Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

i have played the game that started it all

60 replies to this topic
KoLSPD2
  • KoLSPD2

    The Lurker

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2004

#31

Posted 24 October 2004 - 01:39 PM

I enjoyed GTA1 and 2, but London was the odd one in the series so far. 1 introduced four weapons (five if you count the fists), all have one purpose: raising hell for no reason. 2 was better because it introduced more weapons and health, and you could save.

Opinions on the first three:

GTA1: 8/10
GTA London: 6/10
GTA2: 9/10 o_O

Richard Zurawski
  • Richard Zurawski

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2003

#32

Posted 28 October 2004 - 07:54 AM

QUOTE (antonio montana @ Oct 18 2004, 15:39)
QUOTE (Groovyman @ Jun 28 2004, 21:22)
well i got to play gta and gta london:1969 and they suck bad. the controls suck the graphics suck (well it wasn't really it's fault it was on the ps1) the music is bad and well i just don't really like it. Maybe it's because i played gtaIII and vice before or it's just because they suck...hard, oh well it doesn't matter, im returning them to the video store and won't be renting them again, or will i buy them, ever. confused.gif

they suck sh*t all the colors hurt my eyes

Jesus you really are a stupid f*ck. GTA 1 came out in 1998, it was top sh*t then, so it doesn't matter what it looks like now. You tell me a game released in 1998 that had graphics and gameplay that was just as good as GTA 3/Vice do today and I'll bow down and call you master. The original GTA's were the f*cking bomb, mad arcade style games and thats all they were meant to be.

Long Haired Freaky Guy
  • Long Haired Freaky Guy

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Oct 2004

#33

Posted 28 October 2004 - 11:39 AM

QUOTE (illspirit @ Oct 3 2004, 02:02)
Then of course there's the fact they had to take the trains out on the console version. Hijacking one of those and ramming it into another train is hilarious. And, IIRC, the PS1 version was also missing fire trucks and paramedics...

I have never actually had the chance of getting into a train as of yet, although i do like chasing pedestrians and making them fall onto the train lines.

I have the double pack of GTA1 & GTA London, and i think, for the year they came out in, that they are quality games and will forever remain this way. Nothing beats the thrills of getting onto a motorbike and racing so fast down a road that the camera loses you, only for it to catch up with you to show laying on the road after colliding into a bus.

There were many things that made the early GTA's such great games.

But as with any game, there were flaws in it and many annoying parts, but the gameplay and fun you can have made up for these flaws.

As others have said, you have to have played these earlier versions without playing the modern, 3-d versions. Once you have played GTA3, Vice City or San Andreas, then there is 99% chance that you will not be able to play the 2-d versions and like them and play them as they so deservingly should be.

And without the early 2-d versions, we would not be running around causing havoc in San Fierro or Portland.

GTA1 set a new benchmark in gaming, it pushed the borders and went where no game had ever dared go before.

Just be grateful that GTA1 is the great game that it is.

albo
  • albo

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Oct 2004

#34

Posted 01 November 2004 - 04:14 PM

QUOTE
You didn't know that?! Well, yeah. GTA was born on the computer, which is why it kinda sucks that PC users are forced to wait several months until the PS2 contract is up till they get a copy of the latest GTA.


That's probably because if you own both a PS2 and a PC, you'll buy the PS2 version now, and you might buy the PC version when it comes out so you can do all the modding and stuff.

But if they did it the other way around, you'd buy the PC version now, and by the time it came out on PS2, you wouldn't bother buying it again.


LC 44
  • LC 44

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2004

#35

Posted 12 November 2004 - 05:32 AM

Do any of you guys just find them pretty friggin hard?

Sektor
  • Sektor

    GTAMP.com

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2003

#36

Posted 12 November 2004 - 06:15 AM

GTA1 is hard, not letting you save. It's an arcade type game, you are pretty much expected to die in that a few times, that's why you have lives. Did anyone actually finish all the missions without failing any? You couldn't retry a mission if you failed it so you had to start the level again if you wanted to pass that mission. You didn't need to pass all the missions to pass a level though.

