Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

The Driving Debate

2,696 replies to this topic

Poll: Driving Debate (1903 member(s) have cast votes)

How do you feel about GTA V's driving mechanics

  1. Its great. A huge improvement of GTA IV (764 votes [40.15%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 40.15%

  2. I like it despite it feeling more "arcady" (525 votes [27.59%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 27.59%

  3. Indifferent (82 votes [4.31%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.31%

  4. I dont like it but I can live with it (209 votes [10.98%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.98%

  5. Its terrible. Big step back from GTA IV (323 votes [16.97%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 16.97%

Vote Guests cannot vote
Shug
  • Shug

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2014
  • None

#2521

Posted 18 February 2014 - 05:33 PM

I prefer V's driving, i'm glad they changed it.


rahjee
  • rahjee

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013

#2522

Posted 18 February 2014 - 08:21 PM

In many ways no it doesn't

The breaking is tighter than V

The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.

The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.

I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. 


I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.


B Dawg
  • B Dawg

    It's pure aggression and speed

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2008
  • None

#2523

Posted 18 February 2014 - 08:40 PM Edited by B Dawg, 18 February 2014 - 08:44 PM.

 

 

 

That's why SA is better! Driving isn't too arcade or realistic.

SA's driving was complete garbage stop fanboying.

 

And why exactly was it garbage?

 

@above Mafia II has annoying black people, you can't rob a place without a black dude pulling a gun on you :panic: wtf!?

 

The cars taking forever to speed up, lack of some sort of realism, the car's got damage way to easily, the breaking was more tighter than V's, when it tilts over the car it explodes, I could go on forever. SA physics and realism sucked learn it.

 

Taking forever to speed up? How about realistic acceleration? Besides, the braking and flipping the car is exactly the opposite between SA and V. In SA it sets on fire and burns for a few seconds before exploding no matter how you end up damaging or flipping your car. Too easy to damage? Like in every GTA before it, learn to drive. SA cars don't have brakes as good as the cars in V. And to top it all, the Elegy is the best drifting car ever to appear in a GTA game.

 

SA did a lot more good than bad compared to V.

  • suicidehummer likes this

X_AFRO_X
  • X_AFRO_X

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2014

#2524

Posted 18 February 2014 - 09:29 PM Edited by X_AFRO_X, 19 February 2014 - 02:01 PM.

In many ways no it doesn't

The breaking is tighter than V

The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.

The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.

I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. 


I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

 

______________________________________________^^

This is where I disagree some, for example;

 

If I have Trev's truck, and I hit a 'prius' its like a ton of bricks and I stop immediately!! cant even push the thing outta the way!! with a Truck!

 

this aspect bothers me. this would never happen in IV's physics. they seemed to have taken out a lot of momentum physics outta the driving. and the damage will be very minimal most of the time.. there are times when the damage is surprisingly accurate, and times (most times) when I am going break-neck speed, yet when I hit sumthing it only leaves a scratch..

I can go Off-roading in a sport car for ages.. no regard for speed or the terrain, flipping down mountain side, crashing the whole while.. flip over on the roof... who cares? just 'flip it over' car still runs like a champ. only scratched up some. maybe some hood and window, or headlight damage... :-/ ridiculous.

 

Now I will say that IV's driving would not quite fit, but if they had IMPROVED ON IV's driving, it would've been SO nice. and the most important part to me is the choice. it needs to be a choice; just like Auto Aim < Free Aim. THAT aspect remains a choice, if I wanna noob-shoot it up, I keep the auto aim on.. when I out grow the training wheels, I switch up to the for real aim settings..the same cannot be said for the assisted driving mechanics.  I cant tell you how many times I go to counter steer my drift, and the car just stops responding.. its like you have to unlearn real driving techniques, that were very applicable in IV.. and that is a bummer man.

