Grand Theft Objectivity

[Carpenter]

Thanks for the article, Bob. I've enjoyed the previous GTA games, but considering all the horrible things I've heard happen in this one, I think I'll be sitting it out. I'll go play Saints Row instead.

I have yet to see a single thing in the game that's worse than any of the other GTA games.

I say again, SA had a rape scene played up purely for laughs.

GTA 5 has "immoral" activity too but at least it doesn't try to pretend that it's pure fun and games, at least it shows some reality to the carnage.

 

[Carpenter]

What a shock, another person on the escapist using a strawman argument to defend an unprofessional game review.

People were not "in an uproar" because it got "less than a ten" and the fact that they constantly quoted the article itself (not the score) should have made that obvious, but of course arguing that would require thought, it's easier to say "oh you guys just can't stand it getting less than a perfect score, fanboys" and move on.

Fact is, I could at least respect the review if he had posted that same written review with a very low score. Instead he goes on and on complaining about the game, doesn't mention anything good about the game, then gives it a good score.
It was obvious click bait, if you honestly think it wasn't, you are blissfully naive.

It's really similar to that Game Revolutions review of GTA 4. "If you hated the game so much, why give it a high score?"

"Oh I didn't hate it, it's just that the other reviews already talked about the good so I only talked about the bad stuff"

Yeah other reviewers talked about the bad stuff too so.....what's the point of doing a review at all? If you are going to just assume that your readers have already read or seen all the other reviews, don't do a review at all. A review isn't meant to talk about one aspect of a game and nothing else.

If it was just an article, it would be worth discussion. As a "review" it's unprofessional and souless. If you didn't like the game, give it a low score. If you didn't hate it as much as the written review suggested, why not discuss some of the gameplay features or whatever you did like about the game?
This has nothing to do with "he just has his own opinion" everyone is allowed an opinion, but a reviewer is supposed to present that opinion in a way that informs others of the quality of the product, even if they disagree with his opinion of it.

I am really not surprised that "movie bob" thinks that talking about only one aspect of a product counts as a good review.

BTW I have started playing the game and several things Tito has claimed are demonstrably false. That's lazy at best, dishonest at worst. Just saying.

 

[Carpenter]

Points are pointless. Its a crutch introduced when it became clear that children and teenagers are deeply aversed to freaking read the review and draw concusions about the game from that. Without an easy to gauge number they were incapable to access the game.

Get rid of points. its a review, not a ballgame.

Yes people never actually read the review, hence why all the complaints about the review that obviously inspired Bob's article were quoting the review itself and not mentioning the score.

Again, it's a strawman argument.

"You people get mad whenever your favorite game doesn't get a perfect score." When the score was never the issue.

 

[Carpenter]

Me, I rage against people who give perfect 10s to games. No game is perfect and it's a sign of a complete lack of perspective for anyone to give a perfect score to anything.

A 10 out of 10 game isn't meant to be a perfect game.

Reviewers are not calling the game perfect by giving it a "perfect score" and you seem to be incapable of understanding why never using the 10 is kind of stupid.

Ok your right, 10 is wrong because that's perfect, make it a system of 1-9. Ok a game got a 9, but that's the highest? They must be calling the game perfect and no game is perfect!

If you think the number next to a game on a random website is worth this much discussion, please consider going outside.

 

[Dante dynamite]

Well the reason some people have a problem with the gamespot review in particular is because for example you wouldn't lower the review score for something like James Bond because it has throwaway girls in it because at this point its what is to be expected.

 

[Toilet]

My views on the Carolyn Petit GTAV debacle:

Petit docks points because "This game is misogynistic because reasons."
Ignores the outrageous violence, murder, crime and realistic depictions torture.
Gives the game a 9/10 anyway.

Spoiler

Ignores the fact that the developers interviewed and recorded real gang members and real strippers to make the game reflect real life as much as possible. Also according to most schools of thought men can't comment on what is and isn't misogynistic so the whole thing is moot.

I love "professional" reviewers.

 

[Shjade]

Niko Bellic trashes a laundry for protection money and eventually murders the owner in GTA IV.

CJ kills off a manager of a rapper as a favor to someone he doesn't even like ( and then later kills), as well as the manager's escort. Later he goes on a criminal binge with a psychotic girlfriend (who's the main antagonist of GTA III) doing heists which do include a lot of murder. Later still, he grabs a harvest combine from a survivalist nutjob farm and escapes in it, rolling over the family members who get shredded, limbs flying and are spat out as little stacks of meat.

