Grand Theft Auto IV

October 14th, 2009 | Posted by Michael Clarkson in Critical Compilation:

At the time of its release, Grand Theft Auto IV was hailed as the most important moment in the development of games as art, and their mainstream acceptance as such. It had the usual controversies, from reactionary conservatives as well as genuinely-offended feminists. The perfect scores poured in, then the imperfect scores, and the game’s adherents and detractors went to war in the comment sections of every review site on the internet. At times it seemed more was written about the popular frenzy surrounding GTA IV than about what was actually on the disk. With time, and the realization that GTA IV has neither revolutionized the public perception of games nor caused the world to end in an orgy of violent teenage crime, the game itself has started to come into focus. Grand Theft Auto IV straddles the line between the emergent play of pure sandboxes and the directed play of linear experiences, and so in many ways represents the best and the worst of video games, the boundlessness of their potential, and the tawdry limits of their imagination.

A tale of one city

GTA IV‘s setting, Liberty City, is about the only part of the game that received near-unanimous praise. Leigh Alexander wrote that the triumph of the series is world-building, especially since the world being built is so similar to our own. In her view, the constant complaints about what you can do in GTA games are really just complaints about the possibilities of our own world. Lorenzo Wang points out that the weather effects, lighting, and sense of place are key aspects in making the world resemble a humming metropolis. The incredible level of detail built into the game’s systems make the simple act of exploring this space a magical experience, according to Daniel Purvis. Tom Armitage argued that this detail and scope overwhelm the player at first, just as they do Niko, and make it so that the player shares his process of acclimatization.

Yet the city offers more than just a sense of raw majesty and immensity of scope. Chris Remo found that what really sold him on Liberty City as an immersive world were the mundane parts of Niko’s life. Watching TV, hanging out with friends, and slowing down for tolls engaged him with the city more effectively than the continuity of its landscape. Lewis Denby similarly found that GTA IV‘s greatest beauty lay in its ability to capture small, idiosyncratic moments that allowed him to get lost in the world. IGN blogger Napoleon1066 felt that this attention to mundane behaviors made Niko and the other characters more relatable.

Another part of Liberty City’s power was in its reactions to the player’s behavior. In this regard, the Euphoria engine governing character movement proved to be particularly effective in making the world believable, as Tom Francis explained. Euphoria and the AI governing pedestrian responses were also particularly effective in making Chris Baker question his violent actions. Jim Sterling pointed out that when the player fights Liberty City, the city fights back in believable ways. This pattern of reaction led Bobby Schweizer to describe public spaces in GTA IV as threatening, from a gameplay perspective, because of the possibility of taking bullets from so many directions and the likelihood of drawing police ire.

The praise was only near-unanimous, however. In a three-part piece for The Observer, Laura Cumming waxed rhapsodic about the city, but Bidisha dismissed it as being neither arcane nor realistic enough to be compelling. Mitch Krpata complained that occasional AI breakdowns, particularly with respect to the street cops, shattered immersion. And PixelVixen argued that the Liberty City was merely a great toy.

The curious case of Niko Bellic

Magical or mundane, the player experiences Liberty City through the persona of Niko Bellic, once a soldier in the Balkan wars, who has been irrevocably scarred by his time in that conflict. Bitter and cynical because of his experiences, Niko becomes part of the criminal underworld not because of a burning desire for wealth or power, but because murder is the only profession for which his life has prepared him. As Heather Chaplin writes for NPR, Niko moves through the city at a deliberate pace, as if physically weighed down by his past, and he feels little joy in what he is doing. Blogger Vitz711 concurs, taking the view that Niko’s journey into the criminal underworld stems from a loss of hope and loyalty. Niko is not proud of his actions, writes Jim Sterling, and through his interactions and the behavior of the game world the player gets to share that feeling. Despite his moral ambiguity, Niko seems to have a code, and Tony Rice, like many players, found himself making decisions based on what he thought Niko would do.

And yet, Niko does show a kind of joy – a drunken appreciation of power. He shouts out boasts in the game’s firefights, and it seems that once the gun enters his hand, he doesn’t mind killing so much after all. In the cutscenes, he constantly bemoans the violence, but that doesn’t stop him from murdering his way across Liberty City once the game part starts, as Trent Polack and Shamus Young point out. While Krystian Majewski felt that Niko’s tragic background made practically any behavior plausible, others were not so convinced. Spencer Greenwood felt betrayed and alienated by the awkward way the dealt with Niko’s attitudes towards crime. In part three of  a cross-blog dialogue, Stephen Totilo stated that he couldn’t interpret the character as anything other than sociopathic scum. N’Gai Croal, however, pointed out that the game shows us an endless procession of self-deluded characters like Manny Escuela and Brucie Kibbutz. Could Niko’s nice-guy routine fall into that pattern as well?

