Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

people say iv is better then v smh...

170 replies to this topic
GTAover9000
  • GTAover9000

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Dec 2012

#151

Posted 13 October 2013 - 01:02 AM

I wish I was 14 again.

 

I remember when San Andreas came out. Was all over.

 

GTA 5 is the San Andreas to this generation of gamers.

  • DeafMetal likes this

woggleman
  • woggleman

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012
  • None

#152

Posted 13 October 2013 - 01:12 AM

 

 

 

I enjoyed V's storyline, but I think Rockstar kind of messed up with the main theme of it all. It was supposed to be about the pursuit of powerful American dollar, but frankly, I did not really get that feel of it, with the exception of Franklin. Michael was already rich, Trevor had his illegal enterprises making money already and he still did not care about a life of luxury and extravagance. And even then, Franklin had his luxury property given to him, he never had the freedom to spend it on a luxury property of his choice, and there should have been more to Franklin's story too. I think that pursuit of the dollar thing was a failure if you ask me. Rockstar should have done better with implementing the main theme properly into the storyline. 

I see what you are saying but they showed this concept from three different perspectives.

 

Michael was supposed to be living the so called American dream but he was miserable and his family was a complete trainwreck. It is clear that what he did to get there was eating at him. The world he lived in is what many aspire to but so many people in it seem miserable.

 

Trevor was actually quite wealthy and had the most money out of anybody when I started with him but had no desire whatsoever to be a part of upper class society. He completely rejected what mainstream society defines as success. He is perfectly happy living on the margins

 

Franklin was desperate to escape the ghetto by any means necessary and that is why he was so ambitious

 

It also touched upon issues of class such as the people around Franklin trying to pull him back down and how Michael looks down on Trevor's community. Money very much was a part of the theme even if it might not be what you envisioned.

 

 

I see what you mean, but I still think Rockstar messed it up a bit. That corrupt cop/federal agent part of the main storyline dragged on for a bit too much, it got to the point where I just wanted it to hurry up and get it over with - it made me think, "hold on I thought this was supposed to be about heists for money ?". I just could not give a flyin' f**k about those corrupt cops and agents anymore. It took up a bit too much of the main storyline, and that kinda ruined the theme for me. I still reckon Rockstar could have done much better.

 

And for the record, I never once complained that GTA IV never had any countryside, It would be stupid for IV to have countryside when the game was centered mostly on New York and nearby New Jersey, countryside would have been so pointless. All those complaining that IV had no countryside were being irrational and unrealistic in my view. I was perfectly happy with IV having no countryside, I just wished that Liberty City and Alderney had bigger suburban sections. 

 

@ RockstarFanboy

 

Well I do agree that GTA V is better than GTA IV, but only slightly better and that is not necessarily a great thing bro. GTA V should have been miles better than GTA IV, Rockstar could and should have done a much better job, which in my view, they did not. IV actually did some things better than V, and had stuff that V did not have, so I can perfectly understand why many people still prefer IV over V. Even I like certain things about IV better than V, even though I think V is slightly the better game. 

 

I do agree the fed thing dragged on a bit too much but the missions were still damn fun. The Paleto Bay heist is up there with the great missions IMO. At least they killed that Steve Hanes guy if you choose C.

 

To me it is much better than IV. Better missions even if there are less of them and they brought back many things that were missing even if it is not everything. The one thing IV was missing was a recreation of Atlantic City. If they were also including NJ why not that?


DP Man
  • DP Man

    GH3O ▲SS

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011

#153

Posted 13 October 2013 - 01:36 AM

The people that hated IV were alway the more immature players that play games with a very childish mentality. They were the kind of people that would rather see a Michael Bay film over a much more better written, deep and les over the top classic. In short, they think the quality of the game solely rests on whether you can play it as if it's a Saint's Row game.

I loved V, however I'll always prefer IV for a myriad of reasons. The story, the city, the characters and the missions were just more memorable and fun in the long run. IV was my most played game to date, with V I lost interest in free roaming post story pretty quick while IV was fun to play for years.
  • Raavi likes this

PkUnzipper
  • PkUnzipper

    Foot Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2013

#154

Posted 13 October 2013 - 04:51 PM Edited by PkUnzipper, 13 October 2013 - 04:57 PM.

I wish I was 14 again.

