Search the Community

- Being arcadey isn't really a problem, but San Andreas definitely did do that better. - No way any of the Saints Row games have driving better than GTA V (maybe better collision physics but not the driving itself).

Boy you drunk as sh*t. The driving is arcadey as hell, the handling flags keep cars from going full speed and if you crash into a car going full speed you come to a complete stop. There’s no reason why if I’m driving a semi truck and I hit a smart car that I come to a 100% complete stop. The driving isn’t “better” by any stretch of the imagination, it’s just much more accessible to a casual audience. The first two saints row games had better driving physics than V and one of those games is 15 years old! the shooting takes zero skill. None. Nada. It’s just lazer like pinpoint accuracy with all of the guns being reskins of one another with minimum stat changes. And as far as cover goes, you can’t even crouch lol so do with that what you will. nobody is tryna gatekeep anybody but when we see bullsh*t and call it out that doesn’t make us the bad guys. People give these companies too much slack and are way too lenient, that’s why they feel like they can get away with watered down, bloated, empty boring games. If someone enjoys V over IV Thats their business but at the base fundamental level of the game, the core of the mechanics and the world Thats built around it, IV is UNDENIABLY better. Hands down no contest.

Director mode would make the most sense. It’s tough, because a lot of the crazy vehicles were originally to be part of the non-canon Alien DLC until they decided f*ck that, GTAO and the world of GTA exists in the same realm as Saints Row.

Oh of course, GTA V does many things better and I think it shines better than its competitors as a generalist game (excluding the narrative). GTA V has also managed to ruin some games for me as well, like how SA and IV might feel outdated in comparison but I never forget what these games did well. That's why I never wanna forget what Mafia 3 did right as well. And with all its flaws, I don't forget what V does well as well. I just don't go with a black and white approach for R* vs non-R* games comparsions you know? The thing is I played too many games where......they takes their sweet time to get to the action. Ever since video game industry has switched to narrative-heavy, I never quite got to have as much as fun as I wanted and interestingly enough I like how Conan O Brien commented on Battlefield 1 in his clueless gamer show of how this is the first time you got to play a game so fast without much bullsh*t. I understand what he meant when I played Saints Row 3 and Mafia 3, to me those games boil down to "No need to wait, just go out there and have fun killing people....that story of a game is just an excuse or justification of why you are killing people and driving fast cars. " Mafia 3 isn't exactly a well-made game but it indeed hits the right spots for me. When I picked up GTA V, I didn't sign up for missions like scouting the port, I signed up for what the trailer showed me, killing, car chases and explosions......I didn't quite get that (or at least not as often as I wanted). I got it from GTA IV and Mafia 3 though. My conclusion is a bit banal but it is that GTA V has its strengths and weaknesses and Mafia 3 also has its strengths and weaknesses as well. The thing is that its strengths ended up overlapping with GTA V's weaknesses, that's how it won me over. I got what I wanted from V, from Mafia 3 instead. It's the point I made earlier of how other games do win some people over because of how specialized they are, W_Ds, Mafia, Just Cause and Saints Row know they can't beat GTA head-on, instead they just hit sweet spots.

I was quite content with how 3d era games and IV/EFLC were handled. Games like Watch Dogs, Just Cause, Saints Row and Mafia 3 also handle their story in similar way. You do missions, you have open world elements to mess around with and story stays in cutscenes. While most people do not like Mafia 3, I liked that you were allowed to take over rackets in any way you wanted, everytime you took one down you get this cool cutscene showing the antagonists' sweating, you planning your next move or some documentary-style commentary on your infamous actions in the future. Once in a while you get a linear style mission but for most part I was just doing what I loved which was driving cool cars in high speed and killing people in a ruthless manner. It's a shame that it is a technical mess and was rushed. It had great potential but I loved its structure personally. I think Rockstar is too influenced by what the market wants. IV was an interesting case because I don't think anyone asked for a serious GTA game especially after SA but we got it and Rockstar made it work. Yes some people didn't like IV and IV didn't care about appealing to everyone. But as @Dryspace pointed out, I think Rockstar is just chasing the easy way now and yes to make games like RDR2 and GTA V have true player freedom, it would require a lot of work because the scale is too big. It's why I prefer future games to be more smaller in scale but have more depth in exchange. Still this chase for a good story is why the industry is suffering a bit. Too much work being put in getting high quality cutscenes with scripted missions to match and not enough in getting a solid gameplay. Not to mention most developers are trying to be a little too different. I mean setting of both V and RDR2 starts with criminals' era ending and how it mourns the golden days......well why not set a game in the golden days for once? Why cockblock us with FIBs and the "West being tamed" barriers? Spoil us for once like you did before in a modern game and then try to do something different.

