How much does the Story mean to you?

[spongeboob911]

A lot.

[Capricornus]

The story is a big and highly important part for me. I like to know a good amount about the character I am playing as. I also enjoy a great story.

[saintsrow]

 

This picture sums it up for me though:

 

All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy.

 

All Work

 

"All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy."

 

"All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy."

 

No Play

 

All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy.

 

All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy. All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy.

 

All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy.

 

All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy.

 

All play and no work makes Dan a dull boy.

 

[ugotsmoked]

Not much really, I will be heavily invested because I am not watching the story, I am doing the story. I decide how much I enjoy it.

[I<3GTAV]

The story is one of the most important things in the game to me. I love playing through and seeing what story Rockstar created.

[vivalavendredi]

The story makes (for me) 25% of the fun or maybe more. That's the reason I got bored in SA after reaching San Fierro in Storymode. I just didn't like it. In III the story wasn't that important to me because it was the first 3D-GTA but after that Vice City set the expectations very high.

 

IV for example had an awesome deep story, even with the connections between the 3 guys when playing IV EFLC. I hope V combines the best of all the 3D era GTAs.

[Verdant]

The story means so much to me, every Rockstar Game they put a lot of hard working into the story line and I am really looking forward to V's.

[zeppelincheetah]

It's the critical part. I would rather have a really really good story without San Andreas proportions of content than a really mediocre story with San Andreas x 3 content.

 

IMO GTA IV was the worst of both. Mediocre story, not much else to do. I'm hoping GTA V will be the best of both. At some point in the past I used to really care about the stories in GTA games because they were really good - GTA III, Vice City and San Andreas in particular were extremely enjoyable all the way through.

 

I don't have my expectations too high on the story because I have definitely been burned before. My favorite game on the Gamecube is a game called Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem . The gameplay is kind of clunky, the graphics are very outdated but the story is fantastic (ED is easily in my top 10 best games of all time) - that's what makes a game.

[thatstupidbug]

This picture means nothing. yeah, they put more effort and time in the script, but this doesn't create a good deep story. GTA IV TRIED so hard to create an emotional and deep storyline, but it failed becasue it was still trapped in the same formula of every other GTA (find a "boss" to wotk with - 3-5 missions - change boss - 3-5 missions ... etc etc).

 

little example: niko and michelle. There are a couple of boring missions (like "go bowling") with "boring" dialogue about niko's past (boring not because they make you fall asleep, but becuase there's less action and more dialogue...maybe boring isn't the right word, but let's move on).

 

What I want to say is that those "boring" missions would have been great as the start of a longer storyline and relationship, when niko fight between his dark past and his desire to find a new love. But unfortunately, there still was the 3-5 missions scheme, and after a (good) shot-out, Michelle simply disappear forever, leaving us with those "boring" cut-scenes that NOW are boring because they leads to nothing.

 

To sum up: to me, they wanted to create an emotional story, but since they were trapped with the old formula (with just 3-5 mission before move on the next boss) they were forced to put in every single cut-scene as much "dialogue" and "emotions" as possible, without the proper time to expand the story, creating an unbalanced experience in the story, with sudden changes between emotional sections, boring ("padding") sections and funny sections.

 

I don't think I'm just speculating here, because GTA V has, according to the previews, a more coherent storyline that will allows R* to put in every mission and cut-scenes the right balance of comedy and drama in. The formula of "different bosses" seems gone. and I dont' think it's a bad thing.

[JOSEPH X]

The story might be cliche and full of gangster/bank robber movies that we've all seen before. Nothing new there. The story should be there to serve the gameplay - that's how all the great games are made.

[zainzombie]

Story is very important to me because it gives the entire game a special feel. Like for example, GTA IV was serious and dark because the story and characters sets that tone up for the rest of the game and it sticks with you even when you freeroam. Same city felt so much different with TLAD with the whole biker gang feel to it and then when TBOGT came out the nightlife of Liberty City and all the colourful characters came to life giving the city yet another different feel to it.

