Grand Theft Auto 5 Review - People Suck

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

I find this review shockingly unprofessional and uninformative. A reviewer's subjectivity should not be praised, especially not when it comes to professional game journalism. I don't read a review to get some dude's opinion. I want to know if the controls are smooth and if the cars handle well, or if it feels like a penguin sliding over icy ground.

This review tells me almost nothing about HOW the game plays. THAT is why I read a review. Metacritic should seriously reconsider including The Escapist in their average scores.

You appear to be confusing reviews with previews... A preview will talk about technical aspects and the like, where as a review is someone who lets you know what they thought of it... they can add technical stuff in if they want, and Greg will in his editorial probably, but the review is all about his lasting impression, and how that shaped his final score.

 

[Teoes]

Bang snip bang

You may be this thread's Bear Jew. I think there's someone else you need to be introduced to.

I never saw Inglorious Basterds. Is being the Bear Jew a good thing, or a bad thing?

I'd say it's a good thing. He makes his point with a baseball bat.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I do like the review takes into account the narrative mostly, because seeing as how it's Rockstar, they're already great at the gameplay. To me it just seems like a polished up GTA4 with more cynicism... and fucking about.

Just started watching Breaking Bad, seeing the ransformation from all round nice guy to drug lord was really engaging, so when I hear that the chrarcters motives are on the sketchy side, can't say I'm intrigued.

But it's GTA, why the game is getting reviewed almost seems like something done out of tradition. The people that love the series will buy it, the people who were blown away by the trailers will buy it, and the 10% of the gaming population that doesn't care... just doesn't care. WHY THE FUCK AM I HERE!?

 

[saxman234]

I find this review shockingly unprofessional and uninformative. A reviewer's subjectivity should not be praised, especially not when it comes to professional game journalism. I don't read a review to get some dude's opinion. I want to know if the controls are smooth and if the cars handle well, or if it feels like penguin sliding over icy ground.

This review tells me almost nothing about HOW the game plays. THAT is why I read a review. Metacritic should seriously reconsider including The Escapist in their average scores.

Isn't a review supposed to be a critique of a game and not just a laundry list of what the game does? Are reviews really journalism? I think of journalism as more like news stories. Reviews are critiques. All reviews are subjective. One person may find the controls smooth, and feel like the cars handle well and other people may hate it. Handling and gameplay are part of reviews but that is not the only thing that make up a review. Reviews are more about the player's experience. Just because this review brings up new points that you do not care about does not mean everyone else does not care about this. I found this review interesting because it discussed questionable game design choices Rockstar made that dissuaded Greg Tito from enjoying the game more. Is this not important enough to discuss?

Also, Jim Sterling gave Deadly Premonition a 10, which controls and feels terrible. Should that review be taken off metacritic? That game is great for other reasons but not for the controls or even basic gameplay.

 

[Anthadlas Babyeater]

Anyway, very weak review, you can't blame GTA for having "scumbag criminals" as main characters anymore than you can blame Superman for being almost unstoppable. It's one thing to rage about the "scumbags" being "scumbags" due to POOR writing, it's another thing to complain, well that they look like cruel egotistical criminals...

Lowering the score because you don't like the subject matter is entirely valid.

Not when the subject matter is delivered in an appropriate way, It's like complaining that you don't like Skyrim because it has too many Dragons and fantasy RPG's are boring.

GTA 5 is a game that sets out to show the story of 3 criminals who want money, respect and power, If you don't like that premise then don't play or review the game. Rather than forcing yourself through a game based on a premise you know you won't like and then writing a review on that game that would clearly be biased against it.

This is why I dislike reviews. Because a genuinely good game can be reviewed by somebody who personally dislikes it, but then publishing a review about it in which other people may base their purchase on the content within that review would make them rethink their purchase of a game that they would actually enjoy.

Game scores should be based on the technical aspects and quality of a game and reviewers personal opinions should be kept seperate. They should be mentioned and explained but the opinion of the reviewer which is purely subjective should not affect the rating of a game because developers can make great games but cannot be held responsible for bad scores based on a reviewers' personal feelings

 

[Riobux]

So, your main problem with it is that the main characters are completely evil? Actually...I have to say I kinda like that idea. To quote Yahtzee "Sometimes it's gratifying to play as an evil hate ridden fuck instead of a snarky self righteous pretty boy." So yeah. I respect your opinion, but I think I'll be giving this game a crack.

