Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

GTA series is misunderstood by fans often.

33 replies to this topic
Bi0ha2ard_q8
  • Bi0ha2ard_q8

    Scam Artist

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2013
  • Kuwait

#1

Posted 24 August 2014 - 09:34 AM

It seems that R* works hard on creating a specific mood for every game, and that mood affects missions, characterization, driving mechanic, music and even the colour tone.

 

Many people here criticise GTA IV or V's driving mechanics for example.

Niko seems to like switching the traction and stability off, most likely because he grew up driving cheaper manual cars and got used to that. Additionally, Liberty city iha sharp corners and narrow streets, drifting is inevitable. Plus its cool and fun to drift IMO. He's also mainly a hired gun, so his prerogative is to escape the police by cornering through the narrow streets and losing the cops.

 

In GTA V set in Los Santos, a very bourgeois city with high end cars. The protagonists are  pro thieves operating in a traffic laden city with wide streets. The driving mechanic is often described as "twitchy", and that actually depends on the car and its capabilities, the "twitchiness" is needed when speeding between cars and weaving through traffic. The drifting focus of GTA IV was replaced by powerful responsive cars that are needed in the crowded wide long streets. The characters are all greedy as well, so they need high end cars to spend their money on or to steal and parade in in that shallow money obsessed city.

 

Another example is the removal of purchasable properties in GTA IV, Niko is an illegal immigrant with a vendetta. How and why would he buy and develop properties?

 

These are just a couple of examples of how Rockstar adds or removes features to suit the setting and maintain a unique immersive experience. 

  • Fuzzknuckles, Marwin, GroundZero and 8 others like this

Cameron
  • Cameron

    💯

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2012
  • United-Kingdom

#2

Posted 24 August 2014 - 09:53 AM

Cars drive like cars regardless of where they are in the world.

When I drive a '97 EK into Los Angeles does it suddenly transform into an invincible race-spec fighter jet on rails?

I don't see the setting as a reason to change driving mechanics. GTA4 driving mechanics would have been really fun in the open roads of LS.

I agree with the properties though. But there's still other things they left out that should be there regardless of where the game is set. Fast food restaurants, QUB3D machines, pool, that sort of thing. Leaving them out isn't a game breaker but it's always the little details that make me like IV a lot more than V.
  • sqre, Nico, universetwisters and 10 others like this

Racecarlock
  • Racecarlock

    The floor here will kill you, try to avoid it.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009

#3

Posted 24 August 2014 - 09:56 AM

That's all well and good, but why can't they have more than one "mood"?

 

Liberty City was Gritty, Los Santos was sunny, and I prefer sunny more. But really, I see no reason why a GTA game couldn't have both a sunny and a gritty location that you could travel between using planes. You could either buy a plane ticket or fly there yourself, though there would obviously be a black screen transition like they had in Burying The Hatchet.

 

And why can't the protagonists give in to our preferences sometimes? If traction control and some other sh*t are all options on real cars, why not have them on the options menu as well?

 

High end, low end, sunny, cloudy and grey, why can't they all be in one game.

 

Maybe GTA VI will give that a try.


CallumL
  • CallumL

    I love you, but you're an asshole.

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#4

Posted 24 August 2014 - 09:58 AM

I think the way the cars are in GTA V beats GTA IV. You get more realistic crashes, and you can't run behind a car and move them like you could back in the VC and SA days. 

 

For the city itself, it is based around movie stars and people trying to make it big in that industry. The city is based around money and is made for people to show off their fancy houses and nice sports cars. You see how the sunsets etc make it give you that sort of feeling that you've kind of made it. 

 

However, the missions in single player are dreadful and a lot of the time you're working for free, which we all hate. In my opinion the older games have much better missions and are more enjoyable. 


Cameron
  • Cameron

    💯

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2012
  • United-Kingdom

#5

Posted 24 August 2014 - 10:03 AM

I think the way the cars are in GTA V beats GTA IV. You get more realistic crashes, and you can't run behind a car and move them like you could back in the VC and SA days. 
 
