Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Why do people hate/dislike GTA V so much?

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
852 replies to this topic

Poll: Why do people hate/dislike GTA V so much? (385 member(s) have cast votes)

Why do you hate it?

  1. Because of the short storyline!!! (29 votes [7.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.53%

  2. Becaue of the bad missions (3 votes [0.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.78%

  3. Because of the ending (4 votes [1.04%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.04%

  4. Because it doesn't have replayabillity (25 votes [6.49%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.49%

  5. Because of the protagonists (3 votes [0.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.78%

  6. Because it did not have features that online had. (31 votes [8.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.05%

  7. because the storyline sucked and I disliked/hated it! (28 votes [7.27%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.27%

  8. I did not dislike, nor hate GTA V. (262 votes [68.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 68.05%

Vote
_Kindled_
  • _Kindled_

    ‘Be Yourself’ is about the worst advice you can give to people.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • United-States

#481

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:29 AM Edited by _Kindled_, 21 August 2014 - 01:31 AM.

^^

 

That's one massive fan-boy.

 

But seriously, though, were you expecting V to be exactly like IV? If that's true than how pathetic and laughable.  :lol:

 

Most people definitely asked for more than they could carry.

  • OneManCrimeWave and Bill Williamson like this

Payne Killer
  • Payne Killer

    Un uomo, un cavallo, una pistola.

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2014
  • None

#482

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:33 AM

^^
 
That's one massive fan-boy.
 
But seriously, though, were you expecting V to be exactly like IV? If that's true than how pathetic and laughable.  :lol:
 
Most people definitely asked for more than they could carry.

He and the many GTA 4 fanboys (me included) were hoping for improvements from IV, not a downgrade.

Geralt of Rivia
  • Geralt of Rivia

    Gwent Master

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • United-States
  • April Fools Winner 2015

#483

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:52 AM Edited by TheMasterfocker, 21 August 2014 - 01:53 AM.



I really liked the storter storyline. 69 missions are more than enough for the story that they wanted to tell. I prefer more focused and action-packed missions that keep the pace and story relevant for the entire campaign, than 100+ missions with fillers and stupid A to B tasks inbetween, like IV.

 

 
Exaggeration much? You make it sound like every mission in GTA V is an action packed master piece. GTA IV has so many missions that go underappreciated by the masses.
 
I guess dark and gritty missions don't sit too well with the Michael Bay crowd who can't go longer than a few minutes without a tank, plane, parachute etc. :sarcasm:
Who said you could voice your opinion here?

Get back! Back I say!

You shall not pass!

@Above:

And it was an upgrade. To me. And to the vast majority of people who bought the game and are pleased with the game.
  • Scaglietti likes this

MiamiViceCity
  • MiamiViceCity

    The Unforgiven

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Most Obsessive Name Changer 2016 (My unofficial GTAF annual award)
    Biggest Fanboy 2013, 2014, 2015
    Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Member in the OGA 2012

#484

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:55 AM

^^

 

That's one massive fan-boy.

 

But seriously, though, were you expecting V to be exactly like IV? If that's true than how pathetic and laughable.  :lol:

 

Most people definitely asked for more than they could carry.

 

Where have I ever said or alluded that I was expecting it to be exactly like GTA IV? 


The Algerian
  • The Algerian

    Professional

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2012
  • None

#485

Posted 21 August 2014 - 02:06 AM

To answer the question: 

"Why do people HATE/dislike GTA V so much?"

 

There's always hate whenever any game or movie comes out.

Especially if it's a sequel to a well-established and beloved series.

People are going to bitch and whine about every little detail, and there's really nothing you can do to stop it.

  • OneManCrimeWave and Kampret like this

Payne Killer
  • Payne Killer

    Un uomo, un cavallo, una pistola.

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2014
  • None

#486

Posted 21 August 2014 - 02:21 AM



I really liked the storter storyline. 69 missions are more than enough for the story that they wanted to tell. I prefer more focused and action-packed missions that keep the pace and story relevant for the entire campaign, than 100+ missions with fillers and stupid A to B tasks inbetween, like IV.

 

 
Exaggeration much? You make it sound like every mission in GTA V is an action packed master piece. GTA IV has so many missions that go underappreciated by the masses.
 
