POLL: how open to change are you with GTA?

[Grotti Vigilante]

So this has been on my mind for a while, but with regards to those of us who play the Grand Theft Auto series, maybe since we were young kids or when it first started (for those life veterans and all that), how many of you are open to changes within the series? For example, how open would you be towards ideas such as leaving the United States, incorporating a female protagonist, and having a cop protagonist? It seems to be something that divides the community, so maybe it's time we all gathered to give our opinions just to see how much change is really advocated for in the community? For me personally, I'm actually not open to a great deal of change. Certainly not in the way of having a female or cop protagonist or setting it outside the US. But I'd say ultimately it'd depend what changes you're proposing for me, I guess. After all, I suggesting some kind of bounty hunter system similar to GTA IV's Most Wanted system and Red Dead's bounty system, which I think would work fine. But please, leave your votes in the poll, and your thoughts down below.

[TheSantader25]

I guess I'm pretty restricted when it comes to change. That's why I still don't agree with some of the decisions R* made in the HD era but yeah. There are changes that I can/may appreciate. Going out of the US is an absolute no from me and would instantly kill GTA for me. Female Protagonist? Corrupt Cop? Very difficult to pull off properly. But if they miraculously do so, I can appreciate it. So in short, if the change fits well and is done properly, I'm in. As for the bounty system, I don't think it fits GTA and will hurt some of the open world aspects this series is known for. 

Edited June 15, 2019 by TheSantader25

[god speed]

I'm partly open to changes. I feel that I don't want Rockstar to take risks now that it takes almost a decade to release a new GTA game. I would rather want them to combine the best parts of earlier games. Maybe I'm getting old.

 

I want the series to stay in the US, we have only seen two cities in the HD era, but the game could take place in two countries if in a border region and handled well. A female protagonist or a cop protagonist might be manageable but could backfire. Less of a gamble with multiple protagonists, but I'd honestly rather see a return to one traditional playable protagonist. I think the wanted level system must remain so that the law enforcement personnel have the memory of a goldfish.

[Evil empire]

It depends entirely on what the changes are.

 

I'm totally open to a GTA outside of the USA since there are unfortunately many other countries gnawed by the crime ; Marseille especially at the time of french connection, Columbia, Mexico, Russia for example would be good places for a new game.

 

I'm also open to have a female protagonist (especially if she's like Catalina) and/or a corrupt cop.

Edited June 16, 2019 by Evil empire

[Aquamaniac]

I'm open to changes as long GTA features cars, guns and an open world, it should not be set too far in the past or in the future though.

 

I favor female protagonists over male for esthetic reasons in 3rd person games, corrupt cops make interesting characters at least in movies and there are some iconic cities outside the US that might work.

 

Edited June 16, 2019 by Aquamaniac

[ChengizVlad09]

Regarding some things I'm pretty much "traditionalists", like setting for example - go US of A, pew, pew, pew - or protagonist(s) - go man spreading and balls scratching - the only females I wanna see here should be in strip clubs and or under my wheels. Of course, I'm only joking about the later one, men should be under them equally, but in all seriousness, why all the fuss about the possible female protag? Virtual bob and vagene? What could be so freaking game changing about that? It's a blob of virtual meat, with or without boobs, or a penis depending how you want to see things. Anyway, simply out of traditional reasons, I wouldn't change anything there, but regarding the female protag, I would just love to hear, as an additional bonus, freaking feminazis bitc#ing about yet another man " running things " in a virtual world, something they are so excluded from and where they can't go to a male strip club to demean them, proudly, just like we are having that "privilege" right now. Alright, this one went to far.

 

Gameplay changes, that's what should be done, like pronto. Like driving mechanics, Jesus jumping Christ, either they are blind or they don't give a flying f, but the driving aspect in HDU, yes both IV and V, is simply tragically boring, out of different reasons, but stupid and unentertaining nonetheless. Drifting, counter-steering, over-steering, under-steering, power-sliding, different car classes, different performances, accurate and logical upgrading, physics - just a couple from the top of my mind - is simply out of their range of thinking when it comes to creating that particular sphere of the game. And it doesn't have to be some hard to handle simulation at all, or even hard to make.

" Should we make cars, sir?

- Yes.

- Well, what's the idea here, sir?

- They should be able to move.

- Intriguing, but should they be able to break, sir?

- Hmm, good one. Yes. "

There, done.  And we spend most of our time driving them, pimping them out or what not. There are flash games that have equal driving mechanics.

