Jump to content

The evolution of GTA.


Mainland Marauder

Recommended Posts

Mainland Marauder

In Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater - a game that was contemporary with SA, mind - you had a life meter and a hunger/energy meter. The latter would go down faster when exerting a lot of energy, e.g. running or swimming, as opposed to resting prone. And, upon running low, would begin affecting Snake's performance. At least in SA that didn't happen, right?

 

Oh, and Snake had to hunt and kill his own food for the most part. Of course, this was in the context of survivalism in the jungle.

 

It was a slow-death thing too. Of course, in SA, I never even came close to dying of hunger. I could've gone outside for a smoke, leaving CJ swaying around in place and singing lyrics off whatever radio station you had been listening too. OK, if it didn't "add" anything it certainly wasn't a huge problem. Nothing like our theoretical virtual sex partner with a headache.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racecarlock

Look, if you want to role play, fair enough. I'll even go for the appearance changing. But I don't want to role play as real guy. I want to be like Arnold Schwarzenegger in the movie true lies complete with harrier flying skills. And that's the problem with mechanics like sleep, hunger, and fuel. It forces role playing on people who do not want to or do not feel like role playing. I know it doesn't take long to fuel up the car or eat or sleep, but that doesn't make any of those tasks any more enjoyable. I don't enjoy getting gas in real life, and the only reason eating is fun is because I can taste stuff. I wish I didn't have to sleep, I got freespace 2 yesterday and even got it to run in a window.

 

The point is, if people don't want to role play, don't force them to role play. That's what I think people should take away from this and why if sleep, hunger, and fuel are put in they should either be options in the menu, or just be animations not on a timer and food would just restore health and sleeping would save like normal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

I didn't say I wanted it to be an RPG. I was just using that as an illustration as to the limits of the kind of open-endedness in interpreting a character when that character has established dialogue and actions. To a certain degree every video game has this, even RPGs.

 

Now, if we had turned GTA into a pen-and-paper game in the style of D&D you could truly have your own vision of a character.

 

This is simply a limit of the video game medium, nothing more, nothing less.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ferocious Banger
In Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater - a game that was contemporary with SA, mind - you had a life meter and a hunger/energy meter. The latter would go down faster when exerting a lot of energy, e.g. running or swimming, as opposed to resting prone. And, upon running low, would begin affecting Snake's performance. At least in SA that didn't happen, right?

 

Oh, and Snake had to hunt and kill his own food for the most part. Of course, this was in the context of survivalism in the jungle.

 

It was a slow-death thing too. Of course, in SA, I never even came close to dying of hunger. I could've gone outside for a smoke, leaving CJ swaying around in place and singing lyrics off whatever radio station you had been listening too. OK, if it didn't "add" anything it certainly wasn't a huge problem. Nothing like our theoretical virtual sex partner with a headache.

Off Topic:Please dont smoke bro

 

*Cancer Awareness*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

I like the no-smoking line under a quote talking about Solid Snake. Nice touch. I quit about three months ago. Part of the becoming single thing. I also quit weighing ~40 pounds more than I do now.

 

 

Mainland Marauder flexes

 

See, I'm just like CJ, laying off the Cluckin' Bell.

 

We'll get this on topic now, however open-ended it is.

 

This Cracked article isn't new and, in fact, has probably been seen by many before but it's worth dropping in here. GTA was an accident, essentially, and it's what you get when you go outside the accepted norms of game design. It's against the spirit of the series to exclude a potential element of the game because it's "not GTA" because GTA wouldn't exist if they said it wasn't part of what they were originally going for.

 

And it helps too that they stuck with it and expanded it when it was just a minor cult hit, as the 2D games really were, and turned it into the reason many people bought a PS2 a little over a decade ago. To this point, I don't think Rockstar has forgotten what got it here.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As for fuel, or petrol if you prefer, I think the idea is adding an extra dimension of challenge to chases. You run out of gas, you're not going to stop and fill up. You're going to run like hell to another vehicle, steal it and go. In IV it was possible to damage your car so as to kill it without blowing it up. And you had to find something else. This is the same idea.

icon14.gificon14.gif I was going to say that exact thing pretty soon if fuel kept being discussed. At least in the urban environment, and especially in a chase, I routinely catch the car on fire and then I get out an jack another car. Same for gas. I would not be filling up unless I was going to leave a sticky bomb on the gas pump, on the way out, so I could blow it up a half-block away.

