Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Remember when everyone hated this game?

146 replies to this topic
kipakolonyasi
  • kipakolonyasi

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 May 2013
  • None

#31

Posted 05 July 2014 - 01:44 PM

i hated the driving in this game when i first played it. almost gave up on the game just because of this. especially certain cars like Stallion was driving even worse than a "boat". and on top of that i was playing the game on a HDTV that had terrible input lag (but i'm figuring it now. i thought it was the game back then) which made it even worse. and i did end up giving up on the game. then gave it another shot months later. then never put it down since.  :O


TheOtherRyan
  • TheOtherRyan

    Soviet Connection

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

#32

Posted 05 July 2014 - 01:46 PM

Although I like GTA V I can't see my views on it being any different than they are now mostly because it tries to appeal to mainstream audiences.

What I love about GTA IV is it's the complete opposite. I love that it goes against the grain and R* weren't afraid of trying something different compared to their previous work. It's something I've always admired about it really.
  • Acetaminophen, Donut and Misunderstood like this

EaglesFan1825
  • EaglesFan1825

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2012

#33

Posted 05 July 2014 - 01:53 PM

People hate these games but they still play them. They complain for the sake of complaining.
  • TheOtherRyan likes this

TheOtherRyan
  • TheOtherRyan

    Soviet Connection

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

#34

Posted 05 July 2014 - 01:58 PM

People hate these games but they still play them. They complain for the sake of complaining.


Well I don't like SA and I can't even remember the last time I played it so for me at least I'm honest. :p
  • EaglesFan1825 likes this

TrevorSpeed914
  • TrevorSpeed914

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2011
  • None

#35

Posted 05 July 2014 - 03:05 PM

People hate these games but they still play them. They complain for the sake of complaining.

I don't even own IV or EFLC anymore.


EaglesFan1825
  • EaglesFan1825

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2012

#36

Posted 05 July 2014 - 07:02 PM


People hate these games but they still play them. They complain for the sake of complaining.

I don't even own IV or EFLC anymore.

I kind of meant before V came out. People still played IV, but all they did was complain.

Mr.Raspberry Jam
  • Mr.Raspberry Jam

    Bringing great joy to a lonely man

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 May 2014
  • United-Kingdom

#37

Posted 06 July 2014 - 08:09 AM

I've never hated it, neither have most of my friends. For most of them it was their first gta game so they never complained, they were more into freeroam than the storyline though.
I still occasionally play it now, it's just too good to forget about over time.

Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

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

#38

Posted 06 July 2014 - 08:14 AM

Well I, personally never hated it either. I played EFLC first at my cousins house and it blew me away and at that time I was a big SA fanatic. I had a lot of fun messing around in free roam with Johnny and Luis with the new physics and exploring the new city. It was brilliant.

 

I got IV again in 2013 for PC and that time I enjoyed playing it as well. Then I re-installed it on my PC in 2014 and I'm having so much fun on my current save. Never looked back since.

 

I guess, despite me being a SA fanatic when I first played it, it helped that I did not know to expect a SA 2.0 because I played it so suddenly or that I was never part of the initial hype train because I was only 6 or 7 back when IV was being marketed.


Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#39

Posted 07 July 2014 - 02:00 AM Edited by Official General, 08 July 2014 - 10:31 AM.

 

I never said I hated the original IV. But I was critical of it when it first came out for good reasons, it was definitely missing certain important things that it should not have been missing. However, I always maintained that I still thought it was a good game. When played it again and discovered new things and also when I played EFLC, the whole IV saga was much better, and I liked it a lot more. IV+EFLC is now my 3rd best GTA after VC and SA. You need to consider the reasons behind the changes, don't just assume that people switched to liking IV just because it was in 'fashion' or for the pure sake of it. I'm pretty sure most gamers are not that stupid or trivial. 

 

I can assure you that if in the future, GTA V remains the same game as it is without any decent, significant improvements, I will never change I say I now love it. Right it's my worst GTA ever since III, and I cannot see that changing at all. 

Sure, you liked it. So did I, along with, what, about 15 other people on here?

My point is, that most people on here hated it and then loved it suddenly after V's release.

Now I tried considering the reason behind these changes and the only reason I see is that they saw that V lacked some important things IV had. Still, that probably isn't the reason people suddenly liked IV's vehicle handling. Just imagine, V came out and what, people just realized how good IV's handling is? That is very improbable.

Granted, there are many people who have valid criticisms for the game, but others just hate on things they wanted from IV and got in V. That doesn't make any sense but I guess people are people and they have to complain about stuff.

 

 

No disrespect, but it seems you didn't quite grasp what I had said in the first place, so I'll have to repeat myself again in a more simpler, straightforward way. 

 

You're saying most people on here hated IV and then loved it suddenly after V. You cannot be sure that the people who hated IV were exact same people who hated V. You're just saying that because you've seen people on here criticize IV and now doing the same to V - but there is no real evidence to say that these are all the same people. You're just making sweeping (and most likely inaccurate) generalizations with these claims, because on the face of it, it looks like makes sense, when in reality there is nothing substantial to back it up. There are still many people on here who say IV was boring, dark and gloomy, and V is much better, brighter and more exciting, - and those guys are still here in significant numbers. Having said that, some guys on here may have had to play V to realize just how good IV really was, what they had missed from it, and what they took for granted. V lacked so many important things, that it made many people realize that IV indeed was much better than they initially imagined, because it did a lot to showcase the fact that IV had good qualities and did things better than V, and some of which were not even seen in V. So therefore some people may have eventually changed their minds and believed IV now to be the better game. Sometimes, it takes someone to dislike something and have an experience to make them actually like it, it happens in real life you know. Maybe some people disliked IV, and they just disliked V even more, you should consider that too.

 

Just because V is the newest and latest GTA, it did not mean that it had an automatic or divine right to be liked by a majority of GTA fans over IV as it's older predecessor. That's the mistake guys like you make when making such statements like you did earlier.


TheOtherRyan
  • TheOtherRyan

    Soviet Connection

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

#40

Posted 07 July 2014 - 02:38 AM

I agree OG.

 

It's pretty much like accusing someone of murder and not having any evidence to back it up with. Woggleman used to do this all the time yet despite his efforts he never provided any real evidence of it and nor has anyone since.

