The Anti Wishlist

[MJL3Productions]

There is a topic about this, but I'll just play along: I don't want it to have a difficulty level (like most FPSs)

Well Its never had a difficulty since like GTA 2 I think, but i don't want an arcade-style gta with lives and sort of kiddy gameplay, you know? I want a serious gta with a lot of weapons and an action packed story!

[flotwig]

There is a topic about this, but I'll just play along: I don't want it to have a difficulty level (like most FPSs)

Well Its never had a difficulty since like GTA 2 I think, but i don't want an arcade-style gta with lives and sort of kiddy gameplay, you know? I want a serious gta with a lot of weapons and an action packed story!

I would actually like a difficulty setting, sometimes missions can get tedious if they are too easy or too hard. It also adds replay value if you can play through the game on different difficulties.

[Secura]

There is a topic about this, but I'll just play along: I don't want it to have a difficulty level (like most FPSs)

Well Its never had a difficulty since like GTA 2 I think, but i don't want an arcade-style gta with lives and sort of kiddy gameplay, you know? I want a serious gta with a lot of weapons and an action packed story!

I would actually like a difficulty setting, sometimes missions can get tedious if they are too easy or too hard. It also adds replay value if you can play through the game on different difficulties.

Though you are very much entitled to your own opinion my friend, I would hate a difficulty that the player could select. However something that might please us both would be very cool and not to intrusive, and that would be that the difficulty changes depending how good you are at the game. Rather than having a diffculty select screen which would in my opinion make GTA feel to arcadey for me and for some reason i feel it would lessen the experience. However the difficulty constantly changing throughout the game could add much more replay value

 

Example:

 

Let's say that should you fail a mission twice, the gang members who your ment to take out decrease in number significantly or if you continue to fail so does the quality of the weapons that they have been provided. It would be the Hardest/Easiest GTA yet and replaying the game to see those super hard difficulty exclusive missions that look like something out of a James Bond film would be epic.

[junkpile]

 

GTA is all about having fun because the very reason games exist is to produce enjoyment or in other more commonly used words FUN.

let me tell you, I enjoy GTA IV, I have lots of fun. And guess what, I don't do killing sprees or randomly shoot people, roll over them etc.

GTA could be even funnier to me, if missions would include much more car chases, non scripted ones, and none you end with lots of explosions, but simple car crashes.

lol GTA really ain't the game for you then

why? because your idea of fun is to run around and randomly shoot anyone?

 

isn't the basis explained in the etymology of the name?

stealing cars? implies the crime of stealing, cops probably chasing...car chases.

 

gee, and lol back at you

[JimmySwag]

GTA is all about having fun because the very reason games exist is to produce enjoyment or in other more commonly used words FUN.

let me tell you, I enjoy GTA IV, I have lots of fun. And guess what, I don't do killing sprees or randomly shoot people, roll over them etc.

GTA could be even funnier to me, if missions would include much more car chases, non scripted ones, and none you end with lots of explosions, but simple car crashes.

lol GTA really ain't the game for you then

why? because your idea of fun is to run around and randomly shoot anyone?

 

isn't the basis explained in the etymology of the name?

stealing cars? implies the crime of stealing, cops probably chasing...car chases.

 

gee, and lol back at you

That won't be fun at all. And wasn't this topic locked by mati?

[Mokrie Dela]

GTA is all about having fun because the very reason games exist is to produce enjoyment or in other more commonly used words FUN.

let me tell you, I enjoy GTA IV, I have lots of fun. And guess what, I don't do killing sprees or randomly shoot people, roll over them etc.

GTA could be even funnier to me, if missions would include much more car chases, non scripted ones, and none you end with lots of explosions, but simple car crashes.

lol GTA really ain't the game for you then

why? because your idea of fun is to run around and randomly shoot anyone?

 

isn't the basis explained in the etymology of the name?

stealing cars? implies the crime of stealing, cops probably chasing...car chases.

 

gee, and lol back at you

That won't be fun at all. And wasn't this topic locked by mati?

if it was locked you wouldnt be able to reply would you?

 

And seriously man, move on now. Junkpile wants to play the game his way, as you play it your way. That's what makes GTA so good - you can play it many ways. I like playing a calm style sometimes but once every now and then i may go on a spree. most of the time i dont though. Its more entertaining for me that way.

