Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

BURNFIREFLY

Best GTA Protagonist

  

858 members have voted

  1. 1. Best GTA Protagonist

    • Claude Speed
      28
    • Tommy Vercetti
      158
    • Carl "CJ" Johnson
      156
    • Toni Cipriani
      6
    • Victor Vance
      10
    • Niko Bellic
      261
    • Johnny Klebitz
      14
    • Luis Fernando Lopez
      15
    • Michael De Santa
      75
    • Franklin Clinton
      21
    • Trevor Phillips
      104
    • GTAO protagonist
      4
    • Huang Lee
      6


Recommended Posts

TheSantader25
24 minutes ago, HotlineVice19603 said:

Cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would vote for CJ. In the freeroam - sure, but in the story CJ is a pushover.

Because people have opinions. For example I can never understand people who think Niko is a complex /Well-developed character. Because CJ is evolving and improving as the story goes on. Something we barely see in GTA games(in most of them the protagonist already has reached his consistent personality but CJ is still figuring himself out) . His Journey throughout SA feels like a "true" one and his flexibile personality gave R* the opportunity to introduce many different aspects for the game. 

In short, He is a protagonist that fits the style of this "series" the most IMO. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vice City criminal

Niko>Tommy>Johnny>Toni>Michael>The rest 
based mostly on appearance/style and personal story.(Though I'm choosing Toni over the rest mostly based on style/outfits)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evil empire

In terms of main protagonist I chose Carl Johnson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pink Pineapple

I can't pick a best, so I'll just give them letter grades.

 

_____________

A

Claude Speed

Tommy Vercetti
Carl "CJ" Johnson

Niko Bellic

_____________

B

Johnny Klebitz

Michael De Santa

Trevor Phillips

_____________

B-

Franklin Clinton

_____________

C-

Luis Fernando Lopez

_____________

 

I didn't play as the others.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Journey_95
On 9/23/2018 at 9:29 PM, TheSantader25 said:

Because people have opinions. For example I can never understand people who think Niko is a complex /Well-developed character. Because CJ is evolving and improving as the story goes on. Something we barely see in GTA games(in most of them the protagonist already has reached his consistent personality but CJ is still figuring himself out) . His Journey throughout SA feels like a "true" one and his flexibile personality gave R* the opportunity to introduce many different aspects for the game. 

In short, He is a protagonist that fits the style of this "series" the most IMO. 

Problem is that never happens, it seems like he evolves during the LV arc for an example but once Sweet gets out he is still the same old pushover. Sweet trashes him a lot during the last part and he just takes it and suddenly starts "caring" for the hood again even though its clear he had moved on. 

 

The idea of CJ developing throughout the story was good but Rockstar didn't really go through with it. He is inconsistent as hell and a pussy compared to the likes of Tommy and Niko

 

OT, My Top 5:
 

1. Niko Bellic

2. Tommy Vercetti

3. Micheal De Santa

4. Johnny Klebitz

5. Trevor Phillips

 

Edited by Journey_95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
51 minutes ago, Journey_95 said:

Problem is that never happens, it seems like he evolves during the LV arc for an example but once Sweet gets out he is still the same old pushover. Sweet trashes him a lot during the last part and he just takes it and suddenly starts "caring" for the hood again even though its clear he had moved on. 

I've explained this before. CJ does not care for the hood. But why does he help sweet? Because he cares for his family. He realizes the mistakes he made in the past and wants to make up for them by helping sweet and wiping out C R. A. S. H. Even in "End if the Line" before entering the palace he says "I was a busta when my family needed me the most. I let Brian die. This one for him. For moms and for you bro". Then sweet says "for Grove". CJ confirms this with an ironic"yeah for Grove". It's clear that he did everything to redeem himself . not for the hood. 

CJ'S actions throughout the story shows how talented he is and as the story progresses he gains experience as well.He improved as a leader and a manager.  He also learns to care for others as well and not just himself. He truly progresses physically and mentally through the journey and the gameplay elements make it more believable. He also does not moan the entire time about his past and also knows who he is so I doubt you can call him more of a pussy than Niko. And as for Tommy, I gotta say he was the only GTA protagonist(maybe with Trevor) to be in charge instead of being a lapdog.

Niko also seems like the most inconsistent to me. He talks like a developed character but acts like another "claude" which is in contrast with his character development. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UndeadPotat0

Micheal Townley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Journey_95
On 10/5/2018 at 10:51 PM, TheSantader25 said:

I've explained this before. CJ does not care for the hood. But why does he help sweet? Because he cares for his family. He realizes the mistakes he made in the past and wants to make up for them by helping sweet and wiping out C R. A. S. H. Even in "End if the Line" before entering the palace he says "I was a busta when my family needed me the most. I let Brian die. This one for him. For moms and for you bro". Then sweet says "for Grove". CJ confirms this with an ironic"yeah for Grove". It's clear that he did everything to redeem himself . not for the hood. 

CJ'S actions throughout the story shows how talented he is and as the story progresses he gains experience as well.He improved as a leader and a manager.  He also learns to care for others as well and not just himself. He truly progresses physically and mentally through the journey and the gameplay elements make it more believable. He also does not moan the entire time about his past and also knows who he is so I doubt you can call him more of a pussy than Niko. And as for Tommy, I gotta say he was the only GTA protagonist(maybe with Trevor) to be in charge instead of being a lapdog.

