Grand Theft Auto IV

As I write these words, the credits are rolling on Grand Theft Auto: The Ballad of Gay Tony. At this point, I figured I'd write up an analysis of the content similar to what I did with The Lost & Damned. However, after wrapping up the game in a little over a week of on-off playtime, I'm left feeling pretty indifferent about the whole thing, and I'm not sure it warrants such an analysis. Before the hate starts pouring in, I'm not saying the game is bad, not by any means. In some respects, it improves on areas that I wanted to see expanded upon in the main game and the first DLC pack. It's longer than The Lost and Damned by a good couple of hours, as well as boasting more interesting achievements and a more colourful supporting cast, the missions are more varied than the ones in Grand Theft Auto IV, it boasts a hell of a lot of content in the way of side-missions, and the new additions to the game's arsenal are a lot of fun to mess around with (especially the sticky bombs). It also does a pretty good job of tying up all the loose ends left over from the last two games. Yet, in spite of all these improvements, The Ballad of Gay Tony is (in my eyes) the weakest of the trinity by a significant margin.

Before I begin to explain why I feel this way, I think it's important to give you a bit of background information about my relationship with the Grand Theft Auto franchise. I've been playing Grand Theft Auto games since the franchise was confined to two dimensions, and prior to the release of Grand Theft Auto IV last year my favourite game in the series was without doubt Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. The primary reason for this was the perfect balance that game managed to strike between story, gameplay and atmosphere. It boasted an extremely well-realised story driven by arguably the series' best protagonist to date, Tommy Vercetti. It took everything that made the gameplay of Grand Theft Auto III so irresistibly fun and cranked it up a notch, crafting some of the series' most memorable missions in the process. Finally, it dropped all of this amazing content into a fully-explorable recreation of 80s Miami, oozing authenticism in everything from the music to the cars and right down to the hawaiian shirts. It may have been a product of pop culture, but Vice City knew it, embraced it, and was brilliant because of it rather than in spite of it. 
 
Two years after Vice City, Rockstar released a sequel in the form of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, a game that has always struck me as the black sheep of the GTA family. While it was an awesome game with a lot to offer, it seemed to take a step back every time it moved forward. Any potential the game's story had was lost as soon as it was attached to protagonist Carl Johnson, who was incredibly flat and lifeless in comparison to his predecessor. For every logical progression of the series' gameplay (such as the ability to swim), there was an illogical one impairing it (everybody remember the jet pack?). On top of all this, the game had a very schizophrenic atmosphere that seemed to lack focus, particularly after getting out of Los Santos. Carl Johnson doesn't fit in in San Fierro or Las Venturas, because he's never anything more than a boring Los Santos gangster. My experience with San Andreas, while a good one, was definitely harmed by its overambitious scope and lack of focus.

The Ballad of Gay Tony could definitely be described as the 'San Andreas' of the Grand Theft Auto IV trinity in pretty much every aspect, but for slightly different reasons. The story never even reaches the standards of The Lost and Damned, let alone the lofty heights of Grand Theft Auto IV's plot. Luis Lopez is a terrible protagonist, very flatly acted and displaying nothing even remotely resembling a personality. It's only the supporting cast that save the game's main story from flatlining completely, largely thanks to the brilliantly portrayed personas of Tony Prince and Yusuf Amir. The additional gameplay content is an awkward hybrid of stuff that needed to be in Grand Theft Auto IV (drug wars, sticky bombs) and stuff that has no place in the new incarnation of Liberty City (base jumping, triathlon races). The missions start off as diverse and interesting, but from the half-way point onwards every other mission involves parachuting out of a helicopter and it soon gets tiresome. 
 
