Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

I Was Too Nostalgic For Quite Some Time - Not Anymore

96 replies to this topic
saintsrow
  • saintsrow

    Dime store angel of death

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2006
  • None
  • Best Story/Poem 2015 [The "I Love Karen Daniels" fanfic]

#61

Posted 14 December 2013 - 09:39 PM

Maybe Yoga is not the best point, Yoga is really sth R* could have left out from the game, it doesn't add much if anything to the experience. Sorry but it's true I think.

The weird thing is that Rockstar marketing made a point of talking about yoga early in the hype train.  That's like making a big pre-release marketing hoopla about darts or bowling or that f'king button-mashing dancing crap that we had to do in GTA-SA and GTA IV.  I didn't understand why Rockstar marketing promoted yoga so much back then, but in retrospect, maybe it's because there were very few other gameplay functions to brag about. 

 

I could see making a bigger marketing push about golf, because there is a fully-realized golf course, and a golf mini-game has the potential for some actual skill development and stats and scoring. 

 

If GTAV had been full of many rich activities and gameplay functions, like we hyped ourselves into believing pre-release, I would have gladly excused and forgotten about yoga.  But instead, yoga is a symbol of the hype deflation that many of us experienced.  :/


Emmi
  • Emmi

    Li'l G Loc

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 09 Jun 2012

#62

Posted 14 December 2013 - 09:50 PM

UPDATED OP: http://gtaforums.com...e/?p=1064293703


Ixnay
  • Ixnay

    bizarro starter kit

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2013
  • None

#63

Posted 14 December 2013 - 10:08 PM

I'm slightly amused (no offense, just saying) by "Yay for positive posts" when the "positive posts" seem to be not much more than "But it LOOKS good." Sure it does. I love the graphics. When I first started it, I was blown away, and I thought, "Hoo boy, this is going to be everything the previous games were and more!" Nope. Not for me, anyway.

  • Official General, HaythamKenway, latigreblue and 2 others like this

Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#64

Posted 14 December 2013 - 10:09 PM Edited by Official General, 14 December 2013 - 10:12 PM.

Well most people on here expected much more interiors than there are in the game now, fun and engaging crime side missions like gang wars, gang activity, and drug-dealing, car theft, armed back-up, other stuff like gambling, and being able to choose and buy our own safehouse properties. Now please do tell me what would have been so unrealistic about expecting to see all of that in GTA V, when GTA IV actually contains some of this stuff which V does not have ??  I don't see what was exactly so unrealistic about many of expectations seen on these forums leading up until GTA V's release. Every now and then on here, I see people like you keep saying this sh*t, but it's just baseless, and unfounded.

You were expecting all that, along with everything else, on this generation of 8 year old hardware? The game is barely running as it is. I thought the lack of interiors was disappointing at first, but what could we have really done in them? Just walk in, look around for a minute, and never return again.  Gambling is another feature that would have been fun for less than 3 minutes. If I remember correctly, Rockstar confirmed purchasing safehouse properties wasn't in the game nearly a year before launch anyway. If you were still expecting it after that, you were being unrealistic.
Sorry bro, I aint buying that ready-made, hardware limitation bullsh*t excuse people like you keep making for Rockstar. I'm sure the stuff I mentioned would not have been that much of an issue, it's not complicated and it's far from impossible.

I'm not even gonna respond to your question about interiors. If you still don't know or understand why a decent amount of interiors are important to a GTA environment by now, then it is my conclusion your gameplay experience of GTA is very unimaginative, boring and lacking in taste. As for gambling, I'd still rather have that than yoga any day.

Your comment about properties is bullsh*t. Rockstar cleverly deceived most of us into believing safe house properties were returning. They first said properties in general would not be returning, then they said it was returning. They may not have been very specific but they knew what they were playing at. They just wanted to keep the pre-hype train moving at full speed by manipulating their words. People had good reason to expect safe house properties based on their deception.
  • saintsrow and 2281 like this

So Awesome
  • So Awesome

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013

#65

Posted 14 December 2013 - 10:44 PM

I used to have a yoyo like you.

proof please

Hooves07
  • Hooves07

    Street Cat

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2013
  • None

#66

Posted 14 December 2013 - 11:18 PM Edited by Hooves07, 14 December 2013 - 11:18 PM.

GTA V is good, but it lacks any singleplayer replayability the other games had. If Red Dead could make its smaller world seem more living despite the tech, Then GTA V should have blown me away.

 

I know R* felt limited by the tech, and they should have scaled down a bit. There are so many empty areas that could have been converted to resources. I prefer a smaller living world opposed to a great big empty world. It's as simple as that. I like GTA V, but there is missed opportunity and growth here many people should see. This forum seems all about licking R*s butthole.

 

I am still a fan of the company. I hope they get it back on track on GTA VI or Red Dead Redemption 2.