I guess dark and gritty missions don't sit too well with the Michael Bay crowd who can't go longer than a few minutes without a tank, plane, parachute etc. :sarcasm:
Who said you could voice your opinion here?

Get back! Back I say!

You shall not pass!

@Above:

And it was an upgrade. To me. And to the vast majority of people who bought the game and are pleased with the game.
It may be an upgrade to you but I was very disappointed with it.
  • MiamiViceCity likes this

S1N0D3UTSCHT3K
  • S1N0D3UTSCHT3K

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2013

#487

Posted 21 August 2014 - 02:41 AM

 

I really liked the storter storyline. 69 missions are more than enough for the story that they wanted to tell. I prefer more focused and action-packed missions that keep the pace and story relevant for the entire campaign, than 100+ missions with fillers and stupid A to B tasks inbetween, like IV.

 

 

Exaggeration much? You make it sound like every mission in GTA V is an action packed master piece. GTA IV has so many missions that go underappreciated by the masses.

 

I guess dark and gritty missions don't sit too well with the Michael Bay crowd who can't go longer than a few minutes without a tank, plane, parachute etc. :sarcasm:

 

 

that's an interesting description of the story production's core appeal...

 

if anything I would have said GTA V panders to the Michael Mann crowd, which is basically the anti-Michael Bay as far as action goes

 

most of GTA V at least... maybe 3-4 missions aside (namely Heist 2 Offshore, Heist 4, and Heist 5 Roof but maybe the Fame of Shame/Semitruck mission feels very Michael Bay/Transformer-ish in how safe and uninspired it was for what should have been the 3rd or 4th most important moment in the story)

 

but all the Heist set-ups and preparation missions (especially with the 1980s synth/cyberpunk esque ambiemt music), the very jazzy original score for the action scenes (The Alchemist is basically as opposite as Hans Zimmer/Michael Bay as you can get)... some of the boring-but-needed-for-attachment missions like Someone Say Yogi or whatever it's called where the ending of that missions is amazing), the slow build up to Heist 1 (all the M and F missions to build up their characters as genuinely needing this heist and appreciating that heist) i mean that's one reason exactly why heist 1 is sooooo good is because the game was purposeful and conservative with its build up to really established anticipation and need.

 

 

which of course then Trevor short of shatters with his Michael Bay esque heist 2.... and i'll agree with you there. first time I played GTA V, I thought heist 2 was a joke... i was 99% sure that it was not actually going to be a mission or heist. i couldn't believe how silly and over the top it was compared to heist 1. almost a 'jump the shark' moment if it's possible to use that term so early within a game

 

but thankfully if you choose container ship method it's not too crazy and then after that first IAA building missions (also very Michael Bay-ish) then the FIB missions begin to tone down a bit and become much more Michael Mann-ish again

 

basically from about when T shows up at M's house up until about the IAA kidnapping and tortune scene, I'd agree that the game becomes a quite Michael Bay-ish and it's probably the worst part of the story. but from about Heist 3 through to the Heist 4 set-up and prep, tones down a lot. Heist 4 goes crazy but gotta admit that's a crazy moment 'done right' and same for the Merryweather train mission....  i think that chapter of the game is probably the best and perfectly climbs from about heist 3, Hood Safari (the jet ski chase is a bit silly but the Grove Street shootout is maybe the best firefight in the game and especially the camerawork at the very moment the shooting starts is STRAIGHT out of Miami Vice/Heat (you know when they first run and duck for cover right before the shooting starts and the camera follows on F's back? that part is awesome and very Mann inspired) and then through Cade Libre (reminds me a lot of Collateral with the music and camera) Exile.... with the Paleto firefight being the climax

 

and once they back in LS. well, it's not really super Michael Mann or Michael Bay-ish... T and M just bitch too much... and Heist 5 feels a bit forced and un-needed (though the ending of the Fire approach where they torch the truck and talk in the getaway vehicle  and then celebrate in Lester's house is one of the best scenes in the game) 

 

the game just starts to lose a bit of its 'care' by then... like heist 1 felt amazing because it built up your anticipation and caring

 

but by heist 5, there was just a bit too much over-the-topness and 'beating the odds' that you're just like, ".....OK"

 

i think Heist 5 Subtle saves it a bit though the set-up is pretty awesome. and there are still super fun missions like Lamar Down, but the bitching between M and T becomes a bit uninspired.

