Is 3 really better than 1?

[TheOnlyCollins]

After re-playing GTA IV and San Andreas (truly epic games in their own retrospective) I began to think of the new platform that GTA will become in GTAV. Im now beginning to think having the ability to follow the emotional story of a single character may be GTAV's downfall. Remember following CJ after his mum was murdered? This is going to be very difficult to achieve the emotional connection when swapping from protagonist to (possibly) antagonist. Do you guys agree maybe the emotional connections maybe lost with 3 fully fledged characters? Post your thoughs!

[Ferocious Banger]

After re-playing GTA IV and San Andreas (truly epic games in their own retrospective) I began to think of the new platform that GTA will become in GTAV. Im now beginning to think having the ability to follow the emotional story of a single character may be GTAV's downfall. Remember following CJ after his mum was murdered? This is going to be very difficult to achieve the emotional connection when swapping from protagonist to (possibly) antagonist. Do you guys agree maybe the emotional connections maybe lost with 3 fully fledged characters? Post your thoughs!

My "connection" with CJ was broken when the story sidetracked away from the mainplot.

[Dick Justice]

No. There are plenty of movies, tv shows and books that feature more than one protagonist. In those mediums, it's never been a hindrance to story development or emotional attachment to a character. Video games are actually being held back by the single-protagonist philosophy in my opinion.

 

San Andreas and IV were both very long games and V will be no shorter. I'd argue that both Carl and Niko overstayed their welcome because towards the end they were doing work (or working for people) that didn't suit their personalities or interests. I also disagree that three people can't be fleshed out properly if they have to split the time. A well-written character can captivate an audience in less than 30 minutes.

[TheQuestfor100Percent]

I'm sure all 3 characters will be fully fleshed out.

[Chekoloco]

GTA V will be awesome... III, VC, SA, IV...will be on our hearts...but V will be the game of my life for maybe 5 or 6 years...with 3 protag!

[shattered-minds]

Yes. Having more than one protagonist enables the writer(s) to explore the dynamics between them a lot more. It also gives more freedom in where they can take the story with the potential of double crossing within the friends, which will hit harder than being betrayed by a job giver that you only see when giving missions. Especially when more and more money is at stake later in the game, maybe at some point they all consider screwing the others over and taking the money for themselves or they all become paranoid that the others are going to screw them over.

[Darrel]

isnt this part of the challenge?

 

If you're not going to take that step to innovate and take the risks to make great games, why bother?. Rockstar are always pushing themselfs.

[GTAaLEX117]

After re-playing GTA IV and San Andreas (truly epic games in their own retrospective) I began to think of the new platform that GTA will become in GTAV. Im now beginning to think having the ability to follow the emotional story of a single character may be GTAV's downfall. Remember following CJ after his mum was murdered? This is going to be very difficult to achieve the emotional connection when swapping from protagonist to (possibly) antagonist. Do you guys agree maybe the emotional connections maybe lost with 3 fully fledged characters? Post your thoughs!

My "connection" with CJ was broken when the story sidetracked away from the mainplot.

Yeah, like after the first 10-15 missions.

[trevors685]

After re-playing GTA IV and San Andreas (truly epic games in their own retrospective) I began to think of the new platform that GTA will become in GTAV. Im now beginning to think having the ability to follow the emotional story of a single character may be GTAV's downfall. Remember following CJ after his mum was murdered? This is going to be very difficult to achieve the emotional connection when swapping from protagonist to (possibly) antagonist. Do you guys agree maybe the emotional connections maybe lost with 3 fully fledged characters? Post your thoughs!

My "connection" with CJ was broken when the story sidetracked away from the mainplot.

After you start auditioning midgets in a casino with a blind owner who then helps you rob a rival casino while at the same time, you're supposed to keep going to Los Santos every 10 minutes to keep your territories from being taken over?

come on m8

[ALeSsAnDrO]

If I want emotional connections and a good, focused story I'll go watch a movie.

I want maximum replayability value, tons of features crammed in, lots of characters, missions, side-missions. Who cares if it sidetracks, I'm not exactly expecting a Oscar-winning plot. It's a game.