 

Since I was actually here when GTA IV was released I don't know of anyone who disliked GTA IV back then and changed their tune with GTA V. As you said there's no way to be sure the same people who don't like GTA V are the same that didn't like GTA IV either.

 

Even back when this forum wasn't a happy place when GTA IV released there were still GTA IV fans who are most likely still are today. I think it's more of a case of some GTA V fans being a bit sensitive that GTA V is getting flack (some deserved, some not) and they're trying to connect dots that don't even exist and to be fair be GTA IV hasn't seen the light at the end of the tunnel.

 

It still gets bashed for being boring, depressing, not having anything to do etc. It's basically the same complaints from 6 years ago just in lesser volume. However it's good to see the positive aspects of GTA IV are being realised. 

  • Official General and Donut like this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#41

Posted 07 July 2014 - 02:54 AM

I think it's more of a case of some GTA V fans being a bit sensitive that GTA V is getting flack (some deserved, some not) and they're trying to connect dots that don't even exist and to be fair be GTA IV hasn't seen the light at the end of the tunnel.

 

Spot on  :^:

 

I'm pretty sure of this myself, I'm inclined to agree with this indeed. I think those who are big fans of V are kinda shell-shocked and stunned to discover that so many other GTA fans just don't share their same love for the game and dislike it, but worse they still believe that IV is the better the game ! They just cannot accept it, or they have a hard time doing so. It's crazy. 

 

 

It still gets bashed for being boring, depressing, not having anything to do etc. It's basically the same complaints from 6 years ago just in lesser volume. However it's good to see the positive aspects of GTA IV are being realised. 

 

Definitely, but V fanatics still choose to overlook this fact. Yeah, V's signifcant and excessive number of flaws and shortcomings that have definitely contributed to IV's re-emergence to be realized as a great game and get the recognition it finally deserves. It took all that for it too happen.

  • TheOtherRyan likes this

Mr_Leone
  • Mr_Leone

    The X

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010
  • None

#42

Posted 08 July 2014 - 09:45 AM

I for one am torn by the fact IV is/was hated. When people are playing VI and it turns out to be a game for the half hour gamer, I will be sitting in the IV section laughing. Not the mocking kind of laughter, no...the "you could have stopped this" kinda laughter. V pisses me off the most out of any GTA game. I just can't see them going back to the drama and superb writing we got in IV. They can make a cookie cutter GTA with planes and loud noises for at least two generations, and still make out like bandits. EFLC didn't sell well and I knew after that they'd take the series in a more profit centric direction. These super car DLCs are just a way for Rock star to seem awake and connected to the game. It is bullsh*t, no longer do they have to scout talented voice actors and spend time writing scripts, in 2014 with social media being as popular as it is, they just have to tweet the fact a new DLC is live and OHHHHH look at YOU rock star, such awesome DLC content! OH I am so jealous that I can't use a musket in IV, like what the f*ck? Rock star is becoming a parody of itself.
  • Official General, Donut and ric4rd094 like this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#43

Posted 08 July 2014 - 10:32 AM Edited by Official General, 08 July 2014 - 10:34 AM.

Rock star is becoming a parody of itself.

 

One of the best posts I've seen on this forum, and it's barely a sentence  :^:  :^:

 

Very true indeed, I've said similar things to this already. 

  • Donut likes this

Donut
  • Donut

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2013
  • None

#44

Posted 08 July 2014 - 10:48 AM

I for one am torn by the fact IV is/was hated. When people are playing VI and it turns out to be a game for the half hour gamer, I will be sitting in the IV section laughing. Not the mocking kind of laughter, no...the "you could have stopped this" kinda laughter. V pisses me off the most out of any GTA game. I just can't see them going back to the drama and superb writing we got in IV. They can make a cookie cutter GTA with planes and loud noises for at least two generations, and still make out like bandits. EFLC didn't sell well and I knew after that they'd take the series in a more profit centric direction. These super car DLCs are just a way for Rock star to seem awake and connected to the game. It is bullsh*t, no longer do they have to scout talented voice actors and spend time writing scripts, in 2014 with social media being as popular as it is, they just have to tweet the fact a new DLC is live and OHHHHH look at YOU rock star, such awesome DLC content! OH I am so jealous that I can't use a musket in IV, like what the f*ck? Rock star is becoming a parody of itself.

^ The truth right here, fellers ^


Deji
  • Deji

    Coding like a Rockstar!

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2007
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Mods]

#45

Posted 08 July 2014 - 10:55 AM Edited by Deji, 08 July 2014 - 11:00 AM.

I "hated" IV, but now I "accept" IV, even though I don't like it... mostly what I hated about IV was that I thought it would turn out to be the general direction for the entire future of the GTA series somehow (well, it kind of was, but now I'm more accepting of "modern" games with over-complicated physics anyway), and I'd gotten sick of the action-y game-play and gloomy environment/story pretty quickly.

It'll always be the same with the latest GTA though. Depending whether or not people like it, they'll overstate their opinions of it in the hopes it somehow actually affects the future of the series, which it won't when R* can only see ~50% going "Yayyy!" and ~50% going "What the f*ck is this pile of sh*t? It completely ruins GTA!!!", so the complaining ends up being a pointless way to wait for the next GTA game, when that was time that could have been better spent playing other games.

Yet, why not accept that there's lots of individual games in the GTA series that suck compared to others? Of course there is. If one thinks whatever GTA is present crap, they should just piss off and not come back until the next GTA release/announcement/teaser, which is what I and whoever else didn't like IV did, while simply sticking to the GTA games I did like.

@above
That line of conversation is stupid AND hypocritical. I hated (well, not 'hated', but for arguments sake) VC and thought of it as barely a game. Yet I'd never make out that the rest of the series, as well as the developers of said series is doomed. Quite the opposite, even though I didn't really like it, it was one of the most popular GTA's of its time, and thus rocketed the future of the series, allowing the masterpiece of SA to be born out of it.

Even if you consider V to be utter garbage, it's absolute nonsense to say that the future GTA's are just going to get worse and worse. Quite the opposite, in fact. And especially since V sold so well, it's bound to give R* plenty of room to make the next GTA even more extraordinary, which is how the damn gaming industry works! You can blame V's DLC's, or V's multiplayer. But heck, IV had DLC and multiplayer, and the positive responses to them was what encouraged R* to further elaborate on them, so it's dumb and hypocritical to blame fans of the currently latest GTA game for ruining the direction of the series, when they liked the game before, which was what started it off with heading in that direction in the first place.
 