 

 

 

so I think sometimes the story production struggles between its mood, sometimes it seems it wants to be a Michael Mann crime drama, very slow and methodical and conservative and atmospheric.....

 

but then there are these Michael Bay-ish moments that just sort of kill that mood

 

I think the former outweights the latter so I don't agree with your comment that it appeals more to the MB crowd then the MM crowd

 

but i see where you're coming from

 

and I think most GTA V fans actually agree because one of the biggest consensus points seems to be that Heist 1 is often considered the favorite and the highlight of the game, as with the point of the game basically starting around Heist 3 and ending after Heist 4 and then Heist 6 Subtle isolated from all the other moments around it... and those all being the most Mann-ish mome 


MiamiViceCity
  • MiamiViceCity

    The Unforgiven

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Most Obsessive Name Changer 2016 (My unofficial GTAF annual award)
    Biggest Fanboy 2013, 2014, 2015
    Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Member in the OGA 2012

#488

Posted 21 August 2014 - 02:55 AM

I really liked the storter storyline. 69 missions are more than enough for the story that they wanted to tell. I prefer more focused and action-packed missions that keep the pace and story relevant for the entire campaign, than 100+ missions with fillers and stupid A to B tasks inbetween, like IV.

 
Exaggeration much? You make it sound like every mission in GTA V is an action packed master piece. GTA IV has so many missions that go underappreciated by the masses.
 
I guess dark and gritty missions don't sit too well with the Michael Bay crowd who can't go longer than a few minutes without a tank, plane, parachute etc. :sarcasm:
Who said you could voice your opinion here?
Get back! Back I say!
You shall not pass!
@Above:
And it was an upgrade. To me. And to the vast majority of people who bought the game and are pleased with the game.
It may be an upgrade to you but I was very disappointed with it.

The only things it's "upgraded" to me are the graphics and some of the physics (but not all as it feels more like a Saints Row game in ways).

In regards to gameplay I thought they done a much better job than GTA IV when it came to customising. Other than that if it wasn't for customising I wouldn't touch the game now.

It's just too hit and miss for me to say its a great game. GTA IV was/is great IMO because it simply suited my tastes. Although GTA V is a good game I wouldn't regret it if I traded it in.

Pastry
  • Pastry

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2013
  • Estonia

#489

Posted 21 August 2014 - 03:35 AM

I don't hate the game but if you ask me RDR and MP3 were flippin' GOTD (Game of The Decade). Somehow they made a great story but still somehow were missing something from it. That special R* charm or the GTA feeling is...it's missing. Opinions please.
  • DonMichaelCorleone and Kampret like this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#490

Posted 21 August 2014 - 05:27 AM

That special R* charm or the GTA feeling is...1001% missing from GTA V.
Definitely!! Undoubtedly!!
  • MiamiViceCity and DonMichaelCorleone like this

DonMichaelCorleone
  • DonMichaelCorleone

    GTA SA>GTA 4>GTA V End of discussion.

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2013
  • None

#491

Posted 21 August 2014 - 10:08 AM

gta 4 was a much better game than gta v.the countryside is pointless in gta v unlike san andreas.there is nothing in countryside.atleast gta 4 had content all over the map.


Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#492

Posted 21 August 2014 - 10:28 AM

gta 4 was a much better game than gta v.the countryside is pointless in gta v unlike san andreas.there is nothing in countryside.atleast gta 4 had content all over the map.

 

Am I the only one getting Deja vu reading this comment? 

 

No, it's really not. The countryside is useless in San An. The little towns are fine, but the countryside is completely useless. In V, there's at least stuff to see in it. What's in the countryside in San An? A badly placed car that rolls down a hill, and a grey lump that looks like a tit, but is apparently a mountain.

 

You could fit most of San An's countryside into V's central airstrip and the area around it. Once you've seen it, you've seen it.

