IV's story

[djense]

Most reviewers and a bunch of people here think IV's story was far and beyond anything before it. I kinda disagree. I did enjoy the story and it was interesting, but I just don't see why so many people are so amazed by it.

 

The whole story is basically:

1. Nikko immigrated from another country and was once a soldier who did bad things. He's looking for someone who betrayed him and his friends.

2. Nikko needs money, even halfway through the game when you have hundreds of thousands of dollars...

 

I liked the concept of making decisions about who to kill, but they barely affected the story line (except the ending) and I tended to not really care about who I killed or didn't kill.

 

Also, Dmitri was a bitch, but he felt too distant of a bad guy the whole time. Tenpenny from SA was always messing your sh*t up everywhere you looked and it engaged me more in the story knowing I was gonna get to f*ck him up at some point.

 

Last, I've played many games with wayyyyy better stories: Chrono Trigger, Resident Evil(s), Starcraft, FFVII, even COD4 was pretty amazing for a FPS.

 

The characterization was awesome, but the story....eh.

 

Maybe someone can comment or let me know why they think it's the cat's pajamas.

[RATEDR307]

I liked it.

[Neon-Noir 198X]

I didn't like the IV storyline. SA had an amazing storyline, it was easy to follow and everyone loved it.

[Snipe Sauce]

I agree that the storyline is good but not great, it just became too preachy. people here complain about lack of features in gta and things to do after the story, and that is a valid complaint but as I said before the biggest problem with iv are the graphics. I'm amazed that I'm almost the only guy complaining about this. do you ever notice how sh*tty the framerate becomes when fighting with cops and sh*t? I mean it's a hassle just pulling out the cellphone. what made me love gta3 so much was that I felt it had a much more slick consistent framerate than all other gta's after it. I don't take away the effort rockstar put into the detail and scope of the new gta but like I said this problem definitely needs to be solved. and yes, dmitri was distant even though he was my favorite character in iv.

[GTAaddictforever]

i already moved past these things and began to ask :

 

if rockstar was going to remove 90% of the features we love in GTA, and rockstar was going to focus on realism and storyline, why the hell do the missions feel boring and the storyline feel 'eh' ......

 

you cant even say :

 

"yeah the game is missing a ton of features and we didn't get any real new fun features, but the storyline was EPIC and the missions were amazing!"

 

we cant even say that.

 

sigh

[Tony Mozzarelli 80]

It's an amazing story and the best ever gritty, realistic, oscar winning, tour de force of a game

story for one simple reason... Because Rockstar said so and Whatever they hold true in Rockstars

offices, we must hold true here on Earth. I appreciate that you weren't aware of this until now, so

i'll overlook it. But if you ever express any unorthodox opinions on the matter again. I will have you

burned at the steak for heresy.

[31st Funk]

Yeah, I think R* screwed up IV's story, VC's and SA's stories where Academy Award worthy in comparison.

[gta 4 gamer]

I liked all GTA stories, but IV was an Ok story..Still very good game

[Twistie]

I actually think that it was one of the best stories so far in GTA. I felt the storyline it made Niko a real character rather than another GTA protagonist where you just go around killing stuff for no reason other than to please the guy you are working for. Whereas Niko has real motivation in the form of finding Darko and Florian as well as protecting his rather greedy and stupid Uncle. I actually have to argue that SA was one of the worst story lines ever. Sure it was fun and enjoyable but as a whole it wasn't very fluid and some parts of the storyline made no sense. In comparison IV was very fluid and realistic. That said, I really enjoyed Vice City although again its story wasn't overly fluid but I was able to make sense of it and see that Tommy was trying to get somewhere unlike CJ who just falls into it. III was again similar to Vice City but it did lack a drama in the storyline that Vice City and IV have.

 

I think its very much up to your taste. If you just want to play a game get some enjoyment out of it and just play around then certainly the SA storyline would be great. However, I prefer to have an 'experience' with a game. Having completed the IV storyline i seemed to have formed a much better player-protagonist relationship with Niko than any of the other protagonists simply because I seem to have grown attached to him and his struggle. I also like the IV storlyine because it ends in a similar way to III. You are not the king of the city or a rich millionaire. You are just another person who has survived Liberty City and I think thats what gives the storyline alot of its credibility.

 

Now I'm going to stop writing and wait for the flames to follow. Have fun I'll just ignore you anyway.

[TT1987]

i already moved past these things and began to ask :

 

if rockstar was going to remove 90% of the features we love in GTA, and rockstar was going to focus on realism and storyline, why the hell do the missions feel boring and the storyline feel 'eh' ......

