Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Why does Gta iv get so much hate?

33 replies to this topic
IGhostUlt
  • IGhostUlt

    LSLKS

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2012

#1

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:01 PM

I felt like that game was one of the best in the series. The only bad things in the game was the dark colors(tbogt fixed this), not much country side, lack of customization, activities, and variety in missions. That was basically it. So why are people hating on it?


NADOLNY
  • NADOLNY

    Homie

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2007

#2

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:03 PM

I dont hate it. But gtav is a lot better.

Richardson0
  • Richardson0

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2013

#3

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:03 PM

I preferred GTA IV to V. Just my two cents.


Distrom
  • Distrom

    Sodom

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2013
  • Venezuela

#4

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:04 PM

Because most of the haters are SA fanboysm claiming the game was a step back.

 

GTA IV was a complete revolution to the GTA franchise, it only lacked ok content, but IMO it was overall better game than previous GTAs.

  • theGTAking101 likes this

Themonsterhunter
  • Themonsterhunter

    Bounty Hunter

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2013
  • United-States

#5

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:05 PM

Mainly due to SA nostalgia. The same thing that makes them hate on this game.

hierbamala
  • hierbamala

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013

#6

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:05 PM

Game was garbage

IGhostUlt
  • IGhostUlt

    LSLKS

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2012

#7

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:09 PM

the game did alot of things better than gta v

  • theGTAking101 likes this

takeral
  • takeral

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2013

#8

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:09 PM

I didn't like the missions(Too repetitive, same sh!t every time). The story was lame(and this comes from someone from Eastern Europe)

 

The physics, graphics,etc did revolutionize the series though. No doubt about that. 


Mr. Rocko
  • Mr. Rocko

    Beep.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Dec 2007
  • United-States

#9

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:16 PM

Because it was repetitive, dull, and there was barely anything to do. The whole city felt like a playground with just swings in it and a cage around it. The driving system was overrated, no way is a sports car or bike suppose to turn like that. The vehicle damage was good though. The frame rate was terrible and they could of done a whole lot more with Times Square.


spamtackey
  • spamtackey

    Business Socks

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

#10

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:20 PM

It's because most people don't design games so they don't realize that when Rockstar said they were making a new engine for GTA IV they actually had to redesign the core of the game and had less time for things like jetpacks and Area 51. San Andreas was only possible due to the work on III and Vice City. Without those games there would not have been a San Andreas. The proof is that GTA III is not San Andreas. Does anyone here honestly believe that GTA III was as near-broken as it was because they wanted it to be lackluster? The same thing applies to GTA IV. They started a new engine and GTA IV could not have been any better. It's nowhere near perfect, but, like GTA III before it, it was a good game and a good starting point. 

  • Distrom likes this

JohnGazman
  • JohnGazman

    More Dakka Is Never Enough

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2013
  • Wales

#11

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:22 PM

Because i'm sick of it? It's not a bad game, but it's time for a change.


DarkFalcon95
  • DarkFalcon95

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2013

#12

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:26 PM

I just hated Liberty City. Never really liked that setting and it was too dark. I thought the game was great but I couldn't take playing in Liberty City. Way too dull and boring.


SmoothGetaway
  • SmoothGetaway

    I got respect for reality

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2011
  • None

#13

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:28 PM

It's not just GTAIV it's every GTA. Look back and you will see SA got a lot of hate at the time, same with Vice City, and surprise surprise...with V as well. Very similar complaints across the board too.

The music sucks
I don't like the main character(s)
The driving is terrible
There's nothing to do after the story

If you have fun in the game, who cares what other people think? This cycle will repeat when VI comes along, stick around and you'll see

Littletimmy
  • Littletimmy

    Master Sergeant Shooter Sergeant Person!

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2013

#14

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:28 PM

because iv is better, everyone hates the things with success


oCrapaCreeper
  • oCrapaCreeper

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2013

#15

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:28 PM Edited by oCrapaCreeper, 27 September 2013 - 10:29 PM.

 It was a great game, but the dark setting and lack of content really gets to you. I can barely play IV without loading up The Balled of Gay Tony.


KillaDanny
  • KillaDanny

    Lone Wolf

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2013

#16

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:33 PM Edited by KillaDanny, 27 September 2013 - 10:43 PM.

because iv is better, everyone hates the things with success

so you're saying gta v is the best considering it's one with most success? not saying I don't agree just wondering...

 

 

Personally I don't hate GTA IV but now that I played GTA V I just can't go back to it...