 

Try taking a very slow plane up as high as it will go. Try taking a dubsta out across the ridges of the mountains. You'll rapidly see that the very realistic countryside of V is far superior to the countryside of V. Of course, you won't admit it, but you'll see it. 

  • kj2022, OneManCrimeWave, _Kindled_ and 1 other like this

Kampret
  • Kampret

    GabeN is fat.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 23 May 2014
  • Indonesia

#493

Posted 21 August 2014 - 10:58 AM

 

gta 4 was a much better game than gta v.the countryside is pointless in gta v unlike san andreas.there is nothing in countryside.atleast gta 4 had content all over the map.

 

Am I the only one getting Deja vu reading this comment? 

 

No, it's really not. The countryside is useless in San An. The little towns are fine, but the countryside is completely useless. In V, there's at least stuff to see in it. What's in the countryside in San An? A badly placed car that rolls down a hill, and a grey lump that looks like a tit, but is apparently a mountain.

 

You could fit most of San An's countryside into V's central airstrip and the area around it. Once you've seen it, you've seen it.

 

Try taking a very slow plane up as high as it will go. Try taking a dubsta out across the ridges of the mountains. You'll rapidly see that the very realistic countryside of V is far superior to the countryside of V. Of course, you won't admit it, but you'll see it. 

 

 

The countryside on both are only useful as a space between towns. except in SA you got 3 cities, making the countryside felt more useful.

 

About taking the Dubsta for mountain offroading, how is it enjoyable? No challenge at all because of its crap physics. I mean, come on. Every lump you hit, you'll flying for like, 10 meters above ground. The car handles the same as if you were driving on tarmac.

  • Niobium likes this

B Dawg
  • B Dawg

    It was mine, Cactus Wine!

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

#494

Posted 21 August 2014 - 11:16 AM Edited by B Dawg, 21 August 2014 - 11:19 AM.

 

I think IV fans are going really overboard with EFLC/IV to V comparisons. The way some IV fans were ranting, I actually thought there were nightclubs in GTA IV (Base game) but then as it turns out it's present only in TBoGT. However some people act as if everything in EFLC is present in the base game. (IV)


That's not really the point bro. The point is that V should built up and majorly improved on what features and content that IV had or lacked.

This. Why didn't V perfect the formula IV was going for. V with tweaks to IV's system had the potential to satisfy everyone, to find a balance.

 

Look at it this way, in the 3D era, all the GTA games were similar in their gameplay mechanics/elements and respective physics. GTA SA gave a more realistic feel after VC but it wasn't too different from it, gave some gameplay improvements like being able to move and shoot with the heavier guns. GTA III, VC, SA, LCS, VCS didn't have major differences between them gameplay wise. Jump forward to the HD era, you have IV with 2 expansions, and V who takes a MAJOR change in every part of the game compared to it's HD and even 3D era predecessors.

 

R* added features that actually mattered and made people happy with the final product, a return to series roots and fundamentals.

 

How is V in any way a return to the roots? A return to III's roots of no crouching?

Vehicles wise, they were never so strong or so easy to control. V has given us some of the ugliest cars to date, as opposed to previous GTAs.

Customization is welcomed, but it was never a fundamental part of the series.

Health regeneration? Forced hit markers and flashing screens for every kill with no option to turn off?

Mini-games and side activities related to sports as opposed to criminal activities?

Yea I could go on, but don't feel like writing more.

  • MiamiViceCity, Tycek, Choco Taco and 3 others like this

Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#495

Posted 21 August 2014 - 11:20 AM

 

Try taking a dubsta out across the ridges of the mountains. 

 

The countryside on both are only useful as a space between towns. except in SA you got 3 cities, making the countryside felt more useful.

 

About taking the Dubsta for mountain offroading, how is it enjoyable? No challenge at all because of its crap physics. I mean, come on. Every lump you hit, you'll flying for like, 10 meters above ground. The car handles the same as if you were driving on tarmac.

 

 

I'm not talking about running over the lumps and bumps. I'm talking about riding over the ridges, not so fast that you're going to hit bumps and take off, but slow enough to take in the scenery. It's stunningly beautiful (just like me). It's not meant to be a challenge. It's about appreciating the huge amount of work put into creating an amazing playground. 

