540°

GTA 6 Writers Reportedly Asked to Be "Less Crude" Toward Transgender People and Other Minorities

According to a new report, Rockstar Games has asked writers on GTA 6 -- the next installment in the Grand Theft Auto series -- to be "less crude" toward transgender people and other minorities.

Read Full Story >>
comicbook.com
Scissorman186d ago

No. Either everyone is off limits or no one's off limits.

Alos88186d ago

I wish we still lived in that world, but this is the way things are now. Some people are considered acceptable targets and others aren't, even though instead of that building tolerance all it really does is create resentment from anyone that's 'allowed' to be mocked by everyone else.

Eonjay186d ago

I honestly think it comes down to freedom of expression in its totality. That is to say, you should be able to make fun of someone and that person should be able to say they don't like it. You have to have both. You can't restrict either. This is real freedom. This is what is missing from the conversation. So in an ideal society, you should be able to make fun of trans people, or Muslims or white people AND trans people and Muslims and white people should be able to complain about it. If you want true equality you have to embrace it fully. Everything else is hypocrisy.

A quick example: remember when the game 'Hatred' came out and people were complaining about it? And then people were complaining that other people were offended. Well thats hypocrisy because if you have a society where people can speak hate, you HAVE to also be able to speak against hate. Otherwise you are just running around in circles.

Let the people make jokes about trans people and let people get offended. Period. Everyone must be free or no one is free.

DivineHand125186d ago

Your comment is far from reality. No group is considered an acceptable target, and don't pretend that LGBT and minority groups were not traditionally treated poorly by the majority.

186d ago
Seth_hun185d ago

In a GTA game everything and everyone should be an acceptable target. They can do whatever they want, it will sell 100 million in a year :)

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 185d ago
Christopher186d ago

But they didn't say off limits. They literally said to not go as harsh and specified that they had used them for lazy and easy targets for jokes in the past. Read: they've been targeted while others were not and now they don't want them to just be the targets but to spread it out.

I really hate that people either have no reading comprehension or see any form of equality as oppression.

Alos88186d ago

But you know off limits is what they meant- of course they meant that. They aren't going to say something like this and then 'only' mock them a little. That sort of joke is off the table now. I have no problem with that much, it's who they're going to go after instead that bothers me. Equality should be about evening the odds, not turning the tables.

senorfartcushion186d ago (Edited 186d ago )

Punching down is punching down

There are not enough trans people in the world. There are more of everyone else. It's a numbers game.

Also how do we know this is even true? Every time something seems even slightly woke the nerds of the Internet jump on it

Christopher186d ago

***But you know off limits is what they meant- of course they meant that.***

Oh, so words don't matter? You can't just read what was said, you have to create your own meaning to them?

How can anyone have a conversation with you with this logic?

porkChop186d ago

The anti-woke crowd have gone so far in the opposite direction that they can't see they're either part of the problem or creating new problems. Any one group of people being off-limits for jokes, sure, that would be an issue. But why would any reasonable person be upset by the jokes and targets just being more fairly distributed? It shouldn't be an issue unless these people just hate minorities and the trans community.

InUrFoxHole186d ago

"The report doesn’t elaborate on why Rockstar Games has asked its writers to make this change or what type of material impact it has has on the game’s development." The writer of the article feels they've been targeted not Rockstar. Tell us about reading comprehension again.

Christopher186d ago (Edited 186d ago )

***The writer of the article feels they've been targeted***

I can't with this.

What I am referencing are direct quotes from Rockstar provided by the author.

What you are referencing are the author's 'feelings' and not what Rockstar said.

Again, reading comprehension.

Edit: I'm loving this debate. People do not realize they are arguing against Rockstar dictating what content they want to make and calling it censorship. It's as if censorship means it's something you disagree with and not what it actually means. "But some of the writers dont like that." Yeah, so? They don't like a lot of things they have to write. Do people really think every writer wanted to leave all the worthwhile lore bits till the end of the second and third-act of Veilguard? Or make characters seem extremely one-dimensional? Nah, but that's what those people in charge of stuff get to do. Same way most developers don't want MTX, but they add that anyway. This is how jobs work. How the heck do people think we got multi-colored ME3 ending? Because the guy in charge of the story made that happen.

