Is It Me Or Are The Missions ALITTLE Disapointing?

[KillerKabel]

Good topic.

 

I agree with almost every post.

And I, for once, actually think we have a nice discussion. This goes for all of the forums BTW.

 

I think a lot of the missions are alike, I think there is too little strategy involved.

For most of the game it's just run, cover, shoot, drive, get drunk with Roman.

 

I do like the fact that it isn't all crazy like in SA, but it's like, R* have become afraid of taking chances.

And are just sticking to what they know, without the craziness.

 

And I think frka has a point when he says there is to little street fighting.

The previews all said that the game would focus more on hand fighting, and yet, there is only like, 2 missions where you don't have weapons to kill with. WTF.

[Southside Dukes Ballas]

the majority of missions in gta4 are shooting missions, which are a million times better than the shooting missions from previous gta games thanks to the improved cover/aiming system aswell as euphoria.

 

i like them, there's enough variety thanks to euphoria.

hahaha improved cover system? the cover system sucked not to mention Euphoria didn't seem any better than Havox physics. The only time I've seen Euphoria look great is in Star Wars Force Unleashed videos.

 

Also the shooting and free aim system didn't seem much better to me. there would be numerous times when I would be surrounded and the aim system still wouldn't aim at the right person not to mention I like the aiming system in Scarface, The Godfather and SA because you could actually aim at various body parts. In SA you could aim at their head for a head shot but in IV the auto aim recticle is always above the head or to the side but never at the head.

 

Also the free aim recticle is better in SR in my mind.

[mufc]

,May 26 2008, 19:44]

Best mission in the game was The Bellic Cousins. And you know what you have to do to lose the sense of repetetivness (Spelling). You should complete side missions along with story ones.

Sidemissions are just as bad. Take Assassin missions for example. Those are ALL "go and take out so and so" missions and so are the Police/FIB missions.

thats an assassins job what else would you do?

take the guy to lunch before you kill them?, no you go and kill people for money what did you expect the assassination missions to be?

It would be good if you had to sneak through their houses and poison their food or some other ways to kill people

[Southside Dukes Ballas]

,May 26 2008, 19:44]

Best mission in the game was The Bellic Cousins. And you know what you have to do to lose the sense of repetetivness (Spelling). You should complete side missions along with story ones.

Sidemissions are just as bad. Take Assassin missions for example. Those are ALL "go and take out so and so" missions and so are the Police/FIB missions.

thats an assassins job what else would you do?

take the guy to lunch before you kill them?, no you go and kill people for money what did you expect the assassination missions to be?

It would be good if you had to sneak through their houses and poison their food or some other ways to kill people

I agree. The sidemissions in IV suck compard to past GTA sidemissions even though they weren't much better but atleast you could do sidemissions in past GTAs fior ever.

 

Also side missions like the assassin side missions have no variety to how to complete them.

[KillerKabel]

 

Also the shooting and free aim system didn't seem much better to me. there would be numerous times when I would be surrounded and the aim system still wouldn't aim at the right person not to mention I like the aiming system in Scarface, The Godfather and SA because you could actually aim at various body parts. In SA you could aim at their head for a head shot but in IV the auto aim recticle is always above the head or to the side but never at the head.

 

Also the free aim recticle is better in SR in my mind.

Never happened to me, the gun fights are much better, and the thing is, you shouldn't flick the stick all up to the max, just half way and you have a perfect headshot, works much better.

 

And ye, the sidemissions/minigames aren't very good.

 

Even though I didn't play many of them, I think the Assassin missions should have involved stalking a person for a couple of days, before sniping him.

 

Maybe we should have been asked to kill mafia bosses? Now that would be awesome!

Edited May 26, 2008 by KillerKabel

[Deema]

,May 26 2008, 19:44]

Best mission in the game was The Bellic Cousins. And you know what you have to do to lose the sense of repetetivness (Spelling). You should complete side missions along with story ones.