Rock Howard
  • Rock Howard

    Some Aussie Dude.

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2006
  • Australia

#67

Posted 14 December 2013 - 11:35 PM

I guess the reason why I didn't like GTAV that much at first was that I simply felt too nostalgic about GTA San Andreas. I couldn't see what GTAV is or has to offer until a certain point a few weeks ago. I'm really starting to ABSOLUTELY love GTAV and I also completely changed my mind. It's Rockstars biggest game yet - YES IT IS TO ME and it's Rockstars best game yet - YES IT IS TO ME. I simply love it, I love it! GAME OF THE YEAR 2013 is an understatement for this masterpiece - this has to be GAME OF THE CENTURY and GAME OF THE GENERATION (PS3, Xbox 360). There's of course some downsides to the game - you can't deny but still it's the perfect game for me. In one week from now (once Christmas holidays start for me) I'll start playing this game more hours a day than before. I'll finish the story, complete 100% and try to get the Platinum trophy. Once I did that I'll focus on taking some professional snapmatic pictures and post them here at the forums. I can't wait. The jorney from October 2011 to September 2013 was an amazing one. 2013 was an amazing year in gaming and the best is yet to come. I'm already looking forward to the story mode DLC Rockstar teased for 2014. Once Rockstar starts giving us more details and assets on that big DLC (and other upcoming GTAV stuff, etc. or other stuff from them) it will all feel like in October 2011 and beyond. I can't wait for this journey - can you?

 

Thank you Rockstar Games for amazing times since 1998!

 

PS. Thanks for the appreciation to this thread all!

 

Found a one of a kind picture from user (http://gtaforums.com...0186-henning92/) speaks for itself I think ...

also it should make the never-tiring "haters" think about it one more time ... can this game really be treated like that?

 

0_0.jpg

Agreed. What we have here is true ARCADE QUALITY at home.


Wolfhuman
  • Wolfhuman

    crush on Amanda De Santa.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 May 2008
  • None

#68

Posted 14 December 2013 - 11:46 PM

 

I guess the reason why I didn't like GTAV that much at first was that I simply felt too nostalgic about GTA San Andreas. I couldn't see what GTAV is or has to offer until a certain point a few weeks ago. I'm really starting to ABSOLUTELY love GTAV and I also completely changed my mind. It's Rockstars biggest game yet - YES IT IS TO ME and it's Rockstars best game yet - YES IT IS TO ME. I simply love it, I love it! GAME OF THE YEAR 2013 is an understatement for this masterpiece - this has to be GAME OF THE CENTURY and GAME OF THE GENERATION (PS3, Xbox 360). There's of course some downsides to the game - you can't deny but still it's the perfect game for me. In one week from now (once Christmas holidays start for me) I'll start playing this game more hours a day than before. I'll finish the story, complete 100% and try to get the Platinum trophy. Once I did that I'll focus on taking some professional snapmatic pictures and post them here at the forums. I can't wait. The jorney from October 2011 to September 2013 was an amazing one. 2013 was an amazing year in gaming and the best is yet to come. I'm already looking forward to the story mode DLC Rockstar teased for 2014. Once Rockstar starts giving us more details and assets on that big DLC (and other upcoming GTAV stuff, etc. or other stuff from them) it will all feel like in October 2011 and beyond. I can't wait for this journey - can you?

 

Thank you Rockstar Games for amazing times since 1998!

 

PS. Thanks for the appreciation to this thread all!

 

Found a one of a kind picture from user (http://gtaforums.com...0186-henning92/) speaks for itself I think ...

also it should make the never-tiring "haters" think about it one more time ... can this game really be treated like that?

 

0_0.jpg

Agreed. What we have here is true ARCADE QUALITY at home.

 

 

jack-nicholson-stare_o_GIFSoup.com_.gif


shattered-minds
  • shattered-minds

    Lovely chap

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 May 2007
  • United-Kingdom

#69

Posted 15 December 2013 - 12:45 AM Edited by shattered-minds, 15 December 2013 - 12:46 AM.

It is a brilliant game, but it is far from perfect. It's only marred by missed opportunities and under developed ideas.

The problem any game that offers freedom has, is the more it gives you, the more you realise the game's limitations. You think to yourself "this is amazing! I can do this, and this, and this and th- hang on, why can't I rob a train!?" You then start to focus on all the things that you can't do or aren't in the game. You wouldn't do that in a racing game, or a corridor shooter, but in a big sprawling city where you can do almost anything, you begin to realise the "almost" a lot more.

Why can't we go in interiors? I get the impression it is due to hardware limitations, having the consoles draw the detailed city as well as those detailed interiors so that there'd be no loading probably is asking a bit too much of them, my ps3 struggles to keep up as it is without throwing interiors into the mix.

