GTA IV: A step backwards?

[wayninja]

Im not going to waste my time with you.

 

Dating is pointless filler along with lots of other stuff in IV.  The argument that R* only took out useless fill stuff is silly.

 

As for you long winded and uncessessary speculation.  All of this stuff should already be in the engine.  It should just be a matter of different skins and meshes and different values for the properties of the materials.

 

It's all the same with you fanboys.  Either R* took it out:

 

1. For realism

2. Because it was useless

3. It's technically impossible to have that in IV.

Awesome. You retreat without even trying to defend yourself. I claim internets victory. Even in the face of fact you still insist your right. Its sad really.

LMAO.., ok, pseudo-geek. You win on the internet. You are the most stubborn!

 

[meth.]

Why is it so hard for the people who like & enjoy the game to stomach those who find flaws with it?

 

You f*cking fa**ots argue like only one side can be right.

[Tornadium]

Im not going to waste my time with you.

 

Dating is pointless filler along with lots of other stuff in IV.  The argument that R* only took out useless fill stuff is silly.

 

As for you long winded and uncessessary speculation.  All of this stuff should already be in the engine.  It should just be a matter of different skins and meshes and different values for the properties of the materials.

 

It's all the same with you fanboys.  Either R* took it out:

 

1. For realism

2. Because it was useless

3. It's technically impossible to have that in IV.

Awesome. You retreat without even trying to defend yourself. I claim internets victory. Even in the face of fact you still insist your right. Its sad really.

LMAO.., ok, pseudo-geek. You win on the internet. You are the most stubborn!

 

I highly doubt i am a geek my friend. I just have an IQ which classes higher than 50% of the forum. Anything less than 50 is "Mentally Retarded". Lets guess what your IQ is?. Im not a Fanboy. This game is flawed however you lament SA like some kind of legend. That too was flawed GREATLY. Its nice to see sh*t turned around on you ain't it?

[wayninja]

I highly doubt i am a geek my friend. I just have an IQ which classes higher than 50% of the forum. Anything less than 50 is "Mentally Retarded". Lets guess what your IQ is?. Im not a Fanboy. This game is flawed however you lament SA like some kind of legend. That too was flawed GREATLY. Its nice to see sh*t turned around on you ain't it?

Right, and I am arrogant and self-righteous. (at least I can spell it right, derr)

 

I never said that SA was a legend, simply comparing it to this one. But nice try on putting words into my mouth fanboy.

[Tornadium]

I highly doubt i am a geek my friend. I just have an IQ which classes higher than 50% of the forum. Anything less than 50 is "Mentally Retarded". Lets guess what your IQ is?. Im not a Fanboy. This game is flawed however you lament SA like some kind of legend. That too was flawed GREATLY. Its nice to see sh*t turned around on you ain't it?

Right, and I am arrogant and self-righteous. (at least I can spell it right, derr)

 

I never said that SA was a legend, simply comparing it to this one. But nice try on putting words into my mouth fanboy.

Hmm, Your calling me a geek when you use spelling as an insult. Oh lawl. I mis-spelled one word, Instantly your arguement is correct.

 

Well ive never seen you say ONE negative thing about SA. Everything about SA is better from the posts of yours that i've read so its very easy to confuse your posts with a poem of ass licking. I've already stated that there are flaws with IV. Does it make me a fanboy because i like one over the other?

 

I actually respect people which can admit that each game is flawed but state their opinion as to why they like either. I stay away from those people. However its the f*cktards like you who posts epic threads about how SA is the "Omgz!!!!!!BESTZ GTA EVAR!"11!!1!" that i love to get a rise out of. The pure fact that you are calling me a fanboy shows that fact. I wished i had saved screencaps of the 2006 era of /b/. You would learn how to troll much better than this.

[Catalinaslover]

Its great we have programmer experts in here now that can confirm that this console gen have reached its final peak and no new additions are possible because the hardware have too much on its shoulders. Bs.

 

If DLC contains car customs ur defense arguments didnt hold up that much huh?

 

 

Your analogy sucks as much ass as your argument.

 

GTA IV was designed with adults in mind as it's an ADULT game. It seems to be a popular trend among the teens to bitch and complain their favorite activity of getting their hair cut/getting a tattoo/dancing/<random pointless filler sh*t here> got taken out of the game.

