3 Good Reasons why Gay Tony will Flop

[numdmind]

This guy fails more than Slamman.

What's wrong with Slamman?

That's what I was thinking when I saw that post.

 

[Mafioso86]

I think he has some interesting points that are made in the article... but to say "3 Good Reasons why Gay Tony will Flop," is a little ridiculous. As other people have said it's DLC and not a stand alone game, to compare it to a stand alone game isn't really fair. I'm sure it will do just as well TLAD which in my opinion would be considered a success for R* (maybe not Microsoft, but I could really careless about them).

 

One other thing to note of course was his previous article where one of the "4 Good Reasons why Lost and Damned will Flop," was...

 

 

3. Worst Vehicle

 

I’m pretty sure everyone can agree with me when I say that the motorcycle is the worst vehicle. When it comes down to it the motorcycle is useless unless you’re trying to do stunts. Being that the story is about a biker gangs also hints you that you’re going to be on two wheels for the majority of the story.

 

Ofcourse R* addressed this in TLAD, greatly improving the bike physics... and for me that's all the proof I need... R* doesn't "phone in" sh*tty products.

[BikerAndy]

 

This guy fails more than Slamman.

What's wrong with Slamman?

That's what I was thinking when I saw that post.

What other than posting random off topic rambles that are hard to read?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nah, only joking Slamman, but your posts are a bit difficult to follow sometimes

[andysniper]

And, to be honest, it did set the world of DLCs on fire, by proving a DLC can be more than just some added weapons and maps for £10 (looking at Far Cry 2 here).

 

 

Why does everyone act like R* is the first to create a substantial (large scale) amount of DLC?

 

Oblivion already did it before GTA IV was much more than a pipe dream. I'm just saying that credit needs to be given where credit is due, and Bethesda delivered some significant content with The Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine content. As a matter of fact, Bethesda offered up an entire new land mass with Shivering Isles, which is more than you can say that R* did. All that R* really did was add some new character models, some new bikes, and a few new weapons, so you kind of contradicted yourself there.

 

I enjoyed TLAD, I got my 20 dollars worth out of it, but I see it for what it was. I would much rather R* focus on new games rather than DLC. I would much rather all game companies spend more time on new product than DLC honestly. DLC is the lazy way out. It's like a musician that keeps remixing the same track over and over and over to make a few more bucks rather than try to make something...new.

R* wanted to show that dlc doesnt just mean adding new maps (call of duty, halo 3) game modes (left 4 dead) or vehicles (burnout paradise). they wanted to show it could more of a standlone content.it wasnt trying to be the first large scale dlc, it just showed people that theres a different, less half-assed way to go about it than just chucking in a few new weapons, vehicles or a map or two.

[Grand Theft Auto Dude]

This must be your blog or something. No one f*cking reads a sh*tty site made on blogspot about games.

The article is from GamePlayer, click the link at the bottom.

[El Zilcho]

Hey dumbass, your blog sucks!

 

So as not to sound like a total dick, I will now proceed to shoot down your idiot points, one by one. <snip snip>

This guy has done exactly what he said he would, he has totally owned this f*cking noob, and proven more than necessary that he's wrong. Nice work Chris Mathers.

 

And when I say he fails more than Slamman, I meant that as in he fails more than Slamman when he makes his unintelligible posts in Gen Chat that talk about something that isn't remotely related to the topic at hand. You've all seen it when he does that.

[buffalosoulj4h20]

 

And, to be honest, it did set the world of DLCs on fire, by proving a DLC can be more than just some added weapons and maps for £10 (looking at Far Cry 2 here).

 

 

Why does everyone act like R* is the first to create a substantial (large scale) amount of DLC?

 

Oblivion already did it before GTA IV was much more than a pipe dream. I'm just saying that credit needs to be given where credit is due, and Bethesda delivered some significant content with The Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine content. As a matter of fact, Bethesda offered up an entire new land mass with Shivering Isles, which is more than you can say that R* did. All that R* really did was add some new character models, some new bikes, and a few new weapons, so you kind of contradicted yourself there.