For the city itself, it is based around movie stars and people trying to make it big in that industry. The city is based around money and is made for people to show off their fancy houses and nice sports cars. You see how the sunsets etc make it give you that sort of feeling that you've kind of made it. 
 
However, the missions in single player are dreadful and a lot of the time you're working for free, which we all hate. In my opinion the older games have much better missions and are more enjoyable.

More realistic crashes?
When I drive into a car on IV, one of us spins out, maybe a rollover if we're lucky, and the driver passes out.
In V, I can drive my Patriot into a taxi at high speed, and the taxi SLIGHTLY moves a bit, both cars in perfect condition.
Oh, and that Taxi can drive into your Patriot and push it out of the way no problem. Yeah, no. That's hardly realistic.

I miss being able to drive around in y Patriot in IV, smashing into cars rolling them over.
  • sqre, ..GhosT, Choco Taco and 9 others like this

Bi0ha2ard_q8
  • Bi0ha2ard_q8

    Scam Artist

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2013
  • Kuwait

#6

Posted 24 August 2014 - 10:04 AM

I think the way the cars are in GTA V beats GTA IV. You get more realistic crashes, and you can't run behind a car and move them like you could back in the VC and SA days. 

 

For the city itself, it is based around movie stars and people trying to make it big in that industry. The city is based around money and is made for people to show off their fancy houses and nice sports cars. You see how the sunsets etc make it give you that sort of feeling that you've kind of made it. 

 

However, the missions in single player are dreadful and a lot of the time you're working for free, which we all hate. In my opinion the older games have much better missions and are more enjoyable. 

 

Many of the main missions in the older games were fluff that cemented the mood, they were replaced by the strangers and freaks side missions. In GTA V most of the main missions feel like real meaty jobs that move the story line effectively.


Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#7

Posted 24 August 2014 - 11:48 AM

That's all well and good, but why can't they have more than one "mood"?

 

Liberty City was Gritty, Los Santos was sunny, and I prefer sunny more. But really, I see no reason why a GTA game couldn't have both a sunny and a gritty location that you could travel between using planes. You could either buy a plane ticket or fly there yourself, though there would obviously be a black screen transition like they had in Burying The Hatchet.

 

And why can't the protagonists give in to our preferences sometimes? If traction control and some other sh*t are all options on real cars, why not have them on the options menu as well?

 

High end, low end, sunny, cloudy and grey, why can't they all be in one game.

 

Maybe GTA VI will give that a try.

I think it's inevitable that we'll get multi-locations again at some point, but let's look at it from a business point of view.

 

Why make one game that offers everything when you can make several that cover all bases over time?

  • Luddite likes this

Payne
  • Payne

    f*ck you

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2014
  • United-States

#8

Posted 24 August 2014 - 02:17 PM

I think the way the cars are in GTA V beats GTA IV. You get more realistic crashes, and you can't run behind a car and move them like you could back in the VC and SA days. 
 
For the city itself, it is based around movie stars and people trying to make it big in that industry. The city is based around money and is made for people to show off their fancy houses and nice sports cars. You see how the sunsets etc make it give you that sort of feeling that you've kind of made it. 
 
However, the missions in single player are dreadful and a lot of the time you're working for free, which we all hate. In my opinion the older games have much better missions and are more enjoyable.

More realistic crashes?
When I drive into a car on IV, one of us spins out, maybe a rollover if we're lucky, and the driver passes out.
In V, I can drive my Patriot into a taxi at high speed, and the taxi SLIGHTLY moves a bit, both cars in perfect condition.
Oh, and that Taxi can drive into your Patriot and push it out of the way no problem. Yeah, no. That's hardly realistic.

