Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Best Develeloper Of This Generation

71 replies to this topic

Poll: It's between Rockstar & Naughty Dog (69 member(s) have cast votes)

Which is your favorite?

  1. Rockstar Games (RDR / GTA IV & V / LA Noire / Midnight Club LA) (54 votes [78.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 78.26%

  2. Naughty Dog (Uncharted 1-3 / The Last of Us) (15 votes [21.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.74%

Vote Guests cannot vote
redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#31

Posted 01 October 2013 - 04:15 PM

 

 

NAUGHTY DOG IS OVERRATED.

Atleast they don't release half finish games aka GTA V. 

Rockstar went downhill this gen. They started of Strong showing the way DLC should be made and taking NO content out of their game. Next with Red Dead Redemption they took out content and sold it for $2. LA Noire was the same but the DLC were worth it. Max Payne 3 had sh*t DLC. GTA V seems to take content out of the game, not care to much about single player, and you can buy money for GTA O. Rockstar is turning into EA. They are no where close to being good developers. Now back in the PS2 era I take that back. 

 

Even with that I can't say a Developer deserves developer of the generation. 

 

I like RDR ( R* SD ), TLOU ( ND ), FC3 ( UBI ), GTA V ( R* N ), UC2 ( ND ), AC 2 ( Ubi ), HF2 ( Val ), L4D2 ( Val ). Skyrim ( Ben )

 

LOOOOOLZ, what a hypocrite.

 

You're talking about cheap DLC's, whereas only optional content that Naughty Dog released was their sh*t-worth $15 multiplayer skins and maps. Meanwhile, Rockstar released Lost & Damned, The Ballad of Gay Tony and Undead Nightmare - all are considered as one of the biggest DLCs in the history of DLCs.

 

All Naughty Dog did during this generation were three (overrated) Uncharted games that didn't change much from each other except for graphics, and one good The Last of Us. Rockstar did many fantastic, different things this generation. Including GTA IV which was practically the first game that really gave people a reason to buy the current-gen consoles, Midnight Club: Los Angeles which is probably one of the most underrated arcade racing games ever, Red Dead Redemption which by many is considered an even better acomplishment than the new GTAs, fresh and innovative L.A. Noire, one of the best third-person shooters - Max Payne 3, and one of the biggest entertainment hits - GTA V.

 

But Rockstar is still nothing in comparison with Naughty Dog, right?

 

LA Noire wasn't made by Rockstar.

MP3 was a flop and you could see that with sales when it released. ( Don't disrespect the fans and that won't happen again )

GTA IV was a nice finish game with good DLC.

RDR had 1 good dlc with the rest taken out content. 
GTA V half finish game with content taken out. 

MCLA was a good finish game

 

UC1 No content taken out

UC2 No content taken out

UC3 No content taken out

TLOU From what we know no content taken out. New SP ( Which GTA V should have ), New DLC maps, and one other DLC pack. 


Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#32

Posted 02 October 2013 - 03:50 AM

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.

 

And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 

1) No Multiple protagonists

2) No usuable computers

3) No stock marketing feature

4) No internet

5) No usable phones

6) No hunting animals

7) No Heists

8) No Dog customization

9) No 'Google' style map

10) No cover system

 

And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.

 

And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.


ryuclan
  • ryuclan

    Maybe I'll Stay awhile

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2007

#33

Posted 02 October 2013 - 04:11 AM Edited by ryuclan, 02 October 2013 - 04:14 AM.

I think this year was the year of the Indie Devs. At least the fanbase for indie games aren't filled with self entitled, whining, complaining, arguing, my game is better than yours bullsh*t spouting morons. But what do you expect with their popularity?

 

Lol redx165 did you really just site the reason for Naughty Dog's rep being better than R* is because you don't think any content was taken out? There is ALWAYS sh*t on the cutting room floor. No game goes from idea to disc with every single thing making it the entire way.


redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#34

Posted 02 October 2013 - 05:19 AM Edited by redx165, 02 October 2013 - 05:35 AM.

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.

 

And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 

1) No Multiple protagonists

2) No usuable computers

3) No stock marketing feature

4) No internet

5) No usable phones

6) No hunting animals

7) No Heists

8) No Dog customization

9) No 'Google' style map

10) No cover system

 

And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.

 

And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.

 

GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 


Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#35

Posted 02 October 2013 - 07:18 AM

 

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.

