GTA V has Worst story as a Grand Theft Auto game

[TheGodDamnMasterReturns]

I think what my largest issue with the story is the lack of stakes and tension. Coming off criticisms of IV's dark tone and mocking from Saints Row 2 marketing, they seemed to want to course correct the tone and atmosphere to the point it felt palpable in The Ballad of Gay Tony.

 

The trouble is they overdid it. I was in university and more immature when the game released and have fond memories of laughing at Trevor's scenes, particularly the Debra confrontation in Floyd's apartment. But in recent years, its just been getting difficult to give a damn about any of the characters. I actually feel the opposite about many characters than I did in my first playthrough.

 

I didn't originally care for Franklin as a character, but he's now my favorite of the trio. He embodies that dry snarkiness and cynicism that Niko was known for. He's the straight man to all the absolutely batsh*t, insufferable maniacs the game throws at you; a lone voice of reason in a f*cked up world. He doesn't seem to enjoy any of the work and FIB blackmail schemes he gets roped into over the course of the story and rightly calls out Michael during the FIB raid. "Poor me, poor me. Man, pour me a drink." Franklin is a reluctant criminal. If not for Lamar f*cking them both out of their jobs he likely would have been content rising to a sales manager position and getting an apartment for himself. He joins Michael because at that point Simeon would never have given him a good reference and he wanted what Michael had: the American Dream, a rat race of insanity as revealed by IV.

 

I was looking forward to playing as Michael the most purely because putting a nuclear family dynamic into a Grand Theft Auto game was intriguing to me. On paper, Michael has the dream but its a facade. He has a wife and two kids who rightly despise him for being a slothful, depressed buffoon who dragged them across the country after throwing his partners under the bus. His mansion has a ludicrous mortgage on it and he's paying hush money to Norton every month. Michael's narrative arc is moreso about accepting what a bastard he has been to everyone and trying to be a better man. In the first act he drives his family away with his mercurial affect and by the end of the game he's being more mindful of their needs. I think I appreciated those optional side missions where each family member called him for help more than his main story. It's really difficult for me to say I "like" Michael as a character but he comes close. A shame the story DLC got canceled.

 

Trevor is where things went horribly awry for me. His associates and his own demeanor feel so unconcerned with the many threats they face that you get the sense they'll survive anything and as a result the tension is almost nonexistent. I pity Trevor because its clear he had a really f*cked up upbringing followed by Michael's betrayal. But he acts like such a sourpuss clown so much and does so much awful sh*t that it makes me despise him. I will say his missions are the best though.

 

I actually think Devon Weston works just fine as a villain. He's arrogant, smug, greedy, a backstabber, and the embodiment of the dudebro venture capitalists and bullsh*t artists that plague the economy of the United States. He straight up sends private mercenaries to kill Michael's family. Steve Haines should have felt more menacing though. It would have been better if he actually had full FIB backing and f*cked with Michael in a more insidious way. As it stands he's just a dirty cop who has you do his laundry for him.

 

Overall, it was a mixed bag for me. IV sort of spoiled me with its more grounded tone and moodier atmosphere. It wasn't afraid to touch on real heartbreaking issues like suicide (Dwayne) and heroin addiction (Derrick).

Edited June 27 by TheGodDamnMasterReturns

[Lock n' Stock]

On 6/27/2022 at 5:33 AM, TheGodDamnMasterReturns said:

I think what my largest issue with the story is the lack of stakes and tension. Coming off criticisms of IV's dark tone and mocking from Saints Row 2 marketing, they seemed to want to course correct the tone and atmosphere to the point it felt palpable in The Ballad of Gay Tony.

 

The trouble is they overdid it. I was in university and more immature when the game released and have fond memories of laughing at Trevor's scenes, particularly the Debra confrontation in Floyd's apartment. But in recent years, its just been getting difficult to give a damn about any of the characters. I actually feel the opposite about many characters than I did in my first playthrough.

