Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Why was GTA Advance panned?

7 replies to this topic
The Horror Is Alive
  • The Horror Is Alive

    Monkey-fighting snakes on this Monday to Friday plane.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2008

#1

Posted 19 January 2009 - 12:04 PM

I'm not putting this into the GTA Advance forum because it is dead and I wouldn't get any answers.

Anyway, these are the GBA specs in "regular computer terms":

17MHz processor
256KB RAM
128KB video card
(up to) 32MB cartridge space

Now, with those specs, don't you think that managing to put a WHOLE GTA game and a WHOLE CITY onto the lowely GBA is a technological feat in so many ways? Also, the fact that it combined GTA3 and GTA1/2 is a great concept, and it was executed so well.

Please give me some reasons as to why the game was "horrible", as some people put it, and convince me that CTW won't get the same treatment sneaky2.gif

Raindancer
  • Raindancer

    Beer monster

  • Feroci Racing
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None

#2

Posted 19 January 2009 - 12:29 PM

Post and you shall get a reply, post in the wrong forum and it will get locked.

But as part of my good customer service training in Iraq, I shall move this thread.

KGBeast
  • KGBeast

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2006

#3

Posted 19 January 2009 - 04:06 PM

Honestly, I thought Advance was a great game. My favorite game ever released on Gameboy Advance. The city was a big feat in it self, giving us a good 2D vision of Liberty, and yet, there were tons of peds on the streets and plenty of traffic. On top of that, all the old school style cars, the soundtrack which was instrumentals from the originals that were amazing. And the old familiar, quick glimpse of boss before he sends you on an arcade styled mission against a vague group of people, with the random name splashed here and there. It was the perfect follow up to GTA 2, and I have no doubt that CW will take the arcade play style of GTA to an entirely new level once again.

Any argument as to why this game is 'bad' that I've ever heard is because it's too similar to the older games, but that's a big plus for me.

QwertyAAA
  • QwertyAAA

    Ceci n'est pas une pipe, c'est le logo de Rockstar

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2008

#4

Posted 21 January 2009 - 03:09 AM

confused.gif
From wiki:


Critical Reception

Critical reception was mixed to positive. On the review aggregator Game Rankings, the game received an average score of 70% based on 41 reviews.[3] On Metacritic, the game received an average score of 68 out of 100, based on 33 reviews.[4]

IGN gave a score of 8.5 out of 10, calling the game "a great, recommended action title."[5] UGO gave an "A" rating, saying that "if you're a great fan of the series, then Grand Theft Auto Advance is definitely the game for you."[6] Game Chronicles gave a positive review, calling the game "nothing short of amazing."[7] Nintendo Power was also impressed, saying that "the game's scope is massive, and the missions are varied and rewarding."[8]

GameSpot gave a score of 6.5 out of 10, saying that "by and large, [the game] just isn't much fun."[9] Game Informer gave a score of 7.5 out of 10, calling the game "only a bare-bones reminder of a much greater work of art."[10]

The Horror Is Alive
  • The Horror Is Alive

    Monkey-fighting snakes on this Monday to Friday plane.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2008

#5

Posted 29 January 2009 - 09:50 AM

Wiki is full of sh*t, remember that.

Anyway, it was panned by about half the people who played it. Oh this sucks, this is top down, I can't see where I'm goin, boo-f*cking-hoo. Live with it confused.gif

lpgunit
  • lpgunit

    It's L, as in Lpgunit, not I.

  • Feroci Racing
  • Joined: 24 May 2008
  • Philippines

#6

Posted 29 January 2009 - 11:56 AM

It's probably because it's either released rather silently, or people are too busy spending time with the more mainstream GTA titles. The 2.5D top-down view is also likely to be the reason why it isn't that popular with gamers, to the point that it isn't mostly considered a part of the GTA3-era canon.

QwertyAAA
  • QwertyAAA

    Ceci n'est pas une pipe, c'est le logo de Rockstar

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2008

#7

Posted 08 February 2009 - 01:58 AM

QUOTE (The Horror Is Alive @ Jan 29 2009, 09:50)
Wiki is full of sh*t, remember that.

Anyway, it was panned by about half the people who played it. Oh this sucks, this is top down, I can't see where I'm goin, boo-f*cking-hoo. Live with it confused.gif

Yeah. But people are morons.

irganc
  • irganc

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2011

#8

Posted 26 November 2012 - 04:09 PM

It's good game, but it could be better.
Look at 3D on GBA engine and imagine LC, it's crappy but better than topdown.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users