Ultimately, it's not the atmosphere that's the problem. Liberty City was so well realised and defined in Grand Theft Auto IV and The Lost and Damned that it's impossible to have any complaints about the game's environment not being detailed enough. The primary problem is that most of the new content in The Ballad of Gay Tony doesn't fit in particularly well with the preconceived image of Liberty City. There just isn't a logical place for so much unfocused content in such a focused atmosphere. In the title of this blog I referred to The Ballad of Gay Tony as more of a limerick than a ballad, and I think that analogy stands. It's funny, but it lacks any real substance, and the end result is something that is superficially entertaining, but dramatically hollow.
 
 
Dan 
 
--- 
 
Currently playing - Grand Theft Auto: The Ballad of Gay Tony (X360)

Hey hey, 
I'm a gamer at heart, though lately I've had less and less time to play. With the holiday season coming along, I want to invest some of my free time to play an epically awesome RPG game! I do have some games in mind, all of which I either own or plan to buy. Since my time is at a premium, I will only dedicate time to one game. Problem is, I can't decide because I want to play them all. Here's the list: 
 
Xbox 360: Fallout 3 (own), Mass Effect (own), GTA4 (own) 
Wii: Zelda: Twilight Princess (own) 
PC: Torchlight (plan to buy), Dragon Age: Origins (plan to buy) 
 
Which game should I play?  
All helpful advice is welcomed! 
 
Thanks! 
Aldo

 This week
New Super Mario Bros.
Assassins Creed 2
Ballad of Gay Tony
WRASSLING

New Super Mario Bros. Wii (singleplayer only)

New Super Mario Bros. Wii is a game that I fount difficult to really point out what the developers worked on the most, on one hand, you'd think it was the co-op as that has been what they have been touting the most. On the other, most of the rest of the game is so well done that it leaves you thinking, this game must have been in development a good while. One shocking thing to me is that this game is not for kids. The look of it may be, but the difficulty seems like it would be incredibly daunting to a young child. New Super Mario Bros. Wii looks damn good unless you get real close at the textures, they then look a little janky.
 
One thing you really notice when you boot up New Super Mario Bros. Wii is dude it's a Mario game. From the title screen to the poor save system, can't get much more than this. That's something I have to touch on, the save system is jacked. Nintendo should really step into the 21st century and revamp that save system to where it saves after each level and not after every mid-boss. You don't really have to worry about that if you break the rules and New Super Mario Bros. Wii still allows you to do that. On World 2-3, at the end, it's 1up central if you want. That really isn't a fault because that 'cheat' is very much a part of Mario games and always has been, shouldn't take it out now. The newest adventure for our plumber and friends is a great albeit hard and sometimes frustrating experience that even with it's negatives, I still recommend.

The Ballad of Gay Tony
 
I tried a bit of Gay Tony and I won't get too deep into it because while the characters are all still fantastic, the controls of walking and some shooting feel so outdated, I just couldn't get sucked in like I did with GTA IV. To be honest, I think that if I would have put around 3 hours into it, I would've gotten used to the controls and have been pulled right back in in but with me having the games I have now, I would rather just play them. More than likely though, I'll buy the Episodes From Liberty City collection next year as the world still seems fantastic and is a world that I definitely want to go back into.

Assassins Creed II

I'm one of those rare people that absolutely loved Assassins Creed 1, it's one of my most favorite games of all time so obviously going into Assassins Creed II, I had the feeling that they was gonna change it so much to the point where it detracts from some of the greatness of the first. Luckily, that is far from what happens. The main character, Ezio, is an extremely loveable character. You know why he's an assassin and you know why he has no problem with killing many people in his way. It may be his look, it may be the way they actually delve deep into Ezio's background to tell you pretty much how his life has went, or it may be his cockiness but I love Ezio and I wouldn't be shocked if he gets my best new character of this year. The original platforming and combat is the main things I did not want Ubisoft to change, and they do slightly but they don't destroy the previous assets, they add on to it. You can still press X and counter an attack with a brutal finishing move but now they've beefed it up to where you can disarm enemies (as well as do different attacks) and get weapons such as a huge ass hammer or a War-Axe type thing. Which when you get them, you get brand new execution styles. All the weapons, which you can buy more from a Blacksmith, add so much more depth to this already fantastic game.