 

I didn't originally care for Franklin as a character, but he's now my favorite of the trio. He embodies that dry snarkiness and cynicism that Niko was known for. He's the straight man to all the absolutely batsh*t, insufferable maniacs the game throws at you; a lone voice of reason in a f*cked up world. He doesn't seem to enjoy any of the work and FIB blackmail schemes he gets roped into over the course of the story and rightly calls out Michael during the FIB raid. "Poor me, poor me. Man, pour me a drink." Franklin is a reluctant criminal. If not for Lamar f*cking them both out of their jobs he likely would have been content rising to a sales manager position and getting an apartment for himself. He joins Michael because at that point Simeon would never have given him a good reference and he wanted what Michael had: the American Dream, a rat race of insanity as revealed by IV.

 

I was looking forward to playing as Michael the most purely because putting a nuclear family dynamic into a Grand Theft Auto game was intriguing to me. On paper, Michael has the dream but its a facade. He has a wife and two kids who rightly despise him for being a slothful, depressed buffoon who dragged them across the country after throwing his partners under the bus. His mansion has a ludicrous mortgage on it and he's paying hush money to Norton every month. Michael's narrative arc is moreso about accepting what a bastard he has been to everyone and trying to be a better man. In the first act he drives his family away with his mercurial affect and by the end of the game he's being more mindful of their needs. I think I appreciated those optional side missions where each family member called him for help more than his main story. It's really difficult for me to say I "like" Michael as a character but he comes close. A shame the story DLC got canceled.

 

Trevor is where things went horribly awry for me. His associates and his own demeanor feel so unconcerned with the many threats they face that you get the sense they'll survive anything and as a result the tension is almost nonexistent. I pity Trevor because its clear he had a really f*cked up upbringing followed by Michael's betrayal. But he acts like such a sourpuss clown so much and does so much awful sh*t that it makes me despise him. I will say his missions are the best though.

 

I actually think Devon Weston works just fine as a villain. He's arrogant, smug, greedy, a backstabber, and the embodiment of the dudebro venture capitalists and bullsh*t artists that plague the economy of the United States. He straight up sends private mercenaries to kill Michael's family. Steve Haines should have felt more menacing though. It would have been better if he actually had full FIB backing and f*cked with Michael in a more insidious way. As it stands he's just a dirty cop who has you do his laundry for him.

 

Overall, it was a mixed bag for me. IV sort of spoiled me with its more grounded tone and moodier atmosphere. It wasn't afraid to touch on real heartbreaking issues like suicide (Dwayne) and heroin addiction (Derrick).

Yeah, GTA V's story was kind of a mess. To me, it felt more like a series of crime film-cliches strung together than an actual narrative, with insufferable characters (Haines, Weston, Michael's family e.g), an asinine "doing jobs for the feds" premise and a schizophrenic tone that doesn't know if it wants to be serious like GTA IV or tongue-in-cheek like the 3D Universe games (I'd say the latter balanced the wackiness and seriousness much better). It desperately wants to be some Tarantino/Michael Mann crime-epic so badly, but ends up feeling more like some Michael Bay schlockfest, only more pretentious.

Edited June 30 by Lock n' Stock

[suicidehummer]

All of the characters are so caricatured and the writing has zero depth, not to mention the acting. Especially Ned Luke, he did a terrible job with Michael. It just feels like he's reading lines from a script. Edit to add: Even when Michael "yells", it's still just a normal tone of voice, just a little more stressed. There's no range there at all. That always drove me nuts. You never feel like he's actually angry.

Edited June 29 by suicidehummer

[Ryo256]

I think the core issue with GTA V's narrative is how little power the protagonists have. In previous GTA games, you have CJ working to fix the hood, establishing himself in San Fierro and Las Venturas and trying to get his brother out of jail. It felt good that you could push towards your own goals. Sure, sometime they have been forced to do things but they usually rebel if a limit is crossed like Niko killing off some of his bosses, dominating them like Francis to give better pay or only agreeing to work further if ULP helps him with his revenge search (note, both of these guys are blackmailing Niko yet he asserts himself on them). Or the example of Tommy rebelling against his boss and becoming a crime boss of Vice City.

