Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Why does this game get so much sh*t?

45 replies to this topic
Niko Vercetti 112
  • Niko Vercetti 112

    That's, just, like, your opinion man

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2012

#1

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:35 AM

I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed, but all over the internet (and hell even these forums), I see people talking so much sh*t about GTA III. I saw one user go as far as to state that this game was a success because we "had no standards in 2001"

I just want to know why people hate such an amazing and nostalgic game, which undountably changed video gaming. Is it simply the fact so many little kids started with San Andreas, and don't accept anything less?

ClaudeSpeedRulez
  • ClaudeSpeedRulez

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2011
  • Brazil

#2

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:05 PM

QUOTE (Niko Vercetti 112 @ Wednesday, Feb 6 2013, 11:35)
Is it simply the fact so many little kids started with San Andreas, and don't accept anything less?

Most likely, yes.

For those who started with the most recent games, it's hard to go back.

Someone who met the series by GTA IV won't be able to play GTA 1, for example.

Carbonox
  • Carbonox

    Too weird to live but much too rare to die

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • Finland

#3

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:20 PM

GTA 3 was the fifth GTA I acquired (after I had started from Vice City and worked my way from there to VCS, before finally snapping III for a cheap price) so yeah, it felt like a step backwards, but I never once doubted that it would be a grade A game, like all the other titles.

Gary-X
  • Gary-X

    Introducing Bats to Faces since 2001

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2010

#4

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:53 PM

/12 year old kid plays GTA IV.
//Same kid gets chance to play GTA III
///Kid isn't impressed.

It's all to do with age and GTA History. GTA III was the first GTA I played so I am used to it, but I probably wouldn't like it as much if I started my GTA Journey in the IV era.

Reiji
  • Reiji

    Sarcastic Cock

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2003

#5

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:16 PM

I remember back in 2003 when Vice City overshadowed III's credibility. III will always be the best because it was my first GTA. There's no hope telling people otherwise, I got used to it.

0909090
  • 0909090

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012
  • Slovakia

#6

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:23 PM

You can't expect people who started with modern games such as GTA IV to like GTA III..sure some people may enjoy them but majority of people who started with later titles do not enjoy of III.

Gary-X
  • Gary-X

    Introducing Bats to Faces since 2001

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2010

#7

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:34 PM

The opposite can sometimes be said. My specialist era is the 3D III era games, but I'm alright at II and Advance as well. But I'm not too keen on the IV era as a whole. Don't get me wrong, I still like them, but I would rather have my arcade feel of the III era anyday.

0909090
  • 0909090

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012
  • Slovakia

#8

Posted 06 February 2013 - 06:34 PM

Sure everyone is different in this aspect. smile.gif But what I said is imo true for most of people.

Macavell
  • Macavell

    Rat

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2012

#9

Posted 06 February 2013 - 09:42 PM

I don't know why... I'm happy to be one of the few younger GTA players who accept and like the oldschool games.

SonOfLiberty
  • SonOfLiberty

    LS1 powered

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia

#10

Posted 07 February 2013 - 01:09 PM

Even though GTA IV is my favourite GTA I still like GTA III. I still have the PS2 version I bought in 2002, but it does feel pretty ancient compared to later titles even for someone like me that remembers when it was new.

For anyone who started with GTA IV, SA and perhaps to an extent VC it's not going to come across as the best game due to feeling so bare bones.

GTAKid667
  • GTAKid667

    The Bad Fella

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 24 May 2010
  • United-Kingdom

#11

Posted 07 February 2013 - 09:50 PM

QUOTE (Niko Vercetti 112 @ Wednesday, Feb 6 2013, 11:35)
I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed, but all over the internet (and hell even these forums), I see people talking so much sh*t about GTA III. I saw one user go as far as to state that this game was a success because we "had no standards in 2001"

I just want to know why people hate such an amazing and nostalgic game, which undountably changed video gaming. Is it simply the fact so many little kids started with San Andreas, and don't accept anything less?

Grand Theft Auto III is my favourite GTA game and I genuinely hate the little kids that say it's awful. They don't see the game the same way as we do. They probably have never played the game because they are too busy playing games made 1 month ago or its all about San Andreas 'The Game they grew up with' . Seriously if they cannot respect older GTA's it is fine by me but saying that they are sh*t and as you said "having no standards in 2001' is just being pathetic.

leaflinks
  • leaflinks

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2005

#12

Posted 08 February 2013 - 01:48 PM

I played 3 back in December 2001, I thought it was such a great game, anything came close to it was Driver.

