Balthazar

Turn on the TV and you have every chance of seeing some pundit attacking Grand Theft Auto IV. With the game being released a week ago, the usual moral crusaders are up in arms about the bad values it teaches and the terrible things players are "encouraged" to do in the game.

I will never hold GTA up as a franchise steeped in morality, because it's not. The game portrays, just like its tagline, how "good things happen to bad people." You spend your time working for scumbags and criminals, doing terrible things for money. It's NOT a game which celebrates the good side of life -- nor does it have to.

That said, however, playing Grand Theft Auto IV has been an interesting experience for me. Since I made a career out of writing about games, I've been far more aware of GTA's so-called depravity, and have spent a lot of time in Liberty City thinking about what developer Rockstar is trying to say, breaking down some of the seedier aspects of the game and deciphering what the player is expected to feel as he plays.

I think of the game's less savory features -- murder, female degradation, drunk driving -- and I have to wonder, does indulging in these elements of GTA IV really say a lot about the game, or the player? Just how much sin does Rockstar actively encourage, and how often does it actually dissuade you from being a bad boy?


Nobody's saying there isn't a lot of murder in the game. Killing isn't a mere choice -- it's a necessity for most of the in-game missions. If you want to progress in the game, you're going to get blood on your hands. That said, however, senseless killing isn't all that encouraged. Gone are the days where you could pick up a "Kill Frenzy" token and mow down innocent civilians. The people you have to kill are mostly people who deserve it -- lowlifes and drug pushers and fellow killers. That's not saying it makes murder better, but Niko is not a character intended to wipe out half the population of Liberty City on a whim.

Rockstar was incredibly clever with the character of Niko, creating a likable and sympathetic individual who, to anybody mindful of storytelling and the artistic side of games, should not be going on a murderous rampage. It's simply out-of-character for Niko to become a mass murderer, and as such, killing sprees do not feel right. Previous characters were far more two-dimensional, and as such it was easier to disassociate and go out for a rampage. With Niko, if you care enough about the character, you shouldn't want to kill everyone in sight.

Even if you do want to drop character and turn psychopath, however, Rockstar has implemented far more forceful ways of discouraging you. For one, the Liberty City Police Department is everywhere. It can actually get pretty annoying, as the streets are crawling with cop cars, and if you accidentally hit the buggers, you'll get chased down. The LCPD is a constant threatening presence in Grand Theft Auto IV, roaming the streets, sounding off warning sirens at you if they see you speeding or running a red light. They consistently remind you that you are being watched, and that if you cross the line, they will be there.

And they will -- you cannot rampage unchecked for long in Liberty City anymore. Even killing one person can alert the cops, and if you make a stand, that Wanted Level will climb with worrying speed. It's not long before Liberty City's N.O.O.S.E task force is dispatched, and you'll be cut down in seconds. Put simply -- Liberty City will fight you if you try to fight Liberty City.

One interesting thing to note is that even among the enemies you do have to kill, you don't always have to finish them off definitively. Take a look next time you drop someone who isn't scripted to die. You will often see them breathing, or writhing. Some of them even get back up and start limping away, clutching their wounds. If you kill only the people who absolutely, positively have to die to advance the story, you'll find that GTA IV's death toll is minimal, at least no greater than any other third person action game.

Niko Bellic is not proud of his actions, or standing in life. Through his in-game conversations with cousin Roman, you will hear his commentary on the state of things in Liberty City. He constantly complains about his lot, having to kill for money, and jacking cars. I admit this is at odds with the sometimes casual way in which he accepts blood money, but it's certainly more than most games throw into their exposition. As Niko takes his girlfriend out for a date, Niko uncomfortably diverts the conversation away from his job, trying not to tell her he's a hired gun. You actually get to experience that kind of horrible double-life situation, and think about how Niko must feel, knowing that a girl who likes him is looking into the eyes of a killer.

On the subject of girls, the degradation of women is a large bone of contention for many. Again, I cannot claim it isn't there -- there are indeed strip clubs where you can go and ogle digital breasts, but then, there are strip clubs in real life, so it's not like Rockstar invented the idea. That's not what this is about, however -- this is about how Rockstar might be discouraging you from objectifying women, and that's through dating.

Yes, as with real-life dating for most males, the objective in GTA is to get Niko some pussy. You take a woman out, work out what she likes, and spend time with her, with the goal of getting laid in mind. However, once again, Rockstar crafted some likable characters out of Niko's dating pool. You get taught that these women have tastes and personalities. It's not exactly deep, but it's deeper than you'd expect, and if you think the dating is over when you've finally gotten what you were after -- think again.

You end up not just screwing these people, but getting into a relationship with them. It's like you are intended to feel guilty if you just ditch them after taking what you came for. I scored with Michelle long before I stopped taking her out (for reasons beyond my control). If I forgot her for a while, she called me and I felt bad. Unless you as a person enjoy being an asshole, you'll realize that these women are not there as objects, but as friendships that need to be maintained. It all goes towards humanizing a game that one could so easily see as nothing but monstrous.

Speaking of monstrous, the infamous argument that GTA allows you to hire a prostitute, kill her and take back your money has also been colored with dissuasion from the developers. As is tradition, I spent my time looking for a prostitute to hire (don't judge me!). First off, it's pretty hard to even find them, but once you have done, you can begin the ghastly business at hand -- and the best thing is that Rockstar has actually made it ghastly!
As you pick up the prostitute and find somewhere quiet to go, Niko will comment about how pathetic he is, and how desperate he has to be to resort to such a low act. The increased gratuity of the act itself (she gets on top of Niko and mimes wriggling around on his penis) does little to make the act more erotic or glamorous -- in fact, it only serves to make the whole sequence feel uncomfortable and nasty. The woman performs the act mostly in silence while Niko tries -- and fails -- to enjoy it. When it's all over and she leaves the car, Niko will comment again about how horrible it was, and you are left feeling anything but horny. It's cold and it's sleazy, and you feel like a shithead for doing it.