 

And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 

1) No Multiple protagonists

2) No usuable computers

3) No stock marketing feature

4) No internet

5) No usable phones

6) No hunting animals

7) No Heists

8) No Dog customization

9) No 'Google' style map

10) No cover system

 

And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.

 

And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.

 

GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 

 

 

Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.


Cyper
  • Cyper

    Liberty City Lover Since 2001

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2008
  • None

#36

Posted 02 October 2013 - 09:04 AM

Null vote.

 

Bohemia Interactive

 

and

 

Rockstar Games


redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#37

Posted 03 October 2013 - 12:48 AM

 

 

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.

 

And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 

1) No Multiple protagonists

2) No usuable computers

3) No stock marketing feature

4) No internet

5) No usable phones

6) No hunting animals

7) No Heists

8) No Dog customization

9) No 'Google' style map

10) No cover system

 

And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.

 

And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.

 

GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 

 

 

Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.

 

How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 


Nonpareil1983
  • Nonpareil1983

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • United-States

#38

Posted 03 October 2013 - 07:20 AM

Well, the only Rockstar game I dislike this gen is Max Payne 3, I like UC 1-3 but I haven't played TLOU, so I have to go with Rockstar. Naughty Dog is definitely second to me though.


Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#39

Posted 03 October 2013 - 10:23 AM

 

 

 

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.

 

And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 

1) No Multiple protagonists

2) No usuable computers

3) No stock marketing feature

4) No internet

5) No usable phones

6) No hunting animals

7) No Heists

8) No Dog customization

9) No 'Google' style map

10) No cover system

 

And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.

 

And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.

 

GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 

 

 

Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.

 

How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 

 

 

Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.


Finn 7 five 11
  • Finn 7 five 11

    Well I'm sorry, Princess.

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2010
  • None

#40

Posted 03 October 2013 - 12:28 PM

Rockstar Games is a publisher. 

Developers are like Rockstar San Diego

 

 

Well it's actually a developer and publisher, Rockstar Games as a whole isn't just referring to the publishing side, it refers to the development side of things, besides, L.A Noire is the only game they actually published, but I am fairly certain it would have been with outside help Via Take Two anyway so they didn't really publish it. But whatever.

You are trying to talk on technicalities but there are technicalities for your technicalities.


ExtremoMania
  • ExtremoMania

    Been saving it for a rainy day...

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2012
  • Philippines

#41

Posted 03 October 2013 - 01:00 PM

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.
 
And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 
1) No Multiple protagonists
2) No usuable computers
3) No stock marketing feature
4) No internet
5) No usable phones
6) No hunting animals
7) No Heists
8) No Dog customization
9) No 'Google' style map
10) No cover system
 
And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.
 
And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.
 
GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 

 
Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.

How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 

 
Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.

Could we please stop the argument on features of both games? They don't have the features necessary for both games because it compensates for the story and realism of both worlds. And don't compare SA and V which are of different universes. You just have to accept which one is best and which one is worst.

sanpreet
  • sanpreet

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2013

#42

Posted 03 October 2013 - 01:37 PM

Rockstar

Ubisoft


caseclosedjk
  • caseclosedjk

    Forum Bastard

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2013

#43

Posted 04 October 2013 - 10:19 AM

Naughty Dog hands down.


sanpreet
  • sanpreet

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2013

#44

Posted 04 October 2013 - 10:29 AM

Naughty Dog hands down.

No hands down hands up boossman.


Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#45

Posted 04 October 2013 - 10:48 AM

 

 

 

 

 

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.
 
And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 
1) No Multiple protagonists
2) No usuable computers
3) No stock marketing feature
4) No internet
5) No usable phones
6) No hunting animals
7) No Heists
8) No Dog customization
9) No 'Google' style map
10) No cover system
 
And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.
 
And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.
 
GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 

 

 
Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.

 

How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 

 

 
Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.

 

Could we please stop the argument on features of both games? They don't have the features necessary for both games because it compensates for the story and realism of both worlds. And don't compare SA and V which are of different universes. You just have to accept which one is best and which one is worst.

 

 

You say 'stop the argument' and yet go on to repeat exactly what I said, isn't that arguing itself? Plus, we aren't really arguing we are all free to challenge each others opinions.


redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#46

Posted 06 October 2013 - 07:00 PM

 

 

 

 

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.

 

And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 

1) No Multiple protagonists

2) No usuable computers

3) No stock marketing feature

4) No internet

5) No usable phones

6) No hunting animals

7) No Heists

8) No Dog customization

9) No 'Google' style map

10) No cover system

 

And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.