Sidemissions are just as bad. Take Assassin missions for example. Those are ALL "go and take out so and so" missions and so are the Police/FIB missions.

thats an assassins job what else would you do?

take the guy to lunch before you kill them?, no you go and kill people for money what did you expect the assassination missions to be?

It would be good if you had to sneak through their houses and poison their food or some other ways to kill people

Ummm... Try Hitman?

[darthbat]

Oh, it would be so much fun if R* would make robbery something like Oceans 11. Like this:

1. Find partners.

2. Use internet to order explosives. ^___^

3. Plot, scheme and re-scheme everything.

4. Rob a bank just the intellectual way.

WTF with my English today...

I like the idea

[SimplySupreme]

I think the topic creator has a valid point but the simple fact is, the missions are still fun, in my opinion.

 

I can understand that the whole "Go there, shoot him" thing bores people and that theres little variation through the course of the game but you have to remember, R* did say there would be a much more realistic approach to the game.

 

Surely some of you looking for more farfetched missions would have realised that flying jetpacks out of military bases isn't gonna fall under the more realistic approach section, and therefore should have maybe anticipated a much more generic emphasis on the missions.

 

I dont mind it, its still fun shooting people, whether it be delivering a package for Jacob or picking up a car for Stevie/Brucie, it hasnt bored me so far and i dont think thats gonna change overnight.

[Rich Rosas]

I think the topic creator has a valid point but the simple fact is, the missions are still fun, in my opinion.

 

I can understand that the whole "Go there, shoot him" thing bores people and that theres little variation through the course of the game but you have to remember, R* did say there would be a much more realistic approach to the game.

 

Surely some of you looking for more farfetched missions would have realised that flying jetpacks out of military bases isn't gonna fall under the more realistic approach section, and therefore should have maybe anticipated a much more generic emphasis on the missions.

 

I dont mind it, its still fun shooting people, whether it be delivering a package for Jacob or picking up a car for Stevie/Brucie, it hasnt bored me so far and i dont think thats gonna change overnight.

Question: Why realism and variety can't go together according to you?

....

 

The shooting missions were fine. Piece of cake when you already have granades or the SMG. All enemy spawns are scripted, so once you know the mission there are no surprises. And with the lame bad guys AI, they only way you can die or miss the target is if you screw up. Why cant you do everything right and still die or fail? Thats realistic.

 

IMO the driving missions were a total joke. Every single persuit mission had a given path, no need for trying to kill them while driving. You just needed to wait them to reach the end of their scripted path and after that they just leave the vehicule and wait for you to execute them or slow down and wait for you to kill them. There's only one persuit mission that if your target reaches his destination is mission failed, but he stops at a gas station first. Dissapointing.

 

But once you learn all this, the fun begins. You can start planning ahead and find a clever way to finish a mission. Sniping, RPGs, take them out of the road. Shootouts inside buildings driving a Sanchez. I have a save point for every mission I like redoing to find the most far fetched and unrealistic way of finishing it. Thats my solution to the infinite number of fun and challenging missions available.

 

Eventhough I think it says a lot about a game that has 94 missions, and almost everyone mentions the bank heist as the best one. It could be that is the most epic mission in gaming history (I don't think so, but could be the case) or there's no other mission that is worth mentioning (which is lame).

[Darvinho]

I agree with the the OP. Missions were a little repetitive and not that difficult. But they were still fun for me (I'm playing the story a second time ). The assassin's missions were disappointing and it would have been nice if you could keep going back and do more just for fun after the story was over. Let's hope the DLC gives us missions with more variety.

 

Still, at the end of the day it was a great story.

[bk112]

LMAO

 

He said "alittle".... very funny mate.

[Dolemite500]

Great topic with some very clever ideas. Deema's direction was my favorite and to a very small extent they have those "plan" elements in the game, like on Final Interview, (setting up the interview, buying the suit, being on time). It would certainly be more submersive to plan a heist per se via cell phone and internet instead of walking into an arrow for a cutscene.

