is vcs good?

[nerner]

Don't ever mention SR2 again here! No, its okay, but I prefer some GTAs, no comment about IV though.

[Vercetti27]

SR2 is just appalling

[nerner]

Vertical Bird was quite hard, and so was The Exchange, and Boomshine Blowout if you were a novice to the game.

Oh yeah, "Boomshine Blowout" !

That was also a b*tch to do...

It was challenging, but I beat it on my first try ! (Of course, VCS wasn`t my first GTA)

 

But I have to agree that it was a damn hard mission, especially since it comes very early in the game.

The game doesn't seem to care about that though. It just starts off hard and gets harder.

It starts as it means to go on, challenging, whereas IV was just the same missions all the way through, with very little variation.

[rampage!]

I liked it. The only mission I didn't care for was Domo Arigato Domesteboto. Not that it was very difficult, just annoying. (A few amusing parts but it still annoyed me.) I played it on the ps2.

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

SR2 is just appalling

 

It's alright, but I wish it didn't try so hard to be like SA.

 

 

 

[DanielH]

 

Vertical Bird was quite hard, and so was The Exchange, and Boomshine Blowout if you were a novice to the game.

Oh yeah, "Boomshine Blowout" !

That was also a b*tch to do...

It was challenging, but I beat it on my first try ! (Of course, VCS wasn`t my first GTA)

 

But I have to agree that it was a damn hard mission, especially since it comes very early in the game.

The game doesn't seem to care about that though. It just starts off hard and gets harder.

It starts as it means to go on, challenging, whereas IV was just the same missions all the way through, with very little variation.

I do hope you're not trying to say this is better than IV.

Edited May 6, 2009 by DanielH

[Blackbird88]

 

Vertical Bird was quite hard, and so was The Exchange, and Boomshine Blowout if you were a novice to the game.

Oh yeah, "Boomshine Blowout" !

That was also a b*tch to do...

It was challenging, but I beat it on my first try ! (Of course, VCS wasn`t my first GTA)

 

But I have to agree that it was a damn hard mission, especially since it comes very early in the game.

The game doesn't seem to care about that though. It just starts off hard and gets harder.

It starts as it means to go on, challenging, whereas IV was just the same missions all the way through, with very little variation.

I do hope you're not trying to say this is better than IV.

Yes it is. Every single GTA can beat IV.

[nerner]

Vertical Bird was quite hard, and so was The Exchange, and Boomshine Blowout if you were a novice to the game.

Oh yeah, "Boomshine Blowout" !

That was also a b*tch to do...

It was challenging, but I beat it on my first try ! (Of course, VCS wasn`t my first GTA)

 

But I have to agree that it was a damn hard mission, especially since it comes very early in the game.

The game doesn't seem to care about that though. It just starts off hard and gets harder.

It starts as it means to go on, challenging, whereas IV was just the same missions all the way through, with very little variation.

I do hope you're not trying to say this is better than IV.

Well it is, both portable GTAs sh*t on IV from a great height.

[Algonquin Assassin]

I reckon VCS comes awfully close to being as good as IV, but LCS? No thanks. Not that LCS is bad, but there's nothing in it that's better than IV. IMO

 

It's weird how I'm a huge fan of the mafia theme, and you would think I would love LCS, but I don't. Just something about it that never pushed me to complete it, whereas with IV I've finished it about 3 times.

 

For me it's definitely IV>VCS>LCS.

Edited May 8, 2009 by Miamivicecity

[zeppelincheetah]

imo VCS is the worst 3d GTA by FAR. it has a horrible story, absolutely un-f*cking-believably awful game glitches and the main new feature - empire building - sucks

 

there are a few upsides to VCS - the mini games are unique to GTA and some of them are really well made. some missions are pretty cool like the one where you operate a robot to crack a safe. also though there's no new cars to speak of (there's like 2 and they're really boring) the jet ski almost makes up for it. i was so glad to see its return in Chinatown Wars. now i don't have to play vcs to ride a jet ski in GTA!

[Algonquin Assassin]

imo VCS is the worst 3d GTA by FAR. it has a horrible story, absolutely un-f*cking-believably awful game glitches and the main new feature - empire building - sucks

 

 

I like the empire building, but the only thing I don't like is how the empire sites ruin the look of VC, with all the ugly looking buildings.

[Vercetti27]

I don't like comparing IV to VCS as I like them for different reasons. And personally I would have liked LCS more if it had more features

[Blackbird88]

imo VCS is the worst 3d GTA by FAR

No. GTA CW is worst.

[Flesh-n-Bone]

I like the empire building, but the only thing I don't like is how the empire sites ruin the look of VC, with all the ugly looking buildings.

To be honest I don't see how they ruin the city's look. If you care so much about "beautiful" look then make them high roller prostitution sites and it will look neon-like and make the spot look cooler. Plus, I prefer the sites to empty spaces as VC showed.

[nerner]

imo VCS is the worst 3d GTA by FAR. it has a horrible story, absolutely un-f*cking-believably awful game glitches and the main new feature - empire building - sucks

 

there are a few upsides to VCS - the mini games are unique to GTA and some of them are really well made. some missions are pretty cool like the one where you operate a robot to crack a safe. also though there's no new cars to speak of (there's like 2 and they're really boring) the jet ski almost makes up for it. i was so glad to see its return in Chinatown Wars. now i don't have to play vcs to ride a jet ski in GTA!