 

And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.

 

GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 

 

 

Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.

 

How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 

 

 

Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.

 

Yes they did have a few featues taken away but Phone with internet was NEVER in GTA at the time. Please use something better to compare cause you came off as a V fanboy. Rampages were taken away from SA. 


Flight180Victm
  • Flight180Victm

    Give me the power, I beg of you!

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2012

#47

Posted 06 October 2013 - 10:32 PM

 

 

 

 

 

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.

 

And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 

1) No Multiple protagonists

2) No usuable computers

3) No stock marketing feature

4) No internet

5) No usable phones

6) No hunting animals

7) No Heists

8) No Dog customization

9) No 'Google' style map

10) No cover system

 

And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.

 

And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.

 

GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 

 

 

Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.

 

How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 

 

 

Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.

 

Yes they did have a few featues taken away but Phone with internet was NEVER in GTA at the time. Please use something better to compare cause you came off as a V fanboy. Rampages were taken away from SA. 

 

I swear to God. Why the f*ck did you even join these forums? It seems like all you do is sh*t on GTA and Rockstar. I mean, what the f*ck do you even contribute to here? All you do is start wars and flip your sh*t if somebody bad mouths Naughty Dog or the PS3. I'd bet my left nut you have a sh*tload of warnings from the Mods. Just do us all a favor and leave. You're just simply a troll and a PS3 and Naughty Dog fanboy.


redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#48

Posted 07 October 2013 - 01:00 AM Edited by redx165, 07 October 2013 - 01:08 AM.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.

 

And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 

1) No Multiple protagonists

2) No usuable computers

3) No stock marketing feature

4) No internet

5) No usable phones

6) No hunting animals

7) No Heists

8) No Dog customization

9) No 'Google' style map

10) No cover system

 

And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.

 

And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.

 

GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 

 

 

Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.

 

How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 

 

 

Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.

 

Yes they did have a few featues taken away but Phone with internet was NEVER in GTA at the time. Please use something better to compare cause you came off as a V fanboy. Rampages were taken away from SA. 

 

I swear to God. Why the f*ck did you even join these forums? It seems like all you do is sh*t on GTA and Rockstar. I mean, what the f*ck do you even contribute to here? All you do is start wars and flip your sh*t if somebody bad mouths Naughty Dog or the PS3. I'd bet my left nut you have a sh*tload of warnings from the Mods. Just do us all a favor and leave. You're just simply a troll and a PS3 and Naughty Dog fanboy.

 

I join the forum because forums are the BEST place to get information about games. 

 

I'm just sick of people bad mouthing any game that can beat GTA V. They say its unoriginal yet GTA has been unoriginal for YEARS now. Yet they ignore that. 

 

They defend a broken product ( the online )

They defend the broken police system 

They say Rockstar doesn't milk their games yet GTA V and MP3 has been milked out. Even LA Noire. RDR is when they took content out of the game to resell it to us. 

 

I didn't realize how bad GTA fanboys really are. They are worst then Call of Duty fanboys. They're up there with Console fanboys and PC fanboys. I mean someone says GTA V is the best game ever just cause it reached 1 Billion sales. That don't mean anything. GTA has a name that MOST people know. Causal gamers love the game. 

 

Naughty Dog fanboy? The only game I really like from them are Crash and The Last of Us. That's it. PS3 fanboys? You mean PS4 cause it is the better system but lets not talk about that since this isn't about which system is better. 

 

Also why are you here? This has nothing to do with you, is it cause you need to help your online buddy? 
 


The Odyssey
  • The Odyssey

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012
  • Australia

#49

Posted 07 October 2013 - 01:15 AM

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.
 
And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 
1) No Multiple protagonists
2) No usuable computers
3) No stock marketing feature
4) No internet
5) No usable phones
6) No hunting animals
7) No Heists
8) No Dog customization
9) No 'Google' style map
10) No cover system
 
And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.
 
And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.
 
GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 
 
Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.
How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 
 
Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.
Yes they did have a few featues taken away but Phone with internet was NEVER in GTA at the time. Please use something better to compare cause you came off as a V fanboy. Rampages were taken away from SA. 
I swear to God. Why the f*ck did you even join these forums? It seems like all you do is sh*t on GTA and Rockstar. I mean, what the f*ck do you even contribute to here? All you do is start wars and flip your sh*t if somebody bad mouths Naughty Dog or the PS3. I'd bet my left nut you have a sh*tload of warnings from the Mods. Just do us all a favor and leave. You're just simply a troll and a PS3 and Naughty Dog fanboy.
I join the forum because forums are the BEST place to get information about games. 
 
