Zero Punctuation: Grand Theft Auto 5

[Goliath100]

snip

That don't answer the question. How do you define "valuable actions" in game?

 

[Carpenter]

I hooted like a loon at that final joke. I'm a bad person.

Having more than 2-3 people writing a single character's dialogue is a terrible idea. Even then, it's really one writing and two editing.

So comics are a horrible idea?
You know how many people have written dialog for spiderman? Still manages to be a consistent character.

I love ZP but if you believe the characters are poorly written just because Yahtzee told you so, maybe you should avoid games as a whole.

Do single issues of comics have multiple dialogue writers? I'm likening a single game to a single comic issue, not a long-running character.

Also, you're being massively presumptuous; I didn't mention anything about the writing of GTAV, naturally I haven't played it so I can't comment, I just thought that the idea of writing by committee isn't the best approach. I got the impression that Yahtzee was insinuating that he felt there was a design by committee approach to the writing.

Huh, well it would appear I was wrong, only three writers credited on IMDB.

Sometimes, yes they do. Problem is, even if it's rare, a comic issue is short, a video game is much longer. It's more comparable to an episodic series than a single comic book.

A game as big as GTA 5 is not comparable to a single comic issue and as a person that's been playing the game a lot I can tell you that there's nothing inconsistent about the dialog or characters, I honestly didn't even know the dialog was written by more than one person.

All to often people confuse character growth with a character being inconsistent.

I do agree, committee often ruins good ideas, but the characters and story are dictated by creative figureheads that have a passion for the series.

Yeah I didn't know three people were credited with the writing either, but I feel there's a lesson in that about not just taking what Yahtzee says on faith. The guy is great at what he does, what he does is not game reviews, it's comedic cynical analysis of games.

I know people will accuse me of being a "fanboy" but the fact is, I'm a fan. I like to defend things I enjoy when I see people making dishonest or unfair criticisms. I am fine with people not liking a game I like, what bugs me is when people that haven't played the game are turned away because of completely dishonest things being said by "trustworthy sources" or those things being spread around as if it's known fact.

The game has plenty of real flaws, but that's because it's massive. They could have made a game like COD that would have little to no glitches but what keeps me interested in Rockstar is their ability to take chances. Changing the GTA formula with almost every sequel is a huge risk that too many companies refuse to take anymore.

Just wanted to say that, as the "fanboy rage" term is thrown around a lot here.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

That don't answer the question. How do you define "valuable actions" in game?

Things that advance the story, make your characters better, or learn about your characters' personalities or learn about the world you're in. That's exactly what I just said and I really don't know how else to explain it.

 

[Carpenter]

So basically the impression I got from this was this did not deserve that billion dollars in sales it got and was basically just GTA IV minus the escort missions.

Yeah....I'll just stick to Saint's Row from now on. GTA has lost me as a franchise.

That's not even close to anything the video was stating.

Yes, please stick to saints row. Starting to see why people don't appreciate the work that went into that game either.

Honestly, who cares how much work went into it? You're not buying the labor, you're buying the results of that labor.

People that don't work ask "who cares how much work went into this"

I care how much work went into it when the quality of the product is pretty good. People dug into the use of symbolism and themes in Spec Ops the line only because that game made it very obvious, it doesn't mean that games like GTA and SR didn't put hidden symbolic meaning into portions of the game or the entire game itself.

The results of that labor is a quality game in the case of SR and GTA so I don't really get what your comment was supposed to mean here.

If you don't like the game, that's fine, but people acting like one game is objectively more "fun" because it has a dildo in it is just kind of sad to see here. SR is a lot of fun, but they didn't make "fun" a higher priority than Rockstar did with GTA. If SR was made to be nothing but arcadey stupid fun then they wouldn't have given it a story in the first place.

 

[Carpenter]

Here is the difference between SR and GTA. There's a mission in GTAV where you have to defend a truck full of stolen supercars from the police using a James Bond'esque sports car with guns and spikes. It's pretty awesome and the mechanics are great; however, I'm quite sure that I'll never see those cars again. If it had been Saints Row, at the end of the mission the James Bond car, and all of the super cars would have automatically added to my garage, to play with and destroy as many times as I'd like.

