|
DTAYLO38's Grand Theft Auto : San Andreas (XBX)
|
| [April 24, 2013 05:16:20 PM]
|
For the first two gaming days I decided to play entirely for the sake of uncovering more of the narrative. As a prestigious gamer the story of all games matters the most to me, and the environment should be reflective of this story. The controversy of GTA: San Andreas usually involves complaints about the portrayal of racial stereotypes, and the neighborhoods they reside in. If the story were about some white guy trying to get promoted (arbitrary hypothetical situation) then the environment would be entirely justifiable, but because Carl, the protagonist has a history with the stereotyped individuals, and just about all the towns depicted, the environments are relevant to the story at hand.
This time around, I decided to leave behind all the narrative related activities and do what most others do: explore the possibilities of San Andreas. Step one: get a ride, because running everywhere would take forever. I initially stole and drove a car, but I don’t like the mechanics for them, so I stole a motorcycle. Step two: find something fun to do while driving. Driving reckless is only fun for so long, so I wanted a way to spice up the driving. I tried racing but those weren’t very satisfying to win (too easy). So I ran over a cop. Cool, that got me a one-star warrant level, and police cars were chasing me. This made things fun, so I started driving even more recklessly while escaping the cars, in order to acquire more and more stars to get tougher police forces on my trail. I have read many forums where players have said it is impossible to get to 6 stars without using cheat codes, as the forces sent are ridiculously strong. This proved to be true, but it was my own fault; being chased by a lot of people plus driving recklessly on a motorcycle results in multiple crashes and flying off the seat (and I would get arrested on the ground). This happened at around 3 stars.
The interesting ethical idea to point out here is that the entire game sets up almost limitless situations for the player to do illegal activities, but at the same time it punishes you by sending nearly unbeatable police officers at you, taking your money and guns after “dying” or going to jail, etc. People argue that San Andreas promotes criminal activity to those who are easily influenced, but fail to point out that there is still a legal system that frowns upon these actions. No one in their right mind (I hope) says that every citizen of America is susceptible to becoming a criminal because of the large amount of illegal activities that can be done because we are not given free range to do so, as there is a legal system too that punishes those acts. San Andreas seems like an outlet for those who want to do the unthinkable in an American society, but in a sense its telling the player that it is possible to do these in-game and in real life, and there will be repercussions.
add a comment 
|
| [April 23, 2013 10:14:47 PM]
|
Day two of playing GTA: San Andreas; this time around I decided to lay off of the narrative aspect of the game and just run around and do stuff (I did this mainly because I don’t know how to read the San Andreas map). When running around, driving, riding bikes, I began to realize how boring these things were. It’s not because transportation is a boring part of sandbox games, because in racing games all the player does is these actions: drive. And this game even has racing events, which are pretty fun. So what’s the difference between freely traveling in a car and competing in races? The only actual difference is the competition a race offers. I’m guessing without competition there is a lack of necessity to actual do it, whereas with competition the goal is to win, plain and simple. Ok, so then I wonder what else is there to do in this game that has competition. The answer to this is very obvious, yet unexpected: everything.
Let us not forget that for the entirety of this game the player is a gangbanger, doing illegal crimes all the time, whether it is petty stealing bikes or killing a police officer. In my free time of wandering Los Santos I first decided to beat up some guys outside Carl’s house. The guys reacted like they were meant to and began to fight back. This appeared to be fun, until I easily beat the dudes to the floor. Disappointed, I began to look for more fun confrontations. I then rode my stolen bike to the rival gang neighborhood and picked on a group of them. Some commenced our fight using only fisticuffs, and about two had guns. Overpowered, I jumped in my car and ran them all over. Piece of cake. Next, the bigger challenge was to fight the cops, who will hunt you down as long as a wanted star is available. I got up to 4 stars, until my car was blown up by a SWAT helicopter. The point of this is there are many things to do in GTA that offer a fun challenge. What is odd, however, is that everything “fun” is an illegal action.