I'm mostly amused that "you play as bad people" is a worthy justification to penalise it 1 1/2 stars. It's like panning Silent Hill 2 because:

Spoiler

James Sunderland turns out to be a complete bastard.

Or giving Payday 2 a low score because "you shoot police officers".

I just find it hilarious that contrary to the website name, escapism isn't good if it's pretending to be the bad guy. However, they're allowed their opinion, and I'm allowed to look elsewhere for reviews.

 

[nexus]

What am I reading.

I'm.... yea I'm done coming here. Used to love this site, but now it seems like a chore to have to come here just to see the occasional ZP, or Jim video. The forums are nothing but neo-feminist rallies and other nonsense, so I guess he's just catering to his newfound bizarre audience.

So long and thanks for all the fish.

 

[lacktheknack]

Anyway, very weak review, you can't blame GTA for having "scumbag criminals" as main characters anymore than you can blame Superman for being almost unstoppable. It's one thing to rage about the "scumbags" being "scumbags" due to POOR writing, it's another thing to complain, well that they look like cruel egotistical criminals...

Lowering the score because you don't like the subject matter is entirely valid.

Not when the subject matter is delivered in an appropriate way, It's like complaining that you don't like Skyrim because it has too many Dragons and fantasy RPG's are boring.

GTA 5 is a game that sets out to show the story of 3 criminals who want money, respect and power, If you don't like that premise then don't play or review the game. Rather than forcing yourself through a game based on a premise you know you won't like and then writing a review on that game that would clearly be biased against it.

Sounds good to me. However, he played it, he didn't like a key aspect of it and it badly affected the score. Such is life, and it's really not worth having the aneurysm that some people are having over it.

Remember, people, the final score has no bearing on real life. I think everyone is forgetting this.

 

[Fasckira]

I figured this would have at least netted a 4 star, surprised to see it dropped to a 3.5 considering most the negative points brought up seemed to be more down to Greg being morally offended. I don't think this review really sits with the community expectations of the game, which is a surprise as Greg normally manages to hit the nail on the head.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

On one hand, the review's as honest as it gets. It's too well constructed and thought out for clickbait. However, I take issue with one point:

What's missing in GTA V's story is a sense that the characters have been painted into a corner by various machinations beyond their control, like Niko Bellic of GTA IV, or must commit their crimes to mete out justice, as Tommy Vercetti does in Vice City.

This is and always has been Grand Theft Auto, since GTA III (I don't remember the first two or London having a story). Claude was a criminal before Catalina turned tail on him. Tommy Vercetti was a criminal, gang member, drug dealer and killer for the Forelli family. CJ was the most sympathetic, having cleaned up his life before being dragged back in.

Nico is the first character they've actually tried hard with and it was hard to feel sorry for him when he was constantly splattered with someone else's guts. How jarring was it to go on missions where you stormed a building site, then only a few cut scenes later listening to him whine about his morals.

 

[lacktheknack]

I find this review shockingly unprofessional and uninformative. A reviewer's subjectivity should not be praised, especially not when it comes to professional game journalism. I don't read a review to get some dude's opinion. I want to know if the controls are smooth and if the cars handle well, or if it feels like a penguin sliding over icy ground.

This review tells me almost nothing about HOW the game plays. THAT is why I read a review. Metacritic should seriously reconsider including The Escapist in their average scores.

No... that's why you read a preview or FAQ.

"I don't read a review to get some dude's opinion"... wat.

 

[hino77]

Am i the only one who finds crying fanboys hilarious? I was literaly reading the comments with popcorn in hand, its better than watching a commedy XD. Though i guess that its kinda sad that people still dont understand that reviews are subjective opinions, i remember the same complaints to a review in a magazine that i read 10 years ago, so people didnt change that much over the years.

 

[ShotgunSmoke]

This just in: criminals tend to be sociopathic and generally unpleasant people. More at eleven.

This is like playing ARMA and complaining that the characters act too professional.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Unfortunately, you can only hear a character say "&^%@ you, Mother&*^%er" so many times before it starts to grate on you.

It certainly would be weird to hear people constantly speaking punctuation out loud. Do they really say "ampersand caret percentage symbol at"? That doesn't sound anything like how Californians speak.

 

[Anthadlas Babyeater]

Anyway, very weak review, you can't blame GTA for having "scumbag criminals" as main characters anymore than you can blame Superman for being almost unstoppable. It's one thing to rage about the "scumbags" being "scumbags" due to POOR writing, it's another thing to complain, well that they look like cruel egotistical criminals...