 

Now, if cars had health regen, I wouldn't even have to stop / jack for damage. That would be a paradigm shift. colgate.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GTA36362355

The Cracked article seems a lie to me.

 

"Back in the BMG office, Sam and the others booted up Race 'n' Chase. There was just one problem: the game kind of sucked."

 

"Senior producer Gary Penn—a former journalist with a streak of Johnny Rotten and a taste for bright green socks—felt dejected. “This is a f*cking simulation,” he said, bemoaning the game's “stupid details.” Up in Dundee at DMA, the developers were starting to agree. By casting the player as the cop, they realized, they had cut out the fun. Some dismissed it as Sims Driving Instructor.

 

When an unruly gamer tried to drive his police car on the sidewalk or through traffic lights, a persnickety programmer reminded him that the stop lights needed to be obeyed. Were they building a video game or a train set? Even worse, the pedestrians milling around the game created frustrating obstacles. It was almost impossible to drive fast without taking people down, and, because the player was a cop, he had to be punished for hit-and-runs.

 

Race 'n' Chase hit a road block. There was just no way to have a fast and furious arcade-style game while playing by the rules. The DMAers stared at the screen, as the cars and the people raced around. Maybe there was another solution, they realized. Instead of having to avoid all of the pedestrians, what if you got points for running them over? What if you were the bad guy instead?"

Grand Theft Auto was born.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racecarlock
The Cracked article seems a lie to me.

 

"Back in the BMG office, Sam and the others booted up Race 'n' Chase. There was just one problem: the game kind of sucked."

 

"Senior producer Gary Penn—a former journalist with a streak of Johnny Rotten and a taste for bright green socks—felt dejected. “This is a f*cking simulation,” he said, bemoaning the game's “stupid details.” Up in Dundee at DMA, the developers were starting to agree. By casting the player as the cop, they realized, they had cut out the fun. Some dismissed it as Sims Driving Instructor.

 

When an unruly gamer tried to drive his police car on the sidewalk or through traffic lights, a persnickety programmer reminded him that the stop lights needed to be obeyed. Were they building a video game or a train set? Even worse, the pedestrians milling around the game created frustrating obstacles. It was almost impossible to drive fast without taking people down, and, because the player was a cop, he had to be punished for hit-and-runs.

 

Race 'n' Chase hit a road block. There was just no way to have a fast and furious arcade-style game while playing by the rules. The DMAers stared at the screen, as the cars and the people raced around. Maybe there was another solution, they realized. Instead of having to avoid all of the pedestrians, what if you got points for running them over? What if you were the bad guy instead?"

Grand Theft Auto was born.

Wow. It's pretty sad that it seems now traffic laws are what people are asking for. I dealt with traffic laws in mafia II and the whole 3 stars if you run over 1 person thing. And it was annoying as hell. There's a good reason GTA has forgone traffic laws and 3 stars on murder up until now, and it's because it would be annoying as hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...what would happen if Rockstar and its predecessors had some rigid rule about not mixing established game genres in its games, like GTA.

 

Well, I'm thinking - we wouldn't have GTA at all, for one.

 

GTA and its play-alikes get referred to as a "sandbox" game. But what's all in it? Let's break down what I consider three "core" aspects of GTA, and what they came from.

 

•For one, the "sandbox" element was just taking a regular game world and making it much bigger, and removing somewhat the linear progression through it. It was basically an expansion of a maze game in the 2D games. And in 3D, it expanded upon the kind of environment that games like Tomb Raider brought us about 15 years ago. And that was essentially a 3D platformer. So it essentially derives its roots from good ol' Super Mario. So does a fair portion of GTA's gameplay. You're jumping and running a lot, aren't you?

 

•Except, ooh, you're shooting guns. It's a shooter too! Platformers and shooters co-existed for a long time. Remember Contra? Hell, even Mario threw fireballs. And so GTA is part shooter. First person sometimes, also. You went into a FPS mode firing the assault rifles in GTA3 and Vice. You still do with the rocket launchers. You still do in certain missions.