Looking through the comments and once again there's more posts talking about irrational fanboy rage than actual irrational fanboy rage.

Can someone please explain this fucking phenomenon to me? Maybe if I know the mentality behind it, it won't irk me so damn much every time I see it.

It's kind of a "become the thing you hate" type of thing.

Reminds me of the first trailer for RE5 being released and the capcom boards instantly going "people are going to call this racist" with other posters going "people calling this racist? RE2 had white zombies!" and suddenly everyone was acting like they were fighting back the horrible PC police. Suddenly people were making youtube videos about how "it's so not racist" directed at a group of people that didn't even exist considering nobody at the time called it racist.

Have yet to see anyone calling RE5 racist, despite the fact that it was released and we found out that it portrayed African natives as leaf skirt and tribal mask wearing, spear throwing, growling beasts. Yes they were "infected" but I think the people that used that defense (before any complaints were made mind you) don't understand how symbolism works. You are still depicting Africans as savage tribesmen out for the white man's blood. Don't try to use the partner as a defense, she's a slightly more subtle stereotype. I believe her last line in the game was "that is for my fallen ancestors" or something like that.

Now with that in mind, I am kind of wondering if RE4 and 5 were meant to be exploring the idea of xenophobia by portraying "foreigners" as they may be imagined by a racist white guy that has never left his homeland.
This fits RE4 perfectly on every level, but 5 comes off as more "invade Africa, horrible savage land we need to free from oppression" propaganda.
That's just my opinion though.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

This is one of the more realistic reviews he's ever done. Its not overly troll-y nor is he gushing over GTAV. Yatzhee seems to have the same reaction to this game I did. A solid, resolute, proud 'what else can I play?'
Not that its a terrible game, mind. I just was so f-ing bored I stopped playing after about 3 hours. My friend who had clocked in 100+hours was flabbergasted until I got out D3 for xbox, and we had a golly good time!

Simply put, GTA is now incredibly bland. It was as basic and by the numbers as these games get.

 

[Carpenter]

I know for a fact they can program planes to be easy to fly, the same way I know games can program sniper rifles to not bounce around like an epileptic on a trampoline. But they want to "simulate difficulty" and apparently, shitty controls are how they do that.

The planes were easy enough to fly for me.

Yes they could program them to be "easier to fly" but they could have also programmed the game with more hand holding auto aim and missile bullets, it just wouldn't be very challenging and would probably feel pretty soulless.

You exaggerate the turbulence you experience in planes (even with the lowest possible flying skill) that I have to wonder if you even played the game.
On maxed out shooting skill your sniper rifle doesn't wave around in the slightest and stays perfectly steady.
Shitty controls? Can you give an example of what you mean? Are you aware that the other two things you mentioned have nothing to do with the "controls" of the game?
You are exaggerating these things so much that it makes me wonder if you even played the game before posting these complaints.

 

[maninahat]

I think comparisons, not just with Saints Row IV, but also Skyrim are in order. Just how does one make games this big both balanced and with tightness and direction?

Good question. I think one way is to commit whole heartedly to a linear set up, with the open world acting as a backdrop or an occasional diversion (like in Arkham asylum/city or LA Noire). The other is to commit properly to the open world set up, and stop punishing the player with failure for slightly stepping out of some strict boundaries (like STALKER). Games like Skyrim and GTA fail at either, because they try to sell themselves on an open world but actually prefer to focus on some meagre, tightly scripted story.

 

[Carpenter]

Looking through the comments and once again there's more posts talking about irrational fanboy rage than actual irrational fanboy rage.

Can someone please explain this fucking phenomenon to me? Maybe if I know the mentality behind it, it won't irk me so damn much every time I see it.

There were angry hordes of fanboys in the comments of Greg Tito's review calling for his head and hurling death threats at his family for giving GTA V 3.5 stars out of 5. I'll say that again to drive it home : 3.5/5 That's the kind of score I was happy to get for a score on homework or a test in school.

Again, that's the strawman used by Escapist staff to frame the issue their way.

The complaints (I saw no death threats or threats against his family) were regarding the review itself, not the score. The score was a good score, but it was a good score tacked onto a review that did nothing but complain and state things about the game that are demonstrably false.

