Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Was GTAV worth the wait?

102 replies to this topic

Poll: Was GTAV worth the wait? (203 member(s) have cast votes)

Was GTAV worth the 5 year wait?

  1. Yes (120 votes [57.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 57.14%

  2. No (90 votes [42.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.86%

Vote Guests cannot vote
Tycek
  • Tycek

    Being a bastard works.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2009
  • Poland

#61

Posted 05 June 2014 - 07:54 PM

It wasn't worth the waiting and it wasn't worth the price. GTA V is the worst GTA made by R* North in my honest opinion. 

  • sqre and Official General like this

Misunderstood
  • Misunderstood

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 May 2014
  • United-States

#62

Posted 05 June 2014 - 08:45 PM

GTA IV was the best GTA in my mind way before I even heard of GTA V. I knew it was the best the second I played it in 2008 (or 09).

 

That being said, GTA V is a great game, no doubt about it. But when compared to GTA IV, it takes one step forward and two steps back.

It adds in airplanes and more forms of transport that was missing from GTA IV. It adds a big giant map, car that can be customized more than they could in GTA SA, character customization like in SA, three characters, great graphics, ability to swim underwater, more vehicles and much much more. But for all of those additions, something gets taken away or not added. Where is the shoulder swapping? Where is crouching? 

 

Story:

Then there are three characters. It seemed really cool at first. If we got bored of playing as one character for too long, we could switch to another one. Missions could be played less linear. However, because of this, the story suffered a lot. RDR is shorter than GTA V at 59 missions (compared to V's 69 missions) however, that game felt much longer and was way better. GTA V feels short because it has three characters who sadly never get the time needed to develop. GTA IV had 90+ missions and even more with the DLC. GTA SA had 100+ missions. GTA V, which has three characters and a map bigger than SA and IV, only has 69. If you play GTA V, you can tell that Michael is the main main protagonist. He has the most development and the most screen time. Plus, the story basically focuses on him and the majority of things that happen are caused by him. Franklin and Trevor just fell like side characters more than main ones. Franklin has a goal to get rich and get out of the hood yet we never explore his past, why he wants to get out of the hood, and he gets out of the hood within 10 missions and sits around in his mansion, transforming himself into Michael and Trevor's bitch. They should have kept him in the hood for a longer period of time and developed hime more. Lamar was a better character than Franklin and felt like he could have had a lot going for him. Franklin was a boring, bland and uninteresting character. He is one of the worst protagonists created and he doesn't get enough development or screen time.

 

Trevor could have been interesting. While both M and F reside in Los Santos, Trevor could have delivered us a bucket load of missions out in the countryside. However, he only gets a handful of missions in the countryside and then gets thrown into LS with F and M, therefore eliminating the countryside gameplay of things for the majority of the game. Trevor also gets really annoying after he reunites with Michael. It's just him constantly bitching about how Michael is a fraud, a traitor and an asshole. However, his and Michael's story (no matter what ending), never has closure and Trevor never did anything or fully snapped on Michael to the point I was actually wondering if he would kill him. We got close in Kill the Hatchet but their story still never had any closure. Trevor should have spent more time in the countryside and doing missions there and even after he entered LS, he should have still gotten time out of the city.

 

Michael was an asshole and to be honest, I did not care for any of the main characters. The great things about Niko is that we felt his struggle and hate of being at the bottom of the food chain. Niko came off of a boat without a penny to his name and worked with his cousin, who lied about the rich life he was living. Niko's story is a generic rag to riches story that GTA is known for but he's made even more interesting because he wishes to get revenge on the man who betrayed him and his friends. Here, Niko has two stories that develop side by side. Niko has two goals here: to get rich and live the American Dream but to also kill one of his allies who ratted out his other allies. 

 

All three of the protagonists in GTA V should of had separate stories that slowly intertwine with each other. These stories should each develop side by side to give each protagonist a "story" while their stories would also come together for an epic finale. This would have been much better than having the story focus mostly on Michael, somewhat on Trevor and leaves Franklin in the dark. Overall, the story in V is very forgettable and is not written well. Nor are the characters.

