GTA V - Amnesty condemns torture scene

[putowtin]

EDIT: Also why the hell are Amnesty even releasing a statement on this? Surely their place is helping victims, not moralising on media releases.

Because if torture is glamorous, people become desensitized to i, so when they hear about on the news, in real life, they don't think it really matters

 

[tomtom94]

First off: I haven't played the game. The last GTA game I played was San Andreas and I didn't finish it, just borrowed it off a friend for a week. I may well pick GTA V up at some point. I can't really comment on this scene because I haven't played it, nor really on the content of GTA V as a whole. Just wanted to raise a point I found interesting with regards fan reaction to all the current criticism of GTA V (some of which is, admittedly, ridiculous) around the media.

When GTA's reckless violence / criminal characters etc. are condemned, there is a tendency for people claim that it is satirical, or at the very least, not intended to be taken seriously. In particular, the fact that it's "just a game". (Note: this is a point I can agree with, having played a lot of Timesplitters and so forth)

In this instance however, I've seen people claim that GTA is meant to be taken seriously, that the whole idea of the scene is to be disgusted (I can't comment because I haven't played it), and that GTA provides a look at "things that happen"; to censor them would be akin to cowardice and so forth.

Now, I've played games that intend to make you discomforted - I would recommend Spec Ops: The Line to anyone (though not as much as I would recommend not reading spoilers first). As a result, I have nothing against them. But they come with a caveat. The point with Spec Ops was the fact that gradually as you went through the game you realised that your actions were not having the desired effect, and (unless you count the multiplayer which the developers themselves have disowned) there isn't any real way that you can complete the story without getting the point that the hero fantasy is completely broken. (I'm aware that its attempt to deconstruct Modern Warfare and video game tropes was less successful, but I hold up the rest of the story as among the best I've ever played)

In GTA games, meanwhile, you can stop in between any story mission and go murder ten pedestrians with little consequence; among other factors (like the general humour found in the supporting cast and the sympathetic protagonists - don't know if this is different in GTA V) this is presumably where the "not to be taken seriously" portion comes in. If GTA IS intended to not be taken seriously then great - it's a very fun formula. I've played GTA games myself and had a great time. But can the attitude of "no consequences is fun!" really coexist with a serious message about the criminal underworld?

It just struck me how quickly the nuke in COD 4 - a genuine shock with a great impact and point to make - seems to have faded from the collective consciousness of the video game community at large now that COD is a big multi-player driven franchise. Barring the token "shocking moment" in each story campaign, the COD franchise is more about killing people over and over again in deathmatches rather than making any serious points - except when, as in the instance of No Russian, they need to justify their creative decisions. (I stuck up for No Russian, incidentally, but I find there to be an awful lot of Unfortunate Implications in the rest of the franchise). I think the same is true of GTA - if it did try to make a serious message it would be lost amid a sea of (admittedly hilarious) GIFs of the protagonist jumping off tall buildings and defeating tanks with his bare hands.

The point I'm trying laboriously to make is that we can't really have it both ways with GTA. If it's intended as a satirical and/or fun look at criminal life and not to be taken seriously it seems a tad hypocritical to then say "but X Y and Z are really great points and this shows the power of video games as a medium!". If, on the other hand, it is intended as a realistic portrayal of the criminal underworld and to make serious social points in its own right then it should be careful about the messages it puts out because the juxtaposition could trivialise serious matters. For example, within mainstream entertainment, the current go-to villains seem to be either Russian or Middle Eastern, which shows that the fact it occurs in Modern Warfare may only be part of a wider problem in culture, but no less worrying as a problem. Extra Credits did a great couple of episodes about lazy design and propaganda games where they point out that it's generally not a developer's intention to spread misinformation but that doesn't stop it happening (citing an incident in Call of Juarez: The Cartel where an incident occurs that is pretty much the direct opposite of what actually occurs in real life)

