98 replies to this topic

[Lock n' Stock]

 

Playing GTA IV after V has actually made me appreciate it more. There's still stuff to do after the story like vigilante missions, drug deals for Jacob, doing tasks for strangers and stealing cars. Even though it didn't have things like car customisation, planes, tanks, purchasable property or other things that previous games and V had, it was a great effort considering they started from scratch with a new engine. While V was a triumph, it felt like they took two huge steps forward and one step back, as if they were trying too hard to please people who hated IV.

 

While I can understand why IV was shallow and boring for some, I felt it was a somewhat better effort than V, which properly delivered a bit less on expectations since Rockstar North were also working on Agent at the time, and wanted to get a new GTA title out ASAP.

I beg to differ, Rockstar only put effort into the world and the story, it feels like they didn't try hard on GTA IV at all after that, that is why the vehicle variety is garbage and it is also why the vehicle spawning system is terrible.

 

Right, whatever you say. I still believe otherwise.

[HaythamKenway]

I think both of them are great in their own right. However, IV remains my personal favorite.

 

While I liked V's story, because of how un-GTA-ish it was (no clear primary antagonist, no revenge plot), it had its share of faults. Both Trevor and Franklin feel sort of...there, but not really important. As if this isn't really their game. Franklin has a strong opening, but once Michael appears, he pretty much plays no important part in the story until the end. Michael's and Trevor's relationship is wonderfully build and played with (

Spoiler

Trevor's sudden apperance in Michael's house

or

Spoiler

their confrontation at the graveyard in North Yankton

are among my favorite scenes in the entire GTA series), but Trevor himself is seriously underdeveloped. He had an enourmous potential and there are definitely seeds of something interesting here and there in the story, but I never felt I understood him. I understood all IV era protagonists, I understood Michael and Franklin, but Trevor is sort of mystery to me. Maybe I missed something, but R* has never shown me what really made Trevor tick, why I should care about him. I mean, you can make the audience care about psychopathic characters - not symphatize with them - but understand them. Trevor just didn't felt properly fleshed out.

 

On the other hand, Michael is my favorite protagonist in any GTA game to date. Even though he doesn't have as many redeeming qualities as CJ, Niko or Johnny, he was a complex and interesting character to follow. He was a bastard, but I really rooted for him. It was truly heartwarming for me,

Spoiler

to see him find a place in life, where he feels he belongs and rebuild relationships with his family.

 

As for the rest of the cast, I'd say IV's was better. V's characters are maybe more entertaining (Jimmy, Lamar), but also, as a result, feel less believable. In IV, even comic reliefs, such as Brucie or Bernie had some depth to them. I didn't feel that way with Jimmy, Wade or other characters.

 

If V was just a Michael's story, it would have been excellent. But it was also Trevor's and Franklin's story. And those two were just underdeveloped and sort of brought it down. I love the multiple protagonist concept and I want R* to continue with it, but next time, they need to give all their stories proper focus. Maybe just two protags instead of three will help?

 

Even though I did nothing but complained about V's story in previous text, I think IV's story isn't that much better. It has its problems too, some of which V avoided. For example, V's plot didn't feel as forcefully stretched out (Bohan and early Algonquin chapter in IV are prime offenders) and it made me feel like every mission really moved the plot forward.

 

Gameplay-wise, I have to admit, V wins. You can't really beat all those toys to play with in freeroam and sweet MP3 shooting. However, IV still has better driving and I think its side-missions were better. Vigilante missions, Import-Export, Fixer's assassinations, Little Jacob's deliveries, etc. There were less of them, but they were better structured.

 

As for setting, IV easily beats V, in my opinion. V's map is big, colorful and varied, but I just don't like Los Santos. I love Liberty City, with its atmosphere and boroughs. It's in ingame presentation of the city too. The way Los Santos is presented in the game, as a sh*thole of celebrity, status and fame-obsessed d*ckwads, I don't know, it just kinda rubbed me in a wrong way. Liberty City was a "worst place in the America" too, after all, but it just had more class. I love the countryside, but unfortunately, when it comes to GTAs, the city is the star of the game. And Los Santos, although technically perfect, didn't capture my heart like IV's or even III's Liberty City, Vice City or 2004 San Andreas.

 

And another thing that goes hand in hand with this - the soundtrack. Radio stations are one of things that add that "GTA magic" to freeroaming. And V's radio stations are serious letdown. There are some great songs in there, but they are more like hidden gems. Of course, every previous GTAs had songs I didn't like, but they grew on me. Not so with V's. And who had the horrible idea of mixing genres on radio stations? Los Santos Rock Radio especially suffered from this and when classic rock stations are usually your favorites throughout GTA series, it hurts.

