GTA V to Feature Three Different Main Characters

#201 Posted by Rekt_Hed (847 posts) -

@JeanLuc said:

@CL60

Lol at people seriously complaining about there being no female lead.

Seriously? Fuckin' hell, the internet is getting more and more whiny as time goes on.

I'm just disappointed. Having a female protagonist could open up some unique, interesting storylines.

Maybe you find out one of the 3 dudes........ wasn't born a dude! *GASP*!

#202 Posted by voltronadactylsaurusrex (69 posts) -

Where in the fuck did this rumor of a female protagonist being in GTAV come from? There was no reason to speculate that there was going to be a female protagonist. In the only piece of info we had about the game being the first trailer they released where did it even give a hint of a female protagonist. This female protagonist shit came from baseless speculation.

#203 Posted by Wheatley117 (17 posts) -

I think the roles will be pretty game-stereotypical. Left guy: Psychopath Mid: Good guy, had personal problems. Right guy: Smart and annoying. Just taking a guess

#204 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

This is fucking awesome news.

#205 Posted by sublime90 (530 posts) -
#206 Posted by Hunter5024 (5601 posts) -

@Shaanyboi said:

And all three will be unlikable cunts who have no consistency between their character motivations and their actions.

Because, y'know, Rockstar are such brilliant writers....

Let's not discourage some of the only people in the industry who actually try to engage the player in interesting narratives.

#207 Posted by Shaanyboi (1282 posts) -

@Microshock said:

@Lucidlife said:

Wonder if GB will embarrass itself yet again with another 5/5 score for a GTA game. Probably.

GTA IV wasn't deserving of a 5/5? With it's amazing world, deep single player, and fun multiplayer? Really, that's not worth a 5?

Shhhh.

Nothing about the single player was "deep". It was written like garbage, controlled like crap, and filled with the same dumb missions every open-world game regurgitated time and time again up to that point.

#208 Posted by MjHealy (1839 posts) -

Patrick has said on here that the DLC was better than the main game. Nuh-uh, sir! A case can be made for The Last and Damned but Ballad of Gay Tony? Way too hit and miss.

Otherwise, with GTA V, colour me ecstatic.

#209 Posted by themangalist (1731 posts) -

@jeffrud said:

@themangalist said:

@Christoffer said:

moral entrepreneurs

If you came up with that, you should pat yourself on the back. Stonking brilliant.

Not sure if sarcasm, but the term is coined by American sociologist Howard S. Becker. My sociology studies are killing me these days, so sorry for throwing out words that don't belong on a gaming forum.

#210 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

Any word on 3 player co-op. would be cool if you could pick your character and a friend doing one of the characters missions. And the missions don't even have to be co-op just in the same world, you could be a t the beach gym and you see your mate roll past with 20 cops chasing him.

#211 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@Coafi said:

Will any of the main characters have a cousin that will constantly invite me to bowl? If not, I'm out.

What about if the tennis mini game had all the characters from rock star table tennis?

#212 Edited by TheKing (828 posts) -

@Shaanyboi said:

@Microshock said:

@Lucidlife said:

Wonder if GB will embarrass itself yet again with another 5/5 score for a GTA game. Probably.

GTA IV wasn't deserving of a 5/5? With it's amazing world, deep single player, and fun multiplayer? Really, that's not worth a 5?

Shhhh.

Nothing about the single player was "deep". It was written like garbage, controlled like crap, and filled with the same dumb missions every open-world game regurgitated time and time again up to that point.

What? You have to be joking. I know it's internet cool to hate on GTA IV now, but come on. GTA IV was an amazing game when in came out.

#213 Posted by PhilESkyline (774 posts) -

@Aegon said:

The guy in the middle looks like Diggle from Arrow.

I just started watching that show today. It's pretty good!

#214 Posted by Landon (4133 posts) -

@mikeeegeee: No, it's some guy named Trevor.

#215 Posted by jorbear (2517 posts) -

Guys I still like GTA IV. Sorry.

#216 Edited by Shaanyboi (1282 posts) -

@TheKing

Yeah, no. I'm not joking. GTA4 was filled with an unearned self-importance and REALLY poorly done... uhh... what I assume it think is "social commentary", all around one clunky ass game.

#217 Posted by dezvous (540 posts) -

@TheKing said:

@Shaanyboi said:

@Microshock said:

@Lucidlife said:

Wonder if GB will embarrass itself yet again with another 5/5 score for a GTA game. Probably.