Niko also seems like the most inconsistent to me. He talks like a developed character but acts like another "claude" which is in contrast with his character development. 

Well the problem is that he does both. I can see as well that he didn't care much for the Grove when he got Sweet out and their conversations in some missions after that also showed that. But then he helps out anyway and at the end gets to have it all, the hood stuff with Sweet and the casino & manager stuff etc. its a missed opportunity for his character since Rockstar apart from GTA IV and TLAD always wants their cheesy perfect happy endings with no consequences and that wouldnt happen if the conflict was taken further.

 

Depends on which part...he is a complete bitch during the Catalina missions or when he is with Tenpenny. And he is Sweet's "running dog" as he says, never really in charge of the whole thing in the hood at all. But then during the Loco Syndicate story or the Casino business he suddenly takes control. His character feels too inconsistent and all over the place for me since Rockstar slapped three different stories on him (SA is a game where the multiple protagonists feature would have made more sense than in GTA V).  

 

Also his past isnt nearly as dark as Niko's so of course he doesn't whine much about it. But Niko shows far more depth andhis inconsistency is the point since its said multiple times how hypocritifcal he is. Comparing him with Claude is ridiculous.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
2 hours ago, Journey_95 said:

Well the problem is that he does both. I can see as well that he didn't care much for the Grove when he got Sweet out and their conversations in some missions after that also showed that. But then he helps out anyway and at the end gets to have it all, the hood stuff with Sweet and the casino & manager stuff etc. 

Well I already stated that he does those "hood" related missions for his family. Not the hood. And well of course at the end he gets it all. It's like when you studied for a math test and it also helped you out with the physics test as well even if you didn't care about the physics test at all. 

 

2 hours ago, Journey_95 said:

its a missed opportunity for his character since Rockstar apart from GTA IV and TLAD always wants their cheesy perfect happy endings with no consequences and that wouldnt happen if the conflict was taken further.

It's obvious that the main theme of GTA is mostly based on happy Hollywood movies and happy endings suits it most of the time. R* tried something different with TLAD and IV and it was a nice minor change(even though I didn't like it) but it doesn't change GTAs true identity. 

Also what's up nowadays that everyone wants a dramatic end to a story to feel like it's been a well-developed story? People these days seem to prefer sad endings. They mostly acknowledge bright stories and happy endings as poorly made stories. There's nothing wrong with a happy ending. 

2 hours ago, Journey_95 said:



 

Depends on which part...he is a complete bitch during the Catalina missions or when he is with Tenpenny. And he is Sweet's "running dog" as he says, never really in charge of the whole thing in the hood at all. But then during the Loco Syndicate story or the Casino business he suddenly takes control. His character feels too inconsistent and all over the place for me since Rockstar slapped three different stories on him. 

 

Well it appears you haven't fully understood CJ's character if you think that way. Like I said before in many other threads CJ is a character that wanted to make something of himself while fixing his mistakes in the past. These were literally his two goals throughout the game. The Loco Syndicate and Casino Stories were about Carl's first goal(making it big) so obviously he is gonna take charge because this is what he wants. He wants to be somebody and These two businesses were his way of making cash and making it to the top.

 

At the same time the "hood" missions were related to his second goal(Fixing his past since as the story goes further he feels more and more guilty about abandoning his family. Obviously sometimes greed takes over again and sweet has to slap some sense back to him) so he obviously does not take charge here since he doesn't care about the hood. He just wants to make up for what's lost so he just assists sweet and leaves the leadership to him. Why should he want the leadership here? It doesn't help him with his goals. 

 

And about Catalina:

 

CJ was stuck in a land he knew little of and heavily needed money. This is where CJ shows some of his talent regarding "being an opportunist". Unlike many think, CJ is actually a smart protagonist. Since Catalina is a psychopath and Carl is in desperate need of money in an unknown rural area, he has to act like a bitch. If he acted like what he was Catalina wouldn't help since she was a sadist psycho. But this does not necessarily mean Carl is a bitch. Carl played his role pretty well. As soon as new opportunities came (Cesar and Wu Zi Races) He dumped Catalina and stood up against her since there was no use for her anymore. In this case CJ  easily manipulated Catalina to get what he wants.

2 hours ago, Journey_95 said:

SA is a game where the multiple protagonists feature would have made more sense than in GTA V

 

 

I don't think so. SA's true advantage regarding storytelling is following Carl throughout his Journey across San Andreas. If it was divided to three plots the story would turn to dog-sh*t. The true impact within the story comes from the fact that you can feel Carl's evolution while traveling in such different places and taking part in very dangerous activities. It feels like a true episodic experience and feels long and rewarding. Multiple protagonists wouldn't have the Same impact. 

 

Where as in V you follow three protagonists as they leave their personal lives for a common goal(organized crime) which is why it made sense. V wants to deliver the true "professional heist crew feeling". Having three protagonists would make the player feel closer to this crew and therefore accept them(if he/she doesn't end up hating them of course(Trevor...)) 

2 hours ago, Journey_95 said:

 

 

Also his past isnt nearly as dark as Niko's so of course he doesn't whine much about it. But Niko shows far more depth andhis inconsistency is the point since its said multiple times how hypocritifcal he is. Comparing him with Claude is ridiculous.