Angyobangyo186d ago

Nothing to do with comprehension. Knowing how the a certain community reacts, any kind of joke will set them off regardless if it's harsh or not. Imagine playing GTA of all games, and getting upset at the kind of content the game offers.

Knushwood Butt185d ago

Where does it say that, 'others were not' ?

185d ago
Chard185d ago

This will continue until/unless class war replaces culture war

185d ago
Christopher185d ago

***Interesting point. So, can men become women? Words matter, right?***

There's a reason it's called the trans community and not just absorbed into men and women.

***Equality... then "target" the other types of people just as much as the ones "perceived" to be picked on. That'll make things equal as well.***

Literally what R* is saying. They are literally saying they've been discriminating with the target of their jokes and want to fix that.

Silver_ShadoWolf184d ago

You can never tell people what they meant, especially when they DID NOT SAY IT. That was the most teenage girl response ever: “They said what they wanted, but that’s not what they meant.” Something is seriously wrong with the guy who said this

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 184d ago
CrimsonWing69186d ago

Exactly, the South Park route!

staticall186d ago

Personally, i think some people are forgetting what kind of game GTA is and what kind of characters we're playing. They're, you know, criminals. And criminals break the law and say some awful, dumb, obscene -ist and -phobic shit, it's kind of their shtick. How often do you see criminals on the news or street quoting Shakespeare and making inspirational speeches like Martin Luther King Jr.?
The whole appeal, in my personal opinion, to many in GTA games is to act unhinged, cause chaos, steal, kill hundreds, blow stuff up, vent, do some weird and crazy stuff.

Asking to be "less crude" to certain groups of people [in a GTA game] is, the way i see it, a way to disaster. Let me quote one South Park miniseries, called «Cartoon Wars» (it's applied to TV show, but i'm sure you'll be able to make the connection):
«If we convince the network to pull this episode for the sake of Muslims, then the Catholics can demand a show they don't like get pulled. And then people with disabilities can demand another show get pulled. And so on and so on, until Family Guy is no more! It's exactly what happened to Laverne & Shirley.»

Next they'll stop joking about millionaires (they got feefees too, you know), police, army, education system, food industry, oil companies and so on and we'll get the most sterile boring game ever in the end (again, to get an idea, rewatch South Park, «Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo» episode, when they tried to make christmas play to be as non-offensive as possible and how everyone "loved" that in the end).

P. S.: And before someone will start saying stuff that only minorities were the butt of the joke in previous GTA games or something like that - GTA was making fun of everyone, no exceptions, always have. But looks like never will anymore.

DarXyde186d ago

Brother, read. Please. Stop being needlessly reactive.

That's not the argument... The argument is that they're going to do it LESS.

Grand Theft Auto is a product of the culture. It always was. Always.

GTA has never said anything or anyone is above critique and criticism. But culture and politics have always been at the heart of the humor. They've made jokes about race, gender and even disability which they've done well because they never leaned into it too heavily. It was always in context and funny because they don't beat you over the head with the writing. The conservatism and liberalism bashing? Hilarious and well done. The race and gender stuff? I'd say funny and well done too, but GTA frequently strives to make sure we're laughing with each other, not really at each other. Nothing malicious, more like a diverse group of people at a high school lunch table roasting each other. But people change and by extension, so does the culture.

There will be jokes that will be crude towards everyone. But this adjustment I'm sure is a reflection of the divisiveness that's come since GTAV. It's a VERY different world since the last GTA and like I said, GTA is a product of the culture.

If it upsets you that much, there is always the option to ignore or boycott the game.

I'm looking forward to it personally.

Knushwood Butt185d ago

How do you measure, 'less'? 49 crude jokes instead of 50?

DarXyde185d ago (Edited 185d ago )

Knushwood Butt,

That's not up to me, and I'm not measuring. My guess is that Rockstar staff are revisiting the older games and see what feels out of place or cringe in today's society. They've always done a great job showing humor through dialogue without telling you the joke. Like Big Smoke in San Andreas: they played into him being fat when ordering at the drive thru, but he doesn't just go "I'm fat, so I'm gonna order a lot. Here goes: I'll have a number 9...."