Shooting mechanics, AI, real enemies, not some sitting ducks, some freaking challenge for god's sake. It has slipped someone's mind to tell them not all firearms should spray the same dot at the max fire rate, but hey, it's easier that way and besides kids just love it. Enemy AI will head-shot you straight from Sandy (W)hores while you zigzagging it down the East LS highway, going 150 km/h. Magnificent programing. It doesn't have to be Sekiro or Dark Souls difficulty wise, but 'kin 'ell, HDU games are not only easy, but due to that particular characteristic - being easy - they actually stale so fast. I know, I know, they aren't total BS, but everything seems like one big boring grind, especially starting with V and 0nline. Whatever happened to good ol' challenge, just a pinch of it at least, it's GTA for crying out loud. I know old school GTA missions that contain toy choppers and are still more entertaining and challenging than taking out the entire squad of mercenaries in V. Where's the sense in that? Something being demanding doesn't mean it's not fun, quite the contrary. I want to feel I can't always take all those criminals, gangsters, paid mercenaries, police, swat, FIB, or whatever, that easily. I want to be f'cking humiliated by them, to feel adrenaline and excitement while trying to save my sorry as$ - no, I'm not a masochist. All of them, present just for the sake of appearance. Sometimes, I would simply like to get into a fistfight with a bunch of them, not to be unnecessarily bothered by the police in the middle of a f'cking nowhere - being instantly shot at, no matter who started the fight, to have some combos at my disposal, to learn some cool moves I can combine and deliver my fist of fury up in their virtual a$$es and f'cking feel cool about it, cos it can take some time to get there and I already took some serious beatings from them, I want my revenge. Hell, maybe I just want to stand next to that nice police officer and not get shot, simply for standing there. I mean, for the ultra popular AAA title, GTA feels like sh*t sometimes, not only because it's ridiculously easy and dull, but because, a top of all that, it wants to be a matured story telling piece of crap, that has a deep narrative and which the critics will like and drool upon, because of the touchy story of some pice of $hit middle-aged maniac that doesn't know how to manage his family affairs the right way. Boo-fcking-hoo. And he has his therapist as well. Whom we have to listen. Not him. 

Some farty, sagged old pricks that run the review industry, who never bothered to even play the damn video games will rate it 9.5. That's BS. I want to see someone paid actual attention to programing the damn game, not simply preying upon us to ef us with the microtransaction nonsense. You know, like real systems that are taking place, some action-reaction $hit, to be a living breathing world for once, just like they love to advertise it so much in their efing trailers. Do we really need hundreds of meaningless activities - and I can bet that was their intention, I can fcking bet - grindy and almost worthless pass-times, or simply a couple of well done, well executed, thought-through and meaningful modes that we can really enjoy, and not like, forget it's in the game after we beat it for the first and last time? Cage fighting for example, what's wrong with that? I think it beats the living $hit out of arm-wrestling. No, I'm most certain it does. Rotating that analog stick for a few moments suppose to get you somewhere in order to beat your opponent. GTFO. More serious opponents, waves of them trying to rip us apart in a most gory fashion, where we'll have a sense they are indeed for real. Something where we indeed have to learn something and use our skill the best way we can in order to save ourselves and as well progress further.. No, spin that fcking analog stick and enjoy some arm wrestling wile we put a 2.5 mil price tag on this ugly as$ car you don't need...

 

With all that tech and visual BS, they cannot make the damn game more interesting than the 1985 Mario. Sigh, seriously, have they forgotten they are making video games? 

 

 

Edited June 16, 2019 by ChengizVlad09

[Gummy]

I'm open to it. Change how we interact with the story, freedom, and chaos, but keep the story, freedom, and chaos.

 

I think they should finally change the mission to mission format. It works well, but I kinda wanna see a different format on how the story and mission plays out.

 

 

Edited June 16, 2019 by Gummy 

[tranceking26]

I would like a similar game to V, but things like a female protagonist would be a welcome change.

 

Also somewhere outside of the USA would be cool.

 

 

 

 

[Lioshenka]

I'm OK with changes, as long as they are done right. VC and SA both brought some fundamental change (jumping from open cars, swimming). However, the game overall seems natural and the changes worked well. The later games unfortunately were too radical in taking a completely new direction.

 

So yes, I'm open to change, but I don't think R* will ever be able to make a good change any more. They lost that ability.

Edited June 16, 2019 by Lioshenka

[Lemoyne outlaw]

it really depends on what it is. but i am open to some change. like i remember before gta 5 came out. and they announced that it would have 3 protagonists. at first i did not want that. but now after having played gta 5 plenty of times. i really do like the multiple protagonists. and i would not mind seeing it done again. maybe two instead of three. i would also be open to having a female or cop protagonist. as long as its done right. and i certainly believe that rockstar could do a great story with them. but i dont want gta to leave the usa. although it would be nice for them to move to other locations in the usa. there are plenty other states that would be great for gta. i personally want to see a tennessee gta. so overall some change is welcome but others are not.

