Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

GTA V doesn't feel like a GTA?

149 replies to this topic
knowledge709
  • knowledge709

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2013

#121

Posted 14 April 2014 - 10:53 PM

driving Motorcycles in IV was way more realistic.


Ash_735
  • Ash_735

    1 627 826 3789

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2005
  • None
  • Most Knowledgeable [GTA] 2013
    Best Map 2013 "ViceCityStories PC Edition"

#122

Posted 14 April 2014 - 11:01 PM

driving Motorcycles in IV was way more realistic.


Yeah, extremely realistic as in, who let this old man with arthritis and can't balance ride this motorcycle. Not to mention the fact that the slightest bump would send Niko flying, at least they fixed that in TLAD so riding motorcycles wasn't a chore.

Not saying GTAV is great either, riding motorcycles there feels just plain. TLAD had it best, shame it's the most hated thing regarding GTA since GTA Advanced and most people refused to play it to even notice.

Deji
  • Deji

    Coding like a Rockstar!

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2007
  • None

#123

Posted 14 April 2014 - 11:10 PM

I can't really pin point it but I think one of the obvious things that throws it off for me is the fact there isn't really a distinctive theme song for V; III, San Andreas, Vice City , IV all had those amazing theme songs, there is other things that make it feel like a different franchise to me but I'm really not sure what they are. 

 

I'll ignore the fact this post has all the usual traits of fixation on one particular game... but personally I don't feel IV had a theme song either... it had theme music, yes, kind of like a score, but not a 'theme song'. Still, this is because IV was more cinematically aimed than any GTA before it. And thus, IV broke the "Grand Theft Auto as we know it" trend (not to mention they created an entirely new engine which makes the game feel almost 100% different anyway). But so what? Can't you accept these games individually instead of comparing them to their predecessors and successors?

 

And I already wrote a couple of long-ass posts about how franchises are complete bullcrap (GTAForums censors bullsh*t so lets see if we get lucky) and people take titles, brands and logos way too seriously. They were in this forum though, so they're probably long lost by now.


Raptomex
  • Raptomex

    Listen to Slayer

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2004
  • United-States

#124

Posted 15 April 2014 - 12:33 AM

I think V definitely has the best gameplay in the series but I agree it does feel different from past games. I wouldn't say it feels so different to call it a "reboot" but it definitely feels fresh and I welcome all the improvements. I do miss the intro like previous games but I also loved how the opening in this game worked. They place you right in the middle of a heist.


Brandonn96
  • Brandonn96

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#125

Posted 15 April 2014 - 08:27 AM Edited by Brandonn96, 15 April 2014 - 08:30 AM.

I think V definitely has the best gameplay in the series but I agree it does feel different from past games. I wouldn't say it feels so different to call it a "reboot" but it definitely feels fresh and I welcome all the improvements. I do miss the intro like previous games but I also loved how the opening in this game worked. They place you right in the middle of a heist.

Now that you've brought up the term "reboot" I suppose V does feel like a reboot to me , thematically and structurally it feels like a very new game.

 

 

I can't really pin point it but I think one of the obvious things that throws it off for me is the fact there isn't really a distinctive theme song for V; III, San Andreas, Vice City , IV all had those amazing theme songs, there is other things that make it feel like a different franchise to me but I'm really not sure what they are. 

 

I'll ignore the fact this post has all the usual traits of fixation on one particular game... but personally I don't feel IV had a theme song either... it had theme music, yes, kind of like a score, but not a 'theme song'. Still, this is because IV was more cinematically aimed than any GTA before it. And thus, IV broke the "Grand Theft Auto as we know it" trend (not to mention they created an entirely new engine which makes the game feel almost 100% different anyway). But so what? Can't you accept these games individually instead of comparing them to their predecessors and successors?

 

And I already wrote a couple of long-ass posts about how franchises are complete bullcrap (GTAForums censors bullsh*t so lets see if we get lucky) and people take titles, brands and logos way too seriously. They were in this forum though, so they're probably long lost by now.

 

IMO GTA IV had one of the best theme songs going I'd place "Soviet Connection" above a lot of theme songs in the franchise, and yes I accept it as an individual project but it doesn't mean you can't compare and contrast features from all entries of the series, I don't know what everyone else posting is trying to convey but I'm not aiming to cast negative or positives on anything , just saying it feels like a departure from its predecessors

 


Brandonn96
  • Brandonn96

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#126

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:00 AM

 

Is it just me?, I can't really pin point it but I think one of the obvious things that throws it off for me is the fact there isn't really a distinctive theme song for V; III, San Andreas, Vice City , IV all had those amazing theme songs.