Actually, as Solidus says, the hatred for GTA IV was much, much worse than the hatred for V back when it came out.  But, it went away like the hatred for V will go away.

@Staten
Unless the SP DLC greatly adds to V, I doubt the hatred for it it will just go away.


Well, what you expecting it to do? Somehow DETRACT from V?
  • TheOtherRyan likes this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#46

Posted 08 July 2014 - 11:06 AM Edited by Official General, 08 July 2014 - 11:23 AM.

I "hated" IV, but now I "accept" IV, even though I don't like it... mostly what I hated about IV was that I thought it would turn out to be the general direction for the entire future of the GTA series somehow (well, it kind of was, but now I'm more accepting of "modern" games with over-complicated physics anyway), and I'd gotten sick of the action-y game-play and gloomy environment/story pretty quickly.

It'll always be the same with the latest GTA though. Depending whether or not people like it, they'll overstate their opinions of it in the hopes it somehow actually affects the future of the series, which it won't when R* can only see ~50% going "Yayyy!" and ~50% going "What the f*ck is this pile of sh*t? It completely ruins GTA!!!", so the complaining ends up being a pointless way to wait for the next GTA game, when that was time that could have been better spent playing other games.

Yet, why not accept that there's lots of individual games in the GTA series that suck compared to others? Of course there is. If one thinks whatever GTA is present crap, they should just piss off and not come back until the next GTA release/announcement/teaser, which is what I and whoever else didn't like IV did, while simply sticking to the GTA games I did like.
 

 

Actually, as Solidus says, the hatred for GTA IV was much, much worse than the hatred for V back when it came out.  But, it went away like the hatred for V will go away.

@Staten
Unless the SP DLC greatly adds to V, I doubt the hatred for it it will just go away.

 


Well, what you expecting it to do? Somehow DETRACT from V?

 

 

@ Deji

 

What am I expecting with the SP DLC for GTA V ? How the f*ck am i supposed to know ? So far, Rockstar have disappointed me in many ways with V as it is, and I certainly did not expect that. So my answer to your question is that I don't know what to expect, that's what I'm waiting for Rockstar to tell me, or us I may say. Once I know and see what it is, then I can make a more informed judgement on it and decide whether I want to play it or not.

 

I just hope includes the stuff that I would like to see, or at least some of it. But I certainly hope that it detracts from that bullsh*t FIB and government agent stuff from V, that is for sure. 

 

This is not an attack, but seriously you don't dictate what people should say on here. You're not even a mod, and even then, the mods cannot do that. You really need to stop telling people to piss off from the forums just because they are very critical or negative about V. I really don't see what you're trying to achieve, because your words will just fall on deaf ears, it's not like anyone will listen to you. Okay fine it's what you did, but everyone else is not you, and we don't all think the same. I don't see why you should have such a problem with the other opinions of total strangers on here. Not being rude, but if you cannot handle opposing views of others on these forums, maybe you should be the one to piss off ? Because I'm pretty sure nobody forced you to come here and get all worked up.

  • Donut likes this

Mr_Leone
  • Mr_Leone

    The X

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010
  • None

#47

Posted 08 July 2014 - 11:19 AM

I can't really reply to you Deji, because you said SA was a master piece. I think you will be more than satisfied with VI if you loved SA. More power to you if that's what you think a masterpiece is. IV was an experiment that failed. People don't want to be like me and invest hours into the story, beyond the game. People aren't like me in the fact they don't want to walk down the street and breathe in the architecture of a virtual city. People seem to prefer fast cars, planes and crazy weapons. Rock star has lost control of itself. V felt like a game produced by the demand of the casual gamer, and lost the originality the series once had. I just... I don't know, I feel like V took the depth out of the GTA series. I don't see much beyond what the game tells me. I also have a funny feeling V was a way of getting the attention of the younger gamer. VI be a continuation of that in my opinion.
  • TheOtherRyan, Official General, Donut and 1 other like this

TheOtherRyan
  • TheOtherRyan

    Soviet Connection

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

#48

Posted 08 July 2014 - 11:25 AM

I can't really reply to you Deji, because you said SA was a master piece. I think you will be more than satisfied with VI if you loved SA. More power to you if that's what you think a masterpiece is. IV was an experiment that failed. People don't want to be like me and invest hours into the story, beyond the game. People aren't like me in the fact they don't want to walk down the street and breathe in the architecture of a virtual city. People seem to prefer fast cars, planes and crazy weapons. Rock star has lost control of itself. V felt like a game produced by the demand of the casual gamer, and lost the originality the series once had. I just... I don't know, I feel like V took the depth out of the GTA series. I don't see much beyond what the game tells me. I also have a funny feeling V was a way of getting the attention of the younger gamer. VI be a continuation of that in my opinion.


This so much, but I'm pretty much the same type of gamer you are. I love investing hours into the story and walking around the streets. I don't need flashy cars, planes, over the top weapons etc to keep myself occupied.
  • Mr_Leone, Official General and Donut like this

Deji
  • Deji

    Coding like a Rockstar!

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2007
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Mods]

#49

Posted 08 July 2014 - 11:26 AM

What am I expecting with the SP DLC for GTA V ? How the f*ck am i supposed to know ? So far, Rockstar have disappointed me in many ways with V as it is, and I certainly did not expect that. So my answer to your question is that I don't know what to expect, that's what I'm waiting for Rockstar to tell me, or us I may say. Once I know and see what it is, then I can make a more informed judgement on it and decide whether I want to play it or not.

Well, DLC's, especially paid SP DLC's, they usually add quite a bit to the game. You said "unless the DLC adds something major", well, it is going to. Whether you end up liking it is a totally different thing. Perhaps it's the entire concept behind V that you don't appreciate, in that case, you're probably not going to like the SP DLC either. Just like how I didn't bother with the DLC because I hated IV, I don't think you should allow your final judgement to depend so greatly on DLC. "Once you know and see what it is", you'll just have set yourself up perfectly to further insult the game - my personal thoughts about people who take such a strong stance against it like you, though, is that whatever the hell the DLC is, they're not going to appreciate it a single bit more. In fact, they're just waiting for another opportunity to further complain, because REALLY? What other logic is there behind paying or playing a DLC for a game that you don't like anyway?
 