Honestly whilst GTA V’s story is iffy when I compare it to GTA IV and/or the Red Dead series compared to other games in the genre it looks like a billion bucks. The Watch Dogs series, Saints Row etc. GTA V looks like a Scorcese film. When I view it more individually it comes off as much better. I can’t deny there are certainly parts of GTA V’s story that are entertaining, but there was a high precedent set before hand and it’s a shame it doesn’t quite come together however it seems like most developers don’t really know to write a story either so yeah. GTA V still outclasses many of it contemporaries.

I disagree with the statement I highlighted in red and made bold. Not because you aren't making a fair point, particularly with the rest of your post, because you are making sense. BUT because an up close and personal torture scene is more intimately violent and brutal than 99% of the crap we do in GTA games. Not because its more actually violent, but because most of what we do in sandbox games like GTA, Saints Row, Just Cause, etc., are from a more comfortable distance, so its easy to forget that you are basically causing pixelated carnage. Moreover, it is not a fair thing to say that people who would find that torture scene disturbing should not be playing a game like GTA. That is a little ridiculous for two reasons: First is because Dan Houser made it very clear that his intent with that scene was for it to be disturbing and to make gamers uncomfortable. Second, why would a level of discomfort with a particular part of a game, a small part that lasts a couple of minutes at most, mean that the person shouldn't be enjoying the rest of what a game like GTA has to offer? It is very judgemental to categorically say that the only way someone should be playing a game like GTA is for them to be completely comfortable with intimate torture in a game. People are uncomfortable and comfortable with all sorts of things. I will give you a for instance: I didn't like the game Manhunt. At the time, back on the PS2 era of GTA games, that game was insanely brutal and violent. But here's the thing: The entire game was like that. So I saw it kind of like the videogame version of one of those crazy-bloody slasher films or movies with words like "Chainsaw Massacre" in the title. What you are failing to take into account is that a movie like that, or a game like Manhunt (if I remember the game correctly) are targeting people who really like a lot of blood and guts and overt violence in their games. Say what you want about GTA games, but most of the violence in it takes place at a more comfortable distance. So GTA, even with one, lone torture scene, is NOT in any way the videogame equivalent of a slasher film So saying that anyone uncomfortable with By the Book because of torture is like saying that not liking slasher films or blood and guts in movies should never go see horror movies. When the reality is that MOST horror movies have one or two bloody or horrific scenes, but it isn't the mainstay of the entire film. Likewise, I would say that people who are uncomfortable with that kind of violence should probably NOT play Manhunt or even that old original XBox 360 launch title, Condemned. But there is a difference between having to endure one or two scenes a player (or moviegoer) is uncomfortable with, while enjoying the rest of the game or movie, and intentionally seeking out an entire game or film that boasts nothing but that level of debauchery. Same with porn verses soft-porn. Some people don't like to see hardcore pornography, but really love nudity or milder sex scenes. They would probably be all right with one or two really graphic scenes if it meant they get to enjoy the other 90 minutes, right? I just think that it is highly reactionary to judge someone as "probably shouldn't play games like GTA" because they are uncomfortable with one or two scenes in a huge, expansive game. Also, there is a huge difference between being uncomfortable with something while enduring it AND coming out publicly to judge and condemn it, right? The OP, for example, is not going on websites or trying to get store owners to take GTA V off the shelves, similar to what Jack Thompson and all those angry liberal activist groups did with GTA games. You really have to ask yourself, why does a person have to be completely comfortable with every, single facet of a game to be somehow worthy of playing it?

I personally didn't even know By The Book was the controversial part when I first played. After years playing games like SA and Saints Row where I can dress up like a silly goof and beat people to death with flowers or a dildo, ripping some dudes' tooth out with pliers is so mundane. I felt the same way with No Russian in MW2, gunning down innocents would've held more weight if there weren't so many games out there where going on a rampage was as easy as one two three.

Go play Saints Row. The stuff you typed out are features that make the world alive. If you don't like immersion, well then, this game is not for you. Also: - Police too hard to avoid, drags certain missions on too long. - git gud, this game doesn't need to be casualized - Most songs on the radio were bad, except for a few. - everyone has their own taste in music, so you can't say that they are bad. I noticed that many people get annoyed by NPCs attacking the player by just standing close to them. This is actual feature. If you look at the NPC while standing right next to them they will attack you. Not all NPCs act this way though, some might walk away, some other might run and scream. Think about what would you do if some weirdo was doing this to you IRL, imo this is realistic.