Lagful
  • Lagful

    Certified Fresh

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2013

#17

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:34 PM

Everyone has very high standards for the series.


calearne
  • calearne

    GTAO is a complete abomination compared to GTA IV multiplayer.

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2013
  • United-States

#18

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:36 PM

The whole game had a strange blue tint.

 

The coloring didn't look like NY.


The Gardener
  • The Gardener

    jebeno isti

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • None

#19

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:41 PM

I didn't like the missions(Too repetitive, same sh!t every time). The story was lame(and this comes from someone from Eastern Europe)
 
The physics, graphics,etc did revolutionize the series though. No doubt about that. 


I agree the missions were repetitive in IV but the story was far superior to GTA 5. I honestly think Rockstar got lazy when they wrote the story in GTA 5 and focused way to much on mission variety and fun. That's not a bad thing though.

AnDReJ98
  • AnDReJ98

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • Serbia

#20

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:57 PM

I don't hate it. I don't see why would i hate it. It's one of the very enjoyable games i've played, i enjoyed that game when used to play it. Don't know why someone have to claim his option as a fact and saying which game is the best or worst. 


Thebull94
  • Thebull94

    Mack Pimp

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 16 Aug 2013

#21

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:08 PM Edited by Thebull94, 27 September 2013 - 11:10 PM.

Because most of the haters are SA fanboysm claiming the game was a step back.

 

GTA IV was a complete revolution to the GTA franchise, it only lacked ok content, but IMO it was overall better game than previous GTAs.

Lol the game was a step back in every f*cking way dude. Just because it had new hardware to run off doesnt mean it was better than San Andreas. f*ck Vice city was better than it (not really a diss as Vice City is arguably my favourite GTA game).

 

GTA V is what GTA IV shoulda been and it disgusts me how blind some of the rockstar fanboys are. 

 

GTA IV came out with pretty graphics and physics engine with a Rockstar logo slapped on it and it was given 10/10 left and right. It had basically nothing to do outside the story, lackluster online (it was only fun f*cking around with friends) and the list goes on. Along comes GTA V with features / mini games added in (basically the same activity count as San Andreas) with a Rockstar logo slapped on it again and what happens? People sh*t their pants and it gets 10/10's left and right again.

 

Saints row 1 sh*ts on GTA IV and always will.

 

 

Watch the incomming comments

 

"OMfg you saints row fanboy"

 

"Go play cod bitch"

 

"Wow you dont think GTA games are teh best games eva? f*cking troll!"

 

Ahhh how amusing :)

Sadly Saints row went down hill after Saints row 1.

 

Seriously Rockstar could shove a sh*t encrusted dildo in a game case (if it would fit) and release it and it would get 10/10s. Too many Rockstar cock hungry fanboys these days.


AnDReJ98
  • AnDReJ98

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • Serbia

#22

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:15 PM

 

Because most of the haters are SA fanboysm claiming the game was a step back.

 

GTA IV was a complete revolution to the GTA franchise, it only lacked ok content, but IMO it was overall better game than previous GTAs.

Lol the game was a step back in every f*cking way dude. Just because it had new hardware to run off doesnt mean it was better than San Andreas. f*ck Vice city was better than it (not really a diss as Vice City is arguably my favourite GTA game).

 

GTA V is what GTA IV shoulda been and it disgusts me how blind some of the rockstar fanboys are. 

 

GTA IV came out with pretty graphics and physics engine with a Rockstar logo slapped on it and it was given 10/10 left and right. It had basically nothing to do outside the story, lackluster online (it was only fun f*cking around with friends) and the list goes on. Along comes GTA V with features / mini games added in (basically the same activity count as San Andreas) with a Rockstar logo slapped on it again and what happens? People sh*t their pants and it gets 10/10's left and right again.

 

Saints row 1 sh*ts on GTA IV and always will.

 

Sadly Saints row went down hill after Saints row 1.

 

Seriously Rockstar could shove a sh*t encrusted dildo in a game case (if it would fit) and release it and it would get 10/10s. Too many Rockstar cock hungry fanboys these days.

 

Calm down. Just because it has some mini or med steps back doesn't mean it's full step back or however you say it. Look a little better into game and you'll see many things that have been improved. Or how do you know, maybe R* used it just as a test on new consoles or something, because R* always try to make their best game at end of generation such as GTA V now. Part of your option is not true. But it still can be your option. Think before post.


Thebull94
  • Thebull94

    Mack Pimp

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 16 Aug 2013

#23

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:28 PM Edited by Thebull94, 27 September 2013 - 11:29 PM.

 

 

Because most of the haters are SA fanboysm claiming the game was a step back.