Those kind of things I can let go. What they did manage to pull off with 7 year old tech is commendable. But then there is the issue of things like the heist planning. We didn't get to plan them the way we want, what we got was a series of binary choices. There was also this thing of hiring extra members, who would level up the more we used them. Except we didn't get to use them often at all. So it was ultimately pointless. Police AI is also far too all-knowing with a response time that boarders on something out of The Minority Report.

Anyway, enough negativity. Despite these problems the game is still mega fun to play. The driving is fun, the missions were (mostly) fun and never felt like the same 5 or 6 mission types over and over. The world is incredibly detailed. You can drive around and spot something new every time.

Anyway, if you made it this far thanks for reading.

TL:DNR; Not perfect but still great game.

Deadly Target
  • Deadly Target

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010

#70

Posted 15 December 2013 - 08:47 AM

Sorry bro, I aint buying that ready-made, hardware limitation bullsh*t excuse people like you keep making for Rockstar. I'm sure the stuff I mentioned would not have been that much of an issue, it's not complicated and it's far from impossible.

I'm not even gonna respond to your question about interiors. If you still don't know or understand why a decent amount of interiors are important to a GTA environment by now, then it is my conclusion your gameplay experience of GTA is very unimaginative, boring and lacking in taste. As for gambling, I'd still rather have that than yoga any day.

Your comment about properties is bullsh*t. Rockstar cleverly deceived most of us into believing safe house properties were returning. They first said properties in general would not be returning, then they said it was returning. They may not have been very specific but they knew what they were playing at. They just wanted to keep the pre-hype train moving at full speed by manipulating their words. People had good reason to expect safe house properties based on their deception.

I'm sorry you ain't buying it bro, but console limitations is a very real problem. It's most likely the reason Rockstar only included interiors that were essential to gameplay. While Burger Shot and hospital interiors would've been nice, they wouldn't have served any purpose in gameplay.

Rockstar weren't trying to be clever about purchasing safehouses either. If you had read the interviews, you'd know they were actually quite up front about it. The Gameinformer preview in particular had Dan Houser straight out telling us features that weren't going to be in the game, when they could have easily gone around those questions.

If you truly need interiors everywhere you go, with side missions telling you what to do in order to have fun in a GTA game, you are a very unimaginative person.

TeCNeEk
  • TeCNeEk

    GTA Legend

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2013

#71

Posted 15 December 2013 - 09:18 AM

RDR is R*'s Masterpiece imo. GTA V is amazing though.


TheOtherRyan
  • TheOtherRyan

    Soviet Connection

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

#72

Posted 15 December 2013 - 12:28 PM


 


 


 


Nostalgia comes with time my friend.  give it a year or two or three and the second you hear "skeletons by stevie wonder", you'll immediately reflect back to gtaV.
 
I noticed it's already starting with me a bit 

 
I have serious nostalgia whenever I hear 'Ogdens Gone Flake' (or whatever it's called - song from the 1st trailer) as well as 'Skeletons', but when GTA VI arrives, I'm not going to be all..."herp derp worst game ever..not enough yoga..f*ck you lazy cockstar...etc etc".
 
And, "wtf cockctar cops are too easy bring bak V cops!!!!"
 
 
And let's not forget..."2 much interiorz...waste of disc space...we wanted a big map...fuk u lazy cockstar cocks..."
 
Do you remember when people whined about IV not having countryside and now they whine that V has too much? The same thing will happen with interiors and people will complain when there is no yoga like they do with Roman's calls.
I don't agree with that at all. Yoga is GTA V's equivalent to bowling yet how many people seriously complain about bowling not being in GTA V?

I'd say in general most people wouldn't give a flying sh*t about yoga being removed if it is in GTA VI.

spamtackey
  • spamtackey

    Business Socks

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2013

#73

Posted 15 December 2013 - 02:07 PM

 

I'm sorry you ain't buying it bro, but console limitations is a very real problem. It's most likely the reason Rockstar only included interiors that were essential to gameplay. While Burger Shot and hospital interiors would've been nice, they wouldn't have served any purpose in gameplay.

Rockstar weren't trying to be clever about purchasing safehouses either. If you had read the interviews, you'd know they were actually quite up front about it. The Gameinformer preview in particular had Dan Houser straight out telling us features that weren't going to be in the game, when they could have easily gone around those questions.

If you truly need interiors everywhere you go, with side missions telling you what to do in order to have fun in a GTA game, you are a very unimaginative person.