I think they could make some pretty funny trans jokes too if it's done well and doesn't feel hostile. Like if they had a character based on JK Rowling and she hooked up with a character based on Buck Angel, there's a lot of potential there.

Really, I take it to mean they're going to approach it with a bit less over the top satire and balance it out with cheekiness. Their goal, I'm sure, is to be funny, not taking a strong political stance.

This is not to say they're just killing all of the over the top satire though. Would they really dig their heels in on these minority groups? They might, but probably not without making them look like lunatics at the same time. They might have an insanely racist white nationalist character who says overtly terrible shit... But then he's got kids who are grossly inbred and only one of them lived past the age of 18.

185d ago
+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 184d ago
andy85186d ago

One of the main points of this series was that it made fun of everyone and no one was spared.
Where will the humour be.

Inverno186d ago

Dood San Andreas is chuck full of stereotypical black/gang stuff. VICE is stereotypical Italian. To the point where it comes off as offensive at times.

Christopher186d ago

No, it really didn't. GTAV was heavily racist towards Franklin in many respects (cabs, NPC responses in shops, etc.). None of that was reciprocated or 'went hard' like that towards others at all.

Add to this, the humor in GTAV is shit. It's made for people who still get off on dick jokes, rape references against just women, and more.

I'm all for good jokes against everyone, but GTAV definitely pounded home the racism and transgender stuff, let alone the misogyny. It got old and tired real freaking fast and is one of the reasons I never completed the game. It's infantile, at best. Sure, you can say it's just not 'my type of satire' but the fact I've seen better on Family Guy is saying a ton.

And if comedians are complaining because people don't find that stuff funny, perhaps start being funny again or live with a crowd that is slowly diminishing over time because people find it just as funny as the comedy about 'Take my wife, please' did for the boomers.

andy85186d ago

Have you even played GTA? The humour is always infantile even going back to GTA 3. That was the beauty of it. Life doesn't always need to be serious.

Angyobangyo186d ago

You take the "blind" in a blind playthough literally. Doesn't know what kind of game he's playing.

GTA is a satirical take on a wide variety of communities, cultures, and societal aspects.
It's taken jibes at:
1. Urban Subcultures: hipsters, gang culture, street racing & car modding
2. Mainstream American Culture: Hollywood & Celebrities, Consumerism, News Media, The American Dream
3.Political Groups and Ideologies: left and right wingers, government and law enforcement
4.Regional Stereotypes: California, New York, South&Mid West Cultures
5.Corporate and Tech Culture: Big Tech and Corporate Greed
6.Music and Entertainment: Reality TV and Pop Culture
7.Criminal Underworld: Organized Crime and Drug Culture
8.Global Stereotypes: British, Eastern Europeans and South American Cartels stereotypes.

Flewid638186d ago (Edited 186d ago )

Don't like? Then don't play.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 186d ago
thejigisup186d ago

There aren't getting rid of crude humor.
We know a few things based on the article.

1 there's crude humor
2 they are asking to be less crude towards some groups.

If the crude humor is tuned to 11 and they are asked to tune it down to am 8 there won't be a problem. I don't see the devs going soft here but it is entirely possible. It's also entirely possible that the writers were so overtuned on crude humor that it just wasn't funny.

I don't see an issue here, let's be honest most players aren't playing the story the are playing gta online or just causing mayhem. The story is a huge part of the initial appeal of the game but its not going to stop anyone from buying the game and having fun.

vTuro24186d ago

I have a bad feeling about this game if I'm honest.

ZycoFox186d ago

Reminds me of when Isaac Hayes quit SP because he got offended by a joke, but the whole show was offensive from the start.

I wonder if this new GTA will get slated like Saints Row did.

TheColbertinator186d ago (Edited 186d ago )

Hayes only got offended and left when they joked about his precious scientology not when South Park insulted blacks, jews, Mexicans, Canadians, Mormons, the French, poor people, women, gays, native Americans, Saharan Africans, fat people, Christians, Muslims, Asians, people with disabilities and everybody else.