Filip454
  • Filip454

    f*ck THE WORLD, I'm OUT!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2009

#13

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:19 PM

For me (oh oh fap fap I'm so oldschool biatch like some ppl say) GTA 3, 2, 1 were the best. But the real thing is that I was rased with these 3 parts. But I still don't think it is only because of good memories. It is something bigger, something magic. GTA IV is just boring (maybe euphoria is so slow?). Old GTAs are the real action games. For example, I can play GTA 3 doing stupid rampages and I can do this whole day. With GTA IV it is just boring (no damage to the bodies etc.). For me, San Andreas is the last playable GTA title. Maybe GTA V will return with ACTION LIKE YOU KNOW, REAL ACTION. That's why I liked Brucie so much - he kept everything cool. GTA IV has no R* sense of humour in the plot. It is just too real situation to be GTA imo.

And GTA III, hands down - no title was close to this masterpiece - to be honest with you, but remember that there was GTA 2, 1 and London 1969 too. Vice City was decent game too.

SonOfLiberty
  • SonOfLiberty

    LS1 powered

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia

#14

Posted 15 February 2013 - 01:32 PM Edited by Miamivicecity, 15 February 2013 - 01:37 PM.

QUOTE (Filip454 @ Friday, Feb 15 2013, 09:19)
For me (oh oh fap fap I'm so oldschool biatch like some ppl say) GTA 3, 2, 1 were the best. But the real thing is that I was rased with these 3 parts. But I still don't think it is only because of good memories. It is something bigger, something magic. GTA IV is just boring (maybe euphoria is so slow?). Old GTAs are the real action games. For example, I can play GTA 3 doing stupid rampages and I can do this whole day. With GTA IV it is just boring (no damage to the bodies etc.). For me, San Andreas is the last playable GTA title. Maybe GTA V will return with ACTION LIKE YOU KNOW, REAL ACTION. That's why I liked Brucie so much - he kept everything cool. GTA IV has no R* sense of humour in the plot. It is just too real situation to be GTA imo.

And GTA III, hands down - no title was close to this masterpiece - to be honest with you, but remember that there was GTA 2, 1 and London 1969 too. Vice City was decent game too.



Sense of humour is quite subjective. I liked Niko's sarcasm and witty remarks.

lloydo
  • lloydo

    Count

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2006

#15

Posted 15 February 2013 - 03:34 PM

Those who still play or like III come from a different generation. Luckily I was able to play it not long after it was released to experience gaming history. icon14.gif

Heihachi_73
  • Heihachi_73

    Hey! My cab!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2006

#16

Posted 15 February 2013 - 04:56 PM

GTA3 gets dissed because it doesn't have jetpacks, swimming, in-game vehicle mods and a gangsta character/theme. Vice City for the same reason. They simply don't know that Tommy Vercetti was the most kick-ass character of the GTA universe, with Claude following silently in his footsteps (and also performing massacres in Harwood if necessary!).

The same could be said about fighting games in a way, someone who was brought up on a 2000s era fighter will usually have trouble playing a 1990s era fighter like Street Fighter II (World Warrior, Champion Edition, Hyper Fighting), Mortal Kombat II and Tekken 1 and 2 (even then, players brought up on later 1990s games like Ultimate MK3 and Tekken 3 may also have trouble with the former titles due to lack of basic moves which are in the later games, like super moves/cancels in the Super SF2 and SF Alpha series, running and combos in UMK3/Trilogy and tech-rolling/side stepping in Tekken 3).

Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K13

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#17

Posted 15 February 2013 - 04:58 PM

QUOTE (lloydo @ Friday, Feb 15 2013, 18:34)
Those who still play or like III come from a different generation.

Not necessarily. I think it's possible for newer gamers to appreciate old games as well, similarly to the way some young people appreciate old music.

MyDog
  • MyDog

    FC BARCELONA

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2009

#18

Posted 15 February 2013 - 09:11 PM

Let's face it. GTA III was great in 2001, but by today's standards it's sh*t. It's played mostly by GTA fans who either play it due to nostalgia or because they want to complete the collection of GTAs they completed.

lloydo
  • lloydo

    Count

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2006

#19

Posted 16 February 2013 - 01:30 PM

QUOTE (_____ @ Friday, Feb 15 2013, 16:58)
QUOTE (lloydo @ Friday, Feb 15 2013, 18:34)
Those who still play or like III come from a different generation.

Not necessarily. I think it's possible for newer gamers to appreciate old games as well, similarly to the way some young people appreciate old music.

That's true, but those newer gamers who want to play it, to experience it, are a minority of a generation who've been brought up with much newer and advanced gaming systems.

0909090
  • 0909090

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012
  • Slovakia

#20

Posted 16 February 2013 - 01:51 PM

I first completed game in 2012, never played much before. I still love playing it as well as other GTAs. smile.gif In some aspects I like it more than today's games actually and I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only one who thinks that.

cidamelo
  • cidamelo

    RIP Amy WINEHOUSE!GRANT RODIEK is back to the EA GAMES!&

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2010

#21

Posted 17 February 2013 - 05:12 AM

Funny thing I don't understand: the friends of my younger son (age around 13-14 years) love GTA III, but hate Vice City notify.gif Anyway, I just can't understand how someone could not like GTA!! Specially those classics ones... I don't think it's sh** even by today standards, it's still an awesome game for me! Classics will always be classics for me, I still like old games like Pitfall lol.gif

aefety
  • aefety

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2013

#22

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:16 AM

Those who still play or like III come from a different generation.