 

Story definitely is important for me and like I mentioned it also complements the freeroam aspect of the game BUT freeroam is and will always will be the best part of the GTA, it is what makes GTA a GTA game. There is a reason why 70-80% of the threads here are discussing vehicles, clothing, police chases, city itself, countryside, underwater exploration etc. etc.

 

I really enjoyed the VC story and IMO that is the best one in gta games yet, (I am pretty sure V will surpass it easily) but I enjoyed SA more than VC because it had so much to do. This may be the first time I am really looking forward to the story of a GTA game.

[Chekoloco]

Story is 50% of game.... Freeroam the other 50%

[jamieleng]

 

I just don't understand those people who skip cutscenes and never put any effort into beating the storyline.... must have terrible ADD or something. I like to listen to all the details and complete it at a slow pace to savor the moment. Skipping everything and rushing through it just ruins it. But to each their own I guess.

On my second playthrough of the storyline. I purposely fail missions at certain points, just so I can hear all the alternate in-game dialogue.

 

@saintsrow

 

Great film that. REDRUM, REDRUM, REDRUM...

Edited April 17, 2013 by jamieleng

[DarkDayz]

 

http://www.technobuffalo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/GTA-III-and-IV-Script-Comparison.jpg

This picture means nothing. yeah, they put more effort and time in the script, but this doesn't create a good deep story. GTA IV TRIED so hard to create an emotional and deep storyline, but it failed becasue it was still trapped in the same formula of every other GTA (find a "boss" to wotk with - 3-5 missions - change boss - 3-5 missions ... etc etc).

 

little example: niko and michelle. There are a couple of boring missions (like "go bowling") with "boring" dialogue about niko's past (boring not because they make you fall asleep, but becuase there's less action and more dialogue...maybe boring isn't the right word, but let's move on).

 

What I want to say is that those "boring" missions would have been great as the start of a longer storyline and relationship, when niko fight between his dark past and his desire to find a new love. But unfortunately, there still was the 3-5 missions scheme, and after a (good) shot-out, Michelle simply disappear forever, leaving us with those "boring" cut-scenes that NOW are boring because they leads to nothing.

 

To sum up: to me, they wanted to create an emotional story, but since they were trapped with the old formula (with just 3-5 mission before move on the next boss) they were forced to put in every single cut-scene as much "dialogue" and "emotions" as possible, without the proper time to expand the story, creating an unbalanced experience in the story, with sudden changes between emotional sections, boring ("padding") sections and funny sections.

 

I don't think I'm just speculating here, because GTA V has, according to the previews, a more coherent storyline that will allows R* to put in every mission and cut-scenes the right balance of comedy and drama in. The formula of "different bosses" seems gone. and I dont' think it's a bad thing.

"This picture means nothing."

 

That's so arrogant, if you read what I said, it's means something for me, maybe not for you. Being an aspiring storyteller myself I know how hard it is to make an incredibly detailed script that doesn't lose its touch half way through. From beginning to end GTA IV had a point and purpose to it's story and in a humanly natural way that whole point was turned around due to a player choice, for me that's deep and nobody can change my opinion on it. The whole America theme is turned on it's head because the eastern European is the guy in charge, the heroin of the story, which is completely insane considering the 'crazy Russian stereotype' everyone used for the antagonists of their films in Hollywood. The 'boring missions' you talk about are in no way compulsory, and probably take up no more than 5% of that whole script, which is a minute percentage.

 

''To me they wanted to create an emotion story." Well to you maybe. But emotion doesn't make a story good and they know this. It's good to have positive and negative emotion to carry it in places, which they did implement, but it isn't essential. Especially not in a game where the protagonists don't think on an emotional level before carrying out their actions. The different bosses thing is nothing to do with the storytelling, it's purely a game play device to keep the game interesting in places, GTA won't lose that core aspect, it seems like they might in V. They probably will have some representation or revenge or accomplishment over a higher power, but told with different narrative devices, but essentially the same plot point when deconstructed.