Not everyone will understand this, but - before Doom and Wolfenstein and Quake in the 90s, what gamers might have reckoned as a "FPS" was an arcade-style light gun game. Like Lethal Enforcers or Operation Wolf. Those missions where you shoot and someone else drives play kinda like those games, except you're aiming the cursor with the controller. You did that on the home ports of those old games if you didn't have a light gun, for that matter. I would prefer a FP not be the standard operating procedure in GTA too, but it's not like it's never been a part of it. It's a part of it when it should be, just like every other genre element is part of GTA when it needs to be.

 

•What's that other thing about GTA? Cars. OK. So we have cars and shooting and running. Did the driving game turn into a shooter or did the shooter turn into a 3D platformer or what? The street races are straight classic racing video game, really. And then, one time they came out with a GTA where you could fly planes. Planes! "What, are we turning into Microsoft Flight Simulator?" (Said no one ever.) That's because it was awesome and now people are angry it wasn't in IV. You can drive a tank too! What is this, a war game? Well, it's certainly combat. So what if more combat elements are thrown in? Weapon customization. Stealth. That doesn't mean it's "turning into" something else. It's already been touched on, in San Andreas. In Bully, which is basically GTA with a kid protagonist who can't drive yet, Jimmy fought bullies but hid in lockers just like a regular Solid Snake. So many of the ideas floated around are not as new as people take them to be. Back to GTA itself, SA expanded the hand-to-hand combo system. I think there could be more emphasis on the street fighting element without any need to go "OMG THEY TURNED IT INTO STREET FIGHTER!" If you yelled "YOGA FLAME!" as you torched The Truth's weed farm, it didn't turn into Street Fighter either.

 

GTA was a moderately popular top-down chase game, essentially, not entirely unlike Pac-Man, and R*/DMA "turned it into" why we're all here. And if they're going to keep releasing GTA games, and keep it where Rockstar can build hype and anticipation for months and even years simply by acknowledging they're going to release another game one day and nothing else, then it's going to have to evolve.

 

One day the pedestrians might all have names and personalities and mannerisms. Did that mean the game became The Sims? Of course not. Or did it "become the Sims" as soon as you took CJ on dates with Denise in the Grove?

 

But don't let me make your mind up for you. Discuss, but when you do, if you're coming in with a "GTA should not be X" then first consider what exactly GTA is and has been, and then explain why something cannot or should not ever be part of the series.

Okay, but everything you've mentioned (First person shooting, racing, hand-to-hand fighting) are all fun things that go into good games. I groan whenever someone mentions pets, hair salons or SCUBA diving. It's not at all the same thing.

G1T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

Well, you had barbershops in SA and the series survived. You also could dive underwater. Come to think of it, it'd have been cool if there was something else to find down there besides oysters.

 

On traffic laws...finetune the police system and it may not be so bad. You had to stop at the toll booths and pay or get a star blowing through to get to Bohan.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racecarlock
Well, you had barbershops in SA and the series survived. You also could dive underwater. Come to think of it, it'd have been cool if there was something else to find down there besides oysters.

 

On traffic laws...finetune the police system and it may not be so bad. You had to stop at the toll booths and pay or get a star blowing through to get to Bohan.

No, I'm not backing down on traffic laws. I've delt with them in mafia II and they can just f*ck off with that sh*t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smokin Aces

Personally. I think many of the posters here don't know what Grand Theft Auto is.

 

If any of these people even played San Andreas they would know exactly what Grand Theft Auto is all about.

 

I see many people complaining about being forced to eat in San Andreas. I find it funny. Because I never died once out of hunger. Ever! For those who say they did, you are simply lying.

 

San Andreas brought the Grand Theft Auto series to the forefront. It will always be the highlight of the Grand Theft Auto franchise.

 

As a matter of fact, GTA IV was 20 steps backwards from San Andreas in terms of gameplay. I am not talking graphics here. GTA IV was 20 steps forwards graphics wise.

 

Where are the car customization places in GTA IV?

 

How come I did't get fat if I eat too much?

 

How come I had absolutely no skills that would upgrade throughout the game simply by playing the game?

