Cilogy Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Many people probably don't notice this, but I'm sure GTA IV has just about as many features as GTA SA. Some things in GTA IV though are just not as fun or don't stick out that much or at all. I find the cover system in GTA IV to be one of the best things ever added to the franchise. cover system = triple win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linki Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 GTA 4 redefined the sandbox genre and in my opinion games in general. It didn't disappoint me at all. It has the RAGE and Euphoria engine. Those two new features alone add so much to the experience. Shooting a bystander is so much more fun (sadistic, I know, but your on a GTA forum so stfu), driving down the street at full speed feels dangerous, jumping out is even better, cop chases and rampages are intense and differ every time you play it, EVERY GAMEPLAY FACTOR DIFFERS EVERY TIME YOU PLAY IT. That's why the replay value beats other games in the same genre. The city itself may be smaller, but it's the biggest one city ever. It feels alive, it's detail is exhaustive, the radio, the T.V. shows, the internet, all add so much more. In fact, Liberty City is the greatest character of the game. Liberty City is so awesome R* realised that GTA 4 vanilla couldn't milk everything out of it, so they added two more stories that will "full circle" the experience. I'm tired, so I'm gonna leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CryptReaperDorian Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Speaking about map size, R* can definately make a map twice the size of SA and keep the same level of detail as GTA IV. 13.9 square miles (GTA SA) is nothing compared to other game maps. Some games have maps that are over ten times the size of SA (like True Crime: Streets of L.A. which was 240 square miles, but that city was very under-detailed and about every block was the same). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LCstuntman Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 GTA 4 redefined the sandbox genre and in my opinion games in general. It didn't disappoint me at all. It has the RAGE and Euphoria engine. Those two new features alone add so much to the experience. Shooting a bystander is so much more fun (sadistic, I know, but your on a GTA forum so stfu), driving down the street at full speed feels dangerous, jumping out is even better, cop chases and rampages are intense and differ every time you play it, EVERY GAMEPLAY FACTOR DIFFERS EVERY TIME YOU PLAY IT. That's why the replay value beats other games in the same genre. The city itself may be smaller, but it's the biggest one city ever. It feels alive, it's detail is exhaustive, the radio, the T.V. shows, the internet, all add so much more. In fact, Liberty City is the greatest character of the game. Liberty City is so awesome R* realised that GTA 4 vanilla couldn't milk everything out of it, so they added two more stories that will "full circle" the experience. I'm tired, so I'm gonna leave it at that. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafioso86 Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 IV didn't disappoint me per se... but I do think they could have made it a little better. I had kind of been hoping they would be able to combine GTA plot, humor, and quality with the graphics and features of SR... I mean SR is a goofy game and it didn't have a lot of replay value for me just because the plot and humor were so weak, but the fact that you could save all your cars, customize them, more clothing options, more safe houses (in SR2 you could buy different ones all over the city)... I feel like that stuff would have helped IV out a lot. I think it also would have benefited from a slightly less dark ending.... but at the end of the day it's still one of my all time favorites and Niko is probably my all time favorite video game protagonist. As far as BOGT goes.... I can't wait, I'm really psyched for it. The only worry I have is similar to something that happened for me after TLAD came out... when I go back and play IV now there are many times I would really like to use the grenade launcher, but can't. I can see there being even more of that feeling after this game comes out with the APC, Buzzard, parachutes, sticky bombs, Explosive Shotgun, Assault SMG, Advanced Machine Gun, and nitrous. It's kind of odd considering Niko's background as a soldier/mercenary... he would seem the most at home of the the characters with these new toys, but he is the one that doesn't get to use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insane Kane Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 cant we just appreciate what things we do get, not everyone will be happy and probably the next gta game will have planes but no parachutes and people will still be unhappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HusseinintheBrain Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Okay, so Rockstar didn't have time to put in all of the good stuff, and GTA IV is just like GTA III in the sense that it is a new engine and era for the GTA series. My issue is, how are these legitimate excuses? I see them as reasons as to why so many people thought GTA IV was a letdown. Many of us didn't want "GTA III", and by that I mean a bare-bones game with little features beyond the storyline. We wanted all of the fun stuff that was in San Andreas, but instead we just got terribly boring "dates", races that involved you getting first and driving unopposed until you win, some vigilante missions and a couple stores. Oh, and pigeons that only give you something if you FIND THEM ALL. Granted, GTA IV is online... but so is San Andreas