 

To me its like there is a 'magnetic current' that the cars all drive on (hover on if you will...) and once you contact them (or try to hand-brake-drift in many cars) you lose the magnetic connection, and become a brick. There is some 'ART' to driving; not just the numb "Mash X" to go, "Mash Square" to stop.. (driving is more than get there as fast and as violently as you can, for some of us drivers.. the non teen folks usually) they have removed a great deal of finesse, which was rich in IV's driving.

 

I need to play more with the Customs shop to see if I can tweak a car(s) to my liking, but the default stuff "straight outta the box" (I have no x box live) is kinda disappointing.

Many cars behave quite the same, as do many of the terrains.. there is a small difference to me anyhow.. again disappointing, from what could have been..

 

If they improved apon IV's physics then it would have fit, if they can make MDC Dub edition fit, they can make IV's driving fit IMO..at least IV was a GTA title...

 

grammar edits..

Font Edit...

  • suicidehummer likes this

DrAnomalous
  • DrAnomalous

    Disfavored Veracity

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2009
  • None

#2525

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:24 PM

Driving in GTA IV isn't at Forza or GT level of realism but the braking distances, the loss of traction, and the collisions all feel far superior to GTA V's snore fest. In GTA V many cars suffer from a crippling traction control; a restricted feel that is undeniable. Races feel like they reward the guy that pits the most cars as opposed to the competitive clean driver that avoids contact and enters and exits corners with precision. Cars bounce off walls, barriers, everything in between and hardly lose momentum. 

 

Every class should have it's pros and cons but instead an Entity can make it up Mt Chiliad faster than an offroad vehicle with 4x4, mud tires, and over a foot of clearance. Super light super cars take a ridiculous amount of punishment. It's a pathetic joke and it renders many great looking vehicles useless. 

 

The argument that this isn't a driving simulator is by far one of the stupidest things I've heard said on this subject. The opinion that realism makes for boring game-play definitely depends on who you ask. I don't need gridlock traffic, my character getting migraines, or having to sit down and pay bills because I know that stuff is frustrating and not fun. I do however find cars and guns very fun and when I see them represented in a game I would like them to feel real and balanced. It's challenging and the challenge is what is immersive and exciting.

 

It's not an elitist attitude as some say. If the game is intended for mature audiences then why should the game be catered to those that sound like they are very uncomfortable with realism and bit of a challenge? 

  • Blingy, ktm_ryder, B Dawg and 7 others like this

StingrayX
  • StingrayX

    ♢ Las Venturas ♢

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#2526

Posted 18 February 2014 - 11:27 PM

In many ways no it doesn't
The breaking is tighter than V
The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.
The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.
I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

I really don't see how a style of driving would not fit an environment's atmosphere. Hell the way Rockstar built the world of V, the driving in V fits in kind of awkwardly and inconsistently.
  • P2FX and DrAnomalous like this

rahjee
  • rahjee

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013

#2527

Posted 19 February 2014 - 07:05 AM Edited by rahjee, 19 February 2014 - 08:09 AM.

 

 

 

 

That's why SA is better! Driving isn't too arcade or realistic.

SA's driving was complete garbage stop fanboying.

 

And why exactly was it garbage?

 

@above Mafia II has annoying black people, you can't rob a place without a black dude pulling a gun on you :panic: wtf!?

 

The cars taking forever to speed up, lack of some sort of realism, the car's got damage way to easily, the breaking was more tighter than V's, when it tilts over the car it explodes, I could go on forever. SA physics and realism sucked learn it.

 

Taking forever to speed up? How about realistic acceleration? Besides, the braking and flipping the car is exactly the opposite between SA and V. In SA it sets on fire and burns for a few seconds before exploding no matter how you end up damaging or flipping your car. Too easy to damage? Like in every GTA before it, learn to drive. SA cars don't have brakes as good as the cars in V. And to top it all, the Elegy is the best drifting car ever to appear in a GTA game.

 

SA did a lot more good than bad compared to V.

 

1.Look at the cars in 4 they did not take that long to speed up, and we both know GTA 4 had better car physics so there's my point right there. So it isn't realistic acceleration.