I'm just sick of people bad mouthing any game that can beat GTA V. They say its unoriginal yet GTA has been unoriginal for YEARS now. Yet they ignore that. 
 
They defend a broken product ( the online )
They defend the broken police system 
They say Rockstar doesn't milk their games yet GTA V and MP3 has been milked out. Even LA Noire. RDR is when they took content out of the game to resell it to us. 
 
I didn't realize how bad GTA fanboys really are. They are worst then Call of Duty fanboys. They're up there with Console fanboys and PC fanboys. I mean someone says GTA V is the best game ever just cause it reached 1 Billion sales. That don't mean anything. GTA has a name that MOST people know. Causal gamers love the game. 
 
Naughty Dog fanboy? The only game I really like from them are Crash and The Last of Us. That's it. PS3 fanboys? You mean PS4 cause it is the better system but lets not talk about that since this isn't about which system is better. 
 
Also why are you here? This has nothing to do with you, is it cause you need to help your online buddy? 
So you're saying anyone who likes the police system and the online fanboys? Stop trying to sh*t on everyone who likes the game just because its popular. Casual gamers love the game? Do you have any logic? So anyone who is an experienced gamer doesn't like it?
Also, they never said GTA V is their favourite game because it reached 1 billion sales. Stop trying to call everyone a fanboy because they like a game you don't like.

redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#50

Posted 07 October 2013 - 01:23 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.
 
And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 
1) No Multiple protagonists
2) No usuable computers
3) No stock marketing feature
4) No internet
5) No usable phones
6) No hunting animals
7) No Heists
8) No Dog customization
9) No 'Google' style map
10) No cover system
 
And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.
 
And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.
 
GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 
 
Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.
How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 
 
Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.
Yes they did have a few featues taken away but Phone with internet was NEVER in GTA at the time. Please use something better to compare cause you came off as a V fanboy. Rampages were taken away from SA. 
I swear to God. Why the f*ck did you even join these forums? It seems like all you do is sh*t on GTA and Rockstar. I mean, what the f*ck do you even contribute to here? All you do is start wars and flip your sh*t if somebody bad mouths Naughty Dog or the PS3. I'd bet my left nut you have a sh*tload of warnings from the Mods. Just do us all a favor and leave. You're just simply a troll and a PS3 and Naughty Dog fanboy.
I join the forum because forums are the BEST place to get information about games. 
 
I'm just sick of people bad mouthing any game that can beat GTA V. They say its unoriginal yet GTA has been unoriginal for YEARS now. Yet they ignore that. 
 
They defend a broken product ( the online )
They defend the broken police system 
They say Rockstar doesn't milk their games yet GTA V and MP3 has been milked out. Even LA Noire. RDR is when they took content out of the game to resell it to us. 
 
I didn't realize how bad GTA fanboys really are. They are worst then Call of Duty fanboys. They're up there with Console fanboys and PC fanboys. I mean someone says GTA V is the best game ever just cause it reached 1 Billion sales. That don't mean anything. GTA has a name that MOST people know. Causal gamers love the game. 
 
Naughty Dog fanboy? The only game I really like from them are Crash and The Last of Us. That's it. PS3 fanboys? You mean PS4 cause it is the better system but lets not talk about that since this isn't about which system is better. 
 
Also why are you here? This has nothing to do with you, is it cause you need to help your online buddy? 
So you're saying anyone who likes the police system and the online fanboys? Stop trying to sh*t on everyone who likes the game just because its popular. Casual gamers love the game? Do you have any logic? So anyone who is an experienced gamer doesn't like it?
Also, they never said GTA V is their favourite game because it reached 1 billion sales. Stop trying to call everyone a fanboy because they like a game you don't like.

 

I'm saying anyone who thinks the police system is fine is a fanboy. Anyone who believes the Single Player didn't get cut content for MP is a fanboy. 

Some guy on here say GTA V is the best game cause it sold 1 billion and said its a fact its the best. That makes you a fanboy if you believe by sales alone a game is better. 

 

A game as big as GTA that been around for almost 20 years will sell well. 

 

Stop defending your broken product and maybe I wouldn't call you a fanboy. 