Hayes was a hypocrite.

Spenok186d ago

Does this really surprise anyone?

I just hope the writers tell them no. Comedy should NEVER be censored.

Either everything is off limits, or nobody is. This is stupid. And there's a reason there has been a ton of backlash by comedians lately.

The_Blue186d ago

How cruel has any Minorites? Rockstar is being clever to act like this will be the woe and not their lack of ambition.

Show all comments (102)
80°

Inside the ‘Dragon Age’ Debacle That Gutted EA’s BioWare Studio

The latest game in BioWare’s fantasy role-playing series went through ten years of development turmoil

In early November, on the eve of the crucial holiday shopping season, staffers at the video-game studio BioWare were feeling optimistic. After an excruciating development cycle, they had finally released their latest game, Dragon Age: The Veilguard, and the early reception was largely positive. The role-playing game was topping sales charts on Steam, and solid, if not spectacular, reviews were rolling in.

HyperMoused1d 8h ago

Its easy they called the die hard fans people in their nerd caves who will buy anything and then went woke to reach modern audiences....insulting the nerds in their caves along the way showing utter contempt for their fan base. very hapy it failed and any company who insults their fan base and treat their customers with contempt and insults, in future, i also hope fail.

neutralgamer19921d 4h ago

It’s disappointing but not surprising to see what's happening with Dragon Age: The Veilguard and the broader situation at BioWare. The layoffs are tragic — no one wants to see talented developers lose their jobs. But when studios repeatedly create games that alienate their own fanbase, outcomes like this become unfortunately predictable.

There’s a pattern we’re seeing far too often: beloved franchises are revived, only to be reshaped into something almost unrecognizable. Changes are made that no one asked for, often at the expense of what originally made these games special. Then, when long-time fans express concern or lose interest, they’re told, “This game might not be for you.” But when those same fans heed that advice and don’t buy the game, suddenly they're labeled as toxic, sexist, bigoted, or worse.

Let’s be clear: the overwhelming majority of gamers have no issue with diversity, LGBTQ+ representation, or strong female leads. In fact, some of the most iconic characters in gaming — like Aloy, Ellie, or FemShep — are proof that inclusivity and excellent storytelling can and do go hand in hand. The issue arises when diversity feels performative, forced, or disconnected from the narrative — when characters or themes are inserted not to serve the story, but to satisfy a corporate DEI checklist. Audiences can tell the difference.

When studios chase approval from a vocal minority that often doesn’t even buy games — while simultaneously dismissing loyal fans who actually do — they risk not just the success of individual titles, but the health of their entire studio. Telling your core customers “don’t buy it if you don’t like it” is not a viable business strategy. Because guess what? Many of us won’t. And when the game fails commercially, blaming those very fans for not supporting it is both unfair and self-defeating.

Gamers aren’t asking for less diversity or less progress. We’re asking for better writing, thoughtful character development, and a respect for the franchises we’ve supported for decades. When you give people great games that speak to them — whether they’re old fans or new players — they will show up. But if you keep making games for people who don’t play them, don’t be surprised when those who do stop showing up

Armaggedon22h ago

I thought the writing and character development were fine. Sometimes things just dont resonate with people.

90°

Report: Just Cause 5 Was in Development at Sumo Digital, But Got Cancelled

Recent evidence we discovered indicates that the next game in the Just Cause series may have been canceled, potentially two years ago.

RaidenBlack3d ago

NOooooooooooooooooooooo....... ..............

mkis0072d ago

Well if it went back to being more like 3 I would have liked it. 4 was crap.

280°

Bend Studio Reportedly Lays Off 30 Percent of Staff Following Live-Service Project Cancellation

Sony's Bend Studio lays off 30 percent of its workforce following the cancellation of its live-service project.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
Jin_Sakai3d ago

And to think we could’ve been playing Days Gone 2 by now.