No matter how often I explain this, people still try to exaggerate the issue and discredit complaints by making up these ridiculous retelling of what really happened.
All it shows is that you feel the need to defend the Escapist but have no real points to defend it with so you rely on dishonest tactics.

 

[Something Amyss]

Hmm okay, he didn't like it that much I guess.

One thing I don't understand though, why is Saints Row considered 'fun' and the later GTA aren't? Because you can run around with a dildo and other wacky stuff? That's wacky. Not necessarily fun. I didn't play GTAV of course (having only a PC and stuff), but I definitely had tons more fun with GTA IV then SR2+3 combined and if GTA had the same stupid wacky humor everywhere, I'd like it less.

"Fun" is a relatively subjective term, so it's hard to quanitify but GTA IV was sluggish and chore-like. Saints Row was action packed. Even better, the action was well-designed. I mean, if sluggish controls and routine date requests are your idea of fun, then Godspeed.

One way GTA V is more fun (to me) is the way it doesn't require you to play five hours to get into things. It starts off fast and keeps a nice pace. It engaged me, something Niko's rather mundane beginnings couldn't do.

either they're very easily impressed/amused, or they have the mind of a teenager, or both.

Well, I am both.

But you know, I looked at your played games on XBL (since you were kind enough to link your GT), and I'm not really seeing much that would qualify as having "more" than that. And hell, the comparison of stuff to do with RDR just seems...Wrong. Flat out wrong.

But whatever. I'm not here to judge. I just find it weird.

But hey, I'm not particularly a fan of the GTA series. I played 3 mostly because everyone said I must, and the open world was a bit of a revolution at the time, so it was something I could appreciate. IV sucked ass in my opinion, highlighting ockstar's tendency for "ooh shiny" over substance, so I sort of get where you're coming from. But V? Well, they still haven't figured out how to do competent gameplay, you pretty much need aim assist to compensate for some of the worst firearm controls in the history of games, and there's an emphasis on shiny, but....

I actually like the story. Well, enjoyed is more the word. The thing is, that even though a lot of the characters are whiny, the sum ends up being better than the whole of its parts. I found myself engaged by the story threads. I actually spent a lot more time actually doing missions in this game than dicking around, which is relatively unqie for sandboxes. I got like 30 hours out of Saints Row 3, despite it being a 5 hour game, because I didn't touch most of the story missions for a loooooooong time.

 

[duchaked]

I actually have to disagree with the GTA V reviews on the Escapist thus far haha
it's unusual because I've never been a fan of GTA (didn't like IV), and always preferred Saints Row and Sleeping Dogs, but GTA V surprised me. I guess I really liked the characters and their relationships (like legitimately enjoyed watching them), which seems to be the make or break aspect for this game.

that being said, I was disappointed that there weren't more to the heists. planning it out was cool, but I have to agree that leveling up your secondary crew members and stuff could have had more depth. most the missions apart from the first and last are just go in and shoot your way out loll

 

[duchaked]

I actually like the story. Well, enjoyed is more the word. The thing is, that even though a lot of the characters are whiny, the sum ends up being better than the whole of its parts. I found myself engaged by the story threads. I actually spent a lot more time actually doing missions in this game than dicking around, which is relatively unqie for sandboxes. I got like 30 hours out of Saints Row 3, despite it being a 5 hour game, because I didn't touch most of the story missions for a loooooooong time.

yeah I found myself actually rushing to do story missions because the characters were fun to watch. I didn't find them "whiny" but selfish oh hell yea very much so loll but I feel like it kinda fits for...well a freaking GTA game. Franklin was very much a Connor-esque paperboy being led along by everyone, but it was Lamar who annoyed the crap about me with his "homies for life" deal until the end when he redeemed himself haha. and I legitimately liked Michael whose struggles to reconnect with his family while staving off a midlife crisis was a nice touch and not something I've really seen before in a game. and I hated/loved Trevor because...well he's Trevor lol

 

[charliesbass]

Michael's justification for doing terrible things is the same justification Walter White uses, in my opinion. His life is boring, middle class and materialistic. Doing bank heists and pulling down peoples houses off cliffs is what makes him feel alive in his humdrum daily pointless life.
With Franklin, he wants to get out of the bad neighborhood and start a new life in a good area, with possibly a new family to bring up. Even if he does have to do bad things, he has to get out of that area.
With Trevor, he's just crazy. That's all.