 

 

The problem with the whole 'console limitations' thing is that they really apply only in a few areas. Many elements of game design from today can be applied to games from the past but weren't because of how gaming principles were back then. Is it really impossible for the SNES to have regenerating health or is it simply that at the time design was still evolving from its arcade roots? When 3D first came into play, no one really knew how to use it well. Look at the awful controls and the awful design of many N64/PS1 games. We've come so far but how much of it is really technical? Technical limitations do limit things like AI, the number of objects on screen, physics interaction, the overall look of the game, and how large a game can be in the case of the Xbox 360, but how much does it really come into play with design? Are those old games simply 'the only way the old systems can do it' or are they a product of a time period or a mixture of both? Likely a mixture because we've found ways around many supposed barriers that exist. Take map sizes for instance. On the PS2 it was a wonder to get San Andreas running. Now GTA V doesn't even have the biggest map around. It pales in comparison to Minecraft with a world potentially greater than the size of the earth and even Just Cause 2. 

 

Interiors we know are very possible. The way that games load the world does allow for more interiors. They don't load a single world but pieces at a time and they do it where it creates an illusion. If that's one thing Rockstar are good at doing it's creating the illusion of a real world where one doesn't exist. Don't tell me you think that the main characters are always loaded and walking around waiting to be found in the game world. It's more likely that there is a random chance they will spawn which increases in certain areas and decreases in others. The character swapping is likely handled a similar way by tracking how long it has been since the character was on screen to determine if they went a far distance or a short one or if they're just going to pick a randomized scenario to find them in. Michael isn't really at home playing games with Jimmy all the time. It just seems that we stumbled in on it when that's how they loaded it based on random choice.  

 

Another way to look at it is this: GTA V's rampages are not all that different from the GTA III / VC rampages. They both give you a weapon. They both spawn certain enemies around you. They both expect you to kill a number of those enemies. GTA III had 20 of these and GTA VC had 35. GTA V had 5. What console limitation prevented them from giving us the objective of 'Kill X number of Type-Of-Dude" more than 5 times? Would the CPU explode if there were 6? Would the graphics suddenly bog down and bug out and never work again? What about an inventory? GTA:O has one. Red Dead Redemption has one. Why can't the hunting mini-game at the very least use one instead of the stupid phone call mechanic if not the full game? What is the technical reason? Unless you can explain these technical reasons then you can't use it as an excuse for any shoddy gameplay in GTA V. It's like saying "the only reason it works is because of magic." because you can't explain how they got something working. 

 

Is GTA V a technical marvel on those systems? Yes. It is amazing the game looks as good as it does and plays smoothly (at least in my experience) on these consoles. I expected a lower draw distance at the very least and more slowdowns and pop-in than I have seen. That said, I definitely believe it could have been better in the gameplay area when given more time. I think the issue with the gameplay was that they ended up rushing the game out to meet next-gen. I suspect that they started later than we believe, experimented in next-gen, cut back on the features to get the game out before next-gen launched and ended up rushing it especially after the delay in order to finish on time while adding some features back in due to fan expectations. It's the only thing that makes sense to me because GTA V, while it is a lot of fun and in no ways a bad game, does not feel like the successor that it ought to.

  • latigreblue likes this

ezfaun
  • ezfaun

    Drive

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2009
  • None

#74

Posted 15 December 2013 - 02:16 PM

I love each and every GTA all the same.

 

I'll remember GTA 3 for paving the way for other great games. GTA VC for it's awesome music and vibe, SA for it's craziness

IV for it's deep background story and GTA V for ending a great generation of consoles with a BANG!!


Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#75

Posted 15 December 2013 - 03:39 PM Edited by Official General, 15 December 2013 - 04:11 PM.

 

Sorry bro, I aint buying that ready-made, hardware limitation bullsh*t excuse people like you keep making for Rockstar. I'm sure the stuff I mentioned would not have been that much of an issue, it's not complicated and it's far from impossible.

I'm not even gonna respond to your question about interiors. If you still don't know or understand why a decent amount of interiors are important to a GTA environment by now, then it is my conclusion your gameplay experience of GTA is very unimaginative, boring and lacking in taste. As for gambling, I'd still rather have that than yoga any day.

Your comment about properties is bullsh*t. Rockstar cleverly deceived most of us into believing safe house properties were returning. They first said properties in general would not be returning, then they said it was returning. They may not have been very specific but they knew what they were playing at. They just wanted to keep the pre-hype train moving at full speed by manipulating their words. People had good reason to expect safe house properties based on their deception.

I'm sorry you ain't buying it bro, but console limitations is a very real problem. It's most likely the reason Rockstar only included interiors that were essential to gameplay. While Burger Shot and hospital interiors would've been nice, they wouldn't have served any purpose in gameplay.

Rockstar weren't trying to be clever about purchasing safehouses either. If you had read the interviews, you'd know they were actually quite up front about it. The Gameinformer preview in particular had Dan Houser straight out telling us features that weren't going to be in the game, when they could have easily gone around those questions.

If you truly need interiors everywhere you go, with side missions telling you what to do in order to have fun in a GTA game, you are a very unimaginative person.

