Why can Epsilon Program be the main antagonist for the next gta?

[GeraldKnight28]

After seeing the  3 antagonists in grand theft auto v and in the C ending.

3 antagonists are scumbags not even close to be a real antagonists.

I through Epsilon Program should be the next antagonist for the next gta.

[BlackListedB]

I chuckled when I heard John Marston use the term Scumbags in Red Dead Redemption, that being said, don't disclose too many spoilers since there are plenty of people who still haven't started playing GTA V yet, remember the PC gamers?!? They probably still want to find out some details without knowing the whole game front to back. Your own mileage should vary of course!

 

Anywayz, for people who you work for and eventually double-cross, or are antagonistic throughout the game, it's possible they can last up to the end, but I think as far as the next GTA, Rockstar haven't cemented any ideas, I seem to notice Dan Houser who pens just about all the scripts, he works with different partners in the writing process, so it's hard to really say what might inspire them, but they have at least said their key interest in writing is to avoid cliches, and also not to emulate books or movie stories that have already been done/told. So that makes for quite a challenge in and of itself!

Edited October 9, 2013 by BlackListedB

[LaurieX]

Given the nature of this thread, this entire reply is a spoiler.

 

Kinda felt like roles were reversed in this one - we were playing as the antagonists, against people who weren't really all that bad.

 

For the most part, I liked Devin Weston. He had character, personality, a little charm, decent work ethic.

 

The Chengs just wanted to do business with the people they felt they would do better business with. And why shouldn't they be allowed to?

 

As for the O'Neill brothers...Trevor would be the first to say it's a cut-throat business, and he would also be the first to cut a deal right out from under someone else.

 

I don't know anything about Stretch, or that part of the storyline, other than that he sold out his friend(s) to get killed by the Ballas. No love lost.

 

Speaking of Lost... they sought revenge on Trevor because he killed Johnny for...what? Banging his girlfriend? And Trevor wouldn't let it go either. They weren't a huge threat to him, yet he persistently attacked them oooover and oooover... he was asking for a war.

 

Steve Haines. He wasn't any more crooked than our own little trio, except that he did his dirty work from behind a badge. From what I've gathered in this, and past GTAs, the FIB never had a reputation for being an upstanding organization anyway, so Steve fit right in, in upholding the FIB's image. Aside from the joy he got in torturing the middle-eastern audio salesman, he didn't seem like a bad guy. He was a criminal, just like our protagonists, trying to cover his own ***.

 

Is that it, or did I miss any so-called antagonists?

 

And as a side-note, I know we gotta "respect the spoiler tags" and whatnot, but I don't feel sorry one bit for someone who hasn't played the game yet coming to these forums. They know the game is out, and they should very well already know that these forums are FULL of people doing nothing but talking about the game. I got a few bits spoiled for myself when I came to the GTA forums knowing full well the game had been leaked. That was 100% my fault, just as it's theirs. But some people just like to finger-point. You know what they say, when you point a finger at me, you have three more pointing back at yourself.

Edited October 11, 2013 by LaurieX

[BlackListedB]

I'm still less then 10% into the mission aspect, or overall, but I'm taking it slow like all prior game experiences, no need to rush a game that again will take at least, AT LEAST 3 years to see a successor on it's same scale.

 

All that Underwater Ocean detail is like another map unto itself.

What I'd like to see is religion handled with some respect by game designers, not alienate all people as players by disparaging all institutions, especially Holy ones like Faith and Religion, Churches dot the landscape of any GTA region, and not in a mocking way either.

[Trevor_Philips]

What I'd like to see is religion handled with some respect by game designers, not alienate all people as players by disparaging all institutions, especially Holy ones like Faith and Religion, Churches dot the landscape of any GTA region, and not in a mocking way either.

 

I'm not alienated, so they aren't alienating all players. Besides, there's a little thing called freedom of expression and religion isn't exempt. If one doesn't like religion being parodied, they can go find another game to play. GTA is built on stereotypes and parodies, which is among what makes it so much fun. Being PC towards anything would ruin it.

