-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GTA3:SA morality question?
- Thread starter jetjevons
- Start date
I've been having fun with the game and will continue to do so but it does leave a bad taste in my mouth (at least until i got used to it).
As WarPig said, the first two games were more overblown in their parody, the satire is thick and it comes across as very much a 'play' setting. Vice City even more so.
SA has this borderline realism thing going so when you have things like the N and F word being flung about every half sentence, and horrifc racial stereotypes that just don't sit well.
When the gay guys in GTA III said 'in the Navy' when you walked by them, it was sort of annoying but still funny but thats all it was, one line. In SA every mission has its cutscene with its stereotypes, then there's annoying banter WHILE you're playing the missions (which I have more a problem of the characters saying too much and less what they're saying) and they just lay it all on way too thick (the mission where you have to go pick up the fried chicken comes to mind).
It's like watching a blacksplotation film shot by oliver stone. There has to be a certain amount of camp to soften the blow otherwise it's just sitting in this odd place were you don't know how serious you're supposed to be taking things.
I think unlike the first two games in the series, this is the one thats going to garner a lot more complaints.
Also, as far as the 'Mafia' versus the 'Gang' discussion. Are they different? No, in fact modern day gangs use a smaller form of the organization that the mafia standardized, so don't russian mobs. However, as noted Mafia's have been romanticized to high heaven and when most people thing 'mafia' they don't think of what really existed, they think of the skewed view.
Its the same as when people think about 'pirates' they think of daring buccaneers, treasures and parrots on the high seas. They don't think of gangly murderers in ships eating maggots in the dark.
It's been long enough that peoples view and opinions on the Mafia have fundamentally changed from the reality. In this way it's retarded to insult someone for trying to differentiate the two. Logically, yea, they're same. But the perception is different enough that they do deserve somewhat different handling of the subject matter.
Combined with my first point about how the original GTA is more obvious with its parody and I think its perfectly valid for people who have a problem with SA that they didn't with GTA.
I think the gameplay is great, I think its a fine game, but all the while i'm playing there's just something that doesn't sit right with me. It won't stop me from enjoying it but it won't stop me from expressing my opinion about it either.
As WarPig said, the first two games were more overblown in their parody, the satire is thick and it comes across as very much a 'play' setting. Vice City even more so.
SA has this borderline realism thing going so when you have things like the N and F word being flung about every half sentence, and horrifc racial stereotypes that just don't sit well.
When the gay guys in GTA III said 'in the Navy' when you walked by them, it was sort of annoying but still funny but thats all it was, one line. In SA every mission has its cutscene with its stereotypes, then there's annoying banter WHILE you're playing the missions (which I have more a problem of the characters saying too much and less what they're saying) and they just lay it all on way too thick (the mission where you have to go pick up the fried chicken comes to mind).
It's like watching a blacksplotation film shot by oliver stone. There has to be a certain amount of camp to soften the blow otherwise it's just sitting in this odd place were you don't know how serious you're supposed to be taking things.
I think unlike the first two games in the series, this is the one thats going to garner a lot more complaints.
Also, as far as the 'Mafia' versus the 'Gang' discussion. Are they different? No, in fact modern day gangs use a smaller form of the organization that the mafia standardized, so don't russian mobs. However, as noted Mafia's have been romanticized to high heaven and when most people thing 'mafia' they don't think of what really existed, they think of the skewed view.
Its the same as when people think about 'pirates' they think of daring buccaneers, treasures and parrots on the high seas. They don't think of gangly murderers in ships eating maggots in the dark.
It's been long enough that peoples view and opinions on the Mafia have fundamentally changed from the reality. In this way it's retarded to insult someone for trying to differentiate the two. Logically, yea, they're same. But the perception is different enough that they do deserve somewhat different handling of the subject matter.
Combined with my first point about how the original GTA is more obvious with its parody and I think its perfectly valid for people who have a problem with SA that they didn't with GTA.
I think the gameplay is great, I think its a fine game, but all the while i'm playing there's just something that doesn't sit right with me. It won't stop me from enjoying it but it won't stop me from expressing my opinion about it either.
There's also the point that MOST people don't think of the Mafia as a "modern" and currently existing group (yes, it exists, I know that). The Mafia could be scene as more fantasy because you don't see the Mob walking around everywhere you go, like they did back in the early 20th century in New York. The modern gang violence is much more real for most people, as it can be seen in full swing.
Does that make the Mafia BETTER than "modern gangs"? No, not at all. It does, however, allow folks to think as an abstract concept rather than a "real" problem.
