Talk:Grand Theft Auto V

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2020

69.160.26.247 (talk) 11:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. OceanHok (talk) 11:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2021

"Michael is living under witness protection with his family in the city of Los Santos, under the alias Michael De Santa." Should be "Michael is living under the facade of witness protection with his family in the city of Los santos, under the alias Michael De Santa." as it has been proven that michael is not under witness protection by DarkViperAU. 90.191.113.98 (talk) 20:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- ferret (talk) 20:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

FWIW I believe that edit request was referencing this video [1]. If the change were made, a new RS probably would not need to be added as it can just sourced to story of the game. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 22:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Changing the plot based on fan researching nearly a decade after the game's released is going to need something a bit strong. The core details don't change either way, and the plot is pushing MOS:VG recommendations on word count as is. This is an FA, we need something strong than fan speculation/research. -- ferret (talk) 23:14, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely, this is a true fact: MANY times, Dave Norton's agreement with Michael Townley is mentioned throughout the game, with direct quotes such as Dave's "well if you expose my corruption I'll expose you're alive" etc. Mantr33r (talk) 10:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

That quote doesn't prove anything. This all remains very WP:OR feel to me, with users speculating based on "it's implied by how this or that was said." The quote above for example would still apply to a situation of a corrupt agent telling someone under legit protection that they would expose them. The bottom line is Michael is under what is presented as witness protection, whether legitimate or not. MOS:VG's word count is being strained here already, and this is a Featured Article. The burden of proof is higher, and fan arguments isn't enough. -- ferret (talk) 13:11, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Mantr33r (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2021 (UTC)Yes it does...???

I think you'd like to see this ferret. AdrianWikiEditor (talk) 05:43, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

:) AdrianWikiEditor (talk) 05:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 05:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

With regards to the arrangement between Michael and Davy:

- He literally calls it an "informal witness protection" at the end of Dead Man Walking (when he is simplifying history for Franklin). He is avoiding explaining the actual details obviously, but there is no reason for him to add 'informal' as a qualifier unless this was not a traditional deal with the FIB. The 'informal witness protection' was his secret agreement with Dave to give Dave the glory of taking down the trio and Dave would help Michael fake his death to get both his criminal enemies and the wider FIB off his back so he could disappear.

- If it were an actual witness protection agreement, what crimes of Dave's would be revealed if they looked through Michael's files. (mentioned at the start of Dead Man Walking) What does Dave mean when he says "I would get 3-5 years, but you?" If Dave was just the middle man for a legit agreement with the FIB where Michael turns himself in, why would Dave get in trouble for the contents of Michael's files? He means that Dave would go away for 3-5 years for his corrupt deal with Michael and Michael, now known to be alive, would be convicted of his past crimes by the wider FIB. - There are dozens of references in the game, literally dozens, including Lester's "that is doesn't sound like any wit-sec program I have ever heard of" when he starts to hear Michael's lies on casing the jewel store.

- That Michael is PAYING Dave over 10k a month, even after 9 years, should scream to you "this is not a witness protection deal". That got to keep his stolen millions, and lives in a mansion shows it is NOT a witness protection deal because that is obviously not what a witness protection deal looks like.

- Michael's crimes spanned 20+ years and included smuggling drugs, running whores, murder, torture, and stealing 10s of millions of dollars. We literally mow down a few dozen cops at the start of the game. You don't get to "cut a deal" and get NO jail time and a mansion after such a career! He was literally the most notorious bank robber of the age "The late, great, Michael Townley". Both Trevor and Brad's careers were shorter, and Michael was the ring leader (of course they were still only known as M, T, B as their identities had not been blown until after the failed North Yankton Heist).

- The FIB also did not know about Lester and Michael asks after his former associates during Casing the Jewel Store, showing Michael did not give up ANYONE to the FIB because Michael would know where they were if he did and therefore would have no expectation they'd be available to help him get back in the game.

- Additionally, the FIB had no reason to shoot Trevor, only Michael did, and the FIB would clearly not kill 1/3 of a bank robbing trio. Michael clearly wanted Trevor dead and he was calling the shots in the deal. As Michael says to Dave at the start of Dead Man Walking "You ungrateful fuck, I made your career" , and Dave doesn't disagree. Michael was never caught, he came to Dave with the deal as noted he "turned himself in" during Monkey Business.

