GTA 2 crap

[Xegethra]

 

the cars arernt todays cars, they are like 20s and 40s but done up all futuristic. retro futurism.

Most cars are based on real models of cars (the Stingray, the Jaguar E-Type, the Lamborghi Miura, the Volkswagen Beetle). Originally cars were going to have a much more futuristic design, but it was dropped out.

you obviously m issed my topic on this matter... (the more futuristic cars were same ones used, just toned down) and yeah they are based on real cars but most of them are from the 30s and such

 

http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=404311

 

my topic on the cars...see they are same one as used, just better looking

[chapapote]

the cars arernt todays cars, they are like 20s and 40s but done up all futuristic. retro futurism.

Most cars are based on real models of cars (the Stingray, the Jaguar E-Type, the Lamborghi Miura, the Volkswagen Beetle). Originally cars were going to have a much more futuristic design, but it was dropped out.

you obviously m issed my topic on this matter... (the more futuristic cars were same ones used, just toned down) and yeah they are based on real cars but most of them are from the 30s and such

 

http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=404311

 

my topic on the cars...see they are same one as used, just better looking

I've done a research. Most of them are 50's-70's, nobody was right. Only a few, like the Jefferson or the Shark, are that old, and cars like the Bug, even though they first appeared many years ago, are not what we could call "old-fashioned".

 

Those concept cars were what I meant when I said "originally cars were going to have a much more futuristic design, but it was dropped out".

 

[Xegethra]

yeah, i dunno, most just seem really old to me....like older than the 50s (my favorite cars the american 50s ones)

 

when i played fallout 3 the cars reminded me of gta 2 somewhat

[sgt.slaughter]

I think most people these days immediately associate good gaming with good graphics. If a game doesn't have high-end graphics and sickening amounts of bloom; then it isn't good. What people tend to look past is game play features and originality. Back in the days of GTA 1/2, DMA were the only ones doing this, there weren't hundreds of "GTA clones" running around like there is today.

 

I would like to know though, what exactly did you find crap about it?

I'm not going for graphics,gameplay is where it's at !GTA 2 seems a little bland when comparing it to the gameplay features of today's GTAs .Aiming,eating,buying things,realistic driving...you know...the good stuff .

[chapapote]

I think most people these days immediately associate good gaming with good graphics. If a game doesn't have high-end graphics and sickening amounts of bloom; then it isn't good. What people tend to look past is game play features and originality. Back in the days of GTA 1/2, DMA were the only ones doing this, there weren't hundreds of "GTA clones" running around like there is today.

 

I would like to know though, what exactly did you find crap about it?

I'm not going for graphics,gameplay is where it's at !GTA 2 seems a little bland when comparing it to the gameplay features of today's GTAs .Aiming,eating,buying things,realistic driving...you know...the good stuff .

GTA 2 had still cool things like the respect meter or car upgrades. No GTA has a perfect gameplay.

[l911]

Yeah the Respect is cool thing in GTA2

[Xegethra]

it was never done the same again was it...i liked the choice to work for different gangs and then piss them off and gain the respect of their rivals and then work for them and so on

[crashsilumator234]

 

I tried San, i tried Vice. I can tell you that i got bored quickly while playing these two. I wiped these games out of my HDD immediately.

 

you are sick

 

you are f*cking sick

 

if one day i see you i will kill you

 

Vice City was one of the best ones ever

 

dumbass

[phantom2510]

Vice City is easily my favorite. I love the 80s Miami vibe. But I also like GTA 2 quite a lot. I got from Half Price Books as part of the GTA Classics Collection. It's a very good game, and I started out with the 3D GTAs.

[Ghost glendale fan 4 live]

I started my GTA-ing back in 98 with GTA (top down version). It was fun at the time but when I tried playing it again recently, just wasnt used to it since I've been spending alot of time playing 3D GTA. Good times though

 

Its kinda like SimCity2000. A few years back they released SimCity something which was 3D...you get to cruise in the city you built. I guess gaming companies are getting with the times...

I started my GTA-ing in 2001 (GTA 3) when I was 7. I hadn't played the older games then, but in 2002 or 2003, I played GTA London and I LOVED it! .... and I have loved the old games and the newer games ever since!

[The Horror Is Alive]

I dunno, the first GTAs I played were GTA1 and GTA2 on the PS1. I could not stand the frame rate slowdown on GTA1, but I had sh*tloads of fun with GTA2 (saving really helped ).