GTA IV wasn't deserving of a 5/5? With it's amazing world, deep single player, and fun multiplayer? Really, that's not worth a 5?

Shhhh.

Nothing about the single player was "deep". It was written like garbage, controlled like crap, and filled with the same dumb missions every open-world game regurgitated time and time again up to that point.

What? You have to be joking. I know it's internet cool to hate on GTA IV now, but come on. GTA IV was an amazing game when in came out.

Not that I disagree with a 5/5 score for the game, but it still bothers me that during that years GOTY deliberations it and MGS4 were in a heated debate for the crowning achievement and it seems like it is dangerously close to going to MGS4. Then they go on a break half way through, and suddenly the general mood of it has shifted to GTA4.

I wished we could have heard what went on during that break.

For the record, I did not think GTA4 was amazing when it came out, but I don't hate it. None of the GTA games capture my attention long enough to beat them.

#218 Edited by algertman (852 posts) -

@doobie said:

@algertman said:

Great. Now it's 3x more boring than IV.

3x more reason for you to just no play it then. why would you play a game you find boring?

Because III, VC, and SA were amazing games and game reviewers busting a nut over how amazing GTAIV was. Then IV came out and I played it. Horrible game. They took out everything that made GTA great and replaced it "look how serious our game is" bullshit.

#219 Posted by GunsAreDrawn (319 posts) -

I was thinking about female protagonists in GTA a few weeks ago, I think if anything it will be a long way off. I also think playing as a female would effect sales because so many younger kids seem to play it (most people at my school had it when they were about 11, some people had GTA 2 when they were 8). I think too many people like the idea of being a bad ass so it wouldnt work, but I think a female protagonist would be really interesting.

#220 Posted by Shaanyboi (1282 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@Shaanyboi said:

And all three will be unlikable cunts who have no consistency between their character motivations and their actions.

Because, y'know, Rockstar are such brilliant writers....

Let's not discourage some of the only people in the industry who actually try to engage the player in interesting narratives.

...some of the only people that try? Dude, what...? Do... do you play many games? Because the writing in Rockstar's games is average videogame crap at best. They're filled with bad caricatures, player action completely contrasting to the gameplay, characters spouting their REALLY poorly thought-out bullshit philosophies to you when you hang out with them (and without provocation, i might add), and protagonists that are nothing more than glorified errand boys.

The praise Rockstar gets for its writing is either some kind of widespread ironic joke that I'm not in on, or people have REALLY low standards for game storytelling... Bully was atleast KINDA entertaining, but that's about it.

#221 Posted by mushroommachine (22 posts) -

I still play GTA IV once in a while, its just a fun game to fuck around with.

#222 Posted by captain_clayman (3320 posts) -

@Jace said:

@PhilESkyline said:

Rockstar is just putting an end to 3 great GTA stories!

Cool, but it can't be right. Tommy would have to be way older than CJ or the GTA 3 guy (Claude)?

tommy is really old if that is tommy. in the original trailer he seemed to be at least middle aged.

#223 Posted by Hunter5024 (5601 posts) -

@Shaanyboi said:

@Hunter5024 said:

@Shaanyboi said:

And all three will be unlikable cunts who have no consistency between their character motivations and their actions.

Because, y'know, Rockstar are such brilliant writers....

Let's not discourage some of the only people in the industry who actually try to engage the player in interesting narratives.

...some of the only people that try? Dude, what...? Do... do you play many games? Because the writing in Rockstar's games is average videogame crap at best. They're filled with bad caricatures, player action completely contrasting to the gameplay, characters spouting their REALLY poorly thought-out bullshit philosophies to you when you hang out with them (and without provocation, i might add), and protagonists that are nothing more than glorified errand boys.

The praise Rockstar gets for its writing is either some kind of widespread ironic joke that I'm not in on, or people have REALLY low standards for game storytelling... Bully was atleast KINDA entertaining, but that's about it.

It's not like I was claiming they were masters of the craft or anything, but there are plenty of games which come out with no story, any number of badly translated derivative JRPG narratives, and nonsense licensed games whose fiction is entirely superfluous without also taking the films into consideration. Those guys aren't trying. When Rockstar releases games that contain more voiced dialogue then just about any other games, with multiple hours of cutscenes, I don't see how you can say they aren't even trying to have an interesting narrative..