I just hope includes the stuff that I would like to see, or at least some of it. But I certainly hope that it detracts from that bullsh*t FIB and government agent stuff from V, that is for sure.

"Stuff that I would like to see" was perhaps in IV... this time its everyone else's turn. People like me, who didn't like IV, finally get something that "makes up" for it. You see it the opposite way, and if IV was released after V, we could be having this conversation backwards :p
 

And you really need to stop telling people to piss off from the forums just because they are very critical or negative about V. I really don't see what you're trying to achieve, because your words just fall on deaf ears, it's not like anyone will listen to you. Okay fine it's what you did, but everyone else is not you, and we don't all think the same. I don't see why you should have such a problem with opinions of strangers on here. Not being rude, but if you cannot handle it on these forums, maybe you should be the one to piss off ?

And you really need to stop telling everyone that fans are somehow being tricked into liking V. That's basically your tactic, insult the game, insult the developers, insult the fans who you share a favourite website with. Yet, I somehow can't insult, be critical of, or be negative towards V haters? Now wait a minute, that seems very biased. But that's what this whole thing is anyway, biased.

I really don't see what you're trying to achieve by speaking out about how much you hate IV, because it's not like anyone will listen to you. Okay fine so you do, but everyone else is not you, and we don't all think the same. I don't see why you should have such a problem with opinions of strangers here. Not being rude, but if you can't handle getting criticised by GTA fans for criticising GTA, maybe you SHOULD be the one to piss off after all?


You see, your argument applies directly to you as well. Unfortunately, since I like GTA for what it is, and I don't like to go around IV forums posting topics about all the reasons (that I think) it sucks, I'd like to remain a member of this forum and get along with fellow fans. I have the choice to be hated by those IV fans by speaking out about how much I hate it, but instead I opt to stay where I'm welcomed. I can make choice when it comes to this, as can you. What I can't choose, however, is the presence of hatred within a forum dedicated to GTA. The fact is, this is a fan forum, and the best of its kind. It kinda falls flat when you have so much negativity present, though. All I'm asking is, just like I respect IV fandom by not moaning about IV's many faults and how it has ruined GTA in every IV topic, those who don't like V should show the same respect to V fans. I'm not actually a 'fan' of V, in fact, since I've not played it enough and it was ages ago. But if you want to complain peacefully, it's usually a good idea to stick to where the other complainers are, instead of finding topics where fans are and complaining about their fandom.

Deji
  • Deji

    Coding like a Rockstar!

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2007
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Mods]

#50

Posted 08 July 2014 - 11:49 AM Edited by Deji, 08 July 2014 - 11:58 AM.

I can't really reply to you Deji, because you said SA was a master piece. I think you will be more than satisfied with VI if you loved SA. More power to you if that's what you think a masterpiece is. IV was an experiment that failed. People don't want to be like me and invest hours into the story, beyond the game. People aren't like me in the fact they don't want to walk down the street and breathe in the architecture of a virtual city. People seem to prefer fast cars, planes and crazy weapons. Rock star has lost control of itself. V felt like a game produced by the demand of the casual gamer, and lost the originality the series once had. I just... I don't know, I feel like V took the depth out of the GTA series. I don't see much beyond what the game tells me. I also have a funny feeling V was a way of getting the attention of the younger gamer. VI be a continuation of that in my opinion.


You heavily fail to understand my view, it seems. I appreciated IV for what it DID do well, and I really enjoyed certain areas... well, mainly the projects. I do like when they depict those really 'seedy' areas in games, feels like anything can happen. I love cities and their architecture, and was really excited by the (first) trailers and screenshots and how Liberty City looked and seemed like it would feel, but it all falls flat if there's not enough "game" there to back it up. I'm not reserving over 30GB of my hard drive space just so I can take a walk in a New York lookalike, well, perhaps I'd consider that if the game wasn't so bogged down that walking down the street and breathing the architecture didn't feel like a massive chore, being knocked over at the slightest bump of a car with Niko's Bambi legs. And whatever "life" the city had seemed to lack presence a lot when I played it, but when I'm desperately looking around for something fun to do, it's easy to see how I'd miss the little details, and it felt like the game didn't want me to look for them. The game just 'feels' very "action-shooter", which left me to mostly stick to the story (which I found interesting up to a point - where it just started getting ridiculously tedious) missions.

But now look, you're making me do what I said I wouldn't and explain my dislike of IV. Heck, at least I can still say it was an "okay" game, with pretty fun shoot-outs (though for me they seemed a bit too, well, "hit'n'miss" - shoot then hide, shoot then hide, yet without a 'working' cover system) but, and this is obviously just me, it felt more like a game a non-GTA fan would enjoy. It feels like the odd-one-out in the entire series, so whether or not it's good doesn't really


But hasn't GTA ALWAYS been for the casual gamer? In fact, the whole reason I got into it is because it was more casual than any other game available. What other games could you just "play"? GTA achieved success by revolutionising the open-world genre. After completion, or even in-between missions, you can just do anything. Pick up, run about, cause chaos and settle back down for the next mission or random self-assigned goal. That's even what I loved about GTA London on PS1... I don't see what your definition of "casual" is that doesn't apply to every GTA game in existence, really. There was no extra depth that V doesn't have now. In fact, any depth in a game probably merely exists in your head. YOU add depth to the game, not the developers, and it's indeed hard to do that if the game isn't a good fit for you, but that doesn't mean the developers are necessarily doing something wrong - well, we'll just have to wait and see in the next few GTA's, really. So what if you only like every-other GTA? So what if they're catering to more casual gamers every now and then? They're giving EVERYONE what they want, in that case, rather than what I suppose you'd have to call "abstract" gamers :p


(EDIT:
Oh yeah, that damn cover system! It was one of the ultimate ruining things for IV, I found. Hit 'cover' and he walks along some weird, extra-complicated path, probably right in front of about 4 goons shooting at him before dying horribly.

I think IV was the game where I failed more than any other GTA game. I certainly remember getting sick of the one hospital I always used to end up, then groaning at the annoyance of having to travel all the way back to the mission starting point, with whatever slow car I happened to find first. The more I got bored of it, the more I stuck to the single-player missions. Unfortunately, the single-player missions where somewhat repetitive and therefore I got even more annoyed. I'm sure LC's a great city, but if it's not inside a great, captivating game, I'm not going to have enough patience to give it it's fair shot. Unlike SA, where I can probably paint you every damn pixel of the map and describe each mission that occurred there, IV didn't give me enough reason to learn where I was or what was great about it.