Well, in my opinion, IV is nowhere near as good as VCS, the story in VCS was better than IV, which was just about revenge and compassion and bullsh*t, it bored me senseless. You need to take your IV blinkers off, and your head out of your arse my friend.

[DanielH]

Then why did IV get absolute universal acclaim and this, well, didn't?

[nerner]

Three syllables my friend:

 

PRO-MO-TION. IV was all about it, and VCS got, none at all, it was even less promoted than GTA: Advance. It was also only originally sold for one platform, unlike IV which was sold on 2 and then ported to PC, which basically everyone owns, although the requirements were ridiculously high, it probably sold more than VCS for PS2.

 

[Flesh-n-Bone]

VCS is the least promoted 3D GTA definitely. Even Chinatown Wars got more attention before release. To this day some people don't even know about LCS and VCS.

 

IV was such a commercial game that it was promoted to an extent so pictures from the game were shown on the walls even here in my city. And to be honest this is the only video game I have ever seen being shown on the streets.

[Vercetti27]

Then why did IV get absolute universal acclaim and this, well, didn't?

IV took like 4 years to make and had a totally different engine and new features whereas VCS was firstly only sold on the psp .

[Radion]

A typical GTA, nothing special compaired from the rest, nor is it the worst one.

 

I'd certainly get it if you bought a PSP, it's a great game with many great missions and features in the game.

 

Not a bad frame rate either, but sometimes the textures take a while to load as it's on the PSP.

[Flesh-n-Bone]

And if you have a PS2 it's also worth getting VCS and LCS. Since they are not available on any other platform aside from these two.

[nerner]

Not a bad frame rate either, but sometimes the textures take a while to load as it's on the PSP.

Yes, many times have I flown into an empire building which hasn't loaded properly, that is one of the only real issues with the PSP version.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Discard this post please.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Miamivicecity

[DanielH]

Three syllables my friend:

 

PRO-MO-TION. IV was all about it, and VCS got, none at all, it was even less promoted than GTA: Advance. It was also only originally sold for one platform, unlike IV which was sold on 2 and then ported to PC, which basically everyone owns, although the requirements were ridiculously high, it probably sold more than VCS for PS2.

So, promotion made the reviews better? Yeah.

[DiscoverProject]

I would prefer to play VCS and LCS other than VC and GTA3 considering that stories have more progressing to get 100% like Trash Dash, Punk Noodles, pizzas, etc, etc.

 

 

[nerner]

Three syllables my friend:

 

PRO-MO-TION. IV was all about it, and VCS got, none at all, it was even less promoted than GTA: Advance. It was also only originally sold for one platform, unlike IV which was sold on 2 and then ported to PC, which basically everyone owns, although the requirements were ridiculously high, it probably sold more than VCS for PS2.

So, promotion made the reviews better? Yeah.

Are you naive or what? Rockstar slipped a backhander to IGN to make them review IV better, I mean, it was good, but it was not a 10, no way.

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

Three syllables my friend:

 

PRO-MO-TION. IV was all about it, and VCS got, none at all, it was even less promoted than GTA: Advance. It was also only originally sold for one platform, unlike IV which was sold on 2 and then ported to PC, which basically everyone owns, although the requirements were ridiculously high, it probably sold more than VCS for PS2.

So, promotion made the reviews better? Yeah.

Are you naive or what? Rockstar slipped a backhander to IGN to make them review IV better, I mean, it was good, but it was not a 10, no way.

There's actually no proof of that. People assume this, because THEY don't feel it deserved a 10, so they'll start throwing these "R* bribed <so, and so>" theories around, because in THEIR mind it didn't deserve a 10. I'm not exactly saying R* didn't give a "backhander" to IGN, or any reviewer for that matter, but I wish people would back themselves up instead of making things up on the spot, without anything supporting it. Internet forums would be such a better place if people didn't try to convey their beliefs/opinions as facts all the time.

 

Although in saying that I wouldn't care if it got a 4, it's still one of the best games I've ever played. IMO no game should get a 10/10 overall (Meaning every aspect of it), because no game is perfect, but I believe IV deserves 10/10 for the story, sound effects, characters, and details.

Edited May 17, 2009 by Miamivicecity

[Vercetti27]

I would say a 10 is massively generous.

 

10 Grahics

9 Sound

7 Lifespan

 

I'd give it 8.5

[wiIIiam]

Oh, the graphics were BEAUTIFUL! It's one of the main reasons why I think VCS is such a good game. Nevermind the glitches, there's WAAAY more things to VCS that are just soo awesome. Vice City is just "the place to be".

[Blackbird88]

 

IV  took like 4 years to make and had a totally different engine and new features whereas VCS was firstly only sold on the psp .

Wrong. IV Engine is Rage/Euphoria. LCS and VCS are using Rage,too

 

Three syllables my friend:

 

 

PRO-MO-TION. IV was all about it, and VCS got, none at all, it was even less promoted than GTA: Advance. It was also only originally sold for one platform, unlike IV which was sold on 2 and then ported to PC, which basically everyone owns, although the requirements were ridiculously high, it probably sold more than VCS for PS2.

I agree. I didn't know about stories. I found them in PCSX2 compatibility list while I was searching for something

Edited May 19, 2009 by /.:Nokiaman:.\