Of course, this sort of contradiction can be tolerable if you can convince yourself that you have no other choice. Sinan Kubba points out that Niko is a man resigned to his unhappy fate, totally aware of the futility of his situation. Could that self-perception relieve him of any principles he claims to have? Daniel Weissenberger takes this a step further, arguing that Niko’s emotional passivity is one of his key traits: he allows himself to be defined entirely by the things others have done to him. Niko may hate being a violent person, while at the same time believing he can be nobody else. In a conversation with a girlfriend, Niko can say that his war experiences “ruined” him. Is that a fact, or just his excuse?

Perhaps such ambiguity was unavoidable in a game of this kind. As Wes Erdelack points out, in this sort of game poses a dilemma: “The game’s protagonist must reflect the player’s choices, on one hand, and be someone in particular, on the other.” Tom Armitage points out that the player’s decisions about how often Niko hangs out with his friends gives the player unintentional control over his understanding of the character. The incoherence of Niko’s character might even reflect a design response to Erdelack’s dilemma. As one participant in a round table discussion at Valuable Games put it, Niko might be a kind of “ideological salad bar” of many motivations so that players can pick their favorite one and run with it. This gives the player a simpler kind of control over the perception of the character.

Drawing a line in the sand

The presence of a strong central character like Niko spotlighted GTA IV ‘s departure from previous entries in the series. As Stephen Totilo pointed out in part 2 of a cross-blog dialogue, the sandbox gameplay that had been the calling card of the series was supplanted in this game by a focus on character and narrative, which he felt was detrimental. N’Gai Croal welcomed the new direction, but felt that at the core there was a fundamental disconnect between the  developer-directed narrative of the cutscenes and the player-driven story of the gameplay. In the case of Grand Theft Auto, where the character’s behavior and the sandbox gameplay are, by their nature, transgressive, the imposition of a restrictive linear narrative can feel particularly limiting.

The problems caused by the combination of the dynamic sandbox world and the linear scripted narrative were recognized in two main forms. The first of these was the inability of the sandbox play to affect the story. Duncan Fyfe describes the issue succinctly: “it’s like a movie stapled to a video game.” Whatever choices the player makes don’t have any connection to Niko or even the story; they’re broken down into a pre-written framework. Ben Fritz points out that GTA IV allows the player to do so many things that are at odds with Niko’s character that one starts to wonder why nobody says anything. The free-form gameplay stretches credulity in other ways, as well. Participants in the Valuable Games roundtable wondered why Niko’s use of prostitutes or visits to the strip club had no effect on his romantic relationships. The narrative, even in its incidentals, found it impossible to accommodate the player’s freedom to shoot anyone. Tom Armitage, in a pair of posts, related his frustration that GTA IV negated his decision to kill the control-freak Jeff, and his mixed feelings when the game eventually offed Jeff for him.

The other significant problem, albeit one not unique to this entry in the series, was the excessive authorial control exerted in the game’s missions. As Shamus Young points out, the missions in GTA IV were over-scripted, brittle affairs where the player must figure out exactly what the developers wanted him to do or repeat them ad nauseam. Chuck Jordan argued that you’d have to play each mission at least twice: once to find out what to do, then again to actually succeed. GTA IV employs restrictive mission objectives that diminish the sandbox feel, according to blogger Zulu. Moreover, the game cheats by making certain characters or vehicles invincible until a particular set piece is completed, a fact that outright infuriated Arthur B. Several writers liken the experience to acting a part in an action movie where you don’t know the script.

This feeling likely stems from the admitted influence of film on the Rockstar games. As Dan Houser stated in a wide-ranging interview with Ben Fritz, Rockstar sees their competition as being the movies, not other games. Not everyone sees this effort as a positive. In a diatribe, Boss Nonnu argues that the obsession with melding games with film is embarrassing and juvenile. In the first part of the cross-blog dialogue, Stephen Totilo explains that the game fails on this point anyway, and never gets us to the point of playing a movie, in part because it defeats its own aims.