 

Where were the destruction derby side games?

 

Where was any of the stuff that made Grand Theft Auto San Andreas fun?

 

Where was property purchasing?

 

Where was talking to pedestrians?

 

Bottom line is this, the things that many of you are so against is what gave the user more freedom in the past. You remove them, and there is less to do, which equals less freedom, which leads to a more linear game.

 

Anyway, just wanted to share this.

 

It truly saddens me that people don't know what the Grand Theft Auto series is all about, and if Rockstar follows the path many of you want, which is, as far as I can tell, a linear story based game where you do nothing except kill people and complete missions, GTA V will be very disappointing indeed.

Edited by Smokin Aces
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Personally. I think many of the posters here don't know what Grand Theft Auto is.

 

If any of these people even played San Andreas they would know exactly what Grand Theft Auto is all about.

 

I see many people complaining about being forced to eat in San Andreas. I find it funny. Because I never died once out of hunger. Ever! For those who say they did, you are simply lying.

 

San Andreas brought the Grand Theft Auto series to the forefront. It will always be the highlight of the Grand Theft Auto franchise.

 

As a matter of fact, GTA IV was 20 steps backwards from San Andreas in terms of gameplay. I am not talking graphics here. GTA IV was 20 steps forwards graphics wise.

 

Where are the car customization places in GTA IV?

 

How come I did't get fat if I eat too much?

 

How come I had absolutely no skills that would upgrade throughout the game simply by playing the game?

 

Where were the destruction derby side games?

 

Where was any of the stuff that made Grand Theft Auto San Andreas fun?

 

Where was property purchasing?

 

Where was talking to pedestrians?

 

Bottom line is this, the things that many of you are so against is what gave the user more freedom in the past. You remove them, and there is less to do, which equals less freedom, which leads to a more linear game.

 

Anyway, just wanted to share this.

 

It truly saddens me that people don't know what the Grand Theft Auto series is all about, and if Rockstar follows the path many of you want, which is, as far as I can tell, a linear story based game where you do nothing except kill people and complete missions, GTA V will be very disappointing indeed.

Dealing with an entirely new engine is not trivial, which is why many small features and minigames had to be cut from San Andreas. Believe it or not, people had a lot of complaints slightly similar to yours when GTA III came out.

G1T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will log in the forum just to see the "no fuel" people go apesh*t when gta v comes out. I guarantee fuel will be in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will log in the forum just to see the "no fuel" people go apesh*t when gta v comes out. I guarantee fuel will be in the game.

What makes you say that?

G1T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smokin Aces

I believe it. I was too young to realize it though. I first played Grand Theft Auto when I was about 11 or 12.

 

I went to Scotland for a vacation and to visit family, and my cousins were playing Grand Theft Auto London. And I absolutely loved it.

 

I then bought all console versions of Grand Theft Auto. GTA III, then Vice City, then San Andreas.

 

GTA III was fun, I don't remember why, I am too old now. Then Vice City came along, and I was old enough to appreciate the story.

 

It was a mix between Scarface and Blow.

 

Then San Andreas came along and it blew my mind. It was one of the most perfect games ever created.

 

With the long wait between San Andreas and GTA IV, the anticipation leading up to GTA IV was something else indeed.

 

Personally, I was expected San Andreas gameplay, in a different city with better graphics.

 

What did I get? Well, in my opinion, I got a linear story based game that left me bored to the point I would completely ignore the actual world that Rockstar created and simply complete missions.

 

Why create such a huge world with nothing fun to do in it other than complete missions?

 

It seems to me, if all you want to do is complete missions, skip the whole open world thing, because people are going through the game too fast to even appreciate it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honest Bill
Personally. I think many of the posters here don't know what Grand Theft Auto is.

 

If any of these people even played San Andreas they would know exactly what Grand Theft Auto is all about.

 

I see many people complaining about being forced to eat in San Andreas. I find it funny. Because I never died once out of hunger. Ever! For those who say they did, you are simply lying.

 

San Andreas brought the Grand Theft Auto series to the forefront. It will always be the highlight of the Grand Theft Auto franchise.

 

As a matter of fact, GTA IV was 20 steps backwards from San Andreas in terms of gameplay. I am not talking graphics here. GTA IV was 20 steps forwards graphics wise.

