So that whole "female main characters don't sell" bullshit

[Catnip1024]

Never played Nier, but Horizon Zero Dawn sold me more on the robot apocalypse setting than the characters. I will give the developers credit that they did do a female character well, though.

I would be interested to see where you got the original argument from, though? I've never really seen it said that female characters don't sell.

I think most of the problem in terms of representation is the settings of your AAA games. Historical combat games are statistically speaking overwhelmingly likely to favour male characters (and modern shooters, for that matter). Gangland violence games also. When you go to the fantasy / wacky settings, representation is a lot more equal, with your Mirrors Edges and Bayonettas et al.

 

[Erttheking]

Never played Nier, but Horizon Zero Dawn sold me more on the robot apocalypse setting than the characters. I will give the developers credit that they did do a female character well, though.

I would be interested to see where you got the original argument from, though? I've never really seen it said that female characters don't sell.

I think most of the problem in terms of representation is the settings of your AAA games. Historical combat games are statistically speaking overwhelmingly likely to favour male characters (and modern shooters, for that matter). Gangland violence games also. When you go to the fantasy / wacky settings, representation is a lot more equal, with your Mirrors Edges and Bayonettas et al.

Mainly in forms of developers talking about how publishers turned down their games because women didn't sell. Remember Me, Life is Strange, even the Last of Us and Bioshock Infinite had to struggle with showing that women were a big part of their game, Naughty Dog having to fight to actually have Ellie featured prominently on the cover, with Ken Levine putting a generic gunbro picture of Booker on the cover of Infinite because he felt he needed to do that to secure the fratboy sales. There was a compromise with the flipable cover though.

 

[Catnip1024]

Mainly in forms of developers talking about how publishers turned down their games because women didn't sell.

Well, that just sounds like excuses to me. "Why did your game get rejected? Was it bad?" "Err... No. It was because the main character was a woman..."

I could be wrong. Execs are generally risk averse, so there may be some crazy reluctance to do different characters. Either way, I'm a sufficiently insignificant portion of the purchasing market these days that they ain't going to listen to me.

 

[Erttheking]

Tomb Raider has always done pretty well, and that's been for decades.

If it's always done pretty well, they wouldn't have had to reboot it twice and turn it into a bloodthirsty shooter.

It's one of the best selling IPs of all time at something like 58 million units. Sure that's over the course of seven or eight games now, but how many installments can a series go before enough elements are rehashed to the point a reboot is needed.

TR 2013's predecessor, Underworld, failed to meet the publisher's expectations.

http://www.tombraiderchronicles.com/headlines3592.html

I've played only Anniversary, Legend, Underworld, Guardian of Light, 2013 and Rise. Legend and Underworld had significant problems. They were fixable, though. The publisher just gave up and turned the games into something they're not. I want Tomb Raider to be Tomb Raider. Hopefully, things will improve now that the lead writer has left. The games definitely don't need to be as expensive as they are now. It's fine to limit your audience with a smaller budget and less killing and cutscenes.

The problem as I'm sure you're well aware is they're owned by a big publisher who is incapable of thinking small, at least with an established brand that's been historically successful. Compound it by the fact that what makes a game better is rarely in line with what makes it more profitable.

My favorite is probably still Anniversary, although I haven't played Legend, GoL or Rise.

 

[Erttheking]

Mainly in forms of developers talking about how publishers turned down their games because women didn't sell.

Well, that just sounds like excuses to me. "Why did your game get rejected? Was it bad?" "Err... No. It was because the main character was a woman..."

I could be wrong. Execs are generally risk averse, so there may be some crazy reluctance to do different characters. Either way, I'm a sufficiently insignificant portion of the purchasing market these days that they ain't going to listen to me.

Maybe, but Life is Strange went on to do well, and Last of Us was a huge success.

 

[CaitSeith]

I was laughing all the way as I read through the replies. I remember how 3-4 years ago the counterarguments were very different. Or maybe you should had posted it on the Gaming Industry forums (where the members with the "games with girls don't sell" arguments are most likely to lurk). Anyways, I'm glad they are doing well.

 

[Trunkage]

This is the first time I hear about this, I've never seen or heard anyone say that the gender of the main character matters much (except for bcell, but, you know.).

I cant tell if your being serious or not.

