@jonmar @smylexx Thanks for that, I agree entirely with the sentiment and, as an old git, i can go back even further than that writer and talk at length and passion about titles that i loved on the Commodore 64 like Rescue on Fractalus and The Eidolon.
I still quote Monkey Island references such as 'that's the second biggest.... *insert whatever* i've ever seen' plus many of those terrible comebacks from the swordfighting sequences.
They really innovated the industry like no other publisher i can think of. Zac McKraken had a fantastic wallchart that came with the game that gave you a gimpse into the fake school lifestyle that the characters inhibited, Loom made you really think about music in a way that you probably hadn't before and was possibly the first introduction to Tchaikovsky for many of its players.
The Star Wars films were obviously milked to death but so many of those better than they had any right to be - when many publishers (Ocean, i'm looking at you) were happy that the film tie-in license alone would sell the game, Lucasarts put real creativity and care into its titles. From the arcade games through to the SNES platformers, the Dark Forces titles and X-Wing games there was a real sense that they wanted to put out a quality product time and time again.
Like the writer of the article you mentioned, I'm also deeply nostalgic about this company and believe that we've lost something very unique here. Our only hope is that many of these talented people get jobs elsewhere in the business and influence those around them to meet the high standards of Lucasarts glory years.
I'm sure Disney have their reasons for doing this but on the surface it appears to be a little shortsighted. With Disney producing the next movies it seems like a win-win situation to have your own game division working closely with the movies writers and artists to ensure that tie-in games look great and play as you'd expect.
Also, it would give Disney the opportunity to branch out using their own considerable back catalogue of titles and characters to the world of videogames. More Mickey's Magical Kingdom games made by a professional team with a proven track record, another Quack Shot perhaps and let's not forget that other Lucasfilm stalwart Indiana Jones.
Personally i'd just squeal like a Japanese schoolgirl if they announced another Monkey Island game..
@Dasim64 I agree that the quality is unlikely to ever match the original trilogy but with the Disney takeover we are, at least, GETTING new movies. Under George Lucas the chance of more movies was as likely as a snowball on tatooine.
Please show me where i've been agressive, i'm intrigued.
I've already answered your point coherently, if you don't like the answer, if it doesn't fit with your opinion, then i'm sorry to hear that.
If you want me to say 'it doesn't matter if someone else plays GTA with a bright green avatar' then i shall if that makes you happy. I'm not omnipresent therefore what people do when they switch on there copy of GTA has no impact on me but, as i've previously stated, my opinion is that the protagonist was carefully chosen in this case and we should simply learn to appreciate the writer's opinion.
@chuckles471 Yup, my point exactly. If it comes at no cost to the story, so be it, pop in as many choices as you want. Give me the option to play as a green, one armed, trangender robot otter..i'd love to!
Fighting games, racing games, sporting games can have options to change the character as much as they want but if it's story-driven, then usually the option to change gender, race or whatever comes at a cost -either to the writing or to the publisher.
@MinerAvatar Firstly, please lose the aggressive tone. I've been nothing but polite in every one of my responses.
Secondly, if the oprion to change the character up front came at no cost to the narrative of the story, then i would not object one iota. I do believe that in GTA:SA the protagonist 'should' be black and male however as it fits with the exact demographic that most of the movies it is emulating were aimed at.
I'm not black but at no point did i ever feel left out just because the hero of the game was. It's simply an artistic choice made by the writers which i respect.
Just because something is 'easy to do' doesn't mean it should be done. The lead character is iconic in the same way that Niko was in the more recent GTA game. It's their story we're playing -our own lives shouldn't really come into it.
That same point could be levelled at movies too -and it's equally short sighted. I really don't feel that the audience would benefit if the directors and writers decided to cast female leads in Rocky, Star Wars, Indiana Jones or Taxi Driver just so that they could hit an untapped demographic. They, quite rightly, make these choices to fit the story and it should never be the other way around
And despite what you say above, I do think that there's pretty much always a cost by having these choices if the game has a narrative structure.
@loafofgame First of all, let me say that i respect your opinion but i disagree with one aspect of it; any game where we have multiple options to change the protagonist usually comes at a cost to the narrative of the game.
Simply put, the more choices we get upfront, the less personality the hero (or heroine) has. The writing has to adapt to each character to fit the choices we make and that's expensive and time consuming. Getting voice actors to repeat lines of dialogue to become gender specific doubles their work. Adding additional options such as transgender roles, different races and backgrounds further complicates the story structure hence why so many protagonists in MMORPGs have such generic backstories.
Sure, in a perfect world it would 'sometimes' be nice to see these options but i would side with the writers every time on this - it's their vision that we get to play out. Star Wars wouldn't necessarily be better if it was Lucy Skywalker taking on the Empire.
smylexx's comments