Rethinking GTA: Building GTA On Foundation Of Player Fun

[Mister Pink]

I'm going to try make this as short as possible as I could write a huge essay on it as I'll I think about is GTA and what makes it successful and what doesn't.

 

 

I was thinking that empire building in a GTA is always a sure way to impress fans. Why? The player is able to vicariously act out their fantasies through the character in order to get what they want. It's a time where players get to do what they want to do without real-life consequence. That, is GTA in it's most basic form. So lets rewind to GTA: Vice City

 

In this game, the plot is simple. You were sent down to start and drugs empire for your Mafia family in New York and send money up. Your start-up capital/product gets stolen. While you're down there doing business, you practically go AWOL and start earning for you. It turns in to a tale of you taking it all for yourself.

 

Can you see the appeal in this? The player (you) is playing for you and the character. It feeds in to our id, our greed our desire to do as we please instead of GTA IV or V where we are always being strung along for somebody else... doing other people's dirty work... with little or no rewards.

 

GTA seemed to be more about the player.. making their fortune and capitalizing on that. So many people were disappointed at working for the FIB in GTA.. It's a great storyline, maybe for a film but I get the feeling Rockstar are making virtual films now and are actually forgetting about the gaming experience in favour of them wanting to show you their "film." They know this so multiple character switching as almost a cynical attempt to try bring back the gameplay which again, is just trying to fit in their mould of a story they want to present.

 

I believe gaming should put the player first in a game like GTA. The story and the gameplay should be built on that foundation using a a good reward system, rewarding the player for particular achievements or rewarding the playing for going above and beyond what the game needs for completion (ex. getting all gold in driving school in San Andreas rewards with Hot Knife)

 

I want this:

 

Player(you) mentality/mindset + fun gameplay = Progatonist x Story

 

Rockstar seem to be doing it like this: Story + Protag = Gameplay x player.

 

Vice City had Tommy Vercetti. He had his opinions but they reflected what the player would feel in that situation at the time. There wasn't huge internal monologues, speeches and self-righteous babble that came in to the series when it went HD.

 

Empire building + a great reward system + real pursuit of money with a story that doesn't conflict with what the player wants to do with gameplay is my dream GTA.

 

San Andreas had CJ doing dirty work for cops but CJ got to build his empire, property buying, businesses etc and he won out in the end. So we can have an enjoyable story and the player can be in the driving seat again.

 

What are your thoughts? Would you like to have a GTA where the focus is on the player again and not playing another character who's interests don't reflect the gameplay you want to have? Example: Michaels family life/Yoga etc.

 

The interests of the character you play must reflect that of the player.. For example, we all like to steal cars in GTA. Thats were the player and the character gel in terms of their wants and desires. I think we can all agree on that.

 

We don't want to play as a peace-loving hippie. Yes, it might be fun but we might not being stealing cars in the name of Karma any more or punching people randomly.

 

Aquiring money in a GTA is fun and rewarding as is buying really cool sh*t that we couldn't afford in real life like a mansion or mansions. I think we can all agree on that. Then what's to stop Rockstar desgining a character and game that reflects our collective gaming desires.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Mister Pink

[Osho]

I'm certainly with you on that as well. I always wished about playing in a setting made with care for the players to be able to freely create his own character through multiple choices, variety in many different ways you want to approach the gameplay, while exploring the truly open ended sandbox world without neither compromises that keep you firmly stick and act according to the realism of the narrative nor game designers own constraints on how player can use the character to play.

 

If Rockstar finds the story that fits a narrative with such a kind of setting then I'm definitely SOLD.

[The Deadite]

At least we agree on something, Vice City history it's the more straight forward of all histories, no complications just Tommy creating an empire.

I found more enjoyable the history of V than SA , at least it makes more sense and is not an stretched mess.

You have a personal vehicle, guess what?
You can still rob vehicles!!!

And they are even storable!!!

Buyable properties are a useless feature more now that we have instant save, besides they are waste of disk space that could get used on others interiors like banks, whorehouses, warehouses, banks and burger shots.

In V we can buy cars , boats, and planes, things that are more enjoyable than a mansion or fancy house.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Midnight Hitman

[.Ryan.]