Wes Erdelack argues that part of the problem is that vast open worlds with epic stories, like those of GTA IV and Fallout 3, simply cannot deliver taut pacing throughout unless the mechanics of gameplay develop a player narrative that matches the developer’s. Justin Marks uses the example of GTA IV, among others, to argue that developers ought to make the gameplay into the narrative, rather than imposing the narrative as packaging through the use of cutscenes. Chuck Jordan points out that the game doesn’t do a good enough job early on aligning the player’s view of the narrative and the developer’s view of it, and makes the case that the real potential of interactive storytelling lies in collaboration between the player and developer. The closest GTA IV comes in this regard is its approach of doling out new gameplay possibilities as a reward for narrative advancement, as Shamus Young notes in comparing it to Saints Row 2.

The tension between the narrative and the gameplay caused some to view contradiction as the game’s defining feature.  Carlo Barbara described the game as a near-impossible balancing act between often-opposing influences. And even while arguing that GTA IV was the game of the year, Wes Erdelack nonetheless acknowledged, “GTA IV is less than the sum of its parts. It contradicts itself; it contains multitudes.

Full of sound and fury, signifying bullets

Opinions remain divided on whether the story being told warranted the sacrifice of the series’ historical gameplay traits. Trent Polack praised the game’s slow start, because it makes the first real shootout feel like the game-changer that it is. In his view, however, the effort to ratchet up the tension late in the game led to what he called “an uninteresting and nonsensical mafioso finale.” Duncan Fyfe argued that the game fell to pieces as it became more involved in the crime, that the real tragedy of GTA IV was that Rockstar abandoned an interesting story about immigrants for a ludicrous one about criminals. Bidisha, writing for The Observer, dismissed the whole as “bad guy-on-guy thug porn,” and Tom Chick identified the writing as one of the game’s great weaknesses because it eventually sank into stock gangster plots and lowbrow satire. Chuck Jordan felt even that fell flat: “I would appreciate seeing something that genuinely offended me,” he wrote, “as it is, I’m just kind of bored and annoyed.”

The mechanics of the plot also came in for some critique. Justin Keverne, among many others, pointed out that one key motivation of the story – Niko’s need for money – falls apart late in the game, when you’re likely to have hundreds of thousands of dollars. I personally contended that Rockstar were too willing to disregard common sense and character motivation in service of whatever would justify the cutscenes and set pieces they wanted to make.

Many who didn’t care for the direction of the plot nonetheless loved the game’s characters. Blogger dvader654 thought that the supporting cast, particularly early in the game, were colorful, unique, and engaging. He was disappointed that the game later largely discarded them in favor of colorless stock mafiosi. Pixelvixen, herself a fictional construct, felt Dwayne Forge was one of the best supporting characters of 2008. Daniel Purvis felt that the characters of The Lost & the Damned were even more realistic and intriguing. Wes Erdelack argued that the power of the supporting cast  derives from Rockstar’s skill at writing convincing human interactions. But the positive opinion of the cast was not universal. Tom Chick quit The Lost & the Damned because its characters were mainly brutal, simplistic thugs. Tom Cross gave up on the main game because he found its characters to universally fit horrible racist or sexist stereotypes.

Those who did make it to the end found a surprisingly subdued conclusion. No matter what choices Niko makes during the course of the game, he loses someone important to him, and gains nothing from his act of revenge. As blogger yamster points out, the friendship system allows you to create Niko Bellic’s character to some extent, but the story then forces you to destroy whom you have created. In a world full of power fantasies that end in glorious triumph, maybe GTA IV‘s most redeeming feature is that it doesn’t grant its chief thug a happy ending.

It’s a wanted level, not a karma level

Given the popular perception and gameplay reality of the series, perhaps it’s a bit odd to examine the role of morality in GTA IV. After all, this game belongs to a group of crime sims that take the murder of policemen too casually, as Matthew Kaplan points out. Leigh Alexander reported that some New Yorkers, angry over the Sean Bell murder, were interested in the game for precisely that reason. Here you have a game in which, infamously, you can hire a prostitute, then kill her to get your money back. GTA IV doesn’t punish you for that behavior, or move you one notch up or down on a good/evil scale. As Josh Birk says, “You can bring your ethics to the table if you want, but they’re just your ethics and the game doesn’t really give a damn.”