There is a very distinctive theme song, though. Along with a lot of other original composed tracks. In fact, each protagonist had a different artist assigned to them. From the Newswire;

 

"Composers were assigned to each of the game protagonists to create their signature scores. Tangerine Dream’s Edgar Froese created De Santa’s score, Alchemist and Oh No for Clinton’s score, and [Woody] Jackson created Philips’ score. But the music heard at any point during the course of the game or on The Score disc is an amalgamation of the composers’ sounds in a true collaboration."

 

Spoiler

 

But that theme is played ONCE during the whole game


Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Boards Of Canada

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

#127

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:02 AM Edited by Mister Pink, 15 April 2014 - 09:04 AM.

Modern GTA's don't quite feel like GTA's to me because having the game set in the past was this kind of fantasy side of the game.. Everyone wishes they could time travel at some stage and playing Vice City was the closest thing to that in terms of exploring a city in an interesting phase (Miami in the 1980's)

 

GTA has gotten so big now I don't think they'll ever set it in the past. I mean they'll do bold and innovative stuff but it's too big to go back and do some things now. All the kids will complain about not having a cell phone etc if GTA has to go back going to phone boxes. 

 

I still believe there's an early 80's Las Venturas in GTA. A f*cking all-out balls to the wall, rags to riches, action- drama, laced heavily with dark humour and references to the film Casino and subtle references to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. One character is played with missions playing as other characters (possibly playing as your enemy/antagonist for some missions). Rags to riches glory... start off as a peasant, cheap murderer, rise through the criminal underworld with the lights and glam as a backdrop, ruthlessly killing your way to the top, earning tons of cash, buying out competition, massacring bosses in drug wars, gambling in casinos.... it will be a GTA - return to form for those who loved the gameplay of III era with the sophistication, physics and graphics of the HD era. 

 

That may sound cliched or obvious but it's sounds like fun to me. If I want some serious social commentary or realistic TV/film I'd go watch The Wire, not play GTA. 

  • StarFyer, Osho and EM_JAY_86 like this

B Dawg
  • B Dawg

    Looks like the diversion worked!

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2008
  • Bosnia-and-Herzegovina

#128

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:03 AM Edited by B Dawg, 15 April 2014 - 09:04 AM.

 

 

People finna say each GTA doesn't fell like GTA because you want a carbon copy of the last one. You guys need to accept the evolution.

f*ck any evolution that translates into dumbing down gameplay and pleasing 'the masses'

 

f*ck evolution if it means dissapointing sequels for old fans.

 

In fact, why doesn't Saints Row EVOLVE into a GTA IV type game? Why doesn't Call Of Duty EVOLVE into a Classic Battlefield 2 like game? Why should all games have a sh*tty one way evolution direction? Why doesn't GTA remove Auto-Aim for the sake of  'Evolution'? (just an example)

 

GTA has always been mainstream and a mass market game. It was never some over complicated that game that only appealed to certain elitists. I hate to tell you this but ever since VC you have been playing a mainstream game. I know it's hard to face but you have liked the same thing the massed liked. 

GTA has always been a mainstream game obviously, and IV wasn't over complicated, and GTA was never an easy, super friendly franchise with too many aiding mechanics. IV might have been harder game mechanics wise, but it's missions were easier, so there's balance. GTA took a direction too many other franchises already took, and it's no longer unique.

  • Mister Pink likes this

Osho
  • Osho

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#129

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:10 AM

Can't you accept these games individually instead of comparing them to their predecessors and successors?

 

This is a video game.

If I ask you, have you never compared any game earlier?

I will expect an answer, YES. That means, you start comparing ONLY when you feel that there's something troubling you playing the game.

 

I still go back, play GTA III after playing GTA VC. Same goes for GTA SA when it released and even GTA IV was a lot better than GTA V, applying the most improvements with only few cutbacks, that didn't matter alot, since it was shown beautifully with a good map and plenty of "GTA" feel to it

 

Criticisms are a component of every new released GTA, but GTA V remains (for me) to be the most weakest addition to the series, for a bunch of "UNEXPECTED" changes that I never dreamed to be absent or taken a step back.