 

In the end, IV and V are neither perfect games. But I just like IV much more. I don't know, maybe it's just because I'm now suffering from the same kind of nostalgia people have for Vice City, except in my case, it's for IV. That game grew on me so much it will be probably hard for R* to beat it with any future GTA. However, these feelings aside, I think IV was just much better structured and focused. V has loads of amazing ideas and concepts, but they feel unfinished and it feels like R* just tried way too hard to please everyone, so they started doing hundreds of different things and finished none. As insane the five year long development time was, V needed even more. Not because of this next-gen crap, so they could throw even more sh*t in, but just to fine tune to perfection what already was in the game.

[CantThinkOfOne2013]

 

• Vehicles: The vehicle variety in GTA IV was complete garbage, I would explore the city and find locations where unique vehicle could have spawned (golf cart at the golf course, construction vehicles at the construction sites, go-kart at the go-kart track, lawn mower at the golf course, etc) but no, all we had was generic vehicles apart from a very select few (hearse, ice-cream truck, etc). Another problem with vehicles in GTA IV was the spawning system, for example, the Romero (hearse) was featured only in one mission and can't be found in free roam, I don't see why it could not spawn at the church or the cemetery. Another thing, the Police Maverick (police helicopter) and Police Predator (police boat) did not have actual spawn points like in previous games and GTA V where the Police Maverick can be found on top of police stations and the Predator could be found patrolling the water, instead, they only appear when the player has a wanted level, so the only way to obtain them is by sniping tricks. Also, the helicopter variety was complete garbage, since the game took out the planes, the helicopter variety should have been a lot better (it should have been a lot better even if the game had planes), 4 helicopters just don't cut it, especially when one is painfully difficult to obtain. GTA V did vehicle variety a lot better, with nearly all vehicles spawning at appropriate locations in free roam and the vehicle variety is the best of any GTA game, it's just a shame that trains are not drivable.

I think IV has a greater advantage in the terms of vehicles because there are a huge variety between vehicles (lowriders, classics, 4-doors etc) unlike V where 70% of all vehicles are super/sports.. 

Also regarding the spawning system, that isn't R*s fault, its the console limitations.

EDIT: Planes weren't in IV because the map was to small.

 

First of all 70% of all vehicles were not super/sports, and second of all console limitations were not the reason that the vehicle spawning is terrible, for example, the Police Maverick spawned on a police station helipad in multiplayer, so there is no reason it shouldn't have been able to do so in single player.

And GTA III, GTA Vice City and GTA Vice City Stories had smaller maps and still had planes.

[CantThinkOfOne2013]

@PkUnzipper

 

Compare Modded IV to Vanilla V? Are you f*cking kidding me?

And I thought comparing Vanilla GTA V to GTA IV+Episodes from Liberty City was bad, comparing modded GTA IV to Vanilla GTA V is just sad. GTA IV fans just can't seem to understand that GTA V does things better than GTA IV.

[Lowi]

GTA V > GTA IV. The end.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Oh I just love generalisations /sarcasm.

[Lock n' Stock]

I honestly miss the wanted system from IV. Sure the cops were fat and incompetent, but at least you actually stood somewhat of a chance against them. V changes this by giving you a lower amount of health and giving them a huge amount of accuracy. While I have no problem with them making it more challenging, they seem to have just made the police on higher wanted levels almost impossible to hold off and escape alive.

[woggleman]

I honestly miss the wanted system from IV. Sure the cops were fat and incompetent, but at least you actually stood somewhat of a chance against them. V changes this by giving you a lower amount of health and giving them a huge amount of accuracy. While I have no problem with them making it more challenging, they seem to have just made the police on higher wanted levels almost impossible to hold off and escape alive.

Both have their pros and cons but nothing is more exciting than hiding behind a wall with an army of cops right on the other side that can't see you. It adds a certain level of suspense to police chases.

[CantThinkOfOne2013]

 

GTA V definitely has a lot more variety to the vehicles, but IV was the first of its kind so it's kind of like saying "Why didn't GTA III have the variety of San Andreas?"

Most of your post was TL:DR (I still plan to read it) but this stood out.

 

I am so sick of seeing this excuse everywhere, GTA III didn't have the variety of San Andreas because, mabye, I don't know, because it may have been made several years before San Andreas, perhaps?
Yes GTA IV had a new engine, but they still had coding for all vehicle types (including planes, the coding still remains) so vehicle variety should have been no problem, but for some bizarre reason, we only generic vehicles (reading everything that was cut from GTA IV is depressing).

And if anyone can still defend the vehicle variety in GTA IV, there is no excuse for the terrible spawning system.
I know some people may like GTA IV better but can they at least admit when it does something wrong, not just make up excuses or scream "STORY".

[spamtackey]

 

 

GTA V definitely has a lot more variety to the vehicles, but IV was the first of its kind so it's kind of like saying "Why didn't GTA III have the variety of San Andreas?"

Most of your post was TL:DR (I still plan to read it) but this stood out.

 

I am so sick of seeing this excuse everywhere, GTA III didn't have the variety of San Andreas because, mabye, I don't know, because it may have been made several years before San Andreas, perhaps?
Yes GTA IV had a new engine, but they still had coding for all vehicle types (including planes, the coding still remains) so vehicle variety should have been no problem, but for some bizarre reason, we only generic vehicles (reading everything that was cut from GTA IV is depressing).