One consistent defense of Grand Theft Auto games is that they merely make abhorrent behavior a possibility, not a necessity. As Chris Baker points out, the public’s perception of GTA IV hinges on the outrageous things you can do, not the relatively tame things you must do, and the game doesn’t celebrate even the required violence. Yes, you can kill that prostitute, but you gain nothing by doing so that you couldn’t get just as easily by buying a $5 hot dog. Does that turn the situation into a test of your own morality? As a participant in the Valuable Games roundtable notes, really making a moral choice isn’t possible unless an immoral option is available. Some players felt that Niko’s attitude towards his situation and the way the world reacts to him don’t particularly encourage crime, either. Jim Sterling felt that Niko’s character and the depiction of certain interactions made killing, or even hiring, the prostitute seem unpleasant, cold, and sleazy. A subset of players reacted by challenging themselves to act as morally as they could within the confines of the game’s systems: strategies are still evolving to play through the game while committing as few crimes as possible.

The feeling that Niko would act in a certain way often guided player response to moments in the game when Niko can choose between two assassination targets, or to let his enemies go free. As Nick Dinicola mentions in his critique of karma systems, even though the player is free to choose to kill, say, Playboy X or Dwayne, the guiding principles of the main character point towards only one choice, even though there’s no explicit karma system. Several developers who played the game made their choice for just this reason, as did N’Gai Croal. Some, however, did not, and Wes Erdelack argued that the substantially better in-game reward for killing Playboy X poisons this dilemma. In general, however, the game doesn’t explicitly prefer any of Niko’s options, and this absence of obvious moral rectitude in most decisions struck blogger Droll as one of the games strengths.

Players did not generally react as well to the forced choice between Francis and Derrick McReary, in part because the game did not seriously engage the consequences of this decision. Niko’s relationships with the McReary clan continue, and there is little discussion of the missing brother. But this neutering of consequence did not always strip Niko’s choices of meaning. Blogger Jesusofwales praised the game’s willingness to let the player choose Darko’s fate without punishment or reward. Tom Chick concurred, stating that the decision to kill or spare Darko said more about the player than the game, and the somber drive afterward “forced you to think instead of watch or listen.”

Nayan Ramachandran, however, felt that dressing up certain choices as explicit moral decisions only served to trivialize the countless murders Niko committed in missions or just driving around. In this respect, Justin Keverne envisioned GTA IV as a test case for the categorical imperative: when murder and theft are trivial and allowed, life and property become meaningless.

Taking the low road on the American Dream

Is there a larger message in GTA IV to match the elaborately-designed city, a point of view on American life that justifies its violence and tawdry sexuality? When Corvus Elrod asked questions along these lines, That Fuzzy Bastard responded (comment #17) that the game should be taken not as a stab at gritty realism, but rather as an attempt at a Brechtian sendup of the ideas America incarnates. When Junot Diaz forcefully argued in a piece for the Wall Street Journal that GTA IV exemplifies America’s cultural evasions rather than its unpleasant realities , Wes Erdelack similarly replied that the game should be interpreted as low satire, a “funhouse mirror” look at the American Dream.

Spencer Greenwood takes this a step further, arguing that the game critiques the American Dream directly, not in its original form, but in the hedonistic view articulated by Packie McReary. In Greenwood’s interpretation, GTA IV accuses the American Dream of having devolved to nothing more than enjoying life as much as you can and leaving a bloated corpse when you go. Peter Conrad, writing for The Observer, similarly argues that “GTA IV is about the revved-up tempo and suicidal trajectory of our mechanised lives.” You can make any number of choices for Niko, but the best victory you can hope for is a hollow one. G. Christopher Williams comes to a similar conclusion. In his view, GTA IV is a consideration of the pursuit of happiness. Niko Bellic comes to America, lured by his cousin’s tales of riches and hot women, hoping to finally wipe out his horrific past, but the world posited by Rockstar makes that dream an empty one. As Williams puts it:

To condemn GTA as a game that thrives on wanton cruelty to achieve happiness is to condemn other “systems” (like the America portrayed by Rockstar as fixated on a pursuit of happiness) whose “rules” do likewise. GTA provides a game where criminal choice is one of the few options available, but the vision of America provided by GTA suggests a “game” of similar nature grounded in capitalism and greed.


You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback.