RaidenBlack3d ago

I would even pay 80 bucks for an UE5 based more immersive Days Gone 2 .... or even a new Syphon Filter.
But nah .... rather lay off staff & re-remasters Days Gone i.e Days Gone Reloaded.

Cacabunga2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Stubborn Sony not wanting to listen to fans is paying the price of its arrogance. They could have let these studios grow and do what they do best and let others like Bungie maybe make gaas for those who want it.

Days Gone 2 is obviously what they should focus on next. We’ve had enough remasters and reeditions of the first one

Profchaos2d ago

Sony's not paying the price its workers are.

z2g2d ago

They were listening to the money that games like Fortnite were pulling in. Market research shows service games when successful make more money. It’s a gamble that Sony was too cocky to worry about. Now ppl are losing their jobs in an economy that’s gonna slow down any minute.

gerbintosh2d ago

@Profchaos

The workers let go were probably hired for the live service game and released now because it was cancelled

jznrpg2d ago

People needed to buy the first game! And not at 20$

neutralgamer19922d ago

I understand the argument that if fans truly wanted a sequel to Days Gone, they should've supported it at launch at full price. But that perspective misses a lot of important context.

First of all, Days Gone launched in a broken state. It needed several patches just to become stable and playable. For many gamers, paying $60 for something clearly unfinished just wasn’t justifiable. That wasn’t a lack of support—it was a fair response to a product that didn’t meet expectations out of the gate.

Despite that, over 8 million people eventually bought the game. It built a strong, passionate fanbase—proof that the game had value and potential once it was properly patched. A sequel would’ve had a much stronger foundation: a team that had learned from the first game, a loyal audience, and way more hype around a continued story.

But Days Gone also had to contend with another challenge—it was unfairly judged against other first-party PlayStation exclusives. Critics compared it directly to polished, masterful experiences like Uncharted, The Last of Us, and God of War. And while those comparisons might make sense from a branding perspective, they didn’t reflect the reality of the situation.

Studios like Naughty Dog and Santa Monica Studio had years—sometimes decades—of experience working with big teams and high budgets on flagship titles. Days Gone was Sony Bend Studio’s first major AAA console release in a very long time—their last being Syphon Filter back in the PS1 era. Before that, they were mostly focused on handheld games. Expecting them to match the output of the most elite studios in the industry, right out of the gate, was unrealistic and frankly unfair.

The harsh critical reception didn’t reflect the potential Days Gone actually had, and it probably played a big role in Sony's decision not to greenlight a sequel. Instead, they pushed Bend and other talented studios like Bluepoint toward live service projects—chasing trends instead of trusting the kinds of games their fans consistently show up for. Many of those live service games have since been canceled, likely wasting hundreds of millions of dollars and valuable time that could’ve gone toward meaningful single-player experiences.

So when people say, “You should’ve bought Days Gone at launch if you wanted a sequel,” they’re ignoring the bigger picture. Gamers didn’t reject the game—they waited for it to be worth their time. And once it was, they absolutely showed up. That should’ve been seen as a foundation to build on, not a reason to walk away from the franchise

InUrFoxHole2d ago

@neutralgamer1992
Has a point. I supported this game day 1. There was either and audio sync issue or a cut scene issue that ruined the game for me early on. I dont blame gamers at all for holding off until it meets their standard.

raWfodog2d ago

I seriously wonder who makes these types of decisions. Days Gone was a solid game. It didn't get that much love at first but people eventually saw the diamond in the rough. The ending basically guaranteed a sequel, but someone said "nope, let's pitch a LS game instead". And the yes-men were all "Great idea, sir!!"

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2d ago
-Foxtrot3d ago

Urgh. Jim Ryan’s sh***y GaaS plans still ripple across their studios even today.

Such a shame, they should have just been allowed to make Days Gone 2.

Sony need to truly let go of their live service plans once and for all.

OMNlPOTENT2d ago

Agreed. I think the live service era is dead. Even titans like Destiny are starting to fall apart. Sony needs to shift their focus back to their single player games.

ABizzel12d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I don’t think the GaaS overall was a bad idea they’ve seen the success of others, however, forcing all your studios to focus on it was absolutely insane.