And if anyone can still defend the vehicle variety in GTA IV, there is no excuse for the terrible spawning system.
I know some people may like GTA IV better but can they at least admit when it does something wrong, not just make up excuses or scream "STORY".

 

 

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Are you saying because they had planes in San Andreas they had coding for GTA IV? I'm sorry, but game engines don't work like that. The coding for GTA San Andreas and GTA IV were completely different and the features had to be redone. Take Crackdown 2, which was on a separate engine. They spent a lot of time trying to recreate what Crackdown was and IMO the ledge grabbing was far superior in the first game. Why not copy/paste it? New engine. 

 

If you're saying they had coding for planes and other vehicles in GTA IV, then it just means they were experimenting with it and working on it. It does not mean they finished it or had time to finish it. There are a lot of things in V that didn't make the cut either. Basketball, pimping, and a few other things had icons made for them, which hints at them working on the features. Why aren't they in the finished game if they worked on them? Because they weren't finished. Actually, if there is coding for planes and stuff in GTA IV then it makes V even less impressive as it was just finishing work on stuff done in IV, which is again the least they could do as a sequel.

 

I'm also seriously not sure what you mean by the terrible spawning system. GTA IV seemed fine as far as vehicle spawning. If you mean putting them in certain locations then that's not a big feature or game killing except to someone looking for an excuse to hate a game. If you mean how good vehicles would spawn once you gained one then that is something they've been working on since GTA III and was rather bad in San Andreas as well, so why does IV stand out as being poor? Again, it's an excuse to hate the game. 

 

I wish you would actually take some time to comprehend the stuff that people are saying rather than copy/pasting your catch-all complaint about GTA IV fans talking about the story. My story comparison in that response does not cover anything going on in the gameplay and you would know that if you weren't too busy making excuses to hate GTA IV. 

[zielarz119]

@CantThinkOfOne2013

GTA V had terrible spawning system, GTA IV spawning was okay, most of the time there was 3 types of taxis and atleast 5 types of different cars and changes after while (I played on PC so this might be console limitations but i don't remember if I had this problem on X360)
I agree GTA V have more variety of vehicles but there is always only 2-3 cars spawning OVER and OVER, I got tired of this sh*t. There is only vehicle variety when you load the game and the engine choses which 2 cars you gonna drive this time.

GTA IV vehicle spawning example:

 

GTA V vehicle spawning examples:

 

[CantThinkOfOne2013]

@CantThinkOfOne2013

GTA V had terrible spawning system, GTA IV spawning was okay, most of the time there was 3 types of taxis and atleast 5 types of different cars and changes after while (I played on PC so this might be console limitations but i don't remember if I had this problem on X360)
I agree GTA V have more variety of vehicles but there is always only 2-3 cars spawning OVER and OVER, I got tired of this sh*t. There is only vehicle variety when you load the game and the engine choses which 2 cars you gonna drive this time.

GTA IV vehicle spawning example:

 

GTA V vehicle spawning examples:

 

Well I have never noticed anything like that in my game (I actually rarely see a Granger), but when I say vehicle spawning system, i'm not talking about the generic cars, i'm talking about spawning locations for different vehicles, for example, I have previously mentioned the Police Maverick (police helicopter) and how it only appears when the player has a 3 or more star wanted level, it doesn't spawn on top of the police station like in previous games and GTA V, same thing goes for the Police Predator (police boat), another example is the Romero (hearse) it only appeared in one mission in GTA IV, and can never be found in free roam, in previous games and in GTA V, I don't usually compare Episodes from Liberty City, but it is worth mentioning that the same issues are in The Lost and Dammed and The Ballad of Gay Tony.

[CantThinkOfOne2013]

 

 

 

GTA V definitely has a lot more variety to the vehicles, but IV was the first of its kind so it's kind of like saying "Why didn't GTA III have the variety of San Andreas?"

Most of your post was TL:DR (I still plan to read it) but this stood out.

 

I am so sick of seeing this excuse everywhere, GTA III didn't have the variety of San Andreas because, mabye, I don't know, because it may have been made several years before San Andreas, perhaps?
Yes GTA IV had a new engine, but they still had coding for all vehicle types (including planes, the coding still remains) so vehicle variety should have been no problem, but for some bizarre reason, we only generic vehicles (reading everything that was cut from GTA IV is depressing).

And if anyone can still defend the vehicle variety in GTA IV, there is no excuse for the terrible spawning system.
I know some people may like GTA IV better but can they at least admit when it does something wrong, not just make up excuses or scream "STORY".

 

 

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Are you saying because they had planes in San Andreas they had coding for GTA IV? I'm sorry, but game engines don't work like that. The coding for GTA San Andreas and GTA IV were completely different and the features had to be redone. Take Crackdown 2, which was on a separate engine. They spent a lot of time trying to recreate what Crackdown was and IMO the ledge grabbing was far superior in the first game. Why not copy/paste it? New engine. 