21 Responses

  • Brinstar says:

    Colour me disappointed. I had hoped that, after the massive blow-up early on in the life of this blog, criticisng its lack of inclusiveness, that the writers here would have actually made an effort to include posts that come from perspectives outside of the usual voices. I mean, it sounded like the writers here wanted to make an effort towards that, but week after week, I am disappointed. Honestly, it appears that rather than willfully excluding women, POCs, and other voices, the writers on this blog are just not thinking about including those voices at all. I’m not even sure which is worse: to be considered and outright excluded, or to be so invisible as to not register as a single thought.

    I’m not only talking about this particular post, either.

    But let’s get specific. Of all games, GTA IV is arguably one of the easiest ones to find critical voices outside of the incestuous boys’ club “Brainy Sphere” or incredibly toxic, mainstream gaming sites (which were linked liberally in this post, e.g. Destructoid). Obviously, I am talking about the healthy amounts of critical writing about the gender issues in GTA IV. Only a couple of posts you linked here have that critical content. Gender issues in GTA IV was a the topic of a huge discussion in the blogosphere, yet in this “critical compilation” post it barely even gets a passing mention. Several women bloggers, some of whom are feminists, criticised GTA IV for its portrayal of women and sex workers. The only mention you make of the feminist response is a dismissive one, lumping their concerns with those of “reactionary conservatives”. If you actually believed that feminists were “genuinely-offended” and had valid critiques, then why did you completely exclude all feminist blogs that critiqued GTA IV on the way it handled gender? And even if you’re going to argue that critical compilations are only supposed to contain critiques from games bloggers, then why did you exclude the well-known voices in the games blogosphere that brought these issues up?

    If these “critical compilations” are truly meant to portray a well-rounded group of posts of the critical response to a game at the time, then I really think the writers of this blog need to be doing a better job of it, because so far these posts seem to be heavily skewed towards maintaining and presenting the status quo (e.g. blogs that the people here like to read, blogs of friends of the people here, a few articles you remembered reading when the game was hot, and a few token mainstream blogs that you found via Google searches), rather than doing deeper research into those alternative, critical voices. On that note, this blog is certainly fulfilling its aims to provide “an entry point into the wide network of like-minded blogs and websites”—because the writers of this site are not linking very far beyond their own reading lists/RSS feeds. How can you truly capture the zeitgeist of criticism of GTA IV with such glaring omissions that I pointed out above?

    • Ben Abraham says:

      Michael Clarkson discusses his approach to creating this complication in a post on his personal blog, and goes into a bit of detail about why he chose not to include some of the posts you seem to be wishing were included.


      Thank you for sharing your feelings about this, Brinstar. If you’d like to practically address the things you raise and would like to create an alternative critical compilation to address these issues, I’d be more than happy to post it as well. Crit-Dist would, as you say, only benefit from your breath of reading and experience.

    • Ben Abraham says:

      Reading back over this I feel I should clarify my first comment.

      My intent was never to suggest that Brinstar should run after and fix up a mistake or omission by Michael or another editor of Crit-Dist.

      The failure to ensure that Critical Distance becomes representative of more than just a white-male majority has been entirely my own, and I’d like to rectify that as soon as possible.

      I don’t as yet have a definite plan for how to go about this, but I am committed to ensuring Critical Distance becomes a more inclusive site. If you have any suggestions, or would like to offer your assistance, please feel free to contact either myself or another editor personally. The contact page on the site sends an email to the editors, and I can be contacted at admin@critical-distance.com.

    • Michel says:

      Whenever I notice links missing from a compilation I post them in the comments for posterity. Thank you for posting that link, but it was buried in the text and not easily identifiable in a quick scan, so here it is again:

      Alex Raymond’s A Brief Summary of Sexism in GTAIV

    • So, I have a few things to say in response to this.

      (1) The first is that I have never said that any of these posts is the end-all be-all of the internet discussion on any game. I am always going to miss posts, even important posts, and I rely on commenters and email correspondence to point out pieces that need to be added so I can do so. I still look for things to add to the older compilations regularly, and I will be updating this compilation, too, probably starting sometime in November after the new DLC is digested. I add new paragraphs and whole new sections, so if you think that there’s an important issue that needs to be talked about in any of these compilations, direct me to the best writing on it and I’ll see about including it in an update.

      (2) In the process of reviewing something in excess of 300 pieces on various blogs all over the blogosphere I read many of the excellent posts on the subject of GTA’s sexist content. However, nearly all of these posts were directed towards IGN’s disgusting video, or towards the misogyny of GTA games historically. Very few of them engaged the game itself, mostly because the authors had not played, and had no intention of actually playing, GTA IV. I understand that choice, but these compilations are meant to focus on essays that address the actual content of the game.