 

 

* There were no limitation for stuff like interiors and extra simple gameplay features, I just don't agree mate. It's a matter of we'll agree to disagree, I'm not repeating myself going in circles. 

 

But even if it was down to console limitations, then I think Rockstar should have just scaled the map down, much more than it is now, and they more than likely would have had more resources and technology to work with. They should have put twice as much concentration on the city of Los Santos first and tried to make it as detailed and immersive as much as they could. Most of what they did with LS was to make it very pretty and stunning to look at, and that was mostly it. Rather than that huge map, they should have made LS bigger, made so many interiors for it, and created much more vibrant NPC action and presence in the streets. 

 

When I look back at the game's environment, I consider all of that open space to be a waste anyway, there was not much use for all that countryside and wilderness, and there was not much to do there either. The wildlife nothing to marvel at either. There was hardly any use for underwater, and not much to see or do down there. If they had scaled down the map and concentrated on the main part of a GTA environment (CITY) in this game, I reckon the limitations would not have been so bad (presuming they were there in the first place). 

 

* Sorry, defend them all you want, but Rockstar deceived a lot of people with that property feature issue. I know this, because I followed all the previews and pre-release stuff very closely. I know a lot of people on here will agree with me on this. You can have your opinion, but I know what I saw and read. Again, we can agree to disagree, no point in going circles. 

 

* I don't need interiors everywhere I go in GTA, but it certainly helps with the immersion and fun in the way I play the game a great deal. I don't wanna be always out in the streets killing and destroying everything in sight, that gets repetitive and it's not realistic to always be out in the streets. I like to have close quarter, intense shootouts in an interior, stuff like that. Go into a nightclub, get into an altercation and a shootout, that kind of thing I find great fun.

 

As for side missions ? Well of course I need them to have fun you dummy. I'm not even gonna go into that, you must be very thick and stupid to wonder why anyone would need side missions in a GTA game to have fun. 


LibSity
  • LibSity

    Genetically Superior

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 May 2013

#76

Posted 15 December 2013 - 03:43 PM

I haven't played it in over a month. I haven't even started the last heist yet, that's where I stopped... That's how GTA is, get into it and really excited for a bit, forget about it and let it collect dust, go through another phase where you play it a ton, rinse and repeat.


ezfaun
  • ezfaun

    Drive

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2009
  • None

#77

Posted 15 December 2013 - 03:47 PM

I haven't played it in over a month. I haven't even started the last heist yet, that's where I stopped... That's how GTA is, get into it and really excited for a bit, forget about it and let it collect dust, go through another phase where you play it a ton, rinse and repeat.

Well at least you come back to it. Not like saint's row. Blegghh


Deadly Target
  • Deadly Target

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010

#78

Posted 16 December 2013 - 06:39 AM

Sorry, defend them all you want, but Rockstar deceived a lot of people with that property feature issue. I know this, because I followed all the previews and pre-release stuff very closely. I know a lot of people on here will agree with me on this. You can have your opinion, but I know what I saw and read. Again, we can agree to disagree, no point in going circles.

Could you share the articles where you feel they decieved us? I'd really like to read them, because I don't remember that even being hinted at.
 

I don't need interiors everywhere I go in GTA, but it certainly helps with the immersion and fun in the way I play the game a great deal. I don't wanna be always out in the streets killing and destroying everything in sight, that gets repetitive and it's not realistic to always be out in the streets. I like to have close quarter, intense shootouts in an interior, stuff like that. Go into a nightclub, get into an altercation and a shootout, that kind of thing I find great fun.

If you played The Ballad of Gay Tony, you'd know nightclub shootouts aren't as interesting as they sound. As I've said before, it would've been nice to have the option but it's not a huge loss, especially if it made room for features with greater importance. There's still a handful of interiors you can have shootouts in anyway. Again, we can agree to disagree, no point in going circles.
 

As for side missions ? Well of course I need them to have fun you dummy. I'm not even gonna go into that, you must be very thick and stupid to wonder why anyone would need side missions in a GTA game to have fun.

If you still don't know or understand why there's no need for endless amounts of side activites in a GTA environment by now, then it is my conclusion your gameplay experience of GTA is very unimaginative, boring and lacking in creativity.

And please do refrain from insulting me for no reason, it's not like I insulted you. I don't take kindly to being called thick or stupid.

TheOtherRyan
  • TheOtherRyan

    Soviet Connection

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

#79

Posted 16 December 2013 - 07:24 AM

Even after three playthroughs and a bit of a fourth one something still feels off to me.

I fell head over heels for GTA IV almost immediately and never questioned myself about it, but I do that all the time with GTA V. I sit there playing it thinking "why couldn't they have done that better?".