[BlackListedB]

I would say, what about Pastor Richards? Shouldn't he return in some fashion? I have to say that kind of over-the-top characterization still feels like something attributed solely to Rockstar, but you could also argue that it lends itself to GTA radio better then the improving environment of the GTA gaming cities. The simplistic and bombastic characters of old helped to liven up a more archaic approach of the previous GTA generation, they also stated that getting celebrities to voice key characters is not a regret in terms of how it really helped add something to the technically challenged games of old.

 

Of course, part of that entails the trouble of working with noted actors and their egos, as we all likely know by now, but it's true that Rockstar had felt it added somehow to the credibility of the older gen GTAs. I still wanted them to explore things like the nightclub life and perhaps TV with some real known stars.

 

The cults and religious characters were often stereotypes in a manner that's keeping with normal satire you'd find in other media outlets, too.

 

@Spartan I am religious though I don't attend Church or pray often like I did under my parents roof, but you should respect one's Faith above all else, that's why it shouldn't be mocked for the sake of it, it's SACRED for a reason, Respect the Lord, peeps!

Edited October 18, 2013 by BlackListedB

[Nate10]

As much as I'd morally like to agree with you Black on respecting one's beliefs, Spartan hit it on the nail. Also, Laurie, that's a well read observation about the antagonists in the game. I totally agree with you. We really did play the antagonist. ""I liked it, I was good at it and I was alive"

[Trevor_Philips]

I would say, what about Pastor Richards? Shouldn't he return in some fashion?

 

@Spartan I am religious though I don't attend Church or pray often like I did under my parents roof, but you should respect one's Faith above all else, that's why it shouldn't be mocked for the sake of it, it's SACRED for a reason, Respect the Lord, peeps!

 

Sure, I wouldn't mind Pastor Richards returning, he was hilarious. Remember the radio show when he shot the nudist?

 

And respect my right to criticize a system which I believe to be archaic in its conception of right and wrong and in need of serious modern reform. Respecting one's faith is one thing, but affording it special treatment such as censoring those who choose to question or believe otherwise is something completely different.

[BlackListedB]

I can't respect, out of respect, anyone who disses deities, since you cannot proclaim yourself the purveyor of ultimate truth, no HUMAN SOUL knows, no priest, no man, no woman on this Earth can tell you with certainty that there is or isn't a God.

 

Anyway, if God represents true love, what's so bothersome with that concept to you, or anyone?!? To me it boggles the mind that you might except hatred and all that over love.

 

In a modern reference, was watching the Last Word on MSNBC which presented a pastor along with comedian and magician Penn Jillette who proclaims himself an Atheist and had a very good discussion about this very subject, happened only last week. Too bad if anyone missed it, but Penn is an active Social Media celebrity and you might have heard it on his Twitter feed. Might show up on YouTube, I haven't looked

Edited November 4, 2013 by BlackListedB

[Trevor_Philips]

I can't respect, out of respect, anyone who disses deities, since you cannot proclaim yourself the purveyor of ultimate truth, no HUMAN SOUL knows, no priest, no man, no woman on this Earth can tell you with certainty that there is or isn't a God.

 

Anyway, if God represents true love, what's so bothersome with that concept to you, or anyone?!? To me it boggles the mind that you might except hatred and all that over love.

 

Read again, you'll notice I didn't diss any deities, proclaim myself anything, or say whether or not God was real. All I said is that it's my right to criticize a belief system that I view is archaic in its conception of right and wrong. You're clearly looking to justify your own intolerance.

 

I'm saying nothing of God here, I'm talking about the people and institutions that preach on his behalf. Are you telling me the thousands of people murdered as a result of the Salem witch trials was a sign of love? How about the constant discrimination of homosexuals (both past and present) and refusal to afford them equal civil rights? How is that love?

 

Anyway, I have nothing against you or anyone else for believing in God. That's your right. But it's also my right to question the institutions that claim to interpret his will to the masses with many not-so-loving messages. Because let's face it, God himself certainly isn't appearing to tell us anything. Whether or not I believe in God is irrelevant to this whole matter.

[BlackListedB]

As this subject's been brought up again, it's highly opinionated no doubt, but as a GTA fan who's pretty ardent about video gaming and tech, I find introducing Real World implications, thoughts and ideas are a great aspect for the fan forums as it's intent is a presentation of ideals, not to attack them, or ban them, etc. As I see it, it's constructive discussion.