In GTA V, however, for a GTA story, has you doing:

1. Chores for the family and FIB as Michael.

2. Chores for Lamar (which fails) and FIB as Franklin.

3. Trevor is the only character that does some crime on his own but most of his schemes fails and he becomes too domesticated when he enters Los Santos. (In fact, he only seems to mess with people weaker than him like a weakened Johnny or Floyd. That's not empowering, he just feels like a sh*t person to play as, narratively, not a powerful criminal).

At the end of it, feels like GTA V is saying, "Oh you expected a fun light-hearted story of doing chaotic crime? WELL BOO HOO, crime is over, you do FIB sh*t and any criminal activity will fail like Trevor/Lamar." That's a bad narrative for a game series that is in its core, a crime-based game.

And you know what's funny. GTAO doesn't make this mistake, it's narrative is purely based on doing crime so the whole V's argument of crime dying is falls on its face too. We were restricted in V for no reason while in GTAO we are free to have fun as we wish. Then even more gut-punching argument is that RDR2 is a story that has theme of anti-crime YET Arthur is a powerful outlaw that does fun criminal activities. Why do the games from RDR series have more fun criminal activities than a GTA game, think on this for a second.

How is it that GTA V has such a boring narrative of being such a weak criminal when it was born among games like GTAO and RDR2 which I explained above had better narrative suited for these kind of games? How is it possible for Rockstar to write this sh*t?

Edited June 27 by Ryo256

[Homicidal Hipster]

Not even close. I'd go as far as to say V has the second best story after IV. The whole witness protection story.. Dave, Trevor and Michaels relationship, the ups n downs. Madrazo and the deathwish ending where everything comes full circle. Bury the hatchet is one of the best written missions in the franchise. No 3D era story comes close to that level of emotional investment except maybe San Andreas. 

[Ryo256]

Funny part about the witness protection part is that I actually thought that Michael was smart to get into that but then after carefully understanding what Lester said during the Jewelry Store casing mission, it turns out that there is no witness protection program. Michael bought the mansion himself and it is him that is transfering money into Dave's account. Making me realize that how sh*tty  the deal was that Michael did. Plus the whole fund transfer is ridiculous since Michael quickly got into a bad financial situation as he claims "mortaged up to his eyeballs." No way this is sustainable. And Michael already made Dave's career by faking his death yet the scumbag still asking for funds. Bad deal.

Also Dave is an okay character but Lester is simply better as a support character. The relationship between him and Trevor/Michael isn't really that special since Trevor doesn't really confront him at all about it. The drama between Michael and Trevor also feels forced just like Bury the Hatchet because of one simple factor: Michael doesn't want Trevor around. Like one would imagine that Michael set Trevor up just to escape criminal life but even after his return, he's begging Dave to get rid of Trevor somehow. And truth be told, Trevor is smart enough to know that people don't want him around but he still stays so again, the drama is just forced because Trevor keeps forcing himself on others. Yes, one might say that Michael should just be honest with Trevor but him not being so just makes both parties sh*t and hence the emotional investment evaporates with that since you are watching one horrible person arguing with one less horrible person or if you do side with Michael then its a one-sided drama with Trevor not letting go of Michael, whining everytime Micheal pushes him away. This is a Trevor's problem, not a relationship issue. Other stories can't really be compared since most of them didn't even go for an emotional story to begin with but what they did go for, they did it good. That's what makes them better.

As for Madrazo, well he's not that special since he doesn't do much in the story other than being a plot device and just responding to stuff. Like it's Michael that screws with his girlfriend's house or it's Trevor who screws with his wife. He, himself, has not much going on in the story (he is better in Online though). Also I always found it strange that you didn't kill him since you kill Stretch and Wei Cheng for less of a reason. 