2. You're totally wrong, I was right about the tight braking and flipping.

3. In every GTA game it takes a few seconds for a car to blow up, stop trolling.

4. In GTA 4 cars didn't get damaged that easily.

5. If you honestly think SA had the best driving, than you can't drive.

6. Unless the cars in 5 braking system isn't modified

7. Who cares?

8. GTA 5 did whole lot better than SA:

a. Because it's for gamers, and not for people who needs cheats and mods.

b. Because the physics and realism is better.

 

You're a SA fanboy.


suicidehummer
  • suicidehummer

    This post will self destruct in 3... 2... 1...

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2011
  • None

#2528

Posted 19 February 2014 - 07:20 AM

In many ways no it doesn't

The breaking is tighter than V

The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.

The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.

I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. 


I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

The braking (correct spelling) is absurd in V. Every car can stop in like 50ft, which is completely unrealistic. SA was without a doubt more realistic.

 

The damage in IV was the most realistic, followed by the III era games, and finally V with the worst. V doesn't even try to be realistic, it's unapologetic in making cars absurdly tough, despite the fact that armor is offered for the sh*tty drivers.

 

Drifting is impossible in V because you cannot continue to spin the wheels after breaking traction in a corner. All you can do is powerslide. It was possible in SA, although hard to control.

 

Your comments are directly contrasting with the reality of what each game's physics were capable of. I never imagined someone could be so wrong about everything involving GTA driving. I pray to god you don't ever get a license.

  • DrAnomalous likes this

rahjee
  • rahjee

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013

#2529

Posted 19 February 2014 - 07:26 AM

 

In many ways no it doesn't
The breaking is tighter than V
The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.
The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.
I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

I really don't see how a style of driving would not fit an environment's atmosphere. Hell the way Rockstar built the world of V, the driving in V fits in kind of awkwardly and inconsistently.

 

Here's why we need this fast arcadish driving in V.

If you used GTA IV 's car physics in V:

 

Your car would always be broken due to  shoot outs, players who are @$$holes, missions, in other words guns are way more stronger and more dangerous in V.

 

Due to the size of GTA V it would take forever to get from place to place with IV's car physics. That's why we need cars to be fast besides, who likes getting places slower? When I'm driving a truck in V and IV I get annoyed because it takes forever. 

 

The races wouldn't be exciting. In IV in my opinion the races felt kind of lame, I'm sure there are people who'd agree with me on this. This is where GTA V's arcadish driving rocks the racing.  

 

  • I mean I just can't see IV's driving in GTA V's game.

rahjee
  • rahjee

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013

#2530

Posted 19 February 2014 - 07:52 AM Edited by rahjee, 19 February 2014 - 08:08 AM.

 

In many ways no it doesn't

The breaking is tighter than V

The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.

The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.

I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. 


I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

The braking (correct spelling) is absurd in V. Every car can stop in like 50ft, which is completely unrealistic. SA was without a doubt more realistic.

 

The damage in IV was the most realistic, followed by the III era games, and finally V with the worst. V doesn't even try to be realistic, it's unapologetic in making cars absurdly tough, despite the fact that armor is offered for the sh*tty drivers.

 

Drifting is impossible in V because you cannot continue to spin the wheels after breaking traction in a corner. All you can do is powerslide. It was possible in SA, although hard to control.

 

Your comments are directly contrasting with the reality of what each game's physics were capable of. I never imagined someone could be so wrong about everything involving GTA driving. I pray to god you don't ever get a license.

 

1. That was a complete lie, the brakes were strong in V and there's nothing really realistic about SA.

 

2. Show me because I'm sure cars in 4 did not damage so easily like the cars in SA, 3, and vice city did. The cars were meant to be strong in V, because the gun fire is heavy.

 

3. Have you ever tried laying off the gas a littlle and just give the RB a slight tap? So no it's not impossible, you're just sticking up for SA.

 

4. It's just a game, it's not meant to be real. When are you going get that and just move on?

 

5. I've honestly never encountered someone trying to back up a game that you say has more realism but it barely has none.