I remember having discussion during the middle of 2014 - you know the one where some people claimed that if there were more female protagonist then there would be less games for male protagonist. All these stats were given about how only male lead games sold. Also, you shouldn't cater to SJWs

???? Not sure what you're tryinng to say here. I'm just expressing my personal experiences and opinions, I have never seen ANYONE (1 exception that I mentioned before) say that a male/female protagonist matters that much that it has an affect on whether they should buy it or not.

I have however seen people complain about the skin-color of protagonist, latest one I can remember is someone complaining about Gears 4 protagonist being a white male. But like I said before, never have I seen someone say ''Oh a male/female protagonist? Pass''.

I just saw your joining date and assumed that you might have had discussion about this a few years ago. You're lucky if you missed it.

It was one of the areas where GG was seen as misogynist, although I remember it being around for games like Gone Home, which doubled as the FPX (walking simulator) taking away way FPS and well as female leads are bad for business

 

[wulf3n]

I'd say a game that makes its budget back in two weeks is doing well

https://www.polygon.com/2017/3/16/14945792/horizon-zero-dawn-launch-sales-ps4

And Automata surpassed the first Nier in sales, on top of being a niche game that managed to get mainstream appeal, something no one saw coming.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nier:_Automata#Sales

While certainly not bad by any stretch of the imagination I would personally hold off on "well" until it starts returning a significant profit. When it gets to 3.5 - 4.5 million I would say it's doing well.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

You're giving them a little too much credit. It was a stupid comment made by stupid people. Gaming executives aren't exactly well known for nuance.

Maybe, however, just because they're stupid doesn't give you carte blanche to be stupid.

Personally I take "Female characters don't sell", as meaning "Main characters whose only special qualifier is their gender doesn't sell", because of cause they don't. If you set out making a character whose only reason for existing is "being a female main character in a shooter" then that isn't really a compelling character.

'

Ok, I'm going to have to ask where the heck you drew that conclusion from, because every time this has been brought up by devs that have had problems getting their games with female characters published, it was painted as a more "boys don't want to buy games with girls in them," way, and "your character has nothing to her except the fact that she's a girl." Seriously, I don't follow your train of logic here.

And kindly don't call me stupid.

I drew that conclusion from people complaining about "female main characters" amongst the playerbase, not necessarily the publishers (because there are people in that group too who sometimes "complain" about female characters, and say that they don't "sell well").

Regarding the devs and the publishers.

They usually only react to hard, cold numbers.

If game A sells better than game B, and the only appreciable difference between them are the gender of main character, then of cause they're bloody going to conclude that a certain gender wont sell.

For example, let's compare Horizon: Zero Dawn, the current Playstation exclusive, to Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, the previous Playstation exclusive.

Uncharted sold 4.93 million copies globally.

Horizon sold 2.55 million copies globally.

If you just look at numbers (like I suspect the publishers are), it's easy to conclude that "female main characters don't sell". Whether that's a fair assessment is an entirely different issue.

EDIT:
Also, I generally don't assume people are stupid.

But if they act stupid (even just for comedic effect), or they do stupid things (like suggesting "giving too much credit", to try and stifle discussion), I'm going to call them stupid.

You do realize you're compared the lifetime sales of a very old game to the two week sales of a brand new game right? How is that a fair comparison? Also you said only appreciative difference. There's a hell of a lot more difference between Uncharted and Hirizon than the gender of the character

Oh l'm not respecting the opinions of out of touch executives. I'm soooooooo stupid. Don't patronize me.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Snip

You're giving them a little too much credit. It was a stupid comment made by stupid people. Gaming executives aren't exactly well known for nuance.

Maybe, however, just because they're stupid doesn't give you carte blanche to be stupid.

Personally I take "Female characters don't sell", as meaning "Main characters whose only special qualifier is their gender doesn't sell", because of cause they don't. If you set out making a character whose only reason for existing is "being a female main character in a shooter" then that isn't really a compelling character.

'

Ok, I'm going to have to ask where the heck you drew that conclusion from, because every time this has been brought up by devs that have had problems getting their games with female characters published, it was painted as a more "boys don't want to buy games with girls in them," way, and "your character has nothing to her except the fact that she's a girl." Seriously, I don't follow your train of logic here.

And kindly don't call me stupid.

