Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

GTA SA vs IV

42 replies to this topic
Ayman1337
  • Ayman1337

    Underground Gamer

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2011

#1

Posted 09 March 2012 - 10:15 PM Edited by Ayman1337, 20 March 2012 - 12:05 PM.

While all of you are waiting for GTA V, which do YOU think is the best GTA so far out of the two favourites: GTA IV and San Andreas.

Well, for me, they're joint best (but obviously, GTA V will change that). Here are the reasons:

GTA IV:
- Better Graphics
- More Advanced Game Mechanics (Euphoria, etc.)
- Modern Setting
- Awesome Features (cellphone, internet, TV, taxi rides*, etc.)
- Extremely Advanced AI
- Advanced Combat System
- Online Multiplayer** and Achievements
- Realistic Atmosphere
- Better Protagonist and Voice Acting

GTA San Andreas:
- Larger Map
- Better Mission Variety
- More Missions
- Wider Variety of Vehicles (More Aircraft, Bikes, Trains, etc.)
- More Weapons
- More Minigames (Lowrider, Gambling, Arcades, etc.)
- RPG-ish Stats (Muscle, Fat, Sex Appeal, Weapon Skills, Vehicle Skills, etc.)
- Car Customization
- Better Character Customization

*You can have taxi rides on San Andreas with CLEO mods
**San Andreas has multiplayer through third-party mods (SAMP/MTASA)

Username.gta
  • Username.gta

    [Formerly Gary-X]

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2010
  • None

#2

Posted 09 March 2012 - 10:29 PM

"War of the two best GTA games so far"
The VC fanbase would like to have a word with you. lol.gif

Anyway, I'm a Gameplay > Graphics person, so I prefer the variety of things in SA to the realistic style of IV.

nickelist1
  • nickelist1

    I do this, you do that. Capeesh?

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2011

#3

Posted 10 March 2012 - 12:31 AM

SA ftw. and when V comes out, it's V ftw

Miamivicecity
  • Miamivicecity

    Get Love Fisted

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Member In An Official Group 2012

#4

Posted 10 March 2012 - 12:43 AM

I know why he didn't mention VC. VC would win this easily if it was an option. ph34r.gif

I guess he wanted to make it interesting instead of a blow out. Anyway I choose GTA IV for these reasons.

- I like Niko over CJ.
- Despite not having a star studded cast and without obvious influences from major Holllywood movies the story and characters I find more entertaining.
- Even though SA has a bigger map I find LC to be more interesting than any of the cities in SA.
- Side missions are better as they integrate with the story. SA is mostly random.
- The removal of micro management (Stamina, muscle, eating etc).

Of course this is only my opinion. If anyone doesn't like it well I guess tough sh*t. smile.gif

bugoy
  • bugoy

    Not interested in GTA anymore, sorry.

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2009

#5

Posted 10 March 2012 - 02:48 AM

VC would lose in graphics and gameplay features, but it would win in the story and setting.

I like SA better. It's one of the most, if not the most customizable PC game, plus there are lots more vehicles to play with, and you don't have an annoying cousin to go bowling with.

Hydro_PlayboyX
  • Hydro_PlayboyX

    #TeamFranklin

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2011

#6

Posted 10 March 2012 - 08:04 PM

IV > SA

-SA had large map with small cities and enormous dead space, while IV had big highly detailed city
-IV had much better story than SA
-IV was far more realistic
-IV didn't have planes(but why the f*ck do you need plane in a city)
-SA had more minigames
-CJ was f*cking annoying with his high voice

MyDog
  • MyDog

    Niko Bellic's my burazer

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2009
  • Serbia

#7

Posted 11 March 2012 - 08:10 PM

Both of these games don't come close to GTA VC, but IV is better.

Gtaghost22
  • Gtaghost22

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2011

#8

Posted 12 March 2012 - 01:38 AM

Both are really good... So its a TIE for me, here is why:

GTA IV:
- better graphics and physics

- Better storyline

- more detailed map

- better and more detailed characters & slightly better protagonist

- new features (i.e internet, mobile, taxi)
........

GTA: San Andreas:

- bigger map

- more missions

- more features than GTA IV

- more minigames (gambling, arcades)

- RPG-ish stats: (fat, muscle, sex appeal)

ccrogers15
  • ccrogers15

    REQUESTED BAN

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2010

#9

Posted 12 March 2012 - 03:28 AM

GTA SA will always be my fave. When i first played GTA LCS and VCS after SA, i was turned off by the new ones, dont get me started with IV.