for PC. In my eyes, SAMP > GTA IV online, and I think the endless features of SAMP outweigh driving around the airport in GTAIV free mode. I'm not saying GTA IV is not a bad game, but it is totally unlike it's predecessors. Rockstar even said so from the beginning, that GTA IV was too serious for parachutes and the like. But, now they tell us that GTA IV was planned to have these DLCs from the start (the gametrailers interview states this). Well, did they plan to make us pay extra for parachutes and a tank from the start? I don't know and I can't prove it one way or another. However, it nonetheless annoys me that they made us pay more for things this series already had. tl;dr: I went into GTA IV thinking it was a sequel to San Andreas, as in it would have the same amount of content of San Andreas. It didn't, and I was let down. Now they are releasing the features from San Andreas... for a 39.99 or 1600 MS point pricetag. Now I'm mad that Rockstar is making us pay more for what we wanted from the start. The exact point of my previous post. I think it splits down into 3 groups, the folks that preferred the pre-IV era (i.e. lighthearted, crime game with loads of features), the folks who prefer the IV era (i.e. serious, realistic, story based, rags to even more rags game) and the folks who just see GTA (i.e. OMGZ, PARACHUTES!!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liquidus119 Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 This is basically like a remake of gta SA, Smaller Hunter (Buzzard) Parachute SWAT APC (not a tank the thing on top does like the damage of the AA-12) Other things that are added that werent in SA, Club management, dancing, champain drinking contest, and more mini's but nobody is going to going to walk around like a wanabe gangster anymore oh and theres no planes D: I agree. We're basically paying for things we had just 5 years ago on an INFERIOR console, this whole DLC thing, IMO, is bullsh*t. Why couldn't we just have all this when IV came out? They could've built and expanded on the San Andreas idea of excess and still made it realistic. I see no reason other than money, GTA: San Andreas with updated graphics ain't worth $100 bucks. They delayed the game 6 months as it was, would you rather they had delayed it for a year just to add some parachutes and dancing? It wouldn't even had made much sense considering the type of character Niko was. I just can't see him parachuting or dancing at the clubs. Maybe they could have added the APC, but besides that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CookPassBabtridge Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 None of these arguments hold water anymore. Its been officially stated that the DLC was planned alongside IV from the very start, so it was a case of Rockstar spreading the content across the trilogy. Its just part of the latest greedy trend in the games industry, where games get short changed on content, only for the so called 'extras' to magically appear shortly after as DLC. As for Niko being the wrong character for this and that, that doesnt work either. He was meant to be ex army, and much more likely to be flying choppers and parachuting than a street-level dealer/bouncer. (Luis). Theres been all kinds of odd excuses for the lack of content, and Im sure R* have been thanking the fanboys for making their job easier. Basically IV could have been the complete experience in one game, parachutes, tanks, the whole works. But R* had to whore it out instead, so here we are today. Even the fkin music has a catch to it. So yeah Im skeptical about the content, more because of the DLC thing than the actual content itself. Basically TBOGT is chunks of SA rehashed, which is really what most older players want, so thats a positive. But on the same tip, there has to be a point where R* need to innovate again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PearlHarborPants Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I know, GTA IV was great. For me, SA was disappointing when it came out - You play as a poser gangster. 'Nuff said. I mean, you were only disappointed with it if parachuting, airplanes and driving tanks around are your only source of fun. Some people just look past all the physics, graphics and new features... Tsk tsk... I never played SA before IV or even after that... Thats probably the reason why i loved GTA IV So so much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpetDweller Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 You can't please ALL of the people ALL of the time. Some people are certainly in for a disappointment because they've built it up so much. There were people who already expected this to be an updated San Andreas since the first hint of a parachute. GTA means so many things to different people. Some love it for the overall feel of a "living breathing world". Some love the interactive nature of things. Some love the story and don't do much freeroam. Some only use freeroam creating anarchy on the streets and never do more than a few missions. Some love the extra little details that are put in here and there; others see these as wastes of time and resources that should have been spent on whatever their personal liking is. The problem is that many GTA fans (and it's the same with all long-running 'cultish' things) always compare a new game against the game they 'personally' thought an earlier could have been. Looking back at previous topics it's clear that every game and every new feature that's been in GTA since, at least, VC has had some complaints against it. The GTA audience is just too diverse. The people that didn't like the dancing in SA won't like it in TBOGT either. Personally I wasn't disappointed by GTAIV. I was