I don't know about all this moralising and hand wringing; sometimes a cigar is just a sick jump off a ramp, you know what I'm saying?
GTA's Morality Is More Complex Than You Realize
- Thread starter Robert Rath
- Start date
Hmmm, of course it's hard to disagree there and I figure that there must be at least some amongst Rockstar who'd like to experiment with designing a new city again rather than being confined to expanding on previous constructions. That said, I bet some higher-ups would prefer they save on resources and the time it would take to map out such expansive exterior [and interior] locations.Robert Rath said:
Also, I get the feeling the writers they currently have are probably much more comfortable taking stabs at American culture than any other, not to mention the marketing team and their concerns about global recognition of references and jokes etc. Going back to London might be an possible compromise rather than some place a little too globally obscure like Panama City or Mumbai.
Anyway, I feel like this 'hoo-ha' largely boils down to one critic not being particularly aware of his own preference for main characters who at least have 'a heart of gold', even if they're not "good guys". I can't help but feel like the over-reaction to his review wasn't actually primarily based on dumb disagreements with what he wrote but rather with what he wrote about. Most critics surely realise that while GTA gameplay does lean quite heavily on its storytelling the experience is anchored fundamentally around the quality of the worldbuilding and the mechanics of exploring that world [of which the mission mechanics are one].
As for picking out some sense of morality in the series, I'd argue that if there is any philosophy to be construed its not so much nihilist but anarchist in nature. The satire of the series goes particularly after the hypocrisy of human beings and, of course, consumerism. While the focus is of course on poking fun in anything and everything there's nothing to say that there isn't meaning to be found in the world- just that everything is available for criticism. After all, there is a certain reverence lying behind some of the comedy, especially in Vice City and San Andreas where nostalgia permeates a little bit more.
I loathe that people are trying to give GTA a message, as if this game is any different than the rest of the series which, at best, makes some off the cuff social statement once every twelve hours of hooker bludgeoning.
If you like the game, fine. But don't disguise it as some deep social commentary. It isn't. It's a sandbox shock genre cash cow. It's butt fucking and domestic terrorism. It's designed to get a rise out of people. It isn't a picket sign. It isn't deep. Cloud using trains as a metaphor for pre-destined slum life in FF7 is a statement. Spec Ops: the Line's hint load screens turning from gameplay tips to self-reflection of horrific deeds is a statement. James running from sexualized monstrosities in Silent Hill 2 is a statement.
GTA's statement is and always has been that it's fun to do fucked up things and piss off parents. Stop treating it like it's the Ulysses of gaming.
If you like the game, fine. But don't disguise it as some deep social commentary. It isn't. It's a sandbox shock genre cash cow. It's butt fucking and domestic terrorism. It's designed to get a rise out of people. It isn't a picket sign. It isn't deep. Cloud using trains as a metaphor for pre-destined slum life in FF7 is a statement. Spec Ops: the Line's hint load screens turning from gameplay tips to self-reflection of horrific deeds is a statement. James running from sexualized monstrosities in Silent Hill 2 is a statement.
GTA's statement is and always has been that it's fun to do fucked up things and piss off parents. Stop treating it like it's the Ulysses of gaming.
The_Scrivener said:
I think this has to be the best description of GTA 5 I've seen yet. It's too bad that outraged fans feel the need to fight anyone to the death who doesn't love their "precious" as much as they do. I love how this article writer essentially told those that find the characters to be morally reprehensible or just fundamentally unlikeable, that they just "don't get it." That at the same time GTA 5 is "just a game which shouldn't be taken too seriously" yet somehow is also "much deeper and complex than you peasants can fathom". Nice how he gets the critics both coming and going. Apparently to him and many others it isn't a matter of personal preference for someone to not like the game or at least the characters, but instead that they are just too uptight or stupid to grasp the games supposed incredibly deep morality.
Sorry but I agree with The Scrivener. GTA 5 is just guns, fast cars, tits and explosions, like any ultra-violent popcorn fare. It isn't Shakespeare. And there's nothing wrong with that if that happens suit your tastes. And times being what they are I imagine for most it will be exactly what they are looking for. However, get off your high horse and stop yelling at the people who feel that Rockstar went a little too far with how hate-fueled and vile the main characters are and find them neither fun nor likeable.
This is pretty much my thoughts when it comes to GTA V. You can write away all the horrible ethical decisions the protagonists make in the game as being deliberately alienating so as to emphasise exactly how morally reprehensible those decisions are, but I can guarantee you the typical player isn't going to care in the slightest.Akichi Daikashima said:
Because this is GTA, and the game doesn't get millions of automatic pre-orders for presenting a complex moral statement; it sells because people like to have fun and unwind by engaging in exactly those activities the game supposedly presents as morally reprehensible.
In short, I too agree with The Scrivener:
The_Scrivener said:
See I rather like the idea of hating my character its unique. tv did that for awhile always making sure the main character never did anything the viewer disagreed with but with shows like breaking bad thats changing. I think its time games did that tooTiberiusEsuriens said:
The question asked by GTA V is "What if the world really WAS like this?" Given some of the observations in this thread about Eastern Europe we know that there is a precedent for this question. If you lived in the world of GTA how would you react? There are people out there just like the characters on GTA V, and perhaps the reason they are the way they are, is that they view the real world in the same light that we view the world of GTA V.
For me it goes a long way to exposing the mindset and worldview of a monster. I find it very engaging.
On an unrelated note Robert Rath is quickly becoming my favourite Escapist contributor after Shamus Young. Thank you for writing genuinely informative features without resorting to rabble rousing. I don't know when this started to become high praise, but I learn things from your writing.
For me it goes a long way to exposing the mindset and worldview of a monster. I find it very engaging.
On an unrelated note Robert Rath is quickly becoming my favourite Escapist contributor after Shamus Young. Thank you for writing genuinely informative features without resorting to rabble rousing. I don't know when this started to become high praise, but I learn things from your writing.
It's definitely a cool way to do story telling, but my issue with it is about exposure time. Breaking Bad is the current successful model of how to make you love hating the main characters. I can watch one or two episodes and feel really involved but then I need a break. As a TV show this is essentially encouraged; those 45 minute chunks of time are perfect bite sized bits. Anyone who's ever played a game, sandbox style in particular, knows that 'break time' is pretty much non-existent. The games are designed to keep us occupied for hours and hours, never stopping, with all activities snowballing into others.rbstewart7263 said:
Like you I think it's great that games are finally experimenting with this stuff more, but over time it will become more apparent what each medium's strengths and weaknesses are, in particular testing the limits of what people can handle in what is essentially and endless game.
The American Dream itself is a morality. As 50 cent puts it, "Get rich or die trying". Right is whatever serves the interests of the dream and wrong is whatever opposes it. Decent people think it's a terrible morality and don't agree with it, but that's doesn't make it a matter of moral nihilism.Jim_Callahan said:
Tarantino films, one after another, are filled with dreamers. Jackie Brown is about "escaping the ghetto", Reservoir Dogs is about the practical reality of strict adherence to the American Dream of wealth without working within the corporate system, Kill Bill is about wishing away the horrors of the dream through celebration of a bushido code of honor. I don't understand why the Reservoir Dogs comparison is the "worst movie analogy possible".