MrDanceWithLance
  • MrDanceWithLance

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2012

#10

Posted 12 March 2012 - 06:47 AM

I choose GTA IV for the following reasons:
- Better Graphics
- More Advanced Game Mechanics (Euphoria, etc.)
- Modern Setting
- Awesome Features (cellphone, internet, TV, taxi rides*, etc.)
- Advanced AI and Combat System
- Online Multiplayer** and Achievements
- More Realism
- I like Niko over CJ.
- Despite not having a star studded cast and without obvious influences from major Holllywood movies the story and characters I find more entertaining.
- Even though SA has a bigger map I find LC to be more interesting than any of the cities in SA, as it is more detailed.
- Side missions are better as they integrate with the story. SA is mostly random.
- The removal of micro management (Stamina, muscle, eating etc).
-SA had large map with small cities and enormous dead space, while IV had big highly detailed city
-IV had much better story than SA
-IV was far more realistic

Ayman1337
  • Ayman1337

    Underground Gamer

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2011

#11

Posted 12 March 2012 - 09:42 PM

QUOTE (bugoy @ Saturday, Mar 10 2012, 02:48)
VC would lose in graphics and gameplay features, but it would win in the story and setting.

Vice City has a really nice feel, but I prefer a modern setting because:
1. You'd have a proper cellphone as opposed to a brick one
2. There would be better looking vehicles (modern setting = modern vehicles)
3. You will have no limits for soundtrack!

Ayman1337
  • Ayman1337

    Underground Gamer

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2011

#12

Posted 12 March 2012 - 09:45 PM

GTA IV = Quality
GTA SA = Quantity

It's about quality, not quantity so I'm guessing IV will win (I'm going to start a poll on this later)!

Ayman1337
  • Ayman1337

    Underground Gamer

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2011

#13

Posted 13 March 2012 - 03:12 PM

QUOTE (MrDanceWithLance @ Monday, Mar 12 2012, 06:47)
I choose GTA IV for the following reasons:
- Better Graphics
- More Advanced Game Mechanics (Euphoria, etc.)
- Modern Setting
- Awesome Features (cellphone, internet, TV, taxi rides*, etc.)
- Advanced AI and Combat System
- Online Multiplayer** and Achievements
- More Realism
- I like Niko over CJ.
- Despite not having a star studded cast and without obvious influences from major Holllywood movies the story and characters I find more entertaining.
- Even though SA has a bigger map I find LC to be more interesting than any of the cities in SA, as it is more detailed.
- Side missions are better as they integrate with the story. SA is mostly random.
- The removal of micro management (Stamina, muscle, eating etc).
-SA had large map with small cities and enormous dead space, while IV had big highly detailed city
-IV had much better story than SA
-IV was far more realistic

you copied some of our suggestions!

bucsfan
  • bucsfan

    I'm the voice of the people, like Moses, only keepin it real

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2010

#14

Posted 19 March 2012 - 03:09 AM

SA for me. I think IV might be the overall better game by modern gaming standards, but I still would rather play SA over IV. IV was great and I liked the DLCs as well, but after you beat the game, you run out of things to do. Here it is 2012, 8 years after the release of SA, and I still play it. There's always something to do, and the missions are more fun than IV. But IV does have the better story overall. Both are great games and my favorite GTA games out there, but SA trumps them all in my opinion.

Flesh-n-Bone
  • Flesh-n-Bone

    OG

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2008
  • Sweden

#15

Posted 19 March 2012 - 05:21 PM

San Andreas is so much better to me, it's not even funny. IV gets on my nerves with the annoying 'realism'. I want GTA to be fun and a complete fantasy land, a place that you can't get to in real life no matter what. IV is basically a real life city with criminals that do a lot more sh*t than in reality. Why the f*ck would I play a game that resembles reality when I want FUN?

SA wins without a doubt with all the amazing features, the huge state, the story, Carl's awesome personality and the urban culture that it's heavily centered around. If only Rockstar could make more GTA games centered around the urban lifestyle with either a black protagonist or a Hispanic one.