 

I enjoyed TLAD, I got my 20 dollars worth out of it, but I see it for what it was. I would much rather R* focus on new games rather than DLC. I would much rather all game companies spend more time on new product than DLC honestly. DLC is the lazy way out. It's like a musician that keeps remixing the same track over and over and over to make a few more bucks rather than try to make something...new.

I agree. I remember the days of the ps2 and xbox without any dlc. The good ole days when you bought a whole game and waited for a sequel in a different town.

[JOSEPH X]

3 good reasons why this topic should be locked, or left to die:

 

1. The source is not credible (who really cares what he thinks?)

2. The topic title is misleading, it looks like the OP is giving 3 good reasons why TBGT will flop.

3. Everybody seems to be in agreement that the source is BS, or are going off-topic

[BikerAndy]

 

3 good reasons why this topic should be locked, or left to die:

 

1. The source is not credible (who really cares what he thinks?)

2. The topic title is misleading, it looks like the OP is giving 3 good reasons why TBGT will flop.

3. Everybody seems to be in agreement that the source is BS, or are going off-topic

Hear hear.

 

But let me just get a quick off topic reply in first

 

 

I would much rather R* focus on new games rather than DLC.  I would much rather all game companies spend more time on new product than DLC honestly.  DLC is the lazy way out.  It's like a musician that keeps remixing the same track over and over and over to make a few more bucks rather than try to make something...new.

I agree. I remember the days of the ps2 and xbox without any dlc. The good ole days when you bought a whole game and waited for a sequel in a different town.

I see what you're saying, but I think we can all agree that vanilla VI was long enough to be considered a complete game. You could argue that possibly the DLC would not have fit on the disk anyway, certainly for non blue ray consoles lol, so without DLC there would not have been TLAD or TBoGT. While I'm looking forward to the next full game in the series, because Liberty City is already created I'd imagine R* wouldn't have to divert too many creative resources to flesh out IV even further even while in the early stages of working on their next creation. Personally I'm not ready to turn my back on LC yet, so given the choice I'd rather shell out a few more £ for some extra stories and backgound that just adds to the whole Liberty experience. I don't think that its going to delay the next game, just add to our existing city until it's time to move on.

[buffalosoulj4h20]

3 good reasons why this topic should be locked, or left to die:

 

1. The source is not credible (who really cares what he thinks?)

2. The topic title is misleading, it looks like the OP is giving 3 good reasons why TBGT will flop.

3. Everybody seems to be in agreement that the source is BS, or are going off-topic

Hear hear.

 

But let me just get a quick off topic reply in first

 

 

I would much rather R* focus on new games rather than DLC.  I would much rather all game companies spend more time on new product than DLC honestly.  DLC is the lazy way out.  It's like a musician that keeps remixing the same track over and over and over to make a few more bucks rather than try to make something...new.

I agree. I remember the days of the ps2 and xbox without any dlc. The good ole days when you bought a whole game and waited for a sequel in a different town.

I see what you're saying, but I think we can all agree that vanilla VI was long enough to be considered a complete game. You could argue that possibly the DLC would not have fit on the disk anyway, certainly for non blue ray consoles lol, so without DLC there would not have been TLAD or TBoGT. While I'm looking forward to the next full game in the series, because Liberty City is already created I'd imagine R* wouldn't have to divert too many creative resources to flesh out IV even further even while in the early stages of working on their next creation. Personally I'm not ready to turn my back on LC yet, so given the choice I'd rather shell out a few more £ for some extra stories and backgound that just adds to the whole Liberty experience. I don't think that its going to delay the next game, just add to our existing city until it's time to move on.

I didn't say IV was an incomplete game. What you don't realize is that if this DLC thing goes on, they will just make DLC to get more money without making a full game for everybody, which is lazy to me. When the last gen consoles were out, we got what we paid for and the sequel was the extension. You might feel that you're not tired of LC, but not everybody feels the same way.

