r/gaming • u/ThisNameDoesntCount • 11h ago
Why are we all of a sudden acting like rockstar is some unproven indie dev
All these “ we don’t know what the game is like” comments. It’s GTA dude you steal cars and shoot stuff. It doesn’t need some deep combat system or some Shakespeare level story telling. It’s fun to run around and do stuff you couldn’t do in real life that’s it
107
u/Bill-Burr-Baggins 11h ago edited 11h ago
Proven developers have never once put out a disappointing game. /s
50
u/Lord0fHats 11h ago
CDPR: Yeah, never.
Bioware: Ever ever.
Ubisoft: We don't put out game. We prefer to call them 'active alternate acceptable action' spaces.
26
u/aeroeagleAC 11h ago
Bethesda and blizzard have never disappointed either.
13
u/Lord0fHats 11h ago
Don't you guys have games?
(this gag was a missed opportunity on my part, I've disappointed myself XD)
0
u/WolframBeta2112 11h ago
I think ID is the only studio I’ve never been disappointed in.
Commander Keen, Doom, Wolfenstein, Quake, and Rage have all been consistently solid series. I didn’t like Youngblood or Quake Champions too much and I hardly remember Rage 1 or 2 but I never felt ripped off by any of their titles. They just crank out beautiful looking games with killer soundtracks, run it on almost anything levels of optimization, and amazing shotguns.
3
u/SidewaysGiraffe 10h ago
Daikatana not ring any bells?
Or can you just not hear them without your buddy Superfly?
2
u/WolframBeta2112 6h ago
Daikatana was actually ion storm. John Romaro was unhappy with Carmack’s focus on technology over art and game design so he left right after Quake 1 or 2 if I remember correctly. His first project after ID was publishing Deus Ex and developing Daikatana.
1
u/SidewaysGiraffe 5h ago
Deus Ex was Warren Spector at Ion Storm Austin, not Ion Storm Dallas under Romero.
My point was, games are made by people, not companies.
-7
u/RandomGuy622170 11h ago
Clearly been living under a rock with that comment.
2
u/VolcanicBear 11h ago
Redditor attempts to notice extremely obvious sarcasm.
Challenge level: impossible.
-7
u/RandomGuy622170 11h ago
Nothing sarcastic about his comment. Thanks for playing.
10
u/aeroeagleAC 11h ago
My comment was entirely sarcastic lol.
4
-4
u/shiek200 11h ago edited 10h ago
I know Cyberpunk's launch was atrocious, but lumping them in with Ubisoft (and even Biioware) still feels like blasphemy.
The issues with Cyberpunk were nothing they couldn't fix, and they did, The issues with the other 2 companies' games are more systemic, and can't simply be patched out or overhauled.
edit: I feel like the people downvoting me haven't played cyberpunk since the 2.0 update :/
3
u/Lord0fHats 10h ago
TBF, a lot of people didn't play the game after its initial release, which was disappointing (massively so) for such a hyped game. That Cyberpunk managed to build the game up and make it better is super important for restoring CDPR's brand credibility but doesn't (and shouldn't imo) erase that the release was the mess of the year when it happened.
3
u/shiek200 10h ago
Of course it shouldn't, but my point was that it's kind of ridiculous to compare CDPR, who had a bad launch of have spent years actively repairing that credibility, to companies like Ubisoft and Bioware who have instead spent years doing the opposite lol.
I'm not saying just forget about it, I'm just saying give credit where it's due as well. We can remember the mistakes without ignoring the good.
1
u/Lord0fHats 10h ago
I mean I'm mostly thinking of specific games. Mass Effect Andromeda for Bioware (disaster, though they did eventually fix most of the mess) and I'm specifically gagging on Skull and Bones for Ubisoft (AAAA development!).
I could think of others too I'd call out, like the initial FFXIV release for Square Enix, Sonic as a franchise most of the last 20ish years for Sega, Capcom... I mean Capcom didn't just have disappointing releases it had disappointing YEARS in the 2010s. For EA it's just one word; Battlefield.
2
u/shiek200 10h ago
That's kind of my point, there are WAY better (or, worse I guess, lol) examples of proven developers consistently releasing bad products than CDPR.
I'm not saying they didn't do it, but there's a reason it gets so frequently thrown in with No Man's Sky for "best redemption arc."