 

6. How does driving on a video game and driving in real life compare to each other? I for one hope you don't get your license, because you'll think GTA driving is real driving.

 

7. The problem with you is, you can't adapt to GTA 5's driving. I for one adapted to SA, 4's, and 5's driving with in 5 minutes I got each game why can't you?


StingrayX
  • StingrayX

    ♢ Las Venturas ♢

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#2531

Posted 19 February 2014 - 02:08 PM Edited by StingrayX, 19 February 2014 - 02:10 PM.

In many ways no it doesn't
The breaking is tighter than V
The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.
The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.
I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

I really don't see how a style of driving would not fit an environment's atmosphere. Hell the way Rockstar built the world of V, the driving in V fits in kind of awkwardly and inconsistently.
Here's why we need this fast arcadish driving in V.
If you used GTA IV 's car physics in V:
 
Your car would always be broken due to  shoot outs, players who are @$$holes, missions, in other words guns are way more stronger and more dangerous in V.
 
Due to the size of GTA V it would take forever to get from place to place with IV's car physics. That's why we need cars to be fast besides, who likes getting places slower? When I'm driving a truck in V and IV I get annoyed because it takes forever. 
 
The races wouldn't be exciting. In IV in my opinion the races felt kind of lame, I'm sure there are people who'd agree with me on this. This is where GTA V's arcadish driving rocks the racing.  
 
  • I mean I just can't see IV's driving in GTA V's game.
Improvements to IV's driving would have been inevitable like increased sense of speed, better damage, and less body roll. Your justifications as to why IV's driving would not fit are laughable and so ignorant. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if IV's driving returned, it would have been tweaked. Your damage excuse is almost the most ludicrous thing I ever read, right next to that strange "slow" excuse, are you high?
  • DrAnomalous likes this

rahjee
  • rahjee

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013

#2532

Posted 20 February 2014 - 03:18 AM Edited by rahjee, 20 February 2014 - 03:32 PM.

 

 

 

In many ways no it doesn't
The breaking is tighter than V
The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.
The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.
I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

I really don't see how a style of driving would not fit an environment's atmosphere. Hell the way Rockstar built the world of V, the driving in V fits in kind of awkwardly and inconsistently.
Here's why we need this fast arcadish driving in V.
If you used GTA IV 's car physics in V:
 
Your car would always be broken due to  shoot outs, players who are @$$holes, missions, in other words guns are way more stronger and more dangerous in V.
 
Due to the size of GTA V it would take forever to get from place to place with IV's car physics. That's why we need cars to be fast besides, who likes getting places slower? When I'm driving a truck in V and IV I get annoyed because it takes forever. 
 
The races wouldn't be exciting. In IV in my opinion the races felt kind of lame, I'm sure there are people who'd agree with me on this. This is where GTA V's arcadish driving rocks the racing.  
 
  • I mean I just can't see IV's driving in GTA V's game.
Improvements to IV's driving would have been inevitable like increased sense of speed, better damage, and less body roll. Your justifications as to why IV's driving would not fit are laughable and so ignorant. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if IV's driving returned, it would have been tweaked. Your damage excuse is almost the most ludicrous thing I ever read, right next to that strange "slow" excuse, are you high?

 What you said in your comment sounds like a far out, fan of IV's driving would say. I've done my best trying to talk to you, but you don't get it. It's a complete waste of time talking to someone who can't adapt to V's driving (Which isn't hard) and talking to a stubborn person who always has to be right. If you're honestly going to defend a video game like an extreme retard do that, while I play both games not thinking about problems in GTA that anyone could ignore.


DrAnomalous
  • DrAnomalous

    Disfavored Veracity

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2009
  • None

#2533

Posted 20 February 2014 - 07:47 AM Edited by DrAnomalous, 20 February 2014 - 07:48 AM.