But it's cool, I'm happy to keep that for myself. I use my imagination when I'm playing. I don't RP. I use the world around me in imaginative ways to get entertainment from it. 

 

When I initially played San An, I was able to do that. When I played through it again before V dropped, I found it almost impossible to really have fun in the countryside in the way I had before. Possibly as a result of playing so much IV before that. San An feels very restricted to me, almost claustrophobic at times. Where you do have some larger open areas, there's not that much in them. 

 

And, get this, I did some comparisons with San An's country side and V's and, what do you know, the forests are about as dense as each other. But because San An's map is so much smaller, but the scale is unrealistically large, it feels like there are more trees. But it's roughly equivalent. 

 

So here's my conclusion. Drum roll, please.

 

San An's map is clever. Very clever. They use a lot of tricks to create a sense of scale. GTA V's map is better, because it's actually got the scale without any need for trickery, is filled with details that you can spend time looking at (I will admit, as I always do, that there could be more interactive stuff out there) if you're so inclined. 

 

But if you're a bang-bang-guy that never takes his foot off the accelerator, you might not have the same kind of fun as those of us that like to use the world in full. 


DonMichaelCorleone
  • DonMichaelCorleone

    GTA SA>GTA 4>GTA V End of discussion.

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2013
  • None

#496

Posted 21 August 2014 - 11:34 AM

 

 

Try taking a dubsta out across the ridges of the mountains. 

 

The countryside on both are only useful as a space between towns. except in SA you got 3 cities, making the countryside felt more useful.

 

About taking the Dubsta for mountain offroading, how is it enjoyable? No challenge at all because of its crap physics. I mean, come on. Every lump you hit, you'll flying for like, 10 meters above ground. The car handles the same as if you were driving on tarmac.

 

 

I'm not talking about running over the lumps and bumps. I'm talking about riding over the ridges, not so fast that you're going to hit bumps and take off, but slow enough to take in the scenery. It's stunningly beautiful (just like me). It's not meant to be a challenge. It's about appreciating the huge amount of work put into creating an amazing playground. 

But it's cool, I'm happy to keep that for myself. I use my imagination when I'm playing. I don't RP. I use the world around me in imaginative ways to get entertainment from it. 

 

When I initially played San An, I was able to do that. When I played through it again before V dropped, I found it almost impossible to really have fun in the countryside in the way I had before. Possibly as a result of playing so much IV before that. San An feels very restricted to me, almost claustrophobic at times. Where you do have some larger open areas, there's not that much in them. 

 

And, get this, I did some comparisons with San An's country side and V's and, what do you know, the forests are about as dense as each other. But because San An's map is so much smaller, but the scale is unrealistically large, it feels like there are more trees. But it's roughly equivalent. 

 

So here's my conclusion. Drum roll, please.

 

San An's map is clever. Very clever. They use a lot of tricks to create a sense of scale. GTA V's map is better, because it's actually got the scale without any need for trickery, is filled with details that you can spend time looking at (I will admit, as I always do, that there could be more interactive stuff out there) if you're so inclined. 

 

But if you're a bang-bang-guy that never takes his foot off the accelerator, you might not have the same kind of fun as those of us that like to use the world in full. 

 

No matter how hard you try to convince.the reality is gta san andreas map is much better than gta v.in gta san andreas there were forests filled with mysterious cabins.have you visited north rock it has images carved on it and many other interesting places in countryside like that ghost town,unique buildings,there are so many details in countryside.v has only mountains.empty mountains.when you go near the mountains it look very ugly.its beautiful when you see it from distance,but how long you enjoy seeing that beauty?for 2 hours?2 days?the places in countryside are the same from sanandreas.the dam,the quarry,the oilfields,the satellites,the powerplant,the military base all were present in san andreas.


Kampret
  • Kampret

    GabeN is fat.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 23 May 2014
  • Indonesia

#497

Posted 21 August 2014 - 11:59 AM

@Fuzzknuckles

 

I do enjoy the scenery, but the whole map felt claustrophobic for me. Mountains everywhere blocking the views.