I drew that conclusion from people complaining about "female main characters" amongst the playerbase, not necessarily the publishers (because there are people in that group too who sometimes "complain" about female characters, and say that they don't "sell well").

Regarding the devs and the publishers.

They usually only react to hard, cold numbers.

If game A sells better than game B, and the only appreciable difference between them are the gender of main character, then of cause they're bloody going to conclude that a certain gender wont sell.

For example, let's compare Horizon: Zero Dawn, the current Playstation exclusive, to Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, the previous Playstation exclusive.

Uncharted sold 4.93 million copies globally.

Horizon sold 2.55 million copies globally.

If you just look at numbers (like I suspect the publishers are), it's easy to conclude that "female main characters don't sell". Whether that's a fair assessment is an entirely different issue.

EDIT:
Also, I generally don't assume people are stupid.

But if they act stupid (even just for comedic effect), or they do stupid things (like suggesting "giving too much credit", to try and stifle discussion), I'm going to call them stupid.

You do realize you're compared the lifetime sales of a very old game to the two week sales of a brand new game right? How is that a fair comparison? Also you said only appreciative difference. There's a hell of a lot more difference between Uncharted and Hirizon than the gender of the character

Oh l'm not respecting the opinions of out of touch executives. I'm soooooooo stupid. Don't patronize me.

Yes I do.

Also, I'm not comparing those numbers. The Publishers are. Big difference. I'm just explaining how the conclusion is made from their point of view.

As for your last quip.

If you don't respect the opinions of, as you call them, "out of touch executives", they're sure as shit not gonna respect yours.

Don't expect to get any levelheaded discourse, if you aren't even willing to actually put yourself in their seat, and see through their eyes. I don't expect you to agree, only to understand their methods.

Through that understanding, it becomes much easier to get them to change their minds.

EDIT:
Honestly, I have no dog in this fight.

I just want to play good games. I have no interest in what gender my character has, as long as the gameplay is tight, the character is likeable, and the story is good.

I just want to help you achieve your goal (getting publishers to realise that female characters WILL sell), and the way you're doing it here, ain't it.

 

[sXeth]

The problem is, and Jim Sterling made this mistake to, those games didn't sell well. He compared Zero Dawn to Bioshock infinite, which outsold it nearly 3-1.

Statistically speaking those games did not outsell male-lead games. Now that's a shame, because both those games are fun, but facts is facts.
I mean hell RE6 outsold RE7 nearly 6-1! That's how it goes!

Did he remember to adjust for the Playstation only sales in the comparison? Cause Bioshock Infinite was on 3x the platforms as Zero Dawn (possibly 5 if you count the Bioshock Collection).

(I think Nier was PS exclusive too, I could be mistaken)

I don't know. He just made the point Elizabeth should have been on the cover, and the sales probably suffered as a result compared to Zero Dawn.
And I think I even told him Infinite outsold Zero Dawn 6-1

Well, doing some research. Infinite had shipped 4 million in its first quarter(3 months). 64% on 360. 31 % on PS3. 5% on PC.
PS4 is probably the bigger base this generation around, so taking that big share, 64% of 4 million is 2.56 million.
As of March (which is two months before the same 3 month period), Horizon ZD had sold 2.6 million.


So once you factor in the console exclusive nature, its actually outsold Infinite. So far, anyways.

Whether putting Elizabeth on the cover of Infinite has anything to do with anything is probably anyones guess. It'd still be a boring generic cover compared to Bioshock the original (which would prettymuch be par for the course with the boring generic game contained inside compared to Bioshock).

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

You're giving them a little too much credit. It was a stupid comment made by stupid people. Gaming executives aren't exactly well known for nuance.

Maybe, however, just because they're stupid doesn't give you carte blanche to be stupid.

Personally I take "Female characters don't sell", as meaning "Main characters whose only special qualifier is their gender doesn't sell", because of cause they don't. If you set out making a character whose only reason for existing is "being a female main character in a shooter" then that isn't really a compelling character.

'

Ok, I'm going to have to ask where the heck you drew that conclusion from, because every time this has been brought up by devs that have had problems getting their games with female characters published, it was painted as a more "boys don't want to buy games with girls in them," way, and "your character has nothing to her except the fact that she's a girl." Seriously, I don't follow your train of logic here.

And kindly don't call me stupid.