[mattymcs]

SA had the worst plot of any GTA game so its not exactly the best one to compare with. I had no emtional connection to CJ whatsoever, the guy was a douche.

[Blazevski12]

After re-playing GTA IV and San Andreas (truly epic games in their own retrospective) I began to think of the new platform that GTA will become in GTAV. Im now beginning to think having the ability to follow the emotional story of a single character may be GTAV's downfall. Remember following CJ after his mum was murdered? This is going to be very difficult to achieve the emotional connection when swapping from protagonist to (possibly) antagonist. Do you guys agree maybe the emotional connections maybe lost with 3 fully fledged characters? Post your thoughs!

CJ was the worst protagonist in a GTA game ( i'm not trying to imply anything here) , his character completly was ruined when that Toreno missions happend ( even to the missions were fun and great).

[shattered-minds]

If I want emotional connections and a good, focused story I'll go watch a movie.

I want maximum replayability value, tons of features crammed in, lots of characters, missions, side-missions. Who cares if it sidetracks, I'm not exactly expecting a Oscar-winning plot. It's a game.

But why can't games have a good plot? Why is that only reserved for movies? Features, re-playability and a good plot aren't mutually exclusive. I get that not every game needs a plot, but where they do have a plot, why can't it be a good one?

 

With games that are trying to tell a story, the successful ones, whether you're aware of it or not, have you creating an emotional attachment to the characters, however small, you want them to succeed.

[ALeSsAnDrO]

But why can't games have a good plot? Why is that only reserved for movies? Features, re-playability and a good plot aren't mutually exclusive. I get that not every game needs a plot, but where they do have a plot, why can't it be a good one?

 

With games that are trying to tell a story, the successful ones, whether you're aware of it or not, have you creating an emotional attachment to the characters, however small, you want them to succeed.

I think games these days are trying way too hard to be like movies. Budgets are skyrocketing and, honestly, I believe most gamers dont care for a gazillion cutscenes or infinite quick time events.

Devs need to focus more on gameplay and less on Hollywood voice acting and deep plots.

Games dont need emotional connection as much as movies do, because you're already in control, you are already the character.

Cinema needs to do it because you're a spectactor, you're never a part of it, you always start "disconnected".

 

Action games, by their nature, defeat the purpose of any realistic plot. You're supposed to mow down thousands of enemies, how and why the hell would you build any serious plot around this?

Either make an action game that doesn't take itself too seriously, with a crazy character, or make an action game that doesnt make you murder an army.

[TakinThyBacon]

After re-playing GTA IV and San Andreas (truly epic games in their own retrospective) I began to think of the new platform that GTA will become in GTAV. Im now beginning to think having the ability to follow the emotional story of a single character may be GTAV's downfall. Remember following CJ after his mum was murdered? This is going to be very difficult to achieve the emotional connection when swapping from protagonist to (possibly) antagonist. Do you guys agree maybe the emotional connections maybe lost with 3 fully fledged characters? Post your thoughs!

I for one was kind of thrown off by San Andrea's plot line, although I really love the game. I really think they should not have detracted from the rage CJ had for the death of his mother, the plot (in my opinion) should have focused on going after those directly responsible for her death as opposed to all these random odd jobs for people that really had very little to do with the story line. I enjoyed many of these missions, but they seemed to be more time fillers as opposed to adding anything to the plot line.

[hobodealerr]

Adding an extra 2 characters is good for both gameplay and narrative.

 

Gameplay wise it has its obvious advantages.

 

Narrative wise it allows us to have three completely different perspectives on characters, America, consumerism, corruptions, betrayals, pluralism, urbanization and the American dream. It also allows for more plot twists and turns. Typically we like certain supporting characters like Packie, or Rosenberg, but imagine if we could get more in depth with the characters? Maybe it'd allow us to see how much of an insane asshole Vercetti was, and how much of a naive bi-polar hypocrite Niko was.

 

Say GTAIV had two main protagonists: Niko and Dimitri. Although we obviously have strong positive feelings for Niko and negative feelings for Dimitri, perhaps if we had played as Dimitri and had experienced his tale, perhaps we would conclude Niko was a worse man than Dimitri. I don't know, the point is that life certainly isn't one dimensional, there's never a clear cut of good vs evil in reality, therefor adding the variety of three different personal narratives allows for a more three dimensional narrative, I think.

