Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Am The Only One Who Misses Liberty City?

127 replies to this topic

Poll: Which City Do You Like Better (245 member(s) have cast votes)

Which City Do You Like Better

  1. Liberty City (120 votes [48.98%])

    Percentage of vote: 48.98%

  2. Los Santos (125 votes [51.02%])

    Percentage of vote: 51.02%

Vote Guests cannot vote
SonOfLiberty
  • SonOfLiberty

    We're all looking for that special someone

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Member in an Official Group 2012

#61

Posted 21 February 2014 - 06:42 AM

1.The peds in IV are lame, and the ability to give a hobo money is pointless.

2. That's not true at all, they occur all over the map. GTA 5 had better random events RDR.

3. In V they would normally attack you if you're in a place that you shouldn't be, in IV the gangs sucked balls, an I don't recall them fighting other gangs.

4. One of the thing I would agree with you, but the strip club beats the pants off of both in IV.

5. The comedy club was dry, and plays were garbage. Besides we have boring movies, to replace those boring shows.

6.The clubs I might also agree with you.

 

-Well this is the way I feel about GTA V's peds. They're not funny at all and just don't interest me. If giving hobos money is pointless I guess greeting peds is too. At least giving hobos money works all the time. Sometimes you can't talk to peds at all no matter how many times you hit the right directional button. Just one of many things about GTA V that feels rushed. Even the ability to talk to peds in San Andreas was better.

 

-No. This isn't what I mean. I know they occur all over the map, but they occur in the same place no matter how many times you ignore them. In RDR if for example you assisted someone to get back their cart this scenario wouldn't get repeated in the same spot every time. In GTA V the "random" events always repeat in the same spot. They're actually quite scripted. Not something that happens dynamically like RDR's.

 

-No offense, but did you actually read my post? I even said the GTA V gangs are better than GTA IV's in the way they're more prone to be aggressive towards the player, but they still don't fight other gangs. One step forward and one step back as far as I'm concerned

 

-I'd rather have two unique strip clubs than just one.

 

-I didn't think thy comedy and cabaret club were that bad. Neither is the theater, but I would've liked to have seen the comedy club again since there is a Split Sides in LS.

 

-Glad you can agree on something.

  • Shenmue18 likes this

Mokrie Dela
  • Mokrie Dela

    МОКРЫЕДЕЛA

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 01 May 2009
  • None
  • Most Talented Writer 2013
    Best Story/Poem 2013 "The Storm"
    Story/Poem of the Year 2011 "Justice in Flames"
    Story/Poem of the Year 2010 "City of Lies"

#62

Posted 21 February 2014 - 11:57 AM

Giving hobos money was great. If you did that, and got in a fight, they'd help you out. Led to some funny moments, especially if you called the cops too....

 

I always gave the sax player money. Shame you can't do that in V.

 

I personally put all of these things down to the fact that V is too big - blame this on lack of focus, technical limitations or laziness it doesn't matter. I would have preferred JUST los Santos (as much as i love the country side), and have the city bigger and more detailed with more stuff in - interiors, clubs etc.

If i sat down and listed everything from previous games that I'd like in, i think it could be done if the map was half the size and ONLY los Santos. I don't get the feeling that LS is a metropolis at all. The gang territory feels tiny. I had hoped it'd stretch on, and the streets seem endless and dangerous. But you can get out of gangland in ten seconds on foot (a slight exaggeration). Downtown feels very cramped and for a city like LA/LS, it feels like the "downtown" sector of my local town (population: less than 100,000). Only Vinewood feels big to me.

 

For that reason I think LC was better - it had that feel to it that LS does not. LS doesn't FEEL like a city to me. The road system is brilliant, better than IV, but the city itself? It's missing something.

What I wish R* did was to keep the map half the size - lets say from LS to the prison - and have that as ALL of LS - more gangland, more suburbs (seriously, there's like 2 streets of suburbs....), bigger CBD (the high end residential area's alright and the hills are great), but mostly: more detail - more overpasses and underpasses, more alleys and interiors - even like IV repeating the same interior with a front and back door and roof access - little access runs to the subway (like in EAston in IV/TLC) enterable interiors, interactive locations such as restaurants and bars.
Several strip clubs, one in the vinewood area - proper classy affair - one in the country (which wouldn't exist in my version of the game); lots of enterable and interactable bars (you can have a drink any time in the strip club - why not have this in several locations as bars?) etc etc

 

Thinking about it now, after playing V so much, I don't think we CAN say which is better - LC or LS. One has more of what the other lacks, and vice versa.

