detail over map size?

[Meezarawcks]

at the end of the day where the features come from, "copied" or jst "thought up" is irrelevant. GTA has shown that the features have always been implemented well, and i have no doubt that V will do the same.

Agreed my friend well said.

[Meezarawcks]

Wow really this again?  I really find it pointless debating for either game.  They both had there merits.  SA was great and so was IV.

I know right? Why is everybody getting all butt hurt over which game had better things to do? They were both great in their own aspects, and I enjoyed both of them immensely; just like I'll love whatever V will have to offer. R* are pros, they spend a lot of time listening to constructive criticism in order to fix what their biggest fan bases saw wrong in previous games. so hopefully they will have listened to this (or something similar since something like this is posted twice a day), and will make V "the best of both worlds".

True say. R* treat there entire games as an art piece so in that respect you have to look at each game individually instead of comparing them to each other.

 

p.s. Nice Chappelle quote in your sig

[Dick Valor]

AMEN!!!

 

I was pissed when they announced V would only be in Los Santos because IV-era cities suck! Theyre totally lifeless and barren! If its only ONE city 75% of the buildings should be enterable. Bottom line. No excuses, No more Toy Towns. If they want crappy, unenterable buildings ATLEAST have multiple cities! Thank you, OP, for saying what needed to be said.

 

 

IV era cities suck? There's only been one so far and it was the best designed city in the franchise's history (at least until V comes out). Quality > quantity. IV does feel more alive than any of the III-era games, both because of the graphics and all the object/pedestrian/vehicle rendering. There are far more buildings that can be entered in IV compared to SA. Granted, they are mostly stairwells, but the city is beautiful and fun to be in, regardless. That said, I appreciate that you want more and in that regard, we are on the same page. I may be a IV fanboy (mostly because the stronger graphics, shooting mechanics, cover system, and wanted system have made it virtually impossible for me to enjoy VC and SA anymore), but I agree that the game could have had more buildings you can enter (the absence of a police station/jail was particularly disappointing, through the hospitals partially made up for this). That is where V comes in and why I think it will appeal to III-era and us IV-era fanboys. Personally, I think the best way R* can give us both what we want is one detailed city (LS) plus lots of countryside and small towns with enterable buildings (like in RDR). If every police station and hospital could be entered (so that you can immediately rampage after dying or getting busted), I would be very satisfied, but the more the better. Multiple cities are unnecessary for me (then again, I'm from L.A. so I'm biased).

[Algonquin Assassin]

Iv is not a living breathing city. Its more like a theme park. All an illusion.

And compared to it's predecessors it's more than an illusion. In the old games people never actually flagged down taxis , talked on cell phones , bought food from vendors , walked into enter able buildings(they were just pre spawned in one when you entered and stood around saying the same 5 lines repeatedly) , and worked at construction sites. The meaningless zombies that filled the streets in the III era just walked around and almost never interacted with their environment besides an occasional exchange of non contextual phrases with another ped. It maybe an illusion but it's far better than any ped behavior we've seen in any other GTA. Before you respond calling me an IV fanboy , I've been playing GTA since 2000 when I first got GTA 1 and have been playing them for the last 11 years.

 

This is what it's meant by a "living, breathing city". Also you get cops pulling over people, people in parks practicing yogo in the mornings, workers maintaining parks etc.

 

Sometimes I think people just bash GTA IV for ANY reason that comes to their mind. Like I said I've playing the series since 1998 and although VC is my favourite GTA I'm still incredibly fond of GTA IV. VC beats it for atmosphere and music, but IMO GTA IV is superior in every other way possible.

 

 

[Eternal Moonshine]

What's good from having this great illusion of life and watching peds do their things when that's pretty much all i can do? It's nice that postman delivers the mail but why can't i do that? A living city is not enough. There's got to be more things to do in the game besides the main storyline. I'm not saying that GTA IV was a bad game, on the contrary, it was a great game but kinda unfinished

[Zee]

Iv is not a living breathing city. Its more like a theme park. All an illusion.

And compared to it's predecessors it's more than an illusion. In the old games people never actually flagged down taxis , talked on cell phones , bought food from vendors , walked into enter able buildings(they were just pre spawned in one when you entered and stood around saying the same 5 lines repeatedly) , and worked at construction sites. The meaningless zombies that filled the streets in the III era just walked around and almost never interacted with their environment besides an occasional exchange of non contextual phrases with another ped. It maybe an illusion but it's far better than any ped behavior we've seen in any other GTA. Before you respond calling me an IV fanboy , I've been playing GTA since 2000 when I first got GTA 1 and have been playing them for the last 11 years.

 

This is what it's meant by a "living, breathing city". Also you get cops pulling over people, people in parks practicing yogo in the mornings, workers maintaining parks etc.

