Search the Community

Some textures just float off of the surface they're meant to be on, no other GTA had texturing quite as bad as V. Window tint doesn't show up in shadows. Convertibles have invisible hit boxes making your player stand on nothing above the open interior, even Saints Row 2006 did hit detection better. Euphoria forces the player to drop off of ledges instead of giving a chance to jump over ledges. 1 star police are too aggressive.

Everyone is saying brand recognition but that only goes so far. Of course the fact that it is a main line GTA is enough to break records, but GTA V is extremely accessible and casual. There’s literally zero skill or finesse to the gameplay, it holds your hand and overpowers you immensely, which gives it a very broad appeal, this and Rockstar’s support of it has enabled GTA Online to reach new heights for the series, sales wise. V is still super shallow, but depth never mattered when it comes to online gaming. Yes, a fair amount of kids, myself included at the time, and people with the attention span of a gold fish complained about GTA IV because it lacked planes and whatever. It wasn’t San Andreas HD edition and that upset some people. But look, Saints Row 2 basically delivered on being the wacky HD open world game that one might have once imagined a sequel to San Andreas to be, and it didn’t sell anywhere near as much as GTA IV. Saints Row made its name off the back of GTA’s success too, so brand recognition is much less a factor here - if you’d heard of GTA in the late 2000’s, you’d probably heard of Saints Row and other open world games looking to take GTA’s crown. So with that said, why didn’t Saints Row 2 even sell anywhere near IV? It had the planes, the customisation and general brainlessness that everyone wanted from IV right? As for GTA V vs its competitors, you’re correct. V is superficially perfect, for the average player who doesn’t really look too closely at things or lacks critical thinking, it really is a near perfect game. It does a good job of keeping that mask on with very tight core mechanics.

The other commenters have already pretty much hit the nail on the head. To add one thing, I think a big part of it has to do with the fact that GTA V filled an incredibly coveted and desirable role in the gaming landscape-that being the accessible and believable modern day open world crime simulator. Despite other developers and franchises attempting to fill that space in some way (looking at you Watch Dogs and Saints Row), no one has gotten close to the dominant success enjoyed by Rockstar and GTA V. Combine that with the brand recognition of Grand Theft Auto, the premier status of Rockstar Games, the games high review scores and acclaim, and the success of GTA Online and you have your answer. Is GTA V the best GTA? In my opinion no, even though I think the game is great and doesn't deserve nearly the amount of harsh criticism directed towards it by some fans. GTA V's perceived strengths and weaknesses in relation to other Rockstar or GTA Games does not really matter with regards to the games success. In my opinion, any GTA game released at the same tame brought up to modern standards would likely have had the same success.