 

Guess what, you can do that in real life! It's not illegal! So go outside and do it!

 

 

Some other game series stick closely to there sucess formula and keep some basic ingredients in there new next gen products.

 

Its like R* had some internal fun with this then?...ppl complaining abhout no car wash in SA and they thought go f*ckurself we gonna deliver ur f*cking car wash..have fun. What new features did IV really deliver?

 

Im gonna make it easy for myself with futures Gta's..im gonna have a fanboy list to check off stuff with

 

1-Car customization.

 

A game that focus so much on nice cars, stealing them and everything need to have some player options to f*ck around with them,colors and spoilers.

Its a good way to blow off some xtra cash too.

If it makes you happy cuppy this is also classified as an adult hobby Irl.

 

2-Imort/export cars

 

Export cars and buy cars should be in.

 

3-Save houses with garages.

 

Getting a phat wallet means i can afford a decent place...either garages or a god damn big f*cking parking lot that allows for atleast 60 cars to be saved ingame.

 

4-Working camera

 

With beautiful graphics i need to take pictures off my cars-events-sunsets and save them so i can send or showoff to friends or put them on a webpage.

 

5-Gambling-casino

 

With a game focused on getting paid for missions i want to be able to loose or win money. There are many online casion games that could be ingame, kinds of poker and so on, thats nice to play for NO RL money.

 

6-Stripclub

 

Ingame since VC, should stay that way.

 

7-Airplanes and parachute

 

Atleast a dodo and a working parachute to have fun with,preferably a plane that handles like the Red bull race types.

 

8-Rampages

 

Some kind of respawned thing like rampages/turf war

that gives me a challenge to use my guns away from the story line but integrated nice ingame.

 

9-Pool

 

Minigame like pool looks to be here to stay..slightly tweaked it will add play time.

 

 

 

This is my future MINIMUM DEMAND list off a gta..ANY released GTA NOT having 1 off this in will be labeld INSTA FAILURE!!!!

 

This fun stuff add up for short mission story gameplay, give variation and value to game experience and gets the player more hooked into the Gta world.

 

R* should have this and some more as a base for the GTA brand and start creating this context before any mission or story work...then il happily buy any sh*tty story they cook up and there bad caracters, il have a game to play and a city to appreciate spending time in and have fun !!!

 

Then i let the fanbois have there heated arguments alone about

if CJ was a looser or if Nikos mommy were a hooker or what story did inflict most emotional engagment.

Edited May 18, 2008 by Catalinaslover

[Karambalaya]

Dating has never been a "pointless filler" (as someone called it) in either SA or IV. It's completely voluntary to do and you can complete both games without going on a date (or doing any "male bonding"). The only exception is Millie in SA. Dating is not required for 100% , it's simply there for getting rewards. If you don't want it, don't do it. However, I think R* did a mistake in SA by making Denise's rewards simply boring (especially compared to what other girlfriends could give you). She was the first girl you could date in the game and thus gave a bad first-impression of the whole dating concept in SA. I think that killed some interest. Anyway, dating is only there for giving you rewards if you spend a little time on doing it. It's not a filler, it's an opportunity.

[TangoIndiaMike]

You're a moron.

Of COURSE it will be set in the US.

The GTAs with the numbers are ALL SET IN THE SAME PLACE!

[wayninja]

 

Dating has never been a "pointless filler" (as someone called it) in either SA or IV. It's completely voluntary to do and you can complete both games without going on a date (or doing any "male bonding"). The only exception is Millie in SA. Dating is not required for 100%

Um...that's almost the definition of pointless filler. And I believe taking your buddies to each activity IS required for 100%

Edited May 18, 2008 by wayninja

[GTAfanatical]

yeah it is a filler. thats what all these 'pointless things were in sa. they were pointless little filler things that added life to the game. hoocking up trailers, forklifts, pointless but its the little details. getting a big mansion, pointless but was fun. just like carwashes are pointless and qubec o whatever its called

 

its a sandbox game and needs stupid things like this in it to keep it interesting for a while. otherwise its like assassins creed where u do the missions and thats it.