 

I remember when San Andreas came out. Was all over.

 

GTA 5 is the San Andreas to this generation of gamers.

 

This is very true.  However as an original SA gen gamer, you didn't have to deal with the monstrosity of a SA online which R* has used in this gen of SA. Back then, you didn't have to deal with R* cannibalizing all the good content that they put into the SA.  Just so they could have a superior online SA.   TBH, I'm not sure if GTA 5 would've broken all gaming records with its astronomical $800 million on launch day if it hadn't been for the spectacular sandbox gameplay in SA and all previous GTA SP titles.

 

IMO, multi player -- with the added burden of micro transactions --- could very well end up hurting the franchise profitability in the long run.  Especially if R* doesn't do something to control the WoW style griefers in free mode.  And particularly if they insist on catering to the whims of younger gamers (who are more likely to be griefers and for who V might be their first GTA game). 

 

IMO fan boys like that have an extremely short attention span and a superficial level of loyalty to this franchise. They don't understand what game play mechanics made previous games (especially SA, GTA III & Vice City) so much more superior in terms of SP game play.  They're more likely to rate the game based on it's pretty graphics and how much SR4 mayhem they can get away with :lol:

 

And unfortunately, R* is partially responsible for this sort of conditioning.  Because let's face it, GTA V is the first gen title to lack the very SP features which would compel you to keep playing long after beating the game.  :/

 

I also suspect the younger gamers are more likely to abandon GTAO in the future.  Whether because they tire of the monotonous grind to gain financial success, tire of griefing, and/or become distracted by the next shiny fps game (like CoD etc) which comes out in the near future. Which would be bad news for future server traffic and micro transactions.  And ultimately R* business model for making money off the online franchise.

  • bish0p2004 likes this

SarahPilko
  • SarahPilko

    Designer

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2009
  • None

#155

Posted 13 October 2013 - 04:59 PM Edited by Sayrawr, 13 October 2013 - 05:01 PM.

Coming from the person who cannot even differentiate 'then and 'than'. Shaking my head indeed.

It is all based on the person's preference and opinion anyway so this topic is pointless and attract angry mobsters.


bish0p2004
  • bish0p2004

    Mack Pimp

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2013

#156

Posted 13 October 2013 - 05:20 PM

I wish I was 14 again.
 
I remember when San Andreas came out. Was all over.
 
GTA 5 is the San Andreas to this generation of gamers.

 
This is very true.  However as an original SA gen gamer, you didn't have to deal with the monstrosity of a SA online which R* has used in this gen of SA. Back then, you didn't have to deal with R* cannibalizing all the good content that they put into the SA.  Just so they could have a superior online SA.   TBH, I'm not sure if GTA 5 would've broken all gaming records with its astronomical $800 million on launch day if it hadn't been for the spectacular sandbox gameplay in SA and all previous GTA SP titles.
 
IMO, multi player -- with the added burden of micro transactions --- could very well end up hurting the franchise profitability in the long run.  Especially if R* doesn't do something to control the WoW style griefers in free mode.  And particularly if they insist on catering to the whims of younger gamers (who are more likely to be griefers and for who V might be their first GTA game). 
 
IMO fan boys like that have an extremely short attention span and a superficial level of loyalty to this franchise. They don't understand what game play mechanics made previous games (especially SA, GTA III & Vice City) so much more superior in terms of SP game play.  They're more likely to rate the game based on it's pretty graphics and how much SR4 mayhem they can get away with :lol:
 
And unfortunately, R* is partially responsible for this sort of conditioning.  Because let's face it, GTA V is the first gen title to lack the very SP features which would compel you to keep playing long after beating the game.  :/
 
I also suspect the younger gamers are more likely to abandon GTAO in the future.  Whether because they tire of the monotonous grind to gain financial success, tire of griefing, and/or become distracted by the next shiny fps game (like CoD etc) which comes out in the near future. Which would be bad news for future server traffic and micro transactions.  And ultimately R* business model for making money off the online franchise.

Agree with everything you wrote. I despise this new generation of online gamers and the developers desire to cater to them.

I still don't get why R* decided to attempt to make online so deep. All they needed to do was give these guys free roam, deathmatches, and races and they would be satisfied.

RichyB
  • RichyB

    Crush grapes mate. Sorry? You're a grape crusher. Next.

