Woodsey said:
You make a good point - I think the biggest problem when trying to make Niko a real character was in fact the very nature of the game; the sandbox.
I see it as a give and take. It's difficult to contain personal reflection in such a macroscopic pursuit as worldbuilding, but every now and then it works. What got me were the emails: Smack dab in an obnoxious mission to pose as a gay man online, you're sent to get your sea legs for the Internet. Thanks, Brucie. This is exactly where I want to be, holed up in some two-bit internet cafe. I flip through the ridiculous websites, I sift through a page of spam...
and all of a sudden I stumble across that beautiful email from Milica, Niko's mother. She's writing to ask if I'm well. I lie to her. For the rest of the game, I'm such an idiot that I find myself logging on to every computer I stumble across, just to see if her next email has arrived.
This is the kind of thing I wouldn't want as a plot point, or scripted event. Perhaps perversely, I like how peripheral it is, how easily missed. It works as a world point: a momentary reminder that there's a bigger world out there than the fishbowl of Liberty City.
Woodsey said:
On a side line, I wish they wouldn't put "moral" choices in a game. I'm playing a story, so tell me the story. Do the most powerful outcome, a second outcome only weakens the two overall.
In games such as Mass Effect it's different, but they were oh so very tacked on in GTA IV.
I agree with you in this case most of the time. In fact, I wrote an article a couple of months back arguig that the only true 'morality games' are the ones we play against ourselves, and something that resists systemization even at the best of times.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_211/6281-Kill-Billy
In GTAIV's case, I wish that the "kill or spare" dynamic wasn't bundled so neatly into the "Do you kill this guy in an awesome way" play mechanic. One mission, I'm chasing some random hood across the rooftops on behest of that louse, Vlad. He's getting away, (because I suck at jumping,) so I pull out my gun, take aim and pick him off. Instead of feeling rotten that I've slid even deeper into Liberty CIty's life of corruption, I'm feeling pretty terrific. I mean, it was a great shot.
Someone tells me later I could have spared him if I chased him all the way to the edge, where he falls off. Instead of stomping on his hands, you hoist him up and let him escape. Hell of a way to spare somebody. If I really liked him, I would have chased him all the way to the edge, helped him up, then bought him a milkshake.
That said, I think there is something at work in the game that's a little more simple than a half dozen choices tacked on in a hasty attempt at a 'morality game.' I think it would be unforgiveably cynical if through your choices could somehow weasel your way to anything resembling a "good end." That's the fatalism I'm referring to in my article - the sense that Niko is so thoroughly buggered by the end of the game that no amount of in game do-goodery is going to save him.
If Niko wants 'morality-game' style vindication, he had better get on that whole 'saving orphan kittens' thing. And let me tell you, orphan kittens are a real pain to save. You give them all the gruel they can eat, but nooo, they want more. And the paperwork! Don't get me started on the paperwork.