 

However, I can still play them for a little bit at a time without getting bored, but not much. After a while, yes, they do start to show a bit of age. Lucky GTA2 pretty much improved on EVERYTHING that was in GTA1.

[Fireman]

Let's get something straight here:

 

Story in GTA = fail.

Which is why IMO GTA 2 was better since it didn't have a sh*tty story attached to it, and it had way more humor than all the other gta's combined. On the other hand the graphics and gameplay were improved (improved gameplay = more options) in each GTA up to IV.

 

I'd choose for GTA 2 myself, because it's definately the most fun of all of them, after that the games became too serious.

 

[B-$hep]

I agree completely with Fireman.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Let's get something straight here:

 

Story in GTA = fail.

Which is why IMO GTA 2 was better since it didn't have a sh*tty story attached to it, and it had way more humor than all the other gta's combined. On the other hand the graphics and gameplay were improved (improved gameplay = more options) in each GTA up to IV.

 

I'd choose for GTA 2 myself, because it's definately the most fun of all of them, after that the games became too serious.

GTA didn't have a story. All you basically done was missions, but there wasn't an overall plot. GTA II had a bit of a story, but it was more of the same. Stories in GTA games didn't come in light until GTA III.

[Fireman]

GTA didn't have a story. All you basically done was missions, but there wasn't an overall plot. GTA II had a bit of a story, but it was more of the same. Stories in GTA games didn't come in light until GTA III.

Did you read my post?

 

That's what I said, and I said that stories in GTA are fail hence III and on were worse than GTA II, because GTA II didn't have a story.

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

GTA didn't have a story. All you basically done was missions, but there wasn't an overall plot. GTA II had a bit of a story, but it was more of the same. Stories in GTA games didn't come in light until GTA III.

Did you read my post?

 

That's what I said, and I said that stories in GTA are fail hence III and on were worse than GTA II, because GTA II didn't have a story.

 

Sorry I thought you were talking about the original GTA.

 

Anyway each to their own, but for me what makes GTA games so great is the stories they have.

 

Just look how popular the GTA III era GTAs are. I mean no offense or anything, but personally I reckon you're in the minority that thinks stories in GTA games are a fail.

 

 

Edited July 6, 2009 by Miamivicecity

[Fireman]

GTA didn't have a story. All you basically done was missions, but there wasn't an overall plot. GTA II had a bit of a story, but it was more of the same. Stories in GTA games didn't come in light until GTA III.

Did you read my post?

 

That's what I said, and I said that stories in GTA are fail hence III and on were worse than GTA II, because GTA II didn't have a story.

 

Sorry I thought you were talking about the original GTA.

 

Anyway each to their own, but for me what makes GTA games so great is the stories they have.

 

Just look how popular the GTA III era GTAs are. I mean no offense or anything, but personally I reckon you're in the minority that thinks stories in GTA games are a fail.

I doubt it, in fact all missions could've been exactly the same without a story, the story doesn't add anything to the games.

 

Also GTA III and on were all 3d (not top-down is what I mean) games which probably attracted more people, also people can like III for the missions, but not for the story. Cause missions are like this:

 

Oh noes (long story), kill enemies (this is the fun part for those who like the mission)!

 

Oh noes, race.

 

[Algonquin Assassin]

The stories add nothing to the games? Maybe in your opinion, but if you said that in one of the other forums here many people would think you're stoned off your ass.

 

The GTA III GTAs, and beyond aren't necessarily popular because of 3D graphics. Have you ever wondered why GTA III was such a revolutionary game? It wasn't only because it brought GTA into a 3D environment, but it was really the first sandbox game with a cinematic plot, and thus opened up a world of opportunities for the future.

 

Then VC came along with the first ever GTA protagonist who had a distinct personality which was reflected in the story.

 

The stories play an enormous part in GTA games. Without them GTA would've died along time ago. Believe it, or not people want a story they can follow. Not just do missions for the sake of doing them.

 

I don't want to give the impression that I don't like the classic GTAs. I still own my PS1 copies of GTA 1, GTA 2, and London 69, but I really didn't get bitten by the GTA bug until it went 3D, and introduced stories.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Miamivicecity

[OXYCAS]

I play GTA 2 today .....

and its still best

dont hate mE!

[Kratos2000]

who cares about sh*tty story?

it has a good story, but you don't think that Catalina or pegorino really exist? not..

i guess you hate movies too, cuz of the "sh*tty story" don't you?

Miamivicecity- true!!!!!

i'm not hate the top-down GTAs too, i respact them as classics but still won't play them.