 

GTA IV was a complete revolution to the GTA franchise, it only lacked ok content, but IMO it was overall better game than previous GTAs.

Lol the game was a step back in every f*cking way dude. Just because it had new hardware to run off doesnt mean it was better than San Andreas. f*ck Vice city was better than it (not really a diss as Vice City is arguably my favourite GTA game).

 

GTA V is what GTA IV shoulda been and it disgusts me how blind some of the rockstar fanboys are. 

 

GTA IV came out with pretty graphics and physics engine with a Rockstar logo slapped on it and it was given 10/10 left and right. It had basically nothing to do outside the story, lackluster online (it was only fun f*cking around with friends) and the list goes on. Along comes GTA V with features / mini games added in (basically the same activity count as San Andreas) with a Rockstar logo slapped on it again and what happens? People sh*t their pants and it gets 10/10's left and right again.

 

Saints row 1 sh*ts on GTA IV and always will.

 

Sadly Saints row went down hill after Saints row 1.

 

Seriously Rockstar could shove a sh*t encrusted dildo in a game case (if it would fit) and release it and it would get 10/10s. Too many Rockstar cock hungry fanboys these days.

 

Calm down. Just because it has some mini or med steps back doesn't mean it's full step back or however you say it. Look a little better into game and you'll see many things that have been improved. Or how do you know, maybe R* used it just as a test on new consoles or something, because R* always try to make their best game at end of generation such as GTA V now. Part of your option is not true. But it still can be your option. Think before post.

 

Part of what option? Rockstar releasing a test? Then charging 60 bucks for it? Nice logic there mate. Your delusional if you think they give a f*ck about the consumer. They are a business they care about profit and that is that. Same with every company (not that I blame them). if you think they made GTA IV as a test so they could make teh best game eva for teh fanbase. Then you sir. Are 100% confirmed delusional.

 

Why do you think this game has terrible cop AI (being aggressive does not hide the fact that they are super mutant ninjas who can predict crimes / your location without actually seeing you), alot of half assed mini games and out of there 200+ million budget 100 million went into advertisements? Top that off with pre release DLC and yea. They really give a f*ck about this community huh?

  • latigreblue likes this

mrhandss
  • mrhandss

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2013

#24

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:30 PM

Look at San Andreas and all that it had. Now remove most of it and make the story and characters dull because Rockstar wants to be "realistic". The driving mechanics also are changed due to this. On top of that, even if the city isn't even close to the same as the version in III, it;s still Liberty city which is just New York. People are goddamn tired of playing in New York. 


AnDReJ98
  • AnDReJ98

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • Serbia

#25

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:40 PM

 

Part of what option? Rockstar releasing a test? Then charging 60 bucks for it? Nice logic there mate. Your delusional if you think they give a f*ck about the consumer. They are a business they care about profit and that is that. Same with every company (not that I blame them). if you think they made GTA IV as a test so they could make teh best game eva for teh fanbase. Then you sir. Are 100% confirmed delusional.

 

Why do you think this game has terrible cop AI (being aggressive does not hide the fact that they are super mutant ninjas who can predict crimes / your location without actually seeing you), alot of half assed mini games and out of there 200+ million budget 100 million went into advertisements? Top that off with pre release DLC and yea. They really give a f*ck about this community huh?

I said ''maybe'' if you know to read. And if i'm not right, why then IV got so high ratings when it came out? Is that everybody are wrong, but just you are right? Really? Learn to make balance between real things and your imagination. I nowhere said a fact, i said a possibility. I agree that IV had some steps back, but you're really underrating it and saying something that isn't fully or actually true at all. But remember, i haven't said it's fact, nor i didn't even say it's my option, a ''possibility''. Look better.


Thebull94
  • Thebull94

    Mack Pimp

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 16 Aug 2013

#26

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:51 PM Edited by Thebull94, 27 September 2013 - 11:52 PM.

 

 

Part of what option? Rockstar releasing a test? Then charging 60 bucks for it? Nice logic there mate. Your delusional if you think they give a f*ck about the consumer. They are a business they care about profit and that is that. Same with every company (not that I blame them). if you think they made GTA IV as a test so they could make teh best game eva for teh fanbase. Then you sir. Are 100% confirmed delusional.

 

Why do you think this game has terrible cop AI (being aggressive does not hide the fact that they are super mutant ninjas who can predict crimes / your location without actually seeing you), alot of half assed mini games and out of there 200+ million budget 100 million went into advertisements? Top that off with pre release DLC and yea. They really give a f*ck about this community huh?