What makes you think the games not the game for him? And "that wouldnt be fun" - are you him? No. You're someone else. Everyone has their own style and no one has the right to dictate what that should be. GTA will always support these different styles, crazy sprees or calm immersion, why does it matter which way they play. Leave it out.

[JimmySwag]

Well you are right Morkie. Sometimes I prefer long drives in San andreas and GTA IV. Playing in a calm way sometimes without a crime makes me feel good.

[Mokrie Dela]

Well you are right Morkie. Sometimes I prefer long drives in San andreas and GTA IV. Playing in a calm way sometimes without a crime makes me feel good.

Exactly. GTA has always somehow made it a joy to simply drive around. Even obeying laws of the road in GTA is fun imo. Then things get crazy, you lose your pants and have a huge shootout, then a chase, and it's fun. You have to take a guy out, you blitz to him, sneak to him, snipe him from afar, it's all still fun. That's the mark of a truely good game.

[junkpile]

Well you are right Morkie. Sometimes I prefer long drives in San andreas and GTA IV. Playing in a calm way sometimes without a crime makes me feel good.

 

 

Do you know the Hitman franchise?

GTA and Hitman share something that Mokrie describes. You could go balls out, gunnin anything down or be a silent assassin. Same with GTA.

 

 

 

 

[Original Light]

Well you are right Morkie. Sometimes I prefer long drives in San andreas and GTA IV. Playing in a calm way sometimes without a crime makes me feel good.

Exactly. GTA has always somehow made it a joy to simply drive around. Even obeying laws of the road in GTA is fun imo. Then things get crazy, you lose your pants and have a huge shootout, then a chase, and it's fun. You have to take a guy out, you blitz to him, sneak to him, snipe him from afar, it's all still fun. That's the mark of a truely good game.

Even making your own story while playing along can be fun, like with RDR.

[El Zilcho]

I don't want a split ending again. I think the trend of having your own decisions affect the game is a little irritating. When done correctly, it really enriches the game experience and is a great addition to any game, but if it is just done for the sake of it, it feels forced. I didn't like the two endings of IV, mainly because one was hugely dramatic and climatic, while the other seemed slapped on (Kate's revenge ending). I'd be happy with a normal ending, with earlier and lesser missions having decisions the player affects.

[Original Light]

I don't want a split ending again. I think the trend of having your own decisions affect the game is a little irritating. When done correctly, it really enriches the game experience and is a great addition to any game, but if it is just done for the sake of it, it feels forced. I didn't like the two endings of IV, mainly because one was hugely dramatic and climatic, while the other seemed slapped on (Kate's revenge ending). I'd be happy with a normal ending, with earlier and lesser missions having decisions the player affects.

R* loves bad endings, ex; RDR, L.A Noire, GTA IV, GTA IV TLaD, and GTA Vice City. The only GTAs with happy ending were GTA III, GTA SA, GTA LCS, GTA VCS, and GTA TBoGT.

[JimmySwag]

Well you are right Morkie. Sometimes I prefer long drives in San andreas and GTA IV. Playing in a calm way sometimes without a crime makes me feel good.

Exactly. GTA has always somehow made it a joy to simply drive around. Even obeying laws of the road in GTA is fun imo. Then things get crazy, you lose your pants and have a huge shootout, then a chase, and it's fun. You have to take a guy out, you blitz to him, sneak to him, snipe him from afar, it's all still fun. That's the mark of a truely good game.

Exactly, we expect for new more features that would make time worthwhile when not on a mission. Also I don't wanna see some slow vehicles. They suck more than the utility vehicles. I would like a lift feature from a passenger though its possible with mods.

[Mokrie Dela]

GTA IV did not have a split ending. The endign was the same. The same damned mission. The only difference is the antagonist and the fatality. It was very poorly done if you ask me. Lazy. The story could have branched - like i want it to.

 

I also don't want to see V have "split" end - I want the story to truely branch and the endings to be different, but of equal stature.

[JimmySwag]

GTA IV did not have a split ending. The endign was the same. The same damned mission. The only difference is the antagonist and the fatality. It was very poorly done if you ask me. Lazy. The story could have branched - like i want it to.

 

I also don't want to see V have "split" end - I want the story to truely branch and the endings to be different, but of equal stature.

