Sunrise Driver Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Reviews were a lil bit paid cause GTA IV on consoles doesn't deserves 10/10 because of bad graphics and aiming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beanmike206 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 I think it got its score more from the technical side than anything else, The city design, weather affects, day and night cycle and not forgetting the physics engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafioso86 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 (edited) I personally would've given it a 10 I think right after completing the game... in hindsight maybe it more deserved a 9... still great game in my opinion, and I don't think there was any bribing. The problem is that there are like two different types of GTA-players... the ones that like being immersed in a massive world of organized crime with an epic story and a lot of wit tossed about and then there are the ones that like to have a massive open world with tons of weapons and stuff just to run amok and cause carnage. I'm definitely the former and I loved the game, but I can see how the later would have been disappointed. GTAIV was more like a really indepth gangster RPG (which is something I had always wanted) than it was just wacky chaotic blowing sh*t up fun. Edit: And as someone else said... if you're not watching the cutscenes... or don't like to watch the cutscenes... I can see where you wouldn't like this game as much as I do. But for me R* has always crafted absorbing stories and managed to combine them with laughs as well. For me playing this game is like watching a favorite movie... but I have more control. Edited February 9, 2009 by Mafioso86 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shunsuke Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Reviews were a lil bit paid cause GTA IV on consoles doesn't deserves 10/10 because of bad graphics and aiming. You have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitara Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 To the people who say GTA IV did not deserve a 10. Please name one game out there now that does deserve a 10? There is no game that even comes close to what Rockstar achieved. The level of detail as someone else pointed out is mind boggling. The first time it rained at night with the lightning and the clouds was pretty awsome. I played Saints Row 2 and I loved that game too but it was not even close to 10, because of what GTA IV did with its detail level. All the customization and activities in Saints Row 2 were awesome additions but it felt more like a GTA Sanandreas 2.0. It was no competition as to which game was not only more technical but also had the better story line. I don't think anyone bribed the reviewers, anyone who put the GTA IV disk in their console was taken back at what Rockstar created. It is a Masterpiece in of itself. Niko is one of the best characters ever in gaming period and his story was easily better then most blockbuster movies last year. Rockstar deserved an 10+ Bring on the Lost and Damned!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mubd Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I am still playing GTA IV. I got it in April. I think that it does deserve 10/10. How can you fit the great graphics, physics and story into one disc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algonquin Assassin Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) To the people who say GTA IV did not deserve a 10. Please name one game out there now that does deserve a 10? There is no game that even comes close to what Rockstar achieved. The level of detail as someone else pointed out is mind boggling. The first time it rained at night with the lightning and the clouds was pretty awsome. I played Saints Row 2 and I loved that game too but it was not even close to 10, because of what GTA IV did with its detail level. All the customization and activities in Saints Row 2 were awesome additions but it felt more like a GTA Sanandreas 2.0. It was no competition as to which game was not only more technical but also had the better story line. I don't think anyone bribed the reviewers, anyone who put the GTA IV disk in their console was taken back at what Rockstar created. It is a Masterpiece in of itself. Niko is one of the best characters ever in gaming period and his story was easily better then most blockbuster movies last year. Rockstar deserved an 10+ Bring on the Lost and Damned!!! Good point. I remember playing GTA IV for the first time on my PS3, and I remember very well being absolutely astounded by how much effort R* put into the surroundings. I'm still amazed when I play it now. No game I bought last year (Maybe MGS4) gave me that feeling. You're right about Niko. He's IMO one of the best video game characters ever created. IV's story was also so well executed too. Some found it boring, but I found it the most engaging storyline to date in the GTA series. There are moments where you feel like you can feel Niko's emotions. I know that sounds sissy, but that's what I feel. Never had that feeling with any other GTA game. The only thing that drags IV down a notch on my rating scale of 1-10 is single player. There's just not enough to do. Everything else is fine, but yeah single player can be boring at times. It's still one of the