#224 Posted by honkyjesus (132 posts) -

Hopefully they add onto 4 in a major way, when a cancelled game (Sleeping Dogs) has very little problem being better than what you do in most ways you have some work to do.

#225 Edited by Fjordson (2448 posts) -

@Shaanyboi said:

The praise Rockstar gets for its writing is either some kind of widespread ironic joke that I'm not in on, or people have REALLY low standards for game storytelling... Bully was atleast KINDA entertaining, but that's about it.

Er...that's probably not it...I think people simply enjoy what they do.

Even though I vehemently disagree I'm not going to say you're wrong since this is all subjective. But I do think there is a hell of a lot more to Rockstar's storytelling than most other video games these days. And not just in a "well, it's the best of all this crap" sort of thing. I genuinely enjoy what they do writing-wise.

#226 Posted by SpicyRichter (513 posts) -

@mnzy said:

@TheMasterDS said:

@mnzy: Does Jackie Brown count?

Sure, good one.

Kill Bill?

#227 Edited by Shaanyboi (1282 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@Shaanyboi said:

@Hunter5024 said:

@Shaanyboi said:

And all three will be unlikable cunts who have no consistency between their character motivations and their actions.

Because, y'know, Rockstar are such brilliant writers....

Let's not discourage some of the only people in the industry who actually try to engage the player in interesting narratives.

...some of the only people that try? Dude, what...? Do... do you play many games? Because the writing in Rockstar's games is average videogame crap at best. They're filled with bad caricatures, player action completely contrasting to the gameplay, characters spouting their REALLY poorly thought-out bullshit philosophies to you when you hang out with them (and without provocation, i might add), and protagonists that are nothing more than glorified errand boys.

The praise Rockstar gets for its writing is either some kind of widespread ironic joke that I'm not in on, or people have REALLY low standards for game storytelling... Bully was atleast KINDA entertaining, but that's about it.

It's not like I was claiming they were masters of the craft or anything, but there are plenty of games which come out with no story, any number of badly translated derivative JRPG narratives, and nonsense licensed games whose fiction is entirely superfluous without also taking the films into consideration. Those guys aren't trying. When Rockstar releases games that contain more voiced dialogue then just about any other games, with multiple hours of cutscenes, I don't see how you can say they aren't even trying to have an interesting narrative..

Quantity =/= quality. Rockstar simply inputting "more" voiced dialogue, or hours of cutscenes doesn't mean anything if they're not doing anything good with it. Yeah, there is a LOT of shit videogame storytelling out there, but for all the fucking championing GTA gets everytime the release a fucking screenshot is made a big deal, I'd expect something far less... dumb.

Look at The Walking Dead, look at Spec Ops: The Line. Two games that manage to tell great stories intertwined well with the gameplay. When Walker in Spec Ops has to get in a firefight, both the scenario and the character are in-line with one another that I believe "okay, yeah, he'd probably start firing back. This makes sense." Hell, for all the shit ME3 got for its deus ex machina of an ending, atleast that series as a whole had some great characters, interesting questions, and good dialogue.

Do you know what GTA4 reminds me of? It reminds me of some idiot in high school who is into some really dumb shit, watches the news one night about Israel vs. Palestine, and then thinks if he brings it up in a conversation, it'll make him sound really socially aware and mature. Just because it strips away the stupid overthetop shit from previous games, and then goes "Man... things are tough for immigrants, huh?", that doesn't make it good. Because it contrasts all of its good intentions and... uhh.. depth, with shitty characters and missions that make no sense for the protagonist to get involved in.

And don't get me started on the shit-stain that was RDR's story. The gameplay was totally fine, but that story... No. Just no.

#228 Posted by TadThuggish (906 posts) -

@Shaanyboi said:

@Hunter5024 said:

@Shaanyboi said:

@Hunter5024 said:

@Shaanyboi said:

And all three will be unlikable cunts who have no consistency between their character motivations and their actions.

Because, y'know, Rockstar are such brilliant writers....

Let's not discourage some of the only people in the industry who actually try to engage the player in interesting narratives.

...some of the only people that try? Dude, what...? Do... do you play many games? Because the writing in Rockstar's games is average videogame crap at best. They're filled with bad caricatures, player action completely contrasting to the gameplay, characters spouting their REALLY poorly thought-out bullshit philosophies to you when you hang out with them (and without provocation, i might add), and protagonists that are nothing more than glorified errand boys.

The praise Rockstar gets for its writing is either some kind of widespread ironic joke that I'm not in on, or people have REALLY low standards for game storytelling... Bully was atleast KINDA entertaining, but that's about it.