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 May 2012

#157

Posted 13 October 2013 - 05:22 PM

There is no police vigilante in V.

Why the f*ck did they add taxi missions instead of police missions?

woggleman
  • woggleman

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012
  • None

#158

Posted 13 October 2013 - 05:26 PM

 

I wish I was 14 again.

 

I remember when San Andreas came out. Was all over.

 

GTA 5 is the San Andreas to this generation of gamers.

 

This is very true.  However as an original SA gen gamer, you didn't have to deal with the monstrosity of a SA online which R* has used in this gen of SA. Back then, you didn't have to deal with R* cannibalizing all the good content that they put into the SA.  Just so they could have a superior online SA.   TBH, I'm not sure if GTA 5 would've broken all gaming records with its astronomical $800 million on launch day if it hadn't been for the spectacular sandbox gameplay in SA and all previous GTA SP titles.

 

IMO, multi player -- with the added burden of micro transactions --- could very well end up hurting the franchise profitability in the long run.  Especially if R* doesn't do something to control the WoW style griefers in free mode.  And particularly if they insist on catering to the whims of younger gamers (who are more likely to be griefers and for who V might be their first GTA game). 

 

IMO fan boys like that have an extremely short attention span and a superficial level of loyalty to this franchise. They don't understand what game play mechanics made previous games (especially SA, GTA III & Vice City) so much more superior in terms of SP game play.  They're more likely to rate the game based on it's pretty graphics and how much SR4 mayhem they can get away with :lol:

 

And unfortunately, R* is partially responsible for this sort of conditioning.  Because let's face it, GTA V is the first gen title to lack the very SP features which would compel you to keep playing long after beating the game.  :/

 

I also suspect the younger gamers are more likely to abandon GTAO in the future.  Whether because they tire of the monotonous grind to gain financial success, tire of griefing, and/or become distracted by the next shiny fps game (like CoD etc) which comes out in the near future. Which would be bad news for future server traffic and micro transactions.  And ultimately R* business model for making money off the online franchise.

 

When we were younger most of us played GTA for the mayhem and fun as well. We were no different than they are.


spamtackey
  • spamtackey

    Business Socks

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

#159

Posted 13 October 2013 - 05:37 PM

There is no police vigilante in V.

Why the f*ck did they add taxi missions instead of police missions?

Technically taxi was added in IV. They just didn't remove it like they did the police missions.


RichyB
  • RichyB

    Crush grapes mate. Sorry? You're a grape crusher. Next.

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 May 2012

#160

Posted 13 October 2013 - 05:47 PM

Obviously I meant permanent.

PkUnzipper
  • PkUnzipper

    Foot Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2013

#161

Posted 13 October 2013 - 05:52 PM Edited by PkUnzipper, 13 October 2013 - 05:59 PM.

 

When we were younger most of us played GTA for the mayhem and fun as well. We were no different than they are.

 

 

fun yes.

 

mayhem--only within the confines of my SP game. Since I've never played online until V, I can't comment on what "mayhem" meant in GTA IV mutiplayer.   But this clearly wasn't a smashing success based on fan boy feedback (and especially the ghost town the GTA IV servers are today).  Even if SA had the dedication R* has put into this generation game, I probably wouldn't have been online given the amount of superior content in SA SP.  Even if I did go online, any "mayhem" would've been limited to TDM and GTA races.  Which makes me a complete buster I guess :lol:

 

I'm willing to bet the same antisocial game play behavior and player dynamics were an issue in IV multi player---just as they are here.  R* didn't do anything to control the greifing in LC and is most likely going to follow the same suit with V.  Too much $$$$ to be made to sacrifice resources in improving game play quality I guess. :/

 

Speaking of mayhem, this OP exemplifies the worst of what I see in the gaming behavior trends of the younger GTA generation.  Good to see the mods finally put an end to the OP's delusional swag :lol:

 

http://gtaforums.com...yolo-swag-sick/


Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    uʍop ǝpısdn

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2004
  • None
  • Best Poster [Music] 2015
    Best Poster [Music] 2014
    Most Knowledgeable [Music] 2013
    Best Contributor [Music] 2012

#162

Posted 13 October 2013 - 05:57 PM

The people that hated IV were alway the more immature players that play games with a very childish mentality. They were the kind of people that would rather see a Michael Bay film over a much more better written, deep and les over the top classic. In short, they think the quality of the game solely rests on whether you can play it as if it's a Saint's Row game.