Miamivicecity
  • Miamivicecity

    Get Love Fisted

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Member In An Official Group 2012

#16

Posted 20 March 2012 - 10:32 AM Edited by Miamivicecity, 20 March 2012 - 10:40 AM.

In the 4 years since GTA IV came out I've lost count how many times people have complained about GTA IV's "realism", but then I sit back and think how much people take it for granted. It's no where near as realistic as R* could've made it.

You only have to look at some ridiculous suggestions people have made like paying bills, refueling, 9-5 jobs etc. Now if R* wanted to make GTA IV super realistic they would've added this stuff wouldn't you agree?

I've had this belief for almost 4 years that R* just wanted to make GTA IV more down to earth, but they weren't out to replicate life. Now personally playing in GTA IV's LC compared to every other city in the GTA universe is like comparing apples to oranges.

LC in GTA IV makes every city in the GTA III era feel like a dull and un interesting sh*t hole. I never bother taking in the sights of the GTA III era cities anymore because they feel dead.

I suppose one thing that pisses about the "realism" debate is people will bash GTA IV for minor things like flying through the windscreen (Which lets face it..... it doesn't happen a lot unless you suck at driving), but they don't seem to mind the micro management in SA. IMO micro management made SA feel like Gangsta Sims.

The GTA series is not in the fantasy genre. R* take real concepts and put their own twists on them. That's the way it's always been. GTA IV just took a slighlty new road being in a post 9/11 setting where certain issues were a bit more relative to modern day.

Anyway I love GTA IV for the fact it was bold and ambitious to write a new chapter in GTA's rather large book.

Flesh-n-Bone
  • Flesh-n-Bone

    OG

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2008
  • Sweden

#17

Posted 20 March 2012 - 08:37 PM

QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Tuesday, Mar 20 2012, 11:32)
I suppose one thing that pisses about the "realism" debate is people will bash GTA IV for minor things like flying through the windscreen (Which lets face it..... it doesn't happen a lot unless you suck at driving), but they don't seem to mind the micro management in SA. IMO micro management made SA feel like Gangsta Sims.

That's also why I love that game more than any other. It's nothing you have to put up with (like GTA4's annoying cops, the weapon limits and... flying through windshields, not to forget Niko being extremely weak and dying fast or losing health by taking bumps on walls or when bouncing on the ground) and it's just optional making the game feel a lot more personal so you get that connection with the fantasy world of San Andreas. Despite what you may think, you don't HAVE to eat, it's just to keep you in good shape and let's be honest, there's something to eat at every corner you turn in the SA streets, whether it's a hot dog seller, some soda drink or Cluckin' Bell, they can be found everywhere.

And of course we don't mean by "realism" that GTA4 has you forced to follow traffic light rules, pay bills or something stupid like that, it's just that the fun atmosphere of the cartoony III era games is gone which just makes the game a lot less entertaining to me. Although I don't mind the removal of the vehicle side missions (paramedics in particular), I do wish they had had the rewards there in some way. Like more health, armor and being able to become fireproof. And the lack of weapons also sucks (only two melees ffs!).

Linki
  • Linki

    Neonic

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2009

#18

Posted 20 March 2012 - 09:59 PM

I loved SA back in the day. I played it heaps. Then IV came along, and I haven't looked back since.

Truly, IV is a whole 'nother generation ahead of the III era. I do occasionally go back to play them for nostalgia's sake, III especially, but it's time has passed. You'd have to be completely ignorant to think SA is better than IV.

IV has better gameplay, for one. The shooting is much more satisfying and intense. The driving is, once you've mastered it, incredibly entertaining. The climbing has improved. But yes, the controls are imperfect. They are still better than SA's controls however.

The urban environment of Liberty City is like a dream-like version of reality, surreal almost. The world seems to revolve on it's own, rather than revolving around you like in SA. It's rich and full of detail, with each neighborhood having it's own identity and feel to it. Sure, I loved the countryside in SA. But Liberty City isn't San Andreas, so why expect mountains and greenery in a place based on NYC?

Saying SA is more "fun" than IV isn't proving anything. I've put much more time into IV because I feel it has more replay value than SA. The action in IV can be hectic and over-the-top as well, you know. Sure, most of my time playing IV is just screwing around killing people, but that's what I've always done in GTA. I hate side missions, personally.

Anyway, I could go on and on, but IV is leaps and bounds ahead of SA (even if I have a nostalgic soft-spot for III, which I think has the best atmosphere).