 

***SPOILERS CONCERNING THE END OF THE GAME BELOW***

 

Ending A and B are terrible endings to the story. If you choose to kill M or T, both have a short conversation, then a short car chase ending in their deaths. These endings are not epic and should not be chosen by anyone. These missions have no difficulty.

 

Ending C was every anti-climatic, cliched and very easy. For an ending called Deathwish, you think it would be hard and almost impossible to do. Might even be considered suicide. However, killing Stretch is easy and simple, Mr. Cheng and his vehicles can be easily destroyed with a simple RPG, Haine's death was a terrible ending to such a dick of a character and Devon's death was stupid and very easy for a guy whose supposed to be the last villain. All three endings in this game suck but lets talk about the antagonists. Stretch was literally shown in two missions before randomly popping up at the end of the game. Mr. Cheng, I don't think was shown even once before we kill him. Haines is killed so easily and is a very anti-climatic end to a character who we hated so much. Devon's death was very unexciting. You just kill 12 guys before capturing him. None of these guys felt like true antagonists and none of them had a focus. When I think of GTA antagonists, I can easily name them.

 

GTA 3: Catalina 

GTA VC: Sonny/Lance

GTA SA: Tenpenny/Big Smoke

GTA IV: Jimmy/Dimitri

 

When I think of GTA V, none of them really stick out to me. 

 

***SPOILERS END***

 

Online is terrible, that's all I gotta say,

  • Zee, tom_p1980, sqre and 4 others like this

VanillaIce
  • VanillaIce

    Cole Phelps FanBoy

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 23 May 2014
  • United-States

#63

Posted 05 June 2014 - 09:00 PM Edited by VanillaIce, 05 June 2014 - 09:01 PM.

i think it was because i look at the game on its Merits and take it for what it is which is a very Enjoyable gameplay experience rather than nitpicking and bitching  and Moaning about every Flaw i give R* Credit for What they have Created which was an Overall very good Game.


The Quench
  • The Quench

    'SEVEN1FO'

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2007
  • None

#64

Posted 05 June 2014 - 09:04 PM

IV was....V wasn't. *regretting not buying the CE of IV  :/*

  • fac316 likes this

xXGst0395Xx
  • xXGst0395Xx

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#65

Posted 05 June 2014 - 09:46 PM

Maybe not quite living up to the hype, but a new GTA game for some time was good enough for me.

  • Sting4S likes this

tom_p1980
  • tom_p1980

    Semi-Retired Forum Junkie

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006
  • England

#66

Posted 05 June 2014 - 10:33 PM

No  :v:


Tilemaxx
  • Tilemaxx

    I Run This Town

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2008
  • None

#67

Posted 05 June 2014 - 10:39 PM

Nope,

 


 

Gameplay = god awful, The police A.I is worse than IV, watchdogs ect I hate it so frigging much I consider it broken it's way to flawed to take seriously. The peds A.I is just as bad. Theirs not enough crime related mini games, I could go on but the game doesn't push limits other than graphics and I'm more of a gameplay guy myself.

 

Really?


Sting4S
  • Sting4S

    ♢ Corverra ♢

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

#68

Posted 05 June 2014 - 11:00 PM

 

Nope,

 


 

Gameplay = god awful, The police A.I is worse than IV, watchdogs ect I hate it so frigging much I consider it broken it's way to flawed to take seriously. The peds A.I is just as bad. Theirs not enough crime related mini games, I could go on but the game doesn't push limits other than graphics and I'm more of a gameplay guy myself.

 

Really?

 

Really what? Elaborate yourself rather than posting some ridiculous one word post.