[DOUGL4S1]

It depends on what the changes are. It would be interesting to see a female protagonist or see the game set in another country, but things like trying to mix sci-fi themes or making the game's story more linear don't appeal to me as much.

[Pink Pineapple]

13 hours ago, ChengizVlad09 said:

 but in all seriousness, why all the fuss about the possible female protag?

 

 

Because it would be very difficult to create a female protagonist who most GTA players would want to play as and would be believable as a violent criminal and not over the top and cringey.

 

Plus, if they miraculously create a female protagonist who fits the game, it wouldn't improve the gameplay. None of the faults I've had with all GTA games would have been fixed by having a female protagonist. It's all risk with no reward.

[Grotti Vigilante]

4 hours ago, Pink Pineapple said:

Because it would be very difficult to create a female protagonist who most GTA players would want to play as and would be believable as a violent criminal and not over the top and cringey.

 

Plus, if they miraculously create a female protagonist who fits the game, it wouldn't improve the gameplay. None of the faults I've had with all GTA games would have been fixed by having a female protagonist. It's all risk with no reward.

Along with your points, let us also not forget that Rockstar like to be realistic, and that the majority of such criminals of GTA in the US are men. Not to mention the fact that even with the odd female being used as a protagonist she would be physically weaker than all the men around her, and it’s not really that empowering to play as someone in that position. One of the best parts of playing Niko was knowing that he was his own boss only taking orders because it served him as a hitman. At the same time I’ve seen plenty criticisms as how CJ submitted to Catalina, even if it may actually have been a good strategy to get himself the money. It’d take a lot longer to explain in detail and I don’t have time right now I’m afraid, but I hope my basic point was put across.

[ChengizVlad09]

I don't know really. I couldn't care less about the gender of a possible protagonist, but I'm certain I would like to see things just as they were in the past when it comes to that. What I'm most definitely certain of, is that bringing a female protag - just like some of you implied - would be somewhat risky and totally unnecessary, at least it seems like it and imo, it cannot bring anything new to the table gameplay wise, which is the most important thing without any doubt. And it craves for some revolutionary change. Their games became diaper disposable, meaning, once you are over with the SP campaign and main story, there's literally nothing to keep you engaged with it any more. Not counting that bs MP predatory service.

 

Subjectively speaking, I really wouldn't like to see a female protag, just because of these pressuring a-hole feminazi and alike SJW movements and politically correct suckers that knows jack $hit about games, lobbying to see a female lead, simply because, well, she is a virtual she and not a virtual he. Not only because of them ofc, but as well because of the fat and unimportant virgin 'gamerz' and 10 year olds who only want to see virtual bob and vegane.

 

It is devastating reading all those articles - some of them from well known gaming sites - mentioning these kind of things and keeping femal protag high on their wanted list, or at their list anyway, as if that would be something of an utmost importance, a crucial needed change or whatever. ln times of stagnating and crumbling gameplay, demeaning predatory practices and microtransactions, where we are being preyed upon, with all of them directly affecting the quality of the gameplay itself, I really wouldn't be suprised seeing such heavy and inimportant bs being implemented just because it was ' hihgly requested '.

 

[Grotti Vigilante]

27 minutes ago, ChengizVlad09 said:

Subjectively speaking, I really wouldn't like to see a female protag, just because of these pressuring a-hole feminazi and alike SJW movements and politically correct suckers that knows jack $hit about games, lobbying to see a female lead, simply because, well, she is a virtual she and not a virtual he. Not only because of them ofc, but as well because of the fat and unimportant virgin 'gamerz' and 10 year olds who only want to see virtual bob and vegane.

That seems to be an issue with these people advocating for such change. They never actually have to deal with them. The people signing petitions to get GTA V off the shelf in Australia cause of its depiction of women would likely not have played it anyway. I just hope any changes in GTA are done for us, the fans who pay good money for consoles to play these games and who’ve stuck with them for years, and not for some virtue signalling do-gooder who probably never even lay a finger on the disc (or in the middle to carry it out the box). 

[ChengizVlad09]

@Damien Scott

 

Honestly, I've played RDR2 and that game is pure nonsense when it comes to anything besides its story and couple of tightly knitted missions that goes along. The graphics is amazing too and I really like it, I love it, $hit looks beautiful. Not to wonder too much off-topic here, but I swear to god, I've tried to give it a second go, walk through it and beat the story line for the second time and I simply couldn't get myself to do it.