      (3) Likely as a result of the decision not to play, many of these pieces contained factual inaccuracies. In the land of the internet, if you get one thing wrong you get everything wrong — for instance, my failure to include a section on GTA IV’s sexism means that I am a cliquish bastard engaged in a “brainysphere” circlejerk. Thus, I was concerned that directing traffic to these blogs would result in an influx of hostile commenters who would use the errors as an excuse to attack those pieces, or worse, their authors, in an unjustified way. The reaction to a privileged comment on this site contributed to my concern on this point. I’m not trying to be anyone’s protector, but I’m also not interested in enabling an influx of people who will make someone else’s life miserable. Maybe that concern became overblown in my mind — I make mistakes all the time.

      (4) Those things said, the decision not to create a separate section treating GTA IV’s racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. was a very difficult one, as I mentioned on my own blog, and one I am of course open to revisiting. I am also still considering a separate compilation concerning the blowup around the IGN video. I would certainly appreciate anyone’s guidance towards posts you thought were especially well-written and apropos.

      Finally, (5) With respect to Alex’s post specifically, it would not have been included in the compilation even if I had decided to create a section on sexism or general bigotry, as opposed to airing that viewpoint in several sections. In addition to some considerations mentioned above, its format (talking points + link list) is generally not something I link to in the compilations. I’m pretty sure some of the posts she links to were included, however, and some additional ones should have been — in the process of winnowing down the list, I sometimes accidentally delete links I meant to keep, and these would have been placed all together. Anyway, they’ll go in the update.

      Okay, that wasn’t the end:
      (6) I really do update these, and I really am not Jesus. I can’t find every post about GTA IV, and I can’t even find some of the good ones. The more that is written about a game, the more difficult it is to wade through the crap and find the diamonds. I rely on the assistance of commenters and friends to help me find writing, on any subject, that provides real insight into a game. It’s not just likely that I’ve missed some good writing, it’s a virtual certainty, so when I ask for your help it’s a sincere request for everyone to help raise the level of discourse. I have a job and also a hobby that I really like, and these compilations require a lot of time and effort, often late at night or at odd moments whenever I can squeeze it in. I won’t ask you to like or even appreciate them. However, I hope you’ll understand that when I ask for help it’s not because I want anyone to do my work for me but because I want us to work together to make the dialogue on games better, deeper, and more aware of realities beyond the interests of 14-year-old white boys.

      Every time I find a good post on any game, that site goes into my blogroll and bookmarks, and automatically gets searched for the next compilation. That doesn’t necessarily mean I’ll include whatever’s written there, but it does increase the chances I will find it. Your assistance on one compilation will shape the content of the others.

      • oliemoon says:

        for instance, my failure to include a section on GTA IV’s sexism means that I am a cliquish bastard engaged in a “brainysphere” circlejerk.

        Really? Someone said that about you? Where?

        • I don’t think he meant that as a quote, but as self depreciating humor and acceptance of the fault.

          Frankly I think the blowup, given how large it was does deserve its own piece. Even further I think these Critical Compilation of games like some of the author pieces may need to be broken up into parts unto themselves. Especially with a game as big and as talked about as Grand Theft Auto 4. Bioshock, I think is only game that has a compilation that seems to surpass GTA4 on the talked about scale and that post I think may have found the upper limit of how much one person can read and link to in a single post. And when Bioshock gets updated with all the new posts, Braid as well, I’m just not sure how readable as a whole they will be.

          It will come down to subject matter and what you are specifically looking for. That much is the brillance of Micheal’s original formatting. Find the heading you are interested in and read those posts. An absence of a heading is troubling, but a subject as big as the sexism/racism/whatever-elseism of a Grand Theft Auto game really should be its own post. Certain games merit their own Critical Compilations and then certain games merit seperate posts in how they represent an issue they spawned like no other game. I can think of only 4 games that created an issue or brought such a fervor to an issue that the issue is almost inexorably linked to that game. The Grand Theft Auto series and the portrayal of all the bad -ism or our society is one of them.

          I may just be rambling at this point on, but one of the things, other than time, that puts me off writing a Critical Compilation of my own, even on a less talked about game is the difficulty of finding posts and being inclusive. I know Ben has been collecting and shifting through links on Far Cry 2 for six months or more. How inclusive can you get on one game, in one post?