 

The other night SciFi channel on cable and Sat TV premiered the film The Adjustment Bureau and I feel that movie is a MUST SEE for approaching the idea of Angels and God or a Heavenly figure in another way, you won't find it heavy handed in the slightest, and it's pretty emotionally moving I felt as well

Even though my parents aren't movie buffs, I encouraged them to see the film as well. 

The term "Angel" is introduced for association I believe, but the words God or Heaven were not, they want the film's focus to be on Free Will and Fate intervening in life path events. If you love your family or someone you marry, or a pet, you have the side of you that should be able to relate to how people of Faith think.

 

I feel GTA doesn't have to be heavy handed because it's a game, and even evolved, games of old, over a decade ago, they didn't need to adopt a religious stand point, but this is reality based gameplay, and of course, it's not a 'bible' or blue print about how you should be living your REAL life.

This point I always come back to, when we see as many senseless acts of violence in the real world today, I find it needs to be said, strongly.

 

Spartan, I think you nearly attacked what I was saying, as I wasn't trying to be judgmental to you in particular, but perhaps an open ended message to all GTA players, this game has been a scapegoat for much of what goes on in the real world, Jack Thompson, ring a bell? He demonized Rockstar and GTA with his religious beliefs, I don't do that, clearly, but I also consider myself a Christian so on the point of organized Religion, there's certainly a different belief system in place for many people who at large believe in the same thing fundamentally

Edited November 4, 2013 by BlackListedB

[Trevor_Philips]

Spartan, I think you nearly attacked what I was saying, as I wasn't trying to be judgmental to you in particular, but perhaps an open ended message to all GTA players, this game has been a scapegoat for much of what goes on in the real world, Jack Thompson, ring a bell? He demonized Rockstar and GTA with his religious beliefs, I don't do that, clearly, but I also consider myself a Christian so on the point of organized Religion, there's certainly a different belief system in place for many people who at large believe in the same thing fundamentally

 

Hey, you're the one who went on about not respecting people that don't share to your opinions on religion, not me. And so what if Jack Thompson used religion to demonize GTA? That doesn't mean Rockstar should be tiptoeing around it in an attempt to make him and others like him happy. What next, should they stop taking potshots at in-game politicians because that's insensitive, too?

[BlackListedB]

Just wanted to speak my mind about how I see the game with plenty of time spent with it, even if I'm not done, that's a natural outlet for gaming forums as I'm stating, Your Mileage May Vary, as the expression goes. That said, here's another food for thought article I think I touched on before;

 

http://metro.co.uk/2013/11/03/what-kids-really-think-of-gta-v-readers-feature-4171073/

 

The impact and implications for unaddressed influence this has on people who get the game, and are not supervised or engaged in discussions about reality, fantasy, real world, action, reaction, impact, all manner of discussions regarding how young people are influenced if left unchecked. My dad's major concern is that popular media without it's own moral compass can desensitize, and it's easy to say, "Hey, not me", but if you look more closely at that issue, you find it perhaps has had an effect, so being that this is GTA we're talking about, I'd think the healthy discussion doesn't just center on what we get out of the game, how it effects different people (outside of discussions about the game itself in the entertainment regard) and how it can evolve to appeal to new sensibilities, which I think will cater to something besides the Lowest Common Denominator being mined for content or as an objective in aiming at.

 

They're making a Dumb and Dumber sequel, that's rather mindless entertainment, and with the reality infused in GTA gaming, and it's evolving in terms of graphics and AI, the game as a whole I feel has to deal with some of this.

Just my opinion as a player, but I would suspect the great many people who work on making this game and marketing it, they don't all share a feeling of what is right for the series is anything that would be objectionable, or push the envelope for pushing's sake.

 

Not respecting people who 'diss religion', not Organized Religion, there's a difference, BTW, this should be obvious with a little thought into the subject. Mankind is hardly kind, after all! hahaha Seriously, the point I made earlier is man or humans only know so much, are only privy to so much and in regard to a higher power, no human can claim they know this absolutely. Just so you know, nothing personal in my comments, I just think games or any entertainment that's shooting for a higher mark should avoid selling their souls

Edited November 6, 2013 by BlackListedB

[Trevor_Philips]

I must confess, I haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about at this point. We've gone from you wanting GTA to be PC in its take on religion, to a group of 10-year-olds whose parents don't pay attention to what games they're playing and would likely cry about society corrupting their kids if they did find out.