[BikerAndy]

I didn't say IV was an incomplete game. What you don't realize is that if this DLC thing goes on, they will just make DLC to get more money without making a full game for everybody, which is lazy to me. When the last gen consoles were out, we got what we paid for and the sequel was the extension. You might feel that you're not tired of LC, but not everybody feels the same way.

Fair enough, and I guess yes not everyone will feel that there is more to see yet in Liberty, but you're looking at it as just a callous money making enterprise. If that was the case and they were just being lazy we wouldn't have had ground breaking dlc that effectively gave us another 1/3 again of the entire game, we would have had the usual crap of a few new outfits, a few more cars, couple more weapons, maybe a couple of online multiplayer changes, that sort of thing. What they gave us would stand up next to most full sized games. And if we missed out this extra content then we'd be missing a huge part of the IV world. Do you not think that the IV environment could still throw up some great plots and games?

[nerner]

It was a good DLC, but it most certainly wasn't ground-breaking, it was a DLC, with missions, a few weapons, cars etc. But still not exactly ground ground-breaking.

[buffalosoulj4h20]

I didn't say IV was an incomplete game. What you don't realize is that if this DLC thing goes on, they will just make DLC to get more money without making a full game for everybody, which is lazy to me. When the last gen consoles were out, we got what we paid for and the sequel was the extension. You might feel that you're not tired of LC, but not everybody feels the same way.

Fair enough, and I guess yes not everyone will feel that there is more to see yet in Liberty, but you're looking at it as just a callous money making enterprise. If that was the case and they were just being lazy we wouldn't have had ground breaking dlc that effectively gave us another 1/3 again of the entire game, we would have had the usual crap of a few new outfits, a few more cars, couple more weapons, maybe a couple of online multiplayer changes, that sort of thing. What they gave us would stand up next to most full sized games. And if we missed out this extra content then we'd be missing a huge part of the IV world. Do you not think that the IV environment could still throw up some great plots and games?

Not really. True that TLAD is a good DLC, but can you picture it if they get carried away? They would start making half-assed games and add 40 dollars worth of DLC again and again. We would be paying 100 dollars for the full game ( if they get carried with it )! I'm not saying it's like this now, but at least there was more assurance when we couldn't even get DLC. Red Dead Redemption and Mafia were possibly delayed because of BoGT, imagine how long it will take for the next full GTA to come out.

[numdmind]

And, to be honest, it did set the world of DLCs on fire, by proving a DLC can be more than just some added weapons and maps for £10 (looking at Far Cry 2 here).

 

 

Why does everyone act like R* is the first to create a substantial (large scale) amount of DLC?

 

Oblivion already did it before GTA IV was much more than a pipe dream. I'm just saying that credit needs to be given where credit is due, and Bethesda delivered some significant content with The Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine content. As a matter of fact, Bethesda offered up an entire new land mass with Shivering Isles, which is more than you can say that R* did. All that R* really did was add some new character models, some new bikes, and a few new weapons, so you kind of contradicted yourself there.

 

I enjoyed TLAD, I got my 20 dollars worth out of it, but I see it for what it was. I would much rather R* focus on new games rather than DLC. I would much rather all game companies spend more time on new product than DLC honestly. DLC is the lazy way out. It's like a musician that keeps remixing the same track over and over and over to make a few more bucks rather than try to make something...new.

R* wanted to show that dlc doesnt just mean adding new maps (call of duty, halo 3) game modes (left 4 dead) or vehicles (burnout paradise). they wanted to show it could more of a standlone content.it wasnt trying to be the first large scale dlc, it just showed people that theres a different, less half-assed way to go about it than just chucking in a few new weapons, vehicles or a map or two.

But all R* did was add some new missions and bikes and guns. Oh yes, R* completely half-assed it with TLAD.

 

Bethesda added much more. My post clarified this point clearly, and still you don't get what I was saying. I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just pointing out that R* didn't do quite as much as they would have you believe with TLAD. I said the game was worth the 20 bucks I spent on it, but I'm sick of GTA IV's Liberty City. The Shivering Isles wasn't just a little map. It was about a third the size of Oblivion's map (which is rather large) and that's just on the surface. Let's not forget all of the new dungeons that the content added.