[wayninja]

Totally agreed. R* can take their trite f*cking story with their stereotyped characters and shove it up their ass. Just give us more pointless filler that I can dick around with for fun. Good stories are for books.

[Captain NoScope]

No matter how good a game is, there will always be people like wayninja that come just to sh*t all over it. People like you just ruin forums. You let stupid little things (like not being able to move prongs on a forklift) bother you and you completely miss how good the game is. The story, writing, style, and humor of this game are far and away better than San Andreas, yet you come on here and say that it's a step backwards. Everything has been condensed so much, there is way more interactivity than in SA in 70% of the space.

 

I'm guessing that somewhere on these boards (likely more than just once) you have complained about not being able to lift weights in the game to make Niko buff. I can't believe anyone actually enjoyed that. Lifting in the game was repetitive and boring. If you really miss it that much, leave your studio apartment and hit the gym. It's a lot more rewarding, trust me.

[Captain NoScope]

Why is it so hard for the people who like & enjoy the game to stomach those who find flaws with it?

 

You f*cking fa**ots argue like only one side can be right.

good job insulting people's sexuality over the internet!!

[Dallasa]

Can somebody explain to me why San Andreas is so great? I came to GTA IV from VC, never played SA. I decided to pick it up a few days ago, because it was really cheap and everybody is saying about how great it is.

 

It is a pile of flaming crap compared to GTA IV. The map is really boring, city at the bottom, long boring drive to get to another city, long boring drive to get to another city, with some generic towns in between. I don't get why people are saying the map was better. I screwed around in the deserts and forests for maybe 10 minutes before I was bored. Those open areas are what makes San Andreas so big. If you removed all that crap, Liberty City would be a lot bigger than San Andreas.

 

Okay, gameplay. Car modding, that was fun for a few vehicles before it just starting to get repetetive. I didn't even see the point either, as I would always lose those cars eventually anyways. Parachutes, that got old quick too. The new engine in GTA IV makes it a lot funner to jump off buildings our out of helicopters without parachutes. Player customization was a bit fun, but this is not the Sims. I don't see you guys bashing games like Halo because you can't change his armor. The only thing I really like better in San Andreas is the modding and cheats. It does add extra life to the game.

 

Okay, some other things. Tanks... when was the last time you saw a tank in New York? Never. Planes, you would be across the map in a few seconds. You have helicopters anyways. The story, it was pretty good. I wouldn't call it the best story ever, but I wouldn't call it 'mediocre'. Whoever said the GTA should not have a story is an idiot. Why do you play games? Because they have a story that draws you in. GTA is about more than just running around killing people.

 

Alright, that is it. I don't want to sound like a fanboy... there are things I am a little disappointed with and I'm not saying that San Andreas is a bad game. Despite all those comments I just made, I really did enjoy playing though SA. I'm just getting tired of people taking the piss out of Rockstar for taking out things that were not much fun or useful in the first place. There are too many people stuck in the past.

[wayninja]

 

No matter how good a game is, there will always be people like wayninja that come just to sh*t all over it.  People like you just ruin forums.  You let stupid little things (like not being able to move prongs on a forklift) bother you and you completely miss how good the game is.  The story, writing, style, and humor of this game are far and away better than San Andreas, yet you come on here and say that it's a step backwards.   Everything has been condensed so much, there is way more interactivity than in SA in 70% of the space.

 

I'm guessing that somewhere on these boards (likely more than just once) you have complained about not being able to lift weights in the game to make Niko buff.  I can't believe anyone actually enjoyed that.  Lifting in the game was repetitive and boring.  If you really miss it that much, leave your studio apartment and hit the gym.  It's a lot more rewarding, trust me.

Never complained about weights or forklifts. But fanbots like you still constantly put words into my mouth and take me out of context and are a dime a dozen.

 

There is a lot less space and less to do in it.

 

 

Alright, that is it. I don't want to sound like a fanboy... there are things I am a little disappointed with and I'm not saying that San Andreas is a bad game. Despite all those comments I just made, I really did enjoy playing though SA. I'm just getting tired of people taking the piss out of Rockstar for taking out things that were not much fun or useful in the first place. There are too many people stuck in the past

 

The problem isn't that R* isn't repeating itself, the problem is that R* is taking things out and replacing them with nothing. And please don't start with the 'it's not realistic angle'. None of GTA IV is realistic.