 

And since these three characters are supposedly forced to work together emphasizes the reality that they aren't necessarily friends, and other than money have no real allegiances to each-other. Double dealings, backstabbing, rip offs, etc etc are bound to occur, and having the ability to experience that from different perspectives could take us on a chaotic, but emotionally satisfying roller-coaster.

 

I believe having three characters allows the writers to write a more flexible, realistic, and three dimensional narrative for GTAV. Just because there are three characters doesn't automatically make narratives better, however since this is based around a team of undesirable thief's whom work together to pull of heists, allowing us to see three different perspectives makes everything that much more interesting and unpredictable.

[Druffmaul]

OP is focusing too much on there being three separate characters. I think GTA V is basically going to be a story about three friends, three partners. Three Musketeers. Three guys who bond with each other. There may be betrayal. There may be heartbreak. I'm sure it's going to be great.

[Coral_City]

LOL @ People hating CJ. You're all f*cking racists. Here's the skinny, for you punk-ass tricks:

 

- Claude in GTA 3: The blandest motherf*cker ever to live. "Oh, but we can shape him to our personality" THEN WHY KILL HOOKERS YOU SICK FREAK.

 

- Tommy in VC: "Hi, I'm your generic mob guy with no feelings and I love to kill" SOOOO INTERESTING

 

- Carl in SA: A guy who grew up in the rough part of Los Santos, left, came back, got screwed, realized how the 'hood was only holding him down and decided to venture out into the world, forced by his circumstances. It hit me that Carl grew over the course of the game... you can find the dialogue in Home Coming:

 

Carl Johnson: I'm alright, man. Hey, man - we off to our new spot! We got a mansion, Sweet! We been putting in work, and sh*t is going well. We got a stake in a casino, we got some insane sh*t in Fierro, we're getting into the rap game! Hey man, let me get you some new clothes, c'mon!

Sweet Johnson: New clothes? Nigga, what the f*ck is this bullsh*t?

Carl Johnson: What you mean, man? What's mine is yours, and you know that.

Sweet Johnson: You never did get it, did you, Carl? I need to check on things in the hood. Man, that's the problem. You always a perpetrator, runing from what's real.

Carl Johnson: Hey man, sh*t's f*cked up there. You don't want to be in the hood.

Sweet Johnson: No. That's exactly where I want to be. What you done for our hood?

Carl Johnson: Man, what the hood done for me? Always dragging me down. Ever since I got out of the hood sh*t been cracking. That's everybody's dream, to get out of the hood...

Sweet Johnson: Man, you sound just like Smoke right now.

Carl Johnson: Alright, man, you hard. I'm gonna show you what's going on in the hood.

 

See the dichotomy between Carl and Sweet? Sweet's stuck in his old ways, while Carl, realizing the world is bigger than his cul-de-sac, decides to do anything in his power to save his family and gang.

 

 

[Platinvm]

The Houser brothers are the best writers in the game industry and I think it is going to be a good story.

 

I have to disagree with you, ALeSsAnDrO, on the whole "games shouldn't be like movies" thing. Although quicktime event are indeed annoying (if you ask me they're just used to keep you concentrated pushing buttons instead of giving you the feeling you're not playing at all) I like stories in games. For me stories in games are the reason to even play them. One of the biggest reasons I like GTA and not SR.

 

It are going to be three heads we can look in, in V and I'm excited to see situations from multiple views instead of one.

[ALeSsAnDrO]

The Houser brothers are the best writers in the game industry and I think it is going to be a good story.

 

I have to disagree with you, ALeSsAnDrO, on the whole "games shouldn't be like movies" thing. Although quicktime event are indeed annoying (if you ask me they're just used to keep you concentrated pushing buttons instead of giving you the feeling you're not playing at all) I like stories in games. For me stories in games are the reason to even play them. One of the biggest reasons I like GTA and not SR.

 

It are going to be three heads we can look in, in V and I'm excited to see situations from multiple views instead of one.

Well, of course I dont want games without stories. That was barely acceptable back in the 8-bit era. Even then some games already had good stories.