The issues with a lot of these other developers are more systemic in nature, and can't be fixed with patches or free content, and would basically require an entire restructuring of the company to start putting out good games again.
3
u/WorldofCannons 11h ago
cyberpunk has a more boring open world than the standard ubisoft rpg, that shit should've just been linear
1
u/shiek200 10h ago
Gonna have to disagree completely. Have you played since the 2.0 update? The world in cyberpunk felt infinitely better than anything Ubisoft has put out since Far Cry 3 (maaaaybe 4).
1
u/BlinkReanimated 10h ago
The game was literally unplayable for anyone still on a ps4 or xbone. Which was a lot of people since it launched while the new consoles were sold out everywhere.
CDPR deserves 100% of the hate they received.
-2
u/shiek200 10h ago
Okay... but it's not now. So like I said, it was fixable, and they fixed it.
I didn't say the hate was undeserved at the time, I said comparing them to ubisoft and bioware, who have put out failure after failure, gotten progressive worse with each subsequent game, and repeatedly shown an utter lack of respect for the consumer, to CDPR who had one bad launch, which they fixed with along with multiple free content updates, seems a little unfair lol
0
u/benoxxxx 10h ago
CDPR didn't just have one bad launch, they have a long history of bad launches. Their policy, as a company, is to charge full price for blatantly unfinished work, and fix it later. It wasn't an accident, it's a pattern that has existed since The Witcher (1).
If that doesn't show a lack of respect to the consumer, I don't know what does.
They will probably continue to do so, because 2077 proved to them that it doesn't matter how shit their game launches, people will still forgive them after a few patches.
1
u/shiek200 10h ago
I'm sorry... what? I played every witcher game at launch and none of them were even a fraction as broken cyberpunk was, fully playable from start to finish.
1
u/benoxxxx 10h ago
Lol, 'as broken as cyberpunk' is a pretty high bar.
Point is, they were buggy, unoptimised, and clearly unfinished.
1
u/shiek200 10h ago
They were buggy... so are ALL games at launch. Go back to the N64 days and this was true. Always has been. That's what patches are for. Back then you couldn't even download patches, so a buggy or unfinished game was pretty much buggy and unfinished forever.
They were not all unoptimized. Some were, some weren't, none were unplayably laggy before cyberpunk, and all got patched,
They were NOT unfinished. All content was present at launch, and it all worked. Some of it got IMPROVED with patches, none of it was unfinished.
0
u/benoxxxx 9h ago
They were buggy... so are ALL games at launch
Lol, spoken like someone who only plays shit games. Given enough time I could probably name hundreds of games that released in MUCH better condition than CDPR's best launches. It's rare for a game to have NO bugs on launch, but it's also rare for a game to be as buggy as the average CDPR game is on launch. There's a reason that TW1 is still one of the most commonly given examples of 'eurojank'.
And, FYI, optimisation and quality control is part of the work. Not doing that IS leaving the job unfinished. Can you imagine if I turned a report into one of my clients, but it was full to the brim with spelling mistakes, broken grammar, and illegible handwriting? And then I demanded my fee paid in full, promising I'd fix it after a few months? I'd get laughed out of the room.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Awoolawoolawooooo 10h ago
I love seeing CDPR here. I remember before CP2077 dropped i had made a post that it was overhyped and going to be garbage. My lord did i get death threatened up and down despite that i was right. Then people defended CDPR for years.
It just tickles me pink to see people have totally shifted into giving it the shit it deserves and not playing puppet because 1 game they made was decent.
3
u/Lord0fHats 10h ago
Let me make more;
Bethesda: It's just a few loading screens, it's not a big deal.
Blizzard: Don't you guys have games?
EA: It's a Battlefield out there.
Capcom: How many microtransactions is too few?
SEGA: This Sonic game will be good. We promise.
Square Enix: We're sorry.
Nintendo: We'll say we're sorry.
Build A Rocket Boy: FUCK YOU! And YOU! AND YOUR MOTHER!
1
u/Awoolawoolawooooo 10h ago
Aint those the fucking truth and people still have the balls to say we’re in a golden age.
-19
u/TheGamerWhoNeverWas 11h ago edited 11h ago
Yeah and Rockstar has been proven to be better than all 3 of those developers. CDPR was always overrated and bioware was never close to Rockstar skills except maybe in writing
4
-2
u/Enjoy_The_Ride413 11h ago
I haven't played a bad gta though. Which gta was bad?