That's just my opinion anyway.

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

I know for a fact they can program planes to be easy to fly, the same way I know games can program sniper rifles to not bounce around like an epileptic on a trampoline. But they want to "simulate difficulty" and apparently, shitty controls are how they do that.

The planes were easy enough to fly for me.

Yes they could program them to be "easier to fly" but they could have also programmed the game with more hand holding auto aim and missile bullets, it just wouldn't be very challenging and would probably feel pretty soulless.

You exaggerate the turbulence you experience in planes (even with the lowest possible flying skill) that I have to wonder if you even played the game.
On maxed out shooting skill your sniper rifle doesn't wave around in the slightest and stays perfectly steady.
Shitty controls? Can you give an example of what you mean? Are you aware that the other two things you mentioned have nothing to do with the "controls" of the game?
You are exaggerating these things so much that it makes me wonder if you even played the game before posting these complaints.

My sniper rifle comment was more about how it works in games in general, here it doesn't seem so bad.

I still hate the flying controls and Yhahtzee seems to agree. Its a problem when I cant do things like "go forward" or "turn right" without nearly crashing the helicopter. In fact it seems as if the game is aware of its bad controls and tries to make "challenges" out of them. That's why you get points for things like flying under bridges. You don't get points for driving a car trough a tunnel because making the car go in a strait line without crashing into every wall isnt a challenge.

 

[Arcane Azmadi]

Despite not saying it's a bad game I'm sure this review will piss off plenty of GTA fanboys.

Fuck 'em.

Oddly enough I was hoping he would do Shadow Warrior this week. Maybe he will use it to cleanse his palate of the 'meh' that is his opinion of gtaV.

Spoiler: MEH

Actually, so was I. Being one of the miniscule number of people who didn't give a FUCK about GTAV, I'd actually forgotten he was likely to be doing it, so I was hoping he'd be doing Shadow Warrior too. I just hope it isn't a massive disappointment to him like Duke Nukem Forever was- it already starts with an automatic strike against it by being a reboot of a classic property with the exact same name as the original.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

It's interesting how when Yahtzee doesn't want to like a game, he brings up plot points that he doesn't particularly like and focuses on them. He did the same thing with the Last of Us.

Honestly, I miss the days when Zero Punctuation was about criticizing games due to actual issues with the gameplay and mechanics. There was hardly a word here about the gameplay itself. Yeah, the planes handle poorly but that's all that I got from this review. It really just seems lazy to me and an attempt to run against the mainstream. It's like he watched some character footage on YouTube and based the entire video on that.

I mean seriously, let's do a play-by-play. The first 45 seconds is complaining about the advertising. Then he complains about the fact that it's named GTA V even though there are more than 5 games, a joke he's made several times already about the same series. Then he complains about GTA IV. Next he describes the characters, saying they're all poorly written but gives no actual examples of them being poorly written other then that Franklin is whiny and misinterpreting Michael's overall character. After that he brings up the problem of linearity within the mission structure and the poor flight controls which I definitely agree with. The rest of the review he talks about not being able to play online yet and then saying it was ok but not great. That's just simply weak criticism and it's really disappointing.

I would have respected it a lot more if he brought up the fact that the traffic AI is pretty bad and the gunplay feels sticky and weird or maybe the brought up the texture popping and characters and cars randomly disappearing. But as far as I'm concerned there's no actual evidence that he even played the game.

I truly don't have a problem with people disliking what I don't like. Metal Gear Solid is a favorite of mine and I didn't have a problem with his MGS4 review. I also like Dead Space, Gears of War, and Borderlands. My problem is when the criticism isn't well thought out.

I can tell you firsthand that Saints Row 4 is absolute garbage and not even accidentally good. It's not even a matter of opinion. It's glitchy, boring, has absolutely no sense of pacing, most of the content is literally copy-pasted from Saints Row 3, the missions are insultingly easy, and the superpowers simply break the game.

