|
AreaMan's Grand Theft Auto - San Andreas (PS2)
|
| [July 27, 2009 10:21:59 AM]
|
The final time I played GTA San Andreas, I spent that time doing the missions. By the end of my playing time, I had racked up quite a substantial amount of money. Looking back on the game and the missions, the question arises, “Is it right to make money in such a fashion as C.J. does in San Andreas?” In San Andreas, the goal of the game is to make money and get out of the ghetto and off the streets, in order to become a huge figure in the area of San Andreas. However, the means of this include murder, robbery, and other hellacious acts most would deem unethical. Although there are some “good” deeds, including eliminated drug dealers, the character still commits murder in order to do this. San Andreas glorifies wealth in the game. The richer you become, the higher up and more prominent you become in the game. It does not matter how you make the money, as long as it rolls in and there is lots of it. Although it fits directly in with the game play, San Andreas promotes an unethical way of making money through very anti-social and criminal ways. However, that must be taken into account as the title of the game reflects it in “Grand Theft Auto”.
read comments (1)  -
add a comment 
|
| [July 27, 2009 01:08:47 AM]
|
The second time I’ve played San Andreas for this assignment was a lot similar to the first time, in which I spent most of the time doing free play. This time, however, instead of starting gang wars, I mainly just went around doing the usual murderous rampages mixed with auto theft and police pursuits. While playing it this time, I was focusing in on the theme of race. In San Andreas, C.J., the main character, is an African American. The game becomes a stereotype of the black culture. C.J. is a gangbanging, violent, ghetto-raised kid. However, the problem lies within the fact that C.J. is made as a character to look up to and see as cool. The character, nor gamer, does not see repercussions or consequences for the individuals. The main problem with these stereotypes involves the race of the teen(s) playing the game. If an African American were to play this game and see the gang life romanticized in this fashion, it could lead to the thought of the life being led in San Andreas as acceptable. In addition to this, the character of C.J. could also reinforce stereotypes already held by non-black players. All of the lingo, mannerisms, and acts shown in San Andreas are stereotypical black stereotypes, something that could be very questionable.
add a comment
|
| [July 25, 2009 12:01:37 PM]
|
My first time playing GTA for this assignment was basically just free-play. I went around and started a lot of gang turf wars and tried to take over the entire city. Obviously while taking part in turf wars, violence is going to be immensely prevalent. The gang violence in the game is romanticized as doing positive for a community and standing up for yourself and your family. The Ballaz are basically evil in this game, and Grove Street is good. The game has a huge gang theme, and the player is presented with an option of living out a gang life. The ethical dilemma is whether or not it is okay to romanticize gang violence. Perceptibly, the game play makes the situations fun and exciting; otherwise it would not be such a high selling game, however, the gang violence inside the game causes one to ask, “Is it okay to play as a gang leader?” As a society, we have condoned gang violence as a wrong and illegal act, something to be looked down on, but in San Andreas, kids are opened up to the world that it can be and the ‘excitement’ from it. Although it is extremely fun entertainment, it can be viewed as unethical to romanticize gang violence in a way that does not show many repercussions.
add a comment
|