  • Cutter De Blanc likes this

DaCosta
  • DaCosta

    G-T-Addict

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2013

#69

Posted 05 June 2014 - 11:13 PM

We always have to wait (and wait, and wait!) for GTA's but GTA V is a stunning masterpiece of a game and so well worth it. :)

 

I guess some people would prefer yearly versions like with Call of Duties and FIFA's, where they release a similar product each year but with some small subtle improvements. Personally, I respect and admire what they put into a GTA so yes, absolutely worth the wait.

  • Midnightz likes this

GtaivCop
  • GtaivCop

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2014
  • Australia

#70

Posted 06 June 2014 - 01:14 AM

For me, no. I haven't picked it up after I finished it, it just doesn't have that addictiveness for me that past GTA's have had.

  • Official General and fac316 like this

The Odyssey
  • The Odyssey

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012
  • Australia

#71

Posted 06 June 2014 - 01:14 AM

Anyone who says Yes is a fanboy
 Anyways if you couldn't tell that was a joke to make you guys hop on Rockstar's dick and attack my statement. GTA V is what it is. 
 I just like to know what is GTA V? It feels like it wants to be GTA SA than it changes and wants to be GTA IV. It doesn't feel like its own game. 

Really dude, you gotta stop posting these "jokes" people won't be able to distinguish if your posts are jokes or are serious. It's ridiculous that you want to get a reaction out of fanboys that much, and it's funny how you would have the exact same reaction if your favourite game was "joked about"
OT: Despite its shortcomings, I felt GTA V certainly did live up to its expectations and has still kept me entertained to this day. Every other game made in 2013 looks mediocre compared to V, especially TLoU and Bioshock Infinite. Good god, those games are for sappy people who are no fun and only care about stories. GTA V is game of the year. #fact
That's why I said it was a "joke", anyone who gets upset clearly can't handle a joke to their favorite game. I just proved your a fanboy. 
 
Funny thing is I didn't say anything about my favorite game. Truth be told TLOU isn't my favorite game. I prefer RDR over TLOU. GTA SA over TLOU. 
I wasn't upset. I was just making a point.
If you're a fan of a gta game, you can defend it if someone has negative critism against it. Doesn't make you a fanboy at all. Maybe you should actually find out what a "fanboy" is
  • Chips237 likes this

Ben73
  • Ben73

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2012
  • Australia

#72

Posted 06 June 2014 - 02:04 AM

Yeah I guess so.

It's good enough it should tie me over until the next gta game.
IV wasn't good enough for me to get my gta fix during the V waiting period. I played SA more than IV.
Shouldn't have that problem with the next.
  • CSUdude likes this

Kalerney
  • Kalerney

    GTA universe resident since 2002

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2011
  • France

#73

Posted 06 June 2014 - 09:19 AM

R* is maybe the only game company who can spend 5 years developing a game and manage to rush it.

  • fac316 likes this

Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#74

Posted 06 June 2014 - 09:21 AM

R* is maybe the only game company who can spend 5 years developing a game and manage to rush it.

 

They did not spend five years developing this game.


Mr. Tibbs
  • Mr. Tibbs

    Liberal Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 May 2014
  • Cayman-Islands

#75

Posted 06 June 2014 - 09:44 AM

How does one say that IV was a good game, let alone a good GTA game, with a straight face? Some real wizardry going on here.

  • Xenology likes this

The Odyssey
  • The Odyssey

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2012
  • Australia

#76

Posted 06 June 2014 - 10:28 AM

How does one say that IV was a good game, let alone a good GTA game, with a straight face? Some real wizardry going on here.

http://dictionary.re.../browse/opinion


~Tiger~
  • ~Tiger~

    Forum Leader

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2014
  • United-Nations
  • Helpfulness Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [GTA V]

#77

Posted 06 June 2014 - 10:47 AM

Please don't turn this into yet another IV versus V debate.

 

Thanks

  • Midnightz likes this

Tilemaxx
  • Tilemaxx

    I Run This Town

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2008
  • None

#78

Posted 06 June 2014 - 12:20 PM Edited by Tilemaxx, 06 June 2014 - 12:20 PM.

