GTA V

[Frenetic Pony]

Considering that he wrote an important and impressive chapter in his book about his long and problematic relationship with Grand Theft Auto IV, I'm pretty sure Tom Bissell isn't just dogging for ad money. This is a weird accusation that gets thrown at all of gaming criticism's best and most controversial writers. It feels immature, to say the least.

 

"Best game writers" I've seen enough to say I don't care for that guy at all. It's entertainment other people may want in and of themselves. But it has little to do with the actual, game itself. That thing's not a review that helps anyone decide, it's an entirely different form of entertainment. The kind of thing I absolutely hated in literature class, "analysis of the literature" and other stuff that didn't have anything whatsoever to do with enjoying the book and more to do with phantasms called up by people's own imagination. It's sitting in English class writing about what the damned green light meant in The Great Gatsby.

 

If you want to enjoy him and stuff like that I'm not complaining. If you think his vague analogies and long winded writing have anything to do with actually playing games for 99.999999% of people out there then I don't know what to say. I was mostly just reminded of how much I hated literature classes and the self important attitude therein that I dropped English as a major.

[Gormongous]

"Best game writers" I've seen enough to say I don't care for that guy at all. It's entertainment other people may want in and of themselves. But it has little to do with the actual, game itself. That thing's not a review that helps anyone decide, it's an entirely different form of entertainment. The kind of thing I absolutely hated in literature class, "analysis of the literature" and other stuff that didn't have anything whatsoever to do with enjoying the book and more to do with phantasms called up by people's own imagination. It's sitting in English class writing about what the damned green light meant in The Great Gatsby.

 

If you want to enjoy him and stuff like that I'm not complaining. If you think his vague analogies and long winded writing have anything to do with actually playing games for 99.999999% of people out there then I don't know what to say. I was mostly just reminded of how much I hated literature classes and the self important attitude therein that I dropped English as a major.

 

If we're just trading in opinions (and not the actual merits of Bissell's writing) it's my opinion that your attitude towards criticism is crass and narrow-minded. It seems as though games, if not all forms of media, are the just sum of their parts to you and therefore discussing the experience of enjoying them in anything less that utterly concrete terms of pleasure or displeasure is sophistry. Needless to say, I disagree with you and I don't doubt many others here do as well. The last thing I need, as a living and thinking being, is another "ten out of ten stars, a great time for all" consumer review that applies the same standards of analysis to games as to a vacuum cleaner or a ride at Six Flags.

[darthbator]

I think lots of modern game opinion pieces greatly over estimate the social impact and responsibility of video games. While I do think that's an important thing, and something that has been a catalyst for evolving the medium, I still think that we're in a place where even the "best" of gaming isn't going to hold up well to the type of deeply cerebral analysis some very smart people are turning towards them.

 

I don't really know how to best exemplify this idea without sounding like an ass... Remember how over the last few years it was super in for a violent shooter to comment on it's own violent nature? Almost daring you to feel bad about the fun you where having blowing people away. I feel like most game writing has REALLY latched onto that core idea and has exploded it outwards. The truth of the matter is most games are about dumb stuff. I'm willing to take it to an extreme and say that 99.9% of "objectively well designed" games are about dumb crap, have no social value, and are simply fun for their base mechanics or systemic interactions.

 

Not a lot of people are going to click on something like http://versus-software.com/blog/super-mario-bros-game-design-analysis/'>this and read through it. Even though I feel something like that is MUCH more elemental to what makes a game objectively "good" (enjoyed by people of all races, colors, and creeds for it's mechanical merits) then most of the kind of "games journalism" we read today. We've really gone through a change where games journalism has transitioned away from being done like electronic product reviews (people have largely reviewed games like stereos for most of their existence IMO).

 

I find a lot of this new wave video game stuff to be interesting yet confusing. It's all extremely socially relevant, which is neat. However I don't think that games criticism has ever been less about video games. I think that's actually very telling...

[Argobot]

It makes me sad that you have such a low view of games' social value. Even if the majority of games are about dumb stuff that doesn't mean they have no social value, and it certainly doesn't mean that they have no impact on society. Most dumb things have a huge impact on our culture and society, which is why criticizing and analyzing them is so important.

 

But I do agree that games criticism oftentimes ignores the design side of games, or gives too much credit to developer intent. It'd be great if mechanics were given equal weight as story.

[plasticflesh]

I've just noticed GTAV's Snapmatic photos are available in the social club. Here's my most interesting one...

 

 

Here's an animation bug of Michael's wife coming home with shopping bags. Except the bags alone were stuck in a loop trying to get through the front door.

[clyde]

I enjoyed reading this piece about GTA 5. It brought up an interesting perspective that I had not considered.

http://www.polygon.com/2013/9/26/4773042/grand-theft-auto-5-waterboarding-torture

[feelthedarkness]

In David Foster Wallace's article on David Lynch he talks about the relative morality Lynch employs, and about film as a domineering form. 