 

 

It's very difficult to grow up in a fully criminalized and drugged hood in your youth. 

Then you finally leave to make something of yourself and end up finding out your mother and brother died. You still can't separate yourself from the hood. 

Two of your best childhood friends betray you and you end up in some of the most dangerous tasks ever to help yourself and your brother out of thid mess. 

I feel like CJ doesn't exaggerate the situation like Niko did.

The Niko I hear during dialogues snd cutscenes is far different than claude and well developed(Even considering his inconsistencies) but when it comes to actions during missions he turns into a senseless killing machine like claude with no morals. He seems to forget about his moral preferences during missions. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Journey_95
52 minutes ago, TheSantader25 said:

Well I already stated that he does those "hood" related missions for his family. Not the hood. And well of course at the end he gets it all. It's like when you studied for a math test and it also helped you out with the physics test as well even if you didn't care about the physics test at all. 

 

It's obvious that the main theme of GTA is mostly based on happy Hollywood movies and happy endings suits it most of the time. R* tried something different with TLAD and IV and it was a nice minor change(even though I didn't like it) but it doesn't change GTAs true identity. 

Also what's up nowadays that everyone wants a dramatic end to a story to feel like it's been a well-developed story? People these days seem to prefer sad endings. They mostly acknowledge bright stories and happy endings as poorly made stories. There's nothing wrong with a happy ending. 

Well it appears you haven't fully understood CJ's character if you think that way. Like I said before in many other threads CJ is a character that wanted to make something of himself while fixing his mistakes in the past. These were literally his two goals throughout the game. The Loco Syndicate and Casino Stories were about Carl's first goal(making it big) so obviously he is gonna take charge because this is what he wants. He wants to be somebody and These two businesses were his way of making cash and making it to the top.

 

At the same time the "hood" missions were related to his second goal(Fixing his past since as the story goes further he feels more and more guilty about abandoning his family. Obviously sometimes greed takes over again and sweet has to slap some sense back to him) so he obviously does not take charge here since he doesn't care about the hood. He just wants to make up for what's lost so he just assists sweet and leaves the leadership to him. Why should he want the leadership here? It doesn't help him with his goals. 

 

And about Catalina:

 

CJ was stuck in a land he knew little of and heavily needed money. This is where CJ shows some of his talent regarding "being an opportunist". Unlike many think, CJ is actually a smart protagonist. Since Catalina is a psychopath and Carl is in desperate need of money in an unknown rural area, he has to act like a bitch. If he acted like what he was Catalina wouldn't help since she was a sadist psycho. But this does not necessarily mean Carl is a bitch. Carl played his role pretty well. As soon as new opportunities came (Cesar and Wu Zi Races) He dumped Catalina and stood up against her since there was no use for her anymore. In this case CJ  easily manipulated Catalina to get what he wants.

I don't think so. SA's true advantage regarding storytelling is following Carl throughout his Journey across San Andreas. If it was divided to three plots the story would turn to dog-sh*t. The true impact within the story comes from the fact that you can feel Carl's evolution while traveling in such different places and taking part in very dangerous activities. It feels like a true episodic experience and feels long and rewarding. Multiple protagonists wouldn't have the Same impact. 

 

Where as in V you follow three protagonists as they leave their personal lives for a common goal(organized crime) which is why it made sense. V wants to deliver the true "professional heist crew feeling". Having three protagonists would make the player feel closer to this crew and therefore accept them(if he/she doesn't end up hating them of course(Trevor...)) 

It's very difficult to grow up in a fully criminalized and drugged hood in your youth. 

Then you finally leave to make something of yourself and end up finding out your mother and brother died. You still can't separate yourself from the hood. 

Two of your best childhood friends betray you and you end up in some of the most dangerous tasks ever to help yourself and your brother out of thid mess. 

I feel like CJ doesn't exaggerate the situation like Niko did.

The Niko I hear during dialogues snd cutscenes is far different than claude and well developed(Even considering his inconsistencies) but when it comes to actions during missions he turns into a senseless killing machine like claude with no morals. He seems to forget about his moral preferences during missions. 

Thats a poor example because the hood stuff isn't compatible with his other stuff in the long run. Thats why he and Sweet kept fighting about it but its conveniently forgotten in the ending.

 

I'm not saying happy endings are bad but for a story about criminals who do bad & dangerous sh*t, darker/bittersweet endings just make more sense. Look at any popular crime movie and tv show and thats how they end too. There should be consequences for what the protagonists do but apart from GTA IV and TLAD, there aren't any and the happy endings feel forced. 

 

But thats not really the case..in the first part of story its just about CJ fixing past mistakes and being there for his brother. Here he definitely seems to care for the hood as well. If Smoke and Ryder's betrayal didn't happen, I doubt he would have made it out of the hood at all.

 

Anyway the whole "becoming successful outside the hood" story is a good idea but its not handled well and only used as a cheap excuse to use the rest of the map (it could have easily been done in LS and be more effective that way). Instead its unnecessarily dragged out, like the badly handled Catalina arc, the random garage sh*t that adds nothing and the Loco Syndicate feels forced (apparently here he still cares for revenge but then later on he has forgotten about it until Sweet bashes him).  And of course suddenly you are invading a military base and getting a Jetpack because I guess that makes him successful or this is his way about fixing his past mistakes...to Truth? Lol. Not to mention randomly burying an innocent dude alive because he insulted his sister.. The story is in real need of trimming the fat and thats why I think multiple protagonists would be better.