One thing almost everyone complained about in the last game is the repetition and they fix that fully while still not fleeing from the point of Assassins Creed, the assassinations. You still get that kind of nervous type feeling before going into an assassination, which is weird as it is pretty easy to assassinate a target, it's as simple as pressing X with the Hidden Blade, but something about the tension in the air is so engrossing. Every game has it's problems and of course, Assassins Creed II has some. The environments look a little ugly when you get up close to them (Similar to New Super Mario Bros. Wii) and I've run into a few woes with the platforming although it is usually silky smooth. I think that even if you hated Assassins Creed 1, you'll love this one. It's shocking how they changed it from Assassins Creed 1 so much but not to the point where it does a dis-service to huge fans of the first. A buy for everyone.

TV
Saturday Night Live- January Jones: B-
Family Guy- Brian Gets a Brand New Bag: B-
Dexter- Road Kill: B
Family Guy- Quagmire's Baby: A
Modern Family- Great Expectations: A-
South Park- Pee: A
Survivor- The Day Of Reckoning: A
The Office- Shareholders Meeting: B
Glee- Ballad: A- This would have easily gotten an A+ but the story of

Mr. Schue/Rachel was just bad.

Movies

Drag Me To Hell: A
Farmhouse: C+
Wrong Turn 3: D-: The movie was horrible but if I graded it on sheer
entertainment value, it'd be a B. I recommend to anybody that likes
dumb horror movies that don't take themselves seriously whatsoever.

I am actually going to post my wrestling shenanigans here, I will keep them completely seperate as I'm sure most of the people reading this don't give two shits about wrestling so feel free to skip it if you like, I will still love you.

Wrestling!

Survivor Series predictions! Since this is Survivor Series and there is a lot of tag matches, I'll predict the order the people will be eliminated because I hate myself.

Team Miz vs. Team Morrison:
1st. Jack Swagger
2nd. Drew McIntyre
3rd. Finlay
4th. Shelton Benjamin
5th. Matt Hardy
6th. Dolph Ziggler
7th. Evan Bourne
8th. Sheamus
9th. Morrison
WINNER: Team Miz

Batista def. Rey Mysterio- Could care less, neither of the wrestlers entertain me much but I could see Batista winning because of Rey's bum knee.

Team McCool vs. Team Mickie
1st. Eve Torres
2nd. Jillian Hall
3rd. Layla
4th. Kelly Kelly
5th. Gail Kim
6th. Alicia Fox
7th. Beth Phoenix
8th. Melina
9th. Michelle McCool
WINNER: Team Mickie

Team Orton vs. Team Kingston- Ted Dibiase Jr. swerve time.
1st. William Regal
2nd. Mark Henry
3rd. R-Truth
4th. CM Punk
5th. Christian
6th. MVP
7th. Cody Rhodes
8th. Randy Orton
9th. Ted Dibiase
WINNER: Team Kofi

Triple Threat World Heavyweight Championship Match: Chris Jericho def. Big Show The Undertaker- Would not be shocked to have 'Taker walk out the champ but I'm hoping and praying for Jericho to get the title.

Triple Threat WWE Championship Match: Triple H def. John Cena and Shawn Michaels- Hopefully this ends DX and Michaels and Trips can start a feud because they need one.

Next Week!
...ummm...yep. TV?

And boom, done with week 8, any questions or comments, post below!

Until next time,

Güle güle!

Let's take a stroll outside the box.

 Videogames, interactive entertainment, is about consequence. What happens if I do this? For me, videogames are a place where i can flirt with reality. In a world which has been designed to be experienced by a player, every exploratory poke is a reward. I want to know what happens next. It's about asking questions and getting answers.
 