 

Just to name a few highly problematic aspects of the gameplay and I mean highly problematic - btw, the most important part of any game, let alone Open World game, the gameplay, not the graphics, not the narrative, nor anything else, but the Gameplay itself. For example, tapping some button constantly in order to make your horse gallop. I just cannot fathom who ever thought of that, but I have my doubts about their sanity and it is possible they might be, at least, latent psychopaths. Too much side missions or random encounters appearing out of nowhere constantly, and I mean constantly, like it's the Jehovah's witness handing out pamphlets, it seriously gets in the way of trying to play the game the way you want to play it. I would get it, if that was something thrilling or insightful, but dropping off random peds to the farthest points on the map every half an hour or so, tends to play with your nerves seriously. It was driving me mad. Literally retarded mini-games, like collecting $hit and milking cows, just to name a few. Ok, I get it, it goes well with the general theme an' all, but do I really need to collect all that virtual $hit scattered around numerous and different places, more than once and are they for real or was that yet another spit in the face? Technical stuff is degenerated to the fullest. I take guns I want to play with from my horse, I finally initiate that mission cutscene and lo and behold, my assault rifles are gone and I have to use the only thing that's left, my pistol for some reason. All because player randomly put all that back on the horse while I wasn't looking, simply because I had to concentrate on tapping that damned button for 10 minutes. Systems, like Wanted System is clearly broken. To this day, I have no single clue how it works or whether if it works at all. It seems like it was taken from some indie game and just pasted there like they didn't give a f'ck. Not to mention law enforcement will appear out of nowhere when you commit some crime in the middle of nowhere, just like it's '97 all over again and I'm playing GTA 1. Is this so f'cking hard to pull off, or are they joking once again. Communicating with peds is so redundant and unnecessary, it hurts my brain, or whatever is left of it playing that game. So, here we are initiating that " antagonize " or " greet " option with random ped citizens. It affects our character and makes us " good " or " bad ". Cute. The only time we needed that option, the only time we actually needed it for making some real difference, whether for the good or bad, is the time it was taken away from us. Ri-dic(k)ulous). Here's an example: I'm riding my horse through some deserted parts and again, my thumb is now falling off completely from all this nonsense tapping, so I switch to that cinematic mode. Almost instantly, I hit some poor bastard and he and I both fell off our horses. I'm stupidly thinking, " hey, there has got to be an option to excuse myself, so we are all good ". Of course, ingenious minds of Rockstar doesn't work that way and there's no option to do that, so I have to kill him - against my will, since I want to be " good " and escape the sheriff's boys and lose some more precious time I dedicated to try and play the damn game. Literally the situations, where this conversation f'ckery is absolutely needed, is nowhere to be found... The hardest thing I had to face with while still playing it, was after I completed the story campaign. Literally nothing meaningful after that, nothing engaging or fun to do. Not to mention thrilling or adrenaline inducing. Not even a f'cking lullaby. Horrible, considering there are games - Rockstar's games - older than the majority of RDR2 public, that are still extremely playable and fun after much more than a decade.

 

These are not traits of an AAA game, let alone something as popular as GTA or RDR. But hey, let them introduce us to the female leading characters, all that $hit will somehow appear better with bobs and vagenes.

Edited June 17, 2019 by ChengizVlad09

[jcole]

it depends on what the changes are. id be happy with rockstar adding new things like more interactions and bigger maps and new types of weapons. but don't have female protagonist in single player for next gta game. don't make the protagonist a cop either because that would just be boring. no SJW bullsh*t like female protagonists in single player in gta 6, hopefully rockstar is smarter than that and they don't put that kind of stuff in the next gta game.

[Beato_dim]

I'm pretty open to changes. I honestly don't see why setting GTA outside of US would be problematic; a woman protagonist is kind of alright - sure, it would be harder to pull off right, and GTA V didn't really have any interesting major female characters (but, on the other hand, GTA IV had, so I still hope they're capable writing a good female lead).

Making the protag a cop is another matter, I think it will either screw up the immersion or screw up the basic GTA formula too much.

[Lioshenka]

On 6/17/2019 at 2:35 PM, Damien Scott said:

Have you played RDR 2? 

Still waiting for the first one to come out on PC (in other words: no) :)

[Algonquin Assassin]

I'm very open if it revitalises and refreshes the concept like GTA IV did after the 3D era had run its course. I've been playing these games for over 2 decades now and I don't remember any "changes" persay that made me feel uncomfortable or wish it was never done. Even if some take a bit longer to adjust to in general I feel the majority of them are done for the better which is only a good thing.

 

-A foreign GTA. Bring it on.