Note that what I'm definitely not saying is that media cannot have a point and also be entertaining (I watched District 9 too, guys), nor that children are going to play the game and potentially copy it, or in fact that certain things should be off-limits in culture. Good culture can tackle any topic in any medium, in my opinion, and video games have a lot of power to do that in new and exciting ways. I'm just saying that we need to not cherry-pick our messages or try to have our cake and eat it. I'm more than willing to discuss this on the condition that people are reasonable in their defence. (The disclaimer is because I seem to get into a lot of arguments recently, although not on here, with people who speak in nothing but hyperbole and take my arguments out of context - apologies but I am not interested in getting involved in another one)

 

[Carpenter]

There's nothing wrong with portraying controversial or upsetting events in any creative medium, even an interactive one. However, if your presentation is sloppy, or crude, or exploitative, or ugly, then there's nothing wrong with people vocally criticizing you for it, either. Having not played GTA V, I can't comment on which camp this torture scene falls into. As it's getting so much shit, I suspect it walks the line at best.

I think the problem is that it obviously tries to have a message, but it's too blunt in how it handles it. And it could've been way more effective if it chose a slightly different route.

You see, you play this section in two parts; One as the torturer, and the other as the guy who needs to get a job done based on the info provided by the torturer, all of which is happening simultaniously while in contact by phone. As the latter, the longer you hold of finishing the job due to uncertainty, the more this one guy gets tortured. And I remember feeling really bad at what was happening on the other end of the phone due to me not being sure whether I had the right target. But once you switch over to the torturer it just becomes grisly SAW action with little to no meaningful context.

It would've been really effective if they had simply cut out the interactivity of the actual torture and expanded on the other section.

Yes, and grand theft auto games in general would be "better" if we didn't shoot anyone but just played the guy that watches a guy shoot people because shooting people is wrong.

Seriously how can you argue that their torture scene is over the line when the game people call the "best in the series" (GTA SA) features a rape scene that's played up for laughs. The victim even does a few more jobs with the rapist.

People keep saying it's "blunt and crude" as if it would have been better if they made it nice and stylized like Saints row. It's supposed to be dark, dirty, and crude because it's a freaking torture scene.
You people saying that it should have been made less violent are missing the fact that doing that would remove the actual point of the torture scene, to make people that think they want to be the "bad guy" very uncomfortable.

 

[Carpenter]

EDIT: Also why the hell are Amnesty even releasing a statement on this? Surely their place is helping victims, not moralising on media releases.

Because if torture is glamorous, people become desensitized to i, so when they hear about on the news, in real life, they don't think it really matters

So you think that this game is glamorizing torture? Then why is every complaint about it talking about how it made them feel sick or wrong?

Oh yes it may make people stop feeling emotional when they hear torture stories in the news, because we are not already desensitized by the constant monotone announcements on the news of torture, war, and genocide.
People are already desensitized, people are just pissed at this game because it shoves it right into their gluttonous little faces. Suddenly when they have to actually see and interact with the torture, it's not fun anymore. Nobody was whining about any of the torture or murder scenes in VC, SA, or 4. I see countless waterboarding jokes on tv and around the internet, do those not desensitize people?
It's not desensitizing people, for the first time in a while I am seeing people act like they are actually disgusted by the act of torture. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.

 

[Carpenter]

Should have the option to sensor this scene or completely disable it. Just like that one CoDMW2 mission which you can skip.

COD did that because it's a game made for kids and mass appeal in general.

GTA is not meant to appeal to everyone, especially kids, and having the scene be "optional" would completely take out the point of having it in the first place.

COD doing something doesn't mean everyone else has to do it. On that note, why don't you see COD giving you an option to play the game without shooting people at all?

Because they want people to be desensitized to the idea of killing certain people.

Letting you skip the "no russian" scene also made it obvious and undeniable that the scene had no real relevance on the story or game in the first place. If you can get a complete experience without playing it, then it didn't need to be there at all.