As for the ending well, none of the endings have proper build-up so there was never a coming of full circle since in Ending A and B, you learn that Steve and Devin do maintain power so in Ending C, killing them was a bad idea. But the story shakes it off and say, "Nah, there are no consequences." Well if that's the case, why not just kill them eariler? And what coming of circle is there for Stretch and Wei Cheng which aren't even much of a focus? It's not like GTA San Andreas that actually shows Tenpenny losing power, getting called to court and a riot happening when everyone is angry at him, giving CJ the window to confront him because he lost much of his power.

GTA V's story has its good parts but most of it is bad or flawed. Other stories did better because they took the easy way and wrote a simple plot with few risks. GTA V takes huge risks with its narrative but build-up and resolution of conflicts is not up to par, making V's narrative seems less valuable than other examples we have, including 3D era stories.

Edited June 29 by Ryo256

[Kris194]

On 6/27/2022 at 12:46 PM, Ryo256 said:

At the end of it, feels like GTA V is saying, "Oh you expected a fun light-hearted story of doing chaotic crime? WELL BOO HOO, crime is over, you do FIB sh*t and any criminal activity will fail like Trevor/Lamar." That's a bad narrative for a game series that is in its core, a crime-based game.

And you know what's funny. GTAO doesn't make this mistake, it's narrative is purely based on doing crime so the whole V's argument of crime dying is falls on its face too. We were restricted in V for no reason while in GTAO we are free to have fun as we wish. Then even more gut-punching argument is that RDR2 is a story that has theme of anti-crime YET Arthur is a powerful outlaw that does fun criminal activities. Why do the games from RDR series have more fun criminal activities than a GTA game, think on this for a second.

How is it that GTA V has such a boring narrative of being such a weak criminal when it was born among games like GTAO and RDR2 which I explained above had better narrative suited for these kind of games? How is it possible for Rockstar to write this sh*t?

First of all, don't compare GTA O and GTA V, they are very different things. Online is a arcade'y gaming experience, that doesn't have any respect for both era and the setting. GTA V however tries to tell realistic story, that fits both: era and setting. Crime has changed a lot in the last 30 - 40 years and singleplayer part of the game luckily reflects this. You can hate it or love it but GTA V is also very unique game, you may never again play something like this. About RDRII vs GTA V comparison, RDRII takes place in 1899, so in the era where cars, internet, TV, CCTV and a lot of modern stuff were not a thing.

[Ryo256]

2 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

 that doesn't have any respect for both era and the setting. 

It used to, in the beginning.
 

3 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

GTA V however tries to tell realistic story, that fits both: era and setting.

So did GTA IV and RDR2, yet that did not stop them from having powerful protagonists that were fun to play as.
 

4 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

Crime has changed a lot in the last 30 - 40 years and singleplayer part of the game luckily reflects this.

Oh come on, Trevor tried to hijack a military plane with a crop-duster.

 

6 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

RDRII takes place in 1899, so in the era where cars, internet, TV, CCTV and a lot of modern stuff were not a thing.

.......So?

What does that have to do with the fact that game has a fun competent protagonist? Does GTA V having cars/internet/TV/CCTV/modern stuff is why it has weak protagonists?
 

 

8 minutes ago, Kris194 said:

You can hate it or love it but GTA V is also very unique game, you may never again play something like this.

 

[ercecamurofficial]

IMO GTA Advande is the worst one.

[EastSideNine]