Those kind of games are backed by hundreds if not thousands over 1,000 developers working on those games year-round even after release for continuous new content monthly, quarterly, and huge annual or bi-annual updates. It was stupid to expect taking your single-player focused studios and have them become GaaS focused studios when many of them have skipped Multi-player modes the entire last generation (a stepping stone into GaaS).

He was after his Fortnite, Apex, etc… and I feel they could have found that by building a singular new studio dedicated to helping developers like Naughty Dog bring Faction 2.0 to life. At most they should have had:

Factions 2.0 GaaS (PlayStation’s Open World Survival)
Destiny 3 (Bungie needs to revamp Destiny)
Horizon GaaS (PlayStation’s Monster Hunter)
A new AAA IP

That’s it. I mean technically Gran Turismo is a GaaS so that could count, and an Open World InFamous meets DC Universe Online could work with custom hero / villain classes.

raWfodog2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

"I don’t think the GaaS overall was a bad idea they’ve seen the success of others, however, forcing all your studios to focus on it was absolutely insane."

What's more interesting is that SIE was not actually 'forcing' their studios to make GaaS games. I have to find the article again but it was explained that these studios knew about Jim's plans for GaaS games and typically pitched those types of games to SIE because they would have a better chance of getting greenlit for production. They were chasing dollars instead of their ideal games.

Edit: I found the article. Take it for what it is, lol

https://wccftech.com/playst...

ABizzel11d 15h ago (Edited 1d 15h ago )

@ra

I don’t think they were forcing all of their studios, however, that initiative didn’t just come out of no where. Jim Ryan’s entire purpose was to make PlayStation more profitable than ever, and a collection of successful GaaS across platforms would have definitely done that. Based on his talk tracks and interviews he is a numbers guy, and he and Herman Hulst ran with this GaaS solution to all the PlayStation teams.

And when your CEO says this is what we’re getting behind and what the company and shareholders want going forward, everyone falls in line and pushes towards it.

Naughty Dog probably wanted Faction 2 with or without influence.

Sony Bend wanted Days Gone 2 and it was shot down, and now more than ever it makes way more sense, since the game, while initial impressions were slightly above average (which at the time wasn’t good enough being compared to God of War, Ghost, TLoUs, etc…), has found a cult following and has ended up selling extremely well across both PS4 and PS5. But instead they were dropped into this GaaS IP that failed and now they’ve wasted years of development when Days Gone 2 could have already been released or releasing.

3d ago
Obscure_Observer3d ago

Sony literally sent Playstation studios into a death trap!

They forced studios into this GaaS bs just cancel their games midway in development and fire thousand of people in the end!

WTF is happening over there? Why those CEOs still got to keep their jobs after billions and billions dollars invested in new studios and games just to so many developers fired and projects canceled in the end?

This is the worst generation of Playstation! Period!

CrimsonWing692d ago

Jim Ryan got fir—err I mean, retired.

anast2d ago

Jimmy followed Phil's advice.

2d ago
raWfodog2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

They didn't actually 'force' their studios, per se, but the initiative was certainly there.

https://wccftech.com/playst...

-Foxtrot2d ago

They didn't have a choice lets be honest, a new boss comes in and lays out all these plans....what are any of them going to do? Pitch a single player game with none of the things that guy is asking for? You're just asking to be given less funding, less notice, less resources and the like. or maybe you're scared incase the guy decides to get rid of you for someone who will actually give him things that he wants.

They didn't get brutally forced but they had no choice but to go with the flow or Jim would find someone who would.

raWfodog2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

@Foxtrot
No, they definitely had a choice but many chose the path of least resistance.

We have plenty of single-player, non-LS games that began development during the LS initiative. Those projects obviously got greenlit for production. These studios just needed to have good ideas for single player games, but most just chose to come up with half-assed LS pitches.

slate913d ago

Can't believe Sony has been shooting themselves in the foot this gen. Abandoning what made them great to chase industry trends

Skyfly472d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Alanah explains the reasons why in this video which goes into more detail: https://www.youtube.com/wat... But its basically down to appeasing their shareholders

Show all comments (44)