 

I also agree on the linearity of the missions. While frustrating as hell, the trial and error aspects of GTA III forced you to be creative, whether that be blocking Salvatore's garage and blowing his convoy up with grenades or going balls out and trying your luck with a securicar and an smg etc...

 

Rockstar tried to make up for this with the choices aspect of the game, but none have huge implications on the storyline except for the final one, but the two endings are too similar to warrant too much praise.

 

I didn't have a huge problem with the assasination side missions, much better than in Saint's Row where you travel to an area of the map and wait for an hour only to find one of the people you have to kill without the proper weapon. But it is really just a branch of the vigilante missions. I would have liked to see some stealth-based missions.

 

My only beef with the topic creator is on the cutting down of side missions from san andreas, because most of those were crap anyways (courier, impossible ambulance and vigilante missions, stupid driving schools) the quarry missions were cool though.

 

If I had an ounce of creativity I could come up with innovative mission ideas like most of you but I'm lacking in that area, but keep up the good work everybody.

[.Up&Coming.]

The other thing I hated about the missions, was how linear they were.  Never once did I have to stop and think my way through a mission. 

 

This game took almost zero strategy to complete.  That's NOT what next-gen gaming should be like.

It's weird how R* told us the exact opposite. Remember the thing about how you have to call the guy to see who picks up? And that's who you kill? I haven't gotten to a mission like this, but I'm guessing it's either a one-time thing, or the guy had an arrow over his head anyway. Was R* afraid the game would be too difficult for certain gamers? Boo f*cking hoo. Give us a challenge please.

 

I still love the missions.

It's a one-time thing, he didn't have an arrow over his head. You simply called his number, saw who picked up the phone and then proceeded to kill him.

and that was a disapointing mission along with other things. But the previews were hyping this mission up so much when it was just a simple call that number, when he answers the phone begins to static when you're close by then he sees you and runs. Then obvioulsy you shoot him and get a 2 star wanted level.

 

Actually the previews were hyping the so called super improved and better wanted level system which in my mind is worse than the last wanted system and is far from realistic.

Wow. I'm not even at that mission and I even knew it would be like that. R* threw a lot of stuff in this game that you never use again (throwing objects, calling peoples phones to make missions more difficult, stun punches, etc.).

[SimplySupreme]

I think the topic creator has a valid point but the simple fact is, the missions are still fun, in my opinion.

 

I can understand that the whole "Go there, shoot him" thing bores people and that theres little variation through the course of the game but you have to remember, R* did say there would be a much more realistic approach to the game.

 

Surely some of you looking for more farfetched missions would have realised that flying jetpacks out of military bases isn't gonna fall under the more realistic approach section, and therefore should have maybe anticipated a much more generic emphasis on the missions.

 

I dont mind it, its still fun shooting people, whether it be delivering a package for Jacob or picking up a car for Stevie/Brucie, it hasnt bored me so far and i dont think thats gonna change overnight.

Question: Why realism and variety can't go together according to you?

....

 

The shooting missions were fine. Piece of cake when you already have granades or the SMG. All enemy spawns are scripted, so once you know the mission there are no surprises. And with the lame bad guys AI, they only way you can die or miss the target is if you screw up. Why cant you do everything right and still die or fail? Thats realistic.

 

IMO the driving missions were a total joke. Every single persuit mission had a given path, no need for trying to kill them while driving. You just needed to wait them to reach the end of their scripted path and after that they just leave the vehicule and wait for you to execute them or slow down and wait for you to kill them. There's only one persuit mission that if your target reaches his destination is mission failed, but he stops at a gas station first. Dissapointing.

 

But once you learn all this, the fun begins. You can start planning ahead and find a clever way to finish a mission. Sniping, RPGs, take them out of the road. Shootouts inside buildings driving a Sanchez. I have a save point for every mission I like redoing to find the most far fetched and unrealistic way of finishing it. Thats my solution to the infinite number of fun and challenging missions available.