It's not like I was claiming they were masters of the craft or anything, but there are plenty of games which come out with no story, any number of badly translated derivative JRPG narratives, and nonsense licensed games whose fiction is entirely superfluous without also taking the films into consideration. Those guys aren't trying. When Rockstar releases games that contain more voiced dialogue then just about any other games, with multiple hours of cutscenes, I don't see how you can say they aren't even trying to have an interesting narrative..

Quantity =/= quality. Rockstar simply inputting "more" voiced dialogue, or hours of cutscenes doesn't mean anything if they're not doing anything good with it. Yeah, there is a LOT of shit videogame storytelling out there, but for all the fucking championing GTA gets everytime the release a fucking screenshot is made a big deal, I'd expect something far less... dumb.

Look at The Walking Dead, look at Spec Ops: The Line. Two games that manage to tell great stories intertwined well with the gameplay. When Walker in Spec Ops has to get in a firefight, both the scenario and the character are in-line with one another that I believe "okay, yeah, he'd probably start firing back. This makes sense." Hell, for all the shit ME3 got for its deus ex machina of an ending, atleast that series as a whole had some great characters, interesting questions, and good dialogue.

Do you know what GTA4 reminds me of? It reminds me of some idiot in high school who is into some really dumb shit, watches the news one night about Israel vs. Palestine, and then thinks if he brings it up in a conversation, it'll make him sound really socially aware and mature. Just because it strips away the stupid overthetop shit from previous games, and then goes "Man... things are tough for immigrants, huh?", that doesn't make it good. Because it contrasts all of its good intentions and... uhh.. depth, with shitty characters and missions that make no sense for the protagonist to get involved in.

And don't get me started on the shit-stain that was RDR's story. The gameplay was totally fine, but that story... No. Just no.

CUT MY LIFE INTO PIECES

THIS IS MY LAST RESORT

#229 Posted by jerseyscum (870 posts) -

There have been plenty of good female characters in plenty of GTA games. Elizabeta Torres in GTA4 was one of the most bloodthirsty characters in the series.

The scene where she shoots Manny basically execution style in her apartment was great

Then again, some of the women in LA street gangs are just as ruthless as their male counterparts. There's always DLC....

#230 Posted by THEBIGZED (104 posts) -

So is Patrick saying that the storytelling in GTAIV was worse than in the DLC? Or was he referring to something else entirely? Anyway, only difference between IV and DLC's stories were that the main game was longer (thus, obviously DLC was more compact) and that Niko Bellic was ten times more memorable than either Johnny whatever bikerdude or Luis Lopez.

GTA V will in any case, though, be one goddamn holy grail of a game.

#231 Posted by Krabonq (87 posts) -

@mike28212:

Did you seriously just call GTA FOUR the "first one" !? WTF.

#232 Posted by AngelN7 (2970 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

Any word on 3 player co-op. would be cool if you could pick your character and a friend doing one of the characters missions. And the missions don't even have to be co-op just in the same world, you could be a t the beach gym and you see your mate roll past with 20 cops chasing him.

That would be too fucking awesome! save it for the next-gen ... and in reality the best way to do co-op in a GTA game seriously.

#233 Posted by Microshock (341 posts) -

@dezvous said:

@TheKing said:

@Shaanyboi said:

@Microshock said:

@Lucidlife said:

Wonder if GB will embarrass itself yet again with another 5/5 score for a GTA game. Probably.

GTA IV wasn't deserving of a 5/5? With it's amazing world, deep single player, and fun multiplayer? Really, that's not worth a 5?

Shhhh.

Nothing about the single player was "deep". It was written like garbage, controlled like crap, and filled with the same dumb missions every open-world game regurgitated time and time again up to that point.

What? You have to be joking. I know it's internet cool to hate on GTA IV now, but come on. GTA IV was an amazing game when in came out.

Not that I disagree with a 5/5 score for the game, but it still bothers me that during that years GOTY deliberations it and MGS4 were in a heated debate for the crowning achievement and it seems like it is dangerously close to going to MGS4. Then they go on a break half way through, and suddenly the general mood of it has shifted to GTA4.

I wished we could have heard what went on during that break.

For the record, I did not think GTA4 was amazing when it came out, but I don't hate it. None of the GTA games capture my attention long enough to beat them.