I passed all the missions on the first level but failed some on the other levels.

You could save in GTA2, so I passed every mission.

Krazy_calvin
  • Krazy_calvin

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2003

#37

Posted 15 November 2004 - 08:26 AM

I bought GTA 1 The first day it came out. It was the first computer game that I personally went and bought for myself. I was 13 or 14 years old when it came out, So I had to ride my bike 7 miles to the local EB. God I loved that game. I spent many a night with my friends playing the game to death. On a couple of nights when we were just playing for pure carnage, we played for so long that it was impossible to find any cars. We destroyed most of them... I also got GTA2 right after it came out. God I loved the flame thrower in the second version... and the electro gun... heh...

Now... i didnt play any of the ps2 versions for a year or two after they came out. The third one i NEVER played... Vice city though... i played for a while after i finally got a ps2 ...

XR5Topaz1992
  • XR5Topaz1992

    I'm a hick....I don't give a $hit

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2004

#38

Posted 18 November 2004 - 01:25 AM

I'm going to go to GameStop in Scranton, PA this weekend and I'm going to pick up GTA 1 and GTA 2 and the London one. I wanna find out for myself how good these games are and how they spawned such classics as Vice City and San Andreas

Socko53
  • Socko53

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2004

#39

Posted 18 November 2004 - 03:39 AM

The city names of Liberty City, San Andreas, and Vice City wouldn't even exist with out GTA1. It was also the only one with such foul language up till the recent San Andreas, which IMO takes it too far. And you could pick your own character, even girls (although with the dialoge it was a bit awkward)Also it is important to remember that Rockstar DID NOT MAKE GTA1 they came into the story with GTA2.

I really hate people who always say "The GTA series started with GTAIII" they have no respect for the past...oh...and they're doosh bags.

Brother Marcus
  • Brother Marcus

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2004

#40

Posted 25 November 2004 - 06:01 PM

QUOTE (Socko53)

Also it is important to remember that Rockstar DID NOT MAKE GTA1 they came into the story with GTA2.

I really hate people who always say "The GTA series started with GTAIII" they have no respect for the past...oh...and they're doosh bags.




The same people have always made the Grand Theft Auto series except GTA London which was made by Runecraft.

Sam Houser worked with BMG Interactive for eight years. But when he became Vice President of Take Two Interactive he formed Rockstar Games with two other brits to publish GTA.

Rockstar Games then acquired DMA Design, finally renaming DMA Design to Rockstar North before GTA: Vice City.


GAME__________________DEVELOPER__________PUBLISHER_________

GTA 1_________________DMA Design_________BMG Interactive (EU), ASC (US)
GTA London 1969_______Runecraft__________Rockstar Games
GTA London 1963_______Runecraft__________Rockstar Games
GTA 2_________________DMA Design_________Rockstar Games
GTA 3_________________DMA Design_________Rockstar Games
GTA Vice City_________Rockstar North_____Rockstar Games
GTA San Andreas_______Rockstar North_____Rockstar Games



Brother Marcus
  • Brother Marcus

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2004

#41

Posted 25 November 2004 - 06:02 PM

QUOTE (Socko53)

Also it is important to remember that Rockstar DID NOT MAKE GTA1 they came into the story with GTA2.

I really hate people who always say "The GTA series started with GTAIII" they have no respect for the past...oh...and they're doosh bags.




The same people have always made the Grand Theft Auto series except GTA London which was made by Runecraft.

Sam Houser worked with BMG Interactive for eight years. But when he became Vice President of Take Two Interactive he formed Rockstar Games with two other brits to publish GTA.

Rockstar Games then acquired DMA Design, finally renaming DMA Design to Rockstar North before GTA: Vice City.