 

MOVIES ARE AN authoritarian medium. They vulnerabilize you and then dominate you. Part of the magic of going to a movie is surrendering to it, letting it dominate you. The sitting in the dark, the looking up, the tranced distance from the screen, the being able to see the people on the screen without being seen by the people on the screen, the people on the screen being so much bigger than you: prettier than you, more compelling than you, etc. Film's overwhelming power isn't news. But different kinds of movies use this power in different ways. Art film is essentially teleological; it tries in various ways to "wake the audience up" or render us more "conscious."

 

I can't help but think how different video games are and how that has shaped the outlook and attitudes of the people who play them. Essentially uglier, and to quote leigh alexander "about feeling powerful and you getting your way." Game people are not only resistant to criticism, but the idea of criticism. We see critical reviews and articles dismissed as just "trying to get attention." (or to quote Homer Simpson "i say the phone company made this film ON PURPOSE") Games have trained us not to just watch, or be told what to think. 

[Zeusthecat]

In David Foster Wallace's article on David Lynch he talks about the relative morality Lynch employs, and about film as a domineering form. 

MOVIES ARE AN authoritarian medium. They vulnerabilize you and then dominate you. Part of the magic of going to a movie is surrendering to it, letting it dominate you. The sitting in the dark, the looking up, the tranced distance from the screen, the being able to see the people on the screen without being seen by the people on the screen, the people on the screen being so much bigger than you: prettier than you, more compelling than you, etc. Film's overwhelming power isn't news. But different kinds of movies use this power in different ways. Art film is essentially teleological; it tries in various ways to "wake the audience up" or render us more "conscious."

This is an interesting perspective but I don't know that I agree with it entirely. What about shitty movies? I think a film completely loses it's "overwhelming power" when it sucks. If I end up going to a crappy movie I start thinking about how terrible the acting is, how stupid the story is, and I start whispering sarcastic things to the person who came to see the movie with me (usually my wife) which completely breaks the power of the movie in my opinion. I don't think film has any power in this case, especially when a movie is so bad that you get up and leave. Then again, maybe the general effectiveness of film as a domineering form just depends on the person.

And is this perspective necessarily unique to film and not to all storytelling mediums? I kind of feel like the same could be said for books or maybe even music.

 

I can't help but think how different video games are and how that has shaped the outlook and attitudes of the people who play them. Essentially uglier, and to quote leigh alexander "about feeling powerful and you getting your way." Game people are not only resistant to criticism, but the idea of criticism. We see critical reviews and articles dismissed as just "trying to get attention." (or to quote Homer Simpson "i say the phone company made this film ON PURPOSE") Games have trained us not to just watch, or be told what to think.

Again, I don't know that I agree entirely. I think there is an element of truth to what you're saying. I mean, I sometimes have the same gut reaction where I think it is ridiculous to have in depth criticism of certain types of games. But, again I feel like I see the same kind of reactions to criticism of movies. I've read the comments for more than a few movie reviews where people seem to be just as volatile as the video game community. Maybe there is just an overall higher percentage of immature kids that pay attention to game reviews than movies have.

[Patrick R]

So I haven't been playing this game but I've been watching

and JESUS is there a lot of chatter. It feels like every mission has 10 minutes of meaningless yapping as you drive somewhere. It's shocking how bad the dialogue can be written. I haven't played the series since San Andreas, but it seems like it's only gotten worse.

[Ucantalas]

I do have to agree, the characters in GTAV NEVER SHUT UP. It drives me insane sometimes, especially in missions where you have to follow another vehicle. Every five seconds will be "Hey, you gotta get closer!", "Hey, don't lose that car!", "Hey, you suck at driving!"

[feelthedarkness]

This is an interesting perspective but I don't know that I agree with it entirely. What about shitty movies? I think a film completely loses it's "overwhelming power" when it sucks. If I end up going to a crappy movie I start thinking about how terrible the acting is, how stupid the story is, and I start whispering sarcastic things to the person who came to see the movie with me (usually my wife) which completely breaks the power of the movie in my opinion. I don't think film has any power in this case, especially when a movie is so bad that you get up and leave. Then again, maybe the general effectiveness of film as a domineering form just depends on the person.

And is this perspective necessarily unique to film and not to all storytelling mediums? I kind of feel like the same could be said for books or maybe even music.

 

I think the mechanism of how the idealized film operates is the same, just the actual effectiveness varies from film to film. In the actually essay he breaks down a little more. Books are less passive, both in terms of physical scale as it doesn't tower over you, force you to gaze up into it, as well as requiring more focused and direct action.

[clyde]

So I haven't been playing this game but I've been watching

and JESUS is there a lot of chatter. It feels like every mission has 10 minutes of meaningless yapping as you drive somewhere. It's shocking how bad the dialogue can be written. I haven't played the series since San Andreas, but it seems like it's only gotten worse.

I think Deagon Age: Origins did this very well. I think it may be that I enjoyed those characters more and therefore, the conversations between them.