Its just that some get way out of control about it, and it's the whole reason why some devs spend millions and then complain about the sales (*cough* Square Enix *cough*)

There's no need for Hollywood stars voicing characters or huge soundtracks composed by renowned composers, it just makes budgets go berserk without adding much to gameplay.

 

Its just that the game itself should come first, and when you play some games where you spend most of the time watching damn cutscenes instead of doing something, it defeats the whole point of gaming.

I'm ok with plots like in GTA SA, sure it gets sidetracked, but with so many main missions hours, its bound to happen at some point.

 

(About the QTE, if they're going to be implemented as poorly as in Tomb Raider, then really devs, dont bother.)

[Grand Theft Savage]

That's BS. Not everyone has an emotional connection with the characters (like myself). It's a game, dude. 3 is way f*cking better than one.

[Redneck Shotgun]

I would rather have 1 but we will see how it goes.

Its going to be diffrent dont listen to the fanboys.

[Platinvm]

The Houser brothers are the best writers in the game industry and I think it is going to be a good story.

 

I have to disagree with you, ALeSsAnDrO, on the whole "games shouldn't be like movies" thing. Although quicktime event are indeed annoying (if you ask me they're just used to keep you concentrated pushing buttons instead of giving you the feeling you're not playing at all) I like stories in games. For me stories in games are the reason to even play them. One of the biggest reasons I like GTA and not SR.

 

It are going to be three heads we can look in, in V and I'm excited to see situations from multiple views instead of one.

Well, of course I dont want games without stories. That was barely acceptable back in the 8-bit era. Even then some games already had good stories.

Its just that some get way out of control about it, and it's the whole reason why some devs spend millions and then complain about the sales (*cough* Square Enix *cough*)

There's no need for Hollywood stars voicing characters or huge soundtracks composed by renowned composers, it just makes budgets go berserk without adding much to gameplay.

 

Its just that the game itself should come first, and when you play some games where you spend most of the time watching damn cutscenes instead of doing something, it defeats the whole point of gaming.

I'm ok with plots like in GTA SA, sure it gets sidetracked, but with so many main missions hours, its bound to happen at some point.

 

(About the QTE, if they're going to be implemented as poorly as in Tomb Raider, then really devs, dont bother.)

I agree and that's what R* does very well. No top of the bill famous people used for voice acting and such, still quality costs money and they can't use just some random kid without experience. Your example makes me think of Yakuza 4. Way more cutscenes than gameplay and that started to annoy me, but I'm not afraid R* will make that mistake. Are you?

[pariah87]

I didnt care much for CJ's story.

 

I am super excited for this story though.

[Acetaminophen]

LOL @ People hating CJ. You're all f*cking racists. Here's the skinny, for you punk-ass tricks:

 

- Claude in GTA 3: The blandest motherf*cker ever to live. "Oh, but we can shape him to our personality" THEN WHY KILL HOOKERS YOU SICK FREAK.

 

- Tommy in VC: "Hi, I'm your generic mob guy with no feelings and I love to kill" SOOOO INTERESTING

 

- Carl in SA: A guy who grew up in the rough part of Los Santos, left, came back, got screwed, realized how the 'hood was only holding him down and decided to venture out into the world, forced by his circumstances. It hit me that Carl grew over the course of the game... you can find the dialogue in Home Coming:

 

Carl Johnson: I'm alright, man. Hey, man - we off to our new spot! We got a mansion, Sweet! We been putting in work, and sh*t is going well. We got a stake in a casino, we got some insane sh*t in Fierro, we're getting into the rap game! Hey man, let me get you some new clothes, c'mon!

Sweet Johnson: New clothes? Nigga, what the f*ck is this bullsh*t?

Carl Johnson: What you mean, man? What's mine is yours, and you know that.

Sweet Johnson: You never did get it, did you, Carl? I need to check on things in the hood. Man, that's the problem. You always a perpetrator, runing from what's real.

Carl Johnson: Hey man, sh*t's f*cked up there. You don't want to be in the hood.

Sweet Johnson: No. That's exactly where I want to be. What you done for our hood?