I still think it's amazing. Even if the entire game was shit, the way they captured the heart and look of NYC is an AMAZING accomplishment all of it's own, but the game wasn't shit. I think it's just GTA haters hating on another GTA game, that's all.

Don't tell me multiplayer isn't incredibly fun, or that the story wasn't at least sort of decent.

#234 Posted by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -

sweet

#235 Posted by Meowshi (2911 posts) -

@Clonedzero said:

@Meowshi: rofl way to twist everything he said... jesus

How did I twist what he said?

What is the point of this vague, meaningless post?

#236 Posted by ThePhilatron (257 posts) -

Patrick, youre idea of a female protaganist is nice, bit it would make no sense given what they are doing. It seems clear to me that they are recasting they're previous main characters to fill out an all star cast.

#237 Edited by mike28212 (30 posts) -

@Krabonq: Well to be fair I didn't "just" do that, it was actually about 8 hours ago. was thinking four and typed first. after having my mistake pointed out earlier, I immediately placed the bag of shame over my head and wore it the rest of the work day. Fortunately, it was a Doritos bag giving me double xp for halo 4.

#238 Edited by Meowshi (2911 posts) -

@AndyAce83 said:

@Meowshi said:

You're being silly. It just would have been cool to play as a female protagonist in a GTA game. You're way too quick to jump on the "FUCK FEMINISM!!!" bandwagon. The only one making it an overblown PC issue is you.

Why am I being silly for pointing out the many manginas out there who want to play female characters. I have played portal, resident evil 0-6 and code Veronica . Most have strong female leads. I DONT CARE ABOUT THAT! I dont. I really dont care if the characters are male or female in the game I am playing as long as the game itself is funny. The forced progressiveness is what I distain. The, "I am so broad minded and smart cuz I long for the option of another gender in the game" BS. What would change if there was a female character avatar in GTA V? Would she be less criminal? To be honest, if there was a female character criminal in any future GTA she would probably be a lesbian and butch. That would be the only natural choice. Like some of the bicker-chicks in Lost and the Damned.

To summarize; I do not object to any game character as long as it doenst seem forced and PC (cuz I am playing on console) like some of these comments. I just dont get the "longing for" that in GTA. Like THAT is what is missing. What I think is missing is character choice. I know GTA is story based, but some character options would have been nice.

Also the "you are the one making the fuzz" ending is dull. I just point out how stupid it sound. I have a right to do that and it is a PC issue forced by progressive manginas.

You can't ask "why am I being silly" and use the word "manginas" in the same sentence. You just can't.

First I'd like to just point out that everyone does not think like you. Just because you don't care about the gender or ethnicity of your character in video games, doesn't mean that no one should. I was really excited when it was announced that GTA San Andreas would have a black protagonist, and I was really excited when it was announced that GTA IV would have a non-American protagonist. These are interesting perspectives that aren't commonly explored in video games, and that's exciting to me. Just like a female character would be. Just like any unexplored narrative would be.

If you're going to intentionally misinterpret people longing for a new perspective in a GTA game as "forced progressiveness", then yes, you are being silly. The fact is that you're the only one being over-sensitive here. Someone simply going, "Dang, it would have been cool to play as a female character this time," has sent you into a frothing mix of ignorance and shortsightedness.

#239 Posted by Meowshi (2911 posts) -

@AndyAce83 said:

Also the "you are the one making the fuzz" ending is dull. I just point out how stupid it sound. I have a right to do that and it is a PC issue forced by progressive manginas.

But it's absolutely true. The reactionary response to any topic regarding females in video games is silly, as is bringing up irrelevant nonsense like the Feminist Frequency. You guys need to grow up.

#240 Posted by whitespider (95 posts) -

I don't want to be abusive and aggressive like some pc gamers. However I really want this to come to pc. If I just stuck to my xbox and ps3 for years after they came out - I would more easily be able to tolerate 720p @ (let's be honest here) 24.7fps. However, the truth of the matter is that once you go up, going down is extremely hard. At least in my case.

Surely some of you can relate to that? Imagine that you upgraded from a tube television strait from 1993 to a wall sized OLED television running at 1000hz and 7680x4320 resolution. Then people said "shut up and just play the game on the crt television and be happy with it, or else you are a fucking snob"

For weeks, you would suffer from eye strain, possible headaches, the adjustment would counteract the entire game's enjoyment.