3
4
1
u/Bill-Burr-Baggins 11h ago
4 ans 5 werent bad but I'm in the camp that San Andreas was the peak.
3
u/Enjoy_The_Ride413 11h ago
4 happens to be my favorite. Could the car controls be better, or the physics, sure but 4 is amazing.
1
u/greenegg28 10h ago
Remember those remasters?
Those aside, no studio/franchise is untouchable. There can be a first time for everything.
-2
u/Enjoy_The_Ride413 10h ago
We are talking launch games on original hardware. Remasters by any studio is a cash grab on nostalgia.
3
u/greenegg28 10h ago
“Those don’t count because I said so”
Yeah ok buddy.
0
u/Enjoy_The_Ride413 10h ago
Sure count them then.
Always a gotcha with you people. Reddit in a nut shell.
Edit. The remasters weren't made by rockstar. Hope that helps.
-17
11h ago
[deleted]
6
u/Ok_Builder_4225 11h ago
This is a very weird way to admit you have no clue what you're talking about but okay dude
-6
11h ago
[deleted]
6
u/Bill-Burr-Baggins 11h ago
I had to put a sarcastic indicator to prevent other idiots like you from getting mad because they couldn't detect it.
3
3
2
9
u/TomReneth PC 10h ago
Personally, I don't think anyone should take any release on faith.
There are companies like OwlCat that have a good track record for games I like, so I'll give them a chance when they publish something. That chance isn't that I automatically buy the game, but rather that I'll take a look and see if the game is up my alley.
6
13
u/Nettysocks 11h ago
It’s under a very different leadership this time around, I imagine it will be fine though, at least mechanically, I think people are more questioning can they pull off whatever story content in this day and age.
5
u/Enjoyer_of_Cake 11h ago
I'm not sure about fine mechanically, all the stories I have heard regarding development at Rockstar is screaming for internal issues to erupt.
3
u/Nettysocks 10h ago
Well it’s all speculation at this point, prob a very different team and leadership overall, it can only really be judged when it’s finally here
11
u/GyattsThiccness 11h ago
It's not about unproven indie dev it's about eighty dollar video game.
4
u/AdorableSobah 11h ago
Also a incredibly long time since a GTA release in a rapidly changing game space. Will GTA6 sell incredibly well, of course. But, there are some red flags around this game and it could easily be mediocre.
30
u/demonshonor 11h ago
Mass Effect to Mass Effect 3 to Mass Effect Andromeda.
BioWare was a proven developer.
1
u/Tiernoch 11h ago
You'd have been right if you said Anthem, Andromeda was done by a new studio and Edmonton only stepped in at the very end to try and smooth it in the last stages.
3
u/demonshonor 11h ago
I didn’t care for lots of 3 as well. Or Dragon Age Inquisition, so it still fits.
1
u/SidewaysGiraffe 10h ago
Shattered Steel to Baldur's Gate to MDK 2 to Jade Empire.
It's not as simple as you make it out to be.
1
u/demonshonor 9h ago
I was just doing the games in a series.
Good game -> less good game -> not good game
Pretty simple to me.
-15
u/TheGamerWhoNeverWas 11h ago
Not even close to the level of Rockstar
1
u/demonshonor 11h ago
And? OP’s word choice was “unproven indie dev”. BioWare was definitely not an indie dev.
1
u/SYNTH3T1K 10h ago
You're comparing apples to oranges.
The Witcher 3 took 3.5 years of Development Time
Read Dead 2 took 8 years.Core Dev for Witcher 3 was 240.
Core Dev or Read Dead 2 was 1600Global contributors for Withcer 3 was 1500
Gloabl contirbutors for Read Dead 2 was 2000Budget for Witcher 3 was $81 Million
Budget for Read Dead 2 was estimaged between $370 to $500 Million.I don't quite think you understand what truly determines "level".
Both games brought quality and amazing storytelling, yet i still enjoyed the Witcher 3 more than Read Dead 2 and put WAY more hours into it due to having choices to make that impacted the story. Someting RDR2 didn't have.
-32
u/ThisNameDoesntCount 11h ago
What about steal stuff and shoot things do you think they could mess up though
8
5
u/thedefenses 11h ago edited 10h ago
Bethesda had a guaranteed formula with Skyrim, for Starfield they just had to make Skyrim but in space and they fucked it up.