Oddly enough, it was awful. lol I pre-ordered the game and picked it up at the fabled Midnight launch on release. I absolutely hated the game right from the start. I don't want to stir up any crap between IV and V fans, but I don't think anyone here will be surprised by me saying that I absolutely hated IV, just everything about it. So I really wanted to give V a chance to woo me back into the GTA franchise. The problem I had was I got the complete wrong idea about what GTA V was as a game, in terms of physics, character movement, and "realism." So when I was playing the game waaaaay back in September of 2013, my perception of V was absurdly off, and I hated it because I thought it was really nothing more than GTA IV Part Deux or something. So after a few days, I just abandoned it, and went back to Saints Row games, GTA Trilogy games, Just Cause 2, and other sandbox games more to my liking. Fast forward a little more than a year. My online friends in another forum BEGGED me to give V another chance, but I refused I wanted no part of it, and thought GTA was dead to me, at least future GTA games. I had bilateral rotator surgery in Dec 2014 and then March of 2015, and I was out of work for a good chunk of time. So when it came up yet again, about me giving V another try, I rolled my eyes, and said, "Fine, whatever, I have nothing to lose and I certainly have plenty of time." My online forum friends insisted that V really was nothing like IV and I totally had the wrong idea. Well, turns out they were 100% and I was 100% wrong. Very soon after I started playing V I was blown away by how amazing it was. I had wanted a bonafide San Andreas sequel from IV, and didn't get it, obviously. But once I settled into V, I really saw how Rockstar was trying to offer a compromise between San Andreas (including VC and III) and GTA IV. Don't get me wrong, there are still some areas that V leans into the physics and gameplay motifs and ideas of IV way too much for my tastes, but I realized back then that this is what compromise is. I once hear a definition of compromise, "A compromise is a solution where nobody is really happy." so I decided then and there to give GTA V a pass for all the things it sort of brought to the table that were too much like IV for my tastes. So to this day, I force myself to overlook those attributes and focus on the huge plethora of stuff in V that is actually very much to my liking At first, back when it launched, I didn't think much of the story at all. This is not to say thought it was bad or anything. Or good, for that matter. I didn't care about the story, because I erroneously believed the game was just a steaming pile of dog s**t. So the story was neither good or bad to me at that point. Now, after getting sucked in the way I did, I really love the story. I have some criticisms of the story, but mostly I think it's fantastic. I love the interaction between the three protagonists, the dialog between them, the often seamless character switching, particularly when used in missions, and I really like the govenment intrigue plotlines, and how it intersects with all three characters, I have even come to like the family drama with Michael's wife and kids. I like that it's a comedic, satire of the typical American family. I love the way all the antagonists are done, and how Michael, Trevor, and Franklin deal with them, and all sort of have their own enemies, which they collectively have to deal with. I love the SP heists, too. Both storywise and gameplay. My only real criticism of the story is how Trevor behaves toward the women in his life, both his Mom and Mrs. Medrazzo. It would have been fine to make Trevor a little weepy, crying, clingy, and vulnerable, to show that side of him, but it was so cringeworthy and heavy ham-fisted, Trevor should have remained an unhinged, badass lunatic throughout. They did manage to show his twisted morality and how even as a raging psychotic, he did have a moral code that in some ways might even be commendable. Had he shown some emotion (such as abandonment, lovelorn tears and heartache, as well as a little clingyness) it would have been okay if it were less heavy handed and piled on. If I have to be honest, V has maybe the best GTA storyline, simply because the PS2 was very limited and the narrative had to be a little more contained for the Trilogy games. Love all of this. The map, the ambiance, the whole vibe of both the city and desert areas. Fantastic, and the landmarks are incredibly memorable, and I love exploring even to this day. Los Santos has such a So Cal vibe, it really does. I have traveled to California many times, and the map of V really captures the whole So Cal feel and mood. The desert is absolutely amazing, and even I love all the scenic mountains, the running and often turbulent water in the streams and such. So much eye candy to see and enjoy. The animals on the map really add so much to the game, too. I was a late comer to GTAO. Honestly, I was so disappointed with the way that Rockstar completely stopped supporting the SP, while lavishing GTAO with constant upgrades, that I sort of boycotted GTAO. I wanted nothing to do with it. BI couldn't wait for GTA VI for some new GTA content for me! But I decided to give it a try last year, in June of 2020. I snagged a deep discounted PS4 version and I have literally never looked back. In the 16 months I have been playing, I literally went from, "Come on Rockstar, I WANT GTA VI DAMMIT!" all the way to, "Take your time with VI, guys! I am really doing great stuff in Online and I know once VI comes out I lose everything I progressed my character to in V to start all over with a blank slate in VI. So, yeah, take your time!" lol Based on studying the history, since as I said I was late to the party, I think it evolved amazingly. From what I have read, back in 2013/2014, the most expensive things were the $1 Million + sport scars, and every thing in the game was about grinding out money, which came very difficult just playing the game, and it was all just a map full of people kllling each other for no other reason than they can. But seeing how they have evolved GTAO, with all kinds of heists, Cayo Perico, a million cars, a lot more garage space, all the insanely varied myriad of businesses, and on and on. It really is a truly remarkable online mode. Even with the annoying griefers, Well, the community is a mixed bag for me. I find that a lot of fans in the V section are hostile both to the game and fans who really love it and are willing to talk about why. Back in 2013, I remember people were mostly positive about V, both online and SP. But as time went on, I have noticed that GTA fans here have become more and more negative about V as time goes on. I also think that this forum community has evolved markedly toward using this forum as a platform to lobby Rockstar into making GTA VI much different than they made V. We all know Rocksar reads these forums, and I think that the current community has sort of become focused on the quest of feverishly trying to convince Rockstar that unless they go back to what they did in games like GTA IV that "VI will suck just like V does."