 

Where are the car customization places in GTA IV?

 

How come I did't get fat if I eat too much?

 

How come I had absolutely no skills that would upgrade throughout the game simply by playing the game?

 

Where were the destruction derby side games?

 

Where was any of the stuff that made Grand Theft Auto San Andreas fun?

 

Where was property purchasing?

 

Where was talking to pedestrians?

 

Bottom line is this, the things that many of you are so against is what gave the user more freedom in the past. You remove them, and there is less to do, which equals less freedom, which leads to a more linear game.

 

Anyway, just wanted to share this.

 

It truly saddens me that people don't know what the Grand Theft Auto series is all about, and if Rockstar follows the path many of you want, which is, as far as I can tell, a linear story based game where you do nothing except kill people and complete missions, GTA V will be very disappointing indeed.

Dealing with an entirely new engine is not trivial, which is why many small features and minigames had to be cut from San Andreas. Believe it or not, people had a lot of complaints slightly similar to yours when GTA III came out.

I don't believe that for a second, i never heard anything but praise for GTAIII from all fans of the originals, i'd like to see any complaints that were made at the time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will log in the forum just to see the "no fuel" people go apesh*t when gta v comes out. I guarantee fuel will be in the game.

What makes you say that?

1.GTA love taking ideas from other sandbox games. It took ideas, from scareface, saints row etc. The fuel was originally supposed to be in san andreas but they dropped it. Mafia 2 picked up on this idea and it worked. I only had to fill my tank once during the whole game but it was a nice little feature.

 

2. Looking at the trailer it seems like they are paying attention to detail like with the hardtop convertible. This feature adds a touch of realism. That tells me in gta v a lot of small things we couldn't do we will be able to do in this game like fuel. We saw NPC getting fuel in iv, why shouldn't we in V?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Cracked article seems a lie to me.

 

*snip*

Grand Theft Auto was born.

 

After that you ended up at DMA Design working on Race 'n' Chase, the early version of what would become Grand Theft Auto. Am I right to think that originally you played the cop?

 

GP: As I recall, it was either/or. It was basically cops and robbers. It didn't really have much -- it had an odd structure at the time and it was very much a traditional mission-based thing. You chose your missions and it was quite linear in the way it worked.

 

But I'd been working on Frontier, which is very different and there were definitely other people on the team who had things like Syndicate, Mercenary and Elite very much in their minds as well. That combination definitely led to the more open plan structure there is now.

 

The game as it stands now is basically Elite in a city, but without quite the same sense of taking on the jobs. You take on the jobs in a slightly different way, but incredibly similar structurally. It's just a much more acceptable real world setting. The game was cops and robbers and then that evolved fairly quickly -- nobody wants to be the cop, it's more fun to be bad.

 

And then that evolved into Grand Theft Auto and it was a real mess for years, it never moved on, it never went anywhere. It never really felt like it was going anywhere. It was almost canned. The publisher, BMG Interactive, wanted to can it, as it didn't seem to be going anywhere.

 

What was so wrong with it?

 

GP: There are probably two key things it fell down on. Two critical things. One of them is stability, which is a really boring one but it crashed all the f*cking time. So even if you did get something in the game, you couldn't really test it. The designers couldn't test stuff out or try things out, it just kept crashing as simple as that. That was a boring one, but that was pivotal -- so that was the first step to get that knocked out.

 

Now the other thing that was a problem was the handling -- the car handling was appalling. There was a point in it where you used to have a button for opening the doors and it was just rubbish. I can't remember if this is true because we used to joke about it that you even had to start the engine. It was awful, it was too sim-y.

 

And there was a whole living city thing that crept into it. That kind of inspires people to be more realistic and simulate more often. That steers you in a certain direction.

 

But there were people on the team constantly trying to get that fixed. So the core of playing was fundamentally broke. There were steps being taken to fix that, but it wasn't really gelling together. The police behaved really badly, the way they originally worked was just rubbish.

 

Then one day, I think it was a bug, the police suddenly became mental and aggressive. It was because they were trying to drive through you. Their route finding was screwed I think and that was an awesome moment because suddenly the real drama where, "Oh my God, the police are psycho -- they're trying to ram me off the road."