I said ''maybe'' if you know to read. And if i'm not right, why then IV got so high ratings when it came out? Is that everybody are wrong, but just you are right? Really? Learn to make balance between real things and your imagination. I nowhere said a fact, i said a possibility. I agree that IV had some steps back, but you're really underrating it and saying something that isn't fully or actually true at all. But remember, i haven't said it's fact, nor i didn't even say it's my option, a ''possibility''. Look better.

 

 

 

Actually the metacritic is 98. Whereas the user score is 79. So the 'real thing' (fact) is the users (us the consumers, the ones that dont get paid to review games highly *cough* Rockstar *cough* thought GTA IV was an average game. Whereas the media thought it was perfect. LOL stfu and do research before you talk sh*t.

 

http://www.metacriti...d-theft-auto-iv

 

Ill just let you soak that in. Then refer you to the point were I said the media sucks up Rockstars ass. Now kindly stfu :)


woggleman
  • woggleman

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012

#27

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:56 PM

I loved IV but the driving was awkward though using classic controls makes a huge difference. Also the lack of planes really was a setback and it took a good 6 or 7 missions before things got fun. V is everything IV should have been and it is hard to go back now.

 

People seem to have found a newfound love for IV now though since V came out.


AnDReJ98
  • AnDReJ98

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • Serbia

#28

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:58 PM Edited by AnDReJ98, 28 September 2013 - 12:00 AM.

@Thebull94

 

This is going to nowhere. Useless explaining you all this, stubborn and immature kids like you just need to leave on their own. Maybe you'll understand later, maybe not. Anyhow i'm not a teacher, so i'm out of this.


ExtendUnlimited
  • ExtendUnlimited

    Cool.

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Sep 2013
  • None

#29

Posted 28 September 2013 - 12:07 AM

 

 

 

Because most of the haters are SA fanboysm claiming the game was a step back.

 

GTA IV was a complete revolution to the GTA franchise, it only lacked ok content, but IMO it was overall better game than previous GTAs.

Lol the game was a step back in every f*cking way dude. Just because it had new hardware to run off doesnt mean it was better than San Andreas. f*ck Vice city was better than it (not really a diss as Vice City is arguably my favourite GTA game).

 

GTA V is what GTA IV shoulda been and it disgusts me how blind some of the rockstar fanboys are. 

 

GTA IV came out with pretty graphics and physics engine with a Rockstar logo slapped on it and it was given 10/10 left and right. It had basically nothing to do outside the story, lackluster online (it was only fun f*cking around with friends) and the list goes on. Along comes GTA V with features / mini games added in (basically the same activity count as San Andreas) with a Rockstar logo slapped on it again and what happens? People sh*t their pants and it gets 10/10's left and right again.

 

Saints row 1 sh*ts on GTA IV and always will.

 

Sadly Saints row went down hill after Saints row 1.

 

Seriously Rockstar could shove a sh*t encrusted dildo in a game case (if it would fit) and release it and it would get 10/10s. Too many Rockstar cock hungry fanboys these days.

 

Calm down. Just because it has some mini or med steps back doesn't mean it's full step back or however you say it. Look a little better into game and you'll see many things that have been improved. Or how do you know, maybe R* used it just as a test on new consoles or something, because R* always try to make their best game at end of generation such as GTA V now. Part of your option is not true. But it still can be your option. Think before post.

 

Part of what option? Rockstar releasing a test? Then charging 60 bucks for it? Nice logic there mate. Your delusional if you think they give a f*ck about the consumer. They are a business they care about profit and that is that. Same with every company (not that I blame them). if you think they made GTA IV as a test so they could make teh best game eva for teh fanbase. Then you sir. Are 100% confirmed delusional.

 

Why do you think this game has terrible cop AI (being aggressive does not hide the fact that they are super mutant ninjas who can predict crimes / your location without actually seeing you), alot of half assed mini games and out of there 200+ million budget 100 million went into advertisements? Top that off with pre release DLC and yea. They really give a f*ck about this community huh?

 

Businesses are always about profits, without no profit there isn't a business. For the mini games in GTAV really are pretty fun on side, sadly you don't enjoy them. You would need to prove those 100 million budget for ads and pre release DLC, no sources no support on your post.


SmoothGetaway
  • SmoothGetaway

    I got respect for reality

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2011
  • None

#30

Posted 28 September 2013 - 12:15 AM

I seriously wish some of you would keep your fantasy life off the Internet. Why else would you bring up sh*t encrusted dildos, dudes sucking dick and taking it up the ass all the time.

Like, seriously all the f*cking time.

Its literally the only response I've seen from some of you.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users