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

    1. GTANet.com

    1. GTA Online

      1. The Cayo Perico Heist
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA VI

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

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

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

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

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

    1. Announcements

    2. Support

    3. Suggestions

Should the next GTA be more serious?


UAL

Recommended Posts

Algonquin Assassin
2 hours ago, DexMacLeod said:

It's not consistent, though. The main character wasn't even consistent. Niko goes from complaining about killing one minute to mowing down everyone in his path the next. GTA IV's ludonarrative dissonance is one of the most common complaints about the game.

And it's a bullsh*t complaint really that shows some people don't understand the story very well. As iiCriminnaL 49 said Niko's "complaints" about killing are more to do with Roman getting them into hot water and Niko has to try to get them out of it than something he genuinely despises.

 

Lets also remember Niko was a solider and worked as a human smuggler in the past. Killing was something that made up a large part of his life. Hell he works as a hired gun/assassin for the majority of the game and doesn't mind whacking gang members, but the way some people make it seem it's like he makes long rants how killing is wrong and no one should do it blah, blah, blah lol. Exaggerated would be putting it too kindly. It's just objectively WRONG!!!!. 

 

Anyway Niko's as consistent as they come and there's a reason he's often regarded as the best protagonist in the series. The people who complain about shoddy concepts like "Ludonarritve dissonance" have no idea. :)

 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
9 hours ago, iiCriminnaaL 49 said:

they ruined it all with the Triads and their ridiculous sexual jokes in Bury The Hatchet.

Oh yea let's not forget the part of Michael going through his dialogue with Amanda in his head while driving to the graveyard..........it's parts like those that makes you think you are playing a completely different game.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
superen23

Doesn't matter. If you know how to make them good everything is fine. I can't except something because of GTA creators leaving Rockstar.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194
19 hours ago, DexMacLeod said:

It's not consistent, though. The main character wasn't even consistent. Niko goes from complaining about killing one minute to mowing down everyone in his path the next. GTA IV's ludonarrative dissonance is one of the most common complaints about the game.

It just shows, that some people don't understand story. I would love all characters in games to be so "inconsistent" as Niko was.

Edited by Kris194
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
RenegadeAngel

I sometimes think the term "ludonarative dissonance'' was made up by some internet kid who wanted to seem smart. Most games have it. Why? Because otherwise it would have been super boring. People know it and draw the line between the narrative and the gameplay. You might as well quit gaming for good if it really bothers you.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kris194

Maybe this will help some people understand GTA IV story so we don't have to read again things like "Niko complaining about killing"

 

 

 

Niko, Arthur Morgan and John Marston are IMO best characters in Rockstar's games.

Edited by Kris194
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
Orbea Occam
34 minutes ago, RenegadeAngel said:

I sometimes think the term "ludonarative dissonance'' was made up by some internet kid who wanted to seem smart. Most games have it. Why? Because otherwise it would have been super boring. People know it and draw the line between the narrative and the gameplay. You might as well quit gaming for good if it really bothers you.

 

Exactly, what a terrible argument. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
On 5/25/2020 at 7:40 AM, Algonquin Assassin said:

 

And that's why most people don't like GTA V's characters. Humour should feel natural and organic. When it feels forced and shoved down our throats like it is in GTA V there's a problem.

 

I guess that makes GTA V the teenage girl who likes to pretend she's mature and grown up, but still plays with Barbie dolls and wears Hello Kitty pyjamas?

I disagree with all of this. "Most people" in this IV-centric forum perhaps feel like V is all those things you're complaining about. V is a well balanced story, with humor, social commentary, and some moments of more serious tones. The bickering and fued between Michal and Trevor, lasting pretty much the entire game has some very funny parts, granted, but I believe them (the actors playing Michael and Trevor, I mean) as well as Franklin's attempt to be a go between. I think that the triangular plot between the protagonists with Devon Weston and the FIB made for some excellently well implemented government intrigue.

 

I think the opposite is true about IV, not just as a game, but as a lackluster, boring story. IV is what happens when writers don't stay in their lane. Look, the writers on Rockstar's staff are great. For video game writers. Which is a fine attribute since GTA is........wait for it......a videogame. I may hate IV's story and gameplay because its absolutely filled to the brim with hack gangster/immigrant/low-rent poverty cliche, but I suppose even IV's story is fine, again, for a videogame. I love all you IV fans who act like V is the odd man out for having a story that isn't somehow equivalent to a Coppola or Scorcese film. Jeeze, guys, its a f*cking videogame, for Christsakes. For all my complaints about IV's story, I don't technically think its any worse than San Andreas, V, III, or VC. But the stories are not great, none of them. Certainly not IV's story. And I will grant, by that same grading on a curve scale, V is fine, and yes, so is IV. But all of the rejects in this forum (lol sorry) who are deluding themselves when they say that IV is like Goodfellas or The Godfather really make my sides split I laugh so hard. And before some of you get all nuts, no I don't think that V's story is comparable to a major, Hollywood blockbuster. These are videogame stories, nothing more.