          Most of the talk about GTA4 was during its release window, the large summer drought of 2008. This was months before I started haunting the middle circle and even over a year before I found the other unnamed, yet equally important circles such as the IrisNetwork. So I am walking into the critical discussion relatively blind. I have read none of these in essence. There is more here than I can reasonably digest comfortably. Eventually maybe, but it will take several sittings, during my daily reading in my reader. Now I may sound defeatest or lazy (guilt on both counts) but the compilations I cannot believe are comprehensive by any stretch of the imagination or should they be, some bad post shouldn’t be put up by virtue of being tagged GTA4.

          Despite all that and really anything else I’ve said, and this is a general rule of life, I’m not trying to be cruel, facist, anit-feminits, post-masculinist or whatever the term is, (it’s late and my brain is straining to explin itself) if you feel something isn’t right you have to change it yourself. Ben really does have an open door policy when it comes to writers. A policy I hope to take advantage of one day. As long as its good and meets the mission statement of the site.

          Actually one last thing occurs to me and I didn’t want to end on that note. I’m not sure how wide a range Simon Ferrari’s critical game search engine is, but promoting it, streamlining it, and getting more sites on it seems to be the first step at inclusiveness. I’d like to think the absence of certain circles is not to any conceious effort of suppression, but of ignorance to their existance.

          If I say anymore and misspeak I’ll regret it. I’ll focus my thoughts later, but I had to get this down.

          • For the record, I don’t feel that a compilation of articles reacting to machinima/poorly edited trailer would be appropriate for this site. We can write about games, we can write about people who write about games, but I don’t like the line that is crossed when we start writing about non-interactive videos made by journalists before the game had even been released (well, the day of).

            edit: Though I’d be interested in discussing expanding the scope of CD with other readers and contributors! Perhaps a Cultural Criticism heading under Spotlight.

          • I feel like we’ve done this already. We’ve done issue mini compliations. At the beginning of the site’s life there was the sexism in games post. It was a piece to spawn discussion and it did and site itself was better for it. I feel that such compilations are useful when an issue in our culture comes up. Most of the posts are week-in-reviews followed by Peer spotlights, Critical Compilations and podcasts. There is more that the site can do.

            As to the idea of a post on the video itself. I think it is important to compile the reaction to it. That video got mainstream coverage and put video games in a certain light. That perception is important to their future. I think if someone does write the compilation that it would be worthy of posting.

      • Alex R says:

        Ok, so, out of curiosity, what WERE the feminist and/or anti-racist and/or LGBT-focused posts that you read about GTA IV?

      • Brinstar says:

        Michael: I fail to understand why you wouldn’t include contextual information about the post in the actual post itself. I don’t read your blog, and I think it’s not a good idea to assume that people who read this post two or three years from now will go read your blog to get an understanding of why you chose to include/exclude the links you did. Why should a post that discussed misogyny in GTA in general be excluded from a post about a particular game in the GTA series? Surely it’s still relevant and provides more historical context surrounding the game. I think your decision to exclude posts that covered the commentary around GTA IV and racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. was the wrong one. This post makes it appear that there was very little or no opposition to how GTA IV portrayed any marginalised group, when we all know this wasn’t the case. What you’re presenting is a very skewed, very inaccurate image of the discussions and critiques going on at the time.

        for instance, my failure to include a section on GTA IV’s sexism means that I am a cliquish bastard engaged in a “brainysphere” circlejerk.


        Thus, I was concerned that directing traffic to these blogs would result in an influx of hostile commenters who would use the errors as an excuse to attack those pieces, or worse, their authors, in an unjustified way. The reaction to a privileged comment on this site contributed to my concern on this point. I’m not trying to be anyone’s protector, but I’m also not interested in enabling an influx of people who will make someone else’s life miserable. Maybe that concern became overblown in my mind - I make mistakes all the time.

        How patronising. Instead of presenting a more accurate picture of the discussions at the time, you’d rather exclude posts because you assume that commenters would damage the delicate disposition of those blog authors. That renews my faith in the editorial standards at this site.

        • I hope you’ll forgive my putting things into a single comment rather than replying in several places.

          As for explaining my decisions on my blog instead of the post (which is what I did for the Fallout and BioShock compilations), it was just a matter of how long this post was and how long those comments were. I try not to make very much of these posts about me, because my feeling is that while there are very many people who are interested in reading about GTA IV, very few of them are also interested in reading about me.