There was too much

 

 

 

 

 

In many ways no it doesn't
The breaking is tighter than V
The car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.
The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.
I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

I really don't see how a style of driving would not fit an environment's atmosphere. Hell the way Rockstar built the world of V, the driving in V fits in kind of awkwardly and inconsistently.
Here's why we need this fast arcadish driving in V.
If you used GTA IV 's car physics in V:
 
Your car would always be broken due to  shoot outs, players who are @$$holes, missions, in other words guns are way more stronger and more dangerous in V.
 
Due to the size of GTA V it would take forever to get from place to place with IV's car physics. That's why we need cars to be fast besides, who likes getting places slower? When I'm driving a truck in V and IV I get annoyed because it takes forever. 
 
The races wouldn't be exciting. In IV in my opinion the races felt kind of lame, I'm sure there are people who'd agree with me on this. This is where GTA V's arcadish driving rocks the racing.  
 
  • I mean I just can't see IV's driving in GTA V's game.
Improvements to IV's driving would have been inevitable like increased sense of speed, better damage, and less body roll. Your justifications as to why IV's driving would not fit are laughable and so ignorant. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if IV's driving returned, it would have been tweaked. Your damage excuse is almost the most ludicrous thing I ever read, right next to that strange "slow" excuse, are you high?

 What you said in your comment sounds like a far out, fan of IV's driving would say. I've done my best trying to talk to you, but you don't get it. It's a complete waste of time talking to someone who can't adapt to V's driving (Which isn't hard) and talking to a stubborn person who always has to be right. If you're honestly going to defend a video game like an extreme retard do that, while I play both games not thinking about problems in GTA that anyone could ignore.

 

Dude that's a contradiction overload. At least from what I can actually understand in that paragraph. 


StingrayX
  • StingrayX

    ♢ Las Venturas ♢

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#2534

Posted 20 February 2014 - 02:46 PM

<p>

In many ways no it doesn'tThe breaking is tighter than VThe car's get damage way to easily in San Andreas.The drifting sucked more than V's I could go on forever.I read the other pages and they're all fanboyish. I'd prefer GTA 4's driving for a challenge but it just wouldn't feel right in GTA V's atmosphere.

I really don't see how a style of driving would not fit an environment's atmosphere. Hell the way Rockstar built the world of V, the driving in V fits in kind of awkwardly and inconsistently.
Here's why we need this fast arcadish driving in V.If you used GTA IV 's car physics in V: Your car would always be broken due to  shoot outs, players who are @$$holes, missions, in other words guns are way more stronger and more dangerous in V. Due to the size of GTA V it would take forever to get from place to place with IV's car physics. That's why we need cars to be fast besides, who likes getting places slower? When I'm driving a truck in V and IV I get annoyed because it takes forever.  The races wouldn't be exciting. In IV in my opinion the races felt kind of lame, I'm sure there are people who'd agree with me on this. This is where GTA V's arcadish driving rocks the racing.   
  • I mean I just can't see IV's driving in GTA V's game.
Improvements to IV's driving would have been inevitable like increased sense of speed, better damage, and less body roll. Your justifications as to why IV's driving would not fit are laughable and so ignorant. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if IV's driving returned, it would have been tweaked. Your damage excuse is almost the most ludicrous thing I ever read, right next to that strange "slow" excuse, are you high?
 What you said in your comment sounds like a far out, fan of IV's driving would say. I've done my best trying to talk to you, but you don't get it. It's a complete waste of time talking to someone who can't adapt to V's driving (Which isn't hard) and talking to a stubborn person who always has to be right. If you're honestly going to defend a video game like an extreme retard do that, while I play both games not thinking about problems in GTA that anyone could ignore.
What I said is what anybody with some common sense would presume. It isn't just what a "IV fanboy" would say. Just so you know, I do enjoy IV's driving physics albeit I am not "one of those guys" who likes to think that nothing is wrong with IV's driving physics or that nothing is better than it and there is nothing good about V. No.

