So I just beat Bully (PS2) and overall came away pretty lukewarm on it. I'm not going to be too critical about the gameplay or it's visuals which have not aged well. I like playing old games and get use to their technical shortcomings fast but it took me quite sometime w/ Bully. Open world games from this era feel really bad to control and they are really ugly to look at but nonetheless, its personality shines through and Bullworth Academy and it's surrounding towns are certainly charming.

That said, the thing I came for: the story, the characters, and the writing are what most disappointed me. I've played most Rockstars games since GTA3. I pretty much like all of them. The gameplay has gradually improved and GTA5 and Max Payne 3 are undoubtedly the most mechanically sound games to come out of Rockstar. However, I find myself feeling the exact opposite about the writing in these games. Was I just the right age for GTA3, Vice City, and GTA4 (I skipped San Andreas) to seem like biting satire? With exception of MP3, which worked for me, the writing has fallen flat for me after GTA4. I enjoyed RDR as a game but found the writing left me cold (though I liked Bonnie) and GTA5 did nothing for me in that department either (though the black characters were on point).

The reason why I'm starting to think maybe the writing has always been bad is because Bully came out before GTA4. Perhaps the writing was good for the time but Rockstar hasn't evolved along w/ the current culture? What do you think?

Kinda disagree with every thing you just said but I love Rockstar games and bully is one of my all time favorites. I don't think their writing is amazing or best in its form but I certainly don't dislike it or anything. Also what I think rockstar does do best is characters and settings.

(though the black characters were on point)

Er...

...so I've only really played Red Dead, GTA V, and Max Payne 3 (and some GTA 4, but not enough). Rockstar's generally pretty good at writing dialog, I don't often find myself rolling my eyes at stupid things characters have to say. Few other developers have been able to write dialog that doesn't sound wooden or cliche or both.

But they're not really good at making a story feel like a consistent and cohesive whole. The whole middle third of Red Dead feels tangential to the story and the whole thing would be over if John Marston weren't always just demanding some information only to be told "go do this for me and I'll tell you something" several times by the same person before actually getting anywhere. GTA V kinda doesn't have a plot. I mean, it does, but it only comes into play a few times throughout the course of the game.

Max Payne 3 was a while ago, I couldn't tell you all that much about its plot. Some stuff about Max being the guy who was supposed to take the blame for something and then he shaves his hair and gets a ridiculous beard and stops drinking cold turkey but the pain pills are still OK.

I think they actually write pretty compelling stories and that they've only gotten better over time.

GTA 3 and Vice City were especially rough in terms of hamfisted satire, one-dimensional characters, etc.

I think the Beastcast kind of exaggerated how "bad" the writing is or has gotten and how little importance it plays. There is a reason why games like GTA still manage to hold peoples attention so much more than your typical open world game - it's why Sleeping Dogs, while a really fun game, didn't really set the world on fire. The writing is pretty good in my opinion. I like to see these stories play out and I like the cartoony, over the top characters - it's basically what I come to GTA for. That signature style of writing. There was no point in GTA V where I groaned and thought to myself "oh my GOD this again?" whereas I've had that feeling about several other modern sequels, including most recently Dark Souls 3.

Also could not disagree more with @justin258 up there. Max Payne 3 has such an underappreciated story of redemption. The plot is so great because Max isn't motivated by the greater good, or justice, or any of those stereotypical sentiments usually found in videogames attempting to tell a grand story. Max is doing it all for himself, because he made a promise and it doesn't even matter who he made that promise to, it's important for him personally to see this through to the end because he wants to. I really loved it - a great look at a mans journey to find himself again in the haze of drugs, booze and bitter resentment.

@justin258: I thought Franklin and Lamar were fun, funny, likable characters. They were well done.

I definitely thought the writing and story in GTA5 were its weakest part, Rockstar's worst effort that I've actually played through. Most attempts at satire were super lazy or contrived, and much of the narrative fell totally flat for me.

I think Rockstar's background writing has always been awful and their attempts at parody have never been subtle enough, nor intelligent enough, to be funny. Their stories are pretty good, but I can barely tolerate their side characters.

I pretty much share the same sentiment. I'd also say that while their games are well acted, the writing can be pretty abysmal at times. Red Dead Redemption is definitely their best game, but even that game had some embarrassing side characters writing wise.

RDR was good, but I felt a lot of GTA5 was so up its own butt in terms of the heavy handed satire. It had its moments, but overall it made Saints Row 4 seem subtle in comparison.