Carl Johnson: Man, what the hood done for me? Always dragging me down. Ever since I got out of the hood sh*t been cracking. That's everybody's dream, to get out of the hood...

Sweet Johnson: Man, you sound just like Smoke right now.

Carl Johnson: Alright, man, you hard. I'm gonna show you what's going on in the hood.

 

See the dichotomy between Carl and Sweet? Sweet's stuck in his old ways, while Carl, realizing the world is bigger than his cul-de-sac, decides to do anything in his power to save his family and gang.

[email protected] Butthurt! No but really San Andreas as amazing as it was.. the story was just all over the place CJ complained alot and a bunch of other things that I don't really care to talk about. But call people racist because they don't like a character is stupid. I think CJ is just above Luis. just by a little.

[Game2048]

YES. CHANGES. GTA NEEDS THEM VERY MUCH

[brian.]

After re-playing GTA IV and San Andreas (truly epic games in their own retrospective) I began to think of the new platform that GTA will become in GTAV. Im now beginning to think having the ability to follow the emotional story of a single character may be GTAV's downfall. Remember following CJ after his mum was murdered? This is going to be very difficult to achieve the emotional connection when swapping from protagonist to (possibly) antagonist. Do you guys agree maybe the emotional connections maybe lost with 3 fully fledged characters? Post your thoughs!

If one of them ends up an antagonist, if done well, it could make you question which one is truly the antagonist, which one is truly the bad guy or good guy - it could be a very powerful philosophical thing, bigger than the ways IV played with concepts like this and previous games (now, you dont have to understand just your character's actions, you have to pick who was right and who was wrong) - maybe.

[Homemade Dynamite]

Every game needs new ideas to stay fresh, including GTA.

[Red Hat]

Yep

[Coral_City]

LOL @ People hating CJ. You're all f*cking racists. Here's the skinny, for you punk-ass tricks:

 

- Claude in GTA 3: The blandest motherf*cker ever to live. "Oh, but we can shape him to our personality" THEN WHY KILL HOOKERS YOU SICK FREAK.

 

- Tommy in VC: "Hi, I'm your generic mob guy with no feelings and I love to kill" SOOOO INTERESTING

 

- Carl in SA: A guy who grew up in the rough part of Los Santos, left, came back, got screwed, realized how the 'hood was only holding him down and decided to venture out into the world, forced by his circumstances. It hit me that Carl grew over the course of the game... you can find the dialogue in Home Coming:

 

Carl Johnson: I'm alright, man. Hey, man - we off to our new spot! We got a mansion, Sweet! We been putting in work, and sh*t is going well. We got a stake in a casino, we got some insane sh*t in Fierro, we're getting into the rap game! Hey man, let me get you some new clothes, c'mon!

Sweet Johnson: New clothes? Nigga, what the f*ck is this bullsh*t?

Carl Johnson: What you mean, man? What's mine is yours, and you know that.

Sweet Johnson: You never did get it, did you, Carl? I need to check on things in the hood. Man, that's the problem. You always a perpetrator, runing from what's real.

Carl Johnson: Hey man, sh*t's f*cked up there. You don't want to be in the hood.

Sweet Johnson: No. That's exactly where I want to be. What you done for our hood?

Carl Johnson: Man, what the hood done for me? Always dragging me down. Ever since I got out of the hood sh*t been cracking. That's everybody's dream, to get out of the hood...

Sweet Johnson: Man, you sound just like Smoke right now.

Carl Johnson: Alright, man, you hard. I'm gonna show you what's going on in the hood.

 

See the dichotomy between Carl and Sweet? Sweet's stuck in his old ways, while Carl, realizing the world is bigger than his cul-de-sac, decides to do anything in his power to save his family and gang.

[email protected] Butthurt! No but really San Andreas as amazing as it was.. the story was just all over the place CJ complained alot and a bunch of other things that I don't really care to talk about. But call people racist because they don't like a character is stupid. I think CJ is just above Luis. just by a little.

"I can't make an argument so I will call this person butthurt." For people who hated Luis or CJ, chances are there's some inherent racist feelings inside of you.

 

Considering your only argument was "he complained a lot" (because all the other protags don't complain at all, lol right?), it's safe to assume you just never liked the fact that CJ was a black dude.