I don't enjoy a scenery by standing like a dope, I do some offroading with the Dubsta, but like I said, it felt dull for its lack of challenge, thanks to the new driving physics.

 

If I want to appreciate details, I'd go with IV instead. Now that's detail.

  • MiamiViceCity and Osho like this

Kampret
  • Kampret

    GabeN is fat.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 23 May 2014
  • Indonesia

#498

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:06 PM

...
V is better received from fans and press and that's the only concrete data we should keep in mind for the next game, because R* added features that actually mattered and made people happy with the final product, a return to series roots and fundamentals.
...

 

Health regen isn't GTA roots. Titanium cars aren't GTA roots, heck in 3D era your car would've blew up after like, 5 hits. Special abilities aren't GTA roots, that's SR-like. Weapon wheels aren't GTA roots (it's a good feature if you ask me). And the list goes on.

  • MiamiViceCity and Osho like this

Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#499

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:08 PM

No matter how hard you try to convince.the reality is gta san andreas map is much better than gta v.

No it's not. 

 

in gta san andreas there were forests filled with mysterious cabins.

Filled? No. I've played hundreds of hours of San An. There's probably 3 or 4 that I recall. Hardly filled. And if you filled a forest with cabins, it would be a town, not a forest. 

have you visited north rock it has images carved on it and many other interesting places in countryside like that ghost town

Yes I have. Have you visited the countryside of Blaine County? It has many, many images painted all over the various structures. It has a hidden hippy camp. It has a hidden homeless camp. It has little settlements dotted around the shores of the lake. It has three small towns, as well as several smaller areas filled with houses. 

 

Ghost town? You mean the collection of shoe boxes that has literally nothing to do in it (Aldea Malvada)? Or do you mean this collection of matchboxes, Las Brujas?

 

Now, if I recall correctly, the game drags you to these locations within the story. You don't get to wander around and find them, you're taken there. V doesn't do that. It lets you find places on your own. 

P.S. Look at those gnarly rocks. So real, much authentics.

there are so many details in countryside.v has only mountains.empty mountains.when you go near the mountains it look very ugly.its beautiful when you see it from distance,but how long you enjoy seeing that beauty?for 2 hours?2 days?the places in countryside are the same from sanandreas.the dam,the quarry,the oilfields,the satellites,the powerplant,the military base all were present in san andreas

There are way more details in Blaine County. Way more. Take, for example, the many environmental easter eggs. Of which there are none in San Andreas. The Thelma and Louise easter egg, the Infinite 8 easter eggs, the UFOs, the ghost, and so on and so on. What's San An got? A bike on top of Chilead. A geyser. A huge rock formation that you can fly through, but serves as little purpose as us arguing over the same sh*t every day. 

No matter how hard you try to convince, the reality is the GTA V map is much better than San An's map.

  • Tilemaxx likes this

Xerukal
  • Xerukal

    Kind ol' Trev

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2013
  • None

#500

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:09 PM Edited by Xerukal, 21 August 2014 - 12:11 PM.

Special abilities are not Saints Row like. SR had no such feature in it. The closest thing resembling a special ability in the Saints Row series would be the addition of superpowers in the fourth game. 

 

The protagonists' special abilities are hardly superpowers. Michael and Franklin's can be explained away as focus, and Trevor's is just pure drug fuel.

  • OneManCrimeWave and _Kindled_ like this

PhillBellic
  • PhillBellic

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2012
  • Australia
  • Ban Roulette Winner 2016

#501

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:25 PM

 

...
V is better received from fans and press and that's the only concrete data we should keep in mind for the next game, because R* added features that actually mattered and made people happy with the final product, a return to series roots and fundamentals.
...

 

Weapon wheels aren't GTA roots (it's a good feature if you ask me).

 

Weapon Wheels were an import from Red Dead Redemption. That is the way I see it.

 

Cheers.

  • Kampret likes this

Kampret
  • Kampret

    GabeN is fat.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 23 May 2014
  • Indonesia

#502

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:37 PM

 

 

...
V is better received from fans and press and that's the only concrete data we should keep in mind for the next game, because R* added features that actually mattered and made people happy with the final product, a return to series roots and fundamentals.
...

 

Weapon wheels aren't GTA roots (it's a good feature if you ask me).