Not gonna lie, R* knew people would buy GTA V because it was taking place in Los Santos, the place where San Andreas thrived. There wasn't enough San Andreas throwback though to compensate in my opinion. Franklin is a Grove Street Gang member, a well respected one at that, but we have no idea nor backstory how he even became so well respected. When Franklin is in trouble there is no ability to call Grove Street gang members to his assistance like in TLAD or San Andreas. They took a major backstep in terms of gang environment and opportunities that could've arrived from it. Also, they took special friend abilities out of the game. In GTA IV, you had Little Jacob, Terry, and Armando that would give you discounted weapons and body armour. In GTA V? You pay full price for everything unless you find hidden body armour around the map. This virtually made "hanging out with friends" irrelevant and they shouldn't have even added the ability to anyways. All you do with friends in GTA V is boring. You get drunk, or go eat something. GTA IV had comedy clubs, bowling alleys, golfing, and helicopter rides. What do we have in GTA V? Darts. I might be then only one here to say this, but I was looking forward to Grove Street gang violence. Only Grove Street involved missions is with just Lamar, and occasionally Stretch. We don;t meet any other Ogs in the gang, for the most part just seems like R* gave gang stuff a backseat to the overall game, which I don't necessarily agree with. I was expecting full fledge gang rivals, people shooting at you as soon as you enter the wrong territory, etc. but the game takes place during some weird peace time between all gangs where the Ballas and Grove Street gang territories reversed. Idk, just seems like that whole aspect did not live up to expectations, killing Johnny Klebitz in Mr. Philips didn't help either, but I do feel like that was R*'s way of expressing how they feel about the fourth game, stomping it's brains in and leaving it to die. Ironically Trevor had more gang related missions than Franklin did. Michael was just a sad character and I didn't really care about his internal family affairs that seems like it was ripped straight out of a cliche movie script. I call him lazy writing because his entire existence is based off of Max Payne and Neil McCauley from the movie Heat. 

[Ondr4H]

1 hour ago, EastSideNine said:

Not gonna lie, R* knew people would buy GTA V because it was taking place in Los Santos, the place where San Andreas thrived. There wasn't enough San Andreas throwback though to compensate in my opinion. Franklin is a Grove Street Gang member, a well respected one at that, but we have no idea nor backstory how he even became so well respected. When Franklin is in trouble there is no ability to call Grove Street gang members to his assistance like in TLAD or San Andreas. They took a major backstep in terms of gang environment and opportunities that could've arrived from it. Also, they took special friend abilities out of the game. In GTA IV, you had Little Jacob, Terry, and Armando that would give you discounted weapons and body armour. In GTA V? You pay full price for everything unless you find hidden body armour around the map. This virtually made "hanging out with friends" irrelevant and they shouldn't have even added the ability to anyways. All you do with friends in GTA V is boring. You get drunk, or go eat something. GTA IV had comedy clubs, bowling alleys, golfing, and helicopter rides. What do we have in GTA V? Darts. I might be then only one here to say this, but I was looking forward to Grove Street gang violence. Only Grove Street involved missions is with just Lamar, and occasionally Stretch. We don;t meet any other Ogs in the gang, for the most part just seems like R* gave gang stuff a backseat to the overall game, which I don't necessarily agree with. I was expecting full fledge gang rivals, people shooting at you as soon as you enter the wrong territory, etc. but the game takes place during some weird peace time between all gangs where the Ballas and Grove Street gang territories reversed. Idk, just seems like that whole aspect did not live up to expectations, killing Johnny Klebitz in Mr. Philips didn't help either, but I do feel like that was R*'s way of expressing how they feel about the fourth game, stomping it's brains in and leaving it to die. Ironically Trevor had more gang related missions than Franklin did. Michael was just a sad character and I didn't really care about his internal family affairs that seems like it was ripped straight out of a cliche movie script. I call him lazy writing because his entire existence is based off of Max Payne and Neil McCauley from the movie Heat. 

Well get discount on weapons in GTA V is simple, just shoot any medal medal in target practice and sale ia yours.

[KingAJ032304]

On 6/29/2022 at 1:18 PM, Ryo256 said:

Oh come on, Trevor tried to hijack a military plane with a crop-duster.

Nothing wrong with that

[Ondr4H]

I played both stories of GTA IV and V... GTA IV story recently.

 

Must say, GTA V story is high stakes story executed poorly. Its Michael Bay esque movie, but not so good one. It had all essence to be it, but fails in jokes and characters. Its probably only GTA game that I rushed to finished, but not in good way. I just wanted to quit this nosense. I expected HEAT movie and I get discount Mission Impossible...