Flesh-n-Bone
  • Flesh-n-Bone

    OG

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2008
  • Sweden

#19

Posted 21 March 2012 - 01:39 AM

QUOTE (Linki @ Tuesday, Mar 20 2012, 22:59)
I loved SA back in the day. I played it heaps. Then IV came along, and I haven't looked back since.

Truly, IV is a whole 'nother generation ahead of the III era. I do occasionally go back to play them for nostalgia's sake, III especially, but it's time has passed. You'd have to be completely ignorant to think SA is better than IV.

IV has better gameplay, for one. The shooting is much more satisfying and intense. The driving is, once you've mastered it, incredibly entertaining. The climbing has improved. But yes, the controls are imperfect. They are still better than SA's controls however.

The urban environment of Liberty City is like a dream-like version of reality, surreal almost. The world seems to revolve on it's own, rather than revolving around you like in SA. It's rich and full of detail, with each neighborhood having it's own identity and feel to it. Sure, I loved the countryside in SA. But Liberty City isn't San Andreas, so why expect mountains and greenery in a place based on NYC?

Saying SA is more "fun" than IV isn't proving anything. I've put much more time into IV because I feel it has more replay value than SA. The action in IV can be hectic and over-the-top as well, you know. Sure, most of my time playing IV is just screwing around killing people, but that's what I've always done in GTA. I hate side missions, personally.

Anyway, I could go on and on, but IV is leaps and bounds ahead of SA (even if I have a nostalgic soft-spot for III, which I think has the best atmosphere).

"You'd have to be completely ignorant to think SA is better than IV."

No, actually, you have to be completely ignorant to say that. It's called opinion. I find San Andreas more "fun" and that's why I would play it a million times over before even asking for a bit of IV. And speaking of replay value, I was bored of IV the moment I finished the last mission, with SA, I continued to roam around for quite a while and enjoyed the huge, varied cities and countrysides as well as all the things to do. Sure, the detailed graphics are nice for IV but it doesn't make it more fun for me, and a game is all about fun. I don't know what there is to "prove".

I and most others who prefer SA find it more "fun" and there's nothing deeper to it. It's as simple as that.

w32natoproducoes
  • w32natoproducoes

    Renato Urbano

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2012

#20

Posted 21 March 2012 - 02:07 AM

LOL

no sense to compare GTA IV and GTA San Andreas


Djdevin10
  • Djdevin10

    Kill People, Burn Sh*t, F*ck School.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2010

#21

Posted 21 March 2012 - 03:15 AM

GTA:VC is better ph34r.gif


But for real, it's a tie. For a serious story, realistic physics, and east coast rap music(My fav) I play GTA 4.

For fun game-play that i can play for hours, planes, RPG like game, 90's west coast rap music, it's GTA SA.




DarrinPA
  • DarrinPA

    Orange Grove Member

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2009
  • None

#22

Posted 21 March 2012 - 03:35 AM

"Quantity vs Quality" I simply have both with San Andreas.



For all the VC fans - Vice City is a close 2nd for me.

Linki
  • Linki

    Neonic

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2009

#23

Posted 21 March 2012 - 04:09 AM

QUOTE (Flesh-n-Bone @ Wednesday, Mar 21 2012, 01:39)
QUOTE (Linki @ Tuesday, Mar 20 2012, 22:59)
I loved SA back in the day. I played it heaps. Then IV came along, and I haven't looked back since.

Truly, IV is a whole 'nother generation ahead of the III era. I do occasionally go back to play them for nostalgia's sake, III especially, but it's time has passed. You'd have to be completely ignorant to think SA is better than IV.

IV has better gameplay, for one. The shooting is much more satisfying and intense. The driving is, once you've mastered it, incredibly entertaining. The climbing has improved. But yes, the controls are imperfect. They are still better than SA's controls however.

The urban environment of Liberty City is like a dream-like version of reality, surreal almost. The world seems to revolve on it's own, rather than revolving around you like in SA. It's rich and full of detail, with each neighborhood having it's own identity and feel to it. Sure, I loved the countryside in SA. But Liberty City isn't San Andreas, so why expect mountains and greenery in a place based on NYC?