best games I've ever bought though. Edited February 10, 2009 by Miamivicecity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitara Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) To the people who say GTA IV did not deserve a 10. Please name one game out there now that does deserve a 10? There is no game that even comes close to what Rockstar achieved. The level of detail as someone else pointed out is mind boggling. The first time it rained at night with the lightning and the clouds was pretty awsome. I played Saints Row 2 and I loved that game too but it was not even close to 10, because of what GTA IV did with its detail level. All the customization and activities in Saints Row 2 were awesome additions but it felt more like a GTA Sanandreas 2.0. It was no competition as to which game was not only more technical but also had the better story line. I don't think anyone bribed the reviewers, anyone who put the GTA IV disk in their console was taken back at what Rockstar created. It is a Masterpiece in of itself. Niko is one of the best characters ever in gaming period and his story was easily better then most blockbuster movies last year. Rockstar deserved an 10+ Bring on the Lost and Damned!!! Good point. I remember playing GTA IV for the first time on my PS3, and I remember very well being absolutely astounded by how much effort R* put into the surroundings. I'm still amazed when I play it now. No game I bought last year (Maybe MGS4) gave me that feeling. You're right about Niko. He's IMO one of the best video game characters ever created. IV's story was also so well executed too. Some found it boring, but I found it the most engaging storyline to date in the GTA series. There are moments where you feel like you can feel Niko's emotions. I know that sounds sissy, but that's what I feel. Never had that feeling with any other GTA game. The only thing that drags IV down a notch on my rating scale of 1-10 is single player. There's just not enough to do. Everything else is fine, but yeah single player can be boring at times. It's still one of the best games I've ever bought though. Dude I agree 100%.. I was floored by the level of detail. There is no game out now or ever created to date with the detail that is in this game. Everything was created by hand, no simply copy and paste places in GTA IV. The fact that I still get lost in Liberty City in some areas just say alot about what Rockstar created. You are absolutley correct about the single player and not many things to do after the story is over. I too missed all the things San Andreas had in it. Rockstar was cursed by there own doing for makeing SanAndreas one of the best games ever created. When I first finished GTA 4 it felt empty and I was kinda let down. I stopped playing it.. I played Saints Row 2 and had a blast with it but I kept wishing it was GTA 4.. I started playing GTA 4 again for the 3rd play through and each time I just appreciate it more and more. Now I just have fun running around creating chaos and just discovering stuff some one at Rockstar put in the game and wanted me to see it.. On a bright note though.. They created GTA 3.. Then Improved it with GTA Vice City... Then they trumped that with GTA SanAndreas.. If GTA 4 is the starter for this generation.. My god I can only imagine what the next chapters will look like and feel like.. They already have the engine done so now it is a matter of them building out a city to traverse.. Bring on Vice City with GTA 4 graphics!!! PS: The sissy part bro.. No worries I am right there with you.. I actually cared about Niko, there are not many games that ever even came this close to me feeling a connection to the character like I did with Niko. He is by far the best character to ever be put in a game bar none. I can not wait for The Lost and Damned.. I am betting Rockstar really went all out here. Lets see what Johnny is all about!! Death and Destruction bring it on!!! Edited February 10, 2009 by nitara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivingReceiver Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Probably some bias going on. Wouldnt be suprised tbh, many flaws in this game even though i like it. I hear that IGN got a few exclusive interviews which may of helped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algonquin Assassin Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) If GTA 4 is the starter for this generation.. My god I can only imagine what the next chapters will look like and feel like.. They already have the engine done so now it is a matter of them building out a city to traverse.. Bring on Vice City with GTA 4 graphics!!! The potential IV has given future titles is enormous. The only thing I'm worried about is that R* might have felt the pressure of SR2, and in the next game they might try to add things similar, and IMO that would be a very bad mistake. They don't need to add tons of features to make a great game. They proved it with IV. Some more wouldn't hurt, but I wouldn't like to see them ruin the next GTA just to get back at SR. What I've always liked about R* is they're quality over quantity. Now they have the base all they need to do now is fine tune it in the next game. I'm going to be very excited the moment they announce the next PS3/360 GTA. Edited February 10, 2009 by Miamivicecity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VickeX Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 