 

GTA IV story is one man tragedy simple as that.No saving world bullsh*t, secret army, IAA vs FIB fight, biggest heist ever.None of this. Its on par with VCS story in term of heartbreaking moments. Story overal is on par with Mafia games stories, for me this means a lot. Characters in this game actually care about Nico and that speaks a lot. There are none exploding buildings, minigun rampage after small bank heist, nuclear weapon heist. And thats for good... Just one hitman being sometimes messy in taking down his targets .

 

Not mention it has two DLCs, at the end three characters with fully fleshed stories, nothing like GTA V main characters.

 

If there will be GTA 6, it needs to go GTA IV path to be good game... But Im having my doubt, after all.

[Ryo256]

6 hours ago, KingAJ032304 said:

Nothing wrong with that

[Homicidal Hipster]

*best story as a GTA game. Think you made a mistake op. I corrected you. 

On 6/27/2022 at 4:12 PM, suicidehummer said:

All of the characters are so caricatured and the writing has zero depth, not to mention the acting. Especially Ned Luke, he did a terrible job with Michael. It just feels like he's reading lines from a script. Edit to add: Even when Michael "yells", it's still just a normal tone of voice, just a little more stressed. There's no range there at all. That always drove me nuts. You never feel like he's actually angry.

You ain't no acting coach mate. Ned Luke is a terrific actor. He hits all the emotional notes and has a cool charisma about him. His "angry tone" is perfect. His blowup in Trevor's meth lab during Paleto setup is bloody brilliant. 

[suicidehummer]

5 minutes ago, Thelema93 said:

*best story as a GTA game. Think you made a mistake op. I corrected you. 

You ain't no acting coach mate. Ned Luke is a terrific actor. He hits all the emotional notes and has a cool charisma about him. His "angry tone" is perfect. His blowup in Trevor's meth lab during Paleto setup is bloody brilliant. 

 

LOL

 

If you're not capable of perceiving it, that's fine. But it's obvious to anyone who can. Michael comes off like a soft-ass. Even his family doesn't get intimidated when he yells. Especially next to Steven Ogg's performance, his terrible acting is obvious.

[Homicidal Hipster]

32 minutes ago, suicidehummer said:

 

LOL

 

If you're not capable of perceiving it, that's fine. But it's obvious to anyone who can. Michael comes off like a soft-ass. Even his family doesn't get intimidated when he yells. Especially next to Steven Ogg's performance, his terrible acting is obvious.

I'm very capable bro. Neds performance is fine. Simeon seemed pretty dammed scared. As did Franklin when they first met. So did Harvey Molina the janitor.. Michaels intimidating when he's cool calm and collected. His anger is a weakness of his. It's his undoing in a lot of situations. But it sounds like your disdain for Ned Luke is personal. Maybe he porked your mum or stole your milk money. Or did he kick your puppy? 

[suicidehummer]

4 hours ago, Thelema93 said:

But it sounds like your disdain for Ned Luke is personal. Maybe he porked your mum or stole your milk money. Or did he kick your puppy? 

 

That you even take such a cheap route as this speaks to the weakness of your argument. Why on earth would I have a grudge against an actor who I'd never even heard of before GTAV?

 

I could just as well say your defense of him must personal, but I don't need to because I can form arguments like an adult and don't need to grasp at straws for ad hominems.

[Emmi]

There is so much wrong and stupid with GTAV's story I cannot even put it in words and also it is the only modern GTA game I never cared to finish its story because at some point I just couldn't face the entire FIB crap no more. I was fed up with all of it and just returned to GTA IV and the 3d-era GTA games. GTAV is a misstep in my opinion in almost every single thing it does or wants to do compared to previous GTA games. It's a disaster!

[R_DeSanta]

I’m probably a little bit biased seeing as GTA V is my favorite game and the first GTA game I ever really played, but I really don’t see anything wrong with the story. I’ve replayed it probably like 10 times or more.

 

What I personally really like about the story is that I think most characters in it are really just trying to do the right thing and literally survive, even though all these crazy and dangerous situations keep happening.

Michael just really tries to be a caring dad despite everything, Franklin just wants a better life for himself and Trevor just wanted closure.