 

Really what? Elaborate yourself rather than posting some ridiculous one word post.

 

Why was gameplay god awful? Was that a rational comment?


matajuegos01
  • matajuegos01

    Stalker

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Dec 2013
  • None

#79

Posted 06 June 2014 - 12:40 PM

"Were not going to announce an announcement"

"in a few weeks or so"

We all remember hearing these lines as we waited for gtaV.

Now that it's all said and done, do you feel it was worth waiting five years for? Do you feel V deserved as much secrecy and media blackout that it got at first? Share your thoughts.

Not at all, it feels rushed.

  • Osho likes this

SFPD officer
  • SFPD officer

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

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

#80

Posted 06 June 2014 - 12:52 PM Edited by SFPD officer, 06 June 2014 - 12:55 PM.

@Misunderstood

Your commentary on the C ending got me thinking, that it could have been better if it was done kinda like Mass Effect 2's final Suicide mission. M, T and F's success would be based on their actions throughout the game. Did you complete this side-mission, hang out with these characters, made this decision and so on. All three of them could die and leave you with no post-story gameplay or all three could survive. Or Michael and Trevor could kill each other anyway, despite Franklin's urging to let it go. Or supporting characters could die: Lamar, obviously, or Lester or Michael's family members. Just a few examples, R* could do so much more with this concept.

Basically, the C ending would have been, from gameplay perspective, just what it was from story perspective - the risky one. Franklin was offered two easy, safe routes, which guaranteed survival of him, and one of his friends at the expense of the other. When he picked C, he risked everything and so would the player if it was like the Suicide mission. You could end up either with the happy ending, with all enemies dead and the trio reunited, but you could also end up with all protags dead and no post-story gameplay or with only one protagonist making it. The whole story would have to be reworked and expanded, but it would have made C more exciting, rewarding (if you did everything correctly) and truly worthy of the title "Deathwish".
  • sqre likes this

OMGmyFACE
  • OMGmyFACE

    Badder Den Dem

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2014
  • United-States

#81

Posted 06 June 2014 - 01:08 PM

Yes and no for me but I only voted no. I got it for cheap so I was more lenient with it and my initial experience wasn't ruined by the bad taste online gives me at the time so I loved every second of it. Threw 70 hours at it before hitting that wall and realizing I was done. That's when I was ready to admit I was bored. I justified it when I reminded myself how much I'd played it but it didn't explain why I immediately wanted to go back to GTAIV. It's been 8.5 months and the game still freezes my console, the music/sound effects cut on and off like it's a buffering youtube clip, garages are still eating my cars, the model memory is awful (look at 4 cars, turn around... turn back and there's 2!), etc etc. They should've delayed it some more. Hell, they probably should've held back and released it on next-gen with all the fixes they should be working on now (but aren't because making MP worse is their primary focus).

 

Don't get me wrong, GTAV is awesome. But I would've gladly waited longer for a completed product. If the game isn't done, don't sell it. If the online is bugged out, don't make up a story about waiting 2 weeks to release it, can the thing or wait until it's fixed.

 

Also, anyone here could've written a better story. When I think back to SP, I just remember the worst I've ever seen or heard Lazlow and thinking "so, this is where GTA's going..."


Official General
  • Official General

    You gotta always carry heat in these Vice City streets

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010

#82

Posted 06 June 2014 - 02:38 PM Edited by Official General, 06 June 2014 - 02:38 PM.

It wasn't worth the waiting and it wasn't worth the price. GTA V is the worst GTA made by R* North in my honest opinion. 

 

I second that  :^:

 

Well since GTA III, at least for me. 

  • fac316 likes this

Tilemaxx
  • Tilemaxx

    I Run This Town

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2008
  • None

#83

Posted 06 June 2014 - 03:35 PM Edited by Tilemaxx, 06 June 2014 - 03:36 PM.

It wasn't worth the waiting and it wasn't worth the price. GTA V is the worst GTA made by R* North in my honest opinion. 