 

But you want to know why I think V really has the better story? Here it is:

 

Because IV's story and writing both come off with such unbelievable pomposity, and I think the writers, Dan Houser and team, just took it way too seriously. Yes, Rockstar has some of the finest writers in videogames, hands down. But in videogames! Neither IV nor V could hold its own against any high end theatrical movie of the same storytelling genre. You people need to get over yourselves pointing to IV like its some storytelling masterpiece. No GTA game is. No videogame I have ever played, in my entire life, is. They're freaking videogames. lol I can assure you that Scorcese or Coppola or Tarantino or Spielberg? Not one iota jealous of the story in any GTA game to date. Videogame stories suck balls compared to the heavy hitter Hollywood writers. Let's just be clear about that. If you want to say V's story sucks, while holding out IV as some kind of Mecca writing feat, you sound like hypocrites. Its like seriously critiquing the little, short comic strips that they used to put into Bazooka Bubble Gum, and getting pissy because it ain't Hemingway or Twain or Nabakov. lol Jeeze, guys, anything else you want to take too seriously? How about the writing in Archie Comics versus Spider-Man, and see which of those comic books stacks up with Shakespeare. Really, lol let's! ANd I love Spider-Man, as well as V's story, and also III, VC, and SA. But unlike you guys, I know that Rockstar at least stayed in their lane with V. Not so much with IV. They tried to be something they're not.

 

Real movie quality writers. That's IV's biggest story flaw in my estimation. Rockstar deluded themselves into thinking they were in the same league as the heavy hitter writers and producers. Clearly they're not.

 

tenor.gif

Edited by ChiroVette
  • KEKW 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they maybe went overboard  with GTAV looking at the criticism of GTAIV and also looking at people calling TBOGT a return to form. I feel the next game will be more balanced storywise.

 

The way I look at it they put their best effort into super serious stories with the Red Dead franchise. RDR2 is night and day compared to GTAV.

 

I think GTA is supposed to have a lighter larger than life gangster film tone. Bad things will happen sure, but you're not going to end the game feeling depressed.

 

The closest they've got to that was GTAIV of course but even then they didn't fully commit, since you could opt to have Niko's girlfriend who he's known for about 5 minutes killed, instead of his cousin who he's known and cared about his entire life lol

Edited by GR7
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin
1 hour ago, ChiroVette said:

I disagree with all of this.

Not really that surprising since you always disagree with anyone who shares a critical view of GTA V.

 

1 hour ago, ChiroVette said:

I think the opposite is true about IV, not just as a game, but as a lackluster, boring story. IV is what happens when writers don't stay in their lane. Look, the writers on Rockstar's staff are great. For video game writers. Which is a fine attribute since GTA is........wait for it......a videogame. I may hate IV's story and gameplay because its absolutely filled to the brim with hack gangster/immigrant/low-rent poverty cliche, but I suppose even IV's story is fine, again, for a videogame. I love all you IV fans who act like V is the odd man out for having a story that isn't somehow equivalent to a Coppola or Scorcese film. Jeeze, guys, its a f*cking videogame, for Christsakes. For all my complaints about IV's story, I don't technically think its any worse than San Andreas, V, III, or VC. But the stories are not great, none of them. Certainly not IV's story. And I will grant, by that same grading on a curve scale, V is fine, and yes, so is IV. But all of the rejects in this forum (lol sorry) who are deluding themselves when they say that IV is like Goodfellas or The Godfather really make my sides split I laugh so hard. And before some of you get all nuts, no I don't think that V's story is comparable to a major, Hollywood blockbuster. These are videogame stories, nothing more.

 

But you want to know why I think V really has the better story? Here it is:

 

Because IV's story and writing both come off with such unbelievable pomposity, and I think the writers, Dan Houser and team, just took it way too seriously. Yes, Rockstar has some of the finest writers in videogames, hands down. But in videogames! Neither IV nor V could hold its own against any high end theatrical movie of the same storytelling genre. You people need to get over yourselves pointing to IV like its some storytelling masterpiece. No GTA game is. No videogame I have ever played, in my entire life, is. They're freaking videogames. lol I can assure you that Scorcese or Coppola or Tarantino or Spielberg? Not one iota jealous of the story in any GTA game to date. Videogame stories suck balls compared to the heavy hitter Hollywood writers. Let's just be clear about that. If you want to say V's story sucks, while holding out IV as some kind of Mecca writing feat, you sound like hypocrites. Its like seriously critiquing the little, short comic strips that they used to put into Bazooka Bubble Gum, and getting pissy because it ain't Hemingway or Twain or Nabakov. lol Jeeze, guys, anything else you want to take too seriously? How about the writing in Archie Comics versus Spider-Man, and see which of those comic books stacks up with Shakespeare. Really, lol let's! ANd I love Spider-Man, as well as V's story, and also III, VC, and SA. But unlike you guys, I know that Rockstar at least stayed in their lane with V. Not so much with IV. They tried to be something they're not.

 

Real movie quality writers. That's IV's biggest story flaw in my estimation. Rockstar deluded themselves into thinking they were in the same league as the heavy hitter writers and producers. Clearly they're not.