 

That's my thoughts anyway. I think the outsider and stereotypical antagonist as protagonist was really fresh, especially in the metropolis that was Liberty City, it really made the character seem vulnerable and small at the start, which is completely identifiable with the gamer. He had one accomplishment in mind throughout the game, he doesn't lose focus, which is really important, and then because of the journey he has undertaken throughout the game, with different characters in mind, the directors chair is given to the gamer. Does he make the deal, or does he choose the path he has always aimed for, revenge. It's an astonishing meta-narrative, one that ultimately provides us with choice, which is very very powerful for me.

Edited April 17, 2013 by darkdayz

[rjmthe2nd]

Hi guys,

 

I'm not sure if there is already a topic for this...

 

But i'm interested to know how much the story means to you? Do you buy the game specifically for the storyline, is it the part of the game you are most eagerly waiting for, is it something you will complete before free roaming? etc.. etc...

 

I have never really been bothered with the GTA storylines I simply buy the game for the fun free roam factor, of course I complete the storyline but for me this is a small part of the game!

Seriously? peopel who buy GTA Just to kill drive around and f*ck around and then claim the game sucks after a while because theirs nothing to it,because they don't play misssions and see they can unlock Cool ass things, i hate dumbasses like that,not saying you are one though.

[thatstupidbug]

"This picture means nothing."

 

That's so arrogant, if you read what I said, it's means something for me, maybe not for you. Being an aspiring storyteller myself I know how hard it is to make an incredibly detailed script that doesn't lose its touch half way through. From beginning to end GTA IV had a point and purpose to it's story and in a humanly natural way that whole point was turned around due to a player choice, for me that's deep and nobody can change my opinion on it. The whole America theme is turned on it's head because the eastern European is the guy in charge, the heroin of the story, which is completely insane considering the 'crazy Russian stereotype' everyone used for the antagonists of their films in Hollywood. The 'boring missions' you talk about are in no way compulsory, and probably take up no more than 5% of that whole script, which is a minute percentage.

 

''To me they wanted to create an emotion story." Well to you maybe. But emotion doesn't make a story good and they know this. It's good to have positive and negative emotion to carry it in places, which they did implement, but it isn't essential. Especially not in a game where the protagonists don't think on an emotional level before carrying out their actions. The different bosses thing is nothing to do with the storytelling, it's purely a game play device to keep the game interesting in places, GTA won't lose that core aspect, it seems like they might in V. They probably will have some representation or revenge or accomplishment over a higher power, but told with different narrative devices, but essentially the same plot point when deconstructed.

 

That's my thoughts anyway. I think the outsider and stereotypical antagonist as protagonist was really fresh, especially in the metropolis that was Liberty City, it really made the character seem vulnerable and small at the start, which is completely identifiable with the gamer. He had one accomplishment in mind throughout the game, he doesn't lose focus, which is really important, and then because of the journey he has undertaken throughout the game, with different characters in mind, the directors chair is given to the gamer. Does he make the deal, or does he choose the path he has always aimed for, revenge. It's an astonishing meta-narrative, one that ultimately provides us with choice, which is very very powerful for me.

Arrogant? maybe a little bit rude, but I wasn't talking directly to you (and I apologize if you feels hurt), but it was a general critique to everyone that use that photo to say that the script in GTA IV is "better" because it's bigger.

 

Quantity doesn't means quality, and I explained why, to me, the script wasn't that good after all. maybe the premise was more original than other games, and maybe the story was more focused on the plot than San andreas, but it suffered to the same ADD that every GTA has, and no matter how many time niko talks about his past and his desire to revenge and to live the american dream, he does the same unrelated stuffs like every other protagonist, from killing homosexuals to robbing a bank, in the Same GTA fashion.

 

The point i was trying to prove is that the game is the same GTA, the plot is the same GTA story, they just used more "dialogues" and "reflexion" and "monologues" in the cut-scenes to give an impression of depth in the storyline that, at the end of the day, didn't changed mutch in the basic premise of the game (go to the boss- whack the boss- go to the boss - whack the boss etc...). the padding and boring missions were more than 5% of the game, but it wasn't a bad things IF it served to create a coherent story (you need time to tell a good story, after all). But the story WASN'T coherent at all (niko wants to stay out fo troubles and he didn't help Roman about his problem with gambling? he goes to kill someone just because brucie said so? he goes to rob a bank while killing thousand of innocent cops?).