I loved V, however I'll always prefer IV for a myriad of reasons. The story, the city, the characters and the missions were just more memorable and fun in the long run. IV was my most played game to date, with V I lost interest in free roaming post story pretty quick while IV was fun to play for years.

That´s not true and you know that. Switching to IV was like us playing 5 now and then going back to a smaller map with just one city  and no countryside and taking away all the features in V. It´s hard to do. 

 

I´m sick of people like you using that as an excuse. We´re not immature players, especially as personally I was 18 or 19 when San Andreas came out. I got all the references to the films, I knew all the actors and knew quite a lot of the musicians on the soundtrack.  


Grand Theft Savage
  • Grand Theft Savage

    'Bout that life

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2013

#163

Posted 13 October 2013 - 06:00 PM Edited by Grand Theft Savage, 13 October 2013 - 06:00 PM.

GTA IV w/ Episodes is on par with GTA V

GTA V is a game with 5 years worth of improvements, so comparing them gameplay wise, GTA V always sh*ts on it


woggleman
  • woggleman

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012
  • None

#164

Posted 13 October 2013 - 06:00 PM

I liked IV but some of it's fanboys are starting to sound just as bad as SA fanboys. I have never seen so much love for that game as I saw the past two weeks.


GTAover9000
  • GTAover9000

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Dec 2012

#165

Posted 13 October 2013 - 06:50 PM

The people that hated IV were alway the more immature players that play games with a very childish mentality. They were the kind of people that would rather see a Michael Bay film over a much more better written, deep and les over the top classic. In short, they think the quality of the game solely rests on whether you can play it as if it's a Saint's Row game.

I loved V, however I'll always prefer IV for a myriad of reasons. The story, the city, the characters and the missions were just more memorable and fun in the long run. IV was my most played game to date, with V I lost interest in free roaming post story pretty quick while IV was fun to play for years.

 

No, it has to do with expectations. GTA is a parody series. GTA 4 didn't know whether it wanted to be serious or a parody. So it felt like an awkward game.

 

However, using words like "immature" and "childish" is sort of weird. There's nothing better about a movie that focuses on relationships than a movie that focuses on gun fights.


ninja1232
  • ninja1232

    Its the Final Countdown.....

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011

#166

Posted 13 October 2013 - 07:00 PM

I prefer GTA III to IV.


Vagos MC
  • Vagos MC

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2013

#167

Posted 13 October 2013 - 07:52 PM

I prefer GTA III to IV.

 

Never really played them. lol. 


PkUnzipper
  • PkUnzipper

    Foot Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2013

#168

Posted 13 October 2013 - 07:56 PM Edited by PkUnzipper, 13 October 2013 - 08:04 PM.

 

When we were younger most of us played GTA for the mayhem and fun as well. We were no different than they are.

 

adding: I would disagree and say we WERE different from this new GTA gaming generation when younger.  Simply because the hyper norms of what was considered "morally and socially acceptable" in the gaming community were significantly different.

 

For starters, you do remember the sh*t storm fallout with R* v. the P.M.S. False Prophet (Jack Thompson) & Big Brother (Hillary Clinton) over the hot coffee mod right?  Yes R* was pushing the envelope even back then with teen fan base gamers. But society's "morals" were different back then.  The actions those two took to censor R* was a good example of this. 

 

If you were a teen back when SA came out--with an official (but questionably obtained) retail copy of the M rated disk AND the fortune of that copy being the 1st ed for the PS---then you were in an exceptional group of teens.  These teens got (what was possibly their first) experience with porn (albeit poorly drawn polygons) via the sex mini game. R* had developed that content on the premise that only adults--and not overly ambitious, tech savvy teens--would be experiencing that adult rated content.  All fine and good.  Until the vices of the W. coast gang bang culture which SA deified finally caught the attention of the False Prophet and Big Brother.... 