Alright, so. Here are some things that you and I hopefully agree on. If this is an incorrect assessment on my part, then you really don't have a good platform for debating me on this point because the following statements are based on empirical evidence, quotes straight from GroveStGTAV. 1. OP is arguing that GTA V has the worst "GTA story" within the context of his (arbitrary) definition. 2. The following quote are is the said definition Note that nothing has been stated, including what proceeds this statement in this post that I am quoting, with respect to substance, that being the grittiness of the games and whatever other points you have brought up. 3. In his own words, by this framework, GTA IV would be the best GTA story in the series and would make GTA V the worst. This is what I am challenging OP on. That by their standards on what a GTA games narrative structure should follow to be considered good is a flawed because that would mean that following their definition you could argue that GTA 3 also has a great narrative but it doesn't. Now, I am arguing objectivity within the context of OP's definitions. Perhaps I could have been clearer on this, because I have just inadvertently allowed you to start nitpicking and taking my words out of context and saying that I'm arguing for absolute objectivity as stories on their own which is unequivocally false. So once again I better retread my steps here. Let's establish one thing, OP's statement about Niko not being a movie protagonist was totally a non-sequitur to begin with. I am perfectly aware that I'm the one who started challenging OP on what is ultimately a moot point, it contributes nothing to the discussion about GTA V being a bad GTA story, but you keep debating what are fundamental truths for all GTA games. They are largely inspired by films, why you keep incessantly arguing they're not is beyond me, many criticisms have been laid against Rockstars approach to mission design which makes them more linear, more narrative driven and strips control away from the player. Yes, this absolutely does have connection to the argument that Niko is a movie protagonist. Designing the entire game around a cinematic approach, which is true for almost if not all HD era Rockstar games obviously means that the protagonists within those games align closely to those of a typical movie. It's an argument which goes beyond the scope of "x is related to y in z movie so that makes them like a movie". Wasn't my point to begin with, but again you're insisting that it was. Erm, yeah. That's my point. You can draw connections between virtually any vidya protagonist and a film character. The entire basis of my point about movie protagonists is that despite OP saying he is not, he absolutely is with consideration to the numerous influences to film and design of GTA IV as a whole. And yes, the same is true for GTA V. You're drawing connections between specific movies/characters and characters in GTA which wasn't my argument to begin with. Tommy is undeniably based on Tony Montana, he follows the conventions of a movie protagonist. You could put Tommy Vercetti in a film and it would probably flow pretty well if you polished up the pacing. Tommy Vercetti is therefore comparable to a typical movie protagonist. You have some gall to say I'm coming to preemptive conclusions about OP's beliefs then go on to make this statement. I'll reiterate what I said before. OP never said anything that would indicate a "GTA story" needs to be gritty. He was referring to the structure of the game. Common sense all you like it's not what OP said. In principle I agree with you about a good GTA game being gritty and grounded, but again, not what he said. The flow of the story OP gave in the paragraph you quoted could easily be applied to a game like Saints Row after you substitute the characters, where in essence you go around working for criminals and doing generally criminal activities but is instead presented in an over the top, silly, comedic tone. From what I recall in Saints Row 2 this is pretty much the premise, albeit you work for yourself but you're still a believable criminal from the underworld doing dirty work. You're arguing from your own beliefs, stop pretending to argue on behalf of OP. You literally asked me for what I think influenced Niko as a protagonist from film and I pulled an example out of the hat and I answered your question. I didn't say that it was the be all end all lol.

People only started to prase GTA IV after V released, before that this forum & others like reddit were trashing it all the time. GTA IV was divisive to say the least, that's why a rip off of 3D Era GTA games like Saints Row 2 was so popular. It was seen as the alternative once GTA went serious and realistic. Also the same dude who wrote GTA V's story wrote RDR2 as well and he left the company now so its not a safe bet that GTA VI's story will be better than V's, if anything the opposite is true. GTA V's story is only so over the top and lacking in depth because people bitched non stop about GTA IV being too dar and seriousk (Dan Houser also wrote the story for that game so he already showed that he can deliver something with more depth). Rockstar wanted GTA to be more dark and gritty (the whole switch to the HD era was a reboot of the series in terms of tone and story) but had to change direction again after the constant whining. To act like it was not a big deal is just silly. Also Arthur Morgan beats all GTA protagonists in terms of depth, only Niko comes close. Acting like 3D Era protagonists and their ridiculous stories were so compelling is just silly. V simply returned to that style Its great to see GTA IV being appreciated more now but its too late. Rockstar will never go back to making more darker and compelling GTA stories and stick with over the top cartoony stuff which is fun but wasted potential. People simply bitched too much about GTA IV's dark and more realistic tone