 

you cant even say :

 

"yeah the game is missing a ton of features and we didn't get any real new fun features, but the storyline was EPIC and the missions were amazing!"

 

we cant even say that.

 

sigh

You should move past those things too

[gtamodder]

I liked IV's storyline, I liked it the best, then SA second, then III's, then VC's. I didn't like VC's for some reason, I just, didn't enjoy it.

[Shootin_spree]

Oh dang, I actually liked the storyline best out of all the GTAs. The protagonist (Niko) made the story so good. How he was the soldier, and he witnessed all of that stuff, it changed his life, and impacted on the storyline. Sure, it wasnt an award winning storyline, but then, i think no other GTAs storylines are award winning.

 

Niko came to Liberty because of Roman, and partly to hunt down Florian and Darko. Then, he gets involved with some bad people, and stuff gets to become heavy for him, leading him to fight for criminals and such. It was the most believeable storyline to me.

 

Thats just my opinion, flame me if you must.

[Mute Giant]

The story itself might not be very different from previous GTA's or other games in general. However, like in a movie, it's not all about the events that makes up the story. Aspects like characters, character interaction, dialouge... ect also have to be taken into consideration. And those elements are what seperates IV from the previous GTA's.

 

Just compare Niko and Tommy. Niko shows compassion, regret, sorrow, frustration.. ect. and he has a concience. What about tommy? He sometimes.... can get angry....? Which one do you identify yourself with the most?

[cr416]

Was there a storyline??

I just pressed X at the start of each cut-scene

[Carl Vercetti]

Damn, I think IV had the best story by far. Not because it's Shakespeare or anything, but compared to GTA's writing and gaming in general (actually experimenting with real life themes like morality and the human condition) it's really progressive. Which, yeah that's kind of the trend now, but it's a good one and Rockstar seems pretty genuine about it.

 

And I like it, I like to feel a connection between myself and the characters, particularly the protagnoist, it enhances the immersion, makes you care about what happens to the characters and makes the game more satisfying.

[KGBeast]

the whole reason i love the story is the intricacy. it wasn't too easy to follow, there were a lot of branching storylines and characters. you actually had to get immersed in the world to have a complete picture of what was going on. the fact that the story resided not only in the msisions, but on the internet and radio as well was something they hadn't really done before. just the shear amount of work put into it, and the fact that you can really immerse yourself if make an effort, made it really enjoyable, and above all fun

[Darrel]

Was there a storyline??

I just pressed X at the start of each cut-scene

If you did you're a total moron.

[chitoryu12]

I didn't like the IV storyline. SA had an amazing storyline, it was easy to follow and everyone loved it.

Correction: It COULD have had an amazing storyline. All the pieces were in place, and Rockstar took all the pieces and sloppily glued them together. C.R.A.S.H. appeared more and more sporadically, until you got to the idea that whenever they appeared for a mission it was only to shove the storyline along. There was a sh*tload of filler missions at the beginning that didn't do anything but sloppily drop hints and reinforce the idea that the city had gone to sh*t. Not to mention CJ was a bitch who would do just about anything for money or his brother, even near-impossible special forces operations that would very likely result in his death or capture, trial for treason, and execution.

[Blackadder.]

 

Yeah, I think R* screwed up IV's story, VC's and SA's stories where Academy Award worthy in comparison.

You have got to be kidding. San Andreas has the worst storyline I have ever experienced in a game ever. It started out fine, a gang at war with other gangs. That's fine. Then you were taking pictures, racing through the countryside. That's alright I suppose. Then you're running a garage, stealing fighter jets, running a casino. Then Rockstar sloppily throws you back to Los Santos and tries to slot into the theme from the beginning of the game. If Uwe Boll ever got the rights to make a GTA film, he would most likely base it on San Andreas.

 

GTA IV has the best storyline for me, aside from the money issue, it was planned out quite well. Dimitri made sure of his presence just enough to piss off Niko, it's not like Dimitri was stalking him. The voice acting also furthered this, Niko sounding solemn when he realised he had done something wrong, screaming when angry. CJ sounded and acted like a twat, a fly would land on him and he started screaming and swearing like there was no tomorrow.

 

To sum it up, GTA IV has a great storyline, but not the best. San Andreas on the other hand, has the worst.

 

Ever.

[greebo-man]

No GTA story has been that brilliant, to be honest.