  • Mister Pink likes this

Deji
  • Deji

    Coding like a Rockstar!

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2007
  • None

#130

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:23 AM Edited by Deji, 15 April 2014 - 09:25 AM.

IMO GTA IV had one of the best theme songs going I'd place "Soviet Connection" above a lot of theme songs in the franchise, and yes I accept it as an individual project but it doesn't mean you can't compare and contrast features from all entries of the series, I don't know what everyone else posting is trying to convey but I'm not aiming to cast negative or positives on anything , just saying it feels like a departure from its predecessors

 

Well, on the other hand, I do indeed remember that "Welcome to Los Santos" theme. I'm not sure how many times in the game I heard it or what, but it made me think "wow, contemporary west coast hip-hop GTASA theme remix" - which is what it is (in fact, the whole game feels like a GTASA remix - which is interesting since IV felt nothing like III). But we can simply accept that theme tunes aren't really cool anyway. I'm sure whatever is designated as a theme song could appear on every damn loading screen, but that would get annoying and boring. It pretty much did with every game before it... R* are a richer company now with a bigger budget to spend on lots of variations of music...

 

 

 

Can't you accept these games individually instead of comparing them to their predecessors and successors?

 

This is a video game.

If I ask you, have you never compared any game earlier?

I will expect an answer, YES. That means, you start comparing ONLY when you feel that there's something troubling you playing the game.

 

I still go back, play GTA III after playing GTA VC. Same goes for GTA SA when it released and even GTA IV was a lot better than GTA V, applying the most improvements with only few cutbacks, that didn't matter alot, since it was shown beautifully with a good map and plenty of "GTA" feel to it

 

Criticisms are a component of every new released GTA, but GTA V remains (for me) to be the most weakest addition to the series, for a bunch of "UNEXPECTED" changes that I never dreamed to be absent or taken a step back.

 

 

Criticism may be a component of every released GTA, but I ask... is that a good thing? Nah...

 

GTA V remains (for the mass market) the strongest addition to the series. Some people can disagree, but it won't affect anything real. The only real truth is that GTA V was a success, which means there will most likely be another game in the series. If you had it your way, V would have never been bought by anyone as some weird sign of resentment to R*'s efforts and as a result they would have had to go back to cheap re-creations of older titles all so you can have some "EXPECTED" content. I swear successors in a series are supposed to do the unexpected though... else GTA would have died years ago because they would have no engine to run it on since the engine used from III to SA was bought by EA...

 

I have compared earlier games before, but not for the purpose of butchering the current. This is like the drama that was caused over the ending of "How I Met Your Mother" - fandom gets too strong and the fans can't even accept the decisions of the creators of the very thing they're a fan of. It's fine to compare, but when that comparison is for the very point of de-valuing the successor, it's usually wrong...

 

and even GTA IV was a lot better than GTA V, applying the most improvements with only few cutbacks

 

That's a terrible statement, because IV and V are so similar it's unbef*ckinlievable. I remember a project bringing V's San Andreas to IV... it's possible because they're using the same damn engine (except IV's is outdated now) with very similar mechanics. The most different game of the series is IV for completely changing the direction of GTA, but V fits the direction it was heading completely, especially considering it's supposed to be more SA-ish. But the proof is in the product. If it wasn't true, R* wouldn't have made it.


Phoenix_Poop
  • Phoenix_Poop

    Player hater or hater player, or what?

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013
  • Sweden

#131

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:46 AM

Well yes, it is different. Its because GTA V brings out a new type of GTA game, the way everything is set. 


Osho
  • Osho

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#132

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:52 AM

Criticism may be a component of every released GTA, but I ask... is that a good thing? Nah...

 

Yes. Isn't it? 

If not, then I won't argue further on this subject.

 

 
and even GTA IV was a lot better than GTA V, applying the most improvements with only few cutbacks

 

 

That's a terrible statement, because IV and V are so similar it's unbef*ckinlievable. I remember a project bringing V's San Andreas to IV... it's possible because they're using the same damn engine (except IV's is outdated now) with very similar mechanics. The most different game of the series is IV for completely changing the direction of GTA, but V fits the direction it was heading completely, especially considering it's supposed to be more SA-ish. But the proof is in the product. If it wasn't true, R* wouldn't have made it.

 

I guess, you are picking the technical aspects and my reply was referred to "GTA" gameplay.