Does that make the Mafia BETTER than "modern gangs"? No, not at all. It does, however, allow folks to think as an abstract concept rather than a "real" problem.
I wonder if Rockstar are going to justify these horrific negative racial stereotypes because they're gangstas and therefore bad guys, and hey, everyone knows it's ok to stereotype bad guys.
Man I think the NAACP is going to have an absolute field day with this game.
Man I think the NAACP is going to have an absolute field day with this game.
jetjevons said:
Most of the voice script and scenarios were written by DJ Pooh
http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hc&id=1800359511&cf=gen&intl=us
Nameless
Member
Things are going to hit the fan with this game and soon. Black outlets(BET,NAACP) are no doubt going to jump all over this game for it's "negative explotation of blacks", as well as its frequent dropping of the "N-Bomb". The "usual suspects" are going to rip it for the amount of langauge, violence, sex, and drug use which have all been increased to an incredible degree. I personally have no problem with it, just a classic example of art imitating life, and Rockster has done an astonishing job recreating the era and that particular culture.
But serioulsy, I'de pay anything to be there Christmas morning, when little Johnny and his entire family are sitting in the living room around the tree, sipping egg nog as Johnny boots up the copy of GTA:SA that his unsuspecting mother or father bought him. And he creeps into "Baller's Territory" for the first time and is approached by a rival gangsta who yells... "Suck My fuckin dick Nigga" and begins to blast away. Mom Drops the egg nog, dad drops his jaw, Grand Ma grabs her heart, and little sister begins to cry....Ahh yes there will be plenty of those moments over the next few months.
Hell, the game even has me, a 21 year old Black Male going "Did I just hear that" from time to time. I do however feel sorry for the hoards of EB, Best Buy and Gamestop clerks who are going to berated beyond belief by angry parents for selling their kids the game.
But serioulsy, I'de pay anything to be there Christmas morning, when little Johnny and his entire family are sitting in the living room around the tree, sipping egg nog as Johnny boots up the copy of GTA:SA that his unsuspecting mother or father bought him. And he creeps into "Baller's Territory" for the first time and is approached by a rival gangsta who yells... "Suck My fuckin dick Nigga" and begins to blast away. Mom Drops the egg nog, dad drops his jaw, Grand Ma grabs her heart, and little sister begins to cry....Ahh yes there will be plenty of those moments over the next few months.
Hell, the game even has me, a 21 year old Black Male going "Did I just hear that" from time to time. I do however feel sorry for the hoards of EB, Best Buy and Gamestop clerks who are going to berated beyond belief by angry parents for selling their kids the game.
kaching said:Do you think there's time for it to become an election issue?
Nah, all the little kids haven't gotten it yet. Like Nameless said, expect it to really start showing up in the media more around December or so. What's really funny is that not only is there the fact that all the clueless gift-givers will not only be ignoring the M rating on the box, but also all the controversy over the last two games in the series. At this point, GTA is most likely as well known as Mortal Kombat was (if not moreso) for being pretty graphic, yet we're most likely going to see the same "think of the children" people coming out of the woodwork soon...
bishoptl said:
I really think it's more about showing your kids the game letting them play it, and teaching them about why it's wrong and why it's different that reality. If just exposure to this kind of thing made kids into psycho criminals I'd be wearing a hockey mask, killing people with my glove of knives, while participating in a gang bang and carjacking an old lady right now instead of just sitting in my cube modeling stuff
Nameless
Member
nathkenn said:
Not only would that take effort, something that many of todays parents don't punch much into raising their child, but god forbid that they are looked upon as "bad parents" for letting their play such a game, which is what public perceptions currently states in most instances.
Funny thing though, is some of the kids back in 5th grade who's parents forbid them from playing Mortal Kombat back when it first released turned out to be some of more fucked up ones in High school.
The first two games engendered plenty of critics who cited glorified acts of heinous violence and other forms of callous disrespect for fellow man. The air of parody that was apparent to some of you in those titles was lost on them. What we have here then, is that the tables have been turned on those of you who were "ok" with the previous titles.
People's thresholds for what's an acceptable level of depicted violence differ, and aren't always based on somewhat arbitrary distinctions of what's "in the past" and therefore somehow more removed. The mafia lifestyle may not seem as real to the contemporary mind as the gang lifestyle seems, but the acts of violence perpetrated by either group are not all that different and are older than either group by far.
Unless we're intending to ban all forms of violence in all forms of media, this will always remain a thorn in the side of some portion of the population who abhors depicted violence once it passes their personal threshold.