 

Eventhough I think it says a lot about a game that has 94 missions, and almost everyone mentions the bank heist as the best one. It could be that is the most epic mission in gaming history (I don't think so, but could be the case) or there's no other mission that is worth mentioning (which is lame).

Did i say realism and variety can't go together?

 

You need to look at this from the correct point of view.

 

In reality, theres only so many realistic ways in which you can take someone out in real life so that sort of throws the variety part of the question out of the window.

 

There will always be people who moan because of the lack of variety but you were told in advance some game features would be sacrificed for the sake of a more realistic approach.

[Rich Rosas]

Rockstar tried to make up for this with the choices aspect of the game, but none have huge implications on the storyline except for the final one, but the two endings are too similar to warrant too much praise.

I found most of the choices available not the choices that a "loyal and not a rat" Niko should had follow.

 

1. Why you have to choose between killing Francis or Derrick? A Niko with some backbone should have said no to Francis and take the heat for that decision. You are supposed to be friend of Packie and Kate, so killing one of his brothers should not be an option.

2. Same case with Faustin, he was your employer and you took a job and the responsability that comes with that job. Killing your employer cause things go to sh*t is for cowards only. Let the russians come for you.

3. Same case with Playboy X and Dwayne. Did Niko ever learned the word "No"? How can he have the nerve to say he is not a rat? He betrayed or killed everyone he worked for.

 

I think Niko was meant to be the bad guy, if that was the case = epic story.

 

[Rich Rosas]

I think the topic creator has a valid point but the simple fact is, the missions are still fun, in my opinion.

 

I can understand that the whole "Go there, shoot him" thing bores people and that theres little variation through the course of the game but you have to remember, R* did say there would be a much more realistic approach to the game.

 

Surely some of you looking for more farfetched missions would have realised that flying jetpacks out of military bases isn't gonna fall under the more realistic approach section, and therefore should have maybe anticipated a much more generic emphasis on the missions.

 

I dont mind it, its still fun shooting people, whether it be delivering a package for Jacob or picking up a car for Stevie/Brucie, it hasnt bored me so far and i dont think thats gonna change overnight.

Question: Why realism and variety can't go together according to you?

....

 

The shooting missions were fine. Piece of cake when you already have granades or the SMG. All enemy spawns are scripted, so once you know the mission there are no surprises. And with the lame bad guys AI, they only way you can die or miss the target is if you screw up. Why cant you do everything right and still die or fail? Thats realistic.

 

IMO the driving missions were a total joke. Every single persuit mission had a given path, no need for trying to kill them while driving. You just needed to wait them to reach the end of their scripted path and after that they just leave the vehicule and wait for you to execute them or slow down and wait for you to kill them. There's only one persuit mission that if your target reaches his destination is mission failed, but he stops at a gas station first. Dissapointing.

 

But once you learn all this, the fun begins. You can start planning ahead and find a clever way to finish a mission. Sniping, RPGs, take them out of the road. Shootouts inside buildings driving a Sanchez. I have a save point for every mission I like redoing to find the most far fetched and unrealistic way of finishing it. Thats my solution to the infinite number of fun and challenging missions available.

 

Eventhough I think it says a lot about a game that has 94 missions, and almost everyone mentions the bank heist as the best one. It could be that is the most epic mission in gaming history (I don't think so, but could be the case) or there's no other mission that is worth mentioning (which is lame).

Did i say realism and variety can't go together?

 

You need to look at this from the correct point of view.

 

In reality, theres only so many realistic ways in which you can take someone out in real life so that sort of throws the variety part of the question out of the window.

 

There will always be people who moan because of the lack of variety but you were told in advance some game features would be sacrificed for the sake of a more realistic approach.

I have to disagree with you, with some imagination one can come up with thousands of different ways to kill someone without resorting to "hollywood" style.