 

-A corrupt cop. Admittedly an uncover cop would be a hard angle to gel with the GTA formula hence it wouldn't work too well, but I think a corrupt cop would be fine. I'm surprised more people aren't for it since Tenpenny gets so much praise so I would've thought more people would love to be in the shoes of a corrupt cop as it opens up for more interesting and unique gameplay opportunities.

 

-A female protagonist. Honestly I don't have a problem. Some of the reasons I've seen for this being a bad idea over the years makes me laugh. Almost no one cares about strippers and hookers, but the moment the idea of a female protagonist is brought up people start stressing how this would affect this segment of the gameplay and there's always this idea that she's going to be a slut and sleep/have sex with every guy she meets for some reason. Sorry, but no. R* have made some incredible protagonists over the years so I'd welcome a female into the fold.

 

The only exception to this is GTA VI or a future GTA even beyond that adopts an online only model. Single player is still the bread and butter, but without that I don't think I would accept it at all. The signs are concerning with the cancellation of GTA V's single player DLC and the continued focus on GTAO. If GTA VI has no single player then I'll stick to their pre 2014 GTAs thanks.

[Bratva Assassin]

Much like SonOfLiberty, I'm very open to change in regards to the GTA series. I mean, GTA IV/EFLC were highly revolutionary in those regards.

 

A foreign GTA is something I would LOVE. I'd love for it to take place in either Italy, Russia, Japan, or China, and for it to focus on the Italian or Russian Mafias, the Triad, or the Yakuza.

 

A female protagonist. Honestly, it isn't that bad of an idea at all. She can easily be a seductress working for a criminal organization. Perhaps she can even use her hypnotic powers against male law enforcement officers or agents in order to decrease wanted level stars.

 

However, the idea of a corrupt cop or spy is one of the few concepts where I'm gonna have to take some time getting used to.

 

And I can't believe nobody has even said this one yet: I think it would actually be great to see a GTA game take place during the Great Depression era, only in some small town, and the character you play as is sorta like Bonnie and Clyde or John Dillinger. Not exactly a Wild West outlaw like in the RDR series, though not necessarily a mobster like in the Mafia series. Even though I'm from Georgia (the US state people, NOT the country), in this particular case I would probably like it the most to take place in either Indiana, South Dakota, or even West Virginia as I actually have grandparents from those states.

 

Also, the biggest concern is that if GTA VI has no single player or is ANYTHING like GTA Online, then I'll just stick to GTAs III-V, thank you very much.

[iiCriminnaaL]

1 hour ago, SonOfLiberty said:

-A corrupt cop. Admittedly an uncover cop would be a hard angle to gel with the GTA formula hence it wouldn't work too well, but I think a corrupt cop would be fine. I'm surprised more people aren't for it since Tenpenny gets so much praise so I would've thought more people would love to be in the shoes of a corrupt cop as it opens up for more interesting and unique gameplay opportunities.

 

If only he was the protagonist instead of CJ...

[Grotti Vigilante]

1 hour ago, SonOfLiberty said:

-A corrupt cop. Admittedly an  uncover cop would be a hard angle to gel with the GTA formula hence it wouldn't work too well, but I think a corrupt cop would be fine. I'm surprised more people aren't for it since Tenpenny gets so much praise so I would've thought more people would love to be in the shoes of a corrupt cop as it opens up for more interesting and unique gameplay opportunities.

For the same reasons Tenpenny was a good antagonist are the exact reasons he’d be a terrible protagonist. He was ultimately a user who got others to do his dirty work and had to keep up appearances as a full time cop. If he did half do what CJ did he’d be found out very quickly no matter how many Pendelbury’s he tried to get rid of. The undercover cop idea seemed fine for Sleeping Dogs even, but I’m still not really in favour.

 

1 hour ago, SonOfLiberty said:

-A  female protagonist. Honestly I don't have a problem. Some of the reasons I've seen for this being a bad idea over the years makes me laugh. Almost no one cares about strippers and hookers, but the moment the idea of a female protagonist is brought up people start stressing how this would affect this segment of the gameplay and there's always this idea that she's going to be a slut and sleep/have sex with every guy she meets for some reason. Sorry, but no. R* have made some incredible protagonists over the years so I'd welcome a female into the fold.

Female protagonists, I feel, would affect the feeling of power for some of us because they’re generally weaker than males. It wouldn’t be much fun to play as Niko if he was weaker than all others around him, but he was a very strong hitman who could easily hold his own and simply worked mostly for money. He had no qualms or issues dealing with criminals who betrayed him. He’d have destroyed Dimitri earlier had he got the chance. But a female fighting off a strong male thug just isn’t as believable, never mind multiple ones. It’d need a lot of time to explain in absolute detail but my battery is dying so please forgive me cutting short.