 

By 2005, the Clinton and JT witch hunt machine finally got to kick R* in the nuts with a multimillion dollar lawsuit. I guess they thought the successful out of court settlement, meant R* would never explicitly try to corrupt impressionable young minds in future GTA games. >. >

 

After that PR fall out, R* had to remove all explicit sexual content (aka pixel cyber porn) from SA game retail disks.  Quite predictably, their half-assed plea to recall the SA game disks fell on deaf ears of those lucky PS players (who still had direct access the sex mini game with 1st ed).  R* had to make the adult X rated mini game content suggestive (like viewing only the exterior of CJ's gf houses during hot coffee). Or abandoning it in discarded code on the game disk (accessible with the hot coffee mod for PC).

 

So if you were a teen back then, this spectacle of a dog and pony show probably didn't affect you.  Why? Because life---from an online gaming communication perspective---was a lot simpler back then:

 

1) the internet and WoW were still in their infancy.  So the griefer mentality mindset of online gamers as we now know it was also in its infancy.

 

2) Neither Google or social media networking were invented yet and

 

3) YouTube--the future, global repository of gaming knowledge/manuals/reviews/cheats--had just launched.  So fan base awareness of using this new medium as an interactive online gaming tool didn't exist yet.  Also the average GTA fan boy age (with teens minors factored in) was considerably older.  Which also means the majority of the younger gen GTA gamers were still in kindergarten and/or not born yet. So the odds of you having to suffer through a 10 year old's shrill soprano through your head set wouldn't be a reality until a decade later. :lol:

 

Besides, minors either had direct access to the mature SA content via 1st ed for PS.  Or were tech savvy enough on how to access it with mods. Also if they had the 2nd ed of the game disk in 2005, definitely knew where to access it on the internet. 

 

But you already know all of this. Since then, JT has been disbarred for life (that came way too late IMO), and Mrs. Clinton has since moved on to bigger and better things in life. :lol:

 

But times have changed since then.  Regardless of whether you had access to the Hot Coffee/other mature content, society's moral fallout with R* clearly made an impression on teenagers back then.  Because it made them aware there were society taboos against providing explicit, interactive, adult cyber porn in a retail game.  So you learned there were moral hyper norms on what society expected back then.

 

The GTA gen today doesn't suffer from these delusions of moral depravity.  Because the gaming industry to date has increasingly failed to provide this GTA gen with any such safeguards.  Overall industry lack of regulation on troll/griefer behavior in online lobbies is one example.  Shifting the accountability to increasingly negligent parents is another. More proof? This incredible crime of child abuse on YouTube proves our society is devolving back to Neanderthal levels: :blink:

 

 

And especially because R* was able to add this to SP in GTA V:

 

 

which is 100% accessible courtesy of said site above, a working internet connection, and any minor with the mental aptitude to access YouTube.

 

A reality which I find personally disturbing.  Unlike the minors who played GTA a decade ago, the current GTA minor fan base has superior access to all known knowledge via the internet. The secrets to your darkest fantasies are but a click away.  So odds are the younger GTA gen of today are likely ending up lost wandering the darkest regions of the woods in YouTube.  Which by default, makes them far more sophisticated in their knowledge of carnal matters--which you and I lacked at the same impressionable age.

 

/end of thesis] :lol:

 

OT:

 

Come to think of it, since the hot coffee fallout with SA, I've noticed that all adult sex rated content is now in the form of scripted cut scenes (instead of SA's explicit, interactive, mini game content). This has left me wondering if this scripted format in which R* has added future adult/sexual content since SA was an outcome of the lawsuit settlement.  Hmmm.


DeafMetal
  • DeafMetal

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2012

#169

Posted 13 October 2013 - 07:56 PM

Well, look at this way, now IV fanboys and SA fanboys can stop going after each other and pick on the new kid in town. Kumbaya and sh*t.


jagcivtec
  • jagcivtec

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2013

#170

Posted 16 October 2013 - 03:57 AM

The problem is GTA5 did get dumbed down for unskilled jerks to play.  Very gimmicky elements have been implemented.  Arcade style no skill needed driving?  Screen flashing to indicate kills?  Man, if R* did this after they had constantly raised the bar with every entry in physics and authenticity, then the future for core gamers is bleak.  I can see where next gen is headed.   Dumbed down games.  Goodby console hello PC.  I will return to the land of MODS, where dumbed down games meet their doom.


djdiond
  • djdiond

    I need dis more than you I think!

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2012

#171

Posted 16 October 2013 - 04:16 AM

San Andreas!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users