Saints Row Reboot called

watch dogs legion, the witcher 3, saints row, resident evil, destiny 2 etc pp you cant deny the truth dude

I must say this again, police system in gta v is total ass. Sometimes i doesnt makes sense. They modelled around 7-10 police cars and bikes and they use around four in chase. Police blockades are just lazy as it can be. I played few openworld city games since gta v for example Mafia 3 and Saints Row 3 remastered and in both games this system feels more diverse . In mafia 3 when is heat higher, normal policemens they just grab machine guns and come with full occupied squad cars sometimes swat trucks appear. Same goes to SR but is interesting, there are undercover cars police bikes chase you when you are on bike. When I use basic guns, there is normal swat team, when I use heavy weapons national guards is deployed with police. Five star is just full war with everything imaginable. There are attack choppers, black hawk helicopters with special teams. No mentions when city is occupied with paramilitary organization STAG. Compare this to GTA V with really basic police system. I even think that GTA IV used more redefined system. Sometimes deployed NOOSE sometimes FIB diferent helicopters on different heats. In TBOGT they use better weapons for noose units. GTA V just made every details possible like flip flops, but they made basic details pretty simple.

Another YT'er related moan from me. TheProfessional, guy does many GTAO related garbage videos but my W + C isn't about those specifically. Over 1 hour to explain why Dimitri betrays Niko? Another 1+ hour for Playboy + Dwayne's story? 50+ minutes for why Julius betrays you in Saints Row? Wtf? And this fella had the nerve to do a MrBossFTW parody video?

I think what my largest issue with the story is the lack of stakes and tension. Coming off criticisms of IV's dark tone and mocking from Saints Row 2 marketing, they seemed to want to course correct the tone and atmosphere to the point it felt palpable in The Ballad of Gay Tony. The trouble is they overdid it. I was in university and more immature when the game released and have fond memories of laughing at Trevor's scenes, particularly the Debra confrontation in Floyd's apartment. But in recent years, its just been getting difficult to give a damn about any of the characters. I actually feel the opposite about many characters than I did in my first playthrough. I didn't originally care for Franklin as a character, but he's now my favorite of the trio. He embodies that dry snarkiness and cynicism that Niko was known for. He's the straight man to all the absolutely batsh*t, insufferable maniacs the game throws at you; a lone voice of reason in a f*cked up world. He doesn't seem to enjoy any of the work and FIB blackmail schemes he gets roped into over the course of the story and rightly calls out Michael during the FIB raid. "Poor me, poor me. Man, pour me a drink." Franklin is a reluctant criminal. If not for Lamar f*cking them both out of their jobs he likely would have been content rising to a sales manager position and getting an apartment for himself. He joins Michael because at that point Simeon would never have given him a good reference and he wanted what Michael had: the American Dream, a rat race of insanity as revealed by IV. I was looking forward to playing as Michael the most purely because putting a nuclear family dynamic into a Grand Theft Auto game was intriguing to me. On paper, Michael has the dream but its a facade. He has a wife and two kids who rightly despise him for being a slothful, depressed buffoon who dragged them across the country after throwing his partners under the bus. His mansion has a ludicrous mortgage on it and he's paying hush money to Norton every month. Michael's narrative arc is moreso about accepting what a bastard he has been to everyone and trying to be a better man. In the first act he drives his family away with his mercurial affect and by the end of the game he's being more mindful of their needs. I think I appreciated those optional side missions where each family member called him for help more than his main story. It's really difficult for me to say I "like" Michael as a character but he comes close. A shame the story DLC got canceled. Trevor is where things went horribly awry for me. His associates and his own demeanor feel so unconcerned with the many threats they face that you get the sense they'll survive anything and as a result the tension is almost nonexistent. I pity Trevor because its clear he had a really f*cked up upbringing followed by Michael's betrayal. But he acts like such a sourpuss clown so much and does so much awful sh*t that it makes me despise him. I will say his missions are the best though. I actually think Devon Weston works just fine as a villain. He's arrogant, smug, greedy, a backstabber, and the embodiment of the dudebro venture capitalists and bullsh*t artists that plague the economy of the United States. He straight up sends private mercenaries to kill Michael's family. Steve Haines should have felt more menacing though. It would have been better if he actually had full FIB backing and f*cked with Michael in a more insidious way. As it stands he's just a dirty cop who has you do his laundry for him. Overall, it was a mixed bag for me. IV sort of spoiled me with its more grounded tone and moodier atmosphere. It wasn't afraid to touch on real heartbreaking issues like suicide (Dwayne) and heroin addiction (Derrick).

