Grand Theft Auto VI (2024)

[Kathandira]

GTA is a cultural monument in the gaming word and should be left alone to be what it wants to be. No one is obliged to participate anyway so just move on if you don’t like whatever GTA stands for.

This is a double edged statement. You can say this to those who complained about things that offended them. However those who complained, and influenced change, can now throw it right back at you.

[Rocksteady 87]

I'm all about making fun of everyone equally, and I find political correctness (as a core concept) absolutely abhorrent for the most part. The purpose and intent behind words is what's important, not the words themselves.

That said, however, when multiple countries--the United States included--begin trying to pass legislation to criminalize, outlaw, and literally put bounties on people for being "different," yeah, sorry, but they deserve nay need some degree of protection against the fascist douchenozzles who are at every turn trying to destroy them just for being who they are. If that means holding back a little on some jokes in a video game, so be it. It's the least thing a good and decent person can do to give them some kind of respite in their life where they're not constantly being attacked by ignorant, hypocritical zealots.

And if that makes me a "woke leftish libtard" then I guess I'm a woke leftist libtard. I'd rather be that than a monster, especially if it's only the actual monsters of the world who go around calling people that over something as trivial as this.

[Orange Joe]

Can you show me where I refer to people in this thread? Seriously mate, you quote me to achieve what exactly? I made a few points either discuss the points or move on. Do not waste my time.

ok in general who is doing this? Got anything besides a few random twitter users?


You say you want to discuss but when I try to discuss this with you you get defensive.....

[PACOX]

Makes me think if people really understand the kind of humor they say is being censored of if they miss the context/message.

Reminds of comedians who say they no longer tell some of their famous jokes because they hate when people taken them out of context.

[Edge-]

I thought exactly the same when blizzard changed the paintings at the inns with pictures of fruit. Even funnier that there wasn't even a hint of complaint about it just proactive censorship to appease some idiots.

Or...because some folks on the dev team wanted to change those paintings because they were fairly pointless? I mean, development teams are people with opinions too, and increasingly it seems that developers are getting a bit more of a say in the whole "making games" bit alongside getting better protections against months of brutal crunch and abuse from their bosses. Just like Rockstar's team wants to intentionally change some things about the direction of GTA with GTA 6, Blizzard's team (following lawsuits and a massive wave of information about how gross Blizz management was in protecting and enabling abusers) spent some time "reclaiming" the game that the current team worked on and making changes they wanted to see in the MMO they were working on.

I guess this is why we are all concerned now because imagine R* caving in to such bullshit like blizzard did.

Or, alternatively, Rockstar's developers are making the game they want to make, and that the team working on GTA 6 - which is a mixture of studio veterans with multiple GTA titles under their belts and newer developers - decided that the franchise needs to continue evolving with the times, as most franchises do.

Really, there aren't many franchises that stay stuck in history without that being the point of the franchise/games, and that's never been the point of GTA, especially since the3D era. The games, even when they go back in time like Vice City, are all very much designed as reflections and critiques/commentary on current events and reality. I'm in no way attempting to argue that it's "high art" or that the series has never leaned on lowest-common-denominator humor (which it still can!), mind you.

It's weird that that the thought is that development teams making changes that nobody asked for is a reaction to some vague group of people who are the problem, rather than the development teams themselves simply acting of their own accord.

[Xilurm]

Or...because some folks on the dev team wanted to change those paintings because they were fairly pointless? I mean, development teams are people with opinions too, and increasingly it seems that developers are getting a bit more of a say in the whole "making games" bit alongside getting better protections against months of brutal crunch and abuse from their bosses. Just like Rockstar's team wants to intentionally change some things about the direction of GTA with GTA 6, Blizzard's team (following lawsuits and a massive wave of information about how gross Blizz management was in protecting and enabling abusers) spent some time "reclaiming" the game that the current team worked on and making changes they wanted to see in the MMO they were working on.

Seriously? That's just being in denial at this point. They changed those picture right after the allegations and all that chaos from Blizzard came out. It was done on purpose, a lot of people thought it was ridiculous, even women.

Also, why would those paintings be pointless but the fruits not be?

[Edge-]

Seriously? That's just being in denial at this point. They changed those picture right after the allegations and all that chaos from Blizzard came out. It was done on purpose, a lot of people thought it was ridiculous, even women.

Also, why would those paintings be pointless but the fruits not be?