New generations isn't the same thing today as they were before. If GTA and GTA 2 were 3D, the new generation of GTA 3 wouldn't have been as new-thinking and awesome as it 'was' then, and people would have noticed more of the things that they would want. It's harder to make something that's awesome today. The only thing new in the fourth generation of GTA is better graphics and physics. People don't see what it's done for the game. And also, the story and city of GTA IV is just awesome. Sure the reviews was legit, and i think it really deserves it. Plus, graphics and things like that shouldn't be taken into the game reviews. I doubt people play a game to see how nice graphics it has. The only thing that should be looked into is how long-lasting the game is, how well done it is and things like that. The story etc. GTA IV surely deserves a 10/10 as it's very well done, and it's re-playable i don't know how many times. I've played it through 2 times and i bet i'll do it three or four more times this year. And that's only the story. Freeroaming owns, and multiplayer owns. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QwertyAAA Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 VickeX, GTA 1 and 2 were 3d. I'm quite sure of that. Maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Colt Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) The cities are 3D. The cars in GTA2 are 2.5D. Everything else are basically sprites. Edited February 10, 2009 by Leo Colt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VickeX Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 VickeX, GTA 1 and 2 were 3d. I'm quite sure of that. Maybe. Top down / abit angled. Not really full 3D like GTA 3. You know what i mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly 13lunt Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Smoke some weed then play Gta IV. You will see why it some many reviewers gave it a 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QwertyAAA Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 The cities are 3D. The cars in GTA2 are 2.5D. Everything else are basically sprites. Yeah, yeah. That. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algonquin Assassin Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Plus, graphics and things like that shouldn't be taken into the game reviews. I doubt people play a game to see how nice graphics it has. The only thing that should be looked into is how long-lasting the game is, how well done it is and things like that. The story etc. I slightly disagree with this. I mean honestly can anyone say they weren't impressed by the graphics the first time they put in IV? That's one of IV's key points. IMO I admit before IV came out I was really interested to see what the graphics would be like, and least to say they didn't disappoint. IV is a great looking game. I know GTA never strived on graphics in the past, but it's a really nice change to have a GTA that looks great. Not to say the old GTAs didn't look great in their own way. VC, and SA can look beautiful at times, but yeah that's what I think. Apart from that, good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 (edited) I love graphics, I'm a graphics whore and I've said that before! How wrong you are to suggest reviewers negate the game's graphics... most only describe what one sees that a still frame cannot suggest. It's also fair to say this game is a 10 when you look at how well it works on the whole...over all. I've not been let down. I will add that the same graphics team led by Aaron Garbut worked on this with some added ppl. To see the art maturity with that in mind, they of course, deserve kudos for the results! Edited February 11, 2009 by Slamman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitara Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 (edited) I agree to a point, graphics should not be the main point in a review. But it still has to be considered. Saints row was a fun game but besides the graphics that were ok at best because GTA SanAndreas already had been there a done that. The game play Saints Row 2 had was pretty good. Some very creative over the top missions and activities.. I will break down how I rated each game using Game Trailers system which is pretty fair GTA 4 Story = 10 Best ever created Design = 9.5 Lacks single player activities (Like San Andreas) internet, bowling, darts and pool were fully realized mini games Gameplay =10 Driving was very realistic. Cover system was a plus, physics engine was realistic. Multiplayer in Liberty City is astounding! Presentation =10 Graphics are some of the best ever created for this type of game Overall = 9.9 Saints Row 2 Story = 8 Entertaining, but Gta San Andreas did it better Design = 10 Excellent customization plenty to do in single player game, lots of interiors and places to explore , activities were pretty great Gameplay = 8 Driving was last gen stuff. No cover system but was not an issue. Physics engine was horrible. Multiplayer was ok.. Presentation = 8 Again after GTA 4, Saints Row was more on par with a GTA San Andreas 2.0. Cut Scenes were great though. Overall = 8.5 I think If Rockstar can give me more to do in the single player game after the game is finished, it would be a perfect game. Here is to hoping they hit the nail on the head with the DLC.. Or the next