I drew that conclusion from people complaining about "female main characters" amongst the playerbase, not necessarily the publishers (because there are people in that group too who sometimes "complain" about female characters, and say that they don't "sell well").

Regarding the devs and the publishers.

They usually only react to hard, cold numbers.

If game A sells better than game B, and the only appreciable difference between them are the gender of main character, then of cause they're bloody going to conclude that a certain gender wont sell.

For example, let's compare Horizon: Zero Dawn, the current Playstation exclusive, to Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, the previous Playstation exclusive.

Uncharted sold 4.93 million copies globally.

Horizon sold 2.55 million copies globally.

If you just look at numbers (like I suspect the publishers are), it's easy to conclude that "female main characters don't sell". Whether that's a fair assessment is an entirely different issue.

EDIT:
Also, I generally don't assume people are stupid.

But if they act stupid (even just for comedic effect), or they do stupid things (like suggesting "giving too much credit", to try and stifle discussion), I'm going to call them stupid.

You do realize you're compared the lifetime sales of a very old game to the two week sales of a brand new game right? How is that a fair comparison? Also you said only appreciative difference. There's a hell of a lot more difference between Uncharted and Hirizon than the gender of the character

Oh l'm not respecting the opinions of out of touch executives. I'm soooooooo stupid. Don't patronize me.

Yes I do.

Also, I'm not comparing those numbers. The Publishers are. Big difference. I'm just explaining how the conclusion is made from their point of view.

As for your last quip.

If you don't respect the opinions of, as you call them, "out of touch executives", they're sure as shit not gonna respect yours.

Don't expect to get any levelheaded discourse, if you aren't even willing to actually put yourself in their seat, and see through their eyes. I don't expect you to agree, only to understand their methods.

Through that understanding, it becomes much easier to get them to change their minds.

EDIT:
Honestly, I have no dog in this fight.

I just want to play good games. I have no interest in what gender my character has, as long as the gameplay is tight, the character is likeable, and the story is good.

I just want to help you achieve your goal (getting publishers to realise that female characters WILL sell), and the way you're doing it here, ain't it.

Ok. You say you don't respect my opinion because I think they're stuck I'd. Then you'd say they'd do something that even I that even i think isn't cutting them enough slack. So...you say I need to understand their views and not dismiss them as out of touch, then claim that they would do something so short sighted and stupid that even I wouldn't criticize them of doing? I just...don't know what you're trying to say.

Respect is earned, not given. After all the damage they've done to my favorite medium, they've far from earned it.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Snip

You're giving them a little too much credit. It was a stupid comment made by stupid people. Gaming executives aren't exactly well known for nuance.

Maybe, however, just because they're stupid doesn't give you carte blanche to be stupid.

Personally I take "Female characters don't sell", as meaning "Main characters whose only special qualifier is their gender doesn't sell", because of cause they don't. If you set out making a character whose only reason for existing is "being a female main character in a shooter" then that isn't really a compelling character.

'

Ok, I'm going to have to ask where the heck you drew that conclusion from, because every time this has been brought up by devs that have had problems getting their games with female characters published, it was painted as a more "boys don't want to buy games with girls in them," way, and "your character has nothing to her except the fact that she's a girl." Seriously, I don't follow your train of logic here.

And kindly don't call me stupid.

I drew that conclusion from people complaining about "female main characters" amongst the playerbase, not necessarily the publishers (because there are people in that group too who sometimes "complain" about female characters, and say that they don't "sell well").

Regarding the devs and the publishers.

They usually only react to hard, cold numbers.

If game A sells better than game B, and the only appreciable difference between them are the gender of main character, then of cause they're bloody going to conclude that a certain gender wont sell.

For example, let's compare Horizon: Zero Dawn, the current Playstation exclusive, to Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, the previous Playstation exclusive.

Uncharted sold 4.93 million copies globally.

Horizon sold 2.55 million copies globally.

If you just look at numbers (like I suspect the publishers are), it's easy to conclude that "female main characters don't sell". Whether that's a fair assessment is an entirely different issue.

EDIT:
Also, I generally don't assume people are stupid.

But if they act stupid (even just for comedic effect), or they do stupid things (like suggesting "giving too much credit", to try and stifle discussion), I'm going to call them stupid.