disappointed with the very first IV trailer, so maybe I had lower expectations, but IV to me was (and still is) a great game. Back when the first details of TBOGT were released I made a topic in the Connection sub-forum predicting that there would eventually be a backlash. This was only because certain topics had already declared TBOGT as "a return to form" and the game they had long been waiting for. This is despite the fact it doesn't contain planes, flame-throwers, paramedic missions or much of the other things people claim that GTA is. In short, I think that most people will be happy, but a vocal minority will no doubt wish to make their opinions known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slomojoe Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Okay, so Rockstar didn't have time to put in all of the good stuff, and GTA IV is just like GTA III in the sense that it is a new engine and era for the GTA series. My issue is, how are these legitimate excuses? I see them as reasons as to why so many people thought GTA IV was a letdown. Many of us didn't want "GTA III", and by that I mean a bare-bones game with little features beyond the storyline. We wanted all of the fun stuff that was in San Andreas, but instead we just got terribly boring "dates", races that involved you getting first and driving unopposed until you win, some vigilante missions and a couple stores. Oh, and pigeons that only give you something if you FIND THEM ALL. Granted, GTA IV is online... but so is San Andreas for PC. In my eyes, SAMP > GTA IV online, and I think the endless features of SAMP outweigh driving around the airport in GTAIV free mode. I'm not saying GTA IV is not a bad game, but it is totally unlike it's predecessors. Rockstar even said so from the beginning, that GTA IV was too serious for parachutes and the like. But, now they tell us that GTA IV was planned to have these DLCs from the start (the gametrailers interview states this). Well, did they plan to make us pay extra for parachutes and a tank from the start? I don't know and I can't prove it one way or another. However, it nonetheless annoys me that they made us pay more for things this series already had. tl;dr: I went into GTA IV thinking it was a sequel to San Andreas, as in it would have the same amount of content of San Andreas. It didn't, and I was let down. Now they are releasing the features from San Andreas... for a 39.99 or 1600 MS point pricetag. Now I'm mad that Rockstar is making us pay more for what we wanted from the start. If you thought it was going to be a sequel to SA then you obviously didn't read anything about the game or see and screenshots before it came out, so it's noone's fault but your own. QQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FullMetal Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 It depends what you found disappointing about IV. TBOGT looks like it's meant to bring back a less-serious tone but it's only an expansion, so it can't make it into a whole new game. On the other hand, there might be people who disliked IV so much they didn't finish it or explore the whole city. They might finally explore the city as Luis and it'll seem like a bigger game to them. Well in my opinion people who didn't enjoy IV haven't explored the city enough. Yes, it's all a (magnificent) illusion of a 'breathing city'. But compared to other games of the same genre and previous GTA titles... this is the closest thing ever to a real 'living and breathing city' up to this day. And I loved IV from the start... but then got bored of it. But once I started playing the storyline over and over again I realised there were alot of places I hadn't discoverd... didn't check out. And if you don't like the 'realistic' approach. Well, then go and play Saints Row/Previous GTA's. In my opinion the series have evolved and the gameplay isn't that realistic. It feels realistic but once you fool around with it you notice how much crazy/exaggerated (and yet brilliantly fun) thingsy you can do within the game. And in my opinion it's alot more rewarding with this 'realistic gameplay' than with the previous games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knife Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I personally hope that this DLC is very well received and that it shows R* that this is the direction that people enjoy the most. OTT action and crazyness. There is no need for GTA to be 'unrealistic' to be totally bonkers. The vast majority of San An was in the realms of reality (the jetpack possibly being the only exception). Sure a gangsta jumping out of planes etc is 'unlikely' but it's not physically impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MVP Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Vanilla was excellent, for me, but I can tell that TBOBT will be better. what you talking about - Vanilla lol? whats that supposed to mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faledak Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Vanilla means original Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MVP Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Vanilla means original okay thanks : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shinsta312 Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 From what rimbaud, who has obtained a copy of EFLC early, had commented on the spoiler threads. I'll be back later, I would like to post a proper review of this tomorrow maybe. I will tell you, it's no San Andreas remake! It is GTA 4 through and through. The features may be a rehash, but the story isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hove_Beach Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 It has the RAGE and Euphoria engine. Those two