[Irishjohn]

I think Deagon Age: Origins did this very well. I think it may be that I enjoyed those characters more and therefore, the conversations between them.

 

I misread this as Deacon Age: Origins, which would be a completely different type of game.

[eot]

can't help but think how different video games are and how that has shaped the outlook and attitudes of the people who play them. Essentially uglier, and to quote leigh alexander "about feeling powerful and you getting your way." Game people are not only resistant to criticism, but the idea of criticism. We see critical reviews and articles dismissed as just "trying to get attention." (or to quote Homer Simpson "i say the phone company made this film ON PURPOSE") Games have trained us not to just watch, or be told what to think. 

Just because games do power fantasies a lot doesn't mean that's what they do best. Take Amnesia, coudn't you say that game is about disempowerment? Most of my favourite games are about feeling isolated or vulnerable, the good Tomb Raider games, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., DayZ etc. Even combat focused games don't have to be power fantasies, I'd say Dark Souls makes you feel vulnerable even when you win, like you just barely made it out of a situation.

[feelthedarkness]

Even if it's scary, it's ultimately a system you control, where the dominance and authorial experience has shifted from the director to you. You're the director, you point the camera. I probably didn't express it too well, but I'm just thinking about the fundamental difference as compared to Wallace's essay on David Lynch. 

[Dewar]

That's more-or-less the argument that Ebert had against video games being art. There are some really good games out there that know just how to get you to look in the right direction to see something awesome. I think that's what seperates the quality games from the pretty good games. The directorial skill to make the player look where you want without using the Gears of War style "press this button to look at the awesome thing" or even worse, taking camera control away entirely.

[plasticflesh]

Michael's son is constantly making snide remarks against 'linear narrative'. Calling GTAV non-linear is partially a misnomer to me, due to GTAV's missions occurring sequentially with minimal branching and scripted cutscenes filled with motion capture and camera cuts, and its locked down locations of Strangers missions. It feels like very traditional linear plotting to me in those ways. I have a counter-productively tight definition of 'non-linear narrative'. AAA requirements for voice acting and motion capture trumps true (or at least truthier) non-linearity as far as I'm concerned. What I'm asking for basically doesn't or cannot exist, or if it does it's not in a form as easy to swallow as GTAV. I mean not even Dwarf Fortress or CK2 are non-linear in this thought, there are the linear goals of not dying. It's a semantic quagmire.

 

In other news, I've become consumed with the following this thread of GtaV:

The esoteric puzzles in the game involving UFOs and secret maps. Here's a disorganized heap of related musings, http://www.reddit.com/r/chiliadmystery/

[clyde]

I was with you until you started talking about what you are asking for. GTA story missions are linear, but between missions it is a systems driven, emergent game. I think this staggered mixture is often what people complain about with all the ludo-narrative dissonance criticisms.

But what type of non-linear gameplay are you looking for that wouldn't include Dwarf Fortress or CK2? They aren't linear because you have to stay alive. That would make life linear. Having to stay alive is just survival-bias. If you aren't alive, you aren't playing the game anymore.

[Zeusthecat]

How is the goal of not dying linear? Isn't that a totally separate thing?

 

I think if a game has a story it is inherently going to have some level of linearity unless the story is somehow entirely systems based and unstructured. If a story is going to have a set beginning and end there is pretty much always going to be linearity to a degree.

 

I think Minecraft is a perfect example of a completely non-linear game (or as close to completely non-linear as you can get).

[plasticflesh]

I'm very sorry my poorly construed argument was not entirely thought out. My greatest error is as what you point out, that I construe death states as a end to narrative and therefore considering it linear is entirely wrong.

 

What brought me to that ill-thought conclusion was trying to think of non-linear experiences that are not simulations or sandboxes. Simulations or sandboxes like Minecraft, Kerbal, The Sims, and Dwarf Fortress to certain extent. This is contrasted with the highly dynamic quasi-non-linear but very guided and objective based rogue-like experiences of the Rogue, Nethack, Spelunky, FTL, Indiana's Desktop Adventures etc. It's a very narrative based game, and while the little details change every time, they are basically on narrative-rails.

 

But you two are very much correct, I ended that thought on a flat note. I am talking in circles going nowhere reiterating things other people have spent thought about more coherently with better effect. I'll try to construe my arguments more effectively

[Zeusthecat]

Dude, no apologies necessary. I think you still made a decent point. I just disagree about the linear aspect of not dying.

[clyde]

I parked my food-truck in multiple (great) locations. No one would buy my tacos and I couldn't figure out how to serve out of the window or even stand up in the truck. I walked around kicking the truck, thinking that something might happen. All that happened was that my crowd became frightened.

TL,DR: the game is broken.

 

[clyde]

I enjoy documenting moments of socio-economic juxtapositions in Los Santos.

 

[toblix]

wow helicopter controls like shittttttt

[melmer]

8/10