Saying SA is more "fun" than IV isn't proving anything. I've put much more time into IV because I feel it has more replay value than SA. The action in IV can be hectic and over-the-top as well, you know. Sure, most of my time playing IV is just screwing around killing people, but that's what I've always done in GTA. I hate side missions, personally.

Anyway, I could go on and on, but IV is leaps and bounds ahead of SA (even if I have a nostalgic soft-spot for III, which I think has the best atmosphere).

"You'd have to be completely ignorant to think SA is better than IV."

No, actually, you have to be completely ignorant to say that. It's called opinion. I find San Andreas more "fun" and that's why I would play it a million times over before even asking for a bit of IV. And speaking of replay value, I was bored of IV the moment I finished the last mission, with SA, I continued to roam around for quite a while and enjoyed the huge, varied cities and countrysides as well as all the things to do. Sure, the detailed graphics are nice for IV but it doesn't make it more fun for me, and a game is all about fun. I don't know what there is to "prove".

I and most others who prefer SA find it more "fun" and there's nothing deeper to it. It's as simple as that.

Oh wow, a IV hater doesn't like it when someone else makes their opinions out as fact? Ha.

You see, I have no problem with people enjoying their games. It's the IV haters that have that problem. I love IV and I loved SA. SA is a great game and, in my opinion, the best of last generation. I may prefer III, The Warriors, Bully, etc. but I do see how SA is the better game.

"Sure, the detailed graphics are nice for IV but it doesn't make it more fun for me, and a game is all about fun." Why are you saying this? Did I even bring up graphics in my post? You IV haters are like a broken record, spouting out the same "arguments" over and over. So, a game is all about fun, huh? Of course we all play games for fun. Christ. You SA fanboys seem to think you guys are the only ones who are having fun and thus, have higher tastes than the people who play IV.

GTA IV is ceaselessly entertaining. Every time I put it on, I always have something cool and unexpected happen. Whether it be from pushing the game to it's limits through utter chaos or from exploring the environment and finding strange little details. It's just a fun game.

DarrinPA
  • DarrinPA

    Orange Grove Member

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2009
  • None

#24

Posted 21 March 2012 - 04:32 AM

QUOTE
Oh wow, a IV hater doesn't like it when someone else makes their opinions out as fact?


It's not just IV haters, it's pretty much anybody who knows the difference between an opinion and fact...


Miamivicecity
  • Miamivicecity

    Get Love Fisted

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Member In An Official Group 2012

#25

Posted 21 March 2012 - 10:06 AM Edited by Miamivicecity, 21 March 2012 - 10:09 AM.

QUOTE (Linki @ Wednesday, Mar 21 2012, 15:09)
QUOTE (Flesh-n-Bone @ Wednesday, Mar 21 2012, 01:39)
QUOTE (Linki @ Tuesday, Mar 20 2012, 22:59)
I loved SA back in the day. I played it heaps. Then IV came along, and I haven't looked back since.

Truly, IV is a whole 'nother generation ahead of the III era. I do occasionally go back to play them for nostalgia's sake, III especially, but it's time has passed. You'd have to be completely ignorant to think SA is better than IV.

IV has better gameplay, for one. The shooting is much more satisfying and intense. The driving is, once you've mastered it, incredibly entertaining. The climbing has improved. But yes, the controls are imperfect. They are still better than SA's controls however.

The urban environment of Liberty City is like a dream-like version of reality, surreal almost. The world seems to revolve on it's own, rather than revolving around you like in SA. It's rich and full of detail, with each neighborhood having it's own identity and feel to it. Sure, I loved the countryside in SA. But Liberty City isn't San Andreas, so why expect mountains and greenery in a place based on NYC?

Saying SA is more "fun" than IV isn't proving anything. I've put much more time into IV because I feel it has more replay value than SA. The action in IV can be hectic and over-the-top as well, you know. Sure, most of my time playing IV is just screwing around killing people, but that's what I've always done in GTA. I hate side missions, personally.

Anyway, I could go on and on, but IV is leaps and bounds ahead of SA (even if I have a nostalgic soft-spot for III, which I think has the best atmosphere).

"You'd have to be completely ignorant to think SA is better than IV."

No, actually, you have to be completely ignorant to say that. It's called opinion. I find San Andreas more "fun" and that's why I would play it a million times over before even asking for a bit of IV. And speaking of replay value, I was bored of IV the moment I finished the last mission, with SA, I continued to roam around for quite a while and enjoyed the huge, varied cities and countrysides as well as all the things to do. Sure, the detailed graphics are nice for IV but it doesn't make it more fun for me, and a game is all about fun. I don't know what there is to "prove".