GAME__________________DEVELOPER__________PUBLISHER_________

GTA 1_________________DMA Design_________BMG (EU), ASC (US)
GTA London 1969_______Runecraft__________Rockstar Games
GTA London 1963_______Runecraft__________Rockstar Games
GTA 2_________________DMA Design_________Rockstar Games
GTA 3_________________DMA Design_________Rockstar Games
GTA Vice City_________Rockstar North_____Rockstar Games
GTA San Andreas_______Rockstar North_____Rockstar Games



Caligula
  • Caligula

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2004

#42

Posted 26 November 2004 - 11:28 PM

GTA1's redeeming features nowadays is a) The superbike and b) The School Children! HAHAHAHAHAHA devil.gif It was so less "politically correct" and shocking back in the day.

Varsis
  • Varsis

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2003

#43

Posted 06 December 2004 - 09:02 PM

I can still remeber the 1st time I played GTA1 on my friends PC, Many a happy hour I spent back then rasing all sorts of carnage devil.gif It's still a good game but I don't play it that often anymore.

BUSTeD
  • BUSTeD

    Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2002

#44

Posted 21 December 2004 - 04:20 PM

QUOTE (Brother Marcus @ Nov 25 2004, 18:02)
QUOTE (Socko53)

Also it is important to remember that Rockstar DID NOT MAKE GTA1 they came into the story with GTA2.

I really hate people who always say "The GTA series started with GTAIII" they have no respect for the past...oh...and they're doosh bags.




The same people have always made the Grand Theft Auto series except GTA London which was made by Runecraft.

Sam Houser worked with BMG Interactive for eight years. But when he became Vice President of Take Two Interactive he formed Rockstar Games with two other brits to publish GTA.

Rockstar Games then acquired DMA Design, finally renaming DMA Design to Rockstar North before GTA: Vice City.


GAME__________________DEVELOPER__________PUBLISHER_________

GTA 1_________________DMA Design_________BMG (EU), ASC (US)
GTA London 1969_______Runecraft__________Rockstar Games
GTA London 1963_______Runecraft__________Rockstar Games
GTA 2_________________DMA Design_________Rockstar Games
GTA 3_________________DMA Design_________Rockstar Games
GTA Vice City_________Rockstar North_____Rockstar Games
GTA San Andreas_______Rockstar North_____Rockstar Games

No, both GTA2 and GTA3 were rockstar. GTA1 was the only DMA design one.


GTA1 and 2 were made by the same people, but the 3D gta's were made by a completely different crew, go look at the employee's lists, none of the original people are there anymore, they all left after GTA2, besides sam houser, and he sucks anyway. Dan houser was the real mastermind.

Scriptkiddie
  • Scriptkiddie

    Ghost Host

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2004

#45

Posted 26 December 2004 - 08:10 PM

Sorry for bringing this topic back up but, just a question that as been haunting me for 8 years now:

"Why did they leave out the trains on the PSX version"?

BUSTeD
  • BUSTeD

    Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2002

#46

Posted 28 December 2004 - 03:16 PM

QUOTE (Scriptkiddie @ Dec 26 2004, 20:10)
Sorry for bringing this topic back up but, just a question that as been haunting me for 8 years now:

"Why did they leave out the trains on the PSX version"?

because PSX sucked? duh.

EmSixTeen
  • EmSixTeen

    yer ma's got athlete's foot!

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2002

#47

Posted 28 December 2004 - 03:26 PM

QUOTE (BUSTeD @ Dec 28 2004, 15:16)
QUOTE (Scriptkiddie @ Dec 26 2004, 20:10)
Sorry for bringing this topic back up but, just a question that as been haunting me for 8 years now:

"Why did they leave out the trains on the PSX version"?

because PSX sucked? duh.