[billiejoearmstrong8]

1 hour ago, Grotti Vigilante said:

 

Female protagonists, I feel, would affect the feeling of power for some of us because they’re generally weaker than males. It wouldn’t be much fun to play as Niko if he was weaker than all others around him, but he was a very strong hitman who could easily hold his own and simply worked mostly for money. He had no qualms or issues dealing with criminals who betrayed him. He’d have destroyed Dimitri earlier had he got the chance. But a female fighting off a strong male thug just isn’t as believable, never mind multiple ones. It’d need a lot of time to explain in absolute detail but my battery is dying so please forgive me cutting short.

Surely this depends on the character though. Not every woman is automatically weaker than every man. Think of someone like Catalina or Elizabeta, not weak compared to those around them in the slightest.

 

I don't think being extremely physically strong is a pre-requisite, sure most of them can kick some arse (especially Niko) but really hand-to-hand combat barely ever happens in GTA missions. It's way more about gun skills where the gender isn't relevant, plus melee weapons exist as does the potential advantage of people not necessarily expecting a woman to fight well or of guys being reluctant to hit/fight a woman. If chubby middle aged Michael can hold his own I'm sure they could come up with an athletic and skilled woman who could too. It could easily be that when hand-to-hand combat did occasionally come up it happened to take place with other women or relatively weaker men and have bigger guys defeated other ways, just the same as they didn't have Michael (or any of the V trio as far as I recall) having bare knuckle fights with strong criminal guys. Pretty sure the closest Michael came to that was beating up a (also middle aged) car salesman and cutting off Lazlow's ponytail, he wasn't beating up gangs of thugs. A woman who is a skilled ruthless criminal, armed, and possibly with a gang/other criminals and status as further protection isn't going to be weaker than all others around her. I think a female protagonist would be intimidating in different ways to a male one that's all, not that unlike how other GTA protagonists are intimidating in various different ways that aren't all just about brute strength.

Edited June 28, 2019 by billiejoearmstrong8

[Grotti Vigilante]

1 hour ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Surely this depends on the character though. Not every woman is automatically weaker than every man. Think of someone like Catalina or Elizabeta, not weak compared to those around them in the slightest.

The average woman will be weaker than the average man though. I thought someone would bring up Catalina sooner or later, to which it worth noting that she is also not that strong. She shot Claude when he was caught off guard, but you can notice how when she was confronted by him later she didn't bother to try and kill him again. Catalina feared his quest for revenge a great deal and made sure the odds were always in her favour during every encounter by having guards or disarming him. Catalina relied on the people around her to get so powerful. But one-on-one, she would stand no chance against Claude. Even when the Cartel was outnumbering him in The Exchange, she made a break for it. Very few women could realistically take on the present GTA protagonists.

 

Quote

I don't think being extremely physically strong is a pre-requisite, sure most of them can kick some arse (especially Niko) but really hand-to-hand combat barely ever happens in GTA missions. It's way more about gun skills where the gender isn't relevant, plus melee weapons exist as does the potential advantage of people not necessarily expecting a woman to fight well or of guys being reluctant to hit/fight a woman. 

Even so, being physically strong gives a sense of power, which is essential to a GTA protagonist because of how part of GTA escapism is being something you aren't, which in this case is an unstoppable badass. If the character is weaker than everyone else in a game like GTA it doesn't feel right. The people not expecting a woman to fight or not wanting to fight them also doesn't mean she's suddenly a winner. The kind of men working in the GTA criminal underworld will kill and fight whoever they must, and chivalry isn't usually a word in their dictionary. But if characters feel the need to be treading on egg shells with the protagonist, it doesn't empower the character or the player. It just downplays them. 

 

Quote

If chubby middle aged Michael can hold his own I'm sure they could come up with an athletic and skilled woman who could too.

Michael was a bank robber and skilled criminal, and being chubby can be a good advantage in combat. Not to mention, he just has that natural intimidation with him that would be much harder to pull of with a woman. There's a reason why firm and imposing men are generally considered leaders while the same women would be considered bossy: perception. Evolutionary speaking, men evolved deeper voices partly for the purpose of intimidating other males, and we have greater upper body strength and increased testosterone levels (and thus have more aggression) for the purpose of intimidation and fighting other males, so this perception probably isn't just deep-rooted in societal conditioning. 

 

Quote

It could easily be that when hand-to-hand combat did occasionally come up it happened to take place with other women or relatively weaker men and have bigger guys defeated other ways, just the same as they didn't have Michael (or any of the V trio as far as I recall) having bare knuckle fights with strong criminal guys. Pretty sure the closest Michael came to that was beating up a (also middle aged) car salesman and cutting off Lazlow's ponytail, he wasn't beating up gangs of thugs.