They changed a lot more, too. Almost as if there were a lot of meetings between leadership on the game and the staff, and staff were essentially given a much bigger say in terms of proposed/approved changes, with there being no real limit on what aspect of the game was being considered (i.e. stuff from the current expansion or from Scarlet Monastery.

Thinking these small changes were some kind of calculated decision by leadership to try to provide cover for Blizzard is founded on any actual evidence. If that was the goal, Blizzard would have done rounds of PR to push out how "woke" they were becoming and all the changes they were making which...IIRC there was basically no real promotion for that outside of folks noticing and some people going, "Ok" while other went "HOW DARE THEY CHANGE THE BIKINI LADY IN SCARLET MONESTARY!".

Why change a largely pointless asset on a wall few people see? Because the developers knew it was there and felt it was pointless/didn't fit, and that replacing it wouldn't negatively impact the game in any way. Sometimes small changes are just that simple.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Seriously? That's just being in denial at this point. They changed those picture right after the allegations and all that chaos from Blizzard came out. It was done on purpose, a lot of people thought it was ridiculous, even women.

Also, why would those paintings be pointless but the fruits not be?

The devs them said the changes were made not because of the higher ups but despite them, that devs wanted to make changes for a long time but weren’t allowed because the suifs were in line with those who were doing the harassing.

Hell the only reason blizzard put out any statement on the changes at all is because data miners found them and it blew up by people screeching about censorship.

it was never higher ups trying to get good will.

[Xilurm]

They changed a lot more, too. Almost as if there were a lot of meetings between leadership on the game and the staff, and staff were essentially given a much bigger say in terms of proposed/approved changes, with there being no real limit on what aspect of the game was being considered (i.e. stuff from the current expansion or from Scarlet Monastery.

Thinking these small changes were some kind of calculated decision by leadership to try to provide cover for Blizzard is founded on any actual evidence. If that was the goal, Blizzard would have done rounds of PR to push out how "woke" they were becoming and all the changes they were making which...IIRC there was basically no real promotion for that outside of folks noticing and some people going, "Ok" while other went "HOW DARE THEY CHANGE THE BIKINI LADY IN SCARLET MONESTARY!".

Why change a largely pointless asset on a wall few people see? Because the developers knew it was there and felt it was pointless/didn't fit, and that replacing it wouldn't negatively impact the game in any way. Sometimes small changes are just that simple.

I mean it wouldn't impact the game in a positive way either. It's not about being woke. Sure they might have changed them based on opinions from the devs themselves. But either way if a dev working there thought the bikini lady was offensive or anything of the sort then that's ridiculous.

Though on the other hand they are allowing underwear customisation in Dragonflight is the opposite of "woke". Maybe it's all about options, though something tells me there wont be any gear resembling the "Robes of Creation" in MoP anytime soon. Hope I'm wrong though because they do look pretty nice.

Either way GTA6 isn't going woke. I love how people in the past used to focus on the fact that you can kill a prostitute and get your money back. No, you can kill a prostitute because you can kill any NPC you come across on the street, not because she is specifically a prostitute.

They most likely are talking about not making fun of minorities anymore, specifically. The other stuff will still be there. Black characters will still probably use the N word frequently, just like Lamar and Franklin do in the recent Contract dlc. Honestly their dialogue is pretty fun whenever they are on screen, and if someone feels offended because of how often they use the n word then I just feel sorry for them.

Strip clubs will definitely be in the game and there will probably be multiple kinds, like in GTA4, a male and a female one which both characters can visit. It would be even more progressive if they let both the characters work in them, but maybe that would take too much dev time to implement.

[Edge-]

Either way GTA6 isn't going woke. I love how people in the past used to focus on the fact that you can kill a prostitute and get your money back. No, you can kill a prostitute because you can kill any NPC you come across on the street, not because she is specifically a prostitute.

I think that was like, that one news report that everyone still laughs about, lol.

Strip clubs will definitely be in the game and there will probably be multiple kinds, like in GTA4, a male and a female one which both characters can visit. It would be even more progressive if they let both the characters work in them, but maybe that would take too much dev time to implement.

I hope so. I'm a big proponent of Equal Opportunity Fanservice in general.

[RobertoCarlos]

I think that was like, that one news report that everyone still laughs about, lol.



I hope so. I'm a big proponent of Equal Opportunity Fanservice in general.

