I don't like the GTA games that much. I find they okay to play for an hour or two of messing around being chased by cops etc but apart from that I tend to get bored quite quickly by the games (only 1 & 2 seems to of hold my interest for a long time).

I think the thing with Vice City is that it hit a sweet spot where there was a great passion for the things that they riffed off of (such as Miami Vice) and everything feels just a bit tighter and coherent then. All the others kind of sprawl. i think they are all good games though.

San Andreas really took too long to get interesting but then was good

3 was fun but only played on Ipod so it might be more dated PC

Vice City was brilliant just for setting and atmosphere

4 was alright but again too long to get going and then you still had friends

Episodes from LC were great I especially loved TLAD because of the style and the theme

I love what I played of 5 but the infamous mission reviewers mentioned (won't directly spoil what it is) really didn't sit well with me and Franklin is basically CJ without the personal vendetta (gang banger rising through the ranks I mean) but the improved shooting is great and heists are fun albeit disappointing (not as many as we were led to believe I mean)

Online I will judge on Tuesday provided of course they don't delay it in UK for Americans to get (which as Scottish studio I don't think they will)

I don't have a gamepad. ;)

I'm not against depicting "killing sprees" or "car stunts" in games. However, I do (repeatedly ;) ) speak up against the unreflected depiction of violence without justification or consequences in games like GTA. I hoestly believe that it's not healthy when a game like GTA 4 can pass itself off as a "serious, mature story" and become successful, when _truly_ mature settings or stories ("Culpa Innata" for example) keep getting ignored by the publishers. This opinion might not be the majority among gamers (though, if you've followed the thread, you've probably seen a few indications that I'm not the only person having it), but I think it' important to question from time to time, from within, the way how our medium deals with violence.

I can relate to that, though it's usually not so much of a problem for me in games like "Total War". It's one of the reasons why I prefer historical settings over contemporary ones though. Playing a WW2 game and taking control of the Third Reich has always felt questionable to me.

Regarding the other media that you mentioned in your other post, I'm afraid I'll have to pass - I never watched "Sopranos" or "Natural Born Killers", so I can't comment on those, and whether or not they are in the same vein as GTA 4. From what I've read about the Sopranos, the settings seems to be much more thought-provoking and reflective than that of GTA 4, but that's just an impression I get.

I'm not against depicting violence in games. I firmly believe that games _should_ be free to address everything, including difficult topics like violence. I do, however, tend to dislike games that glorify or celebrate violence, especially if they use a realistic setting, disregard the perspective of the victims, suggest that massively violent behavior can be kept without negative consequences, reward such behavior through statistics and achievements, and offer no alternatives. Whether intended or not, GTA 4 is making a statement about violence in our world, and it's a statement that I regard as unethical, wrong, and at the very least, problematic.

Blood Bowl, on the other hand, is a) a tactical sports game, and b) an over-the-top parody on sports as well as fantasy clichés. The depicted violence adds to the mad hilarity of a setting that is so far removed from the real world that it can't possibly be taken seriously (imho).

We may have different beliefs on what constitutes a satire then. I simply cannot see satirical aspects in GTA 4 as far as I played it. We may have to agree to disagree on that one.


That was pretty funny. ;)

So you have only played a small portion of one game in the series, yet you feel justified in making sweeping generalizations about the maturity of anyone who enjoys playing these games. Okay...

Almost everything you say about GTA is wrong. A lot of it seems to be related to your mistaken impression that GTA is supposed to be a realistic game. GTA never has been realistic and never will be. GTA IV is more serious in tone than the other games in the series, but it is still very much over the top and obviously meant to be satirical. Which is why you can get away with running over pedestrians or survive ridiculous firefights with SWAT teams or even the military. Of course there are no serious consequences to running over a random pedestrian - what do you expect, that the protagonist is arrested for murder and sentenced to 20 years in prison? Maybe with playable solitary confinement?

In terms of the story of GTA IV, the claim that there are no repercussions of your actions is simply untrue as I said, but to find out you will have to play the game all the way to the end. Playing the introductory chapter is not enough to judge the entire game's story. Also, there are, in fact, a few places in the story where you can decide between killing someone or letting them live (with some minor consequences later in the game). For some reason you also seem to think that the game portrays the protagonist as some sort of admirable figure that the player is supposed to identify with. This couldn't be further from the truth. GTA's protagonists have always been antiheroes and unlikeable, miserable lowlifes. No one wants to be Nico Bellic.

Look, you don't like the game, that's fine. Just don't try to claim that whoever doesn't agree with your view must be immature or emotionally stunted, please.

I bought Vice City on Steam last week just because I wanted to try it out.

Being a fan of The Godfather and Goodfellas...This was perfect even though the Mafia isn't a part of this game.

I think it was worth 10$. I like just exploring and screwing around in an open world. I have a friend that bought V on Xbox who is going to let me borrow it when he's done....so I'll have some fun in the near-future.

DON'T COMPARE BIEPER AND GAGA!!!

I consider Gaga an actual artist who has a big impact on his own work, Bieber much less so. I have even been in one Lady Gaga concert, but I'll NEVER EVER, EVERNEVEREVER go to a Bieber concert! And that's final!

(BTW, nice sarcasm in your comment... :))

In retrospect, while not a Gaga fan, I concur. I have to be honest though, some of her "stunts" (for lack of a better word) I don't find edgy but kind of silly and actually not that original. This doesn't apply to her music or artistic integrity but I didn't think her egg bit or her meat dress was edgy, I just thought they were kind of stupid. A dress made of SPAM or showing up in a giant uterus, now THAT would have been cutting edge :D

Actually Tony IS supposed to be Mafia - he's meant to be making money to pay the family back and the family turns up at the end for the final mission

Well if you count that little detail...but for the most part, you aren't involved with the Mafia throughout the game.

And don't tell me what happens at the end!

Sorry, I was trying to be as vague an un-spoilery as I could!

Well here's an odd thread.

You don't understand what it is you like and yet you also cannot understand why anyone would like things you don't like... How's that even supposed to work?

Just try and figure out what you do like.

I wasn't just being pedantic about the Mafia thing though, all though it I thought of my character - Tony as a Mafia guy going around being all Mafia-ey
Have you bought any properties and businesses yet? When you do you get Tony looking Mafia types hanging around and being your gang, maybe it feels more like it then
But I guess its more modern day Sopranos style mafia, maybe your after that classic, sophisticated, ruthless sociopath style - have you tried the Godfather and Mafia games? Maybe they'd be more your thing...