If it was with multiple protagonists you could actually have focused arcs in each of the cities. CJ and his gangbanging, some Triad or what not against the Loco Syndicate, some mob dude in LV etc. it wouldn't be dog sh*t (the original story is a trainwreck after LS, sadly) but just three standalone stories, from what I have heard Rockstar even had this idea but back then the hardware was too limited.

 

The Catalina part is still bad since CJ doesn't need her at all. He could just rob stores himself, if anything she is a loose canon and too dangerous. But instead of at least maintaining his dignity ( hell if anything Catalina is the type of woman who gets off on badass men) he acts like a complete desperate bitch. If she did this type of sh*t to Tommy or Niko (or even Trevor) they would never stand for it

 

GTA VC's story is still the best 3D Era story because its focused and more cohesive. Everything Tommy does is because he wants to take over the city. In SA Rockstar became too ambitious and CJ's story is a random mess in comparison. I would have just been fine with LS and the countryside+ desert (like in GTA V) too, that way they could have put more effort into one city instead of making three bland one's

 

Nah its because the protagonists back then had less depth. CJ should be far more affected by his mothers death and who actually did it or how Smoke and Ryder betrayed him but he doesn't seem to give many f*cks. Even after knowing Smoke and Tenpenny are responsible for his mother's death he doesnt want to take revenge until Sweet basically forces him. 

Niko's actions during free roam shouldn't be counted. It makes no sense for CJ either to randomly murder pedestrians. But missions wise I think Niko's character is consistent since he is a hired gun and only out for money (or to find the dude who betrayed him). He is ruthless in that regard (definitely no hero) and doesn't care about killing people. Which missions didn't fit? 

Edited by Journey_95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
12 minutes ago, Journey_95 said:

1)Thats a poor example because the hood stuff isn't compatible with his other stuff in the long run. Thats why he and Sweet kept fighting about it but its conveniently forgotten in the ending.

 

2)I'm not saying happy endings are bad but for a story about criminals who do bad & dangerous sh*t, darker/bittersweet endings just make more sense. Look at any popular crime movie and tv show and thats how they end too. There should be consequences for what the protagonists do but apart from GTA IV and TLAD, there aren't any and the happy endings feel forced. 

 

3)But thats not really the case..in the first part of story its just about CJ fixing past mistakes and being there for his brother. Here he definitely seems to care for the hood as well. If Smoke and Ryder's betrayal didn't happen, I doubt he would have made it out of the hood at all.

 

4)Anyway the whole "becoming successful outside the hood" story is a good idea but its not handled well and only used as a cheap excuse to use the rest of the map (it could have easily been done in LS and be more effective that way). Instead its unnecessarily dragged out, like the badly handled Catalina arc, the random garage sh*t that adds nothing and the Loco Syndicate feels forced (apparently here he still cares for revenge but then later on he has forgotten about it until Sweet bashes him).  And of course suddenly you are invading a military base and getting a Jetpack because I guess that makes him successful or this is his way about fixing his past mistakes...to Truth? Lol. Not to mention randomly burying an innocent dude alive because he insulted his sister.. The story is in real need of trimming the fat and thats why I think multiple protagonists would be better.


5)If it was with multiple protagonists you could actually have focused arcs in each of the cities. CJ and his gangbanging, some Triad or what not against the Loco Syndicate, some mob dude in LV etc. it wouldn't be dog sh*t (the original story is a trainwreck after LS, sadly) but just three standalone stories, from what I have heard Rockstar even had this idea but back then the hardware was too limited.

 

6)The Catalina part is still bad since CJ doesn't need her at all. He could just rob stores himself, if anything she is a loose canon and too dangerous. But instead of at least maintaining his dignity ( hell if anything Catalina is the type of woman who gets off on badass men) he acts like a complete desperate bitch. If she did this type of sh*t to Tommy or Niko (or even Trevor) they would never stand for it

 

7)GTA VC's story is still the best 3D Era story because its focused and more cohesive. Everything Tommy does is because he wants to take over the city. In SA Rockstar became too ambitious and CJ's story is a random mess in comparison. I would have just been fine with LS and the countryside+ desert (like in GTA V) too, that way they could have put more effort into one city instead of making three bland one's

 

8)Nah its because the protagonists back then had less depth. CJ should be far more affected by his mothers death and who actually did it or how Smoke and Ryder betrayed him but he doesn't seem to give many f*cks. Even after knowing Smoke and Tenpenny are responsible for his mother's death he doesnt want to take revenge until Sweet basically forces him. 

9)Niko's actions during free roam shouldn't be counted. It makes no sense for CJ either to randomly murder pedestrians. But missions wise I think Niko's character is consistent since he is a hired gun and only out for money (or to find the dude who betrayed him). He is ruthless in that regard (definitely no hero) and doesn't care about killing people. Which missions didn't fit? 

1)I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you actually suggesting that the story should have been just about the hood? That's a very close minded statement IMO. The way the game's events occurred totally made sense as a complete long run journey. 