Mr. Jago
  • Mr. Jago

    Dreams, what are they

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 May 2011
  • United-States

#23

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:18 AM Edited by Mr. Jago, 17 February 2013 - 07:22 AM.

Yeah it's an aggressive way to go about saying it but to be honest I definitely see where they're coming from. Having started with GTA III I simply can't complete the first two, without the 3D perspective the missions just aren't fun to play for me.

@aefty: Still playing it is one thing, it definitely doesn't have the substance to last someone 10 years, but denying that it has merit as a revolutionary title just because it's old seems silly to think.

GTAKid667
  • GTAKid667

    The Bad Fella

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 24 May 2010
  • United-Kingdom

#24

Posted 24 March 2013 - 06:01 PM

QUOTE (Mr. Jago @ Sunday, Feb 17 2013, 07:18)
Yeah it's an aggressive way to go about saying it but to be honest I definitely see where they're coming from. Having started with GTA III I simply can't complete the first two, without the 3D perspective the missions just aren't fun to play for me.

@aefty: Still playing it is one thing, it definitely doesn't have the substance to last someone 10 years, but denying that it has merit as a revolutionary title just because it's old seems silly to think.

Yes but the other thing is, GTA 1 and 2 are in Top Down View whereas GTA 3 is not. So I can understand people not enjoying 1 and 2 but I dont understand the issue with 3
@Cida Melo - I agree, GTA is awesome!

Mr_Leone
  • Mr_Leone

    The Liberty City Experience

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010

#25

Posted 25 March 2013 - 08:38 PM

Am I considered oldschool? I started with LCS. I will admit, playing III after LCS was awkward due to no bikes or choppers so, yeah. I do like III though. It's a great game and I prefer it over VC.

LCS
IV
VCS
III
SA

It's just preference. That's my list.

GTAKid667
  • GTAKid667

    The Bad Fella

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 24 May 2010
  • United-Kingdom

#26

Posted 25 March 2013 - 08:45 PM

QUOTE (Mr_Leone @ Monday, Mar 25 2013, 20:38)
Am I considered oldschool? I started with LCS. I will admit, playing III after LCS was awkward due to no bikes or choppers so, yeah. I do like III though. It's a great game and I prefer it over VC.

LCS
IV
VCS
III
SA

It's just preference. That's my list.

I suppose you can be because LCS is nearly 8 years old smile.gif
Everybody has there own different preferences so it is understandable that not everyone likes the same game. GTA III was great to me, not only because it was what I started with but it is the game in which the series success began

Mr_Leone
  • Mr_Leone

    The Liberty City Experience

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010

#27

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:16 PM

Not even that, LC in itself was so detailed. Even for it's time, it's hard to find a better world. It was designed so well and basically from scratch.

GTAKid667
  • GTAKid667

    The Bad Fella

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 24 May 2010
  • United-Kingdom

#28

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:20 PM

QUOTE (Mr_Leone @ Monday, Mar 25 2013, 21:16)
Not even that, LC in itself was so detailed. Even for it's time, it's hard to find a better world. It was designed so well and basically from scratch.

Yes it was, Rockstar do put great efforts into their games and that is why we get such detailed stuff off of them smile.gif

Mr_Leone
  • Mr_Leone

    The Liberty City Experience

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010

#29

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:31 PM

QUOTE (GTAKid667 @ Monday, Mar 25 2013, 21:20)
QUOTE (Mr_Leone @ Monday, Mar 25 2013, 21:16)
Not even that, LC in itself was so detailed. Even for it's time, it's hard to find a better world. It was designed so well and basically from scratch.

Yes it was, Rockstar do put great efforts into their games and that is why we get such detailed stuff off of them smile.gif

Compared to VC, LC was leaps and bounds ahead. Vice City lacked the variety of terrain, and the fact it was so flat was disappointing.

GoldenBlade
  • GoldenBlade

    Hustlin'

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2012

#30

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:50 PM

QUOTE (Mr_Leone @ Monday, Mar 25 2013, 21:31)
QUOTE (GTAKid667 @ Monday, Mar 25 2013, 21:20)
QUOTE (Mr_Leone @ Monday, Mar 25 2013, 21:16)
Not even that, LC in itself was so detailed. Even for it's time, it's hard to find a better world. It was designed so well and basically from scratch.

Yes it was, Rockstar do put great efforts into their games and that is why we get such detailed stuff off of them smile.gif

Compared to VC, LC was leaps and bounds ahead. Vice City lacked the variety of terrain, and the fact it was so flat was disappointing.

Yeah, it would've been nice to have some hills here and there. There wasn't much off-road access in VC.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users