When you have a game that focuses around the life of a madman who goes around shooting up peds and crack dealers all day, it's pretty damn hard to make it good.

But R* did the best they could, and seeing as the story is only a part of the game, I didn't care too much.

[Nedews]

I think it was awesome. I could not really stand the other games where you did everything for money and did not really care about who you killed. I liked the relation you had with Roman too, you could call him and talk about the things you had done if you wanted too. And the choiches you had was the best part, I always thought for a while before I could make a decision. And after I finsished the game I wondered if I made the right thing. The best story so far = Yes!

[Oxi Oxi]

Was a bit dodgy.

 

Also, if Dimitri double-crossed me, I'd forget about it.

[johnnyk1]

I felt as if the SA story was huge and intresting,but IV was short and very very unintresting.

 

main focus was graphis though.

[Ash_735]

I'm not gonna fight against all the people here cause a lot of users here seem to butt f*ck San Andreas. But I think San Andreas had the worse story of any GTA to date, it just got soo damn stupid. IV had a great story, I like how gritty and toned down it felt, it felt like a lot of indie and older style New York films, anyone here seen 25th Hour? Films takes place in New York and it points out a lot of stuff the GTA IV also points out, I loved it.

[e2thejdot]

I felt as if the SA story was huge and intresting,but IV was short and very very unintresting.

 

main focus was graphis though.

In what universe were you playing in? Short storyline? It was one of the most long-winded games I've ever played. Maybe that was just because I was begging for it to be over though.

 

Overall I wish a lot of the storyline was left out. It would've had more of an impact on me if I didn't have the circus of events to deal with. I mean.. they said they went for a "realistic" "movie" aspect. Those two words don't even belong in the same sentence together. 3 Leaf Clover dulled a lot of the story out for me.. because I did the same sh*t in SA with a casino and it was a very unrealistic mission. They should've also left the mafia out. The sh*t is just played out.

[Maxim]

i liked IV's story but the best story was in gta vice city

[Jake]

They screwed up the story for DLC and $$$.

[chitoryu12]

3 Leaf Clover dulled a lot of the story out for me.. because I did the same sh*t in SA with a casino and it was a very unrealistic mission. They should've also left the mafia out. The sh*t is just played out.

Saying that "3 Leaf Clover" is the same as "Breaking the Bank at Caligula's" is like saying that "Sayonara Salvatore" is the same as "Uncle Vlad". Except for the basic concept of what you're doing, there's almost zero similarities. SA had you doing several missions collecting equipment and setting up for robbing the casino, the actual robbery taking place in the bowels of the casino and ending with you parachuting from the roof to another building. In GTA IV the bank robbery is done as a cutscene, and you run through the streets of Chinatown and the subway tunnels to escape before a final car chase through Liberty City. I'm not sure how any of that is the same.

 

As for the mafia, I enjoyed seeing it again. Not only do I like all the Italian characters (accents for the win), but the mafia is shown in a much better sense. They don't run everything in town and aren't sending literal armies for every job. They're portrayed as living, rather than massive mansions, expensive two-story suburban houses and are in a state of disrepair. Their influence is slowly disappearing, as opposed to the GTA III-era where they expanded as the games went on.

[e2thejdot]

Saying that "3 Leaf Clover" is the same as "Breaking the Bank at Caligula's" is like saying that "Sayonara Salvatore" is the same as "Uncle Vlad".

I was talking about the basic concept of what we're doing. Although, sadly to say the SA version was more realistic. Sure, they're both pretty out there in terms of reality.. but at least there was a set-up process in SA. As I've said on these boards before.. nobody has walked into a bank with automatic weapons and lived to tell about it in ten or more years.

 

But I agree with you.. it was a lot more Rainbow Six-ish (cover and shoot, cover and shoot) than it was SA-ish.

[chitoryu12]

Saying that "3 Leaf Clover" is the same as "Breaking the Bank at Caligula's" is like saying that "Sayonara Salvatore" is the same as "Uncle Vlad".

I was talking about the basic concept of what we're doing. Although, sadly to say the SA version was more realistic. Sure, they're both pretty out there in terms of reality.. but at least there was a set-up process in SA. As I've said on these boards before.. nobody has walked into a bank with automatic weapons and lived to tell about it in ten or more years.

 

But I agree with you.. it was a lot more Rainbow Six-ish (cover and shoot, cover and shoot) than it was SA-ish.

A little realistic, but the escape is humorous. How many people could really parachute off the roof of a casino they just robbed without getting it shot full of holes?