 

Sometimes I think people just bash GTA IV for ANY reason that comes to their mind. Like I said I've playing the series since 1998 and although VC is my favourite GTA I'm still incredibly fond of GTA IV. VC beats it for atmosphere and music, but IMO GTA IV is superior in every other way possible.

Its not enough. Pedestrians dont even pick up dropped items. Tell me, please, what "living, breathing city" has pedrestrians that dont even pick up dropped items? It completely ruins the immersion and makes you realize its not real.

 

 

GTAIV was a fine game, but its city was not "living, breathing." I want to see that term buried. IV was a fine game, but "living, breathing" is just not true.

[Jeeebuuus]

Iv is not a living breathing city. Its more like a theme park. All an illusion.

And compared to it's predecessors it's more than an illusion. In the old games people never actually flagged down taxis , talked on cell phones , bought food from vendors , walked into enter able buildings(they were just pre spawned in one when you entered and stood around saying the same 5 lines repeatedly) , and worked at construction sites. The meaningless zombies that filled the streets in the III era just walked around and almost never interacted with their environment besides an occasional exchange of non contextual phrases with another ped. It maybe an illusion but it's far better than any ped behavior we've seen in any other GTA. Before you respond calling me an IV fanboy , I've been playing GTA since 2000 when I first got GTA 1 and have been playing them for the last 11 years.

 

This is what it's meant by a "living, breathing city". Also you get cops pulling over people, people in parks practicing yogo in the mornings, workers maintaining parks etc.

 

Sometimes I think people just bash GTA IV for ANY reason that comes to their mind. Like I said I've playing the series since 1998 and although VC is my favourite GTA I'm still incredibly fond of GTA IV. VC beats it for atmosphere and music, but IMO GTA IV is superior in every other way possible.

Its not enough. Pedestrians dont even pick up dropped items. Tell me, please, what "living, breathing city" has pedrestrians that dont even pick up dropped items? It completely ruins the immersion and makes you realize its not real.

 

 

GTAIV was a fine game, but its city was not "living, breathing." I want to see that term buried. IV was a fine game, but "living, breathing" is just not true.

I agree with you Zee about peds. not picking up their dropped items but there is not such thing as a living, breathing video game. Even if it could appear "real" you will still know it isn't. Pick up your chin and learn to enjoy art for its sake, not to replace reality.

[Death2Drugs]

Iv is not a living breathing city. Its more like a theme park. All an illusion.

And compared to it's predecessors it's more than an illusion. In the old games people never actually flagged down taxis , talked on cell phones , bought food from vendors , walked into enter able buildings(they were just pre spawned in one when you entered and stood around saying the same 5 lines repeatedly) , and worked at construction sites. The meaningless zombies that filled the streets in the III era just walked around and almost never interacted with their environment besides an occasional exchange of non contextual phrases with another ped. It maybe an illusion but it's far better than any ped behavior we've seen in any other GTA. Before you respond calling me an IV fanboy , I've been playing GTA since 2000 when I first got GTA 1 and have been playing them for the last 11 years.

 

This is what it's meant by a "living, breathing city". Also you get cops pulling over people, people in parks practicing yogo in the mornings, workers maintaining parks etc.

 

Sometimes I think people just bash GTA IV for ANY reason that comes to their mind. Like I said I've playing the series since 1998 and although VC is my favourite GTA I'm still incredibly fond of GTA IV. VC beats it for atmosphere and music, but IMO GTA IV is superior in every other way possible.

Its not enough. Pedestrians dont even pick up dropped items. Tell me, please, what "living, breathing city" has pedrestrians that dont even pick up dropped items? It completely ruins the immersion and makes you realize its not real.

 

 

GTAIV was a fine game, but its city was not "living, breathing." I want to see that term buried. IV was a fine game, but "living, breathing" is just not true.

I agree with you Zee about peds. not picking up their dropped items but there is not such thing as a living, breathing video game. Even if it could appear "real" you will still know it isn't. Pick up your chin and learn to enjoy art for its sake, not to replace reality.

Though I agree it was VERY ridiculous not to see peds pick up dropped items (R* must have been lazy, it's probably easy to make a "pick up" animation), there are other things, such as maintaining parks, cops arresting people, etc. Hopefully, V creates a much more realistic environment.

[AceRay]

Dismissing LC just because of a minor issue is kind of pathetic really. You're ignoring every other aspect that makes up for it and makes it excel.

 

And would you eat bread that fell on the ground?

[Slamman]

It's as "living and breathing" as any game since that time, but before Red Dead Red of course! Rockstar's intent to keep pushing forward... You'll see and better get ready to start eating some crow!