          On the topic of whether a compilation about the IGN video / response/ counter-response / counter-counter response is a good idea generally, or a good fit for the site: I think it is. It doesn’t matter that the video itself is edited machinima, any more than it would matter (for another example) that the Six Days in Fallujah debate erupted over a demo. The issues raised are larger ones of the role of games in culture, the behavioral impact of misogynistic gameplay and narrative elements, and the the degree to which we tolerate this kind of content in all media, not just games. That’s relevant to the site mission, even if it’s not directly apropos for a compilation about a particular game.

          As you may be able to tell from the above, I’ve talked myself back into doing that compilation, either here or on my own blog, in which case I guess Brinstar might hold her nose and actually visit it. I have to do some retracing to build the link list up (see below), but hopefully once that is past I can put the compilation together relatively quickly. If you recall any particularly clear, well-written posts that need to go in it, tweet them to sparkyclarkson and I will slip them in the list.

          With respect to the sites I visited and the essays I read, I can’t reconstruct that at this point. When I write these compilations I go through several rounds of building up and breaking down lists of links, links with synopses, and links/synopses loosely grouped by major topic. At least dozens of posts are deleted at every step, and I haven’t done a good enough job backing up these documents at every point. This is something I need to do better with because the process is error prone — I deleted my own post from the list by accident and only remembered to put it in at the last minute.

  • Pingback: Sunday Supplement: “all-brawling and all-stealthing” | Kotaku Australia

  • Pingback: TOUCHÉ, BITCHES!. video game criticism, review, news and discussion.

  • Alex says:

    This is what we have been trying to tell you guys since day one. Anti-oppression examinations of games are not a niche theory to be cordoned off into their own little kiddie corner. They’re an important part of art criticism; not recognizing that is essentially saying that people of color, women, LGBT folk and so on are separate from the “general” (read: straight white male) games discourse.

    I’m really curious as to what articles you read, Michael, that they all either had factual errors or focused on the IGN video.

    In a way this is really funny, because I brought up the issue of CD not living up to its initial promises just a few weeks ago on Twitter and on the Experince Points blog: http://experiencepoints.blogspot.com/2009/09/unexpectedly-serious-games.html

    And yet all we get is lip service and no actual progress.

    Let me be clear, this is not JUST about this post, it’s about a PATTERN of ignoring and excluding the voices of LGBT folk, people of color, and women, whether it is on purpose or not (and really, I believe you when you say it is not deliberate. That does not make it any less frustrating for me). As I said in the comments on Experience Points, being inclusive of these voices requires ACTIVELY seeking them out and including them.

    “I’m not trying to be anyone’s protector, but”

    In addition to what brinstar said, just a rule of thumb: if you begin a sentence with “I’m not _____, but”, chances are you are or are doing the exact thing you say you aren’t or aren’t doing.

  • “Thus, I was concerned that directing traffic to these blogs would result in an influx of hostile commenters who would use the errors as an excuse to attack those pieces, or worse, their authors, in an unjustified way. The reaction to a privileged comment on this site contributed to my concern on this point. I’m not trying to be anyone’s protector, but I’m also not interested in enabling an influx of people who will make someone else’s life miserable. Maybe that concern became overblown in my mind - I make mistakes all the time.”

    That is a ludicrous concern and a silly position to hold. Bloggers, especially those writing about sensitive topics, often do so with the expectation for their work to be read by others and appropriately critiqued. The purpose of such blogs is to encourage discourse and critical thinking. You do the “blogosphere” no favors by omitting these important links from the discussion.

    • If you read the above again, you’ll notice certain key words like “hostile”, “attack”, and “unjustified” indicating that appropriate critique was not what had me worried. What I was concerned about was inadvertently turning those posts into “flamebait” (the description on my own site). Also, because of our own earlier experience on this site, I was aware that sometimes intelligent people can cause offense and distress by confidently making bold statements about ideas they haven’t really understood. I’m not offended or distressed, so we don’t have the outcome here, but we do have the mechanism.

  • Pingback: links for 2009-10-30 « Gamer/Learner

  • Pingback: While !Finished » Mixed Reactions: Even Progress Comes With Sexist Dynamics

  • Pingback: People Don’t Forget/Nothing is Forgiven – Red Dead Redemption – 2010 - vanlandw.com

  • Pingback: Detailed, critical writing on some milestone games from Critical Distance | Screenagers.me