I was really disappointed with how the properties were put in GTA V. Considering it was the first HD GTA to bring it back (Although in CTW you can buy safehouses) I expected more I guess. The whole thing feels like an afterthought as an excuse to make money more useful.

 

The only property I feel like I have any real input with is the Mackensie Airfield. Everything else is just filler IMO. It would be so much more enjoyable if Michael, Trevor and Franklin were actually interested in building an empire rather than being investors so to speak.

 

This is the aspect I enjoyed in VC and SA. Especially VC. I've said it before, but the first time I finished VC I felt like a king. GTA V doesn't give me that feeling and it's mostly because we're doing the dirty work for the FIB for most of the story.

 

If GTA VI brings properties back I'd rather it be in the vein of VC an SA than GTA V where properties feel like afterthoughts.

[HaythamKenway]

An excuse plot isn't a prerequisite for an enjoyable GTA. You can make a heavily character-driven story that aligns with the player's desires in gameplay. See AC IV for an excellent example of that. The protagonists didn't limit Rockstar's choices when it came to activities. Quite the opposite and with three protagonists in the game, they've had even more options than ever. The problem is that Rockstar didn't bother.

 

Trevor had the background to make empire building system viable. But they didn't bother.

Franklin had the background to make an Import/Export system viable. But they didn't bother.

And don't even get me started on optional heists as side missions. There is no excuse for them not being in the game.

 

The lack of options is the problem. Like you said, SA had CJ doing dirty, paycheck-less work for the cops, but was able to build his empire at the same time. We have no such options in V. It's all just feds, Weston, Madrazo and Trevor's repeated attacks on Merryweather, that never end successfully. And even out of the story, we have no options to build something, to strive towards something. But that certainly can't be blamed on the game being story-driven or characters limiting Rockstar's choices. Even if Michael wants to retire (which itself isn't an excuse, as Luis Lopez too was "somewhat legal", but worked perfectly as a GTA protag), Trevor and Franklin don't. If Franklin ends up as a golf-playing, clothes-ironing, sad personification of boredom, it's not because of the story, but because Rockstar didn't bother.

 

As for protagonists "whining" and being burdened with guilt, exhausted from violence, wanting to leave the criminal life and having therapy sessions - only to murder ten innocent bystanders on the way home - I don't find these things much of a problem. Inner conflict like that only makes characters more interesting to me. We always have to consider free roaming and rampages as non-canon and detached from the story, but even in the story and canon activities, those traits don't limit Rockstar's gameplay choices. Let's take Niko for an example - he's intentionally portrayed as a hypocrite who is unable to truly abandon the violence, so you can have the inner conflict, yet have him commit numerous criminal actions. Or Johnny and Luis - both more symphatetic and humane than previous protags, yet they aren't at odds with the games' gameplay in any way. We don't need 2D self-insert like Tommy or a madman like Trevor to make GTA's story and gameplay work together.

Edited February 7, 2015 by HaythamKenway

[zuckmeslow]

this game feels like they took certain elements from previous gta's and crammed it into a movie sized script, then stretched it for a video game. it feels like its big but at the same time its missing many things story wise. everything happens so quickly i sometimes feel as if there was more character development in the trailers than in the actual game.

[the ironic one]

I consider empire building as a natural step in the evolution of GTA games. That makes GTA VC superior to GTA 3. So now they stepped back. I miss this feature. I hope it'll be back.

What I want is a cost-profits mechanism. Not just money. I want a possibility to extort legal business, establish drug rockets, gambling rockets and so one, in order to get cash flows that could cover my expenses. And expenses would be: bribing cops, fbi agents, judges ect. And of course my crew, my personal army. And it's up to me how many gangsters I want to hire.

I expect quality. There shouldn't be like 100 businesses to extort or rackets to establish. Let's give us 20 but all different and unique. Of course the number of gangsters we can hire should be unlimited as long as we can afford them. so that we face a choice. We can hire more gangsters and buy them some better weapons and cars or spend it on something else.

It would be nice if we could start a guns smuggling racket to earn some money and get some more sophisticated weapons for our mobs.