Tommy Vercetti beats up witnesses as a tutorial, slaughters an entire laundry full of people, and performs hit and runs for the amusement of a Glam Rock band.


All of these are mandatory missions, and almost none of these advance the main plot.

Yet these characters are compared in a positive light, or justified. Hence why I "cry" double standard.

Man...what do the makers of GTA have against laundromats? :|

 

[Kataskopo]

My views on the Carolyn Petit GTAV debacle:
Ignores the fact that the developers interviewed and recorded real gang members and real strippers to make the game reflect real life as much as possible. Also according to most schools of thought men can't comment on what is and isn't misogynistic so the whole thing is moot.
I love "professional" reviewers.

Wait... what? I'm sorry, but that's just untrue. Most schools of thought? What are these schools you speak of? Because that view is mostly held by extreme feminists, and those should not be subject to much attention, and thankfully are not the majority.

Dude, I don't know where you got that, but it's wrong, and I'm sorry. Or rather, I'm not. It's the internet, you should've know better.

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

Even the biggest AAA games cant have everything. So its impossible for any game to really complete the "checklist" imposed by feminist, LGBT, NAACP, the politically correct crowd, and ect. These people impose a huge checklist of things that a game must have from them no to ***** or whine.

Must include positive character of (given minority here)
Must be sure to portray (given group here) in (only) positive light.
Must not have any member of (given group here) exhibit any signs of (given set of stereotypes here)
And many more...

If any game tried to check off this whole list, that would end up being the entirety of the game. There would never be any room for bank heists and scuba diving. To take points from a game because it doesn't check all the boxes on your special little list is unscrupulous thing for a game reviewer to do.

 

[Kataskopo]

Even the biggest AAA games cant have everything. So its impossible for any game to really complete the "checklist" imposed by feminist, LGBT, NAACP, the politically correct crowd, and ect. These people impose a huge checklist of things that a game must have from them no to ***** or whine.

Must include positive character of (given minority here)
Must be sure to portray (given group here) in (only) positive light.
Must not have any member of (given group here) exhibit any signs of (given set of stereotypes here)
And many more...

If any game tried to check off this whole list, that would end up being the entirety of the game. There would never be any room for bank heists and scuba diving. To take points from a game because it doesn't check all the boxes on your special little list is unscrupulous thing for a game reviewer to do.

Because aiming to portray the majority of the human race (females) in a non-weird way is so annoying! Besides, who said anything about any minority? You really think women are minority?

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

Because aiming to portray the majority of the human race (females) in a non-weird way is so annoying! Besides, who said anything about any minority? You really think women are minority?

Women are considered a minority because most believe (maybe rightfully, probably wrongfully) that they have less power/equality. Minority status isn't always based on numbers.

The reviewer was pissed that they didn't create a positive female role model. She would have had the developers contribute resources to creating a character with specific attributes (strong, competent, female) and shoehorning said character into the game so that her sensibilities can be pandered to. Of course they have to fully implement a mass of black, gay, transgender, Latino, Asian, etc. characters portrayed in the same positive way. By the time it's all said and done, you have wasted a ton of development resources and have a game that is overcrowded with arbitrary token characters. I'm sorry but a game cant have everything.

Anyway, her review is just as stupid as a conservative game critic taking off points because he was insulted by the "Republican Space Rangers" in the game. I have never seen a "political alignment" category on any game review site I have been to.

 

[DataSnake]

I say again, SA had a rape scene played up purely for laughs.

I haven't actually played it yet so I may have heard this wrong, but isn't the next mission burying the rapist alive in a porta-potty?

 

[Lieju]

The reviewer was pissed that they didn't create a positive female role model. She would have had the developers contribute resources to creating a character with specific attributes (strong, competent, female) and shoehorning said character into the game so that her sensibilities can be pandered to.

Wait, who are you talking about?
Because if this is about the Gamespot review, I didn't see her say that.

What she does say, is:

On a less positive note, it?s deeply frustrating that, while its central and supporting male characters are flawed and complex characters, with a few extremely minor exceptions (such as the aforementioned optional getaway driver), GTA V has little room for women except to portray them as strippers, prostitutes, long-suffering wives, humorless girlfriends and goofy, new-age feminists we?re meant to laugh at.

And considering she also describes Trevor as a horrible person but a 'terrific' character, it doesn't sound like she wants 'positive role models', but complex characters, which is just good writing.