If you ask me then San Andreas had the best ending. This same boring split endings with Ransom and fighting with goons and thugs really sucks. Rockstar possibly couldn't think of a better ending for IV:era games.

[Secura]

I don't want a split ending again. I think the trend of having your own decisions affect the game is a little irritating. When done correctly, it really enriches the game experience and is a great addition to any game, but if it is just done for the sake of it, it feels forced. I didn't like the two endings of IV, mainly because one was hugely dramatic and climatic, while the other seemed slapped on (Kate's revenge ending). I'd be happy with a normal ending, with earlier and lesser missions having decisions the player affects.

R* loves bad endings, ex; RDR, L.A Noire, GTA IV, GTA IV TLaD, and GTA Vice City. The only GTAs with happy ending were GTA III, GTA SA, GTA LCS, GTA VCS, and GTA TBoGT.

You obviously played a different version of Vice City than I.

 

 

 

Here is how VC ended.

[Silentype]

 

Something that i hope we won't have GTA V is a location we've already been to such as SA and VC. I would at least in my opinion love to see a GTA set in London i just think it would be interesting espcially with that new London spire building. However revisting Miami or LA especially after LA Noire doesn't appeal to me in the slightest.

Ive been to both new york and london in the past year. Both are great cities but London just felt like New York except a much smaller version. I think they need to use different types of cities. Chicago and New York feel like the same types of cities but Miami, Vegas, francisco all feel like different types of cities. I think the next GTA has to have a different feel to it than Liberty. I understand you dont want to see vice or la again buy i think theyre going to use a city that feel different to Liberty. The only ones i can think of that hasnt been used yet that would be suitable for a gta game are Paris, Madrid, san diego and houston.

San Diego and Houston are the only 1s you can think of that are suitable.(are you serious? I can see Houston a little, at best, but San Diego?) I'll throw in Philly and Boston,(major centers of various organized crime.) as well as most cities in the northeastern u.s.a, east coast, and the midwestern city of Chicago. I see what your getting at though, the cities i've listed "would resemble LC too much", but here's 1 thing you got to keep in mind, all cities everywhere resemble each other(including la, miami, etc.) in some type of way, but all have a distinct feel, look & history all their own, so if you know your american crime/criminals/criminal organizations/groups you can't wait for a gta to be set in Chicago, Philly, or Boston.(these cities being primary examples of the makeup of a gta game.)

Edited August 18, 2011 by Silentype

[Wercury]

I definitely would hate a realistic storyline. It ruins the fun.

I want Miniguns, jetpacks, military jets and all that stuff.

 

Realism makes it all boring.

[Original Light]

I don't want a split ending again. I think the trend of having your own decisions affect the game is a little irritating. When done correctly, it really enriches the game experience and is a great addition to any game, but if it is just done for the sake of it, it feels forced. I didn't like the two endings of IV, mainly because one was hugely dramatic and climatic, while the other seemed slapped on (Kate's revenge ending). I'd be happy with a normal ending, with earlier and lesser missions having decisions the player affects.

R* loves bad endings, ex; RDR, L.A Noire, GTA IV, GTA IV TLaD, and GTA Vice City. The only GTAs with happy ending were GTA III, GTA SA, GTA LCS, GTA VCS, and GTA TBoGT.

You obviously played a different version of Vice City than I.

 

 

 

Here is how VC ended.

Well you had to kill Lance Vance! The coolest guy ever. It's a sad ending for me.

[bugoy]

I don't want the stupidest, ugliest, worst land vehicle ever made to appear in the game. I'd rather die than be seen riding in one.

 

Stretched Hummers/Patriots, Satan's vehicle of choice.

[Sinister Assassin]

I don't want this over-the-top action like in TBOGT. Where you capture trains and take out hundreds of men and actually stay sane with a sense of morality.

 

Why? It didn't fit. Sure, as Niko you get to kill lots of guys as well, but somehow it did fit with his story. The soldier who has seen so much in the war it ruined him. In LC he tried to get back his humanity.

Compare GTA IV to EFLC. The map and the crossover of characters and missions let you think it's the same game, but actually, I felt as if Luis could own the whole sh*t with these explosive weapons. These weapons made it too easy. In Freemode/Multplayer, no problem, it's fun but during a serious story?

Tanks, Noose vans and lots of Helicopters taken down? please...this was ridiculous. He ain't afraid the goverment comes after him but f*cking Bulgarin?