[Mister Pink]

An excuse plot isn't a prerequisite for an enjoyable GTA. You can make a heavily character-driven story that aligns with the player's desires in gameplay. See AC IV for an excellent example of that. The protagonists didn't limit Rockstar's choices when it came to activities. Quite the opposite and with three protagonists in the game, they've had even more options than ever. The problem is that Rockstar didn't bother.

 

Trevor had the background to make empire building system viable. But they didn't bother.

Franklin had the background to make an Import/Export system viable. But they didn't bother.

And don't even get me started on optional heists as side missions. There is no excuse for them not being in the game.

 

The lack of options is the problem. Like you said, SA had CJ doing dirty, paycheck-less work for the cops, but was able to build his empire at the same time. We have no such options in V. It's all just feds, Weston, Madrazo and Trevor's repeated attacks on Merryweather, that never end successfully. And even out of the story, we have no options to build something, to strive towards something. But that certainly can't be blamed on the game being story-driven or characters limiting Rockstar's choices. Even if Michael wants to retire (which itself isn't an excuse, as Luis Lopez too was "somewhat legal", but worked perfectly as a GTA protag), Trevor and Franklin don't. If Franklin ends up as a golf-playing, clothes-ironing, sad personification of boredom, it's not because of the story, but because Rockstar didn't bother.

 

As for protagonists "whining" and being burdened with guilt, exhausted from violence, wanting to leave the criminal life and having therapy sessions - only to murder ten innocent bystanders on the way home - I don't find these things much of a problem. Inner conflict like that only makes characters more interesting to me. We always have to consider free roaming and rampages as non-canon and detached from the story, but even in the story and canon activities, those traits don't limit Rockstar's gameplay choices. Let's take Niko for an example - he's intentionally portrayed as a hypocrite who is unable to truly abandon the violence, so you can have the inner conflict, yet have him commit numerous criminal actions. Or Johnny and Luis - both more symphatetic and humane than previous protags, yet they aren't at odds with the games' gameplay in any way. We don't need 2D self-insert like Tommy or a madman like Trevor to make GTA's story and gameplay work together.

 

Hi, sorry I'm only replying now.

 

While I agree that an excuse plot isn't a prerequisite for an an enjoyable GTA as you so eloquently put it, I do believe it's almost shares the same foundations of "classic" GTA's which are revered amongst the GTA community, especially hardcore fans and long time supporters. Not only does it share the same foundations but it's something that has been diluted in previous GTA's. While GTA advances leaps graphically, technically etc, it also moves away from some of the more simpler fundamental aspects such as empire building in favour of new thrills.

 

While I'm all for evolution of GTA and the seek of new thrills in a GTA, the empire building aspect could have provided 10 GTA titles before it got boring and repetitive. Instead we had two titles (maybe 3, if you include V) that kind of flirted with the empire building aspect but none that characteristically came out and said.. this is an empire-building game where the game "ends" as soon as your hunger dies for MORE.

 

We had a "pursuit of the all-mighty dollar" tagline because Rockstar knows we want that game but it was a bait and switch tactic where it became this diluted, character-switching story with poorly developed characters and underwhelming ending.

 

I just hope the next GTA is focused around what the players want to do gameplay-wise with huge focus on tapping to the our greed and play and reward etc.

 

Of course with GTA Online, I wouldn't expect the single player to be given as much attention again.

 

I can envision us getting half a game and the rest of it drip-feed to us via DLC to get us coming back for online.

 

I really hope a new developer is cooking something to compete with GTA in the future. It can't have a monopoly on this style of open-world game.

[HaythamKenway]

@Mister Pink

 

True, true. Since the HD Era started and Rockstar started to really focus on the plot, they never nailed gameplay and story integration as well as other developers did. TLaD came very, very close, but that game didn't really take the player's wishes into account - Johnny ends up with even less than with what he came in, the clubhouse is burned down (taking some activities with it) and the money means nothing (not to mention that he usually has only a fraction of money Niko and Luis get throughout the story at that point). It was story influencing gameplay, not the other way around.

