Why all Grand Theft Auto apologias are bullshit

[prog]

Or anyway, most of them; I roll my eyes every time someone puts forth the argument that you only kill hookers and run over little old ladies if you want to play the game that way.

This statement is literally true, but it carries the false implication that the game offers you alternative interactions with these non-player characters. Lookie, here are your two options for communicating with any of the random people walking around the game world:

• Ignore them

• Beat / maim / kill them

That's it. The controller doesn't have a "talk" button, but it has an array of buttons dedicated to punching, shooting, and breaking into things.

Your character in GTA is Frankenstein's monster. He wants to talk to the little girl with the flower, but he just doesn't have the facility, and ends up drowning her instead, because his action-range is so limited. Sad.

Comments

[lediva.livejournal.com]

Don't forget "threaten them", if you just aim your gun at them.

That ended up being one of my criticisms with BioShock as well. I also thought that game had a lot going for it, but yeah, you essentially have "the hurt button" (h/t shatterstripes) and nothing else.

[jazzfish]

Your character in GTA is Frankenstein's monster.

This? Is an awesome metaphor.

[pseudomanitou.livejournal.com]

That is one of the more beautifully stated realities of the game.

But damn, keep it to yourself unless you want some state senator to mangle the meaning behind it for political points.

Hmmm... needs an alternate metaphor for senators that want to protect children from bad influences...

[vvalkyri.livejournal.com]

The thing I thought fascinating is that if one steals a cab one starts running fares, and that if one steals a fire engine one goes around putting out fires. (Long conversation the other day with someone who's into the game.)

[chocorisu.livejournal.com]

You could talk to people in GTA San Andreas by pressing left or right on the d-pad. They took that out in the latest one for some reason. It was funny because you could accept compliments from passers-by if you were wearing a sweet outfit, or insult people back when they swore at you.

But, yes. I'm a little sick of people claiming GTA is anything other than what it is: titillating gamer porn. The whole series is one long joke. I LIKE that, I get the joke, and I don't think it needs excusing.

[radtea.livejournal.com]

This is just a more graphic form of the same issue in a vast number of more traditional games. My kids are big into Twilight Imperium, and one of the things that bugs me about the game is that it's set up to force everyone into an all out galactic war. There just isn't any other option.

I think that's bad gamecraft in TI, and I think it's bad gamecraft in GTA. In both cases the raw complexity of the gaming system could easily sustain alternative goals, but the makers have chosen to rig it for violence. Not that violence isn't fun, but it gets kinda boring after a while.

[mrmorse.livejournal.com]

This is why I'm still thinking that my post on the game may amount to concern trolling.

Even assuming I have a valid point, I may be side-stepping the issue of the violence in the game.

Trying to think about this is continuing to tie me in knots. Maybe I should just let it go.

[keimel.livejournal.com]

PUTTIN ON THE RITZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!

[jonny-law.livejournal.com]

Do you then support the analogous argument that non-combat flight simulators are nothing more than terrorist training tools?

There are two options for interacting with the world in a flight simulator:
- Ignore it
- Crash into it

That's it. The controller has an array of buttons dedicated to ignoring the world (ie. not crashing) which also used to interact with the world (ie. crash).

I would assert that any argument about "exploration", which falls under your broad category of "ignore it", would be equally applicable to flight sims and GTA.