 

Weapon Wheels were an import from Red Dead Redemption. That is the way I see it.

 

Cheers.

 

 

I know, but RDR isn't GTA. It's a very good feature if you ask me.


llllI1llllI1
  • llllI1llllI1

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2011

#503

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:38 PM Edited by sibs44, 21 August 2014 - 12:42 PM.

So I went back and played IV with my PS3 and this is what I found:

 

1) The controls are clunky; the way Niko moves about is just sluggish and I'm glad V improved upon this.

 

2) Those who says IV feels more alive, meh, I just don't see it. V has more peds/cars on the streets, more NPCs actually doing their jobs and doing their own activities. In IV, it feels like I'm the only one actually doing anything. Everyone else is standing around or walking about aimlessly. The best I've seen is an NPC taking pictures.

 

3) Mission variety.. oh wait IV doesn't have any.

 

4) Graphics, LC is just bland and a little hard to look at after playing V (though this just comes down to personal taste).

 

5) Traffic, I love that you can drive like a normal person in V. You can't stop at a red light without someone trying to get in front of you in IV, it's just annoying.

 

6) Cops. f*ck. IV. Cops. They see through walls, and they're everywhere. Oh, they actually arrest people? Where do they take them? Nowhere. And please don't say they're too hard. To battle V cops, it takes skill and strategy. This is why I like them. 

 

7) Interiors. IV has more interiors, but what can you really do inside of them? What purpose do they actually serve other than Niko standing there and eating a burger for a few seconds? You're going to go right back on the street anyway.I get why people like them being there.. but then some of you would complain that they take up space.

 

8) Details.. hmm.. I don't see how IV has more detail than V. 

 

9) Comparing the stories between the two, I'd say it's apples and oranges. Niko was a hitman, so his missions were fitting. Michael was the most wanted criminal in the US.. he's a killer..HE TAKES SCORES!

 

10) The only thing I wish they kept from IV were the driving/ragdoll physics. but I can live without it.

 

11) Motion blur, this is where V is lacking. It feels like you aren't going too fast. But this was taken out for gameplay reasons, don't know why.

 

Meh.. I could go on but I think IV fanboys are just very nit picky. What a notice about you lot is that V has certain features that you don't like, but that doesn't mean everyone else won't enjoy them.

 

Both games are amazing for what they are, if you like IV, then play it, no one is telling you not to.

  • OneManCrimeWave likes this

Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#504

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:42 PM

Ah, see, what you've done wrong there is present your opinion as an opinion. You're supposed to call everyone a dick and scream about how you've thrown toys out of your pram as a protest to THEEVILCORPORATEMEGABASTARDS at R*. 

 

Good list, I agree on every point. And I f*cking LOVE IV. Almost as much as V. But every one of these points is something I can agree with. 

  • llllI1llllI1 likes this

PhillBellic
  • PhillBellic

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2012
  • Australia
  • Ban Roulette Winner 2016

#505

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:44 PM

 

I know, but RDR isn't GTA. It's a very good feature if you ask me.

 

I agree it is a very good idea (I am actually using a Weapon Wheel script in IV now). If certain users wanted a return to GTA's roots it shouldn't have been programmed or implemented.

 

Cheers.

  • Kampret likes this

Scaglietti
  • Scaglietti

    Italia

  • Facade Corporation
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • Italy
  • Best Poster [Vehicles] 2016

#506

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:53 PM

So it was true. I do enjoy V a lot more when the driving is better. The Classic Coquette we got two days ago had some of the best handling in this entire game and so I drove it around, not wanting to stop. It was fun, and it really made me appreciate this map more.

 

Conclusion: If every car was fun to drive, in my opinion, I wouldn't be so harsh on V and would enjoy it on a weekly basis. I'd still be p'd off by the lack of interiors and by some overlooked details but they wouldn't be tugging at me 24/7. I guess since my favorite feature (driving) was kind of ruined and made the game a little boring for me, I kind of made a bigger deal out of this missing features.

  • Kampret likes this

Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#507

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:56 PM

Just a quic question - have you played with the car modding at all? 