For me it's not nostalgia. I've given plenty of time to GTA V and whilst things have grown on me it's still not right.
  • saintsrow likes this

Jimmy Boston
  • Jimmy Boston

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2013

#80

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:12 PM Edited by Jimmy Boston, 16 December 2013 - 01:16 PM.

I played III, VC and SA when they were new. I really enjoyed III, VC was my favorite and I spent the most time on it, but I got bored of SA and never finished it (don't remember why, maybe it was too spread out or I just moved on to something else).

I skipped IV even when it was in the bargain bin, partly because of the disappointment in SA and the reviews of IV made it sound a lot different then the older games. Instead, I played a lot of JC2 for sandbox mayhem, even though I got nowhere in the story.

Now I've got GTA V, and I really enjoy it. It brings back the feeling I had the first time in VC. I was thinking about picking up VC for ipad, but every time I look at the old videos and screenshots, I know my nostalgic memory will be ruined by playing it again. So, I've skipped going back to VC to avoid that problem.

For me, I try to think of GTA V as if it's a completely new game without the baggage of the past. Imagine someone new to the series playing V for the first time. On it's own, V is great fun to play and there's not much out there like it. It's not perfect, but most of the negative comments I see are about missing features or things done differently when compared to a nostalgic memory of the older games.

So, I finished the story of GTA V and it left me wanting more single player. Until new DLC comes out, I decided to finally go back try GTA IV for the first time. So far, IV is quite tough to continue playing through after playing V and reading all the nostalgic praise for IV. I'm slogging through it, but there are only a few minor points where I've noticed a IV feature missing from V that would've been nice to have. After hearing about the amazing physics of IV, all I see is cartoony exaggerated bodyroll, understeer and a horrible driving camera. Maybe it's good for drifting or something, but I shouldn't need the handbrake on every tight turn. Sure GTA V is arcade drving, but it's a lot more fun free-roam cruising and racing. Overall as a gaming experience, V gave me a much higher level of enjoyment and desire to keep playing and see more, where IV is kind of a chore to play through so far and I'm hoping it's worth it to get through to the good parts.

I'm sure it would have been better years ago before having played V. I'll continue on to see where it goes and I hear EFLC might be better, but now I can't wait to get through IV and back to spending more time on V.

  • Officer Ronson likes this

Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#81

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:45 PM Edited by Official General, 16 December 2013 - 06:36 PM.

@ Deadly Target

 

 

Could you share the articles where you feel they decieved us? I'd really like to read them, because I don't remember that even being hinted at.

 

 

You use your brain and Google the earlier previews of GTA V, this was all quite a good while ago man, I've no reason to lie to you and make it up. All Rockstar needed to say was that the property feature was back in the game, which they definitely said in previews. Yeah sure, they were very clever with their use of words, but they never specified whether this property feature did or did not include safehouse properties, but it is understandable to see why many people would have been led to believe that it did. Dan Houser beaming with excitement stated, "properties are back in". Okay congratulations you and others were so clever not to fall for it, but many people did and with good reason. If you still wanna argue that, fine, but most people with common sense would understand what I mean. 

 

 

If you played The Ballad of Gay Tony, you'd know nightclub shootouts aren't as interesting as they sound. As I've said before, it would've been nice to have the option but it's not a huge loss, especially if it made room for features with greater importance. There's still a handful of interiors you can have shootouts in anyway. Again, we can agree to disagree, no point in going circles.

 

 

Oh so you know what is and what is not interesting and fun to me in GTA know do you ? I never realized you were the one makes me decide my preferences and tastes in GTA. Nightclub shootouts and other interior shootouts are of major fun and interest in GTA to me, I spent a great deal of my free roam time doing that stuff in GTA IV and EFLC and I loved the missions that had it too. But I'm not going into this any further man, I've explained this to you already. 

 

 

 

If you still don't know or understand why there's no need for endless amounts of side activites in a GTA environment by now, then it is my conclusion your gameplay experience of GTA is very unimaginative, boring and lacking in creativity.

 
And please do refrain from insulting me for no reason, it's not like I insulted you. I don't take kindly to being called thick or stupid.

 

Well if you still don't understand why interiors are so important to the gameplay, then I cannot help you, I'm sorry but it ends there. 

 

I never directly said that about you, it was subject to certain conditions. I stated if you did not understand what I meant, then you must be incredibly thick or stupid. But if you felt you understood what I had meant, then the insult does not apply to you does it ? Exactly. But if that still upsets you and gets you all emotional, I will refrain from doing so. 


 

I fell head over heels for GTA IV almost immediately and never questioned myself about it, but I do that all the time with GTA V. I sit there playing it thinking "why couldn't they have done that better?".

 
For me it's not nostalgia. I've given plenty of time to GTA V and whilst things have grown on me it's still not right. 