Edited August 22, 2009 by Kratos2000

[usernotfound]

GTA2 was awesome. It still is, but ofcourse it's not as good as the newer games. That's just a fact.

 

But oh God, I remember waaaaayyyy back when GTA1 was first released. My pal got it, and I always went to play it with him, we were SO f*ckING AMAZED that we could actually carjack and kill people!! Yes, that may sound very strange to new gen gamers who think killing in games is normal, but back then that was like the first game we ever played where we had so much freedom and could kill and rob and carjack and sh*t. It was the f*cking time of my life.

 

Then I got GTA1 for the PS myself, and played it to death. Ofcourse when GTA2 hit, I got it immediately and loved it all the same. I've spent so much hours in those games. Ofcourse as a kid I never managed to actually complete them, I always just messed around. I remember some other guys in school were playing it and we all found out the cheat MADEMAN together, hahahaha we were so happy.

 

I still have the original CD's now I bought ten years ago.

 

Ah, childhood memories.

 

Actually, I said GTA SA was better, but you can believe me when I say I had a much better time playing GTA1 and 2 then playing GTA SA. Maybe GTA SA can't compare to them after all.

[Fireman]

who cares about sh*tty story?

it has a good story, but you don't think that Catalina or pegorino really exist? not..

i guess you hate movies too, cuz of the "sh*tty story" don't you?

Miamivicecity- true!!!!!

i'm not hate the top-down GTAs too, i respact them as classics but still won't play them.

I do hate movies which have sh*tty stories in them yes, just like any other normal person? :S

[Kratos2000]

who cares about sh*tty story?

it has a good story, but you don't think that Catalina or pegorino really exist? not..

i guess you hate movies too, cuz of the "sh*tty story" don't you?

Miamivicecity-  true!!!!!

i'm not hate the top-down GTAs too, i respact them as classics but still won't play them.

I do hate movies which have sh*tty stories in them yes, just like any other normal person? :S

not, it's not a normal person.

[usernotfound]

who cares about sh*tty story?

it has a good story, but you don't think that Catalina or pegorino really exist? not..

i guess you hate movies too, cuz of the "sh*tty story" don't you?

Miamivicecity-  true!!!!!

i'm not hate the top-down GTAs too, i respact them as classics but still won't play them.

I do hate movies which have sh*tty stories in them yes, just like any other normal person? :S

not, it's not a normal person.

are you being sarcastic or are you stoned

[XXI Inc]

It's not crap. Just a lil bit older. GTA 1 and 2 are classics, which will never be forgotten.

[Jack Reacher]

I judge games on fun factor more than anything else. The gameplay, graphics and controls may be retarded but if im having fun then im all good.

 

For this reason GTA2 is one of my favourties as i have a lot of fun on that game. However i also have lots of fun on GTA SA. Maybe the missions arent fun but thats not the point, most of the playing i do on it arent even for missions, i have spent many hours on a file without 1 mission done. There is just simply so much to explore, so many glitches, exploits and other things to do in the game than the others.

 

GTA VC is also one of my favourites because of its atmosphere. Idk what i like about it, all i can say is it has the best atmosphere and i get nostalgic playing GTA VCS

 

GTA IV, IMO, was crap. No fun factor for me there, i ended up using cabs for everything to skip to locations to get the thing done

[Joaoseinha]

I have all GTA's and i think GTA 2 is the best GTA,but in single player after playing GTA IV it's boring,now i only play GTA 2 in Multiplayer

[Darkel2001]

I had more fun with GTA2 than I ever had with IV

[kudoboi]

u cannot compare a sky view game with a RPG game, they are 2 different type of catogories from 2 huge different f*cking years, u don't expect a 1940 car to have a GPS installed. they cannot be compared, if u want to compare u can only compare eg: gta 2 with gta as they are with same engine or gta 3 vs gta vc vs gta sa and gta 4 vs gta eflc.

but u cannot compare 2 different type of games with different engines, different graphics, different gameplay. it makes it f*cking unfair. yes the new games are better in terms of graphics and gameplay but if gta 2 or gta was not created, there would not be a gta 3 nor a gta 4, i find all of them good, if u were in 1990s you would have think gta was the best f*cking game ever, life changes and you cannot stop it, people have their own personal views, i find IV better but not every1 likes IV.

[Claude Speed.]

GTA is not an RPG game. The only games from the series that have RPG elements are VCS, San Andreas and IV, but nothing considerable to categorize them in the RPG genre.