 

tenor.gif

So the underlying message I can take away from this is just because GTA IV's a videogame (O really? thanks for pointing that out) its story should be pegged down to the same level as every other GTA game because YOU think video game stories generally "suck"?

 

And I don't know what video games you've been playing, but I've played a lot of video games with great stories and can be considered masterpieces in their own right. It's an insult to suggest just because a video game isn't a Hollywood movie it can't have a great story. I enjoyed GTA IV's story more than any other GTA game, but using your biased and narrow minded criteria that makes me a hypocrite lol.

 

Sure GTA IV's story is no Scorcese or Coppola film, but it's still leaps and bounds ahead of any story in the series and to me is the standard R* should be following. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the big issue with GTA IV's story wasn't really the story itself but more how the story was happening within a world that was still operating under the rules of older GTAs. The tone of the world and the tone of the main story and the tone of the presentation don't match up in a way that's really obvious and a little jarring. I have a feeling that Niko's story would work better in a game that's structured more like Mafia II than one that's structured like GTA

 

The 3D universe games feel a lot more cohesive because the presentation feels a lot more cartoony than later games. The way the games look and work is a lot more fast and loose, so it's not that weird when the stories and characters within that world are also fast and loose. GTA IV, with it's much more realistic presentation, doesn't get the same liberties as far as what it can let slide in those regards. GTA V shuffles things around in a way that makes it's separate elements gel better together, but I'm not sure that it does all of this with a story that's actually good

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ChiroVette said:

 

 

tenor.gif

I'm curious to know your take on RDR2?It is by far Rockatar's best work storywise and it shows they can do a serious story well when they really put their mind to it.

 

Sure it is a bit bloated but it's the only game that I've put down for a few days because it genuinely made me feel like sh*t watching Arthur and the gang deteriorate.

 

 

One of the comments in the video put it best. That sh*t is like seeing your dad cry lol.

Edited by GR7
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
44 minutes ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

Not really that surprising since you always disagree with anyone who shares a critical view of GTA V.

 

 

Completely and totally false. I have criticisms of GTA V, and don't even pretend that you are interested in that little fact. Because you and I both know that the many times this issue came up, and I listed things I didn't like about V, most of the disgruntled IV fans got pissy and ignored all my criticisms, dismissing them like somehow, even though I answered the question of listing V's flaws, they acted like I said nothing. LMAO not sure if you were one of them, but I never said V is perfect. Not once. I just thing its ten times the game of IV and has a way better story and writing.

 

  

44 minutes ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

 

So the underlying message I can take away from this is just because GTA IV's a videogame (O really? thanks for pointing that out) its story should be pegged down to the same level as every other GTA game because YOU think videogame stories generally "suck"?

 

Straw Man argument.

 

Your words, not mine. Stop misrepresenting my position, please. I said that videogames need to be viewed as a different entity. Now perhaps you never did, but I remember a plethora of misguided IV fans railing on against V and actually (I swear to f-ing Christ lol) compared IV's story with the likes of Goodfellas, Coppola, etc. The fact is that I even sort of defended IV in my last post. I said, and I quote:

 

Quote

Videogame stories suck balls compared to the heavy hitter Hollywood writers. Let's just be clear about that. If you want to say V's story sucks, while holding out IV as some kind of Mecca writing feat, you sound like hypocrites.

In other words, I was saying that IV and V are both fine for videogame stories. Even though I hate IV, and think the story is boring, lackluster, with forgettable characters, and people I was supposed to care about, but was actually happy when they died (Roman, Kate I think, etc.?) I will admit that V's story is no better than IV's. Regardless of the fact that I find the whole rags to better rags fiasco a giant bore. But objectively, I would say that every single GTA game, including IV, have about the same level of writing chops, skill, and technical expertise. Which is to say, they are fine for videogames, no more, no less.

 

44 minutes ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

And I don't know what video games you've been playing, but I've played a lot of video games with great stories and can be considered masterpieces in their own right. It's an insult to suggest just because a video game isn't a Hollywood movie it can't have a great story. I enjoyed GTA IV's story more than any other GTA game, but using your biased and narrow minded criteria that makes me a hypocrite lol.

 

Sure GTA IV's story is no Scorcese or Coppola film, but it's still leaps and bounds ahead of any story in the series and to me is the standard R* should be following. 

 

This I disagree with completely, particularly that last sentence. I actually think the opposite, and that V has a better story, for my tastes, which is the difference between you and me. And all the IV fans, quite honestly. IV's story sucks in my book, BUT I am willing to concede that "sucks" means I don't like it. You aren't willing to do the same, because you and other IV fans are delusional enough to think that your taste in videogame writing means that this is objectively true.

 

At least I am intellectually honest enough to say that I hate IV, but that objectively, I can understand why you may like it better than V. But when you act like your statement of opinion is a statement of empirical fact, sorry, but no. There are only two completely true statements in this discussion, but you aren't honest enough to admit it, perhaps not even to yourself. Those TWO statements of truth are:

 

1. You think V's story sucks and IV's story is great.

2. I think V's story is excellent and fun, and IV sucks balls.

 

Those are the ONLY true statements being said here, and the only true statements in this whole V versus IV story debate. Too bad you aren't able to realize that substituting your opinion for fact, just as me doing the same, simply is a complete falsehood. I have played videogames reputed to be great stories. And yeah, some were pretty good. For videogames they were even very good. But nothing compared to what's coming out of Hollywood. No way, no how.

