User:McJeff

On the subject of myths
To explain the "nuance" of the position this wiki takes on myths related content.

It isn't that discussion of myths itself is offensive or too far off topic. The problem is that myth related articles tend to be almost completely uncontrollable. First, for whatever reason, they're major vandalism magnets. Second, even if the vandalism is kept ahead of, they tend to fill up with speculation, useless details, and information that isn't just wrong, but "stupid-wrong", e.g. the guy who was convinced that Bigfoot was on the doors of the police cars in GTAV, and that that proved he existed in GTA:SA. Lastly it tends to attract editors who are interested in proving myths rather than editing about them neutrally. They fill up the myth articles with ruminations, personal stories, incorrect information, and modded images masquerading as "proof". If this were Wikipedia, you could call them Single Purpose Accounts and POV-Pushers editing with a Conflict Of Interest. When thwarted, they regularly go full vandal, forcing staff to block and clean up after them.

It is better all around to have an entirely separate Myths wiki, with rules and policies specifically tailored to people who want to write about myths, and simply forbid editing about myths and direct interested editors elsewhere on this wiki.

Why didn't you like the GTA4 era games?
I'm going to refer to an article on TV Tropes called "Darkness Induced Audience Apathy". Every major character was a complete piece of shit, most of the minor ones too, and unlike the GTA3 era games, GTA4 wasn't funny enough to justify it. Basically, I couldn't care about winning the game because I wanted Niko to die as much as I wanted Faustin, Rascalov and Bulgarin to die.