 

May I know what's so shocktog in me saying GTA IV was a good deal better than GTA V?

I clearly see GTA IV brought a change, but not as terrible as GTA V. I was never a part of criticizing GTA IV when it was released and enjoyed the additions and improvements it brought in. It's not the case with V, when you can clearly notice that so many things are either absent or players expectations are simply not met. Let only the more important updates still pending to be released from Rockstar's Busy Schedule(s) after almost 7 months since release.

 

Can you mention any previous GTA from Rockstar that annoyed you so much in begging for the most basic features available in the game as early as possible, just because GTA ONLINE comes first, for so many updates in the priority list?


Deji
  • Deji

    Coding like a Rockstar!

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2007
  • None

#133

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:27 PM Edited by Deji, 15 April 2014 - 01:35 PM.

Yes. Isn't it? 
If not, then I won't argue further on this subject.


It's contradiction. GTA IV's changes are acceptable, but GTA V's aren't? No matter how terrible or good those changes are, it's not relevant whether GTA V feels like GTA or not. GTA's have gone through many generations of huge change, so the point is, on summary, do you like GTA V? If you don't, then it's not because it isn't "as good as the rest" or "not GTA", but because you simply don't like it. Either that, or you're only judging the game based on it's predecessors, which is again not the right way to judge a game, because a franchise is just illusionary (else we should still be playing it in top-down 2D).
 
 

and even GTA IV was a lot better than GTA V, applying the most improvements with only few cutbacks



A change is still a change. So IV's change wasn't 'better' than V's change in terms of the series, because they both change something so they both detract from the rest of the series (little different to enhancing something which was already part of it). They change a huge amount of things in the transition to a new engine, because less of what worked on the old engine would work on the new one. Technical changes are related to the gameplay aspects as well. It definitely felt much different. Contrast V's changes since IV and it's nowhere near as substantial, but it's still a greatly different game - with huge engine modifications (which didn't happen as much from III-VC-SA as they could only get so far with RenderWare plugins). And so, not everything that worked on the previous game would work on this. Hence, they titled it "GTA V" instead of "GTA: Something Something" as their weird R* logic goes...

 
 

I guess, you are picking the technical aspects and my reply was referred to "GTA" gameplay.



I didn't like IV, as it's own game. At the time, I also felt it was the changes from SA making it feel "not like GTA", but I came to realise that I shouldn't judge in contrast to the rest of the series. As it's own game, it somehow seems a little better, but I still didn't want to play it again (though I play plenty of good games and never want to re-play - I'm just not really a 'gamer').

Playing V, I reminded myself not to judge it based on the rest of the series.. but then it seemed to throw so much damn nostalgia in my face (I only played like 30% but already it's just like "YOU RECOGNIZE THIS REFERENCE?!!!!") that it was hard not to compare it to GTASA. Kinda weird to compare it to a game released in 2004. But guess what? V is a better game. That may just be the advantage of almost 10 years, but it definitely means V has value within the series. However, with the power of nostalgia and bad fanboyism, I would say that GTASA was still better. Weird, eh?
 

May I know what's so shocktog in me saying GTA IV was a good deal better than GTA V?


Nothing :p

I replied to the OP, you replied to me. So I felt some kind of responsibility to judge what you said and explained what I didn't think was right about it in excruciating detail. You were saying GTA IV was SO MUCH BETTER than GTA V as a game in the series, instead of judging it based on it's own game. Nothing personal about me or you, but I actually like to clear up things when it comes to approaching other peoples opinions and try, as much as I fail, to find a reason behind them and and point it out. The best you can get from a forum, in my opinion (especially if you don't actually like the game you're discussing lol).

 

and even GTA IV was a lot better than GTA V, applying the most improvements with only few cutbacks, that didn't matter alot, since it was shown beautifully with a good map and plenty of "GTA" feel to it



An improvement in the form of a change can be considered a cutback if someone liked the original way better, but if you were to judge it without knowledge of the original you would be happier with something which was in fact not as good as the original. 
 

I clearly see GTA IV brought a change, but not as terrible as GTA V. I was never a part of criticizing GTA IV when it was released and enjoyed the additions and improvements it brought in. It's not the case with V,


So, even if V's changes were "worse" (which is apparently not equal to "different"), you still can like the game. I know you don't, but then you're not really adding much to the topic... My point is V feeling like GTA is irrelevant to whether GTA V is good. But my bigger point is V is GTA. But don't compare one games changes to another games changes.
 