Mattbodega confused the hell out of me

 by rambling about illusions of reality within videogames. I understood the point that was being made, I just didn't see why it was important. I came away with some conclusions that are probably completely unrelated: As long as the illusion of freedom is being maintained, players are free to continue with their linear adventure unconcerned. Whilst the potential for exploration exists, the player need not worry about physically experiencing it. It's almost like... peace of mind. It's not wanting to reveal how linear a game is because that would shatter the illusion of freedom when you find out that it is inevitably a lot smaller than the games designers would have you perceive. This is why modelers are employed to create entire cities that serve only as a backdrop to a disproportionate chunk of gameplay. The implications that a world exists are enough to convince a player that he or she does not need to explore it, though many would probably leap at the opportunity. This desire to explore is another driving force that spurs a player to... well... keep playing?
 
A while back my housemate bought Grand Theft Auto 4 on PC, played a few levels and then got distracted by something else. I don't think there was any particular reason why, or if there was then he didn't tell me. He's on the same university course as me, he seems more interested in technical prowess than a gripping storyline - he's also the kind of cynical bastard that, if handed a working PC game, will spend the next 3 hours trying to break it. I guess Liberty City didn't have apparent rewards that justified it's exploration. He saw me playing Ballad Of Gay Tony in the living room the other day and sat there watching for a few minutes. Totally unimpressed by the gimmicky dancing minigames and crappy sex animations. However after cruising through a typical run-drive-shoot mission I was dumped back onto the street with a complete lack of wanted level. It was one of those weird moments in GTA4 where you have just finished a mission and aren't sure what to do next, so you idly start picking of pedestrians with an AK just to pass the time. Anyways, I wandered over to an ATM to check my balance - my housemate freaked. He didn't know the game had working ATM's. The illusion of freedom had suddenly and randomly been reconstructed. He wanted to know what else was possible, and immediately rushed off to experiment. Last time I saw him he was skimming through the dozens of Krapea web-pages on the fake GTA internet. 
 
When something does what it is supposed to in a videogame, it's comforting. When it goes beyond that, offering new and exciting results - in my opinion that's what makes a great game. It makes me want to explore and find out what else is possible. It gives a world depth. It doesn't even have to be complicated. It can be as simple as a few lines of dialogue or a scenic backdrop - a world crafted to give the illusion of being much bigger than the sum of it's parts. It can be as mundane as different death animations depending on where you shoot your enemy. Look at Street Fighter 4; The street fighter world has been expertly fleshed out, but you only ever get to experience a microscopic 2D chunk. Your impact on the world is seen by the reactions of the characters in the background, the effects of your attacks on the environments, and the bizarre cut-scenes that break up your arcade adventure. The importance here is that you still think of it as a world, not just a stage.
 
Thanks For Reading 
Love Sweep

I nearly posted this in someone else's thread, but it ran too long to justify muddying up the issue with my opinion, so it became the subject of my first blog. Let me say that I am not a blogger, have no real experience writing these things, and might offend some of you with what I have to say... but I have to say it.
 
Every time a new piece of info drops about MW2, I end up reading hundreds, in some cases thousands of posts from people who are angry and vow not to buy the game, or start a petition to get IW to change something. Very few level heads seem to be prevailing on this issue, so I'm sure that I'm setting out flame bait for someone. Oh well.
 
As far as the F.A.G.S. controversy, domestic terrorism, and possible state violence portrayed in MW2, let me just say this: controversy sells games. It's free marketing for the title, plain and simple. Look at every GTA release, for example. There's a new controversy over something specific, along with a lot of general bashing of some of the most basic and fundamental aspects of the game. Yet no grassroots movement, picket, petition, or bellyaching by any news outlet has ever caused a significant number of people to refrain from purchasing the titles. In fact, in most cases, sales increase with each major iteration, although part of this is definitely due to wider distribution across more platforms than the title was previously availble on. 
 