 

19 minutes ago, GR7 said:

I'm curious to know your take on RDR2?It is by far Rockatar's best work storywise and it shows they can do a serious story well when they really put their mind to it.

 

Sure it is a bit bloated but it's the only game that I've put down for a few days because it genuinely made me feel like sh*t watching Arthur and the gang deteriorate.

 

Honestly?

 

I pre-ordered the game, the Digital Special Edition, I think it was. The version with the Season Pass and the extra pre-order bonuses? Whatever that one was. Truth is, I was sorry I bought it the SECOND I started reading the reviews, and realized that in essence, this game was pretty much GTA IV: The Western Edition. lol I would have gotten a refund, but I made the mistake of pre-ordering it and downloading it on PSN. If it were Steam or XBox Live, I would have gotten my money back easily and immediately, as Steam gives you like 2 hours to play it or something, and I think its similar with XBox Live? But PSN had a loophole I wasn't aware of, and apparently because I "downloaded" the game onto my PS4 Pro, I was no longer eligible for a refund. Even though I didn't even so much as boot the game up for 5 seconds. Oh well, my loss. I have still not even so much as booted up the game, even though I think I paid (lol) $69.99 for the Special Edition. My fault for not reading between the lines, but I have never played RDR2 even once, even though its sitting in my library. I actually deleted it off my PS4 to make room on my hard drive for other games, because it was just taking up space, but theoretically, I could re-download it and play it any time I want.

 

I just don't want to.

Edited by ChiroVette
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

Honestly?

 

I pre-ordered the game, the Digital Special Edition, I think it was. The version with the Season Pass and the extra pre-order bonuses? Whatever that one was. Truth is, I was sorry I bought it the SECOND I started reading the reviews, and realized that in essence, this game was pretty much GTA IV: The Western Edition. lol I would have gotten a refund, but I made the mistake of pre-ordering it and downloading it on PSN. If it were Steam or XBox Live, I would have gotten my money back easily and immediately, as Steam gives you like 2 hours to play it or something, and I think its similar with XBox Live? But PSN had a loophole I wasn't aware of, and apparently because I "downloaded" the game onto my PS4 Pro, I was no longer eligible for a refund. Even though I didn't even so much as boot the game up for 5 seconds. Oh well, my loss. I have still not even so much as booted up the game, even though I think I paid (lol) $69.99 for the Special Edition. My fault for not reading between the lines, but I have never played RDR2 even once, even though its sitting in my library. I actually deleted it off my PS4 to make room on my hard drive for other games, because it was just taking up space, but theoretically, I could re-download it and play it any time I want.

 

I just don't want to.

You honestly should give it a go. Now is the perfect time with the lockdown to be honest.

 

It sh*ts all over GTAIV+V storywise. You're doing yourself a serious disservice not experiencing it. Like I said it's one of the only games endings that have taken me days to not think about. They did a good job.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin
32 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

At least I am intellectually honest enough to say that I hate IV, but that objectively, I can understand why you may like it better than V. But when you act like your statement of opinion is a statement of empirical fact, sorry, but no. There are only two completely true statements in this discussion, but you aren't honest enough to admit it, perhaps not even to yourself. Those TWO statements of truth are:

 

1. You think V's story sucks and IV's story is great.

2. I think V's story is excellent and fun, and IV sucks balls.

 

It's not my problem that you see it that way and can't decipher my own opinions from fact. When I talk about GTA IV's story, writing etc these are my "opinions" obviously. Likewise when I talk about GTA V these are once again my own opinions.

 

If you think the story is wonderful, "fun" etc more power to you, but I don't even think GTA V's story "sucks" necessarily. It has its good moments just like every GTA story, but I'm not going to suppress my feelings on the things I feel aren't so good about it.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
16 minutes ago, GR7 said:

You honestly should give it a go. Now is the perfect time with the lockdown to be honest.

 

It sh*ts all over GTAIV+V storywise. You're doing yourself a serious disservice not experiencing it. Like I said it's one of the only games endings that have taken me days to not think about. They did a good job.

I'm sure I will try it at some point. But I honestly don't have very high hopes. It was a dumb, impulse-buy of a purchase that I regretted literally almost immediately. That said, I did buy it, so I will probably play it eventually. I just have sooooo many games collecting dust that I actually do want to play first. So who knows when I will get around to RDR2. To be frank, though, I watched the video you posted above, and I won't lie. I don't get it.  I mean, forget about the fact that the voice actress playing the sister and the actor playing the guy I presume is the protagonist are quite mediocre as far as acting talent and chops go. It was certainly an all right scene, for what it was. A videogame scene that was fine for, ya know, a videogame scene. Literally nothing about that 3+ minute scene sucked me in, made me want to know what happens next or what came before it. Mediocre acting talent, and literally no part of the scene sucked me in or made me go like, "Wow, I really have to play that game now...hot damn that looks amazing." Just typical modern day, new millennium cut-scene fare. It wasn't bad or anything. I didn't cringe, nor did I get the sudden urge to throw sh*t at my screen in angry protest or something. It was a videogame scene. And to be clear, there's nothing wrong with it. It is what it is. Grade B or C voice-over talent reading lines written by decent but certainly not top notch writers.