 

[Carpenter]

Is it like Splinter Cell where it's completely misplaced and stupidly over the top? Cause that really ruined a lot of Conviction for me, not that i was taking it particularly seriously in the first place but it was in very poor taste.

I don't know how it is in GTAV but i imagine it's just Rockstar trying to be controversial, something i really don't condone.

Conviction?

That was TV show torture, a guy punching people and slamming them into things until they talk. If that made you feel sick or uncomfortable, you are so far removed from reality and "real torture" that you probably should play the scene just to at least be on the right track of what we are talking about.

"Torture" in conviction was played out as the "hero doing the hero's duty" and that's obviously not what's being done with GTA 5.

 

[Brian Tams]

For fuck's sake. If you think Rockstar is advocating torture than you either haven't played the game, or are just an idiot. And if you don't like it because it makes you uncomfortable? Hey, maybe that was Rockstar's intent! It was to make you uncomfortable about torture. This is where gaming can be used as a powerful art form; you get to experience something you would have never experienced before.

If the mission made you uncomfortable, then it was a roaring success. If you're mad about being made to feel uncomfortable, tough shit.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Should have the option to sensor this scene or completely disable it. Just like that one CoDMW2 mission which you can skip.

COD did that because it's a game made for kids and mass appeal in general.

GTA is not meant to appeal to everyone, especially kids, and having the scene be "optional" would completely take out the point of having it in the first place.

COD doing something doesn't mean everyone else has to do it. On that note, why don't you see COD giving you an option to play the game without shooting people at all?

Because they want people to be desensitized to the idea of killing certain people.

Letting you skip the "no russian" scene also made it obvious and undeniable that the scene had no real relevance on the story or game in the first place. If you can get a complete experience without playing it, then it didn't need to be there at all.

They still could make it optional to sensor it. I'm not moved by that scene at all but quiet a few people are so that would be the best sollution w/o making a plothole.

 

[Carpenter]

Should have the option to sensor this scene or completely disable it. Just like that one CoDMW2 mission which you can skip.

COD did that because it's a game made for kids and mass appeal in general.

GTA is not meant to appeal to everyone, especially kids, and having the scene be "optional" would completely take out the point of having it in the first place.

COD doing something doesn't mean everyone else has to do it. On that note, why don't you see COD giving you an option to play the game without shooting people at all?

Because they want people to be desensitized to the idea of killing certain people.

Letting you skip the "no russian" scene also made it obvious and undeniable that the scene had no real relevance on the story or game in the first place. If you can get a complete experience without playing it, then it didn't need to be there at all.

They still could make it optional to sensor it. I'm not moved by that scene at all but quiet a few people are so that would be the best sollution w/o making a plothole.

I ask again, why? Why give people the option to censor the scene? (btw it's not spelled "sensor" nor is it spelled "Sollution")

You keep missing the point that it's supposed to make you uncomfortable. Keep telling me it didn't "move you" because it only shows that you are missing the point. It wasn't meant to "move you" or make you feel good, it was meant to make you feel sick and uncomfortable. Hey look, people like you claiming it should be censored because it makes you feel sick or uncomfortable.

The people that feel that way are the people that might skip it, and the people that are supposed to see it. Making it optional defeats the entire purpose of having it in the first place. It would be like giving you the option to not have your sister die in Fable 2 or having the option to not have any war in COD and the whole game would end when you finish training.

Not everything in games is meant to be sunshine and lollypops, sometimes something is supposed to be unpleasant. Don't like it? Don't play games intended for adults.

 

[LegendaryVKickr]

Should have the option to sensor this scene or completely disable it. Just like that one CoDMW2 mission which you can skip.

COD did that because it's a game made for kids and mass appeal in general.

GTA is not meant to appeal to everyone, especially kids, and having the scene be "optional" would completely take out the point of having it in the first place.

COD doing something doesn't mean everyone else has to do it. On that note, why don't you see COD giving you an option to play the game without shooting people at all?

Because they want people to be desensitized to the idea of killing certain people.