But do you still think a woman could just as easily beat up Simeon and restrain Lazlow like Michael did? I certainly don't think so, most especially not Simeon who was likely full of adrenaline during that fight, which combined with his greater average strength would've made it a one-sided battle. If ever the character won because Simeon was holding back, then we're once again at the idea that having to have people power down for you doesn't give you that sense of power you should be getting in a GTA game. I mean running two scenarios in a dark alley, you come across a mugger. One man, and one woman, both unarmed and relying on intimidation. Whose more likely to get results?

 

Quote

A woman who is a skilled ruthless criminal, armed, and possibly with a gang/other criminals and status as further protection isn't going to be weaker than all others around her. I think a female protagonist would be intimidating in different ways to a male one that's all, not that unlike how other GTA protagonists are intimidating in various different ways that aren't all just about brute strength.

If she doesn't have the strength, intimidation and power, she isn't likely to become a skilled ruthless criminal. I mean given the fact the vast majority of criminals in the US are male, and given that there are greater social measures to assist women, what realistic reason could you come up with that she would not only turn to crime, but become such a powerful criminal? Additionally, having gangs as further protection doesn't add to any strength. CJ and Tommy may have been part of a gang, but they are still dangerous men by themselves, especially Tommy who was able to intimidate people much more than Michael, Claude and Niko. Rockstar most certainly aren't the best people to even write a strong female character anyway. Sadie Adler was their attempt, but she fell short because of how irrational she is and how all the men around her held back. Don't care if she shared work with her husband, Pearson was not intimidated by her anger. Nobody was. Arthur by contrast could intimidate anyone easily. 

Edited June 28, 2019 by Grotti Vigilante

[billiejoearmstrong8]

49 minutes ago, Grotti Vigilante said:

 

A different character can interact and fight with other characters differently. GTA is primarily a shooting game and literally none of the GTA V protagonists have fist fights with big strong thugs in any mission. Niko does because he happens to have the skills to but the V protags have different skills to him so they interact and fight with other characters differently to him. Being very physically strong or exceptional at hand to hand combat isn't a pre requisite for being a GTA protagonist and not all GTA protagonists are the same. Weapons exist. Different ways of being intimidating exist. 

 

Do you think no female criminals exist in real life? No intimidating women? No criminals of any gender that aren't huge and muscly and are still able to be intimidating in other ways? Averages don't matter, the average man is weak too. Whether it's a man or woman we're talking about an individual who has exceptional qualities. Those qualities don't have to amount to just being physically big and strong. Otherwise only the biggest and strongest GTA protagonist so far matters and all the others don't deserve the title. Niko would kick Michael's arse, does that matter? No because they're not in a strong man contest and they're different characters who use different skills to get different jobs done. 

Edited June 28, 2019 by billiejoearmstrong8

[Grotti Vigilante]

6 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

A different character can interact and fight with other characters differently. Literally none of the GTA V protagonists have fist fights with big strong thugs in any mission. Niko does because he happens to have the skills to but the V protags have different skills to him so they interact and fight with other characters differently to him. Being very physically strong or exceptional at hand to hand combat isn't a pre requisite for being a GTA protagonist and not all GTA protagonists are the same. Weapons exist. Different ways of being intimidating exist. 

But if a character isn't physically strong there's no empowerment to be had from playing a video game like GTA. They may not be all the same, but they are all individuals with the strength to hold their own against many people. Even if the intimidation is not through being physically imposing, a female is still not as likely to be intimidating as a man because she doesn't exert the necessary masculine energy. But even if you write her to be that way, then why not just make the character a man and get the added extra upper body strength for further intimidation and power? I refer back to the scenario where a man and woman try using intimidation in a dark alley to mug someone. I am willing to bet that the woman is going to get fewer if any results.

 

6 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Do you think no female criminals exist in real life? No intimidating women? No criminals of any gender that aren't huge and muscly and are still able to be intimidating in other ways? Averages don't matter, the average man is weak too. Whether it's a man or woman we're talking about an individual who has exceptional qualities. Those qualities don't have to amount to just being physically big and strong. Otherwise only the biggest and strongest GTA protagonist so far matters and all the others don't deserve the title. Niko would kick Michael's arse, does that matter? No because they're not in a strong man contest and they're different characters who use different skills to get different jobs done.