 

10 minutes ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

It's not my problem that you see it that way and can't decipher my own opinions from fact. When I talk about GTA IV's story, writing etc these are my "opinions" obviously. Likewise when I talk about GTA V these are once again my own opinions.

 

If you think the story is wonderful, "fun" etc more power to you, but I don't even think GTA V's story "sucks" necessarily. It has its good moments just like every GTA story, but I'm not going to suppress my feelings on the things I feel aren't so good about it.

 

 

Not for anything, but the way you posted that counterargument sure sounded like you were trying to lecture me on how amazing IV is. Hey, maybe its not your fault, or mine, but the fact that this is the way people behave in this forum with a polarized "V versus IV" debate. But if you say that you are only expressing your opinions about V and IV, respectively, and not telling me that one is objectively better and the other objectively worse, then great! But you can't tell that there aren't (or lol rather there weren't) a ton of IV fans in this forum constantly using terms like "Objectively better" to describe IV's story. I have gotten into many tussles here in the V section on many occasions. And the hostility that V fans are met with here, or perhaps used to be met with, can make strong statements like yours seem like you are lecturing me on the "superiority of IV over V." If you are admitting that you're expressing your opinion, that actually makes me VERY happy, because then I can actually have a meaningful dialog with you about this, even in debate. I just want to be very clear, at least in a topic as controversial as this particular one, when what's being expressed is opinion, versus what's fact.

 

If your opinion is that IV is much better, I can completely respect that, even in disagreement, was my point.

Edited by ChiroVette
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

I'm sure I will try it at some point. But I honestly don't have very high hopes. It was a dumb, impulse-buy of a purchase that I regretted literally almost immediately. That said, I did buy it, so I will probably play it eventually. I just have sooooo many games collecting dust that I actually do want to play first. So who knows when I will get around to RDR2. To be frank, though, I watched the video you posted above, and I won't lie. I don't get it.  I mean, forget about the fact that the voice actress playing the sister and the actor playing the guy I presume is the protagonist are quite mediocre as far as acting talent and chops go. It was certainly an all right scene, for what it was. A videogame scene that was fine for, ya know, a videogame scene. Literally nothing about that 3+ minute scene sucked me in, made me want to know what happens next or what came before it. Mediocre acting talent, and literally no part of the scene sucked me in or made me go like, "Wow, I really have to play that game now...hot damn that looks amazing." Just typical modern day, new millennium cut-scene fare. It wasn't bad or anything. I didn't cringe, nor did I get the sudden urge to throw sh*t at my screen in angry protest or something. It was a videogame scene.

Yeah I kind of assumed you played it already so it probably doesn't make much sense lol. With context it's a powerful scene when you compare the protagonist at the start of the game to how he's changed by that point. 

 

They really make it believable how a seemingly ruthless outlaw could transition into a man on the path to redemption. Not only that but they still take into account what choices the player has made throughout the story.

 

That particular scene alone has multiple variations depending on how honourable you've been throughout. It's even possible have that scene play out talking to a completely different character if you never bumped into the sister during your travels.

Edited by GR7
Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin
7 minutes ago, ChiroVette said:

Not for anything, but the way you posted that counterargument sure sounded like you were trying to lecture me on how amazing IV is. Hey, maybe its not your fault, or mine, but the fact that this is the way people behave in this forum with a polarized "V versus IV" debate. But if you say that you are only expressing your opinions about V and IV, respectively, and not telling me that one is objectively better and the other objectively worse, then great! But you can't tell that there aren't (or lol rather there weren't) a ton of IV fans in this forum constantly using terms like "Objectively better" to describe IV's story. I have gotten into many tussles here in the V section on many occasions. And the hostility that V fans are met with here, or perhaps used to be met with, can make strong statements like yours seem like you are lecturing me on the "superiority of IV over V." If you are admitting that you're expressing your opinion, that actually makes me VERY happy, because then I can actually have a meaningful dialog with you about this, even in debate. I just want to be very clear, at least in a topic as controversial as this particular one, when what's being expressed is opinion, versus what's fact.

 

If your opinion is that IV is much better, I can completely respect that, even in disagreement, was my point.

I think you know me a little better than that dude and quite frankly I thought things like this would be beneath either of us now.

 

If that's how it came across it was certainly not my intention or perhaps it was just a case of me choosing a poor choice of words. I don't know. I know you like don't like GTA IV so it would be a waste of my time trying to prove that it's superior even though for my tastes it is as GTA IV is a way better game than GTA V in story and gameplay, but that's just my opinion, not an empirical fact.