 

How about pretending an accident and throwing your victim of road. Hire a hooker to have your target at a place and specific time. Throwing him/her to the subway. Stab him/her. Drown him/her with or without his/her car. Blow up his car, while he/she is inside. Just to give some examples. Why everything has to end in a shootout? I found it far more unrealistic to go to a warehouse, kill 30 guys, follow your target in a bike thru the beach, jump to a helicopter, survive its crash, end killing him in an island with at least five cops in a walk persuit and walk away like nothing happened.

[derek3056]

Great topic. But it's almost sad on how many of you agree with the OP. The truth is really starting to come out.

 

I have a feeling that somewhere in late development, Rockstar got scared and decided to go the other way with things. I mean, most friends of mine who play video games don't like games that require a lot of thinking and strategy. Either that or they just never complete them. They're too busy with work or other things.

 

I think GTA IV was aimed at a much wider audience of people other than JUST gamers.

 

 

[.Up&Coming.]

Great topic. But it's almost sad on how many of you agree with the OP. The truth is really starting to come out.

 

I have a feeling that somewhere in late development, Rockstar got scared and decided to go the other way with things. I mean, most friends of mine who play video games don't like games that require a lot of thinking and strategy. Either that or they just never complete them. They're too busy with work or other things.

 

I think GTA IV was aimed at a much wider audience of people other than JUST gamers.

Yeah. Not everyone has played GTA before. I have, but I still love the missions. GTA isn't going to change its mission style just because some of us have played every one. GTA is GTA...R* will probably keep missions in this basic way forever. I'm fine with it.

[e2thejdot]

The other thing I hated about the missions, was how linear they were.  Never once did I have to stop and think my way through a mission. 

 

This game took almost zero strategy to complete.  That's NOT what next-gen gaming should be like.

It's weird how R* told us the exact opposite. Remember the thing about how you have to call the guy to see who picks up? And that's who you kill? I haven't gotten to a mission like this, but I'm guessing it's either a one-time thing, or the guy had an arrow over his head anyway. Was R* afraid the game would be too difficult for certain gamers? Boo f*cking hoo. Give us a challenge please.

 

I still love the missions.

It's a one-time thing, he didn't have an arrow over his head. You simply called his number, saw who picked up the phone and then proceeded to kill him.

and that was a disapointing mission along with other things. But the previews were hyping this mission up so much when it was just a simple call that number, when he answers the phone begins to static when you're close by then he sees you and runs. Then obvioulsy you shoot him and get a 2 star wanted level.

The funny part about that mission is.. I couldn't read the number on my TV, so I just shot his window out.. and he came to the window. So calling the number is pretty useless.. he comes to the window no matter what you do.

[.Up&Coming.]

The other thing I hated about the missions, was how linear they were.  Never once did I have to stop and think my way through a mission. 

 

This game took almost zero strategy to complete.  That's NOT what next-gen gaming should be like.

It's weird how R* told us the exact opposite. Remember the thing about how you have to call the guy to see who picks up? And that's who you kill? I haven't gotten to a mission like this, but I'm guessing it's either a one-time thing, or the guy had an arrow over his head anyway. Was R* afraid the game would be too difficult for certain gamers? Boo f*cking hoo. Give us a challenge please.

 

I still love the missions.

It's a one-time thing, he didn't have an arrow over his head. You simply called his number, saw who picked up the phone and then proceeded to kill him.

and that was a disapointing mission along with other things. But the previews were hyping this mission up so much when it was just a simple call that number, when he answers the phone begins to static when you're close by then he sees you and runs. Then obvioulsy you shoot him and get a 2 star wanted level.

The funny part about that mission is.. I couldn't read the number on my TV, so I just shot his window out.. and he came to the window. So calling the number is pretty useless.. he comes to the window no matter what you do.

SDTV?

 

Join the club! I've been failing in multiplayer because I can't see the other players clearly...Of course, they can see me. Yay!

 

Or is your TV so good that it has to be downscaled? Then I shouldn't be talking...