I'm sure I should have given the DLC an extra chance, and perhaps spent a bit longer after the missions doing other stuff (though there didn't seem to be much to do afterwards - not much that interested me, anyway) I would've liked the game a bit more, but I'm not really a "gamer" in your typical sense. I never like games that most people do, while also appreciating ones that a lot of people hate, and if it wasn't for the fact "Grand Theft Auto" was on the cover, I would never have played IV at all.)

EDIT: Agh, double-post. I didn't realise I wasn't editing the previous - well, I was... blame this unintuitive quote system!

Mr_Leone
  • Mr_Leone

    The X

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010
  • None

#51

Posted 08 July 2014 - 12:17 PM

I can accept the fact IV wasn't exactly diverse in free roam, sure. One thing I cannot accept is people saying LC fell short. Compared to what? It has no competition at all. None. No other game has came close to achieving what IV did with Liberty City. I've played watch dogs and even it cannot compare to the detail of IV. Even V falls short compared to IV, with the same Mexican led in every place excluding the Alamo sea. Again, cherry picking, but these are things that are important to, how you put it Deji, the abstract gamer. Sure the 3D era was casual, but that was because they couldn't produce the cutscenes and the graphics weren't good enough to tell a gripping tale. I mean, Jesus, they had no facial animations at the time. Hard to portray emotion in the 3D era. I hate SA, I do, but they did the right thing. Better to go all out on gameplay that was proven fluid and effective than half ass a crime drama. The issue I have however is that they already pulled the plug on story first, gameplay second. Mark my words, IV will be the only GTA that plays by those rules.
  • TheOtherRyan and Donut like this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#52

Posted 08 July 2014 - 12:21 PM Edited by Official General, 08 July 2014 - 12:37 PM.

Well, DLC's, especially paid SP DLC's, they usually add quite a bit to the game. You said "unless the DLC adds something major", well, it is going to. Whether you end up liking it is a totally different thing. Just like how I didn't bother with the DLC because I hated IV, I don't think you should allow your final judgement to depend so greatly on DLC. "

 

* I've explained myself to you about the SP DLC. I cannot say anything more or further than that. I don't know what to expect, and when it comes I will judge it accordingly. If I like it (along with the NG additions) and it greatly improves my experience of playing the game, then I will praise it accordingly. If it still does not make much of a difference, then my views about V will stay the same - I will still see the game as I do now - quite a disappointment. Ok you did not bother with IV's DLC because you hated IV - once again that's you and I'm not you - for second time. The thing is, I never hated IV, but I initially was critical of IV myself. I bought EFLC and it greatly improved my experience of IV, I liked IV much more after playing it. If DLC improved IV for me, why cannot the same be for V ? It makes perfect sense to me, but if you don't agree, that you. And I'll say for the last time, I'm not you. 

 

 "Once you know and see what it is", you'll just have set yourself up perfectly to further insult the game - my personal thoughts about people who take such a strong stance against it like you, though, is that whatever the hell the DLC is, they're not going to appreciate it a single bit more  In fact, they're just waiting for another opportunity to further complain, because REALLY? 

 

You're reading to much into that, and that's your business, not mine. I already explained that to you that i'll judge the DLC properly when I know more or when I see it, yet you wanna tweak it to see it from that angle and say it's an opportunity for me to complain ? Why, I have no idea, and I don't care to know either. I'm actually waiting for an opportunity to praise Rockstar for greatly improving V believe it or not - I just want V to be the game that met my expectations, and if DLC can do it, then great. if not then again my views on it remain the same. I've praised Rockstar for making RDR and IV - two of the best games last-gen, with RDR in fact, being the best ever game I played last gen (joint with Uncharted 2). The thing is, V just does not match up to either RDR or IV for me, and I really hoped and thought it would indeed have surpassed both of them.

 

What other logic is there behind paying or playing a DLC for a game that you don't like anyway?

 

I never actually said I don't like GTA V, you said that and assumed that. Yes, I was quite disappointed by it, and I was especially annoyed at the fact that a lot of focus was on the MP, which had some stuff I liked that was not in the SP. But I still think V is a good game, however it's not as great as I thought it would be, and that is still a big disappointment at the same time. So therefore, I have a plausible reason to be interested in this SP DLC because it might further improve my experience of V and make me like it more. 

 

"Stuff that I would like to see" was perhaps in IV... this time its everyone else's turn. People like me, who didn't like IV, finally get something that "makes up" for it. You see it the opposite way, and if IV was released after V, we could be having this conversation backwards :p

 

No disrespect, but I don't care about 'your turn' or 'people like you' bro. I care only about what I expected and what I wanted to see in V, and that's what directly affects my reception and perception of the game. It's great that you and others are happy with V and got most of what you wanted from it, but right now, I feel letdown by V and that's all the concerns me, I'm not interested in what others wanted, it's not gonna make me feel any better about the game. 

 

And you really need to stop telling everyone that fans are somehow being tricked into liking V. That's basically your tactic, insult the game, insult the developers, insult the fans who you share a favourite website with. Yet, I somehow can't insult, be critical of, or be negative towards V haters? Now wait a minute, that seems very biased. But that's what this whole thing is anyway, biased.

 

Nope I never said anything like that. I'm just expressing my views on the game. I don't insult the fans of V either, I just challenge their comments or arguments, I don't generally insult people. If I insult anyone, most times, it's either very minor, it's me playing around or being sarcastic. If I insult someone in a major way, it's because they did it to me first. One thing I don't do is tell people to piss off to another place simply because they don't hold the same views as me. 

 

All I'm asking is, just like I respect IV fandom by not moaning about IV's many faults and how it has ruined GTA in every IV topic, those who don't like V should show the same respect to V fans. I'm not actually a 'fan' of V, in fact, since I've not played it enough and it was ages ago. But if you want to complain peacefully, it's usually a good idea to stick to where the other complainers are, instead of finding topics where fans are and complaining about their fandom.

 

Sorry, no I will not. I will not do as you ask and I will not listen to your advice on this issue, so just respect that. If not then fine, I will counter your comments or arguments directed at me where as I see fit. I don't have to 'find' a topic that suits my complaints or views just because you say so, certainly not. So if you wanna waste your energy repeating yourself and being ignored, then that's up to you.  