version of GTA going forward. Edited February 11, 2009 by nitara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VickeX Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 (edited) I agree to a point, graphics should not be the main point in a review. But it still has to be considered. Saints row was a fun game but besides the graphics that were ok at best because GTA SanAndreas already had been there a done that. The game play Saints Row 2 had was pretty good. Some very creative over the top missions and activities.. I will break down how I rated each game using Game Trailers system which is pretty fair GTA 4 Story = 10 Best ever created Design = 9.5 Lacks single player activities (Like San Andreas) internet, bowling, darts and pool were fully realized mini games Gameplay =10 Driving was very realistic. Cover system was a plus, physics engine was realistic. Multiplayer in Liberty City is astounding! Presentation =10 Graphics are some of the best ever created for this type of game Overall = 9.9 Saints Row 2 Story = 8 Entertaining, but Gta San Andreas did it better Design = 10 Excellent customization plenty to do in single player game, lots of interiors and places to explore , activities were pretty great Gameplay = 8 Driving was last gen stuff. No cover system but was not an issue. Physics engine was horrible. Multiplayer was ok.. Presentation = 8 Again after GTA 4, Saints Row was more on par with a GTA San Andreas 2.0. Cut Scenes were great though. Overall = 8.5 I think If Rockstar can give me more to do in the single player game after the game is finished, it would be a perfect game. Here is to hoping they hit the nail on the head with the DLC.. Or the next version of GTA going forward. I agree with most of that post except that you didn't mention that GTA IV has lots of interiors. Much more than Saints Row 2, eaven though though they might not be built in the same was as they are not used as safehouses there's much more to discover in GTA IV, plus, the activities in SR2 really stinks in my opinion. I really didn't like that game at all, even though i can understand some people do (but not at all close to GTA VC/SA/IV) SR2 Overall score: 6.5 Grand Theft Auto IV Overall Score: 9.9999999 or, more fairly, 10! Edit: More. The multiplayer in SR2 sucked imo, and the cutscenes were ok. The cutscenes in GTA IV was totally amazing. With the story to. Woow. And how can you say that no cover system in SR2 was not an issue? Sure i didn't really care about it in SR2 or any of the past GTA's but i've heard like everybody always complaining that the aiming and no cover system was a big problem/drawback. Edited February 11, 2009 by VickeX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunrise Driver Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 You have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. Yes, I have an idea what I'm talking about. GTA 4 on consoles isn't good as on the PC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullet_Chris Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 You have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. Yes, I have an idea what I'm talking about. GTA 4 on consoles isn't good as on the PC. No sh*t, man.The PC version is a sh*tty, sorry-ass port.It cannot run well even on the newest PC's plus there's no AA and some missing sh*t from it.Your statement is as fake as Michael Jackson's nose. But, yeah GTA IV on PC is better because of modding and the new features.But I will rather buy a 360 to play it(in fact a PS3 would be better, but I'm short on money). I have noticed something great in GTA IV:unlike in the previous games, this one is more serious, the dialogues and cutscenes are more believable.When NIko is angry he really makes you see it.The cutscenes are very well done, it is like a movie to me.They certainly brought this game to a new level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VickeX Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Plus, graphics and things like that shouldn't be taken into the game reviews. I doubt people play a game to see how nice graphics it has. The only thing that should be looked into is how long-lasting the game is, how well done it is and things like that. The story etc. I slightly disagree with this. I mean honestly can anyone say they weren't impressed by the graphics the first time they put in IV? That's one of IV's key points. IMO I admit before IV came out I was really interested to see what the graphics would be like, and least to say they didn't disappoint. IV is a great looking game. I know GTA never strived on graphics in the past, but it's a really nice change to have a GTA that looks great. Not to say the old GTAs didn't look great in their own way. VC, and SA can look beautiful at times, but yeah that's what I think. Apart from that, good post. I didn't really mean it that way. I ment that graphics shouldn't be one of the first thing to look for. Story, Gameplay and such should always go first. Of course the graphics in IV is totally f*cking amazing if we comprare to how big the city is, how much is going on, and then comprare that to the third-gen graphics. And sure everybody likes the graphics in GTA IV, but some people say that "GTA IV isn't funny at all it's just as the old GTA's but with better graphics and physics". That's my point. Those people don't know what they are talking about. So