[Zee]

Dismissing LC just because of a minor issue is kind of pathetic really. You're ignoring every other aspect that makes up for it and makes it excel.

 

And would you eat bread that fell on the ground?

Would you leave your cell phone in the middle of Star Junction? Im sorry but its a huge knock against the game. The AI is seriously flawed in this game.

[coin-god]

Dismissing LC just because of a minor issue is kind of pathetic really. You're ignoring every other aspect that makes up for it and makes it excel.

 

And would you eat bread that fell on the ground?

Would you leave your cell phone in the middle of Star Junction? Im sorry but its a huge knock against the game. The AI is seriously flawed in this game.

ooh, Come on....

 

Can't you come up with something better? For f*ck sake.

[Death2Drugs]

Dismissing LC just because of a minor issue is kind of pathetic really. You're ignoring every other aspect that makes up for it and makes it excel.

 

And would you eat bread that fell on the ground?

5 second rule.... lol.

[Wenis IV]

To the people who bring up the argument "Whats there to do with all the open useless space?", I present a counterargument: Whats there to do in an alley filled with cardboard boxes and shopping carts?

 

3D GTA games have always been about sandbox gameplay and SA was the epitome of that. It was definitely disheartening that IV seemed to throw you into a city that was essentially a giant jail, and no amount of 'detail' could make up for the lack of the unique sandbox gameplay that SA provided. From a gameplay perspective, the OP is right, how can someone prefer detail over a bunch of space that allows you to do whatever you want? By saying its boring and useless is admitting to having no imagination and relying too heavily on the game to play itself for you. And while its possible that you can sacrifice some on both sides to meet on common ground, I would rather the main focus be on huge open environments, and then add detail later on. Graphics should always be secondary to gameplay.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Wenis IV

[Death2Drugs]

To the people who bring up the argument "Whats there to do with all the open useless space?", I present a counterargument: Whats there to do in an alley filled with cardboard boxes and shopping carts?

 

3D GTA games have always been about sandbox gameplay and SA was the epitome of that. It was definitely disheartening that IV seemed to throw you into a city that was essentially a giant jail, and no amount of 'detail' could make up for the lack of the unique sandbox gameplay that SA provided. From a gameplay perspective, the OP is right, how can someone prefer detail over a bunch of space that allows you to do whatever you want? And while its possible that you can sacrifice some on both sides to meet on common ground, I would rather the main focus be on huge open environments, and then add detail later on. Graphics should always be secondary to gameplay.

Agreed. It would just be nice to listen to Free Bird while driving an off-road vehicle in the desert rather than stuck in a virtual urban jail.

[Zee]

The Phones are not the only thing. Workers abandon their sweeping duties if youbump them. People dont remember you if you run away five seconds later. There are no bicycle messengers (iconic for nyc) and theres no military! What sort of living breathing city dosnt have a national guard!

[Jeeebuuus]

The Phones are not the only thing. Workers abandon their sweeping duties if youbump them. People dont remember you if you run away five seconds later. There are no bicycle messengers (iconic for nyc) and theres no military! What sort of living breathing city dosnt have a national guard!

You completely ignored my response to you. IV was in 2008 and for its time was revolutionary. V is four years later of thoughtful advancement of "living, breathing" and will fix some problems but you can't expect real life yet as the technology won't allow real life reaction to whatever your imagination will produce. Deal with it and contribute something of merit in the realm of possibility.

[Zee]

I had these critiscisms when IV debuted. Im not asking for a replacement for reality, simply asking for a more realistic envrioment.

[Jeeebuuus]

I had these critiscisms when IV debuted. Im not asking for a replacement for reality, simply asking for a more realistic envrioment.

Try to be more realistic in your expectations.

[CalgaryJay]

I just jumped from page 2 to 7, I see the vibe of the thread finally changed. Haha man was that a hilarious first page. I've never agreed (point OP was making) and disagreed (the supreme D-bag way he was doing it) with someone so much at the same time before.

 

Anyway, I agree that all the open space in SA was awesome. I loved just ripping through the countryside on a Sanchez and hitting all the natural jumps. It's great how its looking like V will feature a nice mix of city core and countryside. Man I can't wait to play this game...

[Linki]

I had these critiscisms when IV debuted. Im not asking for a replacement for reality, simply asking for a more realistic envrioment.

You want realistic environments, yet you prefer the III era?

 

[Jeeebuuus]

I had these critiscisms when IV debuted.  Im not asking for a replacement for reality, simply asking for a more realistic envrioment.

You want realistic environments, yet you prefer the III era?

He he. You made him.

[coin-god]

I had these critiscisms when IV debuted.  Im not asking for a replacement for reality, simply asking for a more realistic envrioment.