 

when you can clearly notice that so many things are either absent or players expectations are simply not met. Let only the more important updates still pending to be released from Rockstar's Busy Schedule(s) after almost 7 months since release.
 
Can you mention any previous GTA from Rockstar that annoyed you so much in begging for the most basic features available in the game as early as possible, just because GTA ONLINE comes first, for so many updates in the priority list?



I can't actually. I only played part of the story (last thing I remember, I got given a nice house as Franklin and one or two other things happened - yeah go ahead and say I've not played enough to judge it :p) and this was months ago. I didn't notice anything absent because I wasn't judging it based on any game.

But now you seem to be slyly switching from talking about "GTA features" to unfixed game bugs. I've not played enough to notice bugs, but bugs are always an edgy topic when talking about games. Are bugs a part of the game that should be critiqued or should technological glitches and innovative ideas be considered separate? But I notices looaads of IV glitches (I played it on PC). It never came into my consideration when judging the game though, because a glitch or two is fine as long as I can still play.

Now, I want to back off from this unknown territory. I know nothing of Rockstars technical support habits or gamers possible over-reactions to unexpected changes in a game which they could consider a "bug". I don't have a view on GTA Online since I've never played it myself (nor IV's multiplayer for that matter). But I might propose that IV could have been as bad for technical support in that case, as there were still bugs when I played. Surely I could blame that on IV's multiplayer and say R* were only focusing on that, couldn't I? But again, best to keep comparisons to other games in the series to a minimum, eh?



EDITS: These damn quotes are really messed up...

fac316
  • fac316

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Oct 2012

#134

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:38 PM

The radio's there, the scathing satire of pop culture is there, The prostitutes are as well, I feel the peds make it not feel like a gta. From III to IV the peds would come up with one-liners that would have you laughing. With V, there generic and bland (But I feel thats supposed to be the atmosphere of Los Santos as well)


Midnightz
  • Midnightz

    Populus vult decipi.

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2007
  • United-States

#135

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:57 PM Edited by Midnightz, 15 April 2014 - 01:57 PM.

*sigh* GTA V feels like a GTA. Just as all other GTAs felt like a GTA. Same artistry, elements, themes, activities etc. Each one brings new features, nixes some old ones, and changes the gameplay in some way. Even things like camera control get tweaked. I perceive V as an expansion of IV. Just as III, VC, LCS, VCS were lumped together in the past. SA was the expansion of that gen with everything extra thrown in.

 

EDIT: I do agree the ped dialogue is a disappointment. I rarely hear something amusing.

  • fac316 and GTA564 like this

Saiyanskillz
  • Saiyanskillz

    Lures like Terminus, bites like Tyson

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2014
  • United-States

#136

Posted 15 April 2014 - 02:03 PM

For a short time I felt that this game wasn't a gta. But really... I think it's just moving on and going through changes. With 3 characters it certainly makes for a different feeling. The map is pretty big with both city life, boonie life, and something in between. But I've found myself enjoying the new form of gta.

Perhaps the biggest difference in my own personal opinion, is the fact that there are no longer 3 islands that unlock as you progress.

Midnightz
  • Midnightz

    Populus vult decipi.

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2007
  • United-States

#137

Posted 15 April 2014 - 02:09 PM

Unlocking islands is something I never liked. I don't care for the fogged out map (until you travel whereever) either. First thing I did in V was drive a boat around the entire island and when I could, fly around everywhere to show the map in its entirety.


Nightrage
  • Nightrage

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2004
  • Netherlands

#138

Posted 15 April 2014 - 02:33 PM

Each GTA games changes the vibe pretty drastically,  same goes for this game, because it's more realitsm focused and less pure gameplay/fun focused like last generation I get what you mean, but still this game feels allot more GTA then 4, which took itself way to serious.....

  • Mister Pink likes this

Saiyanskillz
  • Saiyanskillz

    Lures like Terminus, bites like Tyson

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2014
  • United-States

#139

Posted 15 April 2014 - 03:34 PM Edited by Saiyanskillz, 15 April 2014 - 03:37 PM.

Unlocking islands is something I never liked. I don't care for the fogged out map (until you travel whereever) either. First thing I did in V was drive a boat around the entire island and when I could, fly around everywhere to show the map in its entirety.