I and most others who prefer SA find it more "fun" and there's nothing deeper to it. It's as simple as that.

Oh wow, a IV hater doesn't like it when someone else makes their opinions out as fact? Ha.

You see, I have no problem with people enjoying their games. It's the IV haters that have that problem. I love IV and I loved SA. SA is a great game and, in my opinion, the best of last generation. I may prefer III, The Warriors, Bully, etc. but I do see how SA is the better game.

"Sure, the detailed graphics are nice for IV but it doesn't make it more fun for me, and a game is all about fun." Why are you saying this? Did I even bring up graphics in my post? You IV haters are like a broken record, spouting out the same "arguments" over and over. So, a game is all about fun, huh? Of course we all play games for fun. Christ. You SA fanboys seem to think you guys are the only ones who are having fun and thus, have higher tastes than the people who play IV.

GTA IV is ceaselessly entertaining. Every time I put it on, I always have something cool and unexpected happen. Whether it be from pushing the game to it's limits through utter chaos or from exploring the environment and finding strange little details. It's just a fun game.

They certainly do Linki. If I could I'd punch every SA fanboy in the face from the last 4 1/2 years or so I've been here that's had this snobby outlook that they know what "fun" is.

Saying things like "a game is all about fun" is like saying the moon orbits the earth. No sh*t a game is all about fun. Why would developers make games if they don't want people to have fun playing them?

R* made GTA IV for a general audience. Not just for the SA retards that think they know everything (this doesn't apply to every SA fan btw. I guess if you get offended you may be one of them). Some people liked GTA IV, some didn't.

That's the way it goes.

Flesh-n-Bone
  • Flesh-n-Bone

    OG

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2008
  • Sweden

#26

Posted 21 March 2012 - 04:27 PM

QUOTE (Linki @ Wednesday, Mar 21 2012, 05:09)
Oh wow, a IV hater doesn't like it when someone else makes their opinions out as fact? Ha.

You see, I have no problem with people enjoying their games. It's the IV haters that have that problem. I love IV and I loved SA. SA is a great game and, in my opinion, the best of last generation. I may prefer III, The Warriors, Bully, etc. but I do see how SA is the better game.

"Sure, the detailed graphics are nice for IV but it doesn't make it more fun for me, and a game is all about fun." Why are you saying this? Did I even bring up graphics in my post? You IV haters are like a broken record, spouting out the same "arguments" over and over. So, a game is all about fun, huh? Of course we all play games for fun. Christ. You SA fanboys seem to think you guys are the only ones who are having fun and thus, have higher tastes than the people who play IV.

GTA IV is ceaselessly entertaining. Every time I put it on, I always have something cool and unexpected happen. Whether it be from pushing the game to it's limits through utter chaos or from exploring the environment and finding strange little details. It's just a fun game.

First of all, I'm NOT an IV hater. I just think it's hella overrated. I enjoyed playing it because it's a GTA game and they are never anything less than great, I just hated the changes made from the III era. And I NEVER made out my opinion to look like it's a fact. I never made a statement as stupid as "Saying SA is better than IV is ignorant".

And if you are too slow to catch up, I clearly stated that what I consider "fun" is just MY OPINION and "fun" FOR ME. But no, you twist it up as if I stated it like a fact. No, I never did that so please, stop doing it. And I mentioned "graphics" because you talked about "fun in SA" proves nothing or something along that line. And since you mentioned details, I mentioned graphics because it's where IV overtakes SA but that doesn't make it more FUN... FOR ME.

And Miamivicecity: No offense but you're as bad as the "SA fanboys" you always trash-talk, just with the opinion on the game reversed. You keep bashing almost everything about that game then when somebody who likes that game and does the same to IV, you call them "SA retards". If it was not clear enough, I DON'T HATE IV. I actually like the game, I just don't think it's anywhere close to matching SA for many reasons I've stated numerous times. And SA is not the only game I prefer to IV, the same goes for every other III-era 3D game including Vice City, III, LCS and VCS.