 

And please don't try to compare the physics/graphics of a game released over 5 years go to one released 3 weeks ago. It's kinda silly.

 

 

Whoever said the GTA should not have a story is an idiot. Why do you play games? Because they have a story that draws you in. GTA is about more than just running around killing people.

 

LMAO, that why I still play Tetris... it's compelling story. GTA IS ABOUT RUNNING AROUND, STEALING CARS, AND DUSTING IT UP WITH THE COPS. IF R* decides it's no longer about these things, I simply won't be playing. I know that dissapoints some of you, but I'm sure some also agree.

Edited May 18, 2008 by wayninja

[Captain NoScope]

No matter how good a game is, there will always be people like wayninja that come just to sh*t all over it.  People like you just ruin forums.  You let stupid little things (like not being able to move prongs on a forklift) bother you and you completely miss how good the game is.  The story, writing, style, and humor of this game are far and away better than San Andreas, yet you come on here and say that it's a step backwards.   Everything has been condensed so much, there is way more interactivity than in SA in 70% of the space.

 

I'm guessing that somewhere on these boards (likely more than just once) you have complained about not being able to lift weights in the game to make Niko buff.  I can't believe anyone actually enjoyed that.  Lifting in the game was repetitive and boring.  If you really miss it that much, leave your studio apartment and hit the gym.  It's a lot more rewarding, trust me.

Never complained about weights or forklifts. But fanbots like you still constantly put words into my mouth and take me out of context and are a dime a dozen.

 

There is a lot less space and less to do in it.

 

 

Alright, that is it. I don't want to sound like a fanboy... there are things I am a little disappointed with and I'm not saying that San Andreas is a bad game. Despite all those comments I just made, I really did enjoy playing though SA. I'm just getting tired of people taking the piss out of Rockstar for taking out things that were not much fun or useful in the first place. There are too many people stuck in the past

 

The problem isn't that R* isn't repeating itself, the problem is that R* is taking things out and replacing them with nothing. And please don't start with the 'it's not realistic angle'. None of GTA IV is realistic.

there's plenty to do, but because we can't go offroading in some backwoods town the game is terrible? ok. About the weights and forklifts, I'm assuming that's something that you were pretty pissed about when you gound they were left out.

 

The only thing that was left out that I really is being able to parachute. It was really fun. But calling it a step backwards is a pretty ridiculous statement.

 

Earlier today while I was playing, I saw two npc's walking. Suddenly, they started fighting. A cop came to break it up, and after a short chase on foot, the cop pulled his gun and the guy surrendered, got in the cop's car, and was taken away. I would love to see that in SA.

 

How about multiplayer? I would say that that's a pretty big improvement from SA's multiplayer....wait a minute there wasn't any!

[Catalinaslover]

 

The story, writing, style, and humor of this game are far and away better than San Andreas, yet you come on here and say that it's a step backwards. Everything has been condensed so much, there is way more interactivity than in SA in 70% of the space.

 

They had this "style" already in GtaIII, i love it, its a big part of the games vibe.

 

though its subjective if this or that story is better, if they tweaked IV in a new vibe slightly,fine... but where is my f*cking gameplay part???

 

Going backward hell yea!! A game franchise mostly add features,no matter if it debut on a new console or not.

 

They should start to work with the sandbox gameplay features..get them done..then do the plot ...if they believe GTA as serie made it only off the amazing story they need to check there egos.

[Dallasa]

 

And please don't try to compare the physics/graphics of a game released over 5 years go to one released 3 weeks ago. It's kinda silly.

 

I never compared the physics/graphics of the two. I am not so stupid that I do not realize that GTA IV will obviously be better in that department. I was talking about features. I never once mentioned that I didn't like San Andreas because the graphics can't compare to GTA IV. Didn't you just say that others put words in your mouth. Well don't put them in mine.

 

[wayninja]

 

there's plenty to do, but because we can't go offroading in some backwoods town the game is terrible? ok.  About the weights and forklifts, I'm assuming that's something that you were pretty pissed about when you gound they were left out.

 

When you assume something that isn't true, it doesn't somehow magically make it true.

 

 

The only thing that was left out that I really is being able to parachute.  It was really fun.  But calling it a step backwards is a pretty ridiculous statement.