 

I can't change what happened in the past in the GTA V forum and it's not even my concern now because I'm no longer a member of staff, but focusing my me and my comments for a moment that's not what I was trying to do. 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
39 minutes ago, GR7 said:

Yeah I kind of assumed you played it already so it probably doesn't make much sense lol. With context it's a powerful scene when you compare the protagonist at the start of the game to how he's changed by that point. 

 

They really make it believable how a seemingly ruthless outlaw could transition into a man on the path to redemption. Not only that but they still take into account what choices the player has made throughout the story.

 

That particular scene alone has multiple variations depending on how honourable you've been throughout. It's even possible have that scene play out talking to a completely different character if you never bumped into the sister during your travels.

 

Ah okay, that makes a lot more sense. Like I said, I own the game, and paid a decent amount of money for it lol so I will eventually play it. When I do, I'll be sure to check back with you! Thanks for taking the time out of your day to explain all this to me.

 

30 minutes ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

I think you know me a little better than that dude and quite frankly I thought things like this would be beneath either of us now.

 

If that's how it came across it was certainly not my intention or perhaps it was just a case of me choosing a poor choice of words. I don't know. I know you like don't like GTA IV so it would be a waste of my time trying to prove that it's superior even though for my tastes it is as GTA IV is a way better game than GTA V in story and gameplay, but that's just my opinion, not an empirical fact.

 

I can't change what happened in the past in the GTA V forum and it's not even my concern now because I'm no longer a member of staff, but focusing my me and my comments for a moment that's not what I was trying to do. 

 

 

 

Not your fault, to be honest. Unfortunately, for better or worse, this is the one forum that when I come here, I feel like I almost always have to suit up for a fight. The truth is that, based on past experience in this forum, and some blatant hostility from IV fans trying to act like their tastes are objective fact, I came at you like you were one of them, and clearly that wasn't fair to you. If it makes you feel any better, I only behave the way I do toward IV fans when I perceive incoming hostility, which in your case, wasn't the case at all, and I reacted to your posts, thinking you were spoiling for a IV vs V fight. The truth is that, while I don't like IV, I don't actually hate it anywhere near as much as I often pretend to, to get under the skin of the angry multitude in this forum whose idea of debate is to attack people personally who disagree with them, and pretend they represent some fictitious majority in the GTA fanbase. This may also come as a surprise to you, but I don't love V anywhere near as much as I posture when arguing in here, but sometimes in a fight you use hyperbole and I like to get under their skin as much as they try and get under mine. lol It is what it is, and I am very glad you clarified your position, because you're right. You have always been reasonable and measured, but I came here thinking I was being lectured when all you were doing was offering your opinion,

Edited by ChiroVette
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
GhettoJesus

I think there are issues on both side. GTA IV was pretty dark in story which I don't mind but it was a bit weird for GTA games. GTA V on the other hand was way too goofy. Aliens, the characters, big foot (this was a nice touch after around 8 years of big foot hunting in SA) you name it. But it isn't as goofy as some people try to make it out (I am replaying it atm and it actually pulled me in). Stories were never the strongest suit in GTA games, compared to every other video games the GTA games would get a C+ or a B-, maybe a B for their stories while GTA IV raised the bar with a better developed story (although from a perspective it is not too different) and with well developed characters.

 

it's hard to decide. I say GTA shouldn't go in a Saints Row direction but it shouldn't go all melancholic either. There needs to be a balance between the two games. Keep the freedom, the tone in the game but also have a well developed story and characters.

 

On an extra note I think why GTA IV feels more serious is not really because of the story (although some parts, the endings, the decision whether to kill Darko and the such), it's moreso because of Niko.

Link to post
Share on other sites
iiCriminnaaL 49
17 minutes ago, GhettoJesus said:

I think there are issues on both side. GTA IV was pretty dark in story which I don't mind but it was a bit weird for GTA games. GTA V on the other hand was way too goofy. Aliens, the characters, big foot (this was a nice touch after around 8 years of big foot hunting in SA) you name it. But it isn't as goofy as some people try to make it out (I am replaying it atm and it actually pulled me in). Stories were never the strongest suit in GTA games, compared to every other video games the GTA games would get a C+ or a B-, maybe a B for their stories while GTA IV raised the bar with a better developed story (although from a perspective it is not too different) and with well developed characters.

 

it's hard to decide. I say GTA shouldn't go in a Saints Row direction but it shouldn't go all melancholic either. There needs to be a balance between the two games. Keep the freedom, the tone in the game but also have a well developed story and characters.

 

On an extra note I think why GTA IV feels more serious is not really because of the story (although some parts, the endings, the decision whether to kill Darko and the such), it's moreso because of Niko.

Personally, I didn't find GTA IV's story to be all that dark. In fact, there's a lot of humor in it, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone said that it had more of it than the predecessors, but unfortunately it gets overlooked by many people who usually tend to remember the darker moments of it. And then again it just mightn't be their cup of tea.