The Odyssey
  • The Odyssey

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012
  • Australia

#51

Posted 07 October 2013 - 01:31 AM

Your argument is stupid. You're saying that MP3 was a flop by judging the sales? Wow.
 
And I too can list a horde of features missing from San Andreas. Let's start shall we? (It is unfair to compare TLOU to GTA since they are completely different games)
 
1) No Multiple protagonists
2) No usuable computers
3) No stock marketing feature
4) No internet
5) No usable phones
6) No hunting animals
7) No Heists
8) No Dog customization
9) No 'Google' style map
10) No cover system
 
And the list goes on and on you see? So by your argument your 'favorite' GTA, San Andreas is a half-finished game itself.
 
And how do you know that there was no content taken out from Uncharted and The Last of Us? There is no verifable proof for that.

The problem is you compare a game made in 2004 to a game made in V. SA has more features then V. Better story since it has one protagonist, who uses computers in the 90s? What kind of criminal uses the stock market? Plus they had a Casino so no need for a stock market. Internet wasn't big back then or even out till the late 90's. Phones were use as phones. They didn't have internet or texts on phones. Hunting animals I will agree with. Casino Heist ( try again ), OH boy a dog ( They got more customization for clothes and cars ), GTA V map feels more real but GTA SA had 3 different countryside and cities. No cover system isn't really needed.
 GTA SA doesn't even need those features and it wouldn't make sense seeing the time period. 
 
Exactly as you say it. GTA V did not need those features SA had because it included features enough to compensate for the missing features and also as you say it the time period. GTA V had content taken out yes but SA too had infact more content taken out than any other GTA game.
How does taking away features improve a game? When SA came out it had the most features in it. You then try to say having the phone with texts and calls, Internet should of been with SA but you couldn't realize that we didn't have that back in the 90s. GTA SA time period wouldn't make sense and we didn't even have phones with internet when SA was made. Computers weren't even popular as they are now. You really need to find something better to compare. 
 
Brimming ignorance here. SA had a lot of features taken out, you clearly haven't read a single word in my post. You keep saying the same thing 'SA had the most features blah blah' but you ignore the fact that SA for one doesn't have more features and that it had the most features taken out.
Yes they did have a few featues taken away but Phone with internet was NEVER in GTA at the time. Please use something better to compare cause you came off as a V fanboy. Rampages were taken away from SA. 
I swear to God. Why the f*ck did you even join these forums? It seems like all you do is sh*t on GTA and Rockstar. I mean, what the f*ck do you even contribute to here? All you do is start wars and flip your sh*t if somebody bad mouths Naughty Dog or the PS3. I'd bet my left nut you have a sh*tload of warnings from the Mods. Just do us all a favor and leave. You're just simply a troll and a PS3 and Naughty Dog fanboy.
I join the forum because forums are the BEST place to get information about games. 
 I'm just sick of people bad mouthing any game that can beat GTA V. They say its unoriginal yet GTA has been unoriginal for YEARS now. Yet they ignore that. 
 They defend a broken product ( the online )They defend the broken police system They say Rockstar doesn't milk their games yet GTA V and MP3 has been milked out. Even LA Noire. RDR is when they took content out of the game to resell it to us. 
 I didn't realize how bad GTA fanboys really are. They are worst then Call of Duty fanboys. They're up there with Console fanboys and PC fanboys. I mean someone says GTA V is the best game ever just cause it reached 1 Billion sales. That don't mean anything. GTA has a name that MOST people know. Causal gamers love the game. 
 Naughty Dog fanboy? The only game I really like from them are Crash and The Last of Us. That's it. PS3 fanboys? You mean PS4 cause it is the better system but lets not talk about that since this isn't about which system is better. 
 Also why are you here? This has nothing to do with you, is it cause you need to help your online buddy? 
So you're saying anyone who likes the police system and the online fanboys? Stop trying to sh*t on everyone who likes the game just because its popular. Casual gamers love the game? Do you have any logic? So anyone who is an experienced gamer doesn't like it?
Also, they never said GTA V is their favourite game because it reached 1 billion sales. Stop trying to call everyone a fanboy because they like a game you don't like.
I'm saying anyone who thinks the police system is fine is a fanboy. Anyone who believes the Single Player didn't get cut content for MP is a fanboy. 
Some guy on here say GTA V is the best game cause it sold 1 billion and said its a fact its the best. That makes you a fanboy if you believe by sales alone a game is better. 

 
A game as big as GTA that been around for almost 20 years will sell well. 
 