The situation is ironically vice versa as I am trying to talk to you, but you don't get it. As evidenced in my last post, I pointed out what would obviously had been improved if IV's driving were to have returned. And if you would have read a couple of my other posts, you would not be calling me a fanboy because I said IV had it's flaws. The fact that you resorted to calling me a fanboy is utterly pathetic and it makes you look foolish because it is almost like you called me a fanboy because you do not agree with me.

You could use the same argument on me with your "IV's driving is too slow" opinion and my input on that, but that is subjective. There are opinions that are neither wrong nor right but some are uneducated or just wrong. For example, I could say that the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport is underpowered and that would be my opinion. But really it isn't right at all. The same goes with your "the driving is slow" opinion.

The sense of speed is terrible in IV but if you floor it in an Infernus, you are going somewhere, and are doing so quickly. If you like to prowl around town at a safe pace like me, you are getting around slowly. This is how it is in IV and V. What I said in my response to you is that IV's driving would have been improved as far as the sense of speed if it had returned. How and why you perceive that as a fanboy-esque response is beyond me.

Going back to this rather hostile response you gave me: I have adapted to V's driving and it is easy AND if you'd read my earlier posts you would have known that, again. Just because I can adapt to V's driving, does not mean that I have to like it. In fact, I did enjoy V's driving for weeks after I received my copy, however over time it just had begun to get bland and too simplistic for my tastes. Again, I've said this before.

Where is my "I am right all of the time" post and in which post was I being stubborn. At least provide evidence to back up such bold claims that you assume to be right.

SentinelXSVCS22
  • SentinelXSVCS22

    Liberty City - Vice City

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2014
  • United-Kingdom

#2535

Posted 20 February 2014 - 03:14 PM

Personally I find V's driving a bit heavy in terms of cornering compared to IV's driving controls. I do prefer IV's driving compared to V's driving by a big margin in terms of controlling a car in all kinds of situations from cornering at speed, to emergency breaking from a high speed. Both games I like very much, with IV and V having pros and cons compared to each other whenever driving around either Liberty City or Los Santos. Also I think that it is down to the reaction whenever playing the game of controlling any car whilst around in the city.


rahjee
  • rahjee

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013

#2536

Posted 20 February 2014 - 03:34 PM

So?


@Stingray, I don't give a f*** they're both cool games, just play them and stop ranting about it. 


StingrayX
  • StingrayX

    ♢ Las Venturas ♢

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#2537

Posted 20 February 2014 - 04:40 PM

So?
@Stingray, I don't give a f*** they're both cool games, just play them and stop ranting about it.

Such a reply, even after nicely explaining things to you, only shows that you are a hypocritical imbecile.
  • DrAnomalous and GúnZinEss like this

suicidehummer
  • suicidehummer

    This post will self destruct in 3... 2... 1...

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2011
  • None

#2538

Posted 21 February 2014 - 07:18 AM Edited by suicidehummer, 21 February 2014 - 07:19 AM.

 

1. That was a complete lie, the brakes were strong in V and there's nothing really realistic about SA.

 

 

2. Show me because I'm sure cars in 4 did not damage so easily like the cars in SA, 3, and vice city did. The cars were meant to be strong in V, because the gun fire is heavy.

 

3. Have you ever tried laying off the gas a littlle and just give the RB a slight tap? So no it's not impossible, you're just sticking up for SA.

 

4. It's just a game, it's not meant to be real. When are you going get that and just move on?

 

5. I've honestly never encountered someone trying to back up a game that you say has more realism but it barely has none.

 

6. How does driving on a video game and driving in real life compare to each other? I for one hope you don't get your license, because you'll think GTA driving is real driving.

 

7. The problem with you is, you can't adapt to GTA 5's driving. I for one adapted to SA, 4's, and 5's driving with in 5 minutes I got each game why can't you?

 

"The problem with you is..."

 

Oh boy, I can't wait to hear your expert analysis of me, I'm on the edge of my seat here!

 

It took me all of three minutes to adapt to V's handling because it's designed for a child. IV actually had a learning curve for those unaccustomed to real racing games.