 

That was awesome, so that stayed in. It was tweaked a little bit, but that stayed in because that was great fun. Suddenly the game got more dramatic and it's no longer boring -- the police trying to pull you over. They're after you, they're trying to ram you off the f*cking road. Everybody suddenly went, "Hey this is actually pretty cool. There's something in this, this is working." It was less about the mission stuff, which we always thought was another mess, and more about just general play -- just being able to piss around.

I think both what you posted and the article are right. smile.gif

pkmTc.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I will log in the forum just to see the "no fuel" people go apesh*t when gta v comes out. I guarantee fuel will be in the game.

What makes you say that?

1.GTA love taking ideas from other sandbox games. It took ideas, from scareface, saints row etc. The fuel was originally supposed to be in san andreas but they dropped it. Mafia 2 picked up on this idea and it worked. I only had to fill my tank once during the whole game but it was a nice little feature.

 

2. Looking at the trailer it seems like they are paying attention to detail like with the hardtop convertible. This feature adds a touch of realism. That tells me in gta v a lot of small things we couldn't do we will be able to do in this game like fuel. We saw NPC getting fuel in iv, why shouldn't we in V?

I still think it's not. Being able to lower and raise the hood of a convertible is a passive feature, not something the game forces you into. Being forced to refuel your car or switch cars because you ran out of fuel is not fun at all, it's just another feature of Mafia II that added nothing but frustration. In previous GTAs your car would blow up or become disabled as punishment for bad driving, not because it's fun to sit in an immobile car. And punishing the player for driving too much is a dumb idea.

 

vvvvvv Well in CTW you use gas stations to build molotov cocktails biggrin.gif

Edited by Pantalla
G1T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

I imagine in about 99 percent of gameplay scenarios, you don't keep a car long enough for it to run empty. This just makes it where you can't just lead 'em on an endless chase around a freeway loop or something. The gas stations have some interactivity. One less dead prop in the game world.

 

We'll say that, since GTA garages have a way of magically regenerating your car, that it magically fills your tank too and you always take off topped off.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racecarlock
I imagine in about 99 percent of gameplay scenarios, you don't keep a car long enough for it to run empty. This just makes it where you can't just lead 'em on an endless chase around a freeway loop or something. The gas stations have some interactivity. One less dead prop in the game world.

 

We'll say that, since GTA garages have a way of magically regenerating your car, that it magically fills your tank too and you always take off topped off.

Ah, but what happens if I want to lead them on an endless freeway loop chase? Do I just get to eat sh*t then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kill Frenzy!

I think GTA is just a special game, their are games called the "GTA clone" but they can´t be compared to GTA, GTA clone means a game just like GTA but different, the only thing what the same is, driving car, open world, die, health. blah blah blah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

You can copy the gameplay but you can't copy the attitude. The Housers and Lazlow.

 

Racecarlock, I suppose there's always last-gen SA's Las Venturas for you. It's great for that.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racecarlock
You can copy the gameplay but you can't copy the attitude. The Housers and Lazlow.

 

Racecarlock, I suppose there's always last-gen SA's Las Venturas for you. It's great for that.

So that's it then? Not even an option in the menu, I would have to eat, sleep, and fuel up my car and I would have no choice. You know, that sucks. I am not a role player nor do intend to be. At least not by force. I have exploring, flying, mountain climbing, car crashing, gambling, and running down pedestrians to do. And at no point in all of my mayhem do I want to be interrupted by fatigue, hunger, or a fuel warning. Why shouldn't it even be optional? Why should I just be forced into a play style I don't like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

 

You can copy the gameplay but you can't copy the attitude. The Housers and Lazlow.

 

Racecarlock, I suppose there's always last-gen SA's Las Venturas for you. It's great for that.

So that's it then? Not even an option in the menu, I would have to eat, sleep, and fuel up my car and I would have no choice. You know, that sucks. I am not a role player nor do intend to be. At least not by force. I have exploring, flying, mountain climbing, car crashing, gambling, and running down pedestrians to do. And at no point in all of my mayhem do I want to be interrupted by fatigue, hunger, or a fuel warning. Why shouldn't it even be optional? Why should I just be forced into a play style I don't like?