many new things has happened except that, plus, those things actually (at least physics) adds greatly to awesome gameplay. Plus, it's new-thinking or whatever as there has never been a Big freeroaming-game with this realistic physics. It's just awesome. I remember the first time i played the game. Oh god. The physics of the car and Euphoria. I loved them from the very start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I don't know how "new" you are to gaming in any capacity but game graphics are vitally important, as much as the fun factor and controlling as well! First thing I do to judge a game of interest is measure the graphic quality of the stills presented. It's what makes one game look better then the next, and it pulls you in as well. the cars in early GTA as well as elements of the environment were rather mundane and simple looking... I think they grew GTA by leaps and bounds so far. I also feel that Next Gen Hardware was up against PC and graphics are a driving force there, obviously...take a look at graphic card prices for proof! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VickeX Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I don't know how "new" you are to gaming in any capacity but game graphics are vitally important, as much as the fun factor and controlling as well! First thing I do to judge a game of interest is measure the graphic quality of the stills presented. It's what makes one game look better then the next, and it pulls you in as well. the cars in early GTA as well as elements of the environment were rather mundane and simple looking... I think they grew GTA by leaps and bounds so far. I also feel that Next Gen Hardware was up against PC and graphics are a driving force there, obviously...take a look at graphic card prices for proof! Of course. I'm not at all new to gaming, and i'm not saying graphics isn't important. I love the graphics and know how important they are, but alot of people don't, and adding to that is that they don't see what else has been done in this game. I think it truly deserves a 10/10 on almost all levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otter Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I think there's some confusion here surrounding the term 'graphics.' Graphics power, as in, fancy shaders and high-res models, etc, mean relatively little to the enjoyment of a game. Art direction, on the other hand, means quite a bit. There's a fuzzy - but bold - line between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunrise Driver Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 (edited) The PC version is a sh*tty, sorry-ass port.It cannot run well even on the newest PC's plus there's no AA and some missing sh*t from it.Your statement is as fake as Michael Jackson's nose. Yeah, bad port blah blah...Controls are fine on PC. Graphics on medium better than on consoles. PC FPS > Console FPS. Of course you may have problems if you set 1680*1280 (or smth like that) all high. Try medium settings and you'll get nice game without any FPS drops. Don't forget to install newest patches and video drivers. Really crappy port is Saints Row 2. Edited February 11, 2009 by Street Mix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOB THE CHEAT Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I didn't barge into the story line, complete the game and whine and moan about the reviews and the boring post-plot status. I took my time, ages it seems, exploring everything. Sure, wandering all over looking for areas of interest CAN be boring, but only if you let it. To me, it was another great immersive experience, and all that land mass (and water) comes in handy when escaping loads of police. The way the elements combine to create a self-contained environment that one can take several paths, and exploit various weapons. I have no doubt the reviews shared that same experience I had with the game, so basically, no... I do not. (believe they were paid, that notion is absurd to me) agreed, i only got the game on christmas and it's fcking amazing! i watched vids ever since april till i got it and knew tonnes about the game, but when i got it i was still impressed/amused! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullet_Chris Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 The PC version is a sh*tty, sorry-ass port.It cannot run well even on the newest PC's plus there's no AA and some missing sh*t from it.Your statement is as fake as Michael Jackson's nose. Yeah, bad port blah blah...Controls are fine on PC. Graphics on medium better than on consoles. PC FPS > Console FPS. Of course you may have problems if you set 1680*1280 (or smth like that) all high. Try medium settings and you'll get nice game without any FPS drops. Don't forget to install newest patches and video drivers. Really crappy port is Saints Row 2. The graphics on PC arent really better.There is a bit of lack of reflections during day on cars in the PC version and overall it runs sh*tty on most people's PCs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QwertyAAA Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Here's how you figure out the port is fine: You put in the disk, you install the game, you play it. If you have to do anything else to get playable FPS on even SA-level graphics, the port is a waste of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now