I didn't say there are no female criminals, but men rule the head count in notorious crimes. I've also already made a point about intimidation when physical strength isn't mentioned earlier, so I don't think I'll repeat myself. It doesn't really matter if the average man is weak, they're still stronger than the average woman, and GTA characters don't have a great amount of exceptional qualities. They aren't superheroes or some kind of superspy, they're common crooks working their way through a harsh criminal underworld to become powerful crooks, competing against other men. As such they only need to have the basic level of strength and intimidation to do this. But a woman probably isn't going to intimidate these powerful men they're working for. Nobody will take her seriously because she is weaker, and in an attempt to be more aggressive and assertive than the average female, they will likely mistake her attempts for basic arrogance and insecurity. 

 

You are free to disagree, but I will never be convinced that a female will realistically be able to make her way up in the criminal underworld in the GTA universe. She'd be too weak in comparison to other options and less intimidating, and from a writing perspective, making her that way would add nothing to the game. If anything it would take away extra intimidation through the lack of imposing physical strength you'd get with a man. If Rockstar were less realistic and more like Saints Row then there's more you can do in the way of working it in, such as with special drugs and such, but that would ruin GTA as a whole. GTA Online's complaints are being too much like Saints Row, so let's not ruin it any further. It was nice to engage in a discussion about it even, but my mind is pretty much made up at this point. 

[billiejoearmstrong8]

27 minutes ago, Grotti Vigilante said:

But if a character isn't physically strong there's no empowerment to be had from playing a video game like GTA. They may not be all the same, but they are all individuals with the strength to hold their own against many people. Even if the intimidation is not through being physically imposing, a female is still not as likely to be intimidating as a man because she doesn't exert the necessary masculine energy. But even if you write her to be that way, then why not just make the character a man and get the added extra upper body strength for further intimidation and power? I refer back to the scenario where a man and woman try using intimidation in a dark alley to mug someone. I am willing to bet that the woman is going to get fewer if any results.

 

It depends on the man and depends on the woman. Not as likely means nothing. Women who are intimidating and who commit violent crime exist. So a GTA character could be one.

 

I just think you place too much importance on physical strength in a GTA protagonist. In reality it's a minor aspect when there's an arsenal of weapons available. None of the V trio were required to fist fight strong opponents to complete their missions and other than Trevor they weren't required to be physically intimidating that often either. They used surprise/stealth and weapons most often. Even the main antagonists of the game (Devin Weston and Steve Haines) aren't physically big and strong. There's other ways to intimidate or to be powerful.

 

It's about the writing. Maybe a female protagonist wouldn't have worked in a given past GTA game story but that's because that was a story written for that protagonist. It's possible to write an intimidating criminal who is female....movies and TV shows have done it, games have done it and even GTA itself has done it. They exist in real life too. By the same token they could also write a male character who isn't physically big and strong but is still powerful and intimidating. It would just be a different story tailored to that character.

 

Edited June 28, 2019 by billiejoearmstrong8

[TheSantader25]

27 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

It depends on the man and depends on the woman. Not as likely means nothing. Women who are intimidating and who commit violent crime exist. So a GTA character could be one.

 

I just think you place too much importance on physical strength in a GTA protagonist. In reality it's a minor aspect when there's an arsenal of weapons available. None of the V trio were required to fist fight strong opponents to complete their missions and other than Trevor they weren't required to be physically intimidating that often either. They used surprise/stealth and weapons most often. Even the main antagonists of the game (Devin Weston and Steve Haines) aren't physically big and strong. There's other ways to intimidate or to be powerful.

 

It's about the writing. Maybe a female protagonist wouldn't have worked in a given past GTA game story but that's because that was a story written for that protagonist. It's possible to write an intimidating criminal who is female....movies and TV shows have done it, games have done it and even GTA itself has done it. They exist in real life too. By the same token they could also write a male character who isn't physically big and strong but is still powerful and intimidating. It would just be a different story tailored to that character.

 

But I think we can agree that writing a "believable" female lead for this series is much more harder than writing a male protagonist. That's why many people are concerned that it's too much work and risk. It could break the entire series if it's done wrong and in the end, for what? 

[billiejoearmstrong8]

6 minutes ago, TheSantader25 said:

But I think we can agree that writing a "believable" female lead for this series is much more harder than writing a male protagonist. That's why many people are concerned that it's too much work and risk. It could break the entire series if it's done wrong and in the end, for what? 

Yes it is. But I think it's always challenging to write a good protagonist, especially when they don't take the easy road and just write one that's similar to previous ones and instead try something new. I think GTA has incredible writing so they're up to the challenge. It doesn't have to be a female protagonist (I'll be happy as long as the protagonist is interesting and well written) but I totally think it's a viable option.

Edited June 28, 2019 by billiejoearmstrong8