 

If you're saying they had coding for planes and other vehicles in GTA IV, then it just means they were experimenting with it and working on it. It does not mean they finished it or had time to finish it. There are a lot of things in V that didn't make the cut either. Basketball, pimping, and a few other things had icons made for them, which hints at them working on the features. Why aren't they in the finished game if they worked on them? Because they weren't finished. Actually, if there is coding for planes and stuff in GTA IV then it makes V even less impressive as it was just finishing work on stuff done in IV, which is again the least they could do as a sequel.

 

I'm also seriously not sure what you mean by the terrible spawning system. GTA IV seemed fine as far as vehicle spawning. If you mean putting them in certain locations then that's not a big feature or game killing except to someone looking for an excuse to hate a game. If you mean how good vehicles would spawn once you gained one then that is something they've been working on since GTA III and was rather bad in San Andreas as well, so why does IV stand out as being poor? Again, it's an excuse to hate the game. 

 

I wish you would actually take some time to comprehend the stuff that people are saying rather than copy/pasting your catch-all complaint about GTA IV fans talking about the story. My story comparison in that response does not cover anything going on in the gameplay and you would know that if you weren't too busy making excuses to hate GTA IV. 

 

According to GTA wiki, coding for planes exists inside GTA IV's game files (and modders have taken full advantage of it), the there is evidences of several planes being cut from the game (Andromada, Dodo, Fighter and Shamal), yet planes were still cut from the game.

When talking about the terrible spawning system, I am not using it as an excuse to hate the game (I don't hate GTA IV, I think it's good in it's own right but it's a terrible GTA), and it does stand out because unique vehicles had appropriate spawning points in previous games and they do in GTA V, yet GTA IV, all you get is generic cars, the only way to get one of the few unique vehicles is by exploits.

[zielarz119]

According to GTA wiki, coding for planes exists inside GTA IV's game files (and modders have taken full advantage of it), the there is evidences of several planes being cut from the game (Andromada, Dodo, Fighter and Shamal), yet planes were still cut from the game.

 

When talking about the terrible spawning system, I am not using it as an excuse to hate the game (I don't hate GTA IV, I think it's good in it's own right but it's a terrible GTA), and it does stand out because unique vehicles had appropriate spawning points in previous games and they do in GTA V, yet GTA IV, all you get is generic cars, the only way to get one of the few unique vehicles is by exploits.

 

They left those 4 planes handling in handling.cfg to make it easy for modders to implement planes. (If there was really some code for flying)

These planes probably handle so bad (we can see on YT) so they deleted them because it was unfinished. They improve it and implement to GTA V but it still feel not perfect. (like we don't really fly a plane but something that pretends to be plane)

[Thegutang]

 

According to GTA wiki, coding for planes exists inside GTA IV's game files (and modders have taken full advantage of it), the there is evidences of several planes being cut from the game (Andromada, Dodo, Fighter and Shamal), yet planes were still cut from the game.

 

When talking about the terrible spawning system, I am not using it as an excuse to hate the game (I don't hate GTA IV, I think it's good in it's own right but it's a terrible GTA), and it does stand out because unique vehicles had appropriate spawning points in previous games and they do in GTA V, yet GTA IV, all you get is generic cars, the only way to get one of the few unique vehicles is by exploits.

 

They left those 4 planes handling in handling.cfg to make it easy for modders to implement planes. (If there was really some code for flying)

 

 

 

Yeah check out the airplane mods for IV. They are awesome!

[spamtackey]

 

 

According to GTA wiki, coding for planes exists inside GTA IV's game files (and modders have taken full advantage of it), the there is evidences of several planes being cut from the game (Andromada, Dodo, Fighter and Shamal), yet planes were still cut from the game.

When talking about the terrible spawning system, I am not using it as an excuse to hate the game (I don't hate GTA IV, I think it's good in it's own right but it's a terrible GTA), and it does stand out because unique vehicles had appropriate spawning points in previous games and they do in GTA V, yet GTA IV, all you get is generic cars, the only way to get one of the few unique vehicles is by exploits.

 

Then they worked on that stuff and didn't finish it fully or felt that it didn't fit in the game. They also had the fingerless gloves that were cut for some reason by the end. All games go through this kind of process. GTA IV isn't the first. Did you know that they also had dialogue in Vice City where Tommy was more involved with Mercedes? In the subtitle files there's a lot of cut dialogue that people found. It's interesting how this kinda thing happens sometimes. 

 

I see what you mean with the vehicles. That's one of the things that bugged me about it I think with the infernus (I think it was). At least give us a cheat to make it easier to get if it's the best / fastest or whatever car in the game. X_X I've had a hard time getting some vehicles and as you said, others just don't spawn at all. It doesn't kill the game but it is a problem that needed addressing. I'm not stupid enough to think IV is 100% perfect and I try not to make it seem that way. Both IV and V are great games in their own ways and anyone hating outright is stupid. Personally, I'm just harsher on V because it didn't have the issues that IV did in development. 