 

 

Nope, that's just one example. If you read my previous posts instead of just freaking out, you will see that I say in many ways a step forward and in others a step back. It's really that simple, not sure why you are seeing red about it.

 

 

Earlier today while I was playing, I saw two npc's walking.  Suddenly, they started fighting.  A cop came to break it up, and after a short chase on foot, the cop pulled his gun and the guy surrendered, got in the cop's car, and was taken away.  I would love to see that in SA.

 

How about multiplayer? I would say that that's a pretty big improvement from SA's multiplayer....wait a minute there wasn't any!

 

Again, it's a bit unfair to compare a game released 3 weeks ago to one released 5 years ago. I would hope the NPC interaction would be improved. But as mentioned previously, when someone said something to CJ on the street, at least he could respond instead of just looking dumb.

 

And no, consoles back then were not as prolific on the internet as they are now and R* did not include multiplayer, but SA for the PC did have a multiplayer mod. All of this is moot anyway, I'm talking about SP, the little I've played MP I haven't really been all that excited about and would rather play SP anyway.

 

 

The new engine in GTA IV makes it a lot funner to jump off buildings our out of helicopters without parachutes.

 

The new engine you are talking about is NOT graphics/physics?

Edited May 18, 2008 by wayninja

[Catalinaslover]

 

The problem isn't that R* isn't repeating itself, the problem is that R* is taking things out and replacing them with nothing. And please don't start with the 'it's not realistic angle'. None of GTA IV is realistic.

 

And please don't try to compare the physics/graphics of a game released over 5 years go to one released 3 weeks ago. It's kinda silly

 

Yes.

 

.

Edited May 18, 2008 by Catalinaslover

[Hove_Beach]

Earlier today while I was playing, I saw two npc's walking. Suddenly, they started fighting. A cop came to break it up, and after a short chase on foot, the cop pulled his gun and the guy surrendered, got in the cop's car, and was taken away. I would love to see that in SA.

In SA NPC's would

 

fight each other more regulary over turf,

fight u just because of your presence - coincidently reacting to clothes you wore

would fight u because of your presence -

would be chased by poice in cars

would be chased by police on foot

would be chased by helicopter with high beems following them

- i dont see hardly any of that in GTA IV -

 

as to the engine arguments - al this about its so many lines of code for euphoria to process - if u look at the cars in the game there are "on the fly " modificatins applied to certain types of vehicles anyway - yes agreed - damage code will add more variables to process in real time - but the basic engine is there already - its just about textures and time getting it in - DLC anybody !!!

 

Most fanbois are jumping on the " its not better than SA bandwagon - but its part of a series - and its taken things from the original gta up to SA but dropped lots of the stuff people liked - it scaled down a little too much without adding enough if any real new features that are player controlled to replace the lost content with.

 

i made a coment earliar about the cheetah - and missing unmarked police cars - and someone jumped on me about usefullness ect - in a city like NY - arent unmarked police cars the norm - again in the series dropping content and not improving it - staying with the police -

 

unmarked police cars - gone ?

swat out of helicopter - gone ?

army - gone ?

tanks - gone ?

 

fanbois wait - "but there isnt an army in NY" mmmmm go down to the ground zero site u will see army plus in other parts of the city - ie some metro stations etc. plus all the talk of terrorists in the game by the NPC's - it would fit in..

 

the list goes on and on -

 

i wish someone would make a list of all this "new content " that would be a sight !

 

 

 

 

[Dallasa]

 

The new engine you are talking about is NOT graphics/physics?

I wasn't really comparing the two games there. I meant that it (for me) would be funner to just freefall without a parachute in GTA IV. So yes, I did mention the physics, but I was not directly comparing the two, just speaking of the physics within GTA IV. Sorry if that was confusing.

 

[EAZZY DUZ IT187]

 

Melee weapons, different looking objects all doing the same thing in a video game. Applying a physical force to an NPC. It's PRACTICALLY an object skinned differently.

and ur point is exactly ??

That in a game based around ranged weaponry having 6-7 different melee weapons that look different but have about the same speed and power is POINTLESS.

 

Knife and Bat do the job fine.