Letting you skip the "no russian" scene also made it obvious and undeniable that the scene had no real relevance on the story or game in the first place. If you can get a complete experience without playing it, then it didn't need to be there at all.

They still could make it optional to sensor it. I'm not moved by that scene at all but quiet a few people are so that would be the best sollution w/o making a plothole.

You can't entirely avoid doing the mission, but you can fail the mission intentionally, three times, and the game will allow you to skip past the part that's giving you trouble. I plan to balls up the mission and just pass over it. Sorry GTA, I'm squeamish and pulling a man's teeth out is not something I signed on for.

 

[Poetic Nova]

snip

First: I don't need a lecture on how to spell, english isn't my first language.
Second: Manhunt 2, 'nuff said, I'm done, don't bother quoting me again.

 

[Tumedus]

The irony to me is that if the scene were played with more guffaws or you were able to bypass it with "choice" the entire message would be lost.

It is pretty clearly condemning the practice. If you played it for laughs you basically turn torture into a gag. You make it okay, thereby legitimizing, not necessarily the practice of it, but the dismissal of it as an issue. If you make it a choice then you allow people to avoid the issue entirely and it honestly becomes a "violence simulator" just for those that want it.

By making it both necessary and straight it forces everyone to confront it. "Does this make you uncomfortable" "Good!" "It should make you uncomfortable so don't pretend it's okay".

I think it also serves as a not so subtle reminder that, while entertaining to be the indifferent bad guy, the shit you are doing in these games is bad. And it's effective in a way that "remember kids, don't try this at home" just fails to capture.

 

[Poetic Nova]

You can't entirely avoid doing the mission, but you can fail the mission intentionally, three times, and the game will allow you to skip past the part that's giving you trouble. I plan to balls up the mission and just pass over it. Sorry GTA, I'm squeamish and pulling a man's teeth out is not something I signed on for.

Would be nice to allow to skip this part of the mission before it started while showing a message that it's not for everyone.

 

[Johnnyseven]

I'm not sure if something like this has already been said but isn't it a bit silly to pick one torture scene out of a game as unacceptable when you probably destroy about five families every time you try and park your car (that you just stole from a dude you probably randomly shot in the face) on a sidewalk?

I haven't thought about it much but this just jumped into my head, it really doesn't make sense that someone would be fine with murdering people left right and center but would object to torture. At least not to me anyway.

 

[LegendaryVKickr]

You can't entirely avoid doing the mission, but you can fail the mission intentionally, three times, and the game will allow you to skip past the part that's giving you trouble. I plan to balls up the mission and just pass over it. Sorry GTA, I'm squeamish and pulling a man's teeth out is not something I signed on for.

Would be nice to allow to skip this part of the mission before it started while showing a message that it's not for everyone.

Fortunately, the mission has created enough attention and controversy already we can just google the mission name, and then choose to fail out of it as much as possible.

However, unless this ends up garnering a Jack Thompson sort of guy pushing his agenda, I don't think it will be censored or removed. But This does remind me of Spec: Ops, where the player is given the option to stop playing if they truly do not want to proceed. Not quite the same I know, but you do still have an option to avoid it in it's entirety, so if it's something you absolutely will not tolerate, you can choose to not play.

Maybe you can find a friend who can do it for you? A lot of my friends would be eager to play any part of the new GTA, having not bought it yet. And also aren't super squeamish like I am.

 

[Compatriot Block]

The most psychopathic player-character in the game explains how pointless and useless torture is literally as he walking out of the building it took place in.

Jesus, at least watch a video of someone else playing it before speaking publicly about it.

 

[Carpenter]

snip

First: I don't need a lecture on how to spell, english isn't my first language.
Second: Manhunt 2, 'nuff said, I'm done, don't bother quoting me again.

