"Variety is the spice of life", said some poet. Whilst true, he potentially wouldn't have considered "variety" eating 2 different flavours of Pringles in the same bowl or taking some time away from collecting dusty records to shoot virtual prostitutes in the face. But that's just the way life is now, isn't it? Here we are, taking a break from vinyl to discuss the big entertainment release, Grand Theft Auto 5.
What about midnight releases? Sure queuing up in the cold with a bunch of nerds to buy a video game you will be too tired to play sounds like fun, but what is it really like? To be perfectly honest, I'm not 100% sure why I was actually there, other than it beat sitting at home doing something more worthwhile in the Tuesday evening showdown. I enjoy videogames, less so now than I used to, but still very much so, but I couldn't really qualify as a "gamer" or even a huge Grand Theft Auto fan. I highly enjoyed "The Last of Us", but that was several months ago. I sometimes play Fifa (it's not even a gamer game). My PC can't run anything but Minecraft and Football Manager, as of now both abandoned due to my all round uselessness. Max Payne 3 was pretty awesome. Got halfway through Far Cry 3 before my brother decided he was finished with it and just sold it. Gran Turismo 5 is fun every now and then. That's pretty much since January I think. My claim to fame is one hundred percenting Red Dead Redemption (but not the expansion, "Undead Nightmare"), a game all round deserving of universal acclaim, and a level of art that surpasses many films. But GTA? I enjoyed IV and found it too was a (for the most part) gripping and praiseworthy game, but a didn't even own the previous iterations. I've the same number of GTA titles as I have copies of GT5 (2 copies, for reasons I could not discuss here. But I will consider speculation.). Regardless of my lack of credentials, I queued for ages out in the cold. Would I recommend it? Yeah, why not. Would I go again? Think I'll just wait for the postman next time.
What of the game everyone loves to discuss. It has rightly achieved universal acclaim among gaming publications. Even backlash has been minimal. The general consensus is that most of those who care find it acceptable, and very small minority have a problem with it. Even these guys are getting to the stage that they are being shouted down (see BBC comment section here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24066068). Rightly? I personal don't think so, as that isn't a debate. Regardless of that most people just don't care.
If I can add anything, it would be only to reinforce that everything you have heard is probably correct, in that the game is awesome, on a technical level, on a narrative level (to a point) and in terms of gameplay. The game is also crude, tasteless and nasty in many cases. But what else is there to expect? However, I find it loses some of it's edge in favour of a crassness in a few cases. The murder of an irritating figure of culture via explosion to the face on live TV is intended to be an us against "the shit they give us" joke, but it comes across as immature and more importantly lacking in any substance. Like those photoshopped images of Justin Bieber being slapped by a fish (or something) that often give the sense the creator has an intense love-hate relationship. Like when teenage boys think the way to impress a girl is to lob pencils at them. A lack of substance defines some of the games humour outside of the narrative.
The game has also come under minor covering fire for it's portrayal of women, particularly in a Gamespot review. Since the reviewer was a woman, and so could only be a militant feminist, the internet has again shouted her down. Personally, given the substance of the story is male orientated life, for example the father/son running theme, the reduction of women to supporting roles (and not a playable character) is justified. However, in many cases women are the subject of ridicule (new age fitness coaches, promiscuous LA women, stay at home mothers). Men are just as much the subject of ridicule, but in such a male orientated game it seems cheap. It's not sexist as such, but a fairly cheap shot considering female Grand Theft Auto players are in the minority. Especially as men deserve far more of the GTA parody than women, having made the dominant cock ups of the past however many years. Culturally, women are not yet afforded the same rights as men. Rockstar maybe being bold by taking women as equal for stick and so equal in everything, but I suspect not. Particularity as (so far) only one woman has been not the subject of ridicule (a hacker who I haven't yet heard speak and is a very minor character). Further, (again so far) not a single character has reacted to the satirical misogyny. This was the key point of the Gamespot review. The parody is far more effective if it is responded to in game and shown up for what it is. However, I have a theory that the mass appeal of the game means that Rockstar were hoping those who noticed appreciated its satirical nature and those who didn't could get a cheap laugh at the expense of a woman. Whilst I get how in actual fact the humour makes a genuine point against perceived cultural misogyny. Yet for Rockstar to climb onto that pedestal they could have made more of an effort.
The above might suggest I dislike the game. I should re-emphasise that it's a dicussion of quality, not taste and that the criticisms are in the main leveled at the surrounding "satire" of LA and modern US life, rather than the narrative. Personally it's one of the best games I have ever played. But critical appraisal drives quality. There's no point just saying how wonderful it is. And as a male gamer, I'd quite like to show it's not just lesbian militant feminists who agree.
Back to records next time. But it's nice to try and cash in on some passing internet traffic.
"You can't repo the assets of a dead man, bitch sitting chief asshole."
There's no points for that.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Speak