 

@ Son of Liberty

 

Yep, me too  :^:


Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#82

Posted 16 December 2013 - 01:52 PM

Oh so you know what is and what is not interesting and fun to me in GTA know do you ? 

 

You seem to have a pretty strong opinion on what other people should want in the game, and if they don't match that, you claim they're riding R*'s dick. Don't be a hypocrite. Not everyone that enjoys the game has a gob full of R*'s nob, seen?

 

As someone else stated earlier in this thread - can't you just let one positive thread slide and let people that enjoy the game... enjoy it?

 

I didn't want gang wars in V and by golly, I'm glad as f*ck they're not in. Some people are unhappy about that (you, as we've heard ad infinitum), others are happy. Yay. Equilibrium. 


Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#83

Posted 16 December 2013 - 02:02 PM Edited by Official General, 16 December 2013 - 02:02 PM.

 

Oh so you know what is and what is not interesting and fun to me in GTA know do you ? 

 

You seem to have a pretty strong opinion on what other people should want in the game, and if they don't match that, you claim they're riding R*'s dick. Don't be a hypocrite. Not everyone that enjoys the game has a gob full of R*'s nob, seen?

 

As someone else stated earlier in this thread - can't you just let one positive thread slide and let people that enjoy the game... enjoy it?

 

I didn't want gang wars in V and by golly, I'm glad as f*ck they're not in. Some people are unhappy about that (you, as we've heard ad infinitum), others are happy. Yay. Equilibrium. 

 

 

That's bullsh*t. And I am not a hypocrite. I have only stated that people are d*ckriding Rockstar whenever there are significant flaws clearly pointed out in a GTA game ( namely GTA V ), and yet they still defend Rockstar and make excuses for them. I've never said anyone was a d*ckrider just for having a personal preference of things they like in GTA. Nah, I refute your claims, not true at all. 

 

I've played it and I've enjoyed what I can out of it, and now I will analyze, discuss and criticize it, on these forums. If you don't like my posts or even looking at them, you can put them in your ignore section. I did that with niko bellic half brother yesterday, I had enough of his recycled bullsh*t. Please, don't let me stop you doing the same with my comments. 

 

If you don't like gang wars, then fine. I'm not gonna knock you for that, and I have not knocked anyone for not liking it. I only challenge people on that when they stupid sh*t like "oooh this is not San Andreas", or "Franklin's is not in a gang anymore", because they are bullsh*t excuses and invalid responses. Other than that, you don't like gang wars ? Cool, your entitled not like that stuff in GTA. 


Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#84

Posted 16 December 2013 - 02:17 PM

 

 I only challenge people on that when they stupid sh*t like "oooh this is not San Andreas", or "Franklin's is not in a gang anymore", because they are bullsh*t excuses and invalid responses.

 

 

Those are completely valid responses. 

 

1. It IS NOT SAN ANDREAS. It's a new game. It has a different vision and isn't trying to tell the same story as was told in San Andreas. It's really that simple. R* moved on. Fans can probably take a lesson away from that themselves. 

 

2. He is trying to leave gang life behind. CJ wasn't. So, why focus on something that has no relevance to his 'get out of the ghetto' story? He is trying to distance himself... the only reason he keeps coming back is because of his loser buddy Lamar, who, had he had his own game, probably would have had all those features you want.

 

But he didn't. 

 

So he doesn't. 

 

So neither do you. 

 

GTA V. It's a new world, a new story, with new characters. Rehashing existing features so that the game is exactly like one we've all played to death already would have been an exercise in tedium. Sure, some fans would have been happy - more wouldn't. I see the majority of people here being more forward thinking and interested in innovation than in playing an HD version of a game they've waxed several years in. 

 

Nostalgia is a terrible thing, and it's not what it used to be. 


Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#85

Posted 16 December 2013 - 02:24 PM Edited by Official General, 16 December 2013 - 02:28 PM.

 

 

 I only challenge people on that when they stupid sh*t like "oooh this is not San Andreas", or "Franklin's is not in a gang anymore", because they are bullsh*t excuses and invalid responses.

 

 

Those are completely valid responses. 

 

1. It IS NOT SAN ANDREAS. It's a new game. It has a different vision and isn't trying to tell the same story as was told in San Andreas. It's really that simple. R* moved on. Fans can probably take a lesson away from that themselves. 

 

2. He is trying to leave gang life behind. CJ wasn't. So, why focus on something that has no relevance to his 'get out of the ghetto' story? He is trying to distance himself... the only reason he keeps coming back is because of his loser buddy Lamar, who, had he had his own game, probably would have had all those features you want.

 

But he didn't. 

 

So he doesn't. 

 

So neither do you. 

 

GTA V. It's a new world, a new story, with new characters. Rehashing existing features so that the game is exactly like one we've all played to death already would have been an exercise in tedium. Sure, some fans would have been happy - more wouldn't. I see the majority of people here being more forward thinking and interested in innovation than in playing an HD version of a game they've waxed several years in. 