 

Since I'm a story kind of guy, I was completely okay with that, but I would lie if I said I wouldn't want a game that would take it the other way. Good writers can make a great story in a game focused primarily on gameplay too. Again, AC IV is an excellent example of that. That game was heavily gameplay-focused, but it had one of the best stories in the AC series. And you can certainly make a "success" story about a man taking over the criminal underground and solidifying his power that is deep and thought provoking and not just some flat power fantasy (The Godfather Part II, anyone?). In short, I can't see how empire building can't work with Houser's HD Era storytelling.

 

I find it ironic that V gives us probably most options we ever had in the series to spend the cash and the trio ends up with much more money than previous protags had, but it all feels hollow. They just give you that money for completing the story that you would have finished anyway, now go buy some cars you just stole on the street in previous games. Compare that, again, to AC IV or Rogue, where, when you end up with a fat bank account, it feels like a result of your hard work - raiding ships, settlements, renovating businesses etc.

 

There is nothing interesting or unique about properties (with an exception of Trevor's Grapeseed airport, the cab depot and the tow truck business) and you never make a connection to them similar to those in Vice City. You can't upgrade them, level them up and participate in a variety of side missions in them like in VCS. There is no sense of ownership, no feeling of pride - "Yes, I managed to do that" - like you would get from looking at a fully upgraded Jackdaw, Monteriggioni, Vice City map full of the Vance family empire icons and so on. And there is a painful lack of rewards overall. You know how SR games give you a cool new weapon, outfit or ability at the end of each activity string? GTAs only rarely have rewards like that, so when playing side missions, you usually don't have that much to strive for.

 

I competely share your hope that we'll see some competition from other developers. From this perspective, I can see why is the loss of SR as a crime sandbox so unfortunate. SR easily could have been that game. Or The Godfather video game series, which went full-on in that direction before EA shut it down. Nowadays, the only other crime sandbox we have is Sleeping Dogs, which is more in GTA IV area of the genre.

Edited February 13, 2015 by HaythamKenway

[.Ryan.]

 

 

I find it ironic that V gives us probably most options we ever had in the series to spend the cash and the trio ends up with much more money than previous protags had, but it all feels hollow. They just give you that money for completing the story that you would have finished anyway, now go buy some cars you just stole on the street in previous games. Compare that, again, to AC IV or Rogue, where, when you end up with a fat bank account, it feels like a result of your hard work - raiding ships, settlements, renovating businesses etc.

 

 

On this point I find with GTA V unlike VC and SA there's really no point in doing side missions to obtain money. You're right in saying it feels hollow. In VC and SA I always done the side missions so I could save up and buy businesses or whatever.

 

It's just not the same in GTA V IMO. I'd also put most of the blame on the stock market since it's really the only way to make a decent amount of coin outside of the story.

[PhillBellic]

Fun, is exactly what GTA V in particular needs.

[Luddite]

Progress maybe?

 

..as opposed to being in static Limbo for the entire game, longing for a reward which feels empty and meaningless because the game had ended long ago.

__

10: btw- this is the #of times I have to resubmit this post to have it accepted.

[wiizardii]

That would be great, also considering we could have a criminal who has a mixed criminal personality: He is an assasin, a drug dealer, drug manufacturer, mafia boss, or something like that.

[Osho]

Rockstar can really show the true potential of roleplaying in sandbox/open worlds based on crimes by opening up as many interesting possibilities for players to enjoy if they focus upon the same through the gameplay and progress in the story "consistently" without any irrelevant things to break the experience like: Michaels family issues.

I really don't like to experience such boring reality shows happening under the title GTA. After playing missions for instance, Father/Son, Daddy's Little Girl etc. there's little impact upon me and ends up being just a boring filler part. I feel like they should put much focus on the crime aspect only through the story mode and cut out such boring parts altogether. Even outside of the story the massive empty open world got almost no crime related things to do nor optional missions to enjoy.

I can see a lot of the potential was wasted in favor of junk like collectibles and time wasters like tennis, golf and, scripted linear S&F and RE stuff.

Rethinking GTA is what Rockstar seriously needs to do.

[helpplease]

Not only was VC story simple but even the layout of the game was simple. It was basically 2 straight roads which rooted out. This meant the map layout was easy to remember and that you can drive very fast to the next location.