If only your parents had used a condom, maybe then another sucky thing would have been prevented.

swaygirl
  • swaygirl

    GamerGirl

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2002

#48

Posted 29 December 2004 - 10:01 AM

as far as i'm concerned, if you haven't played ALL grand theft auto games... then you are NOT a gta player.

if you had played this game first, then you would appreciate the time and effort these guys put into making this game. it's not about how the game looks... or the music... its about the attitude.

and one of the best things about the original gta was the music. i believe the music was orignal too... no need to get songs already made... they did them especially for the game.

my only gripe with the game, is that you can't save after each mission... so we all had to sit at the pc for hours on end playing out each city. crazy times!

anyway, instead of saying its a bad game, try and appreciate that this is where all the attitude of GTA3 has come from.

corban555
  • corban555

    Lazlow!

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 May 2004

#49

Posted 11 January 2005 - 10:07 AM

QUOTE (Groovyman @ Jun 28 2004, 21:22)
well i got to play gta and gta london:1969 and they suck bad. the controls suck the graphics suck (well it wasn't really it's fault it was on the ps1) the music is bad and well i just don't really like it. Maybe it's because i played gtaIII and vice before or it's just because they suck...hard, oh well it doesn't matter, im returning them to the video store and won't be renting them again, or will i buy them, ever. confused.gif

It doesnt suck, you suck.

Groovy
  • Groovy

    General

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2004

#50

Posted 14 January 2005 - 03:09 AM

QUOTE (corban555 @ Jan 11 2005, 03:07)
QUOTE (Groovyman @ Jun 28 2004, 21:22)
well i got to play gta and gta london:1969 and they suck bad. the controls suck the graphics suck (well it wasn't really it's fault it was on the ps1) the music is bad and well i just don't really like it. Maybe it's because i played gtaIII and vice before or it's just because they suck...hard, oh well it doesn't matter, im returning them to the video store and won't be renting them again, or will i buy them, ever. confused.gif

It doesnt suck, you suck.

Don't tell me I suck just because I didin't like them.


-=Parker=-
  • -=Parker=-

    Soon, EA will own you and your family...

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2005

#51

Posted 14 January 2005 - 03:49 AM

Hey, hey, hey... Dont diss the game just because its cheesy, and besides where would you be without it? There would be no gtaforum, eh?

lappey
  • lappey

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2005

#52

Posted 25 January 2005 - 09:01 PM

I played gta1 back in the day when gta london came out and it ruled...hell it still does. graphics dont really matter to me in games. i never played that much of gta 2 tho..i dont know why, but its up for free download now so i might get it.
"GTA London 1963_______Runecraft__________Rockstar Games"
1963????? i knew of 69 but not 63. oh yeah and gta had things that the new ones wont even use now due to, i dunno violence or something, GOURANGA..fantastic, and i think they were elvises in london lol.when i heard that 3d gta was being made i was dissapionted and refused to play gta3 till my freind forsed me to just before vc came out, but they are nowhare near as good as the old topdown versions.....so shut your mouth

Sektor
  • Sektor

    GTAMP.com

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2003

#53

Posted 26 January 2005 - 05:52 AM

It's 1961, not 1963. You need 1969 to play it.

pops capo
  • pops capo

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2002

#54

Posted 27 April 2005 - 08:06 PM

I cannot stress far enough my dislike of idiot douchebags who do not appreciate the original GTA, it's expansions, and the second GTA. I would play that game hours on end (I bought it for PSX for some reason) with cheats because I was like ten or eleven years old.

I bought GTA London for PSX also, and played the crap out of it. I loved the London theme and going around in the Queen's Tank or whatever it was called. It was so great for its day with all sorts of crazy missions, including stealing the crown jewels from the Tower of London.

Then GTA2 came out. I literally creamed myself when I first played that. It was so stunning compared to the first one. It had a bit of a different rendering engine and a lot more weapons. I didn't think it were possible to put so many different weapons into the game, and they somehow did it. I loved going around with an electrogun and a tank and massacring everyone. I didn't really start playing for the missions until around the time GTA3 came out, so I missed out on a lot of that. I was ten as I said, and with the attention span of a ten year old. So, I would of course use the hilarious character name cheats (go look for them on gamefaqs, its a riot for its heyday) and wreck havoc upon the cities.