- In the ENTIRETY of North Yankon, there was exactly ONE FIB agent. ONE and that was Dave. Clearly if the wider FIB was involved, there would have been more than one guy sent to take down the most nutorious bank robbing crew of the modern age. Michael criticizes Dave during By The Book for not being able to control things in North Yankton, allowing the normal police to get involved. Dave was just a little guy in the FIB at this point and so was less able to control local law enforcement, while clearly the wider FIB would have no issue. The existence of local law enforcements again shows that the wider FIB were not involved.

CarToneHK (talk) 07:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

References

Objective article quality changes in "Plot" section

Mantr33r (talk) 22:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC) The users "ferret" and "TheDeviantPro" are sabotaging the article because they want to maintain the plot section, word for word, how it is. The current state of the plot section is that it's just awfully written. The game takes about 20+ hours to beat in Story Mode with TONS of dialogue, phone calls, writing, extra missions, lore and everything, and these users are disregarding it because of some weird personal agenda and ego problem. Me, Spy-cicle and XygenSS all agree that it requires extensive modification to be barely up to par with other video game plot sections. It's a good game story disrespected by two I presume friends who've never played a GTA game in full in their life. Plot sections are meant to be long anyway, look at a movie's plot section. GTA 5 is basically to the level of quality of a movie released at around the same time.

If they wanna edit war, that's fine, but they're provably wrong and the game itself can be cited for the information. How else would you know a game's story?? From a news article? Same way Plot sections for movies are filled out or synopses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mantr33r (talk • contribs) 22:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Plot sections are meant to be long anyway - no. We have a strict character limit on plot sections for a reason. Not pinging TheDeviantPro and ferret when talking about them is a little disrespectful. The game having lots of dialogue and "lore" is exactly why we don't want a series of WP:GAMECRUFT finding its way into the article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:39, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Lee Vilenski What hard word limit? Would you like to try telling the Final_Fantasy_XII article that? That's over 1,300 words. Is there some special exception applied to convoluted plots? Does GTA 5 fail to meet a convolutedness standard? How ocnvoluted does a game or show need to be to justify a longer plot section? Are plot sections summaries or synopses, or both? A summary can be as short as a 2 inch/5 cm tall paragraph (or 5-10 lines of text on an average screen), or as long as well... GTA 5's? Please mention me. And unfortunately, at that time not only did I not know how to mention those users, but I felt personally that mentioning them would be a waste of their time and a pointed attack/harassment which I did not pursue. Again, please mention me, and thank you.Mantr33r (talk) 06:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Mantr33r - WP:VG/PLOT which is our manual of style for video game articles reads To retain focus, generally limit plot sections to 700 words or fewer. There are indeed other articles that don't meet the MOS, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't meet them for this article. No, there is no "too complicated" loophole, or there'd be no MOS at all. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:20, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Who knew a casual edit in a sunday afternoon would get me reeled into this thing. Let me preface this by saying that I am nowhere near an experienced contributor (my edit count should speak for itself) and I might be looking over the most obvious of things during my attempt at rambling.

Mantr33r - I don't appreciate how you're speaking on my behalf.

ferret - You call for reliable sources for changes to be made. Yes, my primary source is that one DarkViperAU video. Wow, Youtube, such credible and respected source of information, this guy must know what he's talking about...

But tell me, does the current revision have it *any* better? [29] is an except from the game with zero explaination. [31], [32], [33] are just pointers to endings A B and C. Is this an acceptable standard in other videogame-related articles? Not a rhetorical question. You're telling me that I can just do the same thing and pull out quotes from the game and stick that up as a reliable source?

"Changing the plot based on fan researching nearly a decade after the game's released is going to need something a bit strong."

I don't see what the age of the game has to do with anything. Besides, what's stopping me from tagging on every minor detail on the plot section? Obviously that would be breaking the rules, but you get the point - the relevant sections on the article has zero citation. You call for "something a bit strong," but the current revision as it stands doesn't have anything substantial either.

I do completely understand the point about word count though. Reverting back to my revision would go past the limit.

XygenSS (talk) 14:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Rockstar Games described Michael's situation as:

Michael is a veteran bank robber, an expert, with the kind of knowledge that only comes from years as a successful career criminal. He's now retired, living comfortably in an unofficial sort of witness protection program.