I’m not 100% sure about this, but I believe just about everything to do in this game is considered illegal. The next big question: why? Why isn’t it fun to obey the traffic lights, order some food and eat it, get a haircut? I personally don’t consider these things fun, and I am speaking entirely on behalf of my beliefs, but I’m quite sure most players won’t find them fun due to their lack of difficulty. I believe the biggest reason for this is to emphasize that video games are a way for people to do things they normally wouldn’t do in real life. For GTA’s case, the developers wanted the “unreal” actions done to be real, illegal things, rather than magical, mystical things. The idea behind this is similar to as if America gave its citizens a “free crime” day: many things that people are curious about can be done with no repercussions. Want to kill a man? Sure, just pick up a copy of GTA. Steal a car? GTA. Voice yourself to the fullest against the police? GTA. While the game gives players the freedom to do anything, it is reflective of the player’s ethical framework. After all I’ve done in the game, I’ve never hit a woman in the game. I never consciously avoided them, I just never wanted to. That’s not to say all the other illegal things I do in the game I don’t mind doing, but to show that even with these punishment-less tasks that can be done, there will always be at least one every player either never or rarely does.
add a comment
|
| [April 22, 2013 11:32:16 PM]
|
I have played Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas before, but playing again with the intent of observing all the cultural aspects depicted I’ve realized it’s not as mindlessly put together as I thought. Granted I only played 30 minutes of the game this go round, I got through enough of the game to understand the basic principles of gameplay and narrative for the entirety of the game. You play as Carl, an ex-gangbanger who has lived in Liberty City for the last five years, who is called saying that his mom has died (or killed, I don’t remember). He then makes his way back to San Andreas and starts back up doing activities with his old gangbanger friends. For this diary log I feel the need to keep in mind that he is the protagonist of this game, yet he is in no way a hero. While I didn’t find much of an answer in the first 30 minutes I will now keep in mind what exactly is it that makes Carl protagonist-worthy? He is no good guy, and he does just the same as every other gangbanger in San Andreas. I can, however, answer that his bad guy stance is necessary for this story to even exist, and the developers must have somehow implemented some way of persuading the players that we should want to accomplish his goal.
Either all the developers for this game were born and raised in the ghettos of western America, or they all put a lot of research into accurately portraying these neighborhoods and their people, realistically and stereotypically. In case it is not clear, stereotypes are usually not made-up details about a demographic, but usually have some factual representation. That being said, just about every aspect of every character is a sort of stereotype. The largest most prominent one belongs to ethnicity. The black people fit the generalization that they are all angry, all the time, they live in poverty, and they are affiliated with someone in a gang. The white people so far are the ones who have jobs, they all annunciate every letter in their words, and they do bad attempts at saying slang. And the Mexicans at this point are cab drivers and the enemy gang. I don’t think many players consciously ponder this idea, but it is made obvious that all these people fitting their stereotypes is not the developers’ attempt at making the most racist game ever, but to elicit some sort of message.
The biggest hint to this is that the law enforcers, the good guys of American cities, are now the bad guys, and the murderous, grand-theft-autoing, drug-abusing gangbangers are, in a sense the “good” guys. While this is an obvious role reversal of common protagonists and antagonists in media, the big question is still “why?” This choice could be done just because the developers wanted to, but because there is a narrative there must be a deeper reason.
Relative to this ethics class, I believe the purpose is to show that the “bad” guys of America have a genuine reason for doing what they do, and the gameplay combined with the narrative is to convince us so. The game starts off with Carl learning that his mother has died. Whether it is said at this or I am just remembering later details, but his mom was killed by the hostile gang, who was already an enemy. For most people, even if they had no clue about Carl being a gangbanger, the hostile gang being an age-old enemy, someone killing a mother would be enough reason for them to understand why he does certain actions throughout the game: to avenge his mother. Like we have discussed in class, there are ethical frameworks that rely on emotional reason, and then there are those that only concern the results. The framework that Carl ultimately acts on is a blend of both. His initial reasoning for starting his revenge is fueled all by emotion, which is totally understandable by most because mothers are highly regarded when it comes to “ethical worth”, so to speak. He then avenges his mother with no regard to anyone or anything, he does what he sees as a vengeful task (in his case is defacing his rivals). Using a Kantian point-of-view in this world he is totally within the boundaries of moral, as he is not surprised when his rivals fight back, doing the same things he has been but for a slightly different reason (avenging their loss of dominance).
The racial and cultural stereotypes in this world are definitely necessary for Carl’s journey to have any ethical security. If he were a cop the players would not condone his actions of a hero (take “Lakeview Terrace” as an example), and if he were just some guy targeting a random gang the players would be slightly confused as to what his motive is.
add a comment
|
|
|
 |
DTAYLO38's Grand Theft Auto : San Andreas (XBX)
|
|
Current Status: Playing
GameLog started on: Monday 22 April, 2013
|
|