new features alone add so much to the experience. peole keep excusing R* saying that it was a new platform and that they needed a year to add "new things" lol - what a lod of rubbish Rage is nothing compared to cryteks engine, even the havok engine or unreal engine is better. Euphoria R* did not even fully develope the euphoria engine, NaturalMotion did. lol they integrated that into their code with the rage engine. NO big game play elements or physics or enemy ai have been drastically changed in any of the new DLC packages. All they have done is reskin cars and weapons and added more content to radio tv etc - thats not hard to code at all. R* need to innovate again as another member said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knife Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Rage is nothing compared to cryteks engine, even the havok engine or unreal engine is better. IV's engine is actually amazing. Show me another engine that can render an entire city at that level of graphics. Compare it to Saints Row and you realise just how good it is. You underestimate how much is going on at one time in GTA IV compared to other games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hove_Beach Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Rage is nothing compared to cryteks engine, even the havok engine or unreal engine is better. IV's engine is actually amazing. Show me another engine that can render an entire city at that level of graphics. Compare it to Saints Row and you realise just how good it is. You underestimate how much is going on at one time in GTA IV compared to other games. Another Hybreed - Ubisofts enigine and the Anvil Engine looks like it can compare - and CryENGINE 3. Ok so i havent played assains creed 2 - but it looks as good - draw distance etc. CryENGINE 2 is proven at being able to produce rich open world graphics - individual tree blades etc, realistic weather, good looking disrtructable invironments the list goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buschkoeter Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 (edited) It has the RAGE and Euphoria engine. Those two new features alone add so much to the experience. peole keep excusing R* saying that it was a new platform and that they needed a year to add "new things" lol - what a lod of rubbish Rage is nothing compared to cryteks engine, even the havok engine or unreal engine is better. Euphoria R* did not even fully develope the euphoria engine, NaturalMotion did. lol they integrated that into their code with the rage engine. NO big game play elements or physics or enemy ai have been drastically changed in any of the new DLC packages. All they have done is reskin cars and weapons and added more content to radio tv etc - thats not hard to code at all. R* need to innovate again as another member said! Maybe there are better engines than RAGE but he didn't say its the best egine existing. I think RAGE looks and feels great for GTA IV and it has a style that fits perfect with the game, I think that's what he meant. Who cares if they didn't fully develop Euphoria ? It works perfectly in the game, it's my personal new favorite 'feature'. WTF? you say they didn't do anything but reskinning car models and putting new weapons in ? What about endless houres of motion capturing and dialoge recording, making the whole cutscenes !? Damn... I can't understand all the people who say IV was boring or it dissapointed them. For me IV was like a dream coming true. Finally there was a GTA that not only has great freedom and many features to offer in addition it has great graphics, a really good story, realistic physics, a city that really feels alive, great detail...and the best thing is it has almost everything to offer that I love about GTA since I played the first one on the Ps1. I'm starting to believe that the most people who were dissapointed with IV only played SA and none of the old games. I mean there were no planes, parachutes, customisation, jetpacks and all that crazy stuff in GTA, GTA2, GTA 3, VC till SA but they were great games too. If you really just want to play with james bond like toys, customize everything but accept bad graphics, physics and an overall cheap production why are you here and not on a SR forum? if something like it exists.... Edited October 27, 2009 by buschkoeter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knife Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 CryENGINE 2 is proven at being able to produce rich open world graphics - individual tree blades etc, realistic weather, good looking disrtructable invironments the list goes on. These are always vast yet overall undetailed environments. Rendering some trees, grass and a bumpy landscape is nothing compared to rendering a city of detailed, unique buildings filled with multiple cars and pedestrians. Crysis has a landscape (aka the floor), a few AI characters and 5 tree models repeated over and over*. I'm not saying crysis doesn't look good. It looks f*cking great. But you have to understand that GTA IV's map is actually far more detailed and takes far more processing power to render than an environment from crysis. Crysis can have textures 10x the resolution of GTA IV because it only has a 10th of the textures in the first place. *These are exaggerations to make my point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bauer Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 If you thought it was going to be a sequel to SA then you obviously didn't read anything about the game or see and screenshots before it came out, so it's noone's fault but your own. QQ The only positioning Rockstar made to distance GTAIV from San Andreas was that GTA IV was going to be "more serious" and