The quality of the writing feels like a 10th grader's 1000 word mid-term essay, and prevents me from truly enjoying the characters and often longing to create my own characters alas Saints Row/The Sims style. However, the voice acting itself is phenomenal. Stephen Ogg did amazing voice acting with Trevor admittedly. The music choices on its soundtrack, combined with its lackluster original score that puts me to sleep, has me switching off the music volume a majority of the time. Which is huge negative for game where I spend estimate 92 percent of the time driving in. The physics are undoubtedly the worst In the series, and perhaps close to even being the worst I've seen in an open world game. The driving has no challenge and all of the vehicles handle so similar and predictable, making driving very boring without a handling mod. It's appalling to think a game - in the same series - released 12 years prior has better physics. Yes, I am talking about GTA3. The amount of land is great in theory, but not when a majority of is not-utilized, or where some sections don't feel like what they're trying to be. Sandy Shores has too many billboards, palm trees and cacti placed in such a short distance to feel like a real desert. Some sections of the map could do with more roads, like a road that comes from the humane labs area and connects to that industrial area below it. The city of Los Santos is too compact and doesn't feel like a city at all, rather more akin to large village, which is unlike GTA4's Liberty City. Overall, while I do enjoy it, I still find that It's a canvas waiting for its paint.

The Benz did focus a bit on Online, but it was more reasonable. Everything up to Heists I think was The Benz's doing. Everything reasonably priced and would make some sense in the world (though using bikes in PSH is still stupid). Everything after was the Housers doing. Everything became "Saints Row" with stuff like Teen Wolf and everything became stupidly overpriced with things like paying $62,000 for a leather jacket and jeans.

It's not "what happened to Rockstar" it's "what the f*ck are the team behind GTA Online thinking?". Cunning Stunts was when they really pushed the bar for the stupid sh*t that was starting to happen but if it makes you feel any better, this arena update is probably the least...far out thing we've seen thus far. In fact I'd say vehicular combat in this style actually sort of suits GTA in it's own sadistic way, especially in this post-Saints Row mindset R* seems to be stuck in, in relation to the GTA series.

sorry I'm a saints row fan not a GTA fan

I played a lot GTA V but I never purchased it.Now Im getting new pc and I wanted to buy it, but I decided to move on. This gta(Mostly next gen version) is half job aimed for casual gamers that never played GTA before.They are constantly aiming for online part of game, with load GB of bull*hit missions and Saint row type of vehicles that I cannot never use as SP player.Police is OP and not fun as in GTA IV or 3D era.NPCs are so offensive making this world unlikable.Damage is nonexistent, making this game some kind of Need for Speed.Country area has old San Andreas better, remember these forests?Where are mechanics as insurance?I know in online... Only thing I want from r* is remaster of VCS and IV and after that they can totally vanish Singleplayer part of game.

STOP THIS, it's not just "as well done as IV's" IT'S A TERRIBLE SYSTEM IN GENERAL, previous GTA games have a better Melee system, other Open World Games have better Melee systems, Saints Row has a better Melee system, etc. This isn't a IV vs V thing, it's a general thing that in gaming, GTAV's Melee system sucks, even the best reviews of the game and those who praise it on other places say this is one area where the game is bed, etc, stop trying to be a super fanboy esquire here man, you've even said you've played Saints Row, etc, compare it to those, can you REALLY say it's satisfying compared to those games at least? And honestly, if you DO think it's a great system, then that's it, I really can't take anything you say serious, you're a joke poster from here on out and I hope you have a lovely time turning every little thing back to IV vs V in this section of the forum, I'm out LMAO you can use all the character assassinations you like, take my words out of context all you like, and attempt to spam this thread with nonsensical banners to bolster your Snore-butthurt IV butthurt. Its all good. But I NEVER said V's combat system was great. I said three things about it: -Hand to hand combat is of ancillary importance, at most, to a sandbox game. -Even though it is better in IV, who cares? (see point #1) -And that it is fine and acceptable in V, and satisfying (lol for all of the THREE minutes I spent using it in any of the MANY 100% campaigns I have done in V) Your overblown, nonsensical interpretations only show that you are more interested in belligerence than discourse. As far as the whole IV versus V you are whinging about, you small, fractional minority of butthurt fans, stuck in the past, are the ones that keep extolling the virtues of IV's combat system in this thread. Which, by the way, the thread isn't even about combat anyway. Yeah, I'm sure that's exactly what's going to happen. It was kind of what you were saying, though. But even so, if you say that isn't your position, then fair enough. But you did spit it back to me completely out of context, then responded to it as if it was my position, when you knew full well it wasn't. Hence, I assigned the quote to you, since changing my meaning or context means you own the quote.

STOP THIS, it's not just "as well done as IV's" IT'S A TERRIBLE SYSTEM IN GENERAL, previous GTA games have a better Melee system, other Open World Games have better Melee systems, Saints Row has a better Melee system, etc. This isn't a IV vs V thing, it's a general thing that in gaming, GTAV's Melee system sucks, even the best reviews of the game and those who praise it on other places say this is one area where the game is bed, etc, stop trying to be a super fanboy esquire here man, you've even said you've played Saints Row, etc, compare it to those, can you REALLY say it's satisfying compared to those games at least? And honestly, if you DO think it's a great system, then that's it, I really can't take anything you say serious, you're a joke poster from here on out and I hope you have a lovely time turning every little thing back to IV vs V in this section of the forum, I'm out.