First, if you have no desire to learn our language maybe speak your own, I may suck at speaking spanish but at least I take criticism and try to improve, I don't just go "Screw your language, I don't know it all so I'm going to just make it up as I go along"

Second, what does manhunt 2 have to do with anything? They were given an AO rating (it wasn't more violent than the first but that's another story) so they had to censor the game in order for it to be released.

That doesn't support your argument in the slightest and the fact that the censored version of the game sucks kind of proves my point that it kills the original intention of the game.

 

[Carpenter]

The irony to me is that if the scene were played with more guffaws or you were able to bypass it with "choice" the entire message would be lost.

It is pretty clearly condemning the practice. If you played it for laughs you basically turn torture into a gag. You make it okay, thereby legitimizing, not necessarily the practice of it, but the dismissal of it as an issue. If you make it a choice then you allow people to avoid the issue entirely and it honestly becomes a "violence simulator" just for those that want it.

By making it both necessary and straight it forces everyone to confront it. "Does this make you uncomfortable" "Good!" "It should make you uncomfortable so don't pretend it's okay".

I think it also serves as a not so subtle reminder that, while entertaining to be the indifferent bad guy, the shit you are doing in these games is bad. And it's effective in a way that "remember kids, don't try this at home" just fails to capture.

Thank you!

People saying it should have a skip option and warning or be more comedic are pretty much proving that this scene needs to be in this game. People are just way too quick to turn torture into a "fun" subject and as you can see when it comes anywhere close to the sick reality people reject it like a child spitting out their peas.

I'm glad it makes people sick, it means there may be some hope for humanity after all. We have been so desensitized to the idea of war, violence, and torture that prison rape is a common comedy trope, torture is a way to show how cool your protagonist is, and real life war is often regarded as a small modern annoyance rather than an extremely serious issue.

 

[Carpenter]

Should have the option to sensor this scene or completely disable it. Just like that one CoDMW2 mission which you can skip.

COD did that because it's a game made for kids and mass appeal in general.

GTA is not meant to appeal to everyone, especially kids, and having the scene be "optional" would completely take out the point of having it in the first place.

COD doing something doesn't mean everyone else has to do it. On that note, why don't you see COD giving you an option to play the game without shooting people at all?

Because they want people to be desensitized to the idea of killing certain people.

Letting you skip the "no russian" scene also made it obvious and undeniable that the scene had no real relevance on the story or game in the first place. If you can get a complete experience without playing it, then it didn't need to be there at all.

They still could make it optional to sensor it. I'm not moved by that scene at all but quiet a few people are so that would be the best sollution w/o making a plothole.

You can't entirely avoid doing the mission, but you can fail the mission intentionally, three times, and the game will allow you to skip past the part that's giving you trouble. I plan to balls up the mission and just pass over it. Sorry GTA, I'm squeamish and pulling a man's teeth out is not something I signed on for.

Good, that's the point, you shouldn't enjoy seeing it or pretending to do it.
It's a good thing that they made you feel sick and made you do this mission to complete the game, the subject of torture has become a joke especially in games and it's about time they start giving people a little dose of reality because the "escapism" trend is only leading to a completely emotionally detached society.

 

[MrBaskerville]

Is it like Splinter Cell where it's completely misplaced and stupidly over the top? Cause that really ruined a lot of Conviction for me, not that i was taking it particularly seriously in the first place but it was in very poor taste.

I don't know how it is in GTAV but i imagine it's just Rockstar trying to be controversial, something i really don't condone.

Conviction?

That was TV show torture, a guy punching people and slamming them into things until they talk. If that made you feel sick or uncomfortable, you are so far removed from reality and "real torture" that you probably should play the scene just to at least be on the right track of what we are talking about.

"Torture" in conviction was played out as the "hero doing the hero's duty" and that's obviously not what's being done with GTA 5.

It wasn't uncomfortable it was just pretty silly (in the context of the game) and out of touch with the tone of the game, making me ask the question, why is it here?

It just feels like they are putting these ridiculous torture scenes into their games to appear edgy and "progressive" while it's really just out of place.