I miss being able to drive around in y Patriot in IV, smashing into cars rolling them over.
Yes, I was disappointed with the patriot first time smashing cars.

matajuegos01
  • matajuegos01

    Stalker

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 Dec 2013
  • None

#9

Posted 24 August 2014 - 03:44 PM

The GTA series is made in a way that is up to us to choose how to play it, you wanna kill everyone? do it you wanna buy everything? do it? you wanna play the story? do it, so it's very stupid for rockstar to only cater one kind of people by removing features with the crappy justification of "not fitting with the tone"


The Harwood Bitcher
  • The Harwood Bitcher

    f*ck YOU

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2014
  • Argentina

#10

Posted 24 August 2014 - 03:51 PM

They respawned the driving system because of all the mountains and such,its not funny to drive your car and have it stuck it in some slope or low end river.
But yeah,cars dosen't flip as they used to and i miss feel like hulk when i drive a patriot,also the bike riding sistem is a disgrace and that is not an oppinion, is a fact.
  • FilipCRO likes this

Bi0ha2ard_q8
  • Bi0ha2ard_q8

    Scam Artist

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2013
  • Kuwait

#11

Posted 24 August 2014 - 03:52 PM Edited by Bi0ha2ard_q8, 24 August 2014 - 03:54 PM.

Your font colour is giving me a headache.

So you can kill every pedestrian until the map's empty? Can CJ buy the San Fierro bridge and develop it. 

Look they're the pro's they know how to make games that make sense.

  • Zello and The Harwood Bitcher like this

..GhosT
  • ..GhosT

    GTAForums Veteran

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2009
  • None

#12

Posted 24 August 2014 - 03:52 PM

Over the years, more and more kids started to play games.

This made producers sink so low in quality and make everything easier than it was before.

 

Look at what Call of Duty, Battlefield, GTA, Saints Row and countless other games have become.

  • sqre, Nico, Drunken Cowboy and 4 others like this

Bi0ha2ard_q8
  • Bi0ha2ard_q8

    Scam Artist

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2013
  • Kuwait

#13

Posted 24 August 2014 - 03:56 PM

GTA V is reasonably challenging. I think.

But I agree, the industry is becoming too casual

  • sqre and Zello like this

Payne
  • Payne

    f*ck you

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2014
  • United-States

#14

Posted 24 August 2014 - 04:38 PM

^maybe r* should do another serious GTA.
  • sqre, Zello, jeanrjm and 1 other like this

jeanrjm
  • jeanrjm

    Tactical

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#15

Posted 24 August 2014 - 05:12 PM

Driving in GTA IV was more realistic. Everything on IV was more realistic. The story too. I got really immersed in IV.

Part of my great disappointment with V was that Rockstar took off all the great additions the've made in IV.
IV was step foward.
  • MiamiViceCity, Nico, Choco Taco and 7 others like this

pedinhuh
  • pedinhuh

    Wanna play with me on PS4? Add me: rph_brasil

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jun 2014
  • Brazil

#16

Posted 24 August 2014 - 05:27 PM

Driving in GTA IV was more realistic. Everything on IV was more realistic. The story too. I got really immersed in IV.

Part of my great disappointment with V was that Rockstar took off all the great additions the've made in IV.
IV was step foward.

That's the main reason why I was soo into IV: Challenging driving physics, any mistake you've while driving would result in your car being soo damaged that you would have no choice but dumping it and take a walk, in V the damage physics are soo badly done, that one gamer that'sused with the series will say the game driving and crash physics got nerfed down to be more casual.
P.S.: By casual, read noob-friendly.

But I still like this game very much, specially online mode which keeps me coming back to play it more from time to time.

  • jeanrjm likes this

Racecarlock
  • Racecarlock

    The floor here will kill you, try to avoid it.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009

#17

Posted 24 August 2014 - 11:52 PM

I will say the cars don't bend enough for my taste in GTA V, but the rest of the damage model is actually pretty good.

 

For one thing, you can detach tires and bumpers now.

 

Hell, not only can you still dent them in, but you can pop them if you hit them in the right spot as well. You can crash in a way that gas leaks from your car until the engine dies, or you can shoot the gas tank for that same effect. If your engine catches fire, sit still enough and it'll just go out and kill the engine rather than spreading to the gas tank every time and exploding your car.

 

I do wish cars bent more in crashes, but the other non-deformation related damage is pretty good.

  • Bi0ha2ard_q8 likes this

FilipCRO
  • FilipCRO

    I ❤ Vice City

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2014
  • Croatia

#18

Posted 25 August 2014 - 01:13 AM

They respawned the driving system because of all the mountains and such,its not funny to drive your car and have it stuck it in some slope or low end river.
But yeah,cars dosen't flip as they used to and i miss feel like hulk when i drive a patriot,also the bike riding sistem is a disgrace and that is not an oppinion, is a fact.