I agree with most things you said. What I respectfully have to disagree with is it's just I've seen some people (not you) say some sh*t about devs as if it's their fault. They're just doing what they're told by the higher ups, you probably know that more than me. The issue is the bad management and Take Two is most likely involved too. I don't think individual devs who are working hard from home should be blamed or trashed. Otherwise, we all know how secretive Rockstar is, they act like they're in 2010 or something meanwhile literally every other company has a more active Twitter page that tweets better stuff compared to "30% off on beans in RDO this week". A good example is how saints row twitter page is still replying to people despite their game being received poorly by most people. They're atleast trying, to communicate with the fanbase, while Rockstar is too secretive as if they're working on some secret super weapons not videogames. The situation would have been better if they were more open about this. I don't think their PR team is bad, but maybe the higher ups at R*/TakeTwo want them to be like this? Maybe they restrict what the PR team can say/do, who knows. I don't really get their secrecy and hate that aspect of Rockstar honestly. I'm not blaming the community as a whole for not liking this. I myself DON'T like this and that's evident if you look through my older posts in this thread when it was revealed. I'm blaming certain people in the community that blidingly blames the developers saying some stupid stuff about them. The individual devs don't deserve that.

The people saying Saints Row handle should sh*t talk about R* on Twitter, imagine them getting bodied in sales even after doing that. Against an 8 year old game. SR reboot itself isn't doing pretty hot among the fans so it's wise for them to not stir the water even more. Frankly I expect E&E to sell more than SR reboot in 2022. It'll be a default purchase for next gen consoles again.

Even the Saints Row team has at least been talking to fans, even the ones that talk sh*t. They even apologized for their stand-offish attitude. Rockstar aren't even just ignoring us, they are arrogant. Not since EA 2018 can I recall a company which communicated with so much hubris.

While I've always found it to be Saints Row 3-4 levels of "too out there" for a GTA game, I think I would have been far easier on the A Picket Fence and a Dog Named Skip trailer if it wasn't coupled with a PC delay (the first of three, to boot) the same day. To this day, it has tainted my opinion of the trailer as its own thing. I suppose it's better than reusing 2011 PS3 footage for a PS5 trailer, though.

Say what you will about the Saints Row reboot being woke, but the gameplay looks fun as hell and it looks quite fresh. GTA V E&E is literally a waste of money. This release is for no one, anyone who would've been interested in GTA V would've bought it the first four times it was released. The graphical improvements are minuscule at best, the type that you flat out don't notice unless expressly pointed out to you. They still haven't fixed the ammo magazines disappearing in cutscenes that's been around since 2014. Lester is sitting in two chairs at once in his brief shot. They're so blind they didn't even notice the yellow license plate in the trailer. At first I thought it was one of those old, yellow California license plates (a meaningless addition even if it was added) but no, it's a modern day California/San Andreas plate but colored yellow because of botched lighting. This is gonna sound elitist, but if you buy E&E for any reason, you're honestly part of the problem. You either bought the game already or you've had a massive window of opportunity to buy this on either PC or XB1/PS4. E&E has so far shown nothing worth a purchase that the previous releases couldn't of had beyond the tiny graphical enhancement (meaningless on PC which has mods that look way better than this). If you decide to purchase E&E, you're no better than kids who spend a grand a month on Shark Cards.

