Using real life brand/model names in-game

[Pascal]

8 hours ago, Aquila said:

The concept of roleplay is to adapt to your surroundings and base your character's reactions on said surroundings.

Yes - and those surroundings are defined via RP commands (/me, /do etc.), rather than the game. If a mafia has killed another player and RPly hidden them in a specific area, players can't "adapt to their surroundings" because they physically cannot see that this has happened via the game, they need to find out via what is conveyed through roleplay.

 

The common argument on this thread is essentially "the game already provides the tools - stick to them". This defeats the very purpose of RP, why limit yourself to a core set of options when thousands exist in reality? Why should we be allowed to RP the use of any rum brand because none exist in game and only RP around half a dozen beer brands existing, because "they're already in-game".

 

After our discussion last night I hit up @Topinambour to clear up what I meant earlier with the example I gave, and we went back and forth over a few points. Whilst we still have our different opinions on things, I'd like to add some more details to why limiting RP it restrictive and a terrible idea.

 

Firstly: cars. If we stick to "GTA Universe" and just say my Buffalo is a Buffalo, when I take it for servicing at a mechanic, not much is known about its design. The wiki often lists what engine it has, but not specific, individual components. Contrast this to a real world vehicle, such as a Charger or a Mustang. Both of these cars have specific defined setups under their hood, this information can be used at a mechanic to create specific RP depending on the specific car. Unique scenarios will be created depending on what you RP your car as.

 

Secondly, locations. I often see people in these "GTA Universe" arguments suggesting that LA, NYC, and Miami shouldn't exist because we have "universe" equivalents. However, if a major real world event happens there, that details specific locations not mirrored in LS/LC/VC - they can't really be replicated in LS/LC/VC etc. because there is no equivalent. It then becomes a major grey area deciding "okay, this stuff is allowed to exist from real life, but this isn't". 

 

I think this issue has been hugely overblown by a very small minority of players who are passionate about discussion. Even if RPing something being something else can "create confusion", we have roleplay commands to correct this, and it only takes 1-2 actions to do so. Things bleed over from real life already in all sorts of other ways and we are also not limited to this "GTA Universe" that has suddenly sprung up as a talking point out of nowhere that was never an issue back in SAMP RP.

[Insanity]

Not supporting.

[Lance]

1 hour ago, Rheotic said:

Why shouldn't laws fall into that category? If you're already going to the extent of literally not using a cigarette's brand, why would you use real-life laws? Everything that is involved with real-life shouldn't be used if it's that way then. Also just proved how silly it is to even suggest such thing, I don't see how it'll affect anybody's roleplay if somebody asks for a Corona or roleplays a Marlboro cigarette...

 

 

 

 

Topic not really about the law, it's about brands. R* gave us their own brands, yet people use IRL ones. Laws are the same IG and IRL. GTA is based on real life afterall. We can change traffic laws, drive on a red light and stop on a green ofc if you wish. And it doesn't affect too much, however for some people(I'm one of them) mixing up GTA brands and RL brands is just confusting and slightly immersion breaking. I don't mind if people mix brands of cigarettes that much, but mixing vehicle model names...too much.

 

@Insanity It's a general discussion, not a suggestion thread to just throw in a support/unsupport and leave. Add reasons. Discuss.

Edited June 19, 2018 by Lance

[Kill3rkrok]

Personally I don't like when people use IRL brands and name's that's why I don't use them myself.

 

I think we should use the brands provided, and only use the irl brands as an insperation for what the vehicle performs like. 

 

For example I would still call my Hermes and Hermes, however I can look at what it is based off to RP that it is a 1940 car with x amount of bhp.

 

In my opinion this simply helps me with immersion on the server rather than some people saying mustang and some saying buffallo

[2Frsh]

I myself even use real life brand names. But, I mean, for everyone their own. I don't really mind. Is this such a big issue, though?

Edited June 19, 2018 by 2Frsh

[aloegarten]

16 minutes ago, 2Frsh said:

I myself even use real life brand names. But, I mean, for everyone their own. I don't really mind. Is this such a big issue, though?

Not really. I'm pretty sure a lot of people advocating for it are from another -now closed- server because it was a "rule" there.

I don't see an issue with letting people roleplay what they want, real-life or GTA Universe. It was left open without a rule for a reason, surely because some people aren't lore experts, and shouldn't have to be just to roleplay.
Those people more than likely don't know the less common GTA brands (e.g Sessante Nove) and would prefer to use the real-life counterpart. It's purely preference, and I believe people should leave it at that.

[Pascal]

14 minutes ago, Rumbunctious said:

Answered your own dilemma

You misunderstood. We use RP commands to describe our environment, we are not limited to what the game environment provides.

 

16 minutes ago, Rumbunctious said:

I guess you guys don't mind if I RP that my Panto is a Gallardo?

It should happen within reason. If you're RPing it being something unreasonable, it's clearly unrealistic. If you're RPing it being something very similar, there's nothing wrong with that - and it even allows you to create different RP depending on the car, as they'll have different components under the hood a mechanic can RP with.

[aloegarten]

21 minutes ago, Rumbunctious said:

I don't understand why people insist on RPing a Buffalo as a Mustang. It's not a Mustang. It's a Buffalo.

But the main body of say - the Dominator, seems to be heavily inspired by a fifth generation Ford Mustang, doesn't it? Comparing a smart-car to a Lamborghini Gallardo (which would be the Vacca iirc) is just a bit dramatic for no reason.
The two aren't really comparable in this situation, no one is going to PG and say that their Faggio is a Harley or something.
As Pascal has been saying previously - having it should be fine aslong as it's actually reasonable, e.g an almost carbon copy of the vehicle's real life counterpart.

Edited June 19, 2018 by aloegarten

[sexyvegan]

i think your energy is best invested being agitated by something else

this is a non-problem

[Tweaker]

I don't see the issue. It doesn't affect me at all if someone wants to say their Buffalo is a Mustang or their Bagger is some sort of Harley. Obviously that person shouldn't be pointing at your Buffalo and insisting it's a Mustang but I haven't seen anyone doing that personally. Any confusion can easily be cleared up with a simple line of text.