MADD attacks 'Grand Theft Auto IV'

UCBooties · Post by **UCBooties** » 2008-05-02 01:44pm

Galvatron wrote:Is there anything worse than an organization of thousands of Maude Flanders clones?

But, but... THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

Any organization that deals with drugs, alcohol, gang culture, gun control... etc. is going to go nuts trying to get free publicity off of trashing this game. The nice thing is, most politicians seem to have realized that the video game issue is a non-starter. So no one cares when these people raise hell about it.

As to realistic trafic laws in GTA. Please God, No. Driving in real life is borring and frustrating. Also time consuming. I do not support the inclusion of anything in the game which is going to make it less fun and waste more time. Also, the trafic in Liberty City is a nightmare anyway, how could you possibly navigate it without breaking trafic laws?

Sriad · Post by **Sriad** » 2008-05-02 02:02pm

Am I the only one who reads MADD as "Mutually Assured Destruction... extra D"?

TithonusSyndrome · Post by **TithonusSyndrome** » 2008-05-02 02:07pm

Kitsune wrote:If you run over any dogs, PETA will likely be after you as well

This is likely why I assume it was a semiconscious choice on Rockstar's part to not include animals in the GTA games, or small children or infants. Having the ability to mount sidewalks and splatter strollers or even run right up to one with a lupara kind of crosses the line, and if not, then at least gets damn close to it.

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2008-05-02 05:16pm

Ohma wrote:Because it's annoying as hell. "Oops! I accidentally ran a red light because the jackass behind me pushed me through the intersection because the devs botched it and none of the other motorists obey that light now I'm in a chase because there was a cop nearby. Oh boy, I have 20 seconds to race halfway across the fucking city, thank goodness the developers were SOOOOO obsessed with making their game "realistic" and I'm now in a four star chase and constantly getting rammed off the road onto a busy sidewalk. "

I don't think shitty coding/scripting is good grounds for dismissing an idea.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2008-05-02 05:31pm

Adrian Laguna wrote: I don't think shitty coding/scripting is good grounds for dismissing an idea.

How about it being fucking boring?

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2008-05-02 05:38pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:How about it being fucking boring?

That would be a valid complaint. In fact, I withdraw my critisism. It occurs to me that Mafia's "pace" is slower and more easygoing than GTA's fast and furious action, that's why it worked there just fine.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2008-05-02 05:40pm

It quite simply wouldn't work even if GTA was more glacial in pacing. The amount of real traffic in a modern city, both vehicular and pedestrian, simply precludes any strict traffic enforcement. At least, without it being painfully tedious and stupid. The aforementioned issue with the LCPD cops being less likely to pull over a red light runner for fear of being capped is valid.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2008-05-02 08:53pm

Stark wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:I take a cab in game, because the cops magically know to set up sting ops to check for drunk drivers in that game.
Don't forget skipping a cab trip means no ingame time passes, so you can make those impossible appointments!

I didn't know that! I guess it's worth the extra cash after all.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2008-05-02 08:56pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:I didn't know that! I guess it's worth the extra cash after all.

Yeah, when some bastard on the other side of the city wants to play darts and there's no fucking way you could actually drive there in time, just port there in a cab. It might take a few minutes ingame (the fade-in and fade-out time) but it doesn't take a 'simulated' time for the length of the trip.

Napoleon the Clown · Post by **Napoleon the Clown** » 2008-05-06 02:04am

And driving drunk in the game is horrendously difficult. It's not like your character gets completely trashed and can drive just as well as normal. Your car won't arrive in perfect condition even if no cops spot you.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2008-05-06 08:40am

I find driving drunk to be a great challenge. It gives me motion sickness like when you drive so fast you get that blurring. Quite a skill if you can manage to not fly out the windscreen.

Starglider · Post by **Starglider** » 2008-05-06 09:19am

When I next play I'm definitely going to try flying a helicopter drunk. That sounds like too much fun to miss.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2008-05-06 09:31am

Starglider wrote:When I next play I'm definitely going to try flying a helicopter drunk. That sounds like too much fun to miss.

Try to fly a helicopter when drunk and once it's lost it's boom and tail rotor. THAT'S flying.

I have no reliable way to separate the boom, though. It just seems to happen sometimes with damage (particularly crashes) that the boom will be knocked off but the cabin is still functional. It's AWESOME.

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2008-05-06 09:39am

It's times like this that remind me why i hate idiots like this almost as much as i hate Sara Silverman (almost...), as they seem incapable of realizing that--GET THIS:

It's a motherfucking video game.

Really?

A game you say? Does that mean it's not real?

I honestly can believe these people sometimes, it's like they have no ability to make a distinction between something real and a fantasy. The argument i LOVE when these anti-video game nuts use is "What our children like to play is what our children become".

Wow really? So you mean after playing Crackdown my children will be superhuman bionic super-soldiers who can jump 16 stories straight up and military press a minivan? Awesome! Hey i'll go play The Darkness next, then my children will be born with demonic powers too! My kids will OWN your fucking kids!