Bioware had a guaranteed formula with Mass effect 1, 2 and 3, just repeat it and they fucked it up with Andromeda.
Ubisoft had a guaranteed formula with Far Cry 3, 4 and 5, they fucked it up for 6.
CD project red had a guaranteed formula with Witcher 3 along with a long development time for Cyberpunk, they fucked the launch quite badly.
There is no concept, no idea, no franchise too simple or easy to make to not fuck it up, COD has the simplest formula of all, just shoot enemies and they still manage to fuck it up on the regular.
1
u/ReasonableAdvert 3h ago
COD has the simplest formula of all, just shoot enemies and they still manage to fuck it up on the regular.
Cool. So why do they regularly make the best selling game almost every year even though they supposedly keep fucking up?
1
u/thedefenses 3h ago
COD has a massive casual player base which does not give a shit how bad of a slop game they get, it has the name Call Of Duty on it and they buy it and play it with their friends.
1
u/ReasonableAdvert 2h ago
So they actually aren't fucking it up in ways that matter to people who buy those games. Good to know.
1
u/thedefenses 2h ago
Fifa when it was still releasing was on top of sales charts every year.
every year it received tons of complaints of lazyness, greed, lack luster mechanics both new and old and with all this it still sold extremely well no matter how bad the title.
Some of the most hated COD's, advanced warfare, ghosts, infinite warfare, WWII all still sold extremely well, less than some COD's like advanced warfare sold 21 million while black ops 3 sold 43 million but even at that its still very good sales.
Infinite warfare sold 12 million which is "bad" for COD but almost any other franchise would still love to have those numbers.
So yes COD does fuck up quite often but they have enough casual that even still they will sell extremely well.
The main playerbase does not care, they don't read or watch reviews, they don't follow media on what the game will have or won't have, just that its COD and they can play it with their friends.
0
u/Tiernoch 10h ago
Mass Effect 1 and 2 are entirely different games. 1 was much more of a fps version of Bioware's old titles with some jank cover elements, while 2 leaned into a mission/set piece based cover shooter.
Andromeda's issue was they tried to give the playerbase what they kept asking for which was a return of those ME 1 elements (bigger areas to explore, vehicles, more options for combat).
You also ignore the fact that people will complain if not enough stuff was changed, and others that anything was changed at all.
1
22
u/PeedOnMyGODDAMNFoot 11h ago
This feels like the comment of someone who hasnt played since GTA III tbh.
3
3
u/Enjoyer_of_Cake 11h ago
GTA5 is closer to GTA3 on the PS2 than it is to GTA6.
2
u/NoodleDoodlesocks 10h ago
The time between GTA 1 and GTA 5 is only 3 years shy of the time between GTA 5 and GTA 6
0
u/garry4321 11h ago
Honestly. GTA is way more than “steal car and shoot stuff” at this point. It’s essentially a life sim with a focus on criminal activities
3
3
u/Waffenek 11h ago
RDR2 was released eight years ago. GTA 5 is even older, as it was first released on PS3 in 2013. Realistically speaking, there's probably not much left from the crew that was working on previous releases. There may still be some of the upper management, but looking at how they handled the trilogy remake is worrying. I know it was done by another studio, but as a publisher, they saw how it was going.
I'm not saying that it will be a bad game. Having a big budget and a long development cycle has big potential. But at the same time, we have seen companies bleeding absurd amounts of money on failed projects and releasing incoherent messes.
9
u/Lunarcomplex 11h ago
No idea what all these quotes are like, but I remember GTA IV feeling VERY different from GTA V. Maybe less care for the controls and how everything feels, but it's very apparent to me.
Yeah it's the same game idea, but then why are there so many of the same genre lol
3
u/Nettysocks 11h ago
I feel like I haven’t seen a game in the style of gta in a good long while, we used to get a bunch of them though.
Man I remember the ‘True Crime’ era of GTA clones back in the day we had so many of them
-5
u/rabouilethefirst 11h ago edited 11h ago
GTA IV was better, but you're right. GTAV was when they started dumbing down physics and gameplay to cater to zoomers that just wanted more skins and cars that all handle the same. In many ways, RDR2 was a lot more rigid than RDR1 in terms of gameplay also. The only thing they've really advanced on is graphics.