 

Just my opinion as a player, but I would suspect the great many people who work on making this game and marketing it, they don't all share a feeling of what is right for the series is anything that would be objectionable, or push the envelope for pushing's sake.

 

This is Grand Theft Auto we're talking about, being objectionable is the whole point.

 

 

I just think games or any entertainment that's shooting for a higher mark should avoid selling their souls

 

Parodying or criticizing religion =/= selling one's soul.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Spartan198

[BlackListedB]

I used selling one's soul as a nice turn of phrase considering the subject, but I keep thinking about this, the joy and most fun I find with GTA is not based on how vulgar or violent it can be, and it's something to give serious thought to, they can avoid all this and have with the first GTAs in the franchise series, it just seems to me that Rockstar are playing these aspects up because of all the heat that came down, but even if Sam Houser was for Hot Coffee, and he was for a time (read that book JACKED, ppl), the backlash was not a pleasant experience for the company, and they basically felt originally that the games could go head to head with what content you'd find in R rated cinema, but there's a limit that just should NOT be crossed, it's useless to even make attempts to do so, it's not VALUE content, plain and simple

[Trevor_Philips]

I used selling one's soul as a nice turn of phrase considering the subject,

 

Yeah, well, it's a wholly overexaggerated turn of phrase.

 

 

but I keep thinking about this, the joy and most fun I find with GTA is not based on how vulgar or violent it can be, and it's something to give serious thought to, they can avoid all this and have with the first GTAs in the franchise series,

 

You're free to enjoy GTA for whatever reasons you choose, but so is everyone else. And one of the main reasons I enjoy it is because it gives society the parodying and mockery that it needs. And the values of religious institutions are something that need a deep looking into.

 

 

it just seems to me that Rockstar are playing these aspects up because of all the heat that came down, but even if Sam Houser was for Hot Coffee, and he was for a time (read that book JACKED, ppl), the backlash was not a pleasant experience for the company

 

The whole point of doing things that haven't been done is to see what works and what doesn't. It's called innovation. Hot Coffee was just one of those things that didn't work (mostly because society is so prudish), but yet its impact is felt to this day in games like Heavy Rain that are far more open about sex. If everyone played it safe like you instead of innovating, we'd still be living in caves and wearing loincloths.

 

And I don't care about that book. Personally, I'm eagerly awaiting The Bloody Crown of Conan which I ordered off Amazon a week ago, but that's irrelevant to the topic of discussion, which is you trying to force your opinions and values on others.

 

 

they basically felt originally that the games could go head to head with what content you'd find in R rated cinema,

 

Point to anything in GTA V that surpasses a movie industry R rating. Violence? Profanity? Nope. Strippers? Nope. Drug use? Nope. Nudity and sex? I've seen plenty of R-rated movies with nudity and sex in them.

 

 

but there's a limit that just should NOT be crossed, it's useless to even make attempts to do so, it's not VALUE content, plain and simple

 

Correction, it's what you consider to be value content. And, frankly, neither I nor anyone else are obligated to conform to that opinion (and yes, it is an opinion). Anytime a line is drawn in front of me, I'm going to step over it and slap the taste out of whoever drew said line. If you don't see GTA as having "value content" anymore, just stop playing the game. I got sick of Resident Evil being nothing more than a CoD clone, but instead of continuing to pump my money into it only to lament about it like a hypocrite, I just stopped playing it.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Spartan198

[BlackListedB]

Look at Imagine by John Lennon, like the earlier comment about Beatles being more popular then Jesus, the point was being considered and voiced, yet in both instances, John Lennon took heat from expressing Religion in the context of something bad, like every human frailty however, it can be both bad and good.

 

Expressed in the book Jacked, Rockstar's pushing of envelopes didn't go out no holds barred, there was fallout, and there will continue to be based just on the medium, demographic and production channel aspects impacting such decisions.

Edited May 8, 2014 by BlackListedB