kingdmx Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 They've got the resources to make both! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Vacuum Seal Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) GTA SA quantity or more.GTA IV detail or more. . This. Forget all of that "disc space" bs. It's called 2 disc. After a 4 year wait with an already developed RAGE engine, there is no excuse for GTAV having to choose one over the other. I didn't vote because they both go hand an hand. Quality may seem like a knee-jerk answer but if the game is the same size as GTA4 or only slightly larger, then the gamer will have not much to do after growing numb to the quality (as with GTA4) which decreases replay-ability and we will need a GTAV to keep us occupied for an even longer wait than 4years if the following GTA is likely coming on next gen consoles. How does Bigger map size automatically equal more replayability? I never said that now did I? I am just saying the more that there is to explore, which is quantity (map size, hidden locations, weapons, scenic areas, clothing, gangs etc.), The less likely you are to get bored. GTAIV was the classic example of a great quality game that got repetitive really fast as there was really only one environment (east coast style urban environment) in the entire map. I would rather have a high quantity of quality aspects in a game than just a few quality aspects. Quantity and quality comparison can be a bit of a fallacy at times because quantity is quality in certain respects. Especially when the matter at hand is a open-world adventure game. Edited January 16, 2012 by canttakemyid "shut up, sit down, relax" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milkmansun Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Quality, Wii U seems to have power to run GTA V smoothly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rere1love Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 i want both Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinky12 Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Quality with a bit of quantity because I like to cruise long distances when not on a mission. GTA IV has quality, but severely lacks in quantity. SA with it's huge map and combination of 3 different settings (country, desert, and urban) give me that sense of driving long distances. GTA IV is just based on NYC (Metropolitan NY). If it was based on NYS (New York State), then the map will have to be a lot bigger with the addition of mountains (Catskills) and even Niagara Falls. I hope GTA V will a balance of both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algonquin Assassin Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) I never said that now did I? I am just saying the more that there is to explore, which is quantity (map size, hidden locations, weapons, scenic areas, clothing, gangs etc.), The less likely you are to get bored. GTAIV was the classic example of a great quality game that got repetitive really fast as there was really only one environment (east coast style urban environment) in the entire map. I would rather have a high quantity of quality aspects in a game than just a few quality aspects. Quantity and quality comparison can be a bit of a fallacy at times because quantity is quality in certain respects. Especially when the matter at hand is a open-world adventure game. Even as it nears 4 years old I don't think GTA IV's map is boring at all considering it's just an urban environment. IMO the details in and around LC make up for not having different varying terrain. It's all well and good to have a big map with varying landscapes, but there still needs to be meat on the bones. JC2 is a classic example of a game with an enourmous map, but is so dull and uninteresting because of how repetitive it actually is. Just compare the city of Panua to LC. Boring. I've owned the game on PS3 and now 360, but still haven't bothered exploring the entire map because it's just too much of a chore. R* nailed urban life in GTA IV. With RDR under their belt there's no reason there can't be a sprawling countryside. I'm more interested in how R* can make these areas interesting than phyiscal size or simply changing the scenery to accomodate players who like that sort of thing. Edited January 17, 2012 by Miamivicecity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean5 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I cant believe people are going with quality. so you'd rather have another GTAIV game that was boring as hell to play after the missions are done? or like GTA:SA where there was lots of things to do afterwards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoanCrawford Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I cant believe people are going with quality. so you'd rather have another GTAIV game that was boring as hell to play after the missions are done? or like GTA:SA where there was lots of things to do afterwards Mmhmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algonquin Assassin Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I cant believe people are going with quality. so you'd rather have another GTAIV game that was boring as hell to play after the missions are done? or like GTA:SA where there was lots of things to do afterwards Why can't the game have the same quality as GTA IV with plenty of features to match? Also I'm sick of people using this as an argument. It's completely subjective on how you approach each game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean5 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I cant believe people are going with quality. so you'd rather have another GTAIV game that was boring as hell to play after the missions are done? or like GTA:SA where there was lots of things to do afterwards Why can't the game have the same quality as GTA IV with plenty of features to match? Also I'm sick of people using this as an argument. It's completely subjective on how you approach each game. unless they made it a ps3/pc exclusive or watered it down alot they couldnt fit it all on the xbox disk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Jamesta Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I hope the game has a little bit of both. I would really enjoy playing on a huge map with great detail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algonquin Assassin Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 (edited) unless they made it a ps3/pc exclusive or watered it down alot they couldnt fit it all on the xbox disk. Well games like Skyrim fit onto the 360 disc and that has a map bigger than any GTA is likely to be and is impeccibly detailed. I don't see why a RDR sized map with RDR/GTA IV details and more features is a bad thing which is what I would like to see personally. Edited January 17, 2012 by Miamivicecity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berna_o2 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Rockstar can make both Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean5 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 unless they made it a ps3/pc exclusive or watered it down alot they couldnt fit it all on the xbox disk. Well games like Skyrim fit onto the 360 disc and that has a map bigger than any GTA is likely to be and is impeccibly detailed. I don't see why a RDR sized map with RDR/GTA IV details and more features is a bad thing which is what I would like to see personally. yeah its a mystery how bethesda compressed skyrim enough to fit on that disk. and a RDR sized map with features would be brilliant. imo RDR had a perfect map Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Vacuum Seal Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 unless they made it a ps3/pc exclusive or watered it down alot they couldnt fit it all on the xbox disk. Well games like Skyrim fit onto the 360 disc and that has a map bigger than any GTA is likely to be and is impeccibly detailed. I don't see why a RDR sized map with RDR/GTA IV details and more features is a bad thing which is what I would like to see personally. yeah its a mystery how bethesda compressed skyrim enough to fit on that disk. and a RDR sized map with features would be brilliant. imo RDR had a perfect map Who ever said that the game had to fit on one disk?....R* can do what they want if they put their minds to it with GTA5. "shut up, sit down, relax" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyDog Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Look if y'all want big maps, countryside and deserts to explore, then go play Skyrim. In my opinion GTA shouldn't be a rpg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackass2009 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 unless they made it a ps3/pc exclusive or watered it down alot they couldnt fit it all on the xbox disk. Well games like Skyrim fit onto the 360 disc and that has a map bigger than any GTA is likely to be and is impeccibly detailed. I don't see why a RDR sized map with RDR/GTA IV details and more features is a bad thing which is what I would like to see personally. yeah its a mystery how bethesda compressed skyrim enough to fit on that disk. and a RDR sized map with features would be brilliant. imo RDR had a perfect map Who ever said that the game had to fit on one disk?....R* can do what they want if they put their minds to it with GTA5. I agree 100%. I'll never understand why people hated on LA Noire for having three disks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00110001 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Quantity. San Andreas came out good, didn't it? Especially with all this advanced technology. thx plz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death2Drugs Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Quantity. San Andreas came out good, didn't it? Especially with all this advanced technology. thx plz Though I agree that San Andreas was a great game, there were still issues with it. There were problems with AI, the graphics were puke-tastic and the physics engine was out-of-date (hell, it was out of date even in 2001). Don't get me wrong, San Andreas was and still is the best GTA ever, but these problems ruined the enjoyment of it. 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