 

2)we're talking about movies and games here which aren't real life. R* themselves made it clear that they want to follow action packed Hollywood style movies with GTA by copying many scenarios from those movies. Consequences are for real life. In games especially (GTA) it wouldn't make sense. 

 

3)Tenpenny didn't let CJ leave anyway. He couldn't do it. The 20 minute introduction shows CJ as an ambitious guy looking to make cash out of the hood. If he had any opportunity he would leave. But he didn't. Until Tenpenny kicked him out. Ath this point you're entirely scrapping the story like it never happened to prove a point. You're talking about "what if" situations. If we really wanna talk about those we can literally call any story meaningless. But the story "did"  happen. 

 

4)Dude You literally don't like any part outside LS and call it "poorly handled" without even giving valid reasons. At least try and prove your point. You just call it poor and take off. That's not how discussions work. 

 

5)Do some people lack the power to connect the dots when the story becomes to complicated and long? Well you just need "focused" stories that focus on one thing the entire time so you can understand them. But look around you, the world is full of different things that happen about different subjects. But they can all effect the Same subject despite being different. That's just how the world works. Seems like the story was too complicated for some people. 

 

6)no he couldn't. He didn't know sh*t about that area. Tenpenny said it himself. The middle of f*cking nowhere. He needed someone who knows vulnerable places with good amounts of cash in the area. Think wider my friend. SA isn't the regular one city type GTA and that's what sets it apart. 

 

7)once again a bombardment of opinions without bringing up reasons. Ok. SA is a mess while a complete movie ripoff is better. Care to say why instead of just pointing it out? 

 

8)He didn't know who killed his mother back then. 

 

9)wasn't talking about free roam. Missions. Niko does not seem to give two sh*ts about his moral code(based on dialogues) during missions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Journey_95
16 hours ago, TheSantader25 said:

1)I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you actually suggesting that the story should have been just about the hood? That's a very close minded statement IMO. The way the game's events occurred totally made sense as a complete long run journey. 

 

2)we're talking about movies and games here which aren't real life. R* themselves made it clear that they want to follow action packed Hollywood style movies with GTA by copying many scenarios from those movies. Consequences are for real life. In games especially (GTA) it wouldn't make sense. 

 

3)Tenpenny didn't let CJ leave anyway. He couldn't do it. The 20 minute introduction shows CJ as an ambitious guy looking to make cash out of the hood. If he had any opportunity he would leave. But he didn't. Until Tenpenny kicked him out. Ath this point you're entirely scrapping the story like it never happened to prove a point. You're talking about "what if" situations. If we really wanna talk about those we can literally call any story meaningless. But the story "did"  happen. 

 

4)Dude You literally don't like any part outside LS and call it "poorly handled" without even giving valid reasons. At least try and prove your point. You just call it poor and take off. That's not how discussions work. 

 

5)Do some people lack the power to connect the dots when the story becomes to complicated and long? Well you just need "focused" stories that focus on one thing the entire time so you can understand them. But look around you, the world is full of different things that happen about different subjects. But they can all effect the Same subject despite being different. That's just how the world works. Seems like the story was too complicated for some people. 

 

6)no he couldn't. He didn't know sh*t about that area. Tenpenny said it himself. The middle of f*cking nowhere. He needed someone who knows vulnerable places with good amounts of cash in the area. Think wider my friend. SA isn't the regular one city type GTA and that's what sets it apart. 

 

7)once again a bombardment of opinions without bringing up reasons. Ok. SA is a mess while a complete movie ripoff is better. Care to say why instead of just pointing it out? 

 

8)He didn't know who killed his mother back then. 

 

9)wasn't talking about free roam. Missions. Niko does not seem to give two sh*ts about his moral code(based on dialogues) during missions. 

1) No but it should have only been focused on LS and countryisde/desert like GTA V. You could have gotten the whole "get out of the hood" message in LS as well if Rockstar bothered to expand on the city. Smoke and Ryder also could have had more meaningful roles that way. SF and LV just make the story lose focus way too much and introduce new organizations and characters that don't matter

2) Well lets see the inspirations for GTA, Scarface, Boyz n the hood, Heat, The Sopranos etc. all movies/tv shows with consequences and rather bittersweet/dark endings. I dont think its just for real life, that would make for boring stories.

3. No that only shows that CJ was a coward who left his family after the whole thing with Brian..you never see CJ having supposedly bigger goals, that only happens in parts of San Fierro and especially in Las Venturas

4. I explained why, the story just loses focus completely and CJ becomes a messy character as a result. They are just unnecessary and tacked on since Rockstar focused more on the map than a well crafted narrative.  I don't even think the Las Venturas part is bad as a standlone (San Fierro is boring as f*ck though), they both just feel like distractions (too "complicated" for its own good). Real life is unfocused but the best stories in movies, tv shows etc. are focused and cohesive. SA is a weird mix of many random stories tacked on.