[Algonquin Assassin]

I know some people may like GTA IV better but can they at least admit when it does something wrong, not just make up excuses or scream "STORY".

You know I always see you saying this, but it doesn't even add up. There are plenty of things GTA IV does wrong like a lack of rewards, the horrible flying rats, a non-existent economy etc and I have no problem admitting it whilst I'm a major fan of the game.

If anything you're exactly what you accuse GTA IV fans of being. You started this thread off trying to be impartial, but it didn't last long because quite frankly you're a one eyed GTA V fan. I'm a one eyed GTA IV fan so I'm no different.

This thread should've been started by someone who isn't a big fan of either game to give a fair look at both. You're too biased..

[smil0]

 

 

 

 

GTA V definitely has a lot more variety to the vehicles, but IV was the first of its kind so it's kind of like saying "Why didn't GTA III have the variety of San Andreas?"

Most of your post was TL:DR (I still plan to read it) but this stood out.

 

I am so sick of seeing this excuse everywhere, GTA III didn't have the variety of San Andreas because, mabye, I don't know, because it may have been made several years before San Andreas, perhaps?
Yes GTA IV had a new engine, but they still had coding for all vehicle types (including planes, the coding still remains) so vehicle variety should have been no problem, but for some bizarre reason, we only generic vehicles (reading everything that was cut from GTA IV is depressing).

And if anyone can still defend the vehicle variety in GTA IV, there is no excuse for the terrible spawning system.
I know some people may like GTA IV better but can they at least admit when it does something wrong, not just make up excuses or scream "STORY".

 

 

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Are you saying because they had planes in San Andreas they had coding for GTA IV? I'm sorry, but game engines don't work like that. The coding for GTA San Andreas and GTA IV were completely different and the features had to be redone. Take Crackdown 2, which was on a separate engine. They spent a lot of time trying to recreate what Crackdown was and IMO the ledge grabbing was far superior in the first game. Why not copy/paste it? New engine. 

 

If you're saying they had coding for planes and other vehicles in GTA IV, then it just means they were experimenting with it and working on it. It does not mean they finished it or had time to finish it. There are a lot of things in V that didn't make the cut either. Basketball, pimping, and a few other things had icons made for them, which hints at them working on the features. Why aren't they in the finished game if they worked on them? Because they weren't finished. Actually, if there is coding for planes and stuff in GTA IV then it makes V even less impressive as it was just finishing work on stuff done in IV, which is again the least they could do as a sequel.

 

I'm also seriously not sure what you mean by the terrible spawning system. GTA IV seemed fine as far as vehicle spawning. If you mean putting them in certain locations then that's not a big feature or game killing except to someone looking for an excuse to hate a game. If you mean how good vehicles would spawn once you gained one then that is something they've been working on since GTA III and was rather bad in San Andreas as well, so why does IV stand out as being poor? Again, it's an excuse to hate the game. 

 

I wish you would actually take some time to comprehend the stuff that people are saying rather than copy/pasting your catch-all complaint about GTA IV fans talking about the story. My story comparison in that response does not cover anything going on in the gameplay and you would know that if you weren't too busy making excuses to hate GTA IV. 

 

According to GTA wiki, coding for planes exists inside GTA IV's game files (and modders have taken full advantage of it), the there is evidences of several planes being cut from the game (Andromada, Dodo, Fighter and Shamal), yet planes were still cut from the game.

When talking about the terrible spawning system, I am not using it as an excuse to hate the game (I don't hate GTA IV, I think it's good in it's own right but it's a terrible GTA), and it does stand out because unique vehicles had appropriate spawning points in previous games and they do in GTA V, yet GTA IV, all you get is generic cars, the only way to get one of the few unique vehicles is by exploits.

 

 

lol the thing is, gta 5 came before gta 4. It was a massive leak back in the days for the pc. they made a huge mistake with packing everything that is fun into one game (gta san andreas). It had everything you could do. They had no possibillity to increase.

Then there was the leak of gta 5 (or they released it, I don't know anymore) and everyone was like "man this game sucks, better graphics but less gameplay and micro transaction" and the app while no one had a smartphone. Time was not right.

They "canceled" gta5, took it off the webs I don't know.

Then, gta 4 came out with gta 5 engine. red dead redemption also with gta 5 skybox and engine. then they released the episodes TLAD and BOGT and after that max payne 3 with gta 5 engine and shooting mechanics adn the max payne typical bullettime.

after that they re-released gta5 and said it was a mix of all the games rdr/gta/mp3.

Gta 5 has the shooting mechanics, engine, cover system and skybox of these games but they turned it around and advertised the game as a mix of these games instead of the other way round. In fact they made games out of gta5. When they had the RAGE engine they could make games like out of a construction kit.