Yeah, I still like Yahtzee reviews, but he does lack the cutting barbs he once had here. I remember back in college when I thought I could be a movie critic, so I just watched a ton of movies and wrote about every one of them. The problem with reviewing movies is that most of them are okay. Not great, not terrible. Alright. And it is really really hard to write anything about a movie that's average. I'm only like 40% into GTA 5 and I'm enjoying it, but I would be hard pressed to provide any truly positive or negative insight other than "it's really pretty." However, I do detest one particular 40 minute triathlon race, but it can be argued that I brought that on myself. I also dislike the lack of fast travel of taxis that GTA 4 had.

That said, it's pretty much "another GTA game" and it's more than enough for me.

 

[OuendanCyrus]

Well, I am both.

But you know, I looked at your played games on XBL (since you were kind enough to link your GT), and I'm not really seeing much that would qualify as having "more" than that. And hell, the comparison of stuff to do with RDR just seems...Wrong. Flat out wrong.

But whatever. I'm not here to judge. I just find it weird.

But hey, I'm not particularly a fan of the GTA series. I played 3 mostly because everyone said I must, and the open world was a bit of a revolution at the time, so it was something I could appreciate. IV sucked ass in my opinion, highlighting ockstar's tendency for "ooh shiny" over substance, so I sort of get where you're coming from. But V? Well, they still haven't figured out how to do competent gameplay, you pretty much need aim assist to compensate for some of the worst firearm controls in the history of games, and there's an emphasis on shiny, but....

I actually like the story. Well, enjoyed is more the word. The thing is, that even though a lot of the characters are whiny, the sum ends up being better than the whole of its parts. I found myself engaged by the story threads. I actually spent a lot more time actually doing missions in this game than dicking around, which is relatively unqie for sandboxes. I got like 30 hours out of Saints Row 3, despite it being a 5 hour game, because I didn't touch most of the story missions for a loooooooong time.

I actually haven't touched my 360 since I completed Skyrim nearly 2 years ago. The main reason that I can't enjoy GTA V is mainly how the world is so large, yet feels like there's not much to do; sure, there's strip clubs, yes, there's golf and tennis, but I never found out whether they contributed to the gameplay. I understand that they are just distractions that are meant to make the player feel more immersed in the game, but I would have preferred it if those distractions actually helped me in the game as opposed to feeling like a time waster. (I did try playing Tennis for a bit because I thought it would raise my Stamina but I don't think it did) Look at Just Cause 2 for example, it has a huge world filled with bases you can take over, and in doing so, you earn more cash and upgrades, in Saint's Row IV, you collect data clusters to improve your super powers, in Red Dead Redemption and Far Cry 3, you can do animal and bounty hunts to get money and improve your character.

I never played GTA IV, but I felt that the cops in GTA V were a bit too efficient, if that makes sense; you cause a bit of mayhem and you get two stars, at which point, you can either stay and continue to fight the cops, earning your more stars, thus making you easier to kill, or try to escape and evade them for a large period of time, I think the game does too good of a job for punishing you, especially for a game where most of the fun is generated by you doing crimes. It's like when someone hands you a bazooka and tells you to have fun in a city, and then immediately snatches it away from you and slaps you across the face for having too much fun, it just doesn't seem right to me. But then again, maybe I'm just awful at GTA games (and awful at driving). Whatever the case, I am geniunely upset that I can't enjoy GTA V, and I am incredibly envious that a lot of people are, I wish I could be you, if you love the game, good for you.

 

[LysanderNemoinis]

I think something has been lost in all the talk about whether or not GTA5 is good and whether or not Yahtzee is going to need a bodyguard from now on, and that's Mr. Croshaw's utterly offensive and reprehensible joke about honey badgers. As a honey badger, I found it extremely upsetting that he would call me incontinent and say that people like myself live in brothels. It's just disgusting, and I truly wish for Yahtzee to make a full apology to all honey badgers for his flagrantly crude remarks. And if you say I'm not a honey badger because I don't have a tail, then you're just a badgerphobe.

 

[NiPah]

What's with this flameshild bullshit? From my end you guys are by far more annoying and immature then the one or two pro-GTA posts. You've got to stop with that crap, it's beyond overused now and it wasn't funny when 4chan invented it 10 years ago, if you've superseded the annoying fanboys as the idiots in a forum topic it's time you take a look at the quality of your posts.