5. Still no excuse of letting yourself become a bitch. Can't respect a character like that

6. Already thought I did. SA lacks depth and consequences for its characters, its unfocused and doesn't really say anything (it hides from that to give you a cheesy happy ending and make it a power fantasy for the player). CJ is a very inconsistent character (sometimes a bitch, then so ruthless that he randomly buries an innocent alive or he steals a Jetpack from a secret military base..just because but it somehow too afraid to break out his brother or go against Tenpenny, even you ignored these two points).  GTA IV actually has more human characters, it shows the effects of leading a criminal lifestyle (most characters you meet have a bad ending one way or the other), the protagonist actually deals with the dark sh*t that happened to him instead of brushing it off, its cohesive and focused (you don't see Niko doing random things). SA is just as much of a "rip off", the LS and LV stories especially rip off typical hood and mob movies in every way

 

Edited by Journey_95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
1 hour ago, Journey_95 said:

1) No but it should have only been focused on LS and countryisde/desert like GTA V. You could have gotten the whole "get out of the hood" message in LS as well if Rockstar bothered to expand on the city. Smoke and Ryder also could have had more meaningful roles that way. SF and LV just make the story lose focus way too much and introduce new organizations and characters that don't matter

2) Well lets see the inspirations for GTA, Scarface, Boyz n the hood, Heat, The Sopranos etc. all movies/tv shows with consequences and rather bittersweet/dark endings. I dont think its just for real life, that would make for boring stories.

3. No that only shows that CJ was a coward who left his family after the whole thing with Brian..you never see CJ having supposedly bigger goals, that only happens in parts of San Fierro and especially in Las Venturas

4. I explained why, the story just loses focus completely and CJ becomes a messy character as a result. They are just unnecessary and tacked on since Rockstar focused more on the map than a well crafted narrative.  I don't even think the Las Venturas part is bad as a standlone (San Fierro is boring as f*ck though), they both just feel like distractions (too "complicated" for its own good). Real life is unfocused but the best stories in movies, tv shows etc. are focused and cohesive. SA is a weird mix of many random stories tacked on.

5. Still no excuse of letting yourself become a bitch. Can't respect a character like that

6. Already thought I did. SA lacks depth and consequences for its characters, its unfocused and doesn't really say anything (it hides from that to give you a cheesy happy ending and make it a power fantasy for the player). CJ is a very inconsistent character (sometimes a bitch, then so ruthless that he randomly buries an innocent alive or he steals a Jetpack from a secret military base..just because but it somehow too afraid to break out his brother or go against Tenpenny, even you ignored these two points).  GTA IV actually has more human characters, it shows the effects of leading a criminal lifestyle (most characters you meet have a bad ending one way or the other), the protagonist actually deals with the dark sh*t that happened to him instead of brushing it off, its cohesive and focused (you don't see Niko doing random things). SA is just as much of a "rip off", the LS and LV stories especially rip off typical hood and mob movies in every way

 

1)It's funny cause most of the criticism towards V's map is because it lacks another City. I'm not responding to the rest. Despite what I said you're still making statements without reasons just fueled by your bias towards the game. Let alone valid ones. 

 

2)You seem to lack the power to see the difference between the video game industry and the movies. In Video games consequences are often ignored more. Why? Because you do way more sh*t than any protagonist in any movie does and if they all wanted to have movie like consequences every protagonist would face a sad ending. Especially in GTA. You want consequences? Every family of anyone you killed wants you dead if you think real. Therefore we see These type of endings only when they make sense for a "game" (RDR, IV, TLAD). Otherwise we would face loads of games all with sad endings. But then again despite ignoring I think that really is what you want. 

 

3)More biased opinions and hatred  against the protagonist with no reasons and not understanding how difficult living in the hood is. Not gonna respond to this. No point. 

 

4)more statements without reasons. 

 

"IV sucks because it sucks" 

That's how I would sound like if I wanted to explain things like you. 

 

5)Now you're changing the subject of the paragraph. Seriously dude WTF? 

 

6)More Biased statements. This time I found a couple of reasons. Let's debunk them since they are all stupid. 

 

"go against Tenpenny" 

 

Tenpenny had CJ by the balls while Sweet was waiting for a trial. Any attempt on Tenpenny and sweet would be dead. After "High Noon" CJ officially broke free out of Tenpenny's hands because the opportunity came and the moment was right. 

 

 

"most characters you meet have a bad ending one way or the other" 

 

Enjoy it. Seems like that's exactly what you want. 

 

"the protagonist actually deals with the dark sh*t that happened to him instead of brushing it off, its cohesive and focused (you don't see Niko doing random things)" 

 

IV does that in the first quarter of the story. After that(Moving to Algonquin)  Niko turns to "Hitman Claude" and starts killing everyone for money. Oh and sometimes he Randomly remembers he is looking for someone while he is killing everyone. He also forgets Bulgarin at the end. So much for dealing with the dark "sh*t". 

 

This was my last response to you in this topic. I took you as one the more sensible guys in this forum but this last couple of posts actually made me think your account has been hacked. Seriously didn't sound like you. You're completely biased against SA and there's nothing I can do about it. There's no point in discussing things when someone actively calls anything in the game sh*t without reasons. 

 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Journey_95
9 hours ago, TheSantader25 said:

1)It's funny cause most of the criticism towards V's map is because it lacks another City. I'm not responding to the rest. Despite what I said you're still making statements without reasons just fueled by your bias towards the game. Let alone valid ones. 