[e2thejdot]

The other thing I hated about the missions, was how linear they were.  Never once did I have to stop and think my way through a mission. 

 

This game took almost zero strategy to complete.  That's NOT what next-gen gaming should be like.

It's weird how R* told us the exact opposite. Remember the thing about how you have to call the guy to see who picks up? And that's who you kill? I haven't gotten to a mission like this, but I'm guessing it's either a one-time thing, or the guy had an arrow over his head anyway. Was R* afraid the game would be too difficult for certain gamers? Boo f*cking hoo. Give us a challenge please.

 

I still love the missions.

It's a one-time thing, he didn't have an arrow over his head. You simply called his number, saw who picked up the phone and then proceeded to kill him.

and that was a disapointing mission along with other things. But the previews were hyping this mission up so much when it was just a simple call that number, when he answers the phone begins to static when you're close by then he sees you and runs. Then obvioulsy you shoot him and get a 2 star wanted level.

The funny part about that mission is.. I couldn't read the number on my TV, so I just shot his window out.. and he came to the window. So calling the number is pretty useless.. he comes to the window no matter what you do.

SDTV?

 

Join the club! I've been failing in multiplayer because I can't see the other players clearly...Of course, they can see me. Yay!

 

Or is your TV so good that it has to be downscaled? Then I shouldn't be talking...

SDTV. I wish I could say my TV was too good. Regular 20 something inch old school TV.

[.Up&Coming.]

The other thing I hated about the missions, was how linear they were.  Never once did I have to stop and think my way through a mission. 

 

This game took almost zero strategy to complete.  That's NOT what next-gen gaming should be like.

It's weird how R* told us the exact opposite. Remember the thing about how you have to call the guy to see who picks up? And that's who you kill? I haven't gotten to a mission like this, but I'm guessing it's either a one-time thing, or the guy had an arrow over his head anyway. Was R* afraid the game would be too difficult for certain gamers? Boo f*cking hoo. Give us a challenge please.

 

I still love the missions.

It's a one-time thing, he didn't have an arrow over his head. You simply called his number, saw who picked up the phone and then proceeded to kill him.

and that was a disapointing mission along with other things. But the previews were hyping this mission up so much when it was just a simple call that number, when he answers the phone begins to static when you're close by then he sees you and runs. Then obvioulsy you shoot him and get a 2 star wanted level.

The funny part about that mission is.. I couldn't read the number on my TV, so I just shot his window out.. and he came to the window. So calling the number is pretty useless.. he comes to the window no matter what you do.

SDTV?

 

Join the club! I've been failing in multiplayer because I can't see the other players clearly...Of course, they can see me. Yay!

 

Or is your TV so good that it has to be downscaled? Then I shouldn't be talking...

SDTV. I wish I could say my TV was too good. Regular 20 something inch old school TV.

Yeah, it's sort of annoying. I feel like I'm missing out on the "amazing graphics". They look great, but I think I'm missing the actual amazing-ness.

 

I have EDTV, so I just got cables to upgrade to 480p. Not much of a difference. The only + is that you can actually read the text on the Internet. I still think ED is just a fancy SD.

[libertycity_fiction]

The other thing I hated about the missions, was how linear they were.  Never once did I have to stop and think my way through a mission. 

 

This game took almost zero strategy to complete.  That's NOT what next-gen gaming should be like.

It's weird how R* told us the exact opposite. Remember the thing about how you have to call the guy to see who picks up? And that's who you kill? I haven't gotten to a mission like this, but I'm guessing it's either a one-time thing, or the guy had an arrow over his head anyway. Was R* afraid the game would be too difficult for certain gamers? Boo f*cking hoo. Give us a challenge please.

 

I still love the missions.

He doesn't

[[MenaceMovies]]

,May 26 2008, 19:44]

Best mission in the game was The Bellic Cousins. And you know what you have to do to lose the sense of repetetivness (Spelling). You should complete side missions along with story ones.