[DarkDayz]

 

Arrogant? maybe a little bit rude, but I wasn't talking directly to you (and I apologize if you feels hurt), but it was a general critique to everyone that use that photo to say that the script in GTA IV is "better" because it's  bigger.

 

Quantity doesn't means quality, and I explained why, to me, the script wasn't that good after all. maybe the premise was  more original than other games, and maybe the story was more focused on the plot than San andreas, but it suffered to the same ADD that every GTA has, and no matter how many time niko talks about his past and his desire to revenge and to live the american dream, he does the same unrelated stuffs like every other protagonist,  from killing homosexuals to robbing a bank, in the Same GTA fashion.

 

The point i was trying to prove is that the game is the same GTA, the plot is the same GTA story, they just used more "dialogues" and "reflexion" and "monologues" in the cut-scenes to give an impression of depth in the storyline that, at the end of the day, didn't changed mutch in the basic premise of the game (go to the boss- whack the boss-  go to the boss - whack the boss etc...). the padding and boring missions were more than 5% of the game, but it wasn't a bad things IF it served to create a coherent story (you need time to tell a good story, after all). But the story WASN'T coherent at all (niko wants to stay out fo troubles and he didn't help Roman about his problem with gambling? he goes to kill someone just because brucie said so? he goes to rob a bank while killing thousand of innocent cops?).

Actually, it was arrogance, because you dismissed my attachment to the picture because of what I said, stating that it means nothing. That is arrogance, as you clearly see yourself and your opinion higher than others. Arrogance is nothing to do with who it's aimed at.

 

Your arguments are loosely coherent in themselves and based around game play aspects and not the overall plot so I'm not going to get in an argument over how you feel about GTA IV's story and script, because I have a different opinion to you clearly. Quite frankly other opinions don't really change my own. The thread asks what the story means to whoever is willing to post, so I did, stating what I liked about other games and how much it means to me in the franchise. I didn't come here for an argument, just to voice my opinion as the original poster set the question.

 

But let me set this to you, when you deconstruct a plot, most of them are the same anyway. Epecially with games when you are dealing with tiers of levels and difficulties, there is no original plot. There are around 8, some people may think less or more, but I stick with 8 as my rule.

 

1. Cinderella: the hero/heroine’s true potential for happiness and fulfillment is at last realized after many ups and downs.

2. Achilles: the Fatal Flaw, which leads to the hero/heroine’s downfall.

3. Faust: or the debt that must be paid when fate finally catches up with you.

4. Tristan: the Eternal Triangle.

5. Circe: or the Spider and the Fly, when the hero/heroine is pursued to the death by something unstoppable etc.

6. Romeo and Juliet: Boy meets Girl, Boy loses Girl, Boy finds Girl again.

7. Orpheus: the Gift that’s Taken Away.

8. The Indomitable Hero: the most recent addition, when the hero/heroine carries on going whatever the odds against him/her.

 

So no, the plot's of GTA are not the same when you look at them and dissect previous games whilst examining the 8 core plots. IV was more of Faust, where as Vice City was more of The Indomitable Hero.

Edited April 18, 2013 by darkdayz

[THEBIGZED]

A lot. It gives the game and the protagonists their personality. Of course a good story alone does not make a good game but it's one of those things that separates Rockstar's open world games from many others.

[Official General]

 

I have never really been bothered with the GTA storylines I simply buy the game for the fun free roam factor, of course I complete the storyline but for me this is a small part of the game!

I'm not being rude, but in my view that is a very poor way to play GTA.

 

Don't get me wrong the free roam factor can be fun for a while, then it's only a matter of time before that one-man army party quickly gets repetitive and a bit boring. There is no substance to simply roaming around the city causing havoc and killing everything in sight, it just becomes meaningless. If you GTA just for that, then frankly I think you have not made full use of the game and you've missed out a great deal.

 

However you said you do complete the storyline so I can't really come at you too hard.

 

To answer your question, the storylines means everything to me in GTA, it's the main reason why I play the game.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Official General