People's thresholds for what's an acceptable level of depicted violence differ, and aren't always based on somewhat arbitrary distinctions of what's "in the past" and therefore somehow more removed. The mafia lifestyle may not seem as real to the contemporary mind as the gang lifestyle seems, but the acts of violence perpetrated by either group are not all that different and are older than either group by far.
Unless we're intending to ban all forms of violence in all forms of media, this will always remain a thorn in the side of some portion of the population who abhors depicted violence once it passes their personal threshold.
See, I could give a fuck for the game's effect on children or race relations or the November elections or any of that shit. That's not why it bugs me. Sure, children shouldn't be playing it, the end, bottom line, may God smite dead any parent who'd let their kid play this game, and fuck any retailer that doesn't card a kid trying to buy it, too. But Rockstar should be able to make the game they wanna make for the audience they wanna make it for, the same way movie directors, authors, and musicians can.
My beef with the content, however, is solely based on the fact that *I* don't think it makes for an enjoyable experience.
DFS.
My beef with the content, however, is solely based on the fact that *I* don't think it makes for an enjoyable experience.
DFS.
I don't think its that simple. Like I said before, its not so much that it 'passes a threshold' because really the content (aside from the increased language which isn't that bad) is pretty much the same. the real difference, and whats getting to people is the presentation.
For instance. Your best friend for the last 10 years, Bob, is known to be a bit of an ass, but he's funny, he jokes around a lot and people know that. So one day Bob tells a horribly racist joke. Now you know bob isn't a racist, the joke is in poor taste but you chuckle a little anyway and tell him he's an ass. You can laugh at it because you know he doesn't mean it.
Now you overhear some old white guy you don't know, with a stern face, tell the same joke to his friend. Your reaction is probably going to think the guys a total racist fuck and you'll think really poorly of him.
It's that sort of joking manner that makes the first 2 games easy to shrug off.
Vark, none of that changes what I said. To keep with your analogy, there's people who never thought your friend Bob was all that funny to begin with and don't look at any racist comment, regardless of who it comes from or the manner in which its conveyed, as harmless. They don't care if its coming from some old white guy with a stern face or your never-serious friend Bob. Racist is racist to them. Your proviso that presentation matters is simply what sets your threshold somewhat higher than theirs.
True, i was commenting specifically though on people who didn't have a problem with the first 2 games.
The general assumption is if you didn't play the first two games you wouldn't play this one but if you did, i'm proposing that the presentation is the main reason for the switch due to the fact that the subject matter and content and relatively the same.
The general assumption is if you didn't play the first two games you wouldn't play this one but if you did, i'm proposing that the presentation is the main reason for the switch due to the fact that the subject matter and content and relatively the same.
I agree with that in principle (that nobody -- ESPECIALLY the government -- has a right to censor anyone else), but I do think it's fine and dandy to boycott something and encourage others to do the same. That's not what you were saying, of course, but some people act like you're doing a big, horrible thing if you dare speak out about content you find questionable.WarPig said:
EDIT: Racial jokes are hilarious. The poorer the taste, the better. I'm not anymore sensitive to race as anything else. It's okay to make fun of Christians, Jews, Muslims, goths, etc., so it's just as okay to make fun of a race.
snapty00 said:
Devil's advocate time.
Is it permissible for the city, state, or federal government to ban certain kinds of speech and expression... such as:
* Shouting "fire" in a theater.
* Issuing death threats.
Etc.
It is, technically, an act of censorship to punish or prevent someone from saying ANYTHING they want to say. Would I be right in assuming that you are in favor of very LIMITED censorship for legal and emergency purposes (see the above list), but opposed to all forms of political censorship?
Censorship isn't always bad... but I would agree fully that political censorship is bad. Other "minor" forms of censorship are really rather different. The question of "censorship" is one more along the lines of what is the absolute minimum restriction that must exist for "nonpolitical matters" so as to keep society safe.
I suppose this raises the interesting question of what would happen if an independent film was released that repeatedly told the audience, directly, to go buy a gun and kill members of a particular group. (I'm not saying GTA does this at all -- I'm just wondering how such a film would work in the context of "free speech" rights)
SolidSnakex
Member
DavidDayton said:
If its about gangs killing gangs, as GTA is, I really doubt there'd be much of an uproar at all. That's what some people don't get I think, this isn't about killing random people, you're going out and killing opposing gangs. They're bad guys. It's like killing a bad guy in any other game.