Same here. I never enjoyed unlocking the islands, although I did enjoy the in-game reasons for the bridges being closed. (Storms, terrorists, etc)

And I think it would have been better to have a greyed map that brightened as you explored, rather than a completely fogged out map that showed nothing until being explored.
  • Midnightz likes this

Gregers08
  • Gregers08

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2011
  • None

#140

Posted 16 April 2014 - 01:22 AM

Added a mission complete jingle for Welcome to Los Santos, The Grip and North Yankton memories

  • Deadly Target and GTA564 like this

CantThinkOfOne2013
  • CantThinkOfOne2013

    You're all a bunch of ungrateful children

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2013
  • Australia

#141

Posted 16 April 2014 - 02:41 AM Edited by CantThinkOfOne2013, 16 April 2014 - 02:47 AM.

 

 

In what way did it begin to feel like splinter cell, The sims or COD. I just cant see the similarities.

GTA is an action/adventure game with a criminal theme. Unfortunately, our favourite forum troll, Official General, is having an extremely difficult (purposely provoking stubbornness and bitterness) time of accepting that government corruption is a form of crime; a form of crime that happens to rack up on a more imposing and international scale. Such a delve into this welcome new direction opened up opportunities for fun and epic gameplay- as evidenced by many of the missions in V.

 

Official General wanted, and prematurely convinced himself that V was going to be a ghetto gangsta game with an ex bank robber getting involved, and he's so upset that the game didn't deliver his SA 2.0-esque requirements, that he feels the need to label the game a "yoga simulator", "Splinter Cell game", "non-crime GTA", etc. This is why he thinks GTA V "lost its feel" as soon as Trevor came into the scene- as at this point, Franklin and his ghetto antics took a backseat, and a more fresher narrative begun to take stage.

 

"Surley your not that stupid, just because it's crime related doesn't mean it's right for GTA"

 

In all seriousness, I agree with you 100%, that above quote is from none other than Official General when I explained to him that government corruption is a crime. I personally thought that the themes were perfect for GTA because it allowed for variety and diversity, speaking of variety, GTA IV's story was great and all but it was also the reason the game lacked mission variety.

I don't get his logic, he thinks that the main focus of GTA has always been storytelling (which is not true) but then he wants a SA 2.0 and GTA San Andreas's story was all over the place (still my second favourite GTA though, because of the gameplay).

 

 

To respond to OP:

GTA V felt like a return to the series roots, GTA IV never felt like a GTA game IMO as the series always had focused on fast gameplay with variety and diversity with a level of craziness, GTA IV axed this for a focus on storytelling, which is the mainstream way to go these days, the lack of variety effect the free roam gameplay which (for me at least) makes up the most hours of gameplay in a GTA game, the two most important aspects of a GTA game for me is the range of vehicles followed by the variety of weapons, GTA IV had none of that. With that being said, GTA IV was still great in it's own right and I still completed it 3 times and made additional hours of fun in the open world, things could have been a lot worse for GTA IV considering the fact that story driven games can get away with anything.

GTA V returned the much needed vehicle variety and weapon variety as well as varied and diverse missions (well not just returned, but made better than ever) and what is IMO the perfect balance of crazy and realism.

  • GTA564 likes this

Deadly Target
  • Deadly Target

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010

#142

Posted 16 April 2014 - 02:42 AM

Added a mission complete jingle for Welcome to Los Santos, The Grip and North Yankton memories

Welcome To Los Santos works surprisingly well as a mission complete jingle. They should have given that one to Franklin, the Grip for Trevor, and NY Memories for Michael. It's very strange how poorly Rockstar managed the soundtrack in some areas.
  • Gregers08 likes this

Mightymomo22
  • Mightymomo22

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Jan 2014
  • United-States

#143

Posted 16 April 2014 - 02:47 AM

I like 5 it's the only one I completed . I never completed Vice City. I like the 3 Characters. There all Unique. Trevors Crazy in a Good way He's Loyal. Franklins smart & laid back. Michael's Smart not as laid back as Franklin or as Crazy as Trevor sometimes I wounded who's more Crazy. Michael sure does has a potty mouth though.

DrAnomalous
  • DrAnomalous

    Disfavored Veracity

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2009
  • None

#144

Posted 16 April 2014 - 04:10 AM

GTA V seriously sits below any other GTA I've played dating back to GTA III. For me because I don't pick it up as much. I'm not saying I won't play it again anytime soon, but I've never lost interest in a GTA like GTA V. Liberty City(IV), San Andreas, Vice City all felt more like real places. GTA V just doesn't have that vibe. I want to like it as much but I don't.