LS is sunny, with a veneer of glitz and glamour but with nothing underneath. IV was dark and dreary (partly why i love it) but it had more behind it. LS's layout and road design is fantastic, IV's felt like it was simplified - IV felt more like a built up city though and V felt to me more like a few buildings plopped in a desert. Graphically, there's no contest, V is the winner, but for story, it's IV

all of these add up and i don't think there is a clear "better". In many ways I enjoy V more than IV, but in many other ways, I enjoyed IV more.

  • neek41 likes this

IDAS Leader
  • IDAS Leader

    We're not strong, We're injustice strong !!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013
  • United-States

#63

Posted 23 February 2014 - 06:07 AM

1

 

1.The peds in IV are lame, and the ability to give a hobo money is pointless.

2. That's not true at all, they occur all over the map. GTA 5 had better random events RDR.

3. In V they would normally attack you if you're in a place that you shouldn't be, in IV the gangs sucked balls, an I don't recall them fighting other gangs.

4. One of the thing I would agree with you, but the strip club beats the pants off of both in IV.

5. The comedy club was dry, and plays were garbage. Besides we have boring movies, to replace those boring shows.

6.The clubs I might also agree with you.

 

-Well this is the way I feel about GTA V's peds. They're not funny at all and just don't interest me. If giving hobos money is pointless I guess greeting peds is too. At least giving hobos money works all the time. Sometimes you can't talk to peds at all no matter how many times you hit the right directional button. Just one of many things about GTA V that feels rushed. Even the ability to talk to peds in San Andreas was better.

 

-No. This isn't what I mean. I know they occur all over the map, but they occur in the same place no matter how many times you ignore them. In RDR if for example you assisted someone to get back their cart this scenario wouldn't get repeated in the same spot every time. In GTA V the "random" events always repeat in the same spot. They're actually quite scripted. Not something that happens dynamically like RDR's.

 

-No offense, but did you actually read my post? I even said the GTA V gangs are better than GTA IV's in the way they're more prone to be aggressive towards the player, but they still don't fight other gangs. One step forward and one step back as far as I'm concerned

 

-I'd rather have two unique strip clubs than just one.

 

-I didn't think thy comedy and cabaret club were that bad. Neither is the theater, but I would've liked to have seen the comedy club again since there is a Split Sides in LS.

 

-Glad you can agree on something.

 

1. Can't really agree with you, but that's your opinion.

2. I honestly don't see how RDR has better random events. I know RDR's random go away if you ignore them, but that doesn't exactly mean they're better. In GTA 5's random events, you bump into people that were in the previous GTA's, the people are totally different, and they're more funnier.

3. OK


Travís.
  • Travís.

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2013
  • Australia

#64

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:39 PM

Everyone acts like GTA IV is gone forever because V's out, if you miss it so much play it.. Simple.
  • OneManCrimeWave and Gta5Girl84 like this

GravelAxe
  • GravelAxe

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2014
  • United-Kingdom

#65

Posted 23 February 2014 - 06:08 PM

I think R* have done well in giving the series two opposites - grimy LC and glitzy LS. LC is for gritty crime drama, LS is for craziness.

 

Because of this, though, LC is probably the better city in its own right. It has to carry the drama and give a sense of place.

 

LS gets the countryside to give players more places to mess around in, and make the map large enough for planes.

 

If you think about it, though - R* know that LS as a city can't carry a game on its own, that's why they have always had to include loads of stuff outside of the city in LS games. 


sibs44
  • sibs44

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2011

#66

Posted 23 February 2014 - 06:22 PM

LC - Many things to do

LS - Big but empty 

So much irony in one post. It's unbelievable. 

  • OneManCrimeWave likes this

ddyoung
  • ddyoung

    Get freaky... Not that freaky

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2010
  • England

#67

Posted 23 February 2014 - 09:14 PM

I think LC was put together much better than LS, it felt more alive and had real atmosphere to each area. However, I think that GTA V is a better game than IV because of the larger map with "wilderness" and ways to spend money.


IDAS Leader
  • IDAS Leader

    We're not strong, We're injustice strong !!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013
  • United-States

#68

Posted 24 February 2014 - 10:39 PM

So much horse Sh!t in one post.