For every news story run about the supposed "controversy" (which is almost a marketing term in itself nowadays), there's a contingent of people who never heard of the series before, but will definitely buy it after hearing that it goes against convention. For every parent that says they won't buy the game for their kid, there's another parent who laughs at the idea that a video game will turn their children into mass murderers, and chooses to excerise their right to decide what they allow their children access to, even minors. Now I wouldn't let a 10 year old play a GTA game, but I wouldn't have a problem getting it for my 15-16 year old if he was responsible in the ways that mattered. The only real debate that holds water is whether this could be viewed as part of a pattern of irresponsible parenting that might contribute to a child becoming a criminal. But, as in many things, it's so much easier to pin blame on one small item and evade or disregard personal responsibility. Intelligent, responsible people aren't fooled, they know that it's a parent's job to raise their child, and it's a person's job to conduct themselves responsibly and maturely as a member of society.
 
I'd be willing to bet that IW knows this, and willingly allowed the F.A.G.S. controversy to play out, since it would undoubtedly garner attention from media outlets that wouldn't give the game any real mention otherwise. If you think that the Activision/IW marketing department didn't realize what their acronym spelled out, or didn't consider the impact it would have on folks' opinion of the game, I assure you you're quite mistaken. They were counting on the fact that someone, somewehere would turn it into the next big "taboo" game out there, and in turn, it would bring in more new customers than it would alienate people. Judging from the responses I've read across the internet, it seems that this isn't too far off from most people's reaction. I've seen plenty of folks who say that they thought the move was in poor taste, but they'll still buy the game. Guess what? IW just turned you into a spokesperson.

As far as the myriad differences to be found in the PC version of the game, compared to its predecessors, this whole thing seems to me like the indie band that goes mainstream and changes its sound so their music is more accessible to a wider audience. Suddenly the "hardcore" fans of that band get all butt-hurt and start accusing them of abandoning the fans that pushed the group to stardom in the first place. The band doesn't really care all that much, they always wanted to play to a wider audience, that's why they chose to go mainstream.
 
Same with IW. CoD grew up on the PC, but it was always stuck in the WWII setting, so those who loved it purely for the gameplay forgave the dated feel of the game and 50-year old weaponry, while those who just wanted to shoot an M4 or an MP5 in a quality game never understood what the hoopla was all about. Out comes MW, and suddenly a MUCH wider audience (including myself) realized that IW knows how to make a high quality shooter, they just kept that ability hidden behind a WWII veneer that put many people off. Add to that the difference in userbase between the PC and consoles, and it became obvious where IW was going to make more of their money back in the future: on the console versions. So they gimped the PC version, for better or worse, and now everyone cries foul.
 
Remember: viable business strategies will almost always alienate the smallest portion of any company's userbase in favor of wider distribution and larger profit margins. In this case, IW is betting that the name alone will push the distribution, and the feature set of the PC has been slimmed down to save on production costs and haxxability so they can charge for DLC map packs and do less overall programming. That's the price we pay for making the CoD franchise into such a gaming juggernaut. It's sad to see so many people upset over so great a game, but I highly doubt that this furor will put any appreciable dent into IW's profits on this game. If you're really that upset about it, boycott the franchise or at least play on the console version and find out what it's like getting headshots without a mouse and keyboard. Sorry.
 
I, for one, am looking immensely forward to fragging (and getting fragged by) the lot of you online. This game is going to be phenomenal; maybe not the BEST GAME EVAR!!!!1!!, maybe not even GOTY, but there is very little disagreement that CoD is one of the premiere franchises when it comes to quality FPS games on the market right now. I suggest those who have continued reservations or complaints get used to that fact, and either get on board or find another game to play. Making yourself the vocal minority just because you're unhappy with the product does you no service, makes you look immature, and only alienates you from what will be one of the biggest-selling games of all time. 
 
Thanks for reading.