 

Also the side characters I feel all have their own personality and add a lot to the story. Michael’s family for example I love their characters, I genuinely find them hilarious and their relationship with Michael endearing at times. Then there’s Ron and Wade, who I think are not only funny but also have interesting backstories and a remarkable relationship with Trevor. And then obviously Lamar who’s probably one of the most hilarious characters ever and his friendship with Franklin is just so wholesome to me.

Also the Strangers and Freaks characters are in my opinion really great and the missions are really enjoyable, the random event characters and even the NPC’s all have amazing lines in the game and there’s just so much detail put into them.

 

‘Surviving is winning, Franklin. Everything else is bullsh*t. Fairytales spun by people afraid to look life in the eye. Whatever it takes kid, survive.’

Edited August 14 by R_DeSanta

[Homicidal Hipster]

3 hours ago, suicidehummer said:

 

That you even take such a cheap route as this speaks to the weakness of your argument. Why on earth would I have a grudge against an actor who I'd never even heard of before GTAV?

 

I could just as well say your defense of him must personal, but I don't need to because I can form arguments like an adult and don't need to grasp at straws for ad hominems.

It wasn't an argument, it was a little joke that obviously went over your head. Don't worry, won't happen again, I'll cater to your denseness from now on. 

[suicidehummer]

8 hours ago, Thelema93 said:

It wasn't an argument, it was a little joke that obviously went over your head. Don't worry, won't happen again, I'll cater to your denseness from now on. 

 

I'm sorry you can't handle anyone disagreeing with you. I know it wasn't an argument, that's why I said you were resorting to childish behavior because you lack an argument. You just keep proving me right with these juvenile insults.

[Homicidal Hipster]

8 hours ago, suicidehummer said:

 

I'm sorry you can't handle anyone disagreeing with you. I know it wasn't an argument, that's why I said you were resorting to childish behavior because you lack an argument. You just keep proving me right with these juvenile insults.

I can handle it just fine mate. I did have an argument and you ignored it entirely and focused on the silly joke I made because you had no retort to my argument.  Don't like him I don't really give a sh*t. But it sounds like you're the one who can't handle anyone disagreeing with you. I said one positive thing about Ned Luke and you went on the defense and said I couldn't perceive it. 

Edited August 15 by Thelema93

[suicidehummer]

18 hours ago, Thelema93 said:

I can handle it just fine mate. I did have an argument and you ignored it entirely and focused on the silly joke I made because you had no retort to my argument.  Don't like him I don't really give a sh*t. But it sounds like you're the one who can't handle anyone disagreeing with you. I said one positive thing about Ned Luke and you went on the defense and said I couldn't perceive it. 

 

"Ned's performance is fine" isn't an argument. Try again, without throwing a tantrum.

 

You're the one who responded to me in the first place. You took issue with my comment, not the other way around.

 

Listen to how he delivers "you're insane" at 4:45. It's embarrassingly bad. No range, he just makes his voice more hoarse to pretend like he's yelling but he never actually yells or has feeling behind his lines.

 

 

[Homicidal Hipster]

4 hours ago, suicidehummer said:

 

"Ned's performance is fine" isn't an argument. Try again, without throwing a tantrum.

 

You're the one who responded to me in the first place. You took issue with my comment, not the other way around.

 

Listen to how he delivers "you're insane" at 4:45. It's embarrassingly bad. No range, he just makes his voice more hoarse to pretend like he's yelling but he never actually yells or has feeling behind his lines.

 

 

Ok big boi. Read my post again and you might glean something. The reason I responded to you was because you can't say whatever the f*ck you want and not get a retort.. this is an online forum. Of course I'm going to take issue with some posts. Michaels anger is supposed to be comedic.. he's an angry retiree... His anger is his undoing in several situations.. he's not Trevor.. he's not going to blow his load everytime he's mad. Go watch his Paleto bay setup outburst.. his anger is very well portrayed.."sarcasm and a room full of you cunts" he has plenty of feeling here... And remember, GTA Vs story is largely a comedy, so the actors approach the lines as such.. the line you described was delivered with 95% comedic gusto and 5% genuine anger.. you're looking for something that isn't there..  nevertheless there's far more to acting than just displaying anger. How about displaying grief? Comedic timing, sorrow, charisma.. there's multiple facets when it comes to acting.. it's all a matter of preference. 