That's where I am at with GTAV. And that's why I am disappointed in a lack of pc version. It's not that I don't want to play the game, and it's not that I won't put up with 20-something fps and less than a quarter of the refresh rate and resolution - it's the consequences of doing so. And that's where the distinction between "snob" and "actual issue" come into play.

And sure, there might be a lot of people who are just like "why should i play inferior version" - I am fully willing to play the inferior version. SIGN ME UP. Seriously. I just don't want eyestrain. I am a headache prone person, and long term clarity and motion changes take me a while to adjust.

Instead of saying "bro, you need to see a doctor about that" , maybe just sympathise that some people need the pc version of this game for 'other than pride' reasons.

#241 Posted by fentonalpha (819 posts) -

I called it on the multiple player characters.... it builds a good infrastructure for them to make DLC stories. I'd personally like to see a cop story much like the police computer missions from 4 only less immersion breaking. It seemed odd to me that Niko would go out and be a vigilante so i didn't do it much. But if i get to play as an actual cop doing cop missions... that'd be great thanks.

#242 Posted by Godzilla_Sushi (1084 posts) -

Great call on the podcast! You guys kind of nailed it!

#243 Posted by mrpandaman (864 posts) -

@whitespider said:

I don't want to be abusive and aggressive like some pc gamers. However I really want this to come to pc. If I just stuck to my xbox and ps3 for years after they came out - I would more easily be able to tolerate 720p @ (let's be honest here) 24.7fps. However, the truth of the matter is that once you go up, going down is extremely hard. At least in my case.

Surely some of you can relate to that? Imagine that you upgraded from a tube television strait from 1993 to a wall sized OLED television running at 1000hz and 7680x4320 resolution. Then people said "shut up and just play the game on the crt television and be happy with it, or else you are a fucking snob"

I wouldn't doubt a PC edition of the game. There was a PC edition of GTA IV that saw some good support from the community. The only Rockstar game lately to not come on PC is Red Dead Redemption.

#244 Posted by Vod_Crack (712 posts) -

This view that the DLC for GTA IV had better storylines than the main game just don't wash with me. Especially The Ballad of Gay Tony, which featured by far the worst protagonist in any GTA game, Luis Lopez. What a prick. And yes, I do like good ol' Claude more because he didn't annoy me!

#245 Posted by MarkWahlberg (4599 posts) -

@WaywardGamer said:

@ILikePopCans: Man, every few seconds would be pretty rough. You'd be all having a nice dinner with a pal and there's Patrick's face rushing through your pasta, all whispering "Better in chuuuuuuunks."

Oh dear god. This might be the best thing I've read in a while.

#246 Posted by clush (413 posts) -

Two things:

1: is there anyone who actually cares about continuity in the GTA universe? To me, that's not what the games are about at all.

2: what the hell is wrong with GTA4's story? Seemed perfectly serviceable to me.

When did these become things? I must've missed a meeting.

#247 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

I just hope it doesn't play as clunky as IV did.

#248 Posted by plaintomato (598 posts) -

@clush said:

Two things:

1: is there anyone who actually cares about continuity in the GTA universe? To me, that's not what the games are about at all.

2: what the hell is wrong with GTA4's story? Seemed perfectly serviceable to me.

When did these become things? I must've missed a meeting.

Somebody thought GTA4's story was bad? Compared to like video game stories?

Maybe hating on GTA4 is just cool or differentiates you from the masses or something?

#249 Posted by Clonedzero (4199 posts) -

@jerseyscum said:

There have been plenty of good female characters in plenty of GTA games. Elizabeta Torres in GTA4 was one of the most bloodthirsty characters in the series.

The scene where she shoots Manny basically execution style in her apartment was great

Then again, some of the women in LA street gangs are just as ruthless as their male counterparts. There's always DLC....

what LA street gang has women as members. really enlighten me please.

#250 Posted by Alkaiser (358 posts) -

@plaintomato said:

@clush said:

Two things:

1: is there anyone who actually cares about continuity in the GTA universe? To me, that's not what the games are about at all.

2: what the hell is wrong with GTA4's story? Seemed perfectly serviceable to me.

When did these become things? I must've missed a meeting.

Somebody thought GTA4's story was bad? Compared to like video game stories?

Maybe hating on GTA4 is just cool or differentiates you from the masses or something?

It's not bad, its just incredibly generic and pretty much completely separated from what you're actually doing outside of cutscenes. Then again, I personally don't like Rockstar storytelling because to me they come off as middle of the road knockoffs of movie genres. Just doesn't interest me.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.