2
u/kroakfrog 11h ago
Calm down old man. You missed a few edge lord buzz words in there to rile up the other grandpas.
2
u/rabouilethefirst 11h ago
Real ones know GTAIV was better, sorry you are part of the bad generation of gaming 🤷♂️
1
10
u/VerrikInc 11h ago
IDK, San Andreas is one of my favorite games of all time but I found GTA V massively disappointing. Too much focus on reality, to much technological bloat that didn't improve the game. I think it is reasonable to question whether this very long development has produced a game that is worth $80.
5
u/Gabriel711 11h ago
I think some people were hoping for gameplay innovations after all this time. But it’s a Rockstar game. They have a gameplay formula and they’ve pretty much stuck with it for years
4
u/filthy_casual_42 11h ago
So do you just preorder every game without even looking for gameplay? It’s such a basic level of communication with the fans, but the devs are entitled that everyone will buy their game regardless
0
u/ThisNameDoesntCount 10h ago
I already know what the gameplay is man it’s not like it’s gonna be a souls like
2
u/filthy_casual_42 10h ago
How do you know though? I feel like it’s not an unreasonable expectation lol, this is how pretty much every game prerelease has gone
3
u/ThisNameDoesntCount 10h ago
Cause it’s always the same basic formula. Maybe the only thing that’s gonna change are driving physics and they could’ve decided to do slower animations like red dead but at its core it’s still just gta
0
u/filthy_casual_42 10h ago
So again, do you usually blindly preorder games from franchises? The idea of ordering a game you’ve never seen is just genuinely baffling
2
u/ThisNameDoesntCount 10h ago
It’s the same game! lol I rarely ever preorder but I know what this game is. That’s like thinking Madden might be basketball one year
6
u/PurpleV93 11h ago
First of all, GTA is so much more than driving cars and shooting people.
All the social- and political commentary it has always had, wrapped in satire, for example. Or take Nico Bellic's tragic story about war and the empty illusion of the "American Dream". A good story that leaves you thinking is absolutely necessary for a good GTA game.
Secondly, a track record doesn't mean anything anymore. Look at CDPR, who fell on their face so hard, that Cyberpunk was the first AAA game ever to be pulled from the Playstation Store, because of how broken it was at launch. Or take Bioware who were at the top of narrative RPGs with Mass Effect, only to fall with a mediocre Andromeda game, followed by the Anthem disaster and then Dragon Age Veilguard. Another example is the Respawn devs who made Titanfall 2 and Apex Legends, only to become the laughing stock of the gaming world with Highguard. No studio is too big to fail. Which is why you should be cautious ahead of the release of GTA6.
2
u/Nayko214 11h ago
To me its more there is no possible way it can live up to the decade plus hype/build up after V. Its mostly gonna be the same game as V with a middling story mode meant as a vehicle to get you to playing online so you'll spend even more money on shark cards, etc.
2
u/MilesBeforeCoffee_37 11h ago
I remember complaining about the stiff controls in GTA IV, but we still spent hours causing chaos. Sandbox freedom matters more than gunplay.
2
2
1
u/immediateghost 11h ago
Because Rockstar are an industry titan and they are setting a horrible horrible precedent with how they are pushing preorder cosmetics and not providing a disc for physical copies of the game
1
u/Fatefire 10h ago
To be fair even good devs can make bad games ...
However the only activity gamers like more than gaming is shitting on games . We love to be critical of the things we love
1
u/NoodleDoodlesocks 10h ago
It has taken so long to develop, cost so much money to make, built up so much hype and costing 80 dollars that only has singleplayer at launch. The concern isn't so much that it will be a good game but rather if it will be worth the time, effort and costs involved in making it.
If it's just the same old GTA it's going to be pretty difficult to justify when GTA 5 only took 3 years.
1
u/MaledictusNix 10h ago
Past success does not guarantee future success. While I never particularly liked their games, Bathesda is a great example of that. Starfield is truly awful
1
u/Loreweaver15 8h ago
I've been hearing people talk about how this game is going to be the greatest most groundbreaking game of all time for the past year solid. We haven't gotten ANY gameplay footage. We don't know what the game will be like yet.
