Jump to content

Who should trevor have killed?


Recommended Posts

Real_Badgirl

How about Mori Kibutz. Everybody pretty much hated him and he could have been ripping off Trevor by not paying some performance enhancing drugs. Trevor could have murdered him in an even brutal manner after Morie started popping off at the mouth and nobody would have been mad. They should have made so Brucie isn't even that mad.

 

I agree, Mori has got to be my least favorite character in the whole series. Whenever he starts bragging about his sexual dominance, I like to shoot him in the nuts until he dies.

 

My feelings on Johnny are neutral, but I would have loved it if Trevor killed Mori.

Mori would have no impact. Brucie, who wasn't exactly a hard case, reduced him to a blubbering baby with one punch to the nose.

 

If you wanted Trevor to enter killing an existing character from IV, it's hard to think of another one who was hard, still alive, and might have been out in the sticks. Blaine County was arguably a more realistic biker setting than Liberty City.

  • Like 1
Hmmm nice bike

If they wanted to off a protagonist, how about Luis Lopez? Tony Prince would go to San Andreas for rehab or to retire (he did say he wanted to leave Liberty City for some spa town, and I think Luis even told him to go to the desert) but would end up getting hooked on meth after meeting Trevor, then Luis goes to find Trevor to kick his ass and Trevor kicks Luis' head in (probably while screaming "EY BRO, CONYO").

They should have made it a character that everybody hated instead of a beloved protagonist. It didn't affect my enjoyment of the game in anyway but I liked TLATD and I was sad to see him go like that. If he were to die they should have had him go out in a blaze of glory. I was also thinking Rocco Pelosi but I think his death was done right.

universetwisters

Trevor shoots Tracy in the kneecaps for ignoring his sexual advances and Tracy dies of blood loss, much to Michael's chagrin.

WorldWideFM

I am always pleased when I play a videogame or watch a television program that has a willingness to kill off major characters, it always makes the stakes feel higher and we have a problem with television here in the UK that it doesn't happen nearly often enough. For that reason, nothing pleased me more than seeing Johnny die in V, I loved the guy, but the whole point is that it's not a fairytale, time runs out for every GTA protagonist eventually and they are not invincible, I am glad that they writers are happy to tackle that head on with deaths like Johnny and Victor.

 

So for that reason; keep Johnny. f*ck, put in Niko if you want and piss off even more people. But I am always pleased to see big characters kileld off, shows guts which too many writers lack.

 

Sadly this forum is full of ten year olds who have a superhero complex.

Edited by jarredxmorris
  • Like 2
ChrisMathers3501

Hmmm...the most badass character in GTA ever...just how DO you kill him off?

 

Hm. Let me think. Ah! Okay. You need an army of enemy gang members, fifty imaginary clowns stuffed in one imaginary clown car, a trio of cow-mutilating redneck-abducting anal-probing aliens in a flying saucer, a team of Merryweather lizard people, NOOSE, the FIB, the IAA, the entire US Army, and once everybody's dead, Trevor is so pissed off and doesn't have anyone left to kill, so he crashes the car he's in, flies out, runs at the nearest wall and headbutts it until dead.

I am always pleased when I play a videogame or watch a television program that has a willingness to kill off major characters, it always makes the stakes feel higher and we have a problem with television here in the UK that it doesn't happen nearly often enough. For that reason, nothing pleased me more than seeing Johnny die in V, I loved the guy, but the whole point is that it's not a fairytale, time runs out for every GTA protagonist eventually and they are not invincible, I am glad that they writers are happy to tackle that head on with deaths like Johnny and Victor.

 

So for that reason; keep Johnny. f*ck, put in Niko if you want and piss off even more people. But I am always pleased to see big characters kileld off, shows guts which too many writers lack.

 

Sadly this forum is full of ten year olds who have a superhero complex.

This is bullsh*t how johnny wasn't invincible. He is a gta protagonist. Literally every gta protagonist is depicted to be about as invincible as superman. All of them can easily take on 50 cops.

 

The scene was only creates as a cheap way to create shock and controversy. Nothing more.

 

OT: I wonder what scott hill, johnny's voice actor, thought about the scene

I am always pleased when I play a videogame or watch a television program that has a willingness to kill off major characters, it always makes the stakes feel higher and we have a problem with television here in the UK that it doesn't happen nearly often enough. For that reason, nothing pleased me more than seeing Johnny die in V, I loved the guy, but the whole point is that it's not a fairytale, time runs out for every GTA protagonist eventually and they are not invincible, I am glad that they writers are happy to tackle that head on with deaths like Johnny and Victor.

 

So for that reason; keep Johnny. f*ck, put in Niko if you want and piss off even more people. But I am always pleased to see big characters kileld off, shows guts which too many writers lack.