They were trying to link prostitute killing and that it may promote killing prostitutes as they are a common target. Naturally they avoid the real issues like prostitutes being targeted because the killer has issue with woman either because they had an abusive controlling mother or girlfriend. Or they see them as turning away from thier role as mothers and wives by being unfaithful on the street and thus deserve it. And lastly the ease of getting them alone or meeting at a remote location. And a lot of the time these are people with no one to turn too and more importantly no one to care when they go missing. But sure its GTAs fault

[PACOX]

Strip clubs will definitely be in the game and there will probably be multiple kinds, like in GTA4, a male and a female one which both characters can visit. It would be even more progressive if they let both the characters work in them, but maybe that would take too much dev time to implement.

You can use this to describe changes they'll probably make.

The strip club in GTA V has a trans character, but its there as a joke = the old "haha, the woman you slept with actually had a dick, you're gay!". Those kinds of jokes are out in GTA VI. If there's a trans person in the game (why not), they aren't going to be there just as a joke. Thats what I feel like Rockstar is going for.

[Nzx]

The funniest part of this whole thing is going to be when Rockstar lampoons the shit out of the people who complained about the game having a female protagonist and all the weirdos that are still holding on to Gamergate go absolutely berserk about it.

And then there will be a bar called the "White Knight" and one of the characters will say "yass queen" in it and those same people will engage in a conspiracy about how it's a dig at "leftists" and that Rockstar is actually hiding their power level or whatever they call it these days.

If you're mad about this, you're a mark. Either because you get sucked in by right-wing chuds who spend all day inside making videos complaining about "woke" people and still call themselves "alpha", or because you've been sucked into believing that you have to attach your entire personality to individual traits about yourself and petition everyone and everything for "representation" of those traits.

[Kallisto]

I mean it wouldn't impact the game in a positive way either. It's not about being woke. Sure they might have changed them based on opinions from the devs themselves. But either way if a dev working there thought the bikini lady was offensive or anything of the sort then that's ridiculous.

Though on the other hand they are allowing underwear customisation in Dragonflight is the opposite of "woke". Maybe it's all about options, though something tells me there wont be any gear resembling the "Robes of Creation" in MoP anytime soon. Hope I'm wrong though because they do look pretty nice.

A lot of these designs that have been changed come from those who were some of the more involved in the crimes that got blizzard in the shit they were in. It was less "These are objectifying, remove." it was more "These were from the brains of XYZ, who was proven to be one of the fuck ups like Alex that caused trouble. Remove that shit and anything related to them." since they don't want to be reminded of the pieces of shit and what they put into the game.

None of the skimpy armour has been removed. They added an incubus for extra fanservice. Expanded the models in den of mortal delights. So the changes were clearly targeted and had history coming from the brains of former staff no sane person would want to have links with.

[Al Gorefiend]

As long as they make fun of everybody equally, people will be okay with it.

[Yriel]

As long as they make fun of everybody equally, people will be okay with it.

But they won't.
"Developers are also being cautious not to “punch down” "
Question is, what is "up" these days?

[Lahis]

Question is, what is "up" these days?

White men.

[Santti]

Given the nature of the GTA games, it only makes sense to make the characters total assholes. The game almost encourages you to be an asshole yourself, from gameplay perspective, so it'd be weird to make the characters anything but pricks. Trevor I feel is the perfect embodiment of your average GTA player.

I've played GTA 5 through a few times now, and I don't really remember anything all that racist in it.

My biggest wishlist item right now, is to have some way to make money in the single-player. In GTA 5, the way to do it is atrocious. You have to play the stock market game, and it's so god damn stupid and boring.

[BeepBoo]

But punching down was one of the best parts of the game. Comedy at the expense of everything, shock value, etc, is the absolute best comedy IMO. Anything that I know would make someone's jaw drop if they heard it is top tier kek. Removing that is removing core identity of the game.

I remember being 12 playing vice city, seeing the moped for the first time, and dying laughing to the name of the moped being "the faggio." I still laugh seeing it in the modern games.

[tomten]

I dunno the figures behind disney but its not that surprising a company whos major earners are themeparks which have been effected by covid might have suffered losses in recent years. Doesnt mean its the "go woke go broke" thing that gets thrown around. When largely most consumers are not really looking out for that stuff.

End game made a record amount of money for a film and features a pointless all female cast shot, captain marvel over 1 billion. I dont think going "woke" means financial failure it comes down to the product/hype behind it

Except Disney is a publicly traded company with shareholder information and its public information where those losses and profits are coming from. But that was already obvious when you wrote "I dunno the figures behind disney".