It’s strange - how one moment you could be so excited about a game being released, and just over a week later, the experience is over.

Well, not over. Just the story. Still, it feels somewhat of an anticlimax - not because it has somehow failed, but because you come to realise that these people don’t really exist. They never did… and so now life returns to normal.

This is, I feel, a testament to the strength of the game’s narrative. In much the same way that a good book draws you in, makes you a part of its world, and then spits you out back into your life, so does GTAIV grab you. It is, in every way, more believable than it’s jet-pack flying, Area 51 spoofing, base jumping predecessors. And come the end, it feels really quite tragic that Niko’s grand story is over.

The difference between this and a book, though, is the narrative choices that you make personally. They are tactful - only introduced once in a while, but with enormous effect. Rather than these decisions being the sort of “moral barometer” gameplay trumpeted by other games, they feel much more like Rockstar have handed you a pen, and allowed you to write a portion of the script. Your personal morality may come into it; or like me, you may just see it as a chance to have your input into one of gamings best stories to date - without it being a reflection of yourself. As a whole, it feels like a masterpiece for the medium - and you’re one of the authors.

Which brings me back to the initial point. When the story finishes, there is a sense of loss, rather than achievement. Part of this comes from the manner of the climax, but it also comes from the fact that it’s over at all. And here is another difference between this and a book. In a book, once you’re done, you’re done. Here, when you finish, there is the slightly sad prospect of still having control over those characters; my Niko is now living a somewhat hollow existence, just wondering the city, trying to find pigeons and doing his part for the LCPD.

For once, I’m not looking forward to GTA moving on to a new character in its next instalment. I, for one, hope to see a little more of Niko in the future - I’m not quite ready to say goodbye.

The barrage has started.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/grandtheftauto4

I’m scared.

We couldn’t honestly let this one slip by, could we. We here at Pixunion try to focus on the games industry as a whole - picking up on its highs, lows, artistic aspects, shamefully low brow but hilariously fun… it’s all there. So of course I’m going to talk about what happens next Tuesday, because this week, that’s all the industry apparently contains.

You only have to look at the main gaming websites, and any one of this months magazines and you can see what’s happening. And if by any chance you don’t know what I’m talking about, well, shame on you.

The thing is, I love this franchise. It’s been getting a bit tired, but I love it, and I am excited. Excited enough for me to break my cardinal rule - when I’m looking forward to it, I let the game itself tell me what it contains, not a website. I try to avoid the hype as much as possible. Here, though, I decided to take a sneaky look at a few feature articles on various gaming sites - and quickly discovered that it was getting silly.

IGN is in the middle of doing a whole week dedicated to the game. Gamespot’s “launch centre” is particularly full. 1up has been doing new features on it for a whole month. Even my personal favourite bastion of decent games coverage, Eurogamer, has just completed a two day double feature. The magazines - including Edge - have been shamelessly shovelling bucketfuls of cover features into our eager faces.

But what’s the point? Everyone knows how tight lipped the developer in question is. There has only been a handful of new information for a while now. This month in Edge, the preview focused entirely on the few multiplayer options that had been revealed. Most of the recent articles are interviews with artists or programmers on how they made a game we haven’t even played. Or they read along the lines of “First released in 1997…” and then give you a history of the franchise for the 50th time.

But rather than just bang on about how bad the hype is, I think this shows something. We’re used to seeing hype. What we’re not used to is every game in Edges “Most Wanted” list being the same one. So what does it become when the journalists, who have to play every single game - good or bad - to completion, who have to sit through a thousand gimmicky press conferences, who see hundreds of games fail to fulfil a promise; what is it when even the most respected writers become genuinely, overwhelmingly excited?

Personally, I think it’s the enthusiasm to see something interesting. Everyone likes to see good ideas - Second Life, for example. But it’s rare to see those given the sort of care and attention needed to make them work. And when a studio relies so heavily on a game’s critical success, combined with a history of making ideas work, well, you can see what’s exciting about it.

Oh, and we’re going to have to think of a new excuse to enjoy it - “it’s just cartoon violence” may not cut it any more.

Are you critical of “celebrity” reality tv?  You know the shows, collection of old faded has-beens gathered together for an arbitrary task to which they are completely unsuited.  So explain to me… why does this idea work so well in gaming? 

Mario, in particular, has long been the Jodie Marsh, the Flavor Flav of gaming - he’ll drop anything to take part in any old sports tournament as long as he gets the exposure.  Of course, the crossover has a long and grand tradition in pop culture, taking in such highlights as Mork’s appearance in Happy Days, and the time Doctor Who appeared in Eastenders.  But it’s videogaming where the concept is most loved - because after all, a game character has no dignity.  Master Chief can step straight out of fighting the Covenant and try his luck against the surprisingly well proportioned women in Dead or Alive (I must have missed the novel that explains how that fits into the Halo canon).

So crossover mascot games are everywhere, and boy do we love ‘em!  They shift bucketloads!  And as these mascot games need ever more characters, do we get more epic confrontations between titans of the genre?  Is Lara Croft better than Pitfall Harry?  Can Zangief out-muscle Marcus Fenix?  Of course not, have you seen who’s in that Mario and Sonic at the Olympics game?  I mean, Vector?  Blaze? 

I suppose it’s partially because modern games don’t really have character design, you get your little face tool instead.  Adjusting the curve of your nose or the shape of your ears is now an integral part of any self-respecting action / adventure.  With such a dearth of memorable or even constant faces in today’s games, complete with strict copyright in the rare cases when interesting characters do appear (Niko : not likely to be in the next Smash Brothers), means the developers have no choice but to dig through the back catalogue.

And so, our half remembered heroes take up the call - their days of saving the universe are long gone, overtaken by today’s leaner, meaner brand of avatar, but before being put out to pasture, at least they can have a last hurrah playing softball, racing karts, or just having a good ol’ scrap.