Rockstar Games' vice president of writing leaves after 16 years
Rockstar Games' vice president of writing leaves after 16 years
Rockstar Games' vice president of writing, Mike Unsworth, has departed the company. Unsworth had been at Rockstar for 1…
You're viewing a single thread.
That’s troubling. I’ve been playing the shit out of both GTA V and RDR 2 because they have the two best campaigns I’ve ever played. Especially RDR2. It was unique in its trajectory, in its beats…I really hope the follow ups, (however many years down the road those might be) won’t be affected too much by this. The writing made those games what they are.
I haven’t played baldurs gate, but I’ve been seeing a lot about it, mostly positive. Interesting, the news about that company. Being successful doesn’t usually call for a massive shakeup. But that’s capitalism for you. Fuck the workers, squeeze more out of those you keep. Classic.
RDR2 straight up fucked me up. I've never had such an emotional response to a game as that one.
And (maybe foolishly), I didn't expect it. I walked right into the end of that storyline and got my ass handed to me.
When you walk into the drunk guys home for his money and kill him, but his son goes “pa, pa, pa…” I know it’s a video game, but I wasn’t expecting that. It was one of those moments where i can never forget. I felt like I actually hurt a person in my mind and kept thinking about it, still do. Absolutely the best game that brings you into the fold as a player.
Same here. The bit at the end where (spoilers) Arthur puts his hat on John had me hand-over-my-mouth-ugly-crying. (/spoilers)
I didn't think any game could be good enough to swing with RDR1 (not even the sequel, at first) but holy moly did RDR2 step up and do just that.
GTA V? Really? I absolutely hated the story in that, and I hated the characters. Here are some of my issues with it:
Trevor:
- interesting epilogue, but otherwise pretty much no character arc
- really wanted to see him try to take on the Los Santos gangs (DLC!)
Franklin:
- largely just does whatever Michael says
- wanted to start a dealership, but he kinda gives up once he makes it big (DLC!)
Michael:
- arc was okay, but he didn't seem like a good fit for main character, especially when Franklin gets the ending
All in all, I felt like the three character perspective was largely a distraction from the lack of actual storytelling. SA and IV didn't have that, so they actually had a meandering plot with some character development to round it all out.
I haven't finished RDR2 (it's so long!), but I really loved RDR and heard that story for RDR2 is even better.
I mean, I’d argue that GTA V didn’t have the most emotional storytelling, but it wasn’t a character driven game like RDR2. The characters had the stories they did because they each opened up different avenues into different types of crimes. They didn’t focus on it. The characters were all insufferable. But that doesn’t mean the writing for the story itself wasn’t good. Yeah, the characters all kinda sucked, but the storytelling propelled the tension and wasn’t just some lame bullshit that felt like it needed to be there. The characters don’t develop that much, but the backstory was great, the intrigue and the vastness of the word made it great. That’s all writing. But you’re right, it couldn’t stand alone as a character driven story.
RDR2 on the other hand is a character driven story at its heart. You definitely need to play it because it’s incredibly well done. If you’re looking for good storytelling, emotional connections to the characters’ trajectories, and a great fuckin game, RDR2 is where you wanna be.
I'm not expecting RDR-levels of storytelling or anything, and the original RDR is way better than any of the GTAs in terms of storytelling and characters. However, GTA V felt like such a downgrade from previous entries.
GTA V starts out strong, with a fun heist sequence, which gets the player excited for more. And then the next thing we see is Michael at marriage counseling, and then we meet Franklin, who seems ready to take up Michael's mantle. Then we see Trevor, who is now running drugs in the rural area, which is also pretty exciting. At the start, I was excited to see all three develop their individual storylines, with Franklin just getting into the underground, Trevor establishing himself as a drug kingpin, and Michael getting his last heist in.
But instead of that, Trevor and Franklin kind of give up on their arcs and they just focus on helping Michael with the heist. Why? Why doesn't Trevor try to take over the drug trade in Los Santos? Why doesn't Franklin try to start his own dealership? Or at least steal cars as side content? If they're really interested in heists, why is there only about five of them? Why can't I go do more after finishing the main storyline? What about Las Venturas, doing heists there would be a ton of fun!