Gta5Girl84
  • Gta5Girl84

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2014
  • Ireland

#69

Posted 06 March 2014 - 12:22 AM

Oh well, it has to be Los Santos. Beautiful ocean, amazingly detailed woodland areas, detailed characters both playable and npc's. and because last of all in LC there is no Trevor :))

Liberty was cool and all, but the buildings look so depressing compared to LS. Just my opinion.

sammclean23
  • sammclean23

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2007

#70

Posted 06 March 2014 - 12:36 AM

I don't know what it is, but I was attached to LS. Explored every inch. For that reason, I couldn't wait for V. Infact, I took the week off and ordered the guide too. Honestly, nothing in the last 5 years has excited me as much, apart from a skydive I did!

 

But, when It was finally released, it wasn't the same. Never got attached or even felt like exploring. Why? I don't know. No idea at all to be honest! maybe it's because I played IV on PC, V on xbox with poor visuals (compared to PC)?. I don't know, and it's a shame, cause I love getting into GTA.

 

Infact, I've not even read the guide :(

 

it could be because with online, playing single player feels strange knowing there's a whole community out there. Can't put a finger on it!!


SonOfLiberty
  • SonOfLiberty

    We're all looking for that special someone

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Member in an Official Group 2012

#71

Posted 06 March 2014 - 04:40 AM

and because last of all in LC there is no Trevor :))

 

 

Thank f*ck for that.:p

  • namor likes this

Niko Vercetti 112
  • Niko Vercetti 112

    That's, just, like, your opinion man

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2012

#72

Posted 06 March 2014 - 10:38 AM

To be honest I like both LC and LS. However I do much prefer LC simply because it felt more like a real place as opposed to a movie set.

I think R* focused a bit too much on people's complaints about lack of countryside. For a location based on America's largest, area-wise, city, it did feel very cramped. And even then it was hard to ignor considering the majority of the map outside LS felt very copy & paste.

Either way they're Rockstar's best attempts at open world cities (Red Dead Redemption would win prize for map's), and I hope they continue to make a mix of life and variety in the map's in future.
  • SonOfLiberty likes this

TheTruthOnly
  • TheTruthOnly

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2013
  • Unknown

#73

Posted 06 March 2014 - 12:46 PM

Liberty City, simple because it really feels like New York, especially Bohan. Los Santos is just as detailed as LC, but it lacks something. Feels empty at times and a little bit like a cardboard town. Maybe PC version and sp DLC will fix that by adding interiors, more activities.

 

Can't wait to see LC again in GTA Online.


Mokrie Dela
  • Mokrie Dela

    МОКРЫЕДЕЛA

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 01 May 2009
  • None
  • Most Talented Writer 2013
    Best Story/Poem 2013 "The Storm"
    Story/Poem of the Year 2011 "Justice in Flames"
    Story/Poem of the Year 2010 "City of Lies"

#74

Posted 06 March 2014 - 02:54 PM

Oh well, it has to be Los Santos. Beautiful ocean, amazingly detailed woodland areas, detailed characters both playable and npc's. and because last of all in LC there is no Trevor :))

Liberty was cool and all, but the buildings look so depressing compared to LS. Just my opinion.

That was largely down to the colour pallet they used. You can almost rectify it by boosting the brightness and colour (or is is saturation?) in the settings menu, but IV was a gritty story set in the autumn. V is the really gorgeous sultry blonde with big tits (but nothing in her head!).

I think i've said it before but it's worth making the distinction between the cities themselves and the games' features. On city alone, i think LS is slightly better - it doesn't feel as big, there's no suburbs, but remember a lot of people complained that Alderney was a "waste of space" and that there's no countryside - rather ironic how its the otherway round, almost.

In story telling, and number of missions, IV is miles ahead but does that really impact the cities ? If LS was bigger, it'd be awesome. as it is it's just very good. I was actually thinking yesterday how small downtown looked. In IV it was massive; Algonquin was a huge expansive island. In V the CBD is literally half a dozen sky scrapers, only 4 or 5 are even close to the grandness of IVs. IV felt more complete, as others have said, more like a full city. LS feels too small for LA.

 

Liberty City, simple because it really feels like New York, especially Bohan. Los Santos is just as detailed as LC, but it lacks something. Feels empty at times and a little bit like a cardboard town. Maybe PC version and sp DLC will fix that by adding interiors, more activities.

 

Can't wait to see LC again in GTA Online.

I wouldn't hold your breath on DLC like that tbh. I just can't see SP DLC of that size. O maybe but not SP


lol232
  • lol232

    We stealin' all da gold!

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2010
  • Serbia

#75

Posted 06 March 2014 - 02:58 PM

LC, just feels more alive.

Markhosdangerous
  • Markhosdangerous

    Markos Dangerous

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2009

#76

Posted 06 March 2014 - 03:30 PM Edited by Markhosdangerous, 06 March 2014 - 03:34 PM.