 

I find that if you mod cars with the same load out, you end up with cars that all perform very similarly. The vanilla cars seem a little more varied to me (though I don't tend to drive the supercars very often, so can't really comment on those in detail).

  • B Dawg likes this

MiamiViceCity
  • MiamiViceCity

    The Unforgiven

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Most Obsessive Name Changer 2016 (My unofficial GTAF annual award)
    Biggest Fanboy 2013, 2014, 2015
    Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Member in the OGA 2012

#508

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:00 PM

 

2) Those who says IV feels more alive, meh, I just don't see it. V has more peds/cars on the streets, more NPCs actually doing their jobs and doing their own activities. In IV, it feels like I'm the only one actually doing anything. Everyone else is standing around or walking about aimlessly. The best I've seen is an NPC taking pictures.

 

 

 

I don't agree with this. I've actually done the complete opposite to you and started playing GTA V on my PS3 again after playing GTA IV for these last few weeks. This is pretty much how I would describe the peds in GTA V. They don't really do anything other than stand around talking or walking around aimlessly.

 

The peds in GTA IV actually bought food from vendors, newspapers/cigarettes from the newstands, swept footpaths, cleaned windows, drug dealers would deal drugs etc. In the almost one year I've had GTA V I've never seen anything like this from the peds in GTA V. The most impressive thing I've seen is a gardener using a leaf blower.

 

Hell I remember seeing fist fights from fender benders between two or more peds. Never seen that in GTA V. IMO GTA V does an awesome job of creating an illusion it's the most alive environment R* have ever created until you realise how predetermined everything is. GTA IV (and RDR for that matter) were much more honest games in this respect.

  • Official General, Osho, Donut and 4 others like this

PhillBellic
  • PhillBellic

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2012
  • Australia
  • Ban Roulette Winner 2016

#509

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:05 PM

 

 

2) Those who says IV feels more alive, meh, I just don't see it. V has more peds/cars on the streets, more NPCs actually doing their jobs and doing their own activities. In IV, it feels like I'm the only one actually doing anything. Everyone else is standing around or walking about aimlessly. The best I've seen is an NPC taking pictures.

 

 

 

I don't agree with this. I've actually done the complete opposite to you and started playing GTA V on my PS3 again after playing GTA IV for these last few weeks. This is pretty much how I would describe the peds in GTA V. They don't really do anything other than stand around talking or walking around aimlessly.

 

The peds in GTA IV actually bought food from vendors, newspapers/cigarettes from the newstands, swept footpaths, cleaned windows, drug dealers would deal drugs etc. In the almost one year I've had GTA V I've never seen anything like this from the peds in GTA V. The most impressive thing I've seen is a gardener using a leaf blower.

 

Hell I remember seeing fist fights from fender benders between two or more peds. Never seen that in GTA V. IMO GTA V does an awesome job of creating an illusion it's the most alive environment R* have ever created until you realise how predetermined everything is. GTA IV (and RDR for that matter) were much more honest games in this respect.

 

The other day I left Niko standing on a street corner for a few minutes, I got a drink, came back to find a hilarious three car crash with the cars occupants having an all out brawl. I then 'ended' the nonsense and left.

 

Cheers.

  • MiamiViceCity, Andreas, Scaglietti and 1 other like this

Geralt of Rivia
  • Geralt of Rivia

    Gwent Master

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • United-States
  • April Fools Winner 2015

#510

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:27 PM Edited by TheMasterfocker, 21 August 2014 - 01:38 PM.

That special R* charm or the GTA feeling is...1001% missing from GTA V.
Definitely!! Undoubtedly!!

Hahahahaha...No.

B Dawg: V didn't work on what IV was going for because IV was easily the most complained about GTA. It was easily the worst received, and it didn't receive bad at all. It received 'badly' in GTA terms.

Less than 30% of people completed the story. The story that was the main thing about GTA IV. It was lacking activities (IIRC), and it was lacking content.

Why would they build off of that? They fixed what people complained about in IV. That's all there is to it. Why build off of a story-centric game when no one finished the story?

Don't like V? Blame the fans.

Saturn:

You're just...you. Not even gonna take you seriously.
  • OneManCrimeWave, Scaglietti and _Kindled_ like this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users