Why are people making an issue of the racial stereotypes now, when GTA has been routinely featuring things like Guy Ritchie movie rejects, pothead yardie rudeboys, pasta-slurping "goombahs" who when angry wax the first person they see, mexicans/Cubans whose sole purpose in life is to race cars/boats and deal drugs, and blacks who think they're "hard ballas" because they've taken over an apartment complex/a row of shanty houses and have gaudy Lamborghinis?
I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if this has been said...
...but, I don't believe the violence is the key attractor here. I think the 'freedom' of the gameplay is much more of a key reason as to why GTA is so popular.
The freedom is presented in this 'violent' vessel, and I *do* think the 'violence' and 'reality' are key selling points (joe average can relate to humans and guns instead of aliens and plasma rifles), but it really is the freedom on offer...
I think the reason it's all violent is that:
(a) the violence is 'satisfying' (just as a gun/violence in a movie) and
(b) the easiest way to express freeform gameplay and choice in a game is by shooting.
Think about it; you're a game developer and you want to create a sandbox city of interaction... do you create code that lets the player have meaningful conversations and complex relationships with each and ever citizen, or do you give them a gun?
...but, I don't believe the violence is the key attractor here. I think the 'freedom' of the gameplay is much more of a key reason as to why GTA is so popular.
The freedom is presented in this 'violent' vessel, and I *do* think the 'violence' and 'reality' are key selling points (joe average can relate to humans and guns instead of aliens and plasma rifles), but it really is the freedom on offer...
I think the reason it's all violent is that:
(a) the violence is 'satisfying' (just as a gun/violence in a movie) and
(b) the easiest way to express freeform gameplay and choice in a game is by shooting.
Think about it; you're a game developer and you want to create a sandbox city of interaction... do you create code that lets the player have meaningful conversations and complex relationships with each and ever citizen, or do you give them a gun?
boutrosinit
Street Fighter IV World Champion
jetjevons said:
Is the King's Head pub in it? I tried to find it in True Crime and it was not there! Ironically, I find that to be a 'True Crime'.
boutrosinit
Street Fighter IV World Champion
Yes; but where is THE KING'S HEAD!?!?!?!!!!!!!
(believe me, I've looked)
Or even the tramps who sleep on the cliff bit?
(believe me, I've looked)
Or even the tramps who sleep on the cliff bit?
Heh, this game is definately more "in your face" than the others as someone put it. Can easilly see how people might be more afraid of this one. This is like slipping Boys in the Hood under unsuspecting in households everywhere . I can tell by the look of the girlfriends of some of my roomates as I played it that this game is wrapped in a context a little too rough for some people.
I'm actually a little amazed too that htis style of game will probably be one of the biggest selling this generation. Then again, look at the success of hip hop music. With lyrics decidedly just as bad as anything shown or portrayed in GTA, these cds go on to sell millions and millions. So content like this selling to the masses is not a big deal or a surprise at all, we've just never seen it in game form. This does have a more realistic tone to it compared to previous GTAs.
It'll also probably be one of the only times unfortunately that a game with such an African-American focus (not just characters, but lifestyle and dialogue, as exaggeratedly violent and gangsta as it may be) will get such a solid gameplay experience. This game is gigantic.
. I can tell by the look of the girlfriends of some of my roomates as I played it that this game is wrapped in a context a little too rough for some people. I'm actually a little amazed too that htis style of game will probably be one of the biggest selling this generation. Then again, look at the success of hip hop music. With lyrics decidedly just as bad as anything shown or portrayed in GTA, these cds go on to sell millions and millions. So content like this selling to the masses is not a big deal or a surprise at all, we've just never seen it in game form. This does have a more realistic tone to it compared to previous GTAs.
It'll also probably be one of the only times unfortunately that a game with such an African-American focus (not just characters, but lifestyle and dialogue, as exaggeratedly violent and gangsta as it may be) will get such a solid gameplay experience. This game is gigantic.
boutrosinit
Street Fighter IV World Champion
jett said:
Right here I imagine, probably bitching about something, posting pictures from images.google with 'PWNED111!!!' all over them, etc...
You know the real reason why? They're excellent games that are a lot of fun to play.jetjevons said:
Look at other similar titles. They don't sell nearly as well, mostly because they straight up suck. GTA3 was and still is an amazing game. SA is such a leap forward in design that it blows my mind every time I play it. Theme and morality aside, these games are amazingly created and designed. I agree that the violence aspect draws in the curious, but that's the real reason why they're so popular.
I think SA is easily the PS2 GOTY, and a challenger for GOTY overall in a very tough year. The scope of the game is just so beyond anything I've seen.