Stop defending your broken product and maybe I wouldn't call you a fanboy. 
Have you ever heard of opinions. I personally like the police system because it creates a challenge, unlike the other GTA games where the cop AI was retarded.
The only thing i've seen that got cut from single player to be put in MP was properties.
This is my opinion. I guess that means I'm a fanboy.

redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#52

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:57 AM

How is it a challenge? The cops spawning needs to be lowered. If you shoot your gun out in the middle of nowhere they know instantly where you're at. I hope I don't have to get the video again. 

 

Properties, gang wars, inventory, quick gps, Merry Weather, lester rewards are all taken away cause they half ass the Single Player. 

 

You're a fanboy cause you are ignoring things that are taking out of the game. 

 

Once again quit defending this broken product. 


The Odyssey
  • The Odyssey

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012
  • Australia

#53

Posted 07 October 2013 - 09:53 AM

For the last time, I like the f*cking game. Many people do. I'm defending it because I like it. That doesn't make me a fanboy.
Why are you here when all you do is call everyone who defends this game fanboys?

Finite
  • Finite

    Lazarus

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2010
  • None
  • Discussion Award [Gaming]
    Literary Prowess [General Chat]

#54

Posted 07 October 2013 - 11:25 AM

Naughty Dog, pretty much every game they made was a hit whereas Rockstar, GTA IV was a travisty and an insult to the GTA franchise.

WOOPWOOP.

 

Oh no you didn't!


The-King
  • The-King

    [Rekt Intensifies]

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2005
  • None

#55

Posted 07 October 2013 - 12:09 PM

Holy sh*t, this topic is a clusterf*ck of stupid.


Street Mix
  • Street Mix

    In the beginning there was Jack

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2008
  • United-States

#56

Posted 07 October 2013 - 12:43 PM

Quote trains!

 

Everywhere!

 

Spoiler


redx165
  • redx165

    Making the GTA fanboys dance

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • None

#57

Posted 08 October 2013 - 12:50 AM

For the last time, I like the f*cking game. Many people do. I'm defending it because I like it. That doesn't make me a fanboy.
Why are you here when all you do is call everyone who defends this game fanboys?

Your defending it cause you don't understand how its broken. You're defending it cause you don't like the negative responds you hear from the average game. Just cause this is a forum for GTA doesn't mean we all get on our knees. 


Grand Theft Savage
  • Grand Theft Savage

    'Bout that life

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2013

#58

Posted 08 October 2013 - 05:22 AM

NAUGHTY DOG IS OVERRATED.

For real, dog

 

OnTopic: Red Dead Redemption is definitely the best game I have ever played.

But I think Rockstar vs. Ubisoft would have been a better comparison.


Alchemist
  • Alchemist

    Est. MMXV

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2013
  • Italy
  • The Congressional Medal of sh*tposting
    Most Talented Graphics Artist 2015
    Most Improved Member 2015
    Best General Topic 2015 [GTAForums Newbie Guide 2.0]
    Best Poster [Technology] 2015
    April Fools Winner 2015
    Best New Gang 2014 [RBE]
    Helpfulness Award [GTA V]

#59

Posted 08 October 2013 - 05:33 AM

So since you only allowed us to choose from Rockstar and and Naughty Dog,

 

are you implying that other developers haven't made games for this generation?


TheOtherRyan
  • TheOtherRyan

    The American Dream

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Member in the OGA 2012

#60

Posted 08 October 2013 - 06:51 AM

For the last time, I like the f*cking game. Many people do. I'm defending it because I like it. That doesn't make me a fanboy.
Why are you here when all you do is call everyone who defends this game fanboys?

Your defending it cause you don't understand how its broken. You're defending it cause you don't like the negative responds you hear from the average game. Just cause this is a forum for GTA doesn't mean we all get on our knees. 

Jeez let it go already. I agree the cop system in GTA V is kind of messed up with how sensitive the cops are and how long it takes to lose them, but if the guy likes it he likes it.

Your condescending bullsh*t has been wearing away at my patience for quite a while. You call anyone who doesn't agree with you or shares your point of view a fanboy and to be blunt it makes you look like an asshat.

I'm sorry, but it's true. I don't have against you personally, but the way you approach discussions is like you can't handle it when anyone says the opposite to what you think. You're a good guy redx, but you do yourself no favours with the way you call people fanboys and/or saying they suck R* off because they're not agreeing with you.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users