 

2)You seem to lack the power to see the difference between the video game industry and the movies. In Video games consequences are often ignored more. Why? Because you do way more sh*t than any protagonist in any movie does and if they all wanted to have movie like consequences every protagonist would face a sad ending. Especially in GTA. You want consequences? Every family of anyone you killed wants you dead if you think real. Therefore we see These type of endings only when they make sense for a "game" (RDR, IV, TLAD). Otherwise we would face loads of games all with sad endings. But then again despite ignoring I think that really is what you want. 

 

3)More biased opinions and hatred  against the protagonist with no reasons and not understanding how difficult living in the hood is. Not gonna respond to this. No point. 

 

4)more statements without reasons. 

 

"IV sucks because it sucks" 

That's how I would sound like if I wanted to explain things like you. 

 

5)Now you're changing the subject of the paragraph. Seriously dude WTF? 

 

6)More Biased statements. This time I found a couple of reasons. Let's debunk them since they are all stupid. 

 

"go against Tenpenny" 

 

Tenpenny had CJ by the balls while Sweet was waiting for a trial. Any attempt on Tenpenny and sweet would be dead. After "High Noon" CJ officially broke free out of Tenpenny's hands because the opportunity came and the moment was right. 

 

 

"most characters you meet have a bad ending one way or the other" 

 

Enjoy it. Seems like that's exactly what you want. 

 

"the protagonist actually deals with the dark sh*t that happened to him instead of brushing it off, its cohesive and focused (you don't see Niko doing random things)" 

 

IV does that in the first quarter of the story. After that(Moving to Algonquin)  Niko turns to "Hitman Claude" and starts killing everyone for money. Oh and sometimes he Randomly remembers he is looking for someone while he is killing everyone. He also forgets Bulgarin at the end. So much for dealing with the dark "sh*t". 

 

This was my last response to you in this topic. I took you as one the more sensible guys in this forum but this last couple of posts actually made me think your account has been hacked. Seriously didn't sound like you. You're completely biased against SA and there's nothing I can do about it. There's no point in discussing things when someone actively calls anything in the game sh*t without reasons. 

 

Dude calm down, lol. I never said GTA SA was "sh*t" (in fact its a good enjoyable game, just overrated) but I have my problems with the story that I explained well enough (but clearly they aren't valid reasons for you). You are just as biased against GTA IV, yet apparently its fine there..at least don't be a hypocrite. I wanted to respond to your points but its better to leave this discussion since we won't agree at all

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UndeadPotat0

Huge fan of Michael De Santa. His character was a mix of John Marston and Max Payne and it shows how much depth he had and how conflicted he is throughout the game dealing with trying to be the good guy but lacking the ability due to his criminal lifestyle. I give Franklin flak for not getting enough screen time and being a underdeveloped character but he was way better written then cj imo.

Edited by UndeadPotat0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
American Venom
On 10/16/2018 at 12:31 PM, UndeadPotat0 said:

Huge fan of Michael De Santa. His character was a mix of John Marston and Max Payne and it shows how much depth he had and how conflicted he is throughout the game dealing with trying to be the good guy but lacking the ability due to his criminal lifestyle. I give Franklin flak for not getting enough screen time and being a underdeveloped character but he was way better written then cj imo.

I don't mind Michael either. GTA V doesn't have that many great original creations, but Michael is a stand out. I could tolerate the whole playing as him like I wish it was back in 2011.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deadasdisco

Favourite protagonist would be Tommy, but honourable mention to the supporting characters. Kent Paul use to kill me hahaha, hilarious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grotti Vigilante

This is actually a harder choice for me to make than it was deciding which antagonist was the best because I expect different things from protagonists. To round it all off though...

  • I was completely indifferent towards Claude since he has no character. His most defining characteristic is that he is mute. That's it. 
  • I like Tommy Vercetti and how even though he was leading a new crime family after taking over Diaz's mansion, he is willing to do work himself rather than just sit around all day ordering people about. He didn't waste time in "Bar Brawl" dealing with a problem Lance failed to deal with. But he's a bit too quick to get angry and resort to violence for my personal liking.
  • I also liked CJ who kind of grew from a hood rat to a successful rapper manager, garage owner, casino shareholder, you get the picture. I love some of his quotes too, they make me laugh. He is a bit of a buster though of course, of course, as stated many times in the game by Ryder. 
  • I didn't mind Toni Cipriani. But I don't particularly find him very memorable, so I can't comment on him much.
  • I wasn't too fond of Vic Vance. He's all about not doing drugs and stuff, but he then proceeds to build a whole criminal empire out of it along with other crimes. Just the inconsistency and such. Again, not very memorable either.
  • I like Niko. He's more human than the previous characters, and he is very clearly molded by his dark past and such. But he's still loyal and protective of the ones he loves. The problem is, he seems to not care when he's killing people, and even if you choose to spare Darko you can immediately negate his development to not desiring revenge by choosing to take revenge on Dimitri. That's probably more down to endings though.
  • I liked Johnny Klebitz for the most part. He's not reckless like Billy, and he's not blindly loyal. He has his principles and he's a sensible biker who seeks to not start gang wars (you know, outside of gang war missions) and had a truce with the Angels of Death. I don't like what he became in GTA V though, especially since he should've completely cut off Ashley from his life after everything with Ray.
  • I think that Luis Lopez was a bit of a douche. Like Tommy he can get very intolerant and easily angered, resorting to violence. For the most part though he's alright, and like Johnny he's not really so reckless as to blindly follow his boss. But again he is still a bit of a douche. But he's actually high on my list of characters I like.
  • I prefer Michael De Santa to all other GTA V protagonists. He's really what binds the story together mostly, and while he's a bit violent and irrationally angry, he loves his family deep down. He's a man going through a mid-life crisis who eventually sorts himself out in the end of the story. He's the best developed GTA V character in my opinion.
  • I wasn't too fond of Franklin Clinton since he felt a bit like a watered down CJ being held back by the hood and his homies but wanting something more. He's not really original in that sense, and you can easily decide what kind of person he is when you either chose to make him betray Michael or Trevor, or even go against all his enemies. It's again more down to the endings if anything.
  • I know this may not go down well with some, but Trevor is overrated. I like how he's very rarely a hypocrite and even still loyal to Michael judging by his willingness to work with him and not kill him after everything, and if you chose to kill Michael he will never want to see Franklin again. He's loyal and he's mostly principled. But he's very angry and needlessly mean-spirited, but he does have insecurities. In fact, he's very human for a lunatic. He's up there with Michael in terms of development.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iiCriminnaaL 49
On 9/21/2018 at 8:11 PM, iiCriminnaaL 49 said:
  1. Jonathan Klebitz (TLAD)
    Thomas Vercetti (VC)