 

I agree a hundred times. Can get over the driving system for cars, but driving motorcycles in GTAV is just childish. Try to ride a bike in GTA IV and then switch to GTAV, its day and night


Osho
  • Osho

    Old School RPG'er

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#19

Posted 25 August 2014 - 05:32 AM

Well, nice attempt in trying to justify Rockstar, but ever since the realism has kicked in, the good old fun has become an absolute joke and one of the main things that ruins the gameplay, for me, because no matter how much you try to become more creative, the game eventually either punishes you or taken care with some odd restrictions.
In my opinion, they could fine-tune the same great classic gameplay by constantly improving them, rather than try to make the game so different and detailed with much thought and efforts into making it feel more real, that it takes away the fun out of the overall gameplay, and players' freedom to try and do something out of the box!!
  • Blennerville likes this

Drunken Cowboy
  • Drunken Cowboy

    Proud Asshole

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013
  • United-States
  • Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Topic [GTA] 2013

#20

Posted 25 August 2014 - 06:06 AM

^maybe r* should do another serious GTA.

 

Why should they? They can put in half the effort for quadruple the money when tapping the market of impressionable, sh*thole children.

  • Acetaminophen, Cameron and jeanrjm like this

jeanrjm
  • jeanrjm

    Tactical

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#21

Posted 25 August 2014 - 06:35 AM Edited by jeanrjm, 25 August 2014 - 06:38 AM.

^
Sadly true
Some Long time fans like me myself are getting older and waiting for some top quality stuff, while Rockstar is bringing in the children

Rytuklis
  • Rytuklis

    That sarcastic asshole you all have grown to love.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2010
  • Lithuania

#22

Posted 25 August 2014 - 06:41 AM

It seems that R* works hard on creating a specific mood for every game, and that mood affects missions, characterization, driving mechanic, music and even the colour tone.

 

Many people here criticise GTA IV or V's driving mechanics for example.

Niko seems to like switching the traction and stability off, most likely because he grew up driving cheaper manual cars and got used to that. Additionally, Liberty city iha sharp corners and narrow streets, drifting is inevitable. Plus its cool and fun to drift IMO. He's also mainly a hired gun, so his prerogative is to escape the police by cornering through the narrow streets and losing the cops.

 

In GTA V set in Los Santos, a very bourgeois city with high end cars. The protagonists are  pro thieves operating in a traffic laden city with wide streets. The driving mechanic is often described as "twitchy", and that actually depends on the car and its capabilities, the "twitchiness" is needed when speeding between cars and weaving through traffic. The drifting focus of GTA IV was replaced by powerful responsive cars that are needed in the crowded wide long streets. The characters are all greedy as well, so they need high end cars to spend their money on or to steal and parade in in that shallow money obsessed city.

 

Another example is the removal of purchasable properties in GTA IV, Niko is an illegal immigrant with a vendetta. How and why would he buy and develop properties?

 

These are just a couple of examples of how Rockstar adds or removes features to suit the setting and maintain a unique immersive experience. 

Your logic makes no sense. So Niko couldnt buy properties just because he's a poor murderer in a poor city, yet CJ could even though he was nothing but a poor ghetto gang banger soon enough left nothing with few hundred dollars in his pocket in flint county. And Los Santos was a sh*thole in SA universe, YET CJ could buy properties.


MyDog
  • MyDog

    Niko Bellic's my burazer

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2009
  • Serbia

#23

Posted 25 August 2014 - 06:56 AM

The difference being, Niko is an illegal immigrant with basically no documents so I don't think he could buy anything even if he had the money. Besides, unlike CJ he has no desire to develop a criminal empire.

  • Bi0ha2ard_q8 likes this

Osho
  • Osho

    Old School RPG'er

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#24

Posted 25 August 2014 - 07:44 AM

The difference being, Niko is an illegal immigrant with basically no documents so I don't think he could buy anything even if he had the money. Besides, unlike CJ he has no desire to develop a criminal empire.