To me, the storytelling really dragged once Trevor came to Los Santos, which was more than half of the game. In fact, I dropped it and came back about three times (restarting twice) because it was so uninteresting, until I finally forced myself to speed through the story just so I could cross it off my list so I wouldn't feel the need to come back. I didn't have the same problem with either GTA SA or GTA IV, and I even finished GTA IV after GTA V (played off and on on console before GTA V, then bought and played through on PC).
And the world felt small to me. I know it was physically bigger than every other GTA game, but it felt so much smaller than GTA SA, which was able to fit three cities and a rural area and still make them feel far apart (GTA V just had one city and a rural area), and it felt similar to GTA IV. I didn't feel any desire to explore like I did with SA. The backstory was interesting, but I think it just highlighted how disappointing the rest of the story was.
In fact, I even like GTA III more than GTA V. It's pretty janky to play today, but it still has that OG charm to it.
So I honestly don't understand why it's so loved. Nothing about it really stood out to me aside from the graphics and performance of the engine. I didn't like the driving as much as IV (controversial take), the humor felt bland to me, and I didn't find any of the side characters particularly interesting, except maybe Lamar, and he also largely gave up on his arc.
So GTA V is by far my least favorite of the series, so much so that I'm not looking forward to GTA VI.
Speculating but they’ve probably already wrapped up all the writing for GTA VI and planned to move on after that. Imagine with Houser leaving we’ll see a few more vets as they finish up their roles for VI.
As someone who has a very small selection of games they like, play God of War. I never played any of them before the 2018 game and I loved it. I start it again and play through like once a year to 100%. Only game I ever 100%ed.
Loved RDR and GTA but not much else has kept my interest anyway close to GoW except maybe Hitman.
What about Larian?
I dunno, I’m not a huge gamer. I’ve had just FIFA and gta v on my console for years happily. Rdr2 is a newer purchase for me and I love it. But I don’t really like fantasy games, so I’m not really larian’s audience.
I like shooting and driving and open worlds. And soccer. I put off getting rdr2 for so long because I couldn’t drive. I regret writing it off because I was definitely wrong about it
You can "drive" a horse in RDR2 lol
Oh I thought you were saying they had some similar senior staff depart the company after bg3 released
I was saying I’ve been hearing good things about BG3 and saw they fired a lot of people to “streamline” the company. I was just deriding capitalism for that insane mindset
I don't see anything about Larian letting go of people after bg3 release
In related news, as part of its recently publicised cutbacks, BioWare has "let go of" Lukas Kristjanson, the lead writer behind Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, and the writer of the first three Dragon Age games, Mary Kirby.
Oh it wasn’t Larian, that name was mentioned to me so I just assumed from the quote above without rereading. I dunno the connection between larian and BioWare, but they’re obviously releasing games together? Or sharing titles?
Gotcha, so Baldurs gate 1 and 2 were released by bioware it 1998 and 2000 respectively, the lead writer for those games was let go by bioware recently, Larian is a completely separate company that got the IP rights to do BG3 👍 I can see where the confusion came in lo Edit: More context in the development section of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur's_Gate_3
RDR2 is the only character driven AAA game I’ve ever seen. I don’t think another one even exists. It was a masterpiece of a story.
Are you joking and I just don't get it? Lol
“Character driven” is a literary term. I can’t name any other character driven AAA games. I don’t think they exist. Every other game I’ve seen is “plot driven”. RDR2 had very little plot and it was all very much a side show. The main part of the story was the characters and how they changed over time.
MAY BE SPOILERS. Not sure how to tag it
Hmm. I’d say Witcher (I’ve only played witcher3) is one. If you miss up with a main characters responses (no spoilers), you change the plot. Another I think is fully dependent on the character, is Detroit become human. Difference is, it’s not one character.
They both have character development, but the plot is the main driver. That’s the opposite of RDR2 where the plot barely matters at all and it’s all about character development.
Okay, I see what you mean now. I didn't think you meant in a literary sense. I thought you meant like, having a main character that has characterization and isn't soley a player insert. You may be right in that regard then; I'm wracking my memory and can't think of another one.
Mass Effect has a lot of character development for a plot driven game, but this doesn't quite fit your criteria.