Gay Tony is the best thing Rockstar has done with Grand Theft Auto IV, without question in my mind. Having beat it and done most of the side stuff, I feel like I can finally elucidate exactly why I enjoyed it so much.
 

1. 

    Luis doesn't care, man
   Luis Lopez is the most unapologetic protagonist yet. Where Niko stretched my limits when he would complain about killing right before he went on a murderous rampage, Luis simply doesn't care. Johnny suffered from the same sort of reluctant hero syndrome as Niko, although to a lesser degree. Luis, when being told he is sensitive, responds: "Not really bro, I like killing people for money". It's refreshing to have such honestly from a protagonist- Luis' views are more aligned with what the player wants to do.
2. No slogging through slow beginning parts before you get to the good stuff. I enjoyed GTA IV's slow burn at the beginning as much as anyone, but Gay Tony does itself a favor by excising that fat and cutting straight to the meat. Early on you'll steal a military-grade helicopter from an arms dealer's pleasure yacht, and things only get more intense from there.
3. It finds a unique niche within Liberty City. While obviously Gay Tony still deals with crime in the same way the other two Liberty City stories did, the focus on nightclubs and the downtown area really helps differentiate it. Partying in Tony's nightclubs is unlike anything else available in GTA IV.
4. 

    Yes, that's a gold helicopter
   The satire and the seriousness are more evenly balanced. GTA has always been an uneasy mixture between a satire of America (ignoring London) and a serious portrayal of the urban crime environment. GTA IV slid way down towards being much more serious, as the guys at Rockstar flexed their storytelling muscles. I wasn't a huge fan myself, but some others were. This episode gives a bit more of the satire and takes itself a little less seriously, and I think that makes it vastly more enjoyable. Simply by having to support gameplay, GTA will never be able to tell a serious, realistic criminal story like The Wire or The Godfather, simply because huge cop-killing rampages simply don't happen in real life. It's nice to see Rockstar not try and have a bit more fun.
5. The missions are simply more creative. A lot of GTA IV's missions simply boiled down to going to point A, shooting some guys, chasing a getaway car to point B, killing those dudes, then losing the cops. Gay Tony does this a few times, but they are the exception rather than the rule here. From train heists to torturing pesky bloggers, Gay Tony mixes things up in a good way. Plus, you know... Base Jumping.

I always enjoy my time with GTA IV, but Gay Tony was my favorite out of three stories. In addition to the things listed above, it was really cool to see all the places the stories crossed over in this final episode. Obviously all three of the stories come together at the diamond deal in the Libertonian, but they cross in other places, and that was really cool to see, especially as Gay Tony closes the only major hanging plot thread from Niko's story while also telling the neat compact tale of Gay Tony and Luis. Pretty much everything else is improved also- the weaponry is fantastic, the new vehicles are great, the side activities have been changed for the better, and you can now easily replay missions. Put simply: it was a great time, well worth my money and yours.

Microsoft deal is over. 
 
What was it, 50 million dollars for, let's face it, a timely exclusive?  Is it timely or not?
 
You guys think we will see those 2 stories on the PS3?  I think we will... in less then a year.

With Gay Tony coming out today, I thought about giving the original GTA4 another try. I bought it on release day, played it a bit and while being kinda impressed for a while, I never really grew too fond of it. Some frustrating missions made it quite unenjoyable back then, so I stopped and moved on. Well, things are working out a bit better this time, as I was able to progress quite a bit more, but I can't help myself - GTA4 is kinda dated now. Compared to Uncharted 2, the presentation just isn't that exciting anymore - the character faces look not very real, animation is puppetlike and the textures look compressed. The clunky controls aren't any help either. But what I am missing most are the checkpoints. It's so damn annoying and frustrating to fail at the very end of a mission, and then after restarting having to do everything again, including the driving to the target. That's just damn tedious and not very fun.
 
I'm not getting any expansions for GTA until I finished it. I'm pretty certain that if I can't at least complete the main story, I'm not ready for more.