 

The story was more grounded and serious than say, that of Vice City, and especially San Andreas, but GTA III felt grimier and even more serious in many ways. On the other hand, as far as emotional, then yeah, GTA IV took more on that approach than every other title in the franchise. But darkness in general? It wasn't a foreigner to me. Even on the emotional side, while that's not everyone's cup of tea, the 3D era was planting the seeds and heading more towards it eventually (except for Liberty City Stories), and it occasionally showed in San Andreas, and especially in Vice City Stories.

Edited by iiCriminnaaL 49
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
GhettoJesus
1 minute ago, iiCriminnaaL 49 said:

Personally, I didn't find GTA IV's story to be all that dark. In fact, there's a lot of humor in it, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone said that it had more of it than the predecessors, but unfortunately it gets overlooked by many people who usually tend to remember the darker moments of it. And then again it just mightn't be their cup of tea.

 

The story was more grounded and serious than say, those of Vice City and San Andreas, but GTA III felt grimier and even more serious in many ways. On the other hand, as far as emotional, then yeah, GTA IV took more on that approach than every other title in the franchise. But darkness in general? It wasn't a foreigner to me. Even on the emotional side, while that's not everyone's cup of tea, the 3D era was planting the seeds and heading more towards it eventually (except for Liberty City Stories), and it occasionally showed in San Andreas, and especially in Vice City Stories.

I think the darkness stands out because all the previous stories were happy. People betray you, backstab you, there was nothing special about it and that was the thing that was closest to dark in previous titles. As for GTA III, it was a casual revenge story, I think the constant bad weather and Claude's coldness could be the reason why some people find it grimy.

 

I do agree, there were some emotional moments before IV. The only one I could come up with in VC Lance Vance's betrayal, you can even see Tommy being remorseful over it (although some may argue that Kelly and Tommy's relationship could also be one, shame it wasn't explored) while in SA your best friends betray you. So yeah, it was there but I guess we just forgot it.

 

I feel like the setting and the weather has a lot to do with how we intercept the story so the sunny and palm tree filled San Andreas and Vice City may not be the best setting for a GTA IV style drama.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
iiCriminnaaL 49
2 hours ago, GhettoJesus said:

I think the darkness stands out because all the previous stories were happy. People betray you, backstab you, there was nothing special about it and that was the thing that was closest to dark in previous titles. As for GTA III, it was a casual revenge story, I think the constant bad weather and Claude's coldness could be the reason why some people find it grimy.

 

I do agree, there were some emotional moments before IV. The only one I could come up with in VC Lance Vance's betrayal, you can even see Tommy being remorseful over it (although some may argue that Kelly and Tommy's relationship could also be one, shame it wasn't explored) while in SA your best friends betray you. So yeah, it was there but I guess we just forgot it.

 

I feel like the setting and the weather has a lot to do with how we intercept the story so the sunny and palm tree filled San Andreas and Vice City may not be the best setting for a GTA IV style drama.

Talking about GTA III, I don't think that the dark weather cycles and Claude's coldness (especially being a silent hitman) are the only standing reasons for making the game feel quite dark in comparison to the successors. The story characters were almost serious to the bone as well, and most of them had a shady vibe.

 

I get your point, though.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Zello
2 hours ago, GhettoJesus said:

I do agree, there were some emotional moments before IV. The only one I could come up with in VC Lance Vance's betrayal, you can even see Tommy being remorseful over it (although some may argue that Kelly and Tommy's relationship could also be one, shame it wasn't explored) while in SA your best friends betray you. So yeah, it was there but I guess we just forgot it.

VCS Light my Pyre

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin
6 hours ago, ChiroVette said:

Not your fault, to be honest. Unfortunately, for better or worse, this is the one forum that when I come here, I feel like I almost always have to suit up for a fight. The truth is that, based on past experience in this forum, and some blatant hostility from IV fans trying to act like their tastes are objective fact,

Ok a few hours have passed and I feel like my blood pressure is back to normal.:p

 

To be fair in hindsight I can understand how you may taken the post I made slightly out of context, but I was just trying to reiterate what seems to be a common opinion that most people seem to think GTA V tries to force humour instead of letting it naturally evolve, but I understand this is really subjective however it's just I don't feel it's necessary for me to slap an "IMO" at the end of every post I make to justify what I say because I assume most people are more than familiar with my posting style and I'm not really the type of person that tries to force opinions as facts.

 

Anyway I was thinking about your point earlier about them being video games and I agree. When it comes to "writing" there isn't a lot of difference between the quality of writing between GTA IV and GTA V nor other GTAs really as they're all written by the same team. I'm not sure who's ever said that GTA IV's story is on the same level as a Scorcese, Coppola film etc, but it could possibly be they meant that the works from those directors reminded them of themes, subject matter etc present in GTA IV's story which is fair enough.

 

When I think of films like Goodfellas, The Godfather, Mean Streets, The Departed, Taxi Driver and so on they tend to be gritty portrayals of the average criminal without themes of sensationalism with the protagonists "taking over" so to speak. In GTA IV by intention or not from R* themselves it really does make me feel like I'm experiencing a crime epic like one of those films. I of course concede that because it's a video game it'll never be on the same level of writing as one of those films, but for the most part it's extremely well done for video game standards..