What the f*ck? I mean, really what? It wasn't worth the price? How much should it cost? 20 bucks? For such a massive game i'd pay twice the initial price, unless you people are happy with 5-6 hrs borefests that ship at 60-70 bucks.

People these days deserve nothing more than F2P arcades and rushed, badly executed rip-offs like Watch Dogs...


Voit Turyv
  • Voit Turyv

    I am the one who rocks!

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 May 2012
  • Poland

#84

Posted 06 June 2014 - 03:37 PM

No because the PC version is nowhere to be found.


Tycek
  • Tycek

    Being a bastard works.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2009
  • Poland

#85

Posted 06 June 2014 - 04:47 PM Edited by Tycek, 06 June 2014 - 04:48 PM.

 

It wasn't worth the waiting and it wasn't worth the price. GTA V is the worst GTA made by R* North in my honest opinion. 

What the f*ck? I mean, really what? It wasn't worth the price? How much should it cost? 20 bucks? For such a massive game i'd pay twice the initial price, unless you people are happy with 5-6 hrs borefests that ship at 60-70 bucks.

People these days deserve nothing more than F2P arcades and rushed, badly executed rip-offs like Watch Dogs...

 

I paid around 100$ for the game buying special edition, which was nothing more than a rip-off because things like guns and clothes should be in the game in the first place. Considering the length and the quality of the game it should be shipped for 50-60$ at best. 

 

I'm not trying to ignite fire here and I won't judge the quality of the WD (because it's not the place), but you can't say it wasn't original at least. GTA V on the other hand was nothing more than sea of cliches. 

 

And you deserve nothing more than a slap across the face, because you can't debate in some civil manner. 


kj2022
  • kj2022

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2011

#86

Posted 06 June 2014 - 07:06 PM

GTA V on the other hand was nothing more than sea of cliches.

 

 

I have to agree here, there's nothing in GTA V's story and backstory that seems original, unlike the other GTA games. I think that's what makes the game lose something for myself. There's nothing in the game I couldn't see in some sh*tty 2nd rate action movie at 2am on some low budget movie channel.


gta3masta5000
  • gta3masta5000

    'Sup?

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2012
  • United-States

#87

Posted 06 June 2014 - 07:12 PM

IMO? No. Why? IDK. I just didn't have that "GTA" feel of previous games. I mean, yeah there was killing. But lately GTA has become more than that. It started with SA's 'hot coffee'. It ruined GTA for me. Too much sex, not enough killing. That's what GTA is about. Killing. That's why I find Saint's Row more fun than GTA these days. It has less sex, more killing. I like the "classic" GTA's more. III, VC, SA, the Stories', hell, even IV.


BlackNoise
  • BlackNoise

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2011
  • None

#88

Posted 06 June 2014 - 07:44 PM

I don't think it was worth the wait. GTA V wasn't revolutionary enough IMO. It was just another new GTA game. I understand why development takes longer nowadays, but I just don't agree with the way R* prioritized the development. I just expected more, based on the development time and what previous GTAs brought to the table. 

 

 

 

R* is maybe the only game company who can spend 5 years developing a game and manage to rush it.

 

They did not spend five years developing this game.

 

How long did they spend developing it? I remember one of the Houser brothers saying they started shortly after wrapping GTA IV. 

  • ric4rd094 likes this

TheMasterfocker
  • TheMasterfocker

    Public Enemy #1

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • United-States

#89

Posted 06 June 2014 - 07:50 PM

Started with concepts and sh*t. Actual development, as in coding and stuff, only took 3-4 years. I know for a fact they didn't start coding for V in 2008, unless it was very late 2008. It's just too short of a time. A game the size of GTA V needs lots and lots of pre - development planning.

Midnightz
  • Midnightz

    Populus vult decipi.

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

#90

Posted 06 June 2014 - 08:12 PM

The coding is cake, it's the super detailed map, models, textures, and all that voice acting (contracts etc.) that takes forever.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users