 

3. Even after I explained to you the difference between a powerslide and drifting, it still hasn't gotten through your thick skull. Wow.

 

4. Many games ARE meant to be realistic. Some are not. Adults with discerning taste prefer realistic games that are challenging and in-depth. When are YOU going to get THAT through your head? Go play NFS or Mario Kart. This is an adult game.

 

5. Trying to repackage my response to your idiocy and throwing it back at me doesn't work buddy.

 

I'm done with you. It's like arguing with a mentally challenged child.

 

  • StingrayX likes this

georgia22
  • georgia22

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2012
  • None

#2539

Posted 21 February 2014 - 02:22 PM

From IV to V there was a big 'improvement' but IV was too boring and with the direction rockstar went with V in terms of fun and game play , the driving had to compliment that. I prefer V but its due to preference like everything else


StingrayX
  • StingrayX

    ♢ Las Venturas ♢

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#2540

Posted 21 February 2014 - 03:30 PM

Please do not give rahjee the attention he wants. He is a hypocritical, unsophisticated, attention whore. He will make such bold claims and state that he tried to speak to you, but when you make a long post explaining everything to him, he will cop out and say he does not care.

The utter stupidity on this side of the forum just leaves me baffled. I want to cuss somebody out without a warning. We need a purge day on this side of the forum.

B Dawg
  • B Dawg

    It's pure aggression and speed

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2008
  • None

#2541

Posted 21 February 2014 - 07:30 PM

From IV to V there was a big 'improvement' but IV was too boring and with the direction rockstar went with V in terms of fun and game play , the driving had to compliment that. I prefer V but its due to preference like everything else

All they had to do is add more action, not dumb down every game mechanic. IV is not boring personally.

 

Spoiler

  • P2FX, DrAnomalous and StingrayX like this

ViceCityStalker
  • ViceCityStalker

    Balls Deep Inside Candy Suxxx

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2013
  • South-Africa

#2542

Posted 24 February 2014 - 02:53 PM

It`s kinda like they take your prick and put it in for you no skill involved at least in IV they spun you around and then put off the lights,it took some skill to get it in.

  • DrAnomalous and suicidehummer like this

Obamakiller
  • Obamakiller

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2014
  • United-States

#2543

Posted 25 February 2014 - 12:49 AM

It is bad but it's gta not Forza so calm down and it's better then gta 4s were u can drift on a straight road

StingrayX
  • StingrayX

    ♢ Las Venturas ♢

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#2544

Posted 25 February 2014 - 01:20 AM

It is bad but it's gta not Forza so calm down and it's better then gta 4s were u can drift on a straight road


Judging by your name, you are a bloody imbecile. And one who repeats debunked claims and stupid sh*t that has already been reasoned with for like your "It's not Forza" claim.
  • P2FX, DrAnomalous and suicidehummer like this

suicidehummer
  • suicidehummer

    This post will self destruct in 3... 2... 1...

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2011
  • None

#2545

Posted 25 February 2014 - 07:26 AM Edited by suicidehummer, 25 February 2014 - 07:28 AM.

Haha, why am I not surprised that Obamakiller likes V and has no concept of proper grammar?

 

Repeating debunked claims is conservatives' bread and butter.


Blingy
  • Blingy

    Nigga Ya Love Ta Hate

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Oct 2004
  • None

#2546

Posted 25 February 2014 - 05:48 PM

Driving in GTA IV isn't at Forza or GT level of realism but the braking distances, the loss of traction, and the collisions all feel far superior to GTA V's snore fest. In GTA V many cars suffer from a crippling traction control; a restricted feel that is undeniable. Races feel like they reward the guy that pits the most cars as opposed to the competitive clean driver that avoids contact and enters and exits corners with precision. Cars bounce off walls, barriers, everything in between and hardly lose momentum. 

 

Every class should have it's pros and cons but instead an Entity can make it up Mt Chiliad faster than an offroad vehicle with 4x4, mud tires, and over a foot of clearance. Super light super cars take a ridiculous amount of punishment. It's a pathetic joke and it renders many great looking vehicles useless. 