But maybe you're talking about something else?

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

The reviewer was pissed that they didn't create a positive female role model. She would have had the developers contribute resources to creating a character with specific attributes (strong, competent, female) and shoehorning said character into the game so that her sensibilities can be pandered to.

Wait, who are you talking about?
Because if this is about the Gamespot review, I didn't see her say that.

What she does say, is:

On a less positive note, it?s deeply frustrating that, while its central and supporting male characters are flawed and complex characters, with a few extremely minor exceptions (such as the aforementioned optional getaway driver), GTA V has little room for women except to portray them as strippers, prostitutes, long-suffering wives, humorless girlfriends and goofy, new-age feminists we?re meant to laugh at.

And considering she also describes Trevor as a horrible person but a 'terrific' character, it doesn't sound like she wants 'positive role models', but complex characters, which is just good writing.

But maybe you're talking about something else?

What she said sounds pretty much like what I said. She is angry over something that is not in the game (i.e. a well written and complex female character). She would have the developers spend extra resources creating and implementing such a character (or multiple such characters) to cater to her personal desires.

GTA isn't sexist for not having a well written female character for the same reason a Tyler Perry movie isn't racist for not having a well written white character. Not every movie/game can portray every type of person and portray them in the specific way you want to see them portrayed. So complaining that a game doesn't have a particular type of character in it is pointless.

Lets say you played a really awesome game that was near perfect in every way. But lets say that, coincidentally, all the main characters were black or maybe female. No bigotry, that's just the story the developer wanted to tell. Would you really shave off points for the game not having complex and well written white males?

 

[Lieju]

The reviewer was pissed that they didn't create a positive female role model. She would have had the developers contribute resources to creating a character with specific attributes (strong, competent, female) and shoehorning said character into the game so that her sensibilities can be pandered to.

Wait, who are you talking about?
Because if this is about the Gamespot review, I didn't see her say that.

What she does say, is:

On a less positive note, it?s deeply frustrating that, while its central and supporting male characters are flawed and complex characters, with a few extremely minor exceptions (such as the aforementioned optional getaway driver), GTA V has little room for women except to portray them as strippers, prostitutes, long-suffering wives, humorless girlfriends and goofy, new-age feminists we?re meant to laugh at.

And considering she also describes Trevor as a horrible person but a 'terrific' character, it doesn't sound like she wants 'positive role models', but complex characters, which is just good writing.

But maybe you're talking about something else?

What she said sounds pretty much like what I said. She is angry over something that is not in the game (i.e. a well written and complex female character). She would have the developers spend extra resources creating and implementing such a character (or multiple such characters) to cater to her personal desires.

GTA isn't sexist for not having a well written female character for the same reason a Tyler Perry movie isn't racist for not having a well written white character. Not every movie/game can portray every type of person and portray them in the specific way you want to see them portrayed. So complaining that a game doesn't have a particular type of character in it is pointless.

Lets say you played a really awesome game that was near perfect in every way. But lets say that, coincidentally, all the main characters were black or maybe female. No bigotry, that's just the story the developer wanted to tell. Would you really shave off points for the game not having complex and well written white males?

If the game tried to make a point about racial relations. GTAV seems to try to satirize sexism, but in her opinion it fails at that and instead just is sexist, instead of commenting on it.

Women aren't nonexistent in the kind of world the game depicts, there is no reason not to have them be well-written. It's not like this is a story about people in a nuclear sub or something.
If I wrote a story with a lot of characters and all the male characters were badly written, wouldn't that be fair for criticism?

A lack of something can definitely be grounds for criticism. Let's say a game has a small world, little variety in combat or character-customisation, a short story etc. Does that mean it shouldn't be critiqued for lacking things?

BTW, Is she angry? She doesn't sound angry to me, after all she praises the game. And why do you think the way women were wirtten was the sole reason she didn't give it a 10/10? In the first place it's not the only criticism she gives, and do you know her review history? (I don't). Does she give a lot 10/10 in the first place, or just if the game doesn't have any big flaws?

Grand Theft Auto V is an outrageous, exhilarating, sometimes troubling crime epic that pushes open-world game design forward in amazing ways.

Sure sounds like she is angry.

And she still didn't say anything about wanting 'strong competent female'-characters shoehorned anywhere.

Also, given the scope of GTAV, do you really believe there couldn't have been a strong competent female characters in it? Are there no such women in the US? Would that have been 'shoehorning' necessarily, if we're pretending that's what she wanted?