he expressed was that the scene had a profound emotional impact on him and that he found it disturbing.

 

By the way? Let's be clear, His reaction was precisely what Rockstar was trying to elicit in people!

 

Are you really going to bust the OP for reacting exactly the way Dan Houser wanted people to react? He and his writing team WANTED people to be disturbed by that scene. And that is exactly what FilthyLittleGod said he experienced. What you should have said was, "Cool, mission accomplished." Instead you called him names. lol

 

Edit: I just re-read the thread to see if I was taking anyone out of context, and I noticed that Neon_Dreaming hit the nail right on the head:

 

 

It's good that you found the mission disturbing, I think that was what the game was going for. During missions and freeroam there are plenty of fatalities at the hands of Michael, Trevor, and Franklin and the player doesn't really notice anymore. Here though it is slow and brutal, it makes you think about what the mission is asking you to do, it feels nasty and uncomfortable. It shows how brutal both Trevor and Steve Hains are.

While at the same time the info you extracted apparently led to a terrorist being killed. If the rogue FIB agents were right about the terrorist Michael killed then they perhaps averted a potential terrorist attack. I'm quite criticial of V and it's story but this was a good mission. It brings to mind the black sites the US military have abroad where they torture alleged terrorists and the morality of such actions.

 

He isn't attacking the OP for his "feelings," and is instead acknowledging that this was precisely the reaction that Dan Houser wanted to elicit.

 

 

 

  • slimeball supreme likes this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users