 

EDIT: No genius, it doesn't apply to cars. Cars have differing top speeds, handling, braking, acceleration, etc. They are quite different to something that has a universal constant.

 

EDIT2: If you played the original and to a lesser extent, the sequel, you would know Grand Theft Auto is primarily about vehicles. Hence the title.

If GTA is about the "vehicles" Then why is there absolutly NO vehicle custimization and around 10-20 paint jobs for each car- which you cannot even pick it randomly gives you one whenever you go into pay n' spray...

 

FAIL

[Catalinaslover]

 

If GTA is about the "vehicles" Then why is there absolutly NO vehicle custimization and around 10-20 paint jobs for each car- which you cannot even pick it randomly gives you one whenever you go into pay n' spray...

 

FAIL 

 

R* f*cked Up for the first time.

 

Yea car customs would done something positive.

 

They also lost momentum in the not blowing us away with some fresh new features...its the first time they retreat and pull almost all features out and give us a...car wash?

 

 

Edited May 18, 2008 by Catalinaslover

[EAZZY DUZ IT187]

 

Can somebody explain to me why San Andreas is so great? I came to GTA IV from VC, never played SA. I decided to pick it up a few days ago, because it was really cheap and everybody is saying about how great it is.

 

It is a pile of flaming crap compared to GTA IV. The map is really boring, city at the bottom, long boring drive to get to another city, long boring drive to get to another city, with some generic towns in between. I don't get why people are saying the map was better. I screwed around in the deserts and forests for maybe 10 minutes before I was bored. Those open areas are what makes San Andreas so big. If you removed all that crap, Liberty City would be a lot bigger than San Andreas.

 

Okay, gameplay. Car modding, that was fun for a few vehicles before it just starting to get repetetive. I didn't even see the point either, as I would always lose those cars eventually anyways. Parachutes, that got old quick too. The new engine in GTA IV makes it a lot funner to jump off buildings our out of helicopters without parachutes. Player customization was a bit fun, but this is not the Sims. I don't see you guys bashing games like Halo because you can't change his armor. The only thing I really like better in San Andreas is the modding and cheats. It does add extra life to the game.

 

Okay, some other things. Tanks... when was the last time you saw a tank in New York? Never.  Planes, you would be across the map in a few seconds. You have helicopters anyways. The story, it was pretty good. I wouldn't call it the best story ever, but I wouldn't call it 'mediocre'. Whoever said the GTA should not have a story is an idiot. Why do you play games? Because they have a story that draws you in. GTA is about more than just running around killing people.

 

Alright, that is it. I don't want to sound like a fanboy... there are things I am a little disappointed with and I'm not saying that San Andreas is a bad game. Despite all those comments I just made, I really did enjoy playing though SA. I'm just getting tired of people taking the piss out of Rockstar for taking out things that were not much fun or useful in the first place. There are too many people stuck in the past.

A pile of flaming crap? I wouldn’t say that. It is alot better in terms of fun but gta has a great storyline and it is WAY more realistic.

 

Parachutes where fun and yes, this isn't the Sims but still, it takes alot of fun out of the game when you cant customize your character even know R* could've made player customization easily its not like good graphics would make it so they cant make a couple of new outfits? Also, the thing about Halo, I think you should go back and play it for a little longer there is customizable armor, helmets, and armor colors so I have no idea where that came from. -1 for you sorry bud.

 

 

Edit: 100% Agree with Catalinaslover 4 u haha

Edited May 18, 2008 by EAZZY DUZ IT187

[GTAfanatical]

if i could customise my car id probably use the car wash

[EAZZY DUZ IT187]

if i could customise my car id probably use the car wash

Yea, but you cant, so carwash= BIG FAIL

[GTAfanatical]

yup

[Fnorg]

You need to think of how much this costed Rockstar. This game costed them around 100 Million to make, because of the huge graphical improvement. Now think of the graphics in San Andreas. Nothing compared to IV. San Andreas might've costed around the same or even less, even if all that space was included, just because of the grapihcs.

Actually, with a few mods yo can make San Andreas look like IV, at least pretty close. ENB + Super AA mod + texture mod = super SA.

[Undecided]

unmarked police cars - gone ?

swat out of helicopter - gone ?

army - gone ?

tanks - gone ?

unmarked police cars - still in

 

The rest is fine