Right now I am actively playing GTA2, as I bought it for PC a few years ago (I forget how I acquired it, think I bought it) and now that I lost my disc I got pissed, but then I downloaded it from the Rockstar classics site. It has an awesome replayability and is much simpler than all that 3D bullsh*t that you kids are so used to. Wow, I've played GTA for seven years. That's a damn long time. I feel so old.

Respect where your precious hit games in 3D come from, fools! And your elder GTA players, too!

Also Fido is really Claude Speed from GTA2 in case you were wondering.

_-playero-_
  • _-playero-_

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2005

#55

Posted 22 May 2005 - 07:32 AM

QUOTE (stealthsniper @ Jul 1 2004, 05:32)
You didn't know that?! Well, yeah. GTA was born on the computer, which is why it kinda sucks that PC users are forced to wait several months until the PS2 contract is up till they get a copy of the latest GTA.

Sony = $$$$

Sony made a contract with R*
So you see, money owns your poor ass...

Venom
  • Venom

    Zpider-Man

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2002
  • England

#56

Posted 29 May 2005 - 03:28 PM

QUOTE (_-playero-_ @ May 22 2005, 08:32)
QUOTE (stealthsniper @ Jul 1 2004, 05:32)
You didn't know that?! Well, yeah. GTA was born on the computer, which is why it kinda sucks that PC users are forced to wait several months until the PS2 contract is up till they get a copy of the latest GTA.

Sony = $$$$

Sony made a contract with R*
So you see, money owns your poor ass...

It is only about the money, nothing else. The company is too big to care.

Greeny341
  • Greeny341

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 May 2005

#57

Posted 03 June 2005 - 09:05 AM

I remember when I was about 7 or something and I was over my cousins house constantly playing on GTA1 for the whole day, it was my pride & joy when I went to his house. I always remembered that when you werent in a car some poeple in a line would start chanting 'blood blood brothers' or something like that and the first car you get in at the start that cyan thing.

Tuff Luv Capo
  • Tuff Luv Capo

    We must find Ansama Benlanden

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Oct 2002

#58

Posted 24 June 2005 - 01:20 PM

I always liked the car chases, and the cranes, and definitely the respect-o-meter that came later on. But gunplay was sh*t, and rockets were horrible.

the_darkside_986
  • the_darkside_986

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2004

#59

Posted 29 June 2005 - 03:14 AM

A few days ago I purchased (a used) box set "collector's edition" that contained GTA1, london, and GTA2, for the ps1 for only 10 dollars.

First, I played GTA1, and it seemed pretty fun even though my first experience with GTA was when I played GTA3 at a friend's house for a couple minutes, and then eventually got a PS2 and played 3, Vice City, and San Andreas.

GTA1 seems very difficult because the mission objectives are often unclear and driving is a real pain. After spending a few minutes on that, I played GTA2. I have been playing GTA2 for a while; I find it far more entertaining than GTA1, and equally fun as GTA3 despite graphics. I think the strange music on GTA2 is actually cooler than GTA3's music, or even San Andreas' real licensed music. (Vice City's VROCK is still awesome, but I think Radio X, of San Andreas, was a huge disappointment.)

I have not touched London 69 yet because to my knowledge it is just an expansion pack for GTA1, with the same engine.

I did not download the free stuff from Rockstar because 1) I do not have hi-speed, and 2) the information said something about the game being enhanced to run on modern computers. My computer is far from modern. I know it would run the original GTA's, but it cannot even run the game Black & White properly.


Fluffyinsanity
  • Fluffyinsanity

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 May 2005

#60

Posted 02 July 2005 - 07:40 AM

This is sort of off topic, but speaking of old school games, if you want to try a game that is a predecessor to the 3D GTA games, then try a little known game called "Urban Chaos" by Eidos. It's A LOT like GTA 3 except it came out 2 years earlier and it has a full 3D city for you to roam.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users