Edited August 16 by Thelema93

[Cutter De Blanc]

On 8/14/2022 at 12:16 PM, suicidehummer said:

 

I'm sorry you can't handle anyone disagreeing with you. I know it wasn't an argument, that's why I said you were resorting to childish behavior because you lack an argument. You just keep proving me right with these juvenile insults.

How does someone insulting you on the internet prove that Ned Luke is a bad actor? 

 

I don't think his portrayal of Michael De Santa is the problem here, although you might want to take some issue with whoever directed him. If they didn't say "cut! do it again with more angry yelling this time" that's on the director. 

 

I personally thought Michael's voice acting was good, in the particular instance you cited where he says, "You're insane!" He's pissed off at Jimmy, but he's also concerned for his safety (and presumably the safety of his boat). That's his kid whom he knows to be an incorrigible f*ckup. You have to assume Jimmy does stupid sh*t all the time. But it's still his kid, not some asshole he's gonna kill. I think his reading of the line was very nuanced, but I suppose it's open to interpretation. 

[suicidehummer]

17 hours ago, Cutter De Blanc said:

How does someone insulting you on the internet prove that Ned Luke is a bad actor? 

 

...what? I didn't say it did.

 

You can argue it in that one instance, but he does it through the whole game. Always "yelling" under his breath as if he's just practicing the lines and doesn't want to disturb somebody in the next room over. There's just no feeling in his delivery. Contrasting it with Trevor, Ogg's performance actually meets the craziness the script calls for. And I guess I should give Franklin's actor some sh*t, too, because he's about as unremarkable as Luke. Both of them ended up being completely forgettable characters.

[anonym444]

i think the story is elite

 

Quote

even The Ballad of Gay Tony's small story with 26 missions are better than GTA V as a Grand Theft Auto game. 

 

well lets not cross the line that much eh

 

even that small dlc better than gta v????

 

haha dont u think thats crossing the line a little

 

'ballad of gay tony story is better than the entire gta v story'

 

ok dude

[Krooked_]

I think the story could've worked better if they stuck with the GTA IV & EFLC formula with Michael being  the main protagonist and Trevor and Franklin being DLC playable protagonists. Part of what made the whole GTA IV saga so good was that each game focused solely on one protagonist as opposed to switching back and forth between all three like in GTA V. The fact that Niko, Johnny and Luis barely knew each other also made interactions between them more interesting.

 

Now that I think about it, the most interesting missions in the game were the ones in the beginning where each of the three protagonists were doing their own thing - Michael dealing with his personal issues and his dysfunctional family, Franklin hanging out with Lamar, getting into trouble and trying to get away from the hood and Trevor running his criminal enterprise in Blaine County, getting rid of the competition etc.

 

Still, I wouldn't call the story bad at all. It's just that Rockstar tried to cram too much characters and storylines in such a short span of time and it didn't work out as well.

Edited August 18 by Krooked_

[Old Man With No Name]

On 8/18/2022 at 8:21 AM, anonym444 said:

i think the story is elite

 

 

well lets not cross the line that much eh

 

even that small dlc better than gta v????

 

haha dont u think thats crossing the line a little

 

'ballad of gay tony story is better than the entire gta v story'

 

ok dude

Thats becuase game makes you feel like you are playing with an actually grand theft auto protagonist. Luis is Tony's bodyguard and does errand jobs for the rich people, italian mafia, russian mafia, strange people, even for his street drug dealer buddies.

 

Also forgot to mention; even as a business owners personal bodyguard, Luis doing his own drug business with his buddies in the unending side activity missions called "Drug Wars" Which is better than most of the combination of gta v's side activities (except for trevor's smugglers run missions) 

 

Edited Saturday at 09:21 PM by Old Man With No Name