I don't know if it was because the age and the hype of those years but I was really excited about being on Liberty City with all the similarities to New York. Los Santos didn't make me feel that way at all. Yeah when I was playing GTA V for the first month I was really excited but not now. This feeling was still on LC until RDR came out. I don't know if it's about that GTA IV was the first game of the "new generation" (of those days) or police system that they don't give you a break plus the old cheat system plus that you only can lower the wanted level ONE by one and you can't see all the environment when you kill somebody, like the paramedics coming and making their reports... or maybe it's just the city. Some roads feels really wide and it gives you the feeling that the city is quite "empty". Like LA NOIRE said at the beginning: Los Angeles (Los Santos in this case) it's a city built for the automobile and not for the man.

 

On Liberty City you could go inside some apartments and get to the roof, despite being the same interior all over again, but it was great for doing great gunfights with the LCPD. And LC feels like it's full of details in every corner and sometimes you wanted to experience that going on foot. Los Santos doesn't give you that feeling: you always want to get your car for going even to the other side of the corner. 

 

In conclusion Los Santos is a great place too, it feels warm and kind (but maybe it is a bad point if you want a hostile environment for this types of games like LC has on things like the weather or the dark feeling of the place) in my honest opinion if GTA V comes to PC I want to make a duplicate of the game and install a mod for playing on Liberty City with all the new features that GTA V has (the new and stunning graphics, and so on...)

  • Mokrie Dela likes this

BladeTheShadow
  • BladeTheShadow

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2014
  • United-States

#77

Posted 07 March 2014 - 10:51 PM

idk becuase i never played liberty city


suicidehummer
  • suicidehummer

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2011
  • None

#78

Posted 08 March 2014 - 03:47 AM

Los Santos is a better map, but IV was a better game because of the amazing driving physics. V would have been 100X better with the old damage system and physics.

  • SonOfLiberty likes this

Simply logic
  • Simply logic

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2014
  • None

#79

Posted 30 March 2014 - 12:48 PM

Remember when you could go about without having to worry about getting spammed by and auto shotgun because your opponent would have to accomplish aiming first? The ridiculous nonsense that GTA V contains is unbelievable when related to GTA IV. What ever happened to good aim and skill? GTA V requires little to no skill just try free running your way up ledges and roll in all directions to try and aim with the imperfect aiming system that troubles you in many circumstances. Maybe GTA V didnt want long gunfights that made sense or tactical navigation through the map. Now there is all kinds of ways to instantly kill your target or get angry. Unlike the champion GTA IV it seems that GTA V was designed to run in cirlcles and roll around. Please bring back our old aiming system. Gunfights used to be cool, and realistic gaming wise.

Funktipus
  • Funktipus

    Mack Pimp

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2008

#80

Posted 02 April 2014 - 05:14 AM

Have to go with LC. I'm a native New Yorker, live in the Bronx, and Rockstar did a fantastic job of capturing the dark, dreary, forebidding 'feel' of NYC. My only complaint was they shortchanged Bohan(the Bronx). No baseball stadium, no zoo, no botanical gardens, no residental areas? There's more than just housing projects here, Rockstar.


warlord GTAV
  • warlord GTAV

    Wizard

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2014
  • Australia

#81

Posted 02 April 2014 - 09:02 AM Edited by warlord GTAV, 03 April 2014 - 11:51 AM.

how can you miss it its not dead just put the disc in and play it again,nobody is forcing the people that miss gtaiv or don't like gtav to play it..and this is a gtav site.


Simply logic
  • Simply logic

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2014
  • None

#82

Posted 03 April 2014 - 07:39 AM

i miss ducking/. being able to crouch to be honest .

im_stoned
  • im_stoned

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2013

#83

Posted 05 April 2014 - 01:14 AM Edited by im_stoned, 05 April 2014 - 01:14 AM.

liberty city felt like real city. Los santos felt like a city straight out of the true crime series enough said


Jizzle2014
  • Jizzle2014

    Employmentally Challenged

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2014
  • None

#84

Posted 05 April 2014 - 05:54 PM

Liberty city felt real the pedestrians Felt like real people in gta v they feel like lifeless actors just trying to be funny it feels to fake gta iv felt real

Nightrage
  • Nightrage

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2004
  • Netherlands

#85

Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:21 AM Edited by Nightrage, 16 April 2014 - 11:24 AM.

