Seamus, whose name almost looks like Samus, growls at journalists who repeat politicians' (false) claims that players must engage in mayhem when playing Grand Theft Auto.
Of course it isn't true. Any well-adjusted preteen could tell you that you are free to either create a ruckus or remain below the radar; either shoot a prostitute, or ignore her. Just like real life!
But it's also not entirely true to say that players aren't rewarded for killing hookers and shooting cops. They ARE rewarded, but not by the game, at least not directly: the reward is that committing crime in the game is FUN. The reinforcement of antisocial behavior doesn't happen in the game world that actually becomes hostile to players who inflict harm. The reinforcement is in players' own minds, which are stimulated to glee by their participation in violent fantasy-enactment.
You know how, when you see a pigeon in your path, you shoo it away? It's kind of fun, even though nobody's paying you to do it. Same in GTA, except that instead of frightening a bird you're ending a person's life. And I think that's what makes GTA's "awfulness" so sticky: we'd like to think that, if challenged to commit murder, we'd decline. But here's proof that we wouldn't.
I can't be sure, but I think that's what might qualify GTA as upper-case-A Art.