You have the right take. People can be toxic, it is what it is. However, the entire forum expressing frustration is still extremely understandable. Aside from RDR2, we've had nothing new from R* except GTA Online updates. GTAF is mostly diehard fans who are sick of GTA 5 at this point, because I sure as sh*t know I am. People are beyond fatigued of GTA Online being the face of the company since 2015. Maybe there are better days ahead, but the direction the company has taken doesn't indicate that. It really doesn't help when it feels like Rockstar Games has had a smug and condescending attitude towards the community. I mean, the trailer speaks for itself and reeks of self parody, almost as if the person who made it just hated it. "Seamless character transitions?". Wow, that's a real game changer there. "Welcome back to Los Santos?". We've wanted to get the f*ck out of Los Santos for a damn decade at this point. Yes, I know this is apples and oranges, and Ubi has waaaay more people, but they've given us Chicago, SF, and London. Even Saints Row with its reboot did the right thing in not revisiting Stilwater and telling Steelport to f*ck off, there comes a time to move on. Add this with the modding takedowns and lawsuit against the Re3 team. R*/T2 have really pissed the waters with the community and this feels hostile. People are just frustrated especially in the midst of a pandemic. We're just tired. Are personal attacks ever OK? No, but everyone has the right to vent their frustration. I'm not too angry given that I seriously doubted this would be more than an HD 60FPS port, but we wanted more.

What if this trailer was just presented from Take 2 instead of Rockstar and how much better GTA V E&E will be in March, if they wasted out time by not adding ssd support, Vulkan and DX 12 API, physics based rendering then I will surely will not touch GTA V E&E. I tried almost all open world games from past, The Getaway 1 and 2, Saints Row 2, 3 and 4, Just Cause Series, Driver and even racing games do not live up to the build quality and detail of GTA games at all, gamepad or keyborad and mouse or whatever, the gta games are king, especially GTA IV. I have been playing GTA VC, SA and VCS on pc and phone for mostly 3 months without GTA IV but missed it a lot. I felt very negative about gaming these days, but give it a chance and you might love something, for me its GTA for now, I will be reviewing the possible GTA V E&E pc version in future, whether you believe me or not, I will support Rockstar Games but I do stand with modders as well. Hope for the best.

Upcoming game - the rebooted Saints Row, specifically. And I get that rebooting a series with new characters or a new look/direction risks annoying established fans - although it's worth bearing in mind that vocal fans are consistently the minority percentage of any audience, and just because older fans don't like something, doesn't mean it won't land just fine with the broader game-buying public. But even so, maybe the reboot won't land with mainstream customers anyway - not everything succeeds, and that sucks, but it is what it is. ...but! When angry fans (of Saints Row 1 and 2) are all "Volition's going to fail hard, and they'll have earned it, for not giving the true fans what we wanted!", just because the new game isn't going back to the look and feel of the first two games (which was never going to happen - not when the change in direction with SR3 sold more copies than 1 and 2 combined), that's not the same as 'being critical when a company does something frustrating'. That's entitled, bitter people wanting other people to suffer, because they weren't catered to exactly how they wanted. (worst of it came when, shortly after the new game reveal, Volition posted a eulogy for fan-turned-dev and community manager Mike "IdolNinja" Watson - and yet some folks still used that as an opportunity to post a bunch of abusive bullsh*t, including making sh*tty remarks about his death to attack the rest of the studio, because f*cking hell, some people are just despicable...) F***, I've been checked out on stuff like Star Trek for over a decade, because I don't like the 'turn your brain off, watch the 'splosions' direction the series went starting with the reboot movies. But all I do is ...just gripe about how I don't like them to anyone who'll listen, and I don't bother watching the new things - I'm not sitting like a vulture, waiting for the production teams to go bust, so I can gloat as 'revenge' for them 'disrespecting the fans' or some other bollocks. They've gone in a new direction, I don't like it, they're getting enough views from people who do like it not to care what I think - that's fair enough. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The world doesn't revolve around my tastes and whims over everyone else's, just because I've got an over-inflated sense of my own importance. Obviously there's a world of difference between R* trying to hype people up with vague "expanded and enhanced" buzzwords and people getting increasingly frustrated by the lack of info, and Volition trying a new direction and older fans flipping their sh*t just because they aren't getting what they wanted - I mainly brought it up because of the intersection of 'sh*tty people harasssing devs on socials, and actively wanting people - individuals - to lose their jobs because of (what is, at the end of the day) disappointing videogame marketing. () And at that point, aside from anything else, I really just wish that the overgrown children of the internet could grow a sense of perspective, and cut that bullsh*t out (for a change...).