You want realistic environments, yet you prefer the III era?

That's exactly what I don't understand. He dosn't like IV, but by the looks of it he should dislike the III era as much as he dislikes IV.

[GourangaMaster]

The way i look at this argument is like this. GTA IV is that total 10 hotty, shes gorgeous but an absolute starfish in the sack. SA on the other hand not so much, shes that 6 below average plain jane whos not much to look at but will shag your brains out like theres no tommorow.

What I ultimately hopes R* goal for V is to accentuate the aesthetics of GTA IV but add in all the the variety and fun both in terms of gameplay and geography from SA. I think from what the trailer has shown they are on their way to doing just that.

 

[Reebokanonymous]

OP needs to take a chill pill. Is it too much to ask for a huge, detailed city as well as rolling hills and wilderness?

 

Rockstar has the resources. Hopefully they didn't have to work as hard on the technical aspects since so much work was needed to bring the series to the new generation of consoles. If that is the case, I see no problem in creating a detailed world that is twice as big as IV.

 

Seriously OP, calling people graphics whores and the like is no way to win people over. I think the argument that San Andreas had "dead space" is not very strong, as it was necessary in order to convince players of the scale, and I had plenty of fun in that "dead space."

 

That being said, it's fun to look around at the environment and see how detailed it is. One of the main reasons I play GTA is because it's an escape. It's cool to see a more accurate representation of what these places actually look like.

 

Ultimately, the point is moot. It's going to be at least as detailed as GTA IV, and it looks way bigger. This will easily be the best GTA yet, and my new favorite game.

[GRINCH ASS BITCH]

 

The way i look at this argument is like this. GTA IV is that total 10 hotty, shes gorgeous but an absolute starfish in the sack. SA on the other hand not so much, shes that 6 below average plain jane whos not much to look at but will shag your brains out like theres no tommorow.

Lol, good analogy, and I agree with it. You've got the chick who's arguably the hottest piece of ass around, but her beauty is superficial; it's only skin deep. Then you've got the chick whose constantly overlooked due to her less-than-perfect looks, but her personality is to die for.

 

One of them's good for a quick fling, the other is marriage material. Hopefully GTA:V will be a hybrid of the two.

[Jeeebuuus]

The way i look at this argument is like this. GTA IV is that total 10 hotty, shes gorgeous but an absolute starfish in the sack. SA on the other hand not so much, shes that 6 below average plain jane whos not much to look at but will shag your brains out like theres no tommorow.

What I ultimately hopes R* goal for V is to accentuate the aesthetics of GTA IV but add in all the the variety and fun both in terms of gameplay and geography from SA. I think from what the trailer has shown they are on their way to doing just that.

Pimp.

[TreyCrll]

The way i look at this argument is like this. GTA IV is that total 10 hotty, shes gorgeous but an absolute starfish in the sack. SA on the other hand not so much, shes that 6 below average plain jane whos not much to look at but will shag your brains out like theres no tommorow.

Lol, good analogy, and I agree with it. You've got the chick who's arguably the hottest piece of ass around, but her beauty is superficial; it's only skin deep. Then you've got the chick whose constantly overlooked due to her less-than-perfect looks, but her personality is to die for.

 

One of them's good for a quick fling, the other is marriage material. Hopefully GTA:V will be a hybrid of the two.

Omg that analogy is a mind f*ck. I honestly think thats the best way to put this...

[inflamedeyeball]

 

The way i look at this argument is like this. GTA IV is that total 10 hotty, shes gorgeous but an absolute starfish in the sack. SA on the other hand not so much, shes that 6 below average plain jane whos not much to look at but will shag your brains out like theres no tommorow.

Lol, good analogy, and I agree with it. You've got the chick who's arguably the hottest piece of ass around, but her beauty is superficial; it's only skin deep. Then you've got the chick whose constantly overlooked due to her less-than-perfect looks, but her personality is to die for.

 

One of them's good for a quick fling, the other is marriage material. Hopefully GTA:V will be a hybrid of the two.

Omg that analogy is a mind f*ck. I honestly think thats the best way to put this...

I too agree with this analogy.

 

The only thing I'd like to add is your friends constantly bringing up your new gf's good looks while you cry yourself to sleep every night thinking about the good old days.

 

...Maybe I'm taking this too far. Whatever.

 

I agree with the OP of this thread, but really dislike this style of inflammatory posting. I fvcking loved SA, still do, but IV has its merits.

 

That is all.

[Mokrie Dela]

I prefer IV tbh, but V is looking good - like a modernised SA.

I was a little sad to not see Vice (my favourite III era game) but apart from chinatoenwars, I have not played a GTA I didn fall in love with.

V is lookin like it may be the perfect Combination.