 

Nostalgia is a terrible thing, and it's not what it used to be. 

 

 

I don't like repeating this. I have never wanted another San Andreas for GTA V, never. I initially wanted a Hispanic protag and Mexican drug cartel theme before the game's general facts were announced. Please don't let me keep repeating this to you bro, I've written it so many times. 

 

I don't have nostalgia for SA, it's not even my favorite GTA title (it comes 2nd). I just wanted that features that were fun and interesting to me in the game, like many others did too. Gang wars is not exclusive to SA, it was always in some form or another in most previous GTAs. 

 

I don't think that's an excuse bruv. Franklin was implied to be involved in all that gang action in his trailer. If Franklin was gonna be nothing like that, Rockstar should have shown something else. Even the most hardened Rockstar defender would admit that. Come on, stop being so stubborn. If you still disagree, fine, I'll just leave it at that. 


Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#86

Posted 16 December 2013 - 02:40 PM

I do still disagree. They were trying to show his past, and the surroundings of his present, not what he would be doing in the game, or what his future would hold. 


Uncle Cletus
  • Uncle Cletus

    IRRITABLE

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2005

#87

Posted 16 December 2013 - 02:42 PM

It doesn't help to like the game in the GTA V forum at the moment when there's a mod here who simply wants to push GTA4 as the superior title and stifle discussion. I risk a warning for telling you that much.

 

I've gone too far. I think I've gone too far...

 

Remember me.


Celticfang
  • Celticfang

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2008

#88

Posted 16 December 2013 - 02:46 PM

^ So if there'd be a Lamar and somebody Episodes From..... type of DLC would some people then turn right around and whine on here OMG ITS NOT SAN ANDREAS 2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111111111!!!!!111oneleventyonemillion

SA was a good game for its time, nine, nearly ten calendar years ago but games move on. So why do some people want V to be a carbon copy remake of SA? It's a whole other setting though. It's a good setting as well.

They should go to KS, start up a kickstarter for it and they'd get a lot of money from SA fans.

Though having said that I don't really care MUCH for interiors outside of missions or that don't have a purpose. What's the use of a completely static nightclub interior you can't interact with? Or a static Burger Shot interior that you can't even sit in? R* made choices for a reason, things get cut from games because of various reasons (Not always DLC before anyone leaps on that bandwagon...Did the fingerless gloves ever come out as DLC? What about climbing telephone poles?)

At the end of the day the devs, managers and publishers have to balance features with fun. Fuel system, for example.

That's a problem with games. The more 'realistic' they become, the more they stop being fun and start being dull. Again, hunger system from SA (ignoring the fact you could easily gitch that out)

Let's say they did put in gang wars but found it boring and dull (which with a badly coded system would be possible) so they scrapped it without saying why (Hey it's their code after all and mostly development goes on without people knowing, they just assume a game's being worked on), people would be all ZOMG COCKSTAH WHY DID U REMOEV GAMG WARZ??!

Or, Roman's calls in IV. Dull and annoying yes?


blowtorchrepair
  • blowtorchrepair

    Mack Pimp

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2009
  • None

#89

Posted 16 December 2013 - 03:02 PM

I couldn't agree more with the OP.  While SP is great I missed a few things from IV, like actually looking out the back window of the vehicle when rear viewing in hood cam mode while driving, for instance...  and I missed a simplistic, classic-IV-freemode online b/c GTAO simply was too much for me to immediately process and fully receive and appreciate (not to mention the clusterfark weeks that followed its release).

 

I even emailed R* requesting a return of a IV-era freemode game option, but now I retract that request.  The new FLIR cam in the helis and how the passenger can control the heli's weapons is AWESOME... my buddy and I didn't realize this until about a week ago. 

 

I enjoy online racing in GTAO more than I have ever enjoyed racing in other big-named racing sims.  

 

This game DOMINATES and will continue to do so as the rest of the pieces fall into place.

 

GTA V = PROOF OF GAWDDDDDD...   :)


Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#90

Posted 16 December 2013 - 03:56 PM Edited by Official General, 16 December 2013 - 04:08 PM.

I do still disagree. They were trying to show his past, and the surroundings of his present, not what he would be doing in the game, or what his future would hold. 

 

 

What's all this talk about his past and future ?? I don't know what all that has to do with his trailer. 

 

All I know is that Franklin's trailer clearly implied there was going to lots of explosive gang action in the hood, it was depicting what happened in his story at the present time within the game, there is really nothing else to it. I really cannot see which other way it could have been logically interpreted. In my view, you are just trying make it sound deeper than it really was and you also appear to be making things up too. 

 

That is a piss-poor excuse you came up with to back your opinion. But you are still entitled to it. 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users