You do realize you're compared the lifetime sales of a very old game to the two week sales of a brand new game right? How is that a fair comparison? Also you said only appreciative difference. There's a hell of a lot more difference between Uncharted and Hirizon than the gender of the character

Oh l'm not respecting the opinions of out of touch executives. I'm soooooooo stupid. Don't patronize me.

Yes I do.

Also, I'm not comparing those numbers. The Publishers are. Big difference. I'm just explaining how the conclusion is made from their point of view.

As for your last quip.

If you don't respect the opinions of, as you call them, "out of touch executives", they're sure as shit not gonna respect yours.

Don't expect to get any levelheaded discourse, if you aren't even willing to actually put yourself in their seat, and see through their eyes. I don't expect you to agree, only to understand their methods.

Through that understanding, it becomes much easier to get them to change their minds.

EDIT:
Honestly, I have no dog in this fight.

I just want to play good games. I have no interest in what gender my character has, as long as the gameplay is tight, the character is likeable, and the story is good.

I just want to help you achieve your goal (getting publishers to realise that female characters WILL sell), and the way you're doing it here, ain't it.

Ok. You say you don't respect my opinion because I think they're stuck. Then you'd say they'd do something that even i think isn't cutting them enough slack. So...you say I need to understand their views and not dismiss them as out of touch, then claim that they would do something so short sighted and stupid that even I wouldn't criticize them of doing? I just...don't know what you're trying to say.

Respect is earned, not given. After all the damage they've done to my favorite medium, they've far from earned it.

I tried to fix a few of what I assumed was mobile auto-correct induced spelling errors (please correct them, if I was wrong).

Let's go through them, point by point.

1) You say you don't respect my opinion because I think they're stuck.

I said, "Maybe, however, just because they're stupid doesn't give you carte blanche to be stupid.".

That isn't "not respecting your opinion". That's rejecting a straw man, because I don't think one side behaving badly gives the other side carte blanch to follow suit.

2) Then you'd say they'd do something that even i think isn't cutting them enough slack.

Not sure of what you're talking about here. Can you give an example?

3) So...you say I need to understand their views and not dismiss them as out of touch, then claim that they would do something so short sighted and stupid that even I wouldn't criticize them of doing?

Yes, I did say you should understand their reasoning (not their views, their reasoning). I however never made a claim that they'd do anything (at the most, I've made observations of their actions).

4) I just...don't know what you're trying to say.

Easy.

Before you label someone as "out of touch" anythings, analyse the situation from their point of view, possibly with their reasoning, and then erect a counterpoint using their reasoning.

"Respect is earned, not given. After all the damage they've done to my favorite medium, they've far from earned it."

The issue is, you aren't giving them any reason to listen to you.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Yeah, auto-correct typo. Meant to say stupid. And you've yet to convince me that I'm stupid.

You basically said that they would use the information of Horizon selling 2.6 million copies even though it's just out and, even as I type out those words, those numbers are out of date. I think they're stupid and even I know they'd put in more research than that.

You'd said that they'll compare a game that has been out for years with a game that has been out for nowhere near as long.

Ok, I took a look at things from their point of view. They're out of touch. Assuming that they think this. After all, this is me calling back to something that happened a few years ago. The idea that women can't sell copies is something that has no real basis in reality, due to how well Horizon is selling. I mean its pretty much made its budget back already, who knows how much it'll make in the long run.

They already have a reason to listen to me. They want my money. Haven't exactly bought an Ubisoft game in awhile. The one exception was Rainbow Six Siege. And guess what that had in it? Playable ladies.

 

[MeatMachine]

I'm probably going to regret this buuuuuut....

I don't think I've ever heard anyone in real life make that argument. It always seems like it's your "Racist Uncle" argument (you know, the "Black people have smaller brains than white people! It's not racist, it's science!!!!") that no one actually says as a real argument.

At best, it feels like a self-fulfilling prophecy by game makers (like how horror games were a dead genre) that they just kind of decided on at some point.

I'm on team "if the game is good, I will buy it" myself. I never had any problems playing a black man in Telltale's Walking Dead, a woman in Tomb Raider, or a badass space marine in Doom, even though I am none of those things in real life...

I'm in total agreement.

I think there is an element of truth to the "games with female protagonists" don't sell well, but I don't think they don't sell well BECAUSE they have a female protagonists. It's more that these games aren't part of a long-established, familiar franchise, or other such reasons.