I was tired of Liberty City even before 4 came out, the nature and diversity is what makes GTA 5 a WORLD and not just a game level. That being said there are rumors Rockstar wants to bring Liberty City to online and I would love that, just to revisit that city with descent gameplay and do more online missions there.
 

 

how can you miss it its not dead just put the disc in and play it again,nobody is forcing the people that miss gtaiv or don't like gtav to play it..and this is a gtav site.

I think this discussion is about the city not about gta 4, yes you can go back and play it, but it won't be as much fun because the gameplay and graphics are awefull compared to gta5


Sting4S
  • Sting4S

    ♢ Corverra ♢

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

#86

Posted 16 April 2014 - 01:56 PM

I never missed Liberty City because I always had the opportunity to go back to it, that's why I play IV now and not V.

Los Santos is beautifully detailed and the road designs/layouts are way more sophisticated than Liberty City's. However, Liberty City's vibe strikes me more. Its not because its dark and gritty, its because it actually feels like a city and I can get immersed into it. Something about Los Santos just feels too superficial. Its almost like Las Vegas; its a great place to visit but I'd never live there. This is odd because if I had the money, I would hop skip and jump to live in or around Los Angeles.

Liberty City may not be as graphically beautifully as Los Santos but it sure as hell feels better as a city and to me it is just as diverse.
  • SFPD officer, SentinelXSVCS22 and neek41 like this

CSUdude
  • CSUdude

    Free Candy van driver

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Jan 2014
  • None

#87

Posted 18 April 2014 - 01:16 PM Edited by CSUdude, 18 April 2014 - 01:30 PM.

I live on the West coast and Liberty City does nothing for me. Less space in general, is very dark and depressing (even when the sun is out) and all of the buildings are so old! As a westcoast person, I love wide open space and a nice big backyard. I would be so depressed if I lived in an apartment building that was tight and crowded. BUT it is purely subjective as we could see from all of the comments.

The only thing that the east coast has right is rap music. There are more varieties of good artists and it makes the music better. Whenever we get a Liberty city game, I always look forward to the rap station. Unlike in V, where WCC is practically Dr. Dre and Snoop Dogg like 30 times.

Next question: Tupac or Biggie?

SFPD officer
  • SFPD officer

    What do I look like I'm made of? Pudding?

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2012
  • Czech-Republic

#88

Posted 18 April 2014 - 02:06 PM

@StingrayX

Same here.

 

I don't know how exactly to feel about LS. It's a beautiful city, I really love the architecture and I think it's more varied than LC, but LC just feels more real and actually lived-in.

 

Another thing (that I also remember brought up somewhere) is that LC encourages exploration. It encouraged you to leave your car and explore the city on foot, stick your nose into every alley, take a train. It was like R* was truly trying to convey that feeling of living in New York. But LS, while it's also incredibly detailed and well constructed, feels more like a stage set. It's like R*'s saying: "Alright, it's there and you are in it, but don't focus on it. Just blaze through it in a sports car, blow up an intersection and steal a jet from the airport. Sure, you can go for a walk in a park, but that's what little girls do. Are you a little girl, young man?"

 

But then again, IV doesn't have countryside. And I really missed that, since no matter how enthralling its urban jungle is, I can get quite tired of it. It would have been perfect if we could leave Algonquin from time to time and go for a drive in some woods upstate.


Blakegtav
  • Blakegtav

    Liberty City Police Dept. Commissioner/Commercial Pilots San And

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2013
  • United-States

#89

Posted 19 August 2014 - 07:37 PM

LC Is way better, It really shows the true Crime aspect of GTA, LS shows none of that unless if You want to consider Dumb Online Crime familys going at it in a Freemode...
GTA IV LC, GTA SA LS > GTA V LS




"Niko is My Influence f*ck school!"
  • maxpaynefan likes this

Shenmue18
  • Shenmue18

    GTAF's #1 Trevor hater.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Unknown

#90

Posted 19 August 2014 - 10:17 PM Edited by Shenmue18, 19 August 2014 - 10:23 PM.

I liked GTA IV's LC way more than V's Los Santos. GTA V's map was probably one of my least favorite in the series, it just didn't feel anywhere near as alive and detailed as Liberty City was, not to mention the actual city of Los Santos is really small, which is a big problem for me because the city is usually where I spend about 95% of my time in the game. That's my second biggest problem with Los Santos other than not being as detailed it felt like the game focused on Los Santos, even though it takes up a really small portion of the map. If they were going to go with GTA V being based more in the urban city they should have just made LS huge and not have made a desert or a forest area, or have the rural section of the map take a larger role in the game.

  • maxpaynefan likes this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users