Linki
  • Linki

    Neonic

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2009

#27

Posted 22 March 2012 - 12:05 AM

QUOTE (Flesh-n-Bone @ Wednesday, Mar 21 2012, 16:27)
QUOTE (Linki @ Wednesday, Mar 21 2012, 05:09)
Oh wow, a IV hater doesn't like it when someone else makes their opinions out as fact? Ha.

You see, I have no problem with people enjoying their games. It's the IV haters that have that problem. I love IV and I loved SA. SA is a great game and, in my opinion, the best of last generation. I may prefer III, The Warriors, Bully, etc. but I do see how SA is the better game.

"Sure, the detailed graphics are nice for IV but it doesn't make it more fun for me, and a game is all about fun." Why are you saying this? Did I even bring up graphics in my post? You IV haters are like a broken record, spouting out the same "arguments" over and over. So, a game is all about fun, huh? Of course we all play games for fun. Christ. You SA fanboys seem to think you guys are the only ones who are having fun and thus, have higher tastes than the people who play IV.

GTA IV is ceaselessly entertaining. Every time I put it on, I always have something cool and unexpected happen. Whether it be from pushing the game to it's limits through utter chaos or from exploring the environment and finding strange little details. It's just a fun game.

First of all, I'm NOT an IV hater. I just think it's hella overrated. I enjoyed playing it because it's a GTA game and they are never anything less than great, I just hated the changes made from the III era. And I NEVER made out my opinion to look like it's a fact. I never made a statement as stupid as "Saying SA is better than IV is ignorant".

And if you are too slow to catch up, I clearly stated that what I consider "fun" is just MY OPINION and "fun" FOR ME. But no, you twist it up as if I stated it like a fact. No, I never did that so please, stop doing it. And I mentioned "graphics" because you talked about "fun in SA" proves nothing or something along that line. And since you mentioned details, I mentioned graphics because it's where IV overtakes SA but that doesn't make it more FUN... FOR ME.

And Miamivicecity: No offense but you're as bad as the "SA fanboys" you always trash-talk, just with the opinion on the game reversed. You keep bashing almost everything about that game then when somebody who likes that game and does the same to IV, you call them "SA retards". If it was not clear enough, I DON'T HATE IV. I actually like the game, I just don't think it's anywhere close to matching SA for many reasons I've stated numerous times. And SA is not the only game I prefer to IV, the same goes for every other III-era 3D game including Vice City, III, LCS and VCS.

That's OK man. Miami and I have been dealing with SA fanboys for quite some time. It's just your initial post closely resembled all the other identical IV bashing's we've seen over the years, so of course we are going to think you're another IV hater.

Flesh-n-Bone
  • Flesh-n-Bone

    OG

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2008
  • Sweden

#28

Posted 22 March 2012 - 12:31 AM

QUOTE (Linki @ Thursday, Mar 22 2012, 01:05)
That's OK man. Miami and I have been dealing with SA fanboys for quite some time. It's just your initial post closely resembled all the other identical IV bashing's we've seen over the years, so of course we are going to think you're another IV hater.

Well, I understand but I'm not one of them. I love the GTA series and enjoy playing them all, I was just disappointed when I played IV and it felt underwhelming. And with that aside, I have not been here much for the last two years which means I have no idea what's going on for the most part around here.

And I forgot to mention that I'm not putting myself above MVC by pointing out that he bashes everything that people like about SA as "unnecessary", "annoying" or something like that. I used to do that a lot when it came to Vice City which for some reason was the original GTA to face my bashing. I've since then lost all that bias and although VC remains my 5th favorite III-era game, it's an absolute classic to perfection, just like every other III-era game IMO.

bucsfan
  • bucsfan

    I'm the voice of the people, like Moses, only keepin it real

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2010

#29

Posted 22 March 2012 - 01:39 AM

I don't think their should be haters of any games in the series on this forum. We're all here because we love GTA and the great great game that Rockstar consistently gives us. They're all great, some people just enjoy specific ones over others. It's not a crime. I loved SA, and I loved IV. But I felt they could've done something to IV to make me want to play it over and over again. Occasionally I'll go back and play it, but I don't get the same enjoyment as when I play SA. Flesh-n-Bone is by no means bashing IV, he's just letting you know why he thinks SA is better. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

tommzy2
  • tommzy2

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2009

#30

Posted 22 March 2012 - 05:20 AM

GTA IV: Quality
GTA SA: Variety

thats how i'll always see it.

both fun in their own ways




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users