Apparently, I forgot to add that to the post I made three days ago. It is not the first time though that I'm saying this, there were numerous discussions regarding the storylines and characters of games like San Andreas before. The fact that I'm not a big fan of gangsta themes is one reason why I'm critizing both, story and characters of SA. And just to clarify, this is not the only reason. Maybe I'm ciritzing this game a little too much. I will re-play San Andreas soon to refresh my memories, so it may change my thinking a bit. We will see, I suppose.
What ?? You said nothing about not liking the gangsta theme that much. This was YOUR quote :
CJ was not really a likeable character. He was just the typical gangsta stereotype and not special at all. It's not only him, but many of San Andreas' characters seem to have that problem. The story is not really anything new, and Carl just seems like another "playa in da hood", or however you want to call him.
I don't get the Love for San Andreas
Posted 17 October 2013 - 03:48 PM Edited by Andreas., 17 October 2013 - 03:49 PM.
Posted 17 October 2013 - 03:51 PM Edited by The Made Man, 17 October 2013 - 03:54 PM.
Are you an idiot? You're reviewing a 2004 repeat 2004 game thats been outdated for 10 years...
I do agree I did not really like CJ as a character. And its NOT because of the gangsta theme. I LOVED that part of San Andreas, my favorite character was Ryder(and Woozie) who was based off Eazy E. I didn't like CJ for loads of reasons. Which is why I think Franklin is a way better black protagonist and shouldn't be compared to CJ.
Posted 17 October 2013 - 03:57 PM Edited by The Made Man, 17 October 2013 - 04:00 PM.
lol @ OP
"Why did people in 1775 love horses so much? We've got cars and planes and space shuttles now, horses are stupid and outdated!"
In short, people like San Andreas because it was the fullest GTA game. Gameplay > Graphics & Story
That's what IV and V fanboys don't understand. They brag about graphics and story yet WE DON'T GIVE A sh*t. GTA SA still has the most content in it then any other GTA game. May not be the biggest but does have the MOST TOWNS, Cities, and etc..
Everyone I knows rather have a Casino then a Stock Market. A casino is fun while a stock market you just put money down and wait a few days to sell. So funSpoiler
Not really SA does not have the most content in all the GTA games nor is it's map the biggest. V's map is the biggest followed by IV and San Andreas..
Now about Content, I'll list what new features SA added, compare them to IV:
1) RPG character development (several features in one)
2) Usable Gyms
3) Some new weapons
4) Bigger map than Vice.
8) Gang Wars
9) 360 degree camera angle
10) Couple of New side missions
11) More clothing options
13) Playing pool.
14) More vehicles
Hopefully I haven't missed anything.
1) Updated Graphics
2) Usage of Cell-phones
3) More realistic pedestrians
4) Biggest single City (Liberty City)
5) Cover system
6) Ability to take a taxi ride
7) Hanging out with friends
8) More side activities compared to the one activity in SA, like getting drunk, heli-copter rides, etc. Now these are a lot of features in one.
9) Calling Paradmedics, cops etc for assistance.
10) More enterable interiors
11) GPS system
12) More weapons
13) More vehicles
14) Usage of computers
15) Branching storylines.
16) Multiplayer, several features in one point again.
17) Video editor (PC version).
See? IV itself has more content than San Andreas, your argument is flawed.
GTA IV's map bigger than SA's???? What???? You're argument is flawed, you just deflated it.
Not only that GTA IV in no shape or form had more weapons than San Andreas, nor did it have more interiors. Vice City had the most weapons out of any GTA game, because it had the most melee weapons. GTA SA comes after. How does GTA IV have more weapons??? When it only had two melee weapons which were just a knife and a bat...Come on.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users