 

Sadly this forum is full of ten year olds who have a superhero complex.

Johnny isn't a major character in GTA V's story. R* should've let things develop a little more before they hit us with something that heavy. You loved Johnny, but you were happy about his death, simply because R* decided to kill him? Or did it make the stakes feel higher? I don't understand why you're giving them credit they don't deserve. They killed off a protagonist from another game in the most disrespectful way, and the explanation was even weaker than Johnny's behavior in that ridiculously short amount of time.

 

What R* did doesn't take guts at all. They knew it wouldn't mean anything for the actual story they were telling. If it was good writing, you would've actually felt something, instead of just being happy that it happened. Like nobum62 said, it was just about shock and controversy.

Racecarlock

So I see some tommy vercetti and niko bellic suggestions in the crowd. Tommy would be an old man, I don't think someone about 40 years old could take on trevor. Same as the meth head thing really.

 

Niko Bellic. Now there's a fight. Niko, however, doesn't strike me as a meth kind of guy, nor someone who would go anywhere near trailer parks let alone trevor's hood.

 

Some suggestions for everyone. So, what, just random people around him? His own crew? What? Random pedestrians don't exactly carry much emotional weight in their deaths. Same goes for that hippie suggestion. I don't think hippies are known to be tough opponents.

 

One guy says still johnny, but he brings a bunch of people to back him up this time so it turns into a big showdown. That's not a bad idea. It gives johnny a bigger and showier death.

 

Another guy says trevor's mom. Well, we don't know who she is. She's not exactly a recognizable face. She's not known for being tough in the GTA series yet. Hell, she's just a random quest. I don't think that will carry a lot of emotional weight. Unless people really get invested in characters we've never seen before and therefore feel something when they die.

HaythamKenway
Johnny isn't a major character in GTA V's story. R* should've let things develop a little more before they hit us with something that heavy. You loved Johnny, but you were happy about his death, simply because R* decided to kill him? Or did it make the stakes feel higher? I don't understand why you're giving them credit they don't deserve. They killed off a protagonist from another game in the most disrespectful way, and the explanation was even weaker than Johnny's behavior in that ridiculously short amount of time.

 

 

What R* did doesn't take guts at all. They knew it wouldn't mean anything for the actual story they were telling. If it was good writing, you would've actually felt something, instead of just being happy that it happened. Like nobum62 said, it was just about shock and controversy.

I do agree with you that R* should have developed Johnny and the Lost before offing them. That's just the problem with V's story. A lot of things happening, a lot of small side plots, but no room to properly develop them. I also agree that R* was aiming for a cheap shock and controversy, rather than giving TLaD's cast a proper conclusion.

 

Yes, I was shocked. Yes, I was sad. Johnny is my second favorite GTA protag, just after Michael and TLaD is probably my favorite GTA overall. But I'm still quite okay with his death. I can definitely see Johnny breaking down after the end of TLaD. It's not something I would have written, but it makes sense to me and it probably even enriched my experience with TLaD. I just replayed that game and what happened in V only made it more poignant and tragic.

 

Watching Billy go off rails, with Johnny criticizing him, only to realize that in 5 years, Johnny too, will become a victim of his own addiction. Watching the brothers tear each other apart, which led to Johnny losing foothold and having to leave Alderney. Watching his inability to led go of Ashley that will ultimately cost him his life. Watching Johnny's reaction to Jim getting killed because of his own greed, which probably gave Johnny a tremendous feeling of guilt, thus paving the way to succumbing to drugs. Watching him making a vow that he'll keep sending money to Jim's wife, giving him a reason to get back together with Terry and Clay to make some money. Watching Ashley talking about "riding into the sunset" and realizing that's probably what Johnny really thought he'll get when he left with Ash, Terry and Clay for Blaine County. Leaving everything behind. Starting anew. No Billy. No Alderney. No burned down clubhouse. No driving around places and remembering the good times he's spend there with his brothers.

 

R*'s games in the current generation were about past and dealing with it. I think Johnny, post-TLaD was very similar to Max Payne in MP3. But while Max has found a new reason to live, let go of what happened to him and of dwelling in his own depression and gave up on bad influences, Johnny was unable do so.

 

It's sad and if I had a choice, I'd have Johnny run a chop shop with Angus, rather than have him end up like this, but I like V's conclusion to TLaD, in a morbid, unhappy sort of way. The same sort of way that makes me appreciate RDR's ending. I think people wouldn't be so up in arms about this if we had at least one mission string dealing with Trevor and the Lost before Johnny's death, instead of killing him right in the first cutscene. The confusion and incomprehension it raised was what made Johnny's death bad, in my opinion, not that it actually happened or the way it happened.

Edited by SFPD officer

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 0 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 0 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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