 

In saying that as much praise as I give the story it's hardly infallible. Bulgarin is completely wasted, Pegorino is a rather weak antagonist, the PBX and Dwayne story arc ends too quickly and so on. Infact if you went through it with a fine tooth comb it's probably riddled with more flaws than we realise.

 

6 hours ago, ChiroVette said:

I came at you like you were one of them, and clearly that wasn't fair to you. If it makes you feel any better, I only behave the way I do toward IV fans when I perceive incoming hostility, which in your case, wasn't the case at all, and I reacted to your posts, thinking you were spoiling for a IV vs V fight. The truth is that, while I don't like IV, I don't actually hate it anywhere near as much as I often pretend to, to get under the skin of the angry multitude in this forum whose idea of debate is to attack people personally who disagree with them, and pretend they represent some fictitious majority in the GTA fanbase. This may also come as a surprise to you, but I don't love V anywhere near as much as I posture when arguing in here, but sometimes in a fight you use hyperbole and I like to get under their skin as much as they try and get under mine. lol It is what it is, and I am very glad you clarified your position, because you're right. You have always been reasonable and measured, but I came here thinking I was being lectured when all you were doing was offering your opinion,

Thankyou.:)

 

To be honest I find the GTA IV vs GTA V arguments kind of stupid now. I can't even remember the last time I posted in the "Things that GTA IV does better than GTA V" thread in the GTA IV forum. I played through GTA V last year and it just put things into perspective for me how much time I had been wasting sh*tcanning it instead of seeing of its stronger aspects.

 

Of course that doesn't mean I don't think constructive criticism shouldn't be encouraged and truthfully there'll always be things about GTA V I don't like about it, but the tit for tat arguments like in the GTA V forum 5 years ago are something I generally try to avoid as all it does is lead to pages and pages of petty arguing never getting anywhere and if anything just making you feel pissed off when you could be using that time to do something more constructive. I'll be 35 in 6 months time and perhaps I'm too young to be saying I'm too old for this sh*t, but yeah. That's how I feel sometimes.:D

 

Life's too short to be arguing over video games.😎

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
iiCriminnaaL 49
7 minutes ago, Zello said:

VCS Light my Pyre

It often gets emotional when Louise is on screen from what I remember.

 

What also got in my mind, about San Andreas, is Beverley Johnson's mourning, CJ regretting killing Ryder, as well as Big Smoke, both in the crack palace and when CJ brought that out after Tenpenny's death.

Edited by iiCriminnaaL 49
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Orbea Occam

GTA3's darker tone came from how the characters were written - the humour was left to the radio stations like Chatterbox, in game advertisements and NPC pedestrian comments. The main characters were very serious people with extremely violent tendencies, that's what created GTA3's unique vibe. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
GhettoJesus
30 minutes ago, Zello said:

VCS Light my Pyre

Shamefully never got to play any of the stories game and only watched walkthroughs of it so I am not sure which mission that is. Only thing I know is that Vic was well developed as a character.

 

Although now that I am looking at it on the wiki it's pretty good storywise and emotionswise.

 

34 minutes ago, iiCriminnaaL 49 said:

Talking about GTA III, I don't think that the dark weather cycles and Claude's coldness (especially being a silent hitman) are the only standing reasons for making the game feel quite dark in comparison to the successors. The story characters were almost serious to the bone as well, and most of them had a shady vibe.

Definitely, the characters aren't transparent at all, they are always scheming. True that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin
3 hours ago, GhettoJesus said:

On an extra note I think why GTA IV feels more serious is not really because of the story (although some parts, the endings, the decision whether to kill Darko and the such), it's moreso because of Niko.

Niko has some epic one liners though and I would strongly vouch for are the best in the series.

 

I couldn't stop laughing when he constantly hung sh*t on Vlad, made fun of Brucie for having "funny balls" etc. He actually has a dry and sarcastic sense of humour when you think about it. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
6 hours ago, ChiroVette said:

Not your fault, to be honest. Unfortunately, for better or worse, this is the one forum that when I come here, I feel like I almost always have to suit up for a fight. The truth is that, based on past experience in this forum, and some blatant hostility from IV fans trying to act like their tastes are objective fact, I came at you like you were one of them, and clearly that wasn't fair to you. If it makes you feel any better, I only behave the way I do toward IV fans when I perceive incoming hostility, which in your case, wasn't the case at all, and I reacted to your posts, thinking you were spoiling for a IV vs V fight. The truth is that, while I don't like IV, I don't actually hate it anywhere near as much as I often pretend to, to get under the skin of the angry multitude in this forum whose idea of debate is to attack people personally who disagree with them, and pretend they represent some fictitious majority in the GTA fanbase. This may also come as a surprise to you, but I don't love V anywhere near as much as I posture when arguing in here, but sometimes in a fight you use hyperbole and I like to get under their skin as much as they try and get under mine. lol It is what it is, and I am very glad you clarified your position, because you're right. You have always been reasonable and measured, but I came here thinking I was being lectured when all you were doing was offering your opinion,

K2v1KTO.png

Edited by Ryo256
Link to post
Share on other sites

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
  • 2 Users Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 2 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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