I think that, at most, games with non-customizable female protagonists don't MARKET as well in advertisements. Advertising is largely appealing to the subconscious, which is why I think its more appealing to the hardcore gaming target audience to have a male protagonist in the promotional material - even if barely anyone actually outwardly cares about the gender of their avatar.

 

[Nazulu]

I don't know anyone who wouldn't buy a game just because it has a female lead and I can't imagine there are many out there. Who said this? I've heard it before and I never found out who brought it up. And is there any REAL research for this topic?

I'm not joining any witch hunt though. If there is a legit reason I would actually be interested to know. I'd imagine games with male leads would have sold more because there are just more of them in more well known franchises that aren't niche at all. So maybe over time if these games get sequels that are persistent in quality then we can make a more accurate assessment then.

 

[burnout02urza]

For what's it worth, I bought Nier Automata mostly because I wanted to put my penis into 2B, and you can destroy her skirt with the self-destruct module.

Horizon: Zero Dawn? Stronk womyn protagonist who don't need no man? No way in hell I'm buying that.

If I'm not buying a game for fetishistic value, I'm not going to buy a game with a female protagonist. I simply relate to male characters more. I mean, it's not like anyone bought Xtreme Beach Volleyball 3 or Senran Kagura for the strong female protagonists, they bought them because they were cock-pleasers.

If you want games with female leads to sell, make them sexy. It's what Lara Croft coasted on for most of her series, after all. If she looked like Nadine from Uncharted, Eidos would've closed after the first game.

 

[CritialGaming]

Then every single game made aside from COD doesn't sell well. Seriously, name five series that pull in those kinds of numbers on each installment

Everything Blizzard makes.

Every WoW Expansion
Overwatch
Diablo 3
Starcraft

Non-Blizzard:
Battlefield
Grand Theft Auto

Anyway OT, I think that the female lead thing is a fucking cop out. Of course Female led games don't sell as well, but it's because they aren't pillars of the gaming industry levels of games. Look at any of the big sells games. Halo, GTA, COD, they aren't selling billions because it's raining men, they sell well because they are established and good (mostly). Not to mention they all have a persistent gameplay loop.

Name me one female-led game that has infinite progression. The biggest selling games in the industry right now all have an endless online component. It's what makes these games so big. COD fans can get 1 game very year and play it endlessly until next year's version comes out. That's how it works. And you have to remember that 99% of the gaming player base doesn't have it's ear to the ground when it comes to new games coming out. Most people buy 1 or 2 games a YEAR, and play them until the wheels fall off or a sequel comes out.

 

[elvor0]

I am black and usually don't mind what race/gender the characters is just as long as the game is good. But even if the game is good, a character can be written horribly. That is why I do not like CJ from San Andreas or Nilin from Remember Me. Though San Andreas I did not like gameplay wise in general. I do appreciate if the character is the same race as me and well written. The same applies if the character is a different gender or race from me.

Just out of curiosity, what did you find horribly written about CJ? I thought he was alright...don't know if I'd call him "likeable" at the end of the day, dude does some pretty horrific things by the end, but he always tried to do the right thing, (for a GTA protagonist) and I don't /remember/ any glaring issues with the way his character was written but then it has been some time. Or was he just a little too stereotypical, given the gangbanger motif?

 

[BrawlMan]

Just out of curiosity, what did you find horribly written about CJ? I thought he was alright...don't know if I'd call him "likeable" at the end of the day, dude does some pretty horrific things by the end, but he always tried to do the right thing, (for a GTA protagonist) and I don't /remember/ any glaring issues with the way his character was written but then it has been some time. Or was he just a little too stereotypical, given the gangbanger motif?

Partially the gangbanger motif, but it was this weird dissonance. CJ claimed to be doing the right things "fer da hood", but obviously by the half way point, this is not the case, and is in it mainly for the money and power. The narration does not seem to acklowledge this, and we'r supposed to root him, when is defintely not much better than his enemies by that point. Say what you will about Claude or Tommy, but at least the motives were mostly clear and consistent and acknowledge. Claude wanted revenge, and Tommy wanted money, and then revenge.

I appreciate the shout-outs for Boyz n Da Hood, Menace II Society (you'll never see me watch that again), Juice, and New Jersey Drive that Rockstar did, but overall San Andreas and CJ did not do it for me. Funny enough, Frank from GTAV is what CJ should have been.