     Aside from the badass personalities of Tommy and Johnny, there's something I really like about both of them: even though they become leaders of their own crime organizations, they don't just send some goons to do their job, but they do it themselves, in constant of many gang leaders (such as: Salvatore Leone, Sonny Forelli, Mitch Baker, Kane, Paul Sindacco, the Mendez brothers, Dimitri Rascalov, and even more...).

 

     As for Johnny, some could argue that he was just working as a simple hitman for Liz Torres and Boccino, rather than behaving as a gang leader, making him similar to Niko when he should be different, but I'd like to point out that if you pay more attention to the events you'll realize that he is more of an active partner/associate than a paid hitman. To be mentioned, whenever there's a deal to make, he's always the one who takes the lead, which can be noticed during Buyer's Market, Shifting Weight and Collector's Item, which shows that he's the closest man to the ones he's associated with. Not to mention that he's still able to call for backup in almost every situation, and aside from Terry and Clay, the best example of what I mentioned appears during the mission Diamond In The Rough, where he tells Jim to call several bikers of The Lost MC to back him up.

 

Such a shame that R* wasted his character in a horrible way.

 

P.S: That doesn't mean that I dislike the mentioned gang leaders apart from Tommy and Johnny. I consider most of them to be among my favorite characters in the series, especially Mitch.

Edited by iiCriminnaaL 49

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mafia Assassin®

Niko

CJ

Johnny

Tommy

Michael

Vic

Toni

Claude

Luis

Trevor

Franklin

Huang

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tacymist

Niko was my favorite since that time Dwayne Forge was telling him how hard his life was. And then Niko just says "Back in my country we didn't have electricity until I was 12" and Dwayne is just like "Dayum..." I really like how Niko was written, I actually felt for the dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
American Venom
4 minutes ago, Tacymist said:

Niko was my favorite since that time Dwayne Forge was telling him how hard his life was. And then Niko just says "Back in my country we didn't have electricity until I was 12" and Dwayne is just like "Dayum..." I really like how Niko was written, I actually felt for the dude.

Or when he reveals to Kate about what really happened to Roman's mother. He's the type of person you can feel for, but at the same time he maintains a wonderful sense of humour. I love when he rips on Vlad, Roman, Brucie etc. There's so many layers to him it's no wonder he's the most favoured among fans.😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iiCriminnaaL 49
Just now, Miamivicecity said:

Or when he reveals to Kate about what really happened to Roman's mother. He's the type of person you can feel for, but at the same time he maintains a wonderful sense of humour. I love when he rips on Vlad, Roman, Brucie etc. There's so many layersto him it's no wonder he's the most favoured among fans.😎

And for some reason some still seem to picture him as a "depressive crybaby". I think they got him confused with Trevor 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Papa_Flow1
On 9/24/2013 at 11:38 AM, Toshio_maxoS said:

Tommy... but Niko got a better story.

Then Michael... I like to see how he trys to safe his family.

 

At the end... last one is Trevor. I love his crazy character but actually he is the biggest dick I've ever met.

And I dont like CJ... dunno why so many love him... I dont.

I love CJ he’s such a gangster. He’s the gang banger I never was lol. Love Tommy the most and Niko does have a great story , I just feel bad you had to lose either your cousin or the love of your life 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Euri13

What about Mike from gta advance? Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tafadzwa Smilogy

WHO IS YOUR BEST PROTAGONIST IN ALL THE GTA GAMES INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING ONES?

1.Michael De Santa

2.Tommy Vercetti 

3.Trevor Phillips 

4.Carl Johnson

5.Niko Bellic

•••

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
universetwisters

Toni because he cares about his mama enough to kill people who f*ck her in diapers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25

1.CJ

2.Michael

3.Tommy

4.Trevor

5.Luis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JPFL

My Top 5:

1.Niko Bellic

2.Tommy Vercetti

3.Toni Cipriani

4.Johnny Klebitz

5.Luis Lopez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XdetraxX

in my opinion it is Tommy Vercetti . To big sentiment for this character . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.