So gta4 had to be "more bad" so they have a gain a possibility to increase.

call me a liar or stupid asshole but thats how I believe it is.

[woggleman]

I love V but I can admit what it does wrong. There are many things would make it an even better experience. The number one is vehicle storage. They give us what is to me the best selection of cars in a GTA and they only let us own a few of them. If they could add a huge garage in a dlc I will be a happy man.

[spamtackey]

I love V but I can admit what it does wrong. There are many things would make it an even better experience. The number one is vehicle storage. They give us what is to me the best selection of cars in a GTA and they only let us own a few of them. If they could add a huge garage in a dlc I will be a happy man.

One of the things I've never understood about any of the GTA games, even GTA IV really, is how Rockstar handles storing vehicles. I guess 3 and Vice City I can understand but with customization in San Andreas they should have upgraded how we store vehicles. Saint's Row gets it right in my mind. A garage where you can always get access to any vehicle you store in it. With, to my knowledge, no max capacity. Maybe SR has a max capacity but I've never run into it. This is what makes it fun to customize vehicles. I don't care if I can paint a car stupid colors and make it look good/ridiculous if I can only drive it once or store it and never use it for fear of it exploding. 

[Cicero The Great]

I think both of them are great in their own right. However, IV remains my personal favorite.
 
While I liked V's story, because of how un-GTA-ish it was (no clear primary antagonist, no revenge plot), it had its share of faults. Both Trevor and Franklin feel sort of...there, but not really important. As if this isn't really their game. Franklin has a strong opening, but once Michael appears, he pretty much plays no important part in the story until the end. Michael's and Trevor's relationship is wonderfully build and played with (

Spoiler

Trevor's sudden apperance in Michael's house

or

Spoiler

their confrontation at the graveyard in North Yankton

are among my favorite scenes in the entire GTA series), but Trevor himself is seriously underdeveloped. He had an enourmous potential and there are definitely seeds of something interesting here and there in the story, but I never felt I understood him. I understood all IV era protagonists, I understood Michael and Franklin, but Trevor is sort of mystery to me. Maybe I missed something, but R* has never shown me what really made Trevor tick, why I should care about him. I mean, you can make the audience care about psychopathic characters - not symphatize with them - but understand them. Trevor just didn't felt properly fleshed out.
 
On the other hand, Michael is my favorite protagonist in any GTA game to date. Even though he doesn't have as many redeeming qualities as CJ, Niko or Johnny, he was a complex and interesting character to follow. He was a bastard, but I really rooted for him. It was truly heartwarming for me,

Spoiler

to see him find a place in life, where he feels he belongs and rebuild relationships with his family.

 
As for the rest of the cast, I'd say IV's was better. V's characters are maybe more entertaining (Jimmy, Lamar), but also, as a result, feel less believable. In IV, even comic reliefs, such as Brucie or Bernie had some depth to them. I didn't feel that way with Jimmy, Wade or other characters.
 
If V was just a Michael's story, it would have been excellent. But it was also Trevor's and Franklin's story. And those two were just underdeveloped and sort of brought it down. I love the multiple protagonist concept and I want R* to continue with it, but next time, they need to give all their stories proper focus. Maybe just two protags instead of three will help?
 
Even though I did nothing but complained about V's story in previous text, I think IV's story isn't that much better. It has its problems too, some of which V avoided. For example, V's plot didn't feel as forcefully stretched out (Bohan and early Algonquin chapter in IV are prime offenders) and it made me feel like every mission really moved the plot forward.
 
Gameplay-wise, I have to admit, V wins. You can't really beat all those toys to play with in freeroam and sweet MP3 shooting. However, IV still has better driving and I think its side-missions were better. Vigilante missions, Import-Export, Fixer's assassinations, Little Jacob's deliveries, etc. There were less of them, but they were better structured.
 
As for setting, IV easily beats V, in my opinion. V's map is big, colorful and varied, but I just don't like Los Santos. I love Liberty City, with its atmosphere and boroughs. It's in ingame presentation of the city too. The way Los Santos is presented in the game, as a sh*thole of celebrity, status and fame-obsessed d*ckwads, I don't know, it just kinda rubbed me in a wrong way. Liberty City was a "worst place in the America" too, after all, but it just had more class. I love the countryside, but unfortunately, when it comes to GTAs, the city is the star of the game. And Los Santos, although technically perfect, didn't capture my heart like IV's or even III's Liberty City, Vice City or 2004 San Andreas.
 
And another thing that goes hand in hand with this - the soundtrack. Radio stations are one of things that add that "GTA magic" to freeroaming. And V's radio stations are serious letdown. There are some great songs in there, but they are more like hidden gems. Of course, every previous GTAs had songs I didn't like, but they grew on me. Not so with V's. And who had the horrible idea of mixing genres on radio stations? Los Santos Rock Radio especially suffered from this and when classic rock stations are usually your favorites throughout GTA series, it hurts.
 