I just bought the last-gen version of GTA V for XBOX 360.. and i will never touch the current-gen version again. I'm done with this sh*t. I don't want to install stupid patches that are meant for GTA: Online only and ruin the singleplayer mode which stupid bugs and stupid GTA: Online adverts on the loading screen. You can't even start the game without being online on PC, it might work several times but then it wants to reactivate my activation key.. Sure, i can easily download a crack and use it that way, but wtf.. i payed 60$ for this game to crack it afterwards? Nah. I'm okay with the last-gen graphics and fps.. It runs really great on 1.00 and feels more like a GTA IV sequel to me. R* even managed to ruin the story of GTA: Online. They said it's based before the events of GTA V and after the stupid Saints Row update, the guy says it's 2017? (Yeah, i don't even now what that guys name is, this is how much i care about GTA: Online.) Damn, R*.. you were better at this.

I know, hearing about that stuff being scrapped is actually not disappointing. You can tell they were really trying to go for the Saints Row crowd at that point.

Not much of a loss really. Those DLCs sounded pretty damn stupid, with the Alien DLC bordering on Saints Row territory, and with the normal story DLC being focused on one of the three characters (Trevor?) instead of any new ones, it was going to be just as weak as well.

That's just close-minded and stupid when you don't even know if the story and gameplay could be interesting and enjoyable. What gameplay and story?Adding dumb alien sh*t and zombies? This isn't Saints Row, they already added too much weird sh*t so far. Completely ignoring the fact that the third one was about the actual V story.

That's just close-minded and stupid when you don't even know if the story and gameplay could be interesting and enjoyable. What gameplay and story?Adding dumb alien sh*t and zombies? This isn't Saints Row, they already added too much weird sh*t so far.

Yeah because that's exactly what we need. A bland, cliche silent protagonist devoid of any personality or character to take us right back to GTA 3........ Who said the protagonist had to be silent? Saints Row's protagonist(s) weren't silent, nor void of personality. You're basically asking for an Online type situation is what I'm referring to. GTA isn't an RPG. This isn't Fable, this isn't Mass Effect, this isn't WoW, and this isn't the Sims. Less roleplay, more stories and characters please. Even if the RPG-style characters weren't silent (which I'm sure they'd be given the amount of options present), this goes against everything that makes GTA, well, GTA. I agree that GTA 5's storyline is starting to become cliche. R* will probably never have another protagonist as likable as Niko Bellic or John Marston (though Trevor and Michael are decent to me) but the solution is not in derailing the franchise into wacky, dumb RPG territory like Online has done a great job of. Rant over.

Yeah because that's exactly what we need. A bland, cliche silent protagonist devoid of any personality or character to take us right back to GTA 3........ Who said the protagonist had to be silent? Saints Row's protagonist(s) weren't silent, nor void of personality.

Not only That, but they're wasting a lot of great potential ideas on Online via adversary modes and freeroam things. I mean, come GTA6, how will they ever top a game that had the Rocket Voltic, a Ruiner 2000, an Oppressor, the APC, Hydras, Juggernaut armour, businesses that include gunrunning, motorcycle, weed, cocaine, import/export, etc. Yachts, Halloween themed Slasher missions, Stunt Races, Tron inspired minigame etc. They've pretty much blown their load entirely on GTAV's Online mode, and most of it was sub-par missions at best (I can't stand adversary modes). So what the hell would they do come the next installment without it feeling like its missing something since we had it ALL on GTAO? The only way I think they could do that is if they go the way of the Saints Row, where they go so over-the-top that they're barely recognizable. Unless they carry everything over from GTA V, the game is going to feel VERY SHALLOW going from V to VI, and that might as well be their downfall.Yes, exactly. Going from one game that gave you practically everything including the kitchen sink to GTA6 is going to be an odd experience with a strange sense of underwhelmingness. They simply added TOO MUCH to one game, as if its going to last forever.

well it sure beats finding and shooting 200 birds while having to run from the police, all for a stupid helicopter. Also, for 100% completion you get to buy unlimited ammo that resets to the default maximum when you save and reload. GTA:IV collectables sucked much worse... I think that R* should've atleast had a collectable finder like in Saints Row: the Third, and add some better rewards for collecting them, like a special Weapon or Vehicle. You only get a vehicle for the Spaceship parts, and a lame Side Mission for the Letter Scraps, and the rest are for 100% completion. How cool would it be to get Infinite Ammo, a Rhino that respawns at Franklin's house, and an unlockable Jetpack?