  • TheOtherRyan likes this

Deji
  • Deji

    Coding like a Rockstar!

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2007
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Mods]

#53

Posted 08 July 2014 - 01:10 PM

*** I'm not you. ***

Indeed, I'm just saying I'm better than you, that's all ;)

But really though, do you have to BE someone to learn from them? I mean, I'm actually suggesting something that I feel would make YOU happier, as well as all the people who simply want to chat about V and enjoy themselves. I'm trying to point hypocrisy by using myself as an example. I'm pointing out how stupid the behaviour I've chosen not to take is, by explaining the logic behind not taking it. Surely you don't have to be me to understand logic?
 

*** RDR *** RDR *** RDR ***

I don't know how many times I'm gonna have to repeat this one but... RDR WAS NOT MADE BY ROCKSTAR NORTH!

"R*" if you mean "Rockstar Games", is a completely different entity from the developers who create each individual game. You need to notice the difference between development and branding. While they are all "Rockstar Games" games, Rockstar Games are mostly in charge of publishing, public relations, marketing, etc., and they have very little effect on what actually makes each game good or not, so any such comparison between GTA and RDR while talking about R* is pretty silly. The developers of each game don't even live on the same continent.
 

I never actually said I don't like GTA V, you said that and assumed that *** But I still think V is a good game

Then, what logic is there behind speaking so negatively so often about GTA V, when you actually think it's a good game? You've gone on and on about it in many topics where it wasn't fitting, insulting fans, calling out Rockstar and saying they're just feeding people bullsh*t, agreeing with everyone who thinks the least bit similarly and disagreeing with those who think otherwise, for what? It's no wonder I just assumed you hated GTA V, when every word coming out of your IP about it has been negative, it's just the most logical conclusion. Now you're saying that you actually thought V was good (thus invalidating all hatred and over-dramatisation of R* and their remaining supporters) - there seems to be an even bigger logical flaw in this whole thing...
 

No disrespect, but I don't care about 'your turn' or 'people like you' bro. I care only about what I expected and what I wanted to see in V, and that's what directly affects my reception and perception of the game. Right now, I feel letdown by V and that's all the concerns me, I'm not interested in what others wanted, it's not gonna make me feel any better about the game.

Yes, but it should at least, if you were a somewhat reasonable person, make you reconsider before bashing every aspect of GTA V so needlessly. You say GTA V was a good game? Well people who are enjoying that good game are righteously "over there", and people who are disappointed in it can be wherever else they want to be. Until this DLC comes, I don't see any logic in lurking around the V fandom waiting for the perfect opportunity to vent more frustration at a game that even you are saying people have a good reason to appreciate... again, it's like going to church and insulting God and his creations.
 

Nope I never said anything like that. I'm just expressing my views on the game. I don't insult the fans of V either, I just challenge their comments or arguments, I don't generally insult people. If I insult anyone, most times, it's either very minor, it's me playing around or being sarcastic. If I insult someone in a major way, it's because they did it to me first. One thing I don't do is tell people to piss off to another place simply because they don't hold the same views as me.

I feel the same way when I insult GTA V criticisers and tell them to piss off, too, and somehow it always results in something unpleasant like this. Negativity only results in more negativity, and that's the whole point in my dramatisations about V-haters needing to be crucified... if you don't like that, think about what you're doing. We're not so different, yet I'm only playing around and being sarcastic, while to me it seems like you have a real bug up your ass and just want to lecture everyone until to have the same views as you. See how unproductive this is? It's my entire point in a nutshell. Be positive! - as I'm always saying ;)
 

Sorry, no I will not. I will not do as you ask and I will not listen to your advice on this issue, so just respect that. If not then fine, I will counter your comments or arguments directed at me where as I see fit. I don't have to 'find' a topic that suits my complaints or views just because you say so, certainly not. So if you wanna waste your energy repeating yourself and being ignored, then that's up to you.

As long as you respect me taking a guarding stance against those who are irrefutably hateful towards a game that even they (apparently) think is "good", sure! I will counter the arguments against V too. And, just like you, I don't seem to care with repeating myself and being ignored. I'd like to point out the distinction, though, that while what people like you are doing is posting in places where people exist who like GTA V, all I do is refute it in those same places and tell the haters to piss off. I'm on the defensive, yet it's the side of negativity which starts it all off. And your actions are simply illogical. Sure, you don't like V and you have every right to criticise it, but why go to the very places where the majority of people enjoy it? And why fixate on V so much? Because you think it's "good" but could be better? And why never use positive criticism, and are always being as negative as possible? There's hundreds of thousands of games out there ranging from terrible to "good, but failed to meet my expectations", yet you feel the need to post REPEATEDLY about ONE of them? There's no logic there. There's games much more deserving of the type of old and tired criticism you and others repeat. There's games which are less deserving, but probably even more disappointing than V in relation to what people expected from it.

The reason why this entire topic is funny is because there were people just like you around, targeting IV. I used myself as an example of the right way people could have gone about the problem of a game being a disappointment. It certainly solved more than going to its fan forums and spouting a tonne of hate about it. If I were, well, like you I guess, I'd spend my time on this forum full of topics about games I do and don't like going to all the ones I don't like and posting all the reasons why I don't like them, too. You've seen my posts, I could tear them to shreds. In case you haven't noticed, I like a good bitch and moan as much as the next woman (teehee), but it is simply very stupid to decide to do that, when I can instead stick to the topics about games I'm interested in, therefore better investing my own time and not ruining everyone else's.

Again, I'm using myself only as an example, because I can only speak for myself. But I'm sure there's a thousand more people like me, just like there's a thousand more people like you or anyone else. The trick to people with difference living peacefully together, is for those people to keep their distance and not push their opinions in the very places the other people use to have their opinions. It's why people from different religions only go to their respective churches, anyone who doesn't stick to that very simple rule is just asking for trouble. Sure, once in a while there can be a good reason for some of each group to come together and, if they're able to, share their opinions in a civilised and POSITIVE manner. But if even one person brings negativity into it, at least one other person is going to get upset. If you're always positive, including when giving criticism, you can continue to share your opinions with those people and be righteous in not expecting negativity straight back. A simple concept, but I'm sure you have a differing, negative opinion about that.



People, spread love, not hate!

HaythamKenway
  • HaythamKenway

    Scavenger

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

#54

Posted 08 July 2014 - 01:27 PM Edited by SFPD officer, 08 July 2014 - 01:46 PM.