According to Dan - "this isn't a game of real estate, or from rags to riches. I wouldn't be surprised if you eventually do find new places to call home, but it sounds to me like properties might be handled in a different way perhaps tied to moments in the story"
Basically they removed many content/features of GTA SA and past titles, simply because they wanted to try new and different, by giving more importance to realism, offering the strong story experience and the surrounding setting.
  • Bi0ha2ard_q8 likes this

Bi0ha2ard_q8
  • Bi0ha2ard_q8

    Scam Artist

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2013
  • Kuwait

#25

Posted 27 August 2014 - 12:46 AM

Well, nice attempt in trying to justify Rockstar, but ever since the realism has kicked in, the good old fun has become an absolute joke and one of the main things that ruins the gameplay, for me, because no matter how much you try to become more creative, the game eventually either punishes you or taken care with some odd restrictions.
In my opinion, they could fine-tune the same great classic gameplay by constantly improving them, rather than try to make the game so different and detailed with much thought and efforts into making it feel more real, that it takes away the fun out of the overall gameplay, and players' freedom to try and do something out of the box!!

 

I'm not justifying or defending Rockstar, I just think they make their games with that logic in mind.

 

When you say "good old fun" I sense a lot of nostalgia that might be clouding your judgement. I played GTA since III and loved them all, but have you played them recently?

The shooting is awkward, the driving is inferior to the HD games and the AI is limited and boring. In V the police actually pursue you.

Just imagine what it'd be like if the squish sound, when you run over someone, was in the HD games. It just wouldn't fit with the graphics and animation we expect from a current game.

  • MiamiViceCity likes this

Racecarlock
  • Racecarlock

    The floor here will kill you, try to avoid it.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009

#26

Posted 27 August 2014 - 12:55 AM

 

^maybe r* should do another serious GTA.

 

Why should they? They can put in half the effort for quadruple the money when tapping the market of impressionable, sh*thole children.

 

Woah dude. I get that you don't like GTA V, but do you have to dismissively insult people for liking it?


Payne
  • Payne

    f*ck you

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2014
  • United-States

#27

Posted 27 August 2014 - 01:13 AM


^maybe r* should do another serious GTA.

 
Why should they? They can put in half the effort for quadruple the money when tapping the market of impressionable, sh*thole children.
We don't need cod playing swagfags in GTA.

Osho
  • Osho

    Old School RPG'er

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#28

Posted 27 August 2014 - 04:56 AM

I'm not justifying or defending Rockstar, I just think they make their games with that logic in mind. 02 When you say "good old fun" I sense a lot of nostalgia that might be clouding your judgement. I played GTA since III and loved them all, but have you played them recently? The shooting is awkward, the driving is inferior to the HD games and the AI is limited and boring. In V the police actually pursue you. Just imagine what it'd be like if the squish sound, when you run over someone, was in the HD games. It just wouldn't fit with the graphics and animation we expect from a current game.

You misunderstood me.
Why should anyone have problems with the across-the-board TECHNICAL improvements?
BUT:
1. Limited content on offer outside story and side NPC activities.
2. A more dynamic, lifelike, REALISTIC, open-world is definitely cool, not the ridiculously annoying realism that kills people's normal enjoyment of " G T A" gaming.
The word is: BALANCE!
[ I should be able to crash without flying out of the windscreen, which happens randomly a lot of times -- something that's annoying more than fun. That's just one example to give you an idea about such unnecessary elements that are absolutely not needed ]
Now, to further explain myself:
> They dropped important things that had made old titles so much fun.
Most important, but not all, among these are:
1. Vigilante missions
2. Import/Export
3. Decrease in number of race tournaments of all types.
4. Asset property missions are not even as good, let alone anyways improved over the past.
5. Least amount of criminal/illegal side activities, of any kind, so far, in the series.
6. Fun weapons of the past.
Et cetra...

> They didn't introduce much that's particularly compelling to replay.