In the end, IV and V are neither perfect games. But I just like IV much more. I don't know, maybe it's just because I'm now suffering from the same kind of nostalgia people have for Vice City, except in my case, it's for IV. That game grew on me so much it will be probably hard for R* to beat it with any future GTA. However, these feelings aside, I think IV was just much better structured and focused. V has loads of amazing ideas and concepts, but they feel unfinished and it feels like R* just tried way too hard to please everyone, so they started doing hundreds of different things and finished none. As insane the five year long development time was, V needed even more. Not because of this next-gen crap, so they could throw even more sh*t in, but just to fine tune to perfection what already was in the game.

We mostly agree with your comment
The main problems of V are :
Wrong setting/ city
Too ambitious
Lack of depth and interaction

It's still a great game, but it lacks ''that magic touch''
However, We already miss it after only a week - and that could mean something

[CantThinkOfOne2013]

 

I know some people may like GTA IV better but can they at least admit when it does something wrong, not just make up excuses or scream "STORY".

You know I always see you saying this, but it doesn't even add up. There are plenty of things GTA IV does wrong like a lack of rewards, the horrible flying rats, a non-existent economy etc and I have no problem admitting it whilst I'm a major fan of the game.

If anything you're exactly what you accuse GTA IV fans of being. You started this thread off trying to be impartial, but it didn't last long because quite frankly you're a one eyed GTA V fan. I'm a one eyed GTA IV fan so I'm no different.

This thread should've been started by someone who isn't a big fan of either game to give a fair look at both. You're too biased..

 

Your an exception, you admit GTA IV has it's flaws, you just prefer it to GTA V. Other users, however, will make up every excuse under the sun for GTA IV, either that or (as mentioned before), shout "story, story STORY" because they think that story is the one defining factor of a game (which is the very reason gaming is screwed).

[Official General]

I know some people may like GTA IV better but can they at least admit when it does something wrong, not just make up excuses or scream "STORY".

You know I always see you saying this, but it doesn't even add up. There are plenty of things GTA IV does wrong like a lack of rewards, the horrible flying rats, a non-existent economy etc and I have no problem admitting it whilst I'm a major fan of the game.
If anything you're exactly what you accuse GTA IV fans of being. You started this thread off trying to be impartial, but it didn't last long because quite frankly you're a one eyed GTA V fan. I'm a one eyed GTA IV fan so I'm no different.
This thread should've been started by someone who isn't a big fan of either game to give a fair look at both. You're too biased..

Your an exception, you admit GTA IV has it's flaws, you just prefer it to GTA V. Other users, however, will make up every excuse under the sun for GTA IV, either that or (as mentioned before), shout "story, story STORY" because they think that story is the one defining factor of a game (which is the very reason gaming is screwed).

One of GTA IV's main strength was it's story indeed. However IV did have many other very good characterstics over GTA V's. It was not just the story, it was the environment, immersion level, decent crime related side missions and better main characters.

[woggleman]

 

I love V but I can admit what it does wrong. There are many things would make it an even better experience. The number one is vehicle storage. They give us what is to me the best selection of cars in a GTA and they only let us own a few of them. If they could add a huge garage in a dlc I will be a happy man.

One of the things I've never understood about any of the GTA games, even GTA IV really, is how Rockstar handles storing vehicles. I guess 3 and Vice City I can understand but with customization in San Andreas they should have upgraded how we store vehicles. Saint's Row gets it right in my mind. A garage where you can always get access to any vehicle you store in it. With, to my knowledge, no max capacity. Maybe SR has a max capacity but I've never run into it. This is what makes it fun to customize vehicles. I don't care if I can paint a car stupid colors and make it look good/ridiculous if I can only drive it once or store it and never use it for fear of it exploding. 

 

This is why I enjoy online. I mostly have ten of my favorite vehicles in the game and I cause havoc with them. If they get destroyed I just call the insurance people. They really should have had that in SP. 

[PkUnzipper]

 

 

I know some people may like GTA IV better but can they at least admit when it does something wrong, not just make up excuses or scream "STORY".

You know I always see you saying this, but it doesn't even add up. There are plenty of things GTA IV does wrong like a lack of rewards, the horrible flying rats, a non-existent economy etc and I have no problem admitting it whilst I'm a major fan of the game.

If anything you're exactly what you accuse GTA IV fans of being. You started this thread off trying to be impartial, but it didn't last long because quite frankly you're a one eyed GTA V fan. I'm a one eyed GTA IV fan so I'm no different.

This thread should've been started by someone who isn't a big fan of either game to give a fair look at both. You're too biased..

 

Your an exception, you admit GTA IV has it's flaws, you just prefer it to GTA V. Other users, however, will make up every excuse under the sun for GTA IV, either that or (as mentioned before), shout "story, story STORY" because they think that story is the one defining factor of a game (which is the very reason gaming is screwed).