not have planes and other crazy stuff. I agree with you on that. However, I really liked that crazy stuff, but I didn't get it with GTAIV... until BoGT omg parachutes and tanks and crazy stuff omg! My point is that they first stated that GTAIV was going to be serious, but now with the DLCs they planned from the start, they add the stuff I wanted from the start. Yes, they are giving us what we want, but for an additional fee... and as this topic is about, will this episode be yet another let down? But, besides the DLC stuff, the biggest problem I have with GTA IV is that it doesn't have as much content as San Andreas. That I thought was a given for GTA IV. Car modding, tons of stores and customization options, buying properties, tons of side-missions, tons of interiors, tons of oddball vehicles, tons of weapons, heck even semis with trailers. You directly compare the content of GTAIV to San Andreas, and San Andreas wins. "Things will be different." Remember that? Now I see it as "Things will be different and largely lacking." Yeah, GTAIV has an awesome physics engine, but it doesn't make all of the missions different, it just makes it so every time you do that mission, the outcome is a little different each time. Yeah, GTAIV is a "living, breathing city", at least until you realize that the only thing the game remembers is the last car you were in once you leave an area. Same goes for the pedestrians, it's rally neat to see them do all the things they do until you've seen them do all the scripted actions that they can do. My point with all of this was that it wasn't my fault for believing it was a sequel to San Andreas, because I expected GTAIV to at least have the same amount of content as San Andreas. At least, have the same amount of content without the episodes, which as Rockstar stated, are two "full games." I don't want a total of three games and an investment of $100 make GTAIV a proper sequel. I thought I was buying a proper GTA game when I bought GTAIV. Oh well, hindsight 20/20... maybe BoGT won't be a letdown so I can sell my copy of GTAIV and buy EFLC. But this time, I'm not buying into the hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenis IV Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 TBOGT is what GTA IV should have been. I guess thats why I AM looking forward to it so much. I just hope the next GTA has all of these features from the start, so we don't have to wait a year and a half later to get it as DLC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Profesh Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 If Luis moves like Johnny 'The Choo-Choo Train' Klebitz, I'm going to be pretty damn annoyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shinsta312 Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 If Luis moves like Johnny 'The Choo-Choo Train' Klebitz, I'm going to be pretty damn annoyed. Sadly, I've heard from the spoiler threads that he does move like Johnny. Probably just grunts less than him, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Profesh Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 If Luis moves like Johnny 'The Choo-Choo Train' Klebitz, I'm going to be pretty damn annoyed. Sadly, I've heard from the spoiler threads that he does move like Johnny. Probably just grunts less than him, though. Guh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilipO43 Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 For me IV while being my fav. game this generation, still left me thinking, what the heck was Rockstar thinking? Rockstar nailed it with SA for the most part, and went one furthur fixing the core problems(a.i, graphics, control, and a much more believable[realistic?] storyline), but you just cannot have such an amazing city with so many possibilities, and just tease the GTA fan, who you just teased with SA and VC as well. And i love IV, as i have all 3 versions(and TLAD), but when i first played VC and then SA i was blown away in the scope(especially SA), and in terms of the mission variety(a big problem in IV), and yes..features. And sure some SA features were just thrown in, and not done very well, but they gave the game a huge amount replayability, and that cannot be denied. Rockstar held back, like a blond on it's 10th date(lol), they held back, and teased most hardcore GTA fans. Now with TBOGT, that IS what vanilla IV needed as the icing on an almost perfect cake. Heck it's too bad it's not a full sequel, because the missions look alot more exciting(with needed variety), it has a greater feature set, more action, VC like color(IV was so heavy on the browns)..ect And i'm saying this being one of the biggest IV fans as well as being a huge fan of realistic games(like Shenmue, the original Rainbow 6, the GRAW series, the SC series..ect), however these types of games need balance, or else they do get boring. (ie...i loved the idea of Shenmue1 and 2, but it was like a sleeping pill each time i played it) TBOGT seems like Rockstar realized that you just need to make sure the game has that balance, at whatever cost. Because playing darts or watching tv or playing only 1 aracde game(which is a puzzle game) is just not my idea of excitment. I cannot wait for TBOGT to being some kick a** excitement to vanilla(and TLAD), because it needs it in the worst way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LCstuntman Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 There is actually way more features in IV than SA. Try playing the game for more than an hour before reviewing it. I'll make a thread one of these days showing all the feature comparisons. Gamespot and IGN (and many more reviewers) gave GTA IV a rating of 10/10. 'NUFF. SAID. 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