So, why is rockstar denying more content, that are pretty damn robust in their implementation than sticking with the mini-games, despite the potential is something I'll never fathom!!
There're quite a number of interesting ( good old fun ) and time consuming things for ONLINE.
Can't they really come up with good stuff for single-player anymore?
That's challenging and has good replay value outside the captivating story.
I consider GTA a strong open-world adventure at heart more than a strong story experience.

Also, I don't see the need to force the players by imposing some new conditions of mission failure, like being punished for being more creative that might mess up the scripted show and cinematic course of action. At times, you can't even leave the immediate mission area too.
I mean, None of such things were present before. It was total freedom back then.
So, in short, I get the impression from Rockstar that they have no shame to try and get away from the many interesting things of the good old fun games, packed with so much to offer and fun for every type of player, and they were praised for giving something like that in the past.

Blennerville
  • Blennerville

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2014
  • Ireland

#29

Posted 27 August 2014 - 09:31 AM Edited by Blennerville, 27 August 2014 - 09:39 AM.

 

Well, nice attempt in trying to justify Rockstar, but ever since the realism has kicked in, the good old fun has become an absolute joke and one of the main things that ruins the gameplay, for me, because no matter how much you try to become more creative, the game eventually either punishes you or taken care with some odd restrictions.
In my opinion, they could fine-tune the same great classic gameplay by constantly improving them, rather than try to make the game so different and detailed with much thought and efforts into making it feel more real, that it takes away the fun out of the overall gameplay, and players' freedom to try and do something out of the box!!

 

I'm not justifying or defending Rockstar, I just think they make their games with that logic in mind.

 

When you say "good old fun" I sense a lot of nostalgia that might be clouding your judgement. I played GTA since III and loved them all, but have you played them recently?

The shooting is awkward, the driving is inferior to the HD games and the AI is limited and boring. In V the police actually pursue you.

Just imagine what it'd be like if the squish sound, when you run over someone, was in the HD games. It just wouldn't fit with the graphics and animation we expect from a current game.

 

 

There really is nothing like the good old 'thats just nostalgia' cop out.

 

 

R* decided to focus on making the HD games be more realistic and put a much heavier focus on these big movie-like scripted storys.

 

Despite everything that is technically better in GTA4 and GTA5 they just dont the Magic that the old games had/still have. The HD games are just not that fun really and imo they dont have any love in them. I will always take the PS2 games over the HD games.

 

Each game (HD era) just seems like a new story (just like your new crime movie release in the cinema) and doesnt feel like its a new GTA imo.

The story for me has become the only real driving force for me playing the HD game - just to finish the story, nothing else, just like they were any other linear game - that isnt really GTA imo.

The HD games could really be called something else entirely like a arbitrary movie title.

 

IMO the issue is that people (myself included) are frustrated with the way GTA had gone (and rightly so), they dont think thats the way GTA should be (and there is a point there - they games has completely changed).

It isnt that the games are misunderstood imo, its that R* seems to come out a random crime story and then just slap the GTA name on it. - e.g. game about politics, FBI, CIA and other random stuff = GTA ?


Bi0ha2ard_q8
  • Bi0ha2ard_q8

    Scam Artist

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2013
  • Kuwait

#30

Posted 27 August 2014 - 02:04 PM Edited by Bi0ha2ard_q8, 27 August 2014 - 02:45 PM.

@Osho

I think all this depends on taste. I prefer the HD games' deep characterization and the grounded feel, as I grow older.

I don't think I would enjoy if say Franklin could do pimping missions, that wouldn't make sense with his high aspirations.

 

But I agree with you on V, the game isn't satisfying somehow,it didn't have enough side activities. I mostly blame online, its like R* is saying go play multiplayer if you want more activities.

IV was amazing though, it had plenty of side activities the story was amazing and Niko is the best character ever made in a video game.

 

@Blennerville

I'm not saying I like it, but I think they introduced the CIA and FBI in the HD games for the sake of realism. So that the protags can do their activities without being seriously pursued by law enforcement organizatons.

Besides wasn't CJ the CIA's bitch to get his brother out?

 

Missions in GTA have always been scripted. They setup a specific scenario for every mission (All GTA's) and you have to play in that setup.

The driving always sucked the shooting system was flawed in the SD games but I played for the story and my connection with the protag.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users