People are just damn frustrated at this point. Everyone is tired of having GTA 5 shoved down our throats. This game has been out for almost a decade at this point, and the gaming landscape has long changed since its release. We've only gotten 1 new video game from R* since 2013, the great RDR2, but nothing since then. It doesn't help that the general perception is that they're trying to milk this game out even more, and that GTA Online "killed" what could've been. I'm becoming more skeptical of this notion, since games take time to make, but when it's been nothing but GTA Online updates up the ass, you get cynical. Especially given that Single Player expansions were long killed off in 2016. Regardless, we all know this game is going to sell because of the casual audience, and that GTA 5 is essentially the default option for an open world crime adventure game. There's no alternative for us to express outrage. At this point, I'm kinda willing to buy Saints Row reboot over E&E, because at least that's new interesting and looks fun. So, do fans have a right to be angry? Absolutely. It's been more than a year since the announcement in June 2020, and this was all we got? Wow, a trailer with very modest graphical improvements and bugs, with absolutely nothing new shown. Worse, the trailer was borderline insulting. "Welcome Back to Los Santos", "Seamless Character Switching", the marketing message genuinely feels hostile, if not smug and condescending. But what really gets it here is the lack of communication. Since 2016, Rockstar have largely distanced themselves from the fans with some exceptions (RDR2 launch). Nothing new ever comes out of Rockstar, everything has to be a f*cking secret, at this point I'm convinced it's harder to leak stuff out of R* than Pyongyang. Which means we never get any cool or upcoming announcements or updates about new stuff. Again, this doesn't help the perception that R* has gone full on GTA Online milking. Did the fans overreact? Yeah, they did. I don't follow the website politics, but praising what is essentially a slight update to an old game on a new console generation comes across as out of touch. The forum community hates this re-release with a passion. We may be stuck in the past of yearly R* releases, but damn it, we want something new. That's not getting into the disastrous newswire post, the ongoing modding crisis, the purported GTA Trilogy remasters which haven't been officially announced so far (if they exist), the ever growing toxicity of the GTAO community, and the delay of this game, which needs "fine polishing and tuning", and I'm the King of Spain I might add to that. Overall, what a disastrous reveal, predictable chaotic reaction, and a sh*tty response by R*. Unfortunately, we know each end of the school year and winter break there are kids that will get their parents to buy them this recycled garbage, giving Strauss his stroke of ego.

almost as if they don't care. what i've noticed is that even Saints Row devs are replying to the people even though some are bashing the game hard. but R* is still a small indie company, i'm sure they will make something out of themselves

At least the Saints Row team has had the decency to acknowledge and respond quickly to the criticisms of their reboot reveal. Some of the responses from their team weren't the best, but they at least tried to explain parts of the game in greater detail, released some gameplay shortly after and explained some of the decisions that were made (even if I and other people who follow the franchise don't agree with the choices). Will wait and see if Rockstar responds to their criticisms of late, but given their lack of communication with the community as of late, I sincerely doubt they will. It would just be nice if they explained why a remaster had to be delayed several months and what their expectations are for the improvements. I know they like to aim for high quality to perfection and having formal communication, but sometimes it doesn't hurt to have a little bit of informal communication with the fan base that loves these games so much. A simple "We are sorry for the delay yadayadayada. Although some of these features may not make it into the final release we are working on and testing features that overhaul the gameplay elements of XYZ and introducing newer features such as blahblahblah."

As much as that new Saints Row looks a bit goofy but damn they already get enough credit compared to R* at the stage this is in

Because before this afternoon I wanted to believe that Rockstar at least had a shred of integrity and self awareness left. But no, even the f*cking descriptions and "new features" in the trailer feel like a f*cking self parody. Like, they really scratched the bare f*cking minimum in showcasing anything new. And FFS it even had the license plates suffering from a lighting bug. f*ck Rockstar. At least there's a brand new Saints Row game which puts Volition above them. Ubisoft have taken us to Chicago, San Francisco/would be San Fierro, and London. Rockstar straight up hates the fans.

Congrats R*, you make Saints Row Reboot trailer looks like a f*cking masterpiece... I hope that they will not release PC version, except for updating some textures/effects through patches. It really doesn't worth it.