Hell, when I ran the prostitute over to see if the money appeared -- it didn't. While I can't speak for everyone, I have to say that no monetary reward was yielded to me when I killed the woman.

That Rockstar took one of its most controversial aspects and turned it into an actual piece of effective social commentary, doing nothing but mocking the use of prostitutes, is commendable in my book. Again, if you feel great after using them in GTA IV, it speaks of the player, not of the game itself.

Reckless driving is also shown as a less-than-glamorous activity. Thanks to Rockstar's frustratingly loose handling of the cars, speeding and mowing everyone down is far less satisfying. The most important aspect though, is the drunk driving. Mothers Against Drunk Driving and members of the police force like to think that drunk driving has been turned into a "joke" by Rockstar, and I will concede that at least walking around drunk, falling over objects in Euphoria Engine-powered stupidity, is pretty hilarious. Trying to operate a car, however, is another matter entirely.

It is simply not fun to drunk drive in GTA IV. It's infuriating, disorienting and the police are on your ass in an instant. This game does not make drunk driving look cool or enjoyable at all. As soon as you get behind the wheel after Niko's been to the bar, you're in for nothing but trouble and pain.

I said at the beginning of this article that Grand Theft Auto IV is not a pillar of morality, and it isn't. It is violent and it has plenty of sexual content, if you consider sex immoral. However, GTA IV does not glamorize or applaud violence even half as much as people think it does. You do not kill without consequence, and Niko is not made to appear awesome for his murders. Death is not glorified, and you are not expected to feel like a God for the amount of death you dish out. Niko Bellic is not John McClaine, and that's not what he's there for.

Okay, so it's not Grand Theft Angel by a long shot. But it's not The Devil, either. Nowhere near.


Grand Theft Angel: How Liberty City plays nice. Destructoid offers reviews, previews, trailers, cheats, and more.

You weak, pathetic fools, I've come for your souls!

Gerbil The Sinner

This deserves its own thread why?

mysticwolf11

I don't see you coming up with any original threads, Gerbil.

Every time a violent video game comes out it seems like there's always somebody wanting to tear it down. Frankly if people would just pay attention to the ESRB warnings and learn to censor their own kids as they please rather than trying to force game companies to do it for them then maybe this so-called violence spouted from video games wouldn't be as much of a problem.

Makes me wonder why Jack Thompson isn't in the spotlight running his mouth about this, though. Where is that crazy bastard?

Banner too large.

PowersForever

Well said Balthazar, it is mirrowed by the times we live in that parents attack these games...Yes, I will admit GTA is not for kids under 18 years old but it isn't a demon like most people make it out to be either.

Like Mystic said, if the parents would take a stand and stop their minor kids from buying these games it wouldn't be such a big problem...It's just some parents don't want to take that stand, they want someone else to do it for them which is why they threaten the game studios with lawsuits.

My mom and dad would not let me play a game like GTA until I hit a certain age, they didn't target Rockstar and get a bunch of people together to fight them, no; they sat me down and talked to me telling me why I couldn't play GTA until I reached an age where I could interpret the game in a mature manner. If more parents would do that, things in this world would be a whole lot better.

Now don't get me wrong not all parents are bad, matter of fact most are good caring parents just wanting to do what is best for their children...But sometimes, things are done in a manner diffrent than the way they should be done. So I will just close this post by saying one last thing, the ESRB Rating is right there in black and white telling what the rating of the game is...If it is a rating you think your kids shouldn't be playing, DON'T BUY IT! You have the power, use it well.

"A Destiny That Binds." Firefly/Serenity.

Gerbil The Sinner

Anybody plays Smash Bros?

Granted, no one took me up on the offer, but my thread was indeed a wholly original thread. Check and mate, sir.

My only question is why this gets its own topic when there's already a thread on GTAIV that's only two threads below it.

Dark Huntress

I've never played this game, but judging off some of the article (I admit I don't feel like reading the entire thing) it kind of sounds like how I felt about 'Fable' it was rated 'M' and I never understood why. I had just played through the game like I would any normal action/rpg game and really saw nothing bad in it. It wasn't until, wel actually towards the end of the game I got online to get help from a walk through and discovered all the extra stuff you could do if you wanted to.

It's not forced on you to take part in certain things. That's good in two ways. One if you end up playing a RPG game, like I did to help learn the new controls to a console, and really don't like playing out the Role Playing part, like me, you don't have to. You can just play through. Secondly if you are into role playing and you find certain things vulgar, you don't have to play it that way.

So you have a choice, which is good. For a RPG game I didn't think Fable was too bad. Though it was a action/RPG, which I don't mind so much, but having the ability to go more in depth or not I thought was nice as it suited two to three kinds of playing styles.

If Fable had been set up to force you to do things, I wouldn't have played it for several reasons, but it did and I actually thought it was an okay game.

Blazing Tiger

Sounds so much different then all the other GTA's out there. Sounds to me like Rockstar is trying to show real life in the game. I got to give them props for that though.

Mesogog

The people complaining about such games, are also out of touch with the real world and how much of the game is based off that real world. They should come down off their high horse for awhile and see that.

the wog boy

it looks like a good game.

Bud Bundy Is My Hero
Help Me Find My Crazy X Girlfriend Jana Hawks PM If You Can Help

http://www.youtube.com/user/RicardoBundy