Sidemissions are just as bad. Take Assassin missions for example. Those are ALL "go and take out so and so" missions and so are the Police/FIB missions.

thats an assassins job what else would you do?

take the guy to lunch before you kill them?, no you go and kill people for money what did you expect the assassination missions to be?

I would much rather it be like the Assassination mission in San Andreas. The one where you had to get into a Black car and head over to a film/song premier in Los Santos. You then had to wait for the singers to get in and then drive the car off and dump it into a river. NOT like in IV where you just have to drive to some location and shoot some random people.

[Darrel]

 

hahaha improved cover system? the cover system sucked not to mention Euphoria didn't seem any better than Havox physics. The only time I've seen Euphoria look great is in Star Wars Force Unleashed videos.

 

Also the shooting and free aim system didn't seem much better to me. there would be numerous times when I would be surrounded and the aim system still wouldn't aim at the right person not to mention I like the aiming system in Scarface, The Godfather and SA because you could actually aim at various body parts. In SA you could aim at their head for a head shot but in IV the auto aim recticle is always above the head or to the side but never at the head.

 

Also the free aim recticle is better in SR in my mind.

1) You have no idea what you're talking about. Euphoria doesn't control the physics. it's an animation engine which works along side the physics engine which is Rage. Rockstar advanced game engine which powers Graphics, and physics. At least know what you're talking about. Do you have anything positive to say? At all ? And btw Euphoria in Gta, truly superb. Open you're eyes and look at the amazing things. Why do you even have the game?

Edited May 27, 2008 by Darrel

[MotjoBoss]

The other thing I hated about the missions, was how linear they were.  Never once did I have to stop and think my way through a mission. 

 

This game took almost zero strategy to complete.  That's NOT what next-gen gaming should be like.

It's weird how R* told us the exact opposite. Remember the thing about how you have to call the guy to see who picks up? And that's who you kill? I haven't gotten to a mission like this, but I'm guessing it's either a one-time thing, or the guy had an arrow over his head anyway. Was R* afraid the game would be too difficult for certain gamers? Boo f*cking hoo. Give us a challenge please.

 

I still love the missions.

It's a one-time thing, he didn't have an arrow over his head. You simply called his number, saw who picked up the phone and then proceeded to kill him.

and that was a disapointing mission along with other things. But the previews were hyping this mission up so much when it was just a simple call that number, when he answers the phone begins to static when you're close by then he sees you and runs. Then obvioulsy you shoot him and get a 2 star wanted level.

The funny part about that mission is.. I couldn't read the number on my TV, so I just shot his window out.. and he came to the window. So calling the number is pretty useless.. he comes to the window no matter what you do.

That's a different mission. I did it the same way.

[AvnGrad]

I would like to think that Rockstar is just throwing us a bone. A small appetizer before the next installment.

 

This is how I look on GTA IV. Otherwise It will be a complete disappointment.

[DanRev]

Think the missions were much better in previous incarnations. What happened to driving around with some guy tied to your bonnet trying to scare the sh*t out of them? That's not "unrealistic" (which is a favourite word of some guys on here) it's just fun, and a bit different.

[edvancleef]

' date='May 26 2008, 19:30'] Other than the missions, I think that this game is awesome and will still continue to play it, no matter what. But compared to the other GTA's, the missions in this title are very drab. I mean, around 87% of missions are "chase so and so and take him out!". The only two favorite missions of mine is the Bank Robbery and Truck Bomb ones. All the rest are really boring. In San Andreas you'd get missions where you'd have to jump off of Airplanes, set houses on fire, ect... I think the missions are a little let down, anyone else agree?

drab?

try to date kate

 

[--Vega--]

The missions were a HUGE dissapointment in this game. They were almost as repetitive as GTA 3's missions. Go here, kill all these guys, follow then kill this guy. There was nothing unique about them. They were just killing a bunch of guys in all different areas of the city.