Rockstar Games has long been criticised and celebrated for pushing the boundaries of violence in video games. All GTA titles have involved killing or harming in various ways, which has sparked media controversy. This does not only involve the Grand Theft Auto series, but equally, the Red Dead series is no less violent. With a new title coming up in 2026, how much violence and GTA VI gore can we expect?
A flashback of Rockstar's gruesome content
When is a game really too gory? That is an issue Rockstar faces repeatedly with each new release, and it dates back as early as GTA III. As some may not know, dismemberment was intended to be a part of the GTA 3D universe, which can be viewed in early builds of the game. The game was already on the verge of national bans due to its gruesome nature. In subsequent titles, the gore has been toned down ever so slightly, with GTA VI removing beheading and disabling any form of bodily dismemberment.
So, how come dismemberment is part of the Red Dead series? It's important to note that PEGI and ESRB evaluate the ratings based on the level of gore to prevent glorification of violence, and context should also be taken into consideration. The time the Red Dead series takes place was naturally cruel and depicts a fair picture of the Western era. But modern society is different.
Reflection on past controversy
There has long been controversy surrounding players’ freedom to kill NPCs, especially those resembling authority figures. This debate has intensified over the years as graphics and realism in games have improved, making such actions feel more lifelike.
Despite how provocative it may seem, Rockstar defends this choice by emphasising that all their games are entirely fictional. Moreover, killing NPCs in GTA is completely optional, and doing so results in an increase in your wanted level, serving as a punishment rather than encouragement.
To be clear: entertainment doesn’t create behaviour, entertainment reflects behaviour ... Entertainment gives people an opportunity to release feelings, engage in feelings, entertainment tells stories. The notion [that] entertainment creating behaviour has been tested and disproved over and over again.
- Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick
Zelnick’s point is that actions performed in video games do not directly translate into real-life behaviour. While some individuals may be influenced in rare cases, the broader consensus, according to Zelnick, is that games do not create behaviour. Instead, it is argued that video games act as a means of expressing your feelings without actual intentions of harm. Therefore, committing violent acts in a game like GTA does not imply or encourage similar actions in reality.
What gore is likely to be included in GTA VI?
Based on the previous statement from Take-Two CEO, it is unlikely that Rockstar is stepping back from violence and gruesome crimes.
When you watch TV and movies from any time [period] they’re very realistic looking so I’m not worried about photorealistic video games
- Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick
From this perspective, we can reasonably expect that the level of gore seen in GTA will likely return, only now enhanced by improved graphics. The question of dismemberment remains speculative but unlikely, as it is contextually difficult to justify this behaviour in the modern era. Although mature content has generally become more acceptable in society, there is still a line to be drawn.
Introducing immoral or violent choices in a video game will always attract controversy. Yet, Rockstar has never explicitly encouraged cold-blooded behaviour.
Systems like the wanted level, which penalise violent acts, serve as a form of in-game accountability. Looking ahead, it’s possible that Rockstar could expand on this by implementing a more reactive and emotionally intelligent response system, where harming NPCs leads to deeper consequences, not just police attention.