 

As much as some people claim that others don't like GTA V like it's predecessors because their being nostalgic, I think they themselves want to defend and place on a pedestal anything labeled GTA. Maybe it's a misplaced sense of guilt for not being a "true fan". It's just weird that a GTA was released not too long ago and I'm actually done and rooting for another urban open world game to top it.


Gregers08
  • Gregers08

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2011
  • None

#145

Posted 16 April 2014 - 02:00 PM

 

Added a mission complete jingle for Welcome to Los Santos, The Grip and North Yankton memories

Welcome To Los Santos works surprisingly well as a mission complete jingle. They should have given that one to Franklin, the Grip for Trevor, and NY Memories for Michael. It's very strange how poorly Rockstar managed the soundtrack in some areas.

 

Yeah that actually could have worked. WTLS would sound kind of weird completing a mission as Trevor so the grip does make a better fit. If I had to go with one theme that would be the central one it would be the grip, it has a sound that's vague enough to fit all three protagonists and it kind of reminds me of a modernized version of something you would hear in the film Heat especially when the guitar comes in.


kvic
  • kvic

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2008

#146

Posted 16 April 2014 - 03:10 PM

driving Motorcycles in IV was way more realistic.

Driving anything in IV is way more realistic, unless you like being put through the windshield for touching the brakes and the twitchy steering of V.


Staten
  • Staten

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2011
  • None
  • Poetic Prowess [General Chat]

#147

Posted 16 April 2014 - 03:17 PM

GTA San Andreas didn't feel like Vice City and IV didn't feel like San Andreas.  R* like to change things while keeping the core stuff (stealing cars, driving them and shooting at things) the same.  This is why I like GTA; each game has a distinct "feel" that is different to the others.

  • Mrflodo likes this

EM_JAY_86
  • EM_JAY_86

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2014
  • United-Kingdom

#148

Posted 16 April 2014 - 06:18 PM

Modern GTA's don't quite feel like GTA's to me because having the game set in the past was this kind of fantasy side of the game.. Everyone wishes they could time travel at some stage and playing Vice City was the closest thing to that in terms of exploring a city in an interesting phase (Miami in the 1980's)

 

GTA has gotten so big now I don't think they'll ever set it in the past. I mean they'll do bold and innovative stuff but it's too big to go back and do some things now. All the kids will complain about not having a cell phone etc if GTA has to go back going to phone boxes. 

 

I still believe there's an early 80's Las Venturas in GTA. A f*cking all-out balls to the wall, rags to riches, action- drama, laced heavily with dark humour and references to the film Casino and subtle references to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. One character is played with missions playing as other characters (possibly playing as your enemy/antagonist for some missions). Rags to riches glory... start off as a peasant, cheap murderer, rise through the criminal underworld with the lights and glam as a backdrop, ruthlessly killing your way to the top, earning tons of cash, buying out competition, massacring bosses in drug wars, gambling in casinos.... it will be a GTA - return to form for those who loved the gameplay of III era with the sophistication, physics and graphics of the HD era. 

 

That may sound cliched or obvious but it's sounds like fun to me. If I want some serious social commentary or realistic TV/film I'd go watch The Wire, not play GTA. 

I'd also like GTA to return to past eras. I'd like to see a version of IV's Liberty City set in the 50's and 60's, playing as an Italian, Irish, or maybe a jewish mobster. It could be in the same HD era as IV and could feature younger versions of characters like Jon Graveli, and other mob members. Have the same city but with relevant differences to the 2008 version, and maybe more surrounding areas. They could include African American and Hispanic protags as well, but have the protags closer to being enemies than friends.


woggleman
  • woggleman

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2012

#149

Posted 16 April 2014 - 06:20 PM

If Liberty City does return it needs to be late 70s.


EM_JAY_86
  • EM_JAY_86

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2014
  • United-Kingdom

#150

Posted 16 April 2014 - 06:26 PM Edited by EM_JAY_86, 16 April 2014 - 06:27 PM.

If Liberty City does return it needs to be late 70s.

Ye, 60's-70's would be a good time period. I'd like to play as a mob related protag, at a time when they were still had a bit of mystery about them, and before they all started snitchin!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users