Lowering the score because you don't like the subject matter is entirely valid.

Not when the subject matter is delivered in an appropriate way, It's like complaining that you don't like Skyrim because it has too many Dragons and fantasy RPG's are boring.

GTA 5 is a game that sets out to show the story of 3 criminals who want money, respect and power, If you don't like that premise then don't play or review the game. Rather than forcing yourself through a game based on a premise you know you won't like and then writing a review on that game that would clearly be biased against it.

Sounds good to me. However, he played it, he didn't like a key aspect of it and it badly affected the score. Such is life, and it's really not worth having the aneurysm that some people are having over it.

Remember, people, the final score has no bearing on real life. I think everyone is forgetting this.

Review scores can easily have a bearing on Rockstars final sales however, even if it is a good game some people won't buy it based on a bad review, which is unfair to the developers as they can make a good game but still have no control over a reviewer that dislikes it for moral reasons and puts other people off from buying it who don't share the same morals.

 

[lacktheknack]

Anyway, very weak review, you can't blame GTA for having "scumbag criminals" as main characters anymore than you can blame Superman for being almost unstoppable. It's one thing to rage about the "scumbags" being "scumbags" due to POOR writing, it's another thing to complain, well that they look like cruel egotistical criminals...

Lowering the score because you don't like the subject matter is entirely valid.

Not when the subject matter is delivered in an appropriate way, It's like complaining that you don't like Skyrim because it has too many Dragons and fantasy RPG's are boring.

GTA 5 is a game that sets out to show the story of 3 criminals who want money, respect and power, If you don't like that premise then don't play or review the game. Rather than forcing yourself through a game based on a premise you know you won't like and then writing a review on that game that would clearly be biased against it.

Sounds good to me. However, he played it, he didn't like a key aspect of it and it badly affected the score. Such is life, and it's really not worth having the aneurysm that some people are having over it.

Remember, people, the final score has no bearing on real life. I think everyone is forgetting this.

Review scores can easily have a bearing on Rockstars final sales however, even if it is a good game some people won't buy it based on a bad review, which is unfair to the developers as they can make a good game but still have no control over a reviewer that dislikes it for moral reasons and puts other people off from buying it.

But this isn't a "bad review". According to the Escapist's Star Standards, 3 1/2 = "deeply flawed but very good game" or "notably above average game". In this case, it's probably the former.

Again: This review made me WANT to play the game, and just sandbox the whole dang thing (since the awful characters are mostly awful in the story quests).

As for whether this review has a major effect on game sales: No, not really.

 

[Milanezi]

Anyway, very weak review, you can't blame GTA for having "scumbag criminals" as main characters anymore than you can blame Superman for being almost unstoppable. It's one thing to rage about the "scumbags" being "scumbags" due to POOR writing, it's another thing to complain, well that they look like cruel egotistical criminals...

Lowering the score because you don't like the subject matter is entirely valid.

No it's not, it's subjective, subjectivism has no place in reviews. Imagine when you were back in college, your teacher couldn't give you a zero because "Well, you did give the right answer. But I hate the color BLUE, and sadly you wrote with a blue pen, so here, you get half the score." That's why I say he CAN judge by "the characters are too cruel and that does not fit the reality around them because of this and that", he CAN'T go with a hollow "I don't like bad guys so I'll punish the game".

If you don't like the subject matter and you don't have the balance to keep yourself "cold to the game", as in, forget everything and focus on objective terms, you can't review. If you hate this sort of violence in games don't review a game that has this sort of thing as part of its focus, the same goes to someone who's an extreme Halo addict making a review of Halo, the guy might ignore major problems just to give it a great review. When Baldur's Gate got that make-over for iPad, I remember here on The Escapist a reviewer who was truly honest: the guy stated he would NOT review the game, because he was such a fan of the original that his emotions might make him over critical in a negative or positive way.

I didn't get the sense that GTA V's reviewer despised the violence of the game, nor am I complaining about the game not getting 5/5. For all I know, the "missing stars" might be for an objective reason. Be that as it may, it is stupid to criticize a game founded on violence because it is "too violent"...

 

[Hover Hand Mode]

This is why star/number ratings are useless in game reviews. Read the words. Don't obsess over the number.
Then again, my opinion of any new GTA game is essentially "people still play GTA?" I suppose I'll derive some entertainment from it once people start running Twitch streams while trying to glitch the game out.