(emphasis added)

Based on what is said in the game, he is in some form of witness protection, just (apparently) not officially granted by the government. This is a very marginal detail and ultimately only affects Michael's interactions with Dave Norton & co., rather than the overall plot. Should it be mentioned, it should be very brief and not given undue weight. The current plot is 702 words. IceWelder [✉] 14:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

User:IceWelder Not only is the plot detail wrong, and many missions are out of sequence, but.. 702 words?? Michael uses "witness protection" to explain to people like Lester Crest and Trevor what has been going on. And, that's a MEDIUM sized plot section! Go to Final Fantasy XII's plot section, it is literally at LEAST 1,300 words. I counted. These fixes that add detail and proper timeline to the story, don't randomly exclude 80% of Trevor's storyline or a HUGE majority of Michael's personal story missions... They would barely add up to 1,000 words. GTA 5 is a 27+ hour game with a LOT going on, that is poorly summarized (as in not even mentioned or condensed, just completely left out.) Mantr33r (talk) 06:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I made no deep analysis of the rest of the plot. My position was simply that this is an FA, the highest quality standard Wikipedia assigns to an article. As such, MOS (word count for plot) must be met. And generally, when suddenly a lot of new or infrequent editors pop up to start editing plot details based on a YouTube video, it requires something deeper than "I played the game, bro." IceWelder has good enough proof that it's not official, but at the same time, it changes nothing about the overall plot description. How do we explain it without going into a dozen+ words of detail? Is adding "unofficial" enough to satisfy? -- ferret (talk) 15:11, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

I think it is worth mentioning in a couple of words that it is unofficial, especially as we link to United States Federal Witness Protection Program. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 16:32, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree that we can add one or two words about the witness protection being unofficial, even though the word limit is just over 700. Someone can do some minor edits to make it under the word limit. But we don't need to rewrite large sections of the plot to mention Dave and Michael's dialogue about the unofficial witness protection, like what Mantr33r and XygenSS were doing. It adds undue weight and bloats the plot; it's just unnecessary. TheDeviantPro (talk) 03:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

ferret What MOS word count for plot? Can you please link it? Because Final Fantasy XII's plot section is twice as long as the current GTA 5 section. If I could theoretically rewrite GTA 5's plot section to be 400-500 words, yet include ALL necessary details unlike the current one, would that count? GTA 5's plot is notoriously big, and unlike say previous games, everything you do is more integrated into the story rather than having some side activities and characters going off to do their random business with no regard to the story like San Andreas and such. 800-900 words which'd be a small change would befit a complex if convoluted plot. Idk. I decided to mention you because I've lost interest in edit warring the article, and also, because you couldn't simply undo my article and keep my changes, but just hit the undo button and ended it at that but urr yeah. I even explicitly said "please, if you have a problem with SOME of my changes, don't delete all of them" and you did exactly that. The undo function lets you selectively pick and choose what is too bloated and what fits. Mantr33r (talk) 06:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Other's have already pointed you to the MOS and addressed the FFXII plot. The undo function does NOT allow for selectively keeping parts of your edit. It requires manually taking up my own time to keep this or that portion of the edit. Secondly, I don't think you're even talking about this article but a different one I reverted you at. I recall that edit summary, and most if not all of that edit needed reverted anyway. -- ferret (talk) 14:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to address some disconnects within the plot section. Assuming zero outside knowledge, a reader may not understand:

- Why Michael, presumed dead after Ludendorff, is alive and in (official) witness protection.

- Why Trevor, presumed dead after Ludendorff, is also alive but seperated from Michael.

- Why Trevor believed that Brad was alive but imprisoned when he was presumed dead after Ludendorff.

- Why Brad was buried in Michael's grave and why Trevor got angry over it.

I do understand that the article is already really pushing the word limit, and that a nobody like me encroaching upon your proud work that was nominated an FA might feel like I'm violating something personal for you, but if you'd let me, I'd like to take a shot at condensing it all down to something more concise and more accurate at the same time.

XygenSS (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

I'd recommend attempting it in the talk page or a WP:SANDBOX or something. I'm going to lock the page from editing if there's any more back and forth reverting of edits. Sergecross73 msg me 18:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

@Mantr33r: I'll respond to all three comments here: the MoS guideline you're looking for is WP:VG/PLOT ("To retain focus, generally limit plot sections to 700 words or fewer"). As for Final Fantasy XII: it's actually 829 words, but you're right, that's going over the guideline too; I've tagged it so hopefully someone more familiar with the story will cut it down. Other stuff exists, but that's not a valid reason to violate guidelines here as well. 700 is the limit. – Rhain ☔ 07:55, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Seconded. The plot for Final Fantasy XII is too long and per OSE irrelevant, and should not be used as a justification for an overly long plot here. For comparison, Red Dead Redemption 2, which is advertised with 60 hours of story gameplay, manages this limit just fine. The only endgame for this trivial plot detail is to propose a change to the plot that will keep it at the word limit. IceWelder [✉] 08:04, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I actually agree with that. Here's what I've been thinking for a first draft of a much less dense Plot section:

"Four bankrobbers rob a bank in Ludendorff, North Yankton, of which only infamous bank robber Michael Townley (now going under De Santa) and Trevor Philips survive. Michael lives in a mansion as a husband and father to two kids, living off of his bank robbing money and remaining anonymous thanks to the corrupt FIB agent Dave Norton, who in turn takes bribes and earns promotions for "killing" him. Trevor Philips is living in squalor in a trailer park at Sandy Shores, Blaine County because all of his bank accounts were frozen by the government. Franklin Clinton is participating in gang business with Lamar Davis and officially working for the corrupt Armenian car salesman Simeon Yetarian.

Michael and Franklin's paths cross when Franklin tries to illegally repossess his son Jimmy's car, after which they become accomplices in crime and rob a jewelry store. Trevor finds out Michael is alive and seeks him out after he finds out about the jewelry store heist, and the three reluctantly work together to pull off a few more heists and are blackmailed into working for the FIB to undermine the IAA. Trevor's activities anger the mercenary group Merryweather funded by Devin Weston and the Triads headed by Wei Cheng, Franklin's friend Lamar is kidnapped by their former ally Stretch and Michael angers FIB agent Steve Haines as well as Devin Weston, resulting in his family being held hostage by Merryweather and Steve Haines blackmailing and attempting to kill him and Dave Norton.

The three with the help of their hacker assistant Lester Crest engage in a final heist where they steal gold bars from a large bank in downtown Los Santos. They pull it off successfully, but are still each left threatened by the Triads, FIB, Merryweather and Stretch working with the Ballas. Franklin is given an ultimatum: murder Trevor, murder Michael, or fight off all four threats endangering the lives and safety of Michael, Franklin and Trevor. Whichever of the two the player chooses to kill will leave the remaining two distant and not friends anymore, while choosing the third option will see the three hold off a massive onslaught from the FIB and Merryweather at a foundry, before each going to personally kill Wei Cheng, Steve Haines, Stretch and finally Devin Weston whom they throw off a cliff."

This is the most accurate and true version of the plot, everything is in correct order and the word count is EXACTLY 385. Nothing is left out, I even managed to fit in how Dave Norton was a corrupt FIB agent, surely our favorite plot detail. The original is entirely out of order and has so so much detail for some things then completely leaves them out for others. This is addressed to ferret, IceWelder, XygenSS, and Lee Valenski in case anyone feels left out, I failed to mention the users I was addressing before and I feel this is relevant.Mantr33r (talk) 08:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

New low res gameplay image, or a side by side?

The original image is based off of VERY old 2013 gameplay reveal footage from a slightly different looking version of Lamar Down, the next gen and PC versions look different. Maybe have a side-by-side image, and maybe have both images submitted by players of each version instead of exclusively from a gameplay promo?Mantr33r (talk) 08:57, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Grand Theft Auto V PS3 PS4 comparison.jpg already exists. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 18:12, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Plot - Presumed Dead?

The three are not presumed dead after the initial heist! Brad Snyder is shot and dies of his wounds in custody, and *officially* has been incarcerated, Michael is living in an informal witness protection in Los Santos and *officially* reported deceased, and Trevor escapes.

Semi-protected edit request on 17 July 2021

Close to the beginning of the plot part about Michael's "deal" with the FIB it should say he refers to the deal as an "'informal' witness protection" Hsmith310 (talk) 02:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. lomrjyo^{(talk•contrib)} 02:31, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Should a new section regarding the reception of the 2022 release for Xbox Series X/PS5 be made/new paragraph written? Pretty much everyone is writing off the release as a disappointing joke offering no new features (except for more lens flares) and are criticising Rockstar for trying to get away with reselling the same game in its third generation of consoles with no improvements. In fact, there's very little written about the game's criticisms after its launch. The page for GTA Online says reception has steadily gotten better since release, but if any of you have actually played the game, you'd know and agree with me that Rockstar has continually been getting trashed online for flooding GTA Online with microtransactions and their lack of action regarding in-game cheaters, especially after the release of the Oppressor Mk II (14 Jul 2018). Coupled with Rockstar's efforts to attack modders who have created more original GTA content in mere weeks than Rockstar has in 8 years, people are saying that Rockstar has shilled out, and they've become what they made fun of in earlier titles of the franchise.

162.83.143.126 (talk) 01:31, 12 September 2021 (UTC)random gta v enthusiast