I can't really reply to you Deji, because you said SA was a master piece. I think you will be more than satisfied with VI if you loved SA. More power to you if that's what you think a masterpiece is. IV was an experiment that failed. People don't want to be like me and invest hours into the story, beyond the game. People aren't like me in the fact they don't want to walk down the street and breathe in the architecture of a virtual city. People seem to prefer fast cars, planes and crazy weapons. Rock star has lost control of itself. V felt like a game produced by the demand of the casual gamer, and lost the originality the series once had. I just... I don't know, I feel like V took the depth out of the GTA series. I don't see much beyond what the game tells me. I also have a funny feeling V was a way of getting the attention of the younger gamer. VI be a continuation of that in my opinion.

The problem with V is that it doesn't even know what it is and R* don't know what to do with it either. They are are just too afraid of their own thing again and risking another backlash. I guess I can understand them in a way. For almost 10 years, they were at the top of their game, they heard nothing but praise and adoration. But a lot has changed since 7th generation began. More quality open world games started cropping up, many of them surpassing GTA in a lot of ways. IV was R*'s baby, created at the time when technology finally caught up with their ambition and they finally could tell the story set in the world they only dreamt about when they were forced to make stylized parodies of past decades because of PS2's limits. But IV was also developed during the Hot Coffee fiasco, the lowest, most psychically draining point in R*'s history. I'm sure people at R* poured their hearts and souls into the game. And then people hated it. Must have been a real punch in the gut.

 

I think R* are quite insecure. They never responded to criticism well (from people they care about that is - they don't care what Fox News say about them, but they do care about what people in video game industry and gaming community say) and it makes sense that they want to avoid it as much as they can. I bet R* wanted to push the boundaries again, send V in another new direction, but then they stopped and told themselves "Wait! What if people will not like this? I don't want to see another five years of people making fun of bowling!". R* did a lot of creative things, especially in story structure and playing around with classic GTA tropes, such as place of antagonist in the story, the presentation of the protagonist or how mission contacts work.

 

But everything else is just painfully conventional. Apart from switching, V doesn't try anything new, it doesn't feel like pushing the series forward or even just in a different direction. R* just went crazy with their attempts to appease the fans and tried to get rid of as much "IV" as possible and cram in as much from 3D Era GTAs that people spend last five years gushing over and ramping everything they liked up to 11 (the last thing is, for example, pretty obvious in how satire is handled, compared to rather somber social commentary of IV and 3D Era's use of satire as a backdrop to crazy criminal fantasy).

 

However, they also wanted to build on IV's foundations. I'm pretty sure they wanted to tell a serious, character-driven story like IV, RDR and MP3. Michael's story arc, the strongest arc of the game with the most attention put to it, is certainly steering in that way. But they were also possibly afraid that the story of a middle-aged ex-thief who searches for a new place in life, goes to therapy sessions and tries to connect with his family would alientate the audience even more than Niko's grim revenge tale. So, at the same time, Franklin was aimed to cater to 3D Era fans and Trevor to people who flocked over to more explosive and over the top open world games like Saints Row and Just Cause. Please note that I'm not saying they exist just for that reason only; I believe that R* wanted to tell a multi-protag story with drastically different leads right from the start, but I'd say it's obvious which protagonist is the most developed and whose arc is central to the overall story.

 

Also, instead of pushing the multi-protag concept further and differentiating the trio more, all three of them are practically the same reskinned character from gameplay standpoint and from storytelling perspective, their lives interwine so much they, and their respective supporting casts, don't get much room for themselves and their own character development. Again, I think this was a compromise out of fear of backlash, because in previews, R* kept talking about how they went great lenghts to make three-protag story work and not get confusing. R* were probably afraid that people can't handle three different GTA storylines running at the same time, which is, as anyone who played IV and its Episodes at the same time can tell you, a total bullsh*t.

 

R*'s outrageous pandering to fans and compromising their own creative vision led to a very disjointed, bloated game that has no ground to stand for by itself. It is just a derivative of previous GTAs, instead of really being its own, new thing. Loads of ideas and features, all heading in different directions, none of them tuned to perfection. The sad irony is that if you are a hardcore fan of VC, SA, IV or whatever, this mash-up of ideas and concepts from previous GTAs has nothing to offer to you, since everything has already been done and most likely better.

  • Mr_Leone, word is bond, Donut and 2 others like this

Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

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

#55

Posted 08 July 2014 - 01:33 PM

^ Yeah. The thing is we as a fanbase are to blame too. Rockstar are afraid of receiving another backlash. Listening to the fans is one thing but we should just let Rockstar create their own game. They probably have a ten fold of great ideas but unfortunately when you have SA fanboys screaming "Jetpacks, planes!" in their face you can't expect them to deliver really. 

 

Why did so many people like RDR? Because it was like the first in the series. (Barely anyone played Red Dead Revolver) Rockstar were under no pressure and they gave (for a lot of people) an absolutely breathtaking game. I feel we should just let them create their own game for GTA VI, then we can see what they have in mind for GTA to contine to evolve.

  • HaythamKenway likes this

boron5
  • boron5

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2013

#56

Posted 08 July 2014 - 01:44 PM

 

 

 

 

Nobody will hate GTA IV as the hatred for GTA V.  :lol:

Actually, as Solidus says, the hatred for GTA IV was much, much worse than the hatred for V back when it came out.  But, it went away like the hatred for V will go away.

 

 

@ Staten

 

Unless the SP DLC greatly adds to V, I doubt the hatred for it it will just go away. 

 

Oh, I don't mean straight away, and no one should count on DLC changing things.  Even EFLC, which is one of the best - if not THE best - examples of DLC done right, still generated hatred toward IV.  People complained it was full of content that had been cut from IV itself.

 

 

To be honest, I most remember people saying that EFLC made IV feel much better. However I heard a few people say that IV should have been what EFLC was. You cannot deny that EFLC definitely made IV more popular as whole, because it certainly worked for me that's for sure. 

 

I agree with you, the feeling I get is that any kind of DLC won't save V, it's been too big a disappointment. But because of V's huge commercial and (many would say undeserved) critical success, I just cannot see Rockstar bothering to produce any game-changing DLC to this game. 

 

Just out of curiosity - and maybe I shouldn't even bother, but.. how has GTA V been a disappointment? Are you talking about the online portion?


Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#57

Posted 08 July 2014 - 02:42 PM

@ Deji

I'm not going over the same things again. I explained myself to you well enough, I've told you what my position is and what I will stand by. Okay, you say you're better than me. If it means everything in the world for you to be the prefect golden boy of these forums, then please knock yourself out. You're still not gonna change anything on my part, so you keep at it pal.

@ Boron5

Please read other earlier threads on critiques and analysis on V, my posts are well documented there. No disrespect, but I cannot be bothered to go into all that again, I'd have so many things to say.
  • Donut likes this

Deji
  • Deji

    Coding like a Rockstar!

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2007
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Mods]

#58

Posted 08 July 2014 - 02:46 PM Edited by Deji, 08 July 2014 - 03:05 PM.

Why did so many people like RDR? Because it was like the first in the series. (Barely anyone played Red Dead Revolver) Rockstar were under no pressure and they gave (for a lot of people) an absolutely breathtaking game. I feel we should just let them create their own game for GTA VI, then we can see what they have in mind for GTA to contine to evolve.


OH MY GOD. THE PEOPLE WHO MADE THE READ DEAD SERIES ARE A DIFFERENT ROCKSTAR. I LITERALLY pointed that out a post ago. What's more is that Read Dead Redemption in particular wasn't even out before GTA V started being made, so expecting some magic to happen where the qualities of one are reflected in the other is stupid and it keeps annoying me how little people actually look into this stuff :p

And yeah, that's exactly what we should do. Give R* some space, stop criticising every move they make, including any moves towards trying to satisfy their fanbase (as a company should) and making money (as a company should). But I doubt they really felt under any "pressure". I mean, they're a company for starters, companies don't have pressure. Each of the workers for the company sure didn't have too much pressure, I mean, not any more than they'd usually have. In fact, if anything, the more GTA is a success, the less pressure they'll feel for the next one, because they've got a certainty for a base rate of success.



Catering to fandom...

The fact is, sales are the true representative at the end of the day. That, and possibly the critical acclaim they get with every single major GTA title they've released to this day, have kept them going and kept them being able to take the next game to new heights. You say they're wrong for listening to SA fanboy's? Well if it wasn't for the huge success of SA, IV would have been a lot more limited, and probably turned out a lot less praise-worthy itself. If R*'s next move are to attempt a repeat of SA's success (just like they were basically doing with IV and III's success, I might add) then good! And they've done it! With the money they've made and are still yet to me, the next GTA games budget will allow them twice the freedom they already had, and even if you don't like V, with every disappointing game, they're a step closer to a game which is more perfect for you. For me, SA was that game, and unfortunately I don't think it can be replaced in my heart [/over_sensitive] but if V at least even nears that, I'm happy. If not, I've just got to trust that in the future they'll bring out a game that will completely blow SA out of the water, and with the success of GTA V, I can be happy knowing that at least the GTA series is not dying any time soon, which provides a greater chance for that "perfect game" (which doesn't exist) to come about.

Gaming isn't like music, in my opinion. It's not like when an artist "sells out" and there's no chance of them making something you like again. Games are highly subjective, because they rely on "fun". And fun isn't something that has a more popular opinion - even if it does, abiding to it doesn't guarantee fun. Unlike Pop music, each release has to aim to be very different from the last. Luckily, Rockstar North are pretty good at that, and I don't think any GTA game has been too similar or too different to and from it's predecessors. They've expanded, adapted and changed, going off of what's most successful. Even when they DO have something successful, they take a whole new angle in the next game and start afresh, so I think they're more interested in trying all sorts of different things than catering to particular audiences. As long as they do what THEY think is in the spirit of GTA, it will still remain the most successful franchise out there, and heck, they seem to be doing pretty well with that tactic.


@ Deji

I'm not going over the same things again. I explained myself to you well enough,

No, you really didn't. I myself explained to you well enough why the things you've gone over are complete garbage.

I've told you what my position is and what I will stand by. Okay, you say you're better than me. If it means everything in the world for you to be the prefect golden boy of these forums, then please knock yourself out. You're still not gonna change anything on my part, so you keep at it pal.

Again, you're doing the same thing you did last time. You can't discuss these things, but you are very capable of putting that negativity out there when it's NOT even the topic of discussion. You're perfectly happy starting and partially participating in these debates, but it only gets so far in before you start to descend to petty levels. If you really don't want to say anything more, why post saying that? I'm a reasonably intelligent guy, so if you'd had just not addressed my post at all, I would have figured out how ignorant you were being. You really didn't have to write a post which does nothing but show such ignorance. This, by the way, is what I was referring to the last time you tried to engage me in this crap, but this time I thought you were ready to see it through and not be arrogant without reasonably defending your point. My mistake.

And if it means everything in the world for you to be an ass about things that people are trying to talk about, then please, as I've said before, but apparently you object against ME saying anything like this, piss off. You're still not gonna change anything on any of our parts, so you keep being the one to start it pal. Oh, how your hypocrisy shows when really pushed!

@ Boron5

Please read other earlier threads on critiques and analysis on V, my posts are well documented there. No disrespect, but I cannot be bothered to go into all that again, I'd have so many things to say.

You seem to continue to bother with it a heck of a lot where it's not wanted though, don't you? It's like you prefer to do the very opposite of what everyone else is doing. If they want to talk about what they like, you talk about what you hate. If they want to talk about what you hate, you suddenly don't want to talk about it at all. You don't seem to mind repeating yourself where it's not wanted, but when actually challenged to, you're not up for it. This is exactly the kind of behaviour I've been expressing my hatred of in my posts. Unlike you, I'm very willing to elaborate more on it if you still don't get it, though ;)

Mr_Leone
  • Mr_Leone

    The X

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2010
  • None

#59

Posted 08 July 2014 - 03:05 PM

Well OG I for one enjoy Deji's posts even though we have zero similar opinions.
  • Deji likes this

Johan
  • Johan

    Free The Future

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2011
  • Dominican-Republic
  • Helpfulness Award [GTA]

#60

Posted 08 July 2014 - 03:15 PM

Never hated it in the first place or known many people that did until I decided to roam this place, V isn't a terrible game, but it's the worst one I've played in the series.. and yeah, even worse than the PSP titles (which weren't bad in the first place, but usually people don't compare those games to any of the "big time" ones)

 

Overhyped.

  • Official General and Donut like this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users