 

The argument that this isn't a driving simulator is by far one of the stupidest things I've heard said on this subject. The opinion that realism makes for boring game-play definitely depends on who you ask. I don't need gridlock traffic, my character getting migraines, or having to sit down and pay bills because I know that stuff is frustrating and not fun. I do however find cars and guns very fun and when I see them represented in a game I would like them to feel real and balanced. It's challenging and the challenge is what is immersive and exciting.

 

It's not an elitist attitude as some say. If the game is intended for mature audiences then why should the game be catered to those that sound like they are very uncomfortable with realism and bit of a challenge? 

As far as i'm concerned, this is the most important reply in this topic yet.

  • GTAfear likes this

Schismatist
  • Schismatist

    The forum asshole

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2011

#2547

Posted 26 February 2014 - 06:39 PM

My issue with GTAV's driving is not the mechanics necessarily, I do like them, but the vehicle damage is just... Aesthetically speaking, it's better, as opposed to just a bunch of bending of the mesh, the car does end up losing parts, including wheels in some cases. However, I find myself in the circumstances of crashing into something from the side and one of my wheels being bent into a position where the car just cannot accelerate above a certain point. At moments like that I just kinda don't want to play anymore because it's just not fun.

I honestly don't care for realism, what makes the game fun should come first, and, going back to GTAIV, I noticed that I'm much more fond of the driving controls then majority of the consumer base was, but at times it does feel as if you are perpetually driving Franklin's Bagger, just BARELY able to make that turn. So I suppose both of them REALLY have their issues, and, I think that the patches to GTAV has made the wheel issue even worse, as I removed the patches from GTAV for some time and, I wasn't encountering these problems nearly as often.


StingrayX
  • StingrayX

    ♢ Las Venturas ♢

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#2548

Posted 26 February 2014 - 09:38 PM

What I can never seem to grasp is why people feel that not being able to make a turn easily is an undesirable factor. I can't help but disagree. Making a turn with ease at questionable speeds is rubbish. I crave the challenge of testing out a specific vehicles brakes and making a turn, sometimes coming real close to missing the turn.

One issue with IV that I will strongly agree with is that the braking was terrible. There was one car, I think it was the Turismo, that had brakes strong enough to bite, but everything else just felt weak. The Faction, for example, sometimes fails to brake even when I push them hard. I end up rear ending a car at around 20 miles an hour. I found ways to get around this but the sense of weak brakes is still very prevalent.

Shootaholic
  • Shootaholic

    zzzz....

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2012

#2549

Posted 27 February 2014 - 07:34 AM

The damage is set too low. I mean there are armour upgrades if you don't want to bash you're car. Most people don't give a f*ck but to me it's a big thing. With increased sensitivity gta could have had damage like next car game or slightly lesser with lesser parts falling off. The stupid explosions are beyond annoying. I wanted to see the crumpled mess of my car after rolling down chilliad, but no the car has to explode after hitting it's roof hard as if it has a gas tank on it's roof.

  • P2FX, Ermac. and ric4rd094 like this

StingrayX
  • StingrayX

    ♢ Las Venturas ♢

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#2550

Posted 28 February 2014 - 02:49 PM Edited by StingrayX, 28 February 2014 - 02:50 PM.

You know, I just might have been more lenient on V's driving physics if the cars did not feel like that were glued to the road- if they did not feel like the suspension locked to where it could not function.

No car body rolls, no car goes over bumps without resulting in what would be extreme discomfort to the occupants of the car, cars just plop onto sidewalks, and the lack of a suspension is basically what makes the cars feel superficial and too sudden when you steer.

I have adapted to V's driving. But it is dull. Just because I strongly distaste V's driving does not mean I have not adapted to it. Car reviewers feel the Audi A6 for example feels a little dull. Does that mean they have not adapted to it? Hell no.
  • DrAnomalous likes this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users