 

 

It's not about story in GTA IV as much as the fact that comparatively, GTA V appears to be completely lacking in one.  Or if one truly exists, it has yet to show itself in SP mode.  Although it appears R* seems to have completely given up on character plot development in favor of protags mindlessly grinding a material treadmill in an endless material acquisition of wealth.....

 

I've come to believe SP was a superficial tutorial which prepped you for what to expect in GTAO.  Because we can now create a customized character before beginning the game.  Which led me to believe that I would be able to create my own char back story in GTAO, based on my character physical attributes. Yet R* has failed to provide supporting online features to make this a reality to date.  So.....

 

1.  if you wanted to begin GTAO playing as a dirty cop who is trying to rise to the top of the crime world and live a double life undercover, you can't.

 

2.  If you wanted to begin GTAO playing as a bored, rich boy who lives in Vinewood and is a wigga wannabe (like Jimmy) and likes to hang out balling in your free time with NPC homies in the hood representing, you can't.

 

3.  If you wanted to begin GTAO playing as a straight cop LCPDFR style you can't. 

 

4.  If you wanted to begin GTAO playing as an aspiring business man making a 100% "clean" living aka establishing a business empire by acquiring properties from non criminal means by doing SA style side missions (like driving trucks/freight missions, doing courier bike missions, etc. etc.) to ultimately buy properties you can't.

 

5.  If you wanted to begin GTAO playing as an aspiring gang banger or crew who would prey in FM on n00bs and virgins who prefer to do #1 - #4 in GTAO, YOU CAN'T.

 

See how limited and frustrating GTAO game play has been designed to be?

 

 

Which leaves me wondering on R* mixed messages to the fan base with GTAO features.  If SP lacked importance in GTAO, then what's the point of that creation menu feature? If my char is a couch potato, then how the f*ck can he nimbly climb up the side of a vertical mountain in FM? Why should he be limited to only doing criminal mission oriented activities (jacking cars in FM/missions etc) if I customize his char to 16 hrs a day making a living from "honest" jobs? Why does he constantly look like a meth/crack head, if I've set the number of hours he can sleep to 12 hrs daily etc. etc.

 

The only RP option available to date is beginning GTAO as an unknown, but street savvy common street thug. Who has had the fortune to meet Lamar on LifeInvader and then gets to grind missions and races to death.  And since your char is extremely ambitious, they might turn to other superior means of making money (aka counterfeit via money glitching), because they don't care to waste hours on mindless grind due to nerfed mission payouts.  But regardless of the method used (shark cards, legally grinding missions, or just glitching) your still can't have the content you really want unless you unlock it first.  And when you do, it's most likely NOT going to be tactical stuff you can use to advance faster in the game (e.g a machine gun, better weapons, chopper, tank etc).  This is the unsatisfying reality of GTAO, regardless of how bloated your bank account may be.  Which really makes the game difficult to enjoy from an immersion perspective, since R* designed it to revolve around the material acquisition of wealth.

 

Also are you referring to SP or online mode here? Because next to a diverse variety of non related side missions & activities, the main mission plot/character back stories are what make SP. GTA III, VC and SA are perfect examples of this. GTA IV only for it's physics engine, greater vehicle variety, more sandbox style features (dating, working attractions like comedy club etc) and gritty realism.  A realism which I'll admit was downright depressing because of the protagonist. While a likeable, Niko's back story and personality were too serious for my taste.  However his char was consistent with his former life/back story and the SP plot was immersive enough to constantly support this.  But while extremely realistic, GTA IV game play lacked the lighthearted fun and spontenaeity of SA, and so didn't inspire me to play immediately after completing it.  At least not without a ton of mods anyways.

[ThatGr]

I'd prefer a remade and improved GTA IV over GTA V any day... I can't relate to Vs characters. I still want to know more about Niko, but frankly, I couldn't give a flying f*ck whether Michael, Trevor, or Franklin died or what their backstories were because having 3 characters (for me)  meant I couldn't immerse myself

 

GTA V was stupid and could have been so much better if they didn't try to make GTA:O some kind of revolutionary update, they could have added all those ideas to single player too!

[CantThinkOfOne2013]

Can someone please explain to me how they can ignore all of a games major flaws just because said game has a great story?

[Official General]

Can someone please explain to me how they can ignore all of a games major flaws just because said game has a great story?

Let this sh*t go. Just accept that for many on here, GTA IV is preferred to GTA V, even though it should have been the other way around.

And believe me, IV has heavily criticized on here so many times, as recently as just before V was released. Every flaw that IV has, has been analyzed on here in countless discussions. I would know because I took part in them. That answers your question

[Officer Ronson]

@OfficialGeneral?

 

Many? All I see is either you, SonOfLiberty or Xstingray, and ocassionaly some random joe that never appears again.

[Algonquin Assassin]

@OfficialGeneral?

 

Many? All I see is either you, SonOfLiberty or Xstingray, and ocassionaly some random joe that never appears again.

 

I take it you don't visit the GTA IV forum very much then.