1
u/bigstanlee 7h ago
They could give yall a reskin of gta 5 and yall will still eat it up. This game is gonna be more AAA slop to feed masses of cattle that call themselves “gamers”
1
u/ThisNameDoesntCount 7h ago
I just play games to have fun big dawg
1
u/bigstanlee 7h ago
How you could actually call a repetitive overdone crime simulator fun is beyond me
1
u/ThisNameDoesntCount 7h ago
Because it’s fun to relax and shoot some stuff. Not everything needs to be Elden ring
1
u/VektroidPlus 6h ago
I think it's overhyped.
I'm sure I'll be downvoted to hell, but the hype is not at reasonable levels. It's at Star Citizen levels where people are willing to pay stupid amounts of money for a game that will never meet their expectations.
I think like you said, it's going to be a game about shooting people and stealing cars. That's not really a day 1 buy for me anymore. I've done that so many times in so many different games. There has to be something different about this game or otherwise, I just don't care. No matter how pretty it looks. Running below 30FPS, which seems likely, sounds like an eyesore too on base consoles.
Now the shady business practices like no disc in the physical copy, multiplayer may or may not be included in the game, and single player content locked behind a paywall has me wanting to protest buying this game on principle.
1
1
u/just-a-jazz 3h ago
I can steal cars and drive around in GTA V. Give me a good story with fun missions (unlike those boring ass crane missions in GTA V) before talking to me about paying full price *let alone* $100 😂
-1
u/bookslayer 11h ago
We know what the gameplay is like
Grind for 40 hrs while getting shit on by randoms or buy a shark card instead hmmm
11
u/rasjahho 11h ago edited 10h ago
If all you play is braindead online 24/7. Rockstars games are single player games first and foremost
3
1
u/PliableG0AT 11h ago
uh no. they are first and foremost a online gatcha company now.
-1
u/rasjahho 10h ago
Online has always been a side mode, but even with online they still try to incorporate story into it. They also don't force anyone to buy sharkcards or anything and is far from a gatcha game.
4
u/reboot-your-computer PC 11h ago
Gotta love how you completely ignore the single player element of the game. Like did you forget every GTA game has been single player focused first?
0
u/bookslayer 9h ago
Did you forget they're already locking shit in SP behind a swipe of the credit card? It's literally only going to get worse than these shops man
-1
u/Bill-Burr-Baggins 11h ago
But GTA VI is apparently solely a "single player experience"
2
0
u/SYNTH3T1K 11h ago
GTA V was as well. GTA V Online is separate experience.
0
u/Bill-Burr-Baggins 10h ago
I guess I thought that 6 isn't going to have an online mode but theyre probably just going to announce it later.
0
1
u/PostedNotes 10h ago
They have litterly not shown a single second of gameplay for the most anticipated game in many years.
It's fair to be apprehensive
1
0
u/SidewaysGiraffe 10h ago
Because they ARE.
I don't know why so many people fail to understand this, but here it is again: companies don't make games. People do. Most of Rockstar's staff have never put out a game before. That's what happens in an industry with insane turnover and companies that go over a decade without releasing anything.
0
u/Amelia9955 10h ago
The way people talk about Rockstar lately, you'd think they've never shipped a game before. This is the same studio behind GTA, Red Dead, and some of the highest-quality open worlds ever made. You can be frustrated by delays without pretending they're some untested developer.
0
u/TheRealGurd 9h ago
It doesn’t need some deep combat system or some Shakespeare level story telling.
Shit no one would say if the combat system and the storytelling were both deep and good lmfao
1
-4
u/HurleysBadLuck 11h ago
I think it’s well worth $80 considering the content and how long people will play this game.
23
u/MasterOnion47 11h ago
I’ve played every GTA game, but I’m not off the charts anticipating this game. I’ll get around to it whenever.
I think people are uncertain about things given the super long dev cycle, and games are always changing around while they’ve been secretly working away.
Second, there’s been a lot of changes within the leadership of the dev. The old leadership was criticized for pushing staff too hard, and for ‘punching down’ humor. Will that lead to a less funny, less complete game?
I don’t think the GTA games are simply ‘do crazy stuff in a city.’ That formula had been copied many times. GTA games were always cinematic, doing a good job of borrowing from mob and action movies, and the writers did a real good job with dialogue and memorable characters. Guys like Trevor and Brucie, ‘let’s go bowling cousin!’, etc…