You mention that the game doesn't look very good. I'm curious what platform and resolution you played it on. I played through a chunk of Bully last Christmas when I was back at my parents' house and decided to mess around with my old 27" CRT and PS2. In that context it actually looked quite good. Maybe HD clashed with the art design?

I've always enjoyed the core stories in the GTA games and think they're generally pretty well written crime stories. Their weird satire of American culture has gotten pretty stale for me, but I still think that the worlds they craft are immaculate and well realized so I enjoy being in them.

That said I think I like most of their non-GTA games much more in terms of writing. LA Noire and Max Payne 3 are a couple of my favourite games of the previous generation of consoles, and most of that was due to the writing (though Max Payne 3 also plays incredibly well on the PC).

I think Red Dead Redemption is better than the original GTA 5 mechanically, though I love what they did with the remaster with the first person. Also, I don't know. I think it's fine, backed up with exceptional voice acting.

@darth_navster: I played the original PS2 Bully. I tried phat PS2 on 27' CRT w/ composite but went w/ PS2 slim on 32' LED w/ component. Even without progressive scan support, I think the components help a lot w/ separating the colors probably a must on a HDTV. Kept the 4:3 ratio sense the widescreen just does a vertical crop. I don't think it's that bad looking when you're standing still and see all the small touches in the environment, the problem is when you start moving. It just took my eyes longer than usual to get use to them.

I don't think the writing has gotten worse. The humor as far as names of stuff in GTA V is super dumb but the writing, particularly dialogue (plus good acting and performance capture), is actually great now and has kept getting better for their studio. I think the dumb jokes in the names for things is also done pretty knowingly in GTA now. It's just an odd component to the worlds style (smart, snappy dialogue and crime hijinks delivered in this world full of those kind of blunt jokes and stereotypes works for me and is entertaining, especially in an LA-esque locale). I strongly disagree with the premise. I think they have gotten much better since the PS2 days and even IV.

I think in particular Red Dead has my favorite dialogue/writing in any game next to probably Max Payne 2 so I disagree a ton on that particular game. Some of the plot mechanics to it are kind of lame (like parts of Mexico) but otherwise it's so strong writing wise. Plus the DLC, which nailed the cheesy Halloween episode motif.

Agreed. I think MP 3 is really underrated. When you say it is "because he wants to", even further I see it as him accepting that he is this videogame shooter guy. That's why he was brought in there in the first place, but he accepts it and turns it on his enemies in a very self aware way. And so he has to see the whole thing through to the end. He is a "fish out of water" and disconnected from many of the characters but that's part of the point of it. I thought they got really into what the hell Max was at the end in a cool way that made sense with their more realistic take on the character and world, one that was Rockstar and not trying to recreate the very unique appeal Remedy achieved with the first two games. Not as good as the first two for me but it's a great game.

In the end it's a taste thing, but I just think this thread goes to show that line of thinking that Rockstar doesn't have quality writing as a studio is not a consensus.

Yup, all of the TV/radio ect. writing in GTAV was awful awful awful - just the absolute laziest, lowest-hanging fruit 'satire' imaginable. However I thought most of the character moments concerning Michael and Trevor were well done. I still didn't care very highly for the overall story of GTAV, however, and much preferred the plot and cast of characters in GTAIV.

The writing for the talk radio has become worse and worse - nothing will touch Chatterbox or Fernando, but it should try - but the actual writing has only become better. It's a shame GTA V was full of such angry characters, I've played through that campaign three and a half times now (and watched an ex-girlfriend play through it once, her first) and after the initial charm of the good camera direction, excellent graphics and cool premise wear off, you're left with a pretty flawed trio. Michael is too whimsical (he is supposed to be a contrast to Trevor but he holds no moral high ground), Trevor is too fanatical (many of his conversations with other characters are actually pretty grating due to all the screaming) and Franklin is too...irrelevant (it makes sense why he's attracted to Michael, but his character would've never got involved with Trevor).

I LOVE GTA V, but it's ramshackle narratively. They were experimenting with something novel, though, and I give kudos for that. Vice City and San Andreas aren't as well written but they are better performed and more tight narratively, which I think gives them an edge over what GTA IV and V offer. From III to V, though, I'd consider it VERY hard to argue Rockstar haven't only got better at everything from driving to stage direction to graphics to mission structure to shooting to environments to you name it. The dialogue and voice acting has lingered a bit in the past, though, and as such as slowly drifted from originality towards mush.