 

I'm just going to stop, because people are going to give credit to R* when it's deserved elsewhere. I'm not comparing GTA IV's DLC with a game like Halo that only adds a few MP maps and guns. You can't make that comparison because Halo isn't on the same page as GTA IV and Oblivion. And hey, Morrowind had plenty of substantial DLC by the way. So there's at least a three or four year head start on R*'s "fresh new take on DLC".

[crazz13]

Wow the last time i read an article that pointless was when i read....actually no that was the most pointless one i have read.

[KGBeast]

It was a good DLC, but it most certainly wasn't ground-breaking, it was a DLC, with missions, a few weapons, cars etc. But still not exactly ground ground-breaking.

 

 

Yes, actually it was pretty f*cking ground breaking. You're under selling it. 20+ new story missions, bike deliveries, side jobs for Stubbs, races, gang wars, 50 new collectibles, 20 new vehicles, several new weapons, tons of new songs and a new radio show, new tv shows, new friend activities, new websites on the internet, changes and additions to the huge map. Nobody has ever done a DLC that expansive. Nice try though.

[trooper]

TLAD & BOGT are great I love that r* is doing this so much, we could have these extensions to the world.. Or sit around at our desks til 201* when the next actual GTA comes out..

[MrParadox]

Horrible article, not only was the TLAD not suppose to be groundbreaking but that reason alone proved it to be very successful. Its one of the top downloads on Xbox Marketplace because R* wanted to do more than just add new cars and missions, which they did.

[shinsta312]

And, to be honest, it did set the world of DLCs on fire, by proving a DLC can be more than just some added weapons and maps for £10 (looking at Far Cry 2 here).

 

 

Why does everyone act like R* is the first to create a substantial (large scale) amount of DLC?

 

Oblivion already did it before GTA IV was much more than a pipe dream. I'm just saying that credit needs to be given where credit is due, and Bethesda delivered some significant content with The Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine content. As a matter of fact, Bethesda offered up an entire new land mass with Shivering Isles, which is more than you can say that R* did. All that R* really did was add some new character models, some new bikes, and a few new weapons, so you kind of contradicted yourself there.

 

I enjoyed TLAD, I got my 20 dollars worth out of it, but I see it for what it was. I would much rather R* focus on new games rather than DLC. I would much rather all game companies spend more time on new product than DLC honestly. DLC is the lazy way out. It's like a musician that keeps remixing the same track over and over and over to make a few more bucks rather than try to make something...new.

R* wanted to show that dlc doesnt just mean adding new maps (call of duty, halo 3) game modes (left 4 dead) or vehicles (burnout paradise). they wanted to show it could more of a standlone content.it wasnt trying to be the first large scale dlc, it just showed people that theres a different, less half-assed way to go about it than just chucking in a few new weapons, vehicles or a map or two.

But all R* did was add some new missions and bikes and guns. Oh yes, R* completely half-assed it with TLAD.

 

Bethesda added much more. My post clarified this point clearly, and still you don't get what I was saying. I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just pointing out that R* didn't do quite as much as they would have you believe with TLAD. I said the game was worth the 20 bucks I spent on it, but I'm sick of GTA IV's Liberty City. The Shivering Isles wasn't just a little map. It was about a third the size of Oblivion's map (which is rather large) and that's just on the surface. Let's not forget all of the new dungeons that the content added.

 

I'm just going to stop, because people are going to give credit to R* when it's deserved elsewhere. I'm not comparing GTA IV's DLC with a game like Halo that only adds a few MP maps and guns. You can't make that comparison because Halo isn't on the same page as GTA IV and Oblivion. And hey, Morrowind had plenty of substantial DLC by the way. So there's at least a three or four year head start on R*'s "fresh new take on DLC".

What were you expecting, another 70+ missions, and with a new piece of land added to the city, it wouldn't make sense. We would have to spend another $50 on that (4000 MS Points), and that isn't necessary. 20+ missions, new guns, and cars are worth the 1600 points. R* had this idea and the story for the 2 DLCs when they were creating IV.