 

 

 

Anyways, this "over the top action" with rockets, James Bond like missions with helicopters shall be an optional thing for multiplayer maybe.

I'm afraid i have to disagree with you because your sense of morality would ruin a GTA Game. So you are basically stating that we are not and should not be alowed over the top weapons and missions because it's to fun and not serious enough. Maybe you should go back and play the III Era and then make that statement again. GTA is all about having fun because the very reason games exist is to produce enjoyment or in other more commonly used words FUN.

Perfectly said, Couldnt agree more

[AceRay]

I don't want a split ending again. I think the trend of having your own decisions affect the game is a little irritating. When done correctly, it really enriches the game experience and is a great addition to any game, but if it is just done for the sake of it, it feels forced. I didn't like the two endings of IV, mainly because one was hugely dramatic and climatic, while the other seemed slapped on (Kate's revenge ending). I'd be happy with a normal ending, with earlier and lesser missions having decisions the player affects.

R* loves bad endings, ex; RDR, L.A Noire, GTA IV, GTA IV TLaD, and GTA Vice City. The only GTAs with happy ending were GTA III, GTA SA, GTA LCS, GTA VCS, and GTA TBoGT.

You obviously played a different version of Vice City than I.

 

 

 

Here is how VC ended.

Well you had to kill Lance Vance! The coolest guy ever. It's a sad ending for me.

R* makes great endings, every single one of them is really good (except LA Noire's, which was really screwed up both in a gameplay sense and a narrative sense but thats for a different time and place.)

[Slamman]

What I want most perhaps is a different LAW and CRIME system for wanted levels, this is sure to see some reform, who likes to run, and run, and run to evade the insane police levels, it's a bit over the top even from reality, REAL reality!

[JoeM]

I definitely would hate a realistic storyline. It ruins the fun.

I want Miniguns, jetpacks, military jets and all that stuff.

 

Realism makes it all boring.

What he said

[Slamman]

Save that for a DLC Episodes to GTA V, I want realistic, not suspension of disbelief, every other video game in the gaming UNIVERSE does that, fellas

[TheShogunOfHarlem]

No regenerating heath: It makes the game too easy and it caters to running and gunning tactics. (anti-run 'n gunner)

No GTA 3 era silliness: Outside of having parachutes flying planes and driving tanks the rest of the 3 era gameplay mechanics and over the top weaponry can stay where it belongs.

 

[Dourvas]

a 20 hours story mode(i want longer)

mountains that i cant climb/interact with

no regenerating health

[Jewstinian]

 

I don't want a split ending again. I think the trend of having your own decisions affect the game is a little irritating. When done correctly, it really enriches the game experience and is a great addition to any game, but if it is just done for the sake of it, it feels forced. I didn't like the two endings of IV, mainly because one was hugely dramatic and climatic, while the other seemed slapped on (Kate's revenge ending). I'd be happy with a normal ending, with earlier and lesser missions having decisions the player affects.

R* loves bad endings, ex; RDR, L.A Noire, GTA IV, GTA IV TLaD, and GTA Vice City. The only GTAs with happy ending were GTA III, GTA SA, GTA LCS, GTA VCS, and GTA TBoGT.

LA Noire wasn't made by R*, it was published. Team Bondi chose that ending.

 

But yeah, I don't like sad endings too much as it makes me feel like the game should be tossed to save Niko's sadness of losing his cousin or girlfriend.

[Long_Haired_Boy]

I definitely would hate a realistic storyline. It ruins the fun.

I want Miniguns, jetpacks, military jets and all that stuff.

 

Realism makes it all boring.

What he said

Well thats ironic.

[CJPNE]

I don't want Los Santos to be too big.

 

Why

 

It's hard to explain, I just really like the idea of the cities coexisting and sharing characters. The cross over and references are one of the main things that make me play GTA. Back to the city size, I'd rather LS not be twice or three times the size of Liberty, it would just spoil it a little for me. A huge map would be great, with the countryside, towns and a good sized LS.

 

I also don't want the date option being taken out. I never cared for dating in San Andreas, i never bothered with it. But in IV, it was awesome. The dialog was hilarious, Alexs blogs were great and as a whole it was just fun. But if the protagonist is married, or an older gentleman, it probably wouldn't fit too well.