Look dude, relax. This is just a theoretical discussion about the series. I'm not anyone at Rockstar.

 

Just because we talk about it in here, doesn't mean it's going to be, or even that it should be. This has run six pages already and you're the only one who seems to be talking it this way. I already clarified my statement regarding role playing games and if you did not understand it, and you think I intended it to be "OH WELL GTA SHOULD BE A RPG" it's not my problem anymore. I explained, it didn't stick. I gave it my best.

 

And not least of all, nobody's forcing you to do a damn thing. You don't like a game? Don't buy it 'til you try it and then don't buy it if you don't like it. Since you have a pretty set list of what you're looking for, I trust you do that already.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racecarlock
You can copy the gameplay but you can't copy the attitude. The Housers and Lazlow.

 

Racecarlock, I suppose there's always last-gen SA's Las Venturas for you. It's great for that.

So that's it then? Not even an option in the menu, I would have to eat, sleep, and fuel up my car and I would have no choice. You know, that sucks. I am not a role player nor do intend to be. At least not by force. I have exploring, flying, mountain climbing, car crashing, gambling, and running down pedestrians to do. And at no point in all of my mayhem do I want to be interrupted by fatigue, hunger, or a fuel warning. Why shouldn't it even be optional? Why should I just be forced into a play style I don't like?

Look dude, relax. This is just a theoretical discussion about the series. I'm not anyone at Rockstar.

 

Just because we talk about it in here, doesn't mean it's going to be, or even that it should be. This has run six pages already and you're the only one who seems to be talking it this way. I already clarified my statement regarding role playing games and if you did not understand it, and you think I intended it to be "OH WELL GTA SHOULD BE A RPG" it's not my problem anymore. I explained, it didn't stick. I gave it my best.

 

And not least of all, nobody's forcing you to do a damn thing. You don't like a game? Don't buy it 'til you try it and then don't buy it if you don't like it. Since you have a pretty set list of what you're looking for, I trust you do that already.

Well yes I do, but the fact is that GTA brings too many things to the table that I do like for me to just stop buying it and liking it. The immersive environments with pedestrians doing all kinds of actions, the fun physics, the excellent satire, these are things that only GTA can ever seem to get right. Saints Row 2 came close, but in the end GTA balances fun with realism really well. And I don't want to have to give up on GTA V out of frustration because my guy fell asleep while flying a plane again.

 

I know it's not set in stone that these mechanics will be in the game, but that doesn't mean we can't debate formula here and whether or not new mechanics will suck or not. Also, when push comes to shove, I can easily fly off the handle and be irrational, but I just don't like people telling me how I should play any game, let alone one that's specifically designed to let people have their own way of playing it. And when people suggest stuff like this, well, it just seems like they're trying to make me play like they do, and I don't like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder
but that doesn't mean we can't debate

Of course not.

 

Except that, in your debating, you're confusing what we talk about as "you must do this" or "it's going to be like this." You're taking my answers to questions, e.g. "what if I don't want to get a new car with fuel?" as "well, this is what I'm getting. I don't like it." Like I said, I'm not Rockstar. I haven't even watched the gawddang trailer. Just seen a few stills. Nobody's telling you how you should do something. No forum rules are in play here so you can throw my status as a moderator out here. I'm just another GTA gamer at the end of the day.

 

I bet you dollars to Rusty Brown Donuts if there's fuel in the game, there's gonna be an infinite fuel cheat. That's for folks like you. I'd covered awhile back that most of these "extra things" there's a way around, often through cheats, and you'll get your oldschool freeway loop circuit just like you like it. This isn't a ballgame. Everyone can win.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder you make some good points but I do think that it comes down to what RaceCarLock said " the fact is that GTA brings too many things to the table that I do like for me to just stop buying it and liking it". Had GTAIV not lacked planes and all the other things we became acustom to in that last generation there would have been as much complianing about having to hangout with friends and go bowling ect. What DEFINES GTA as a series is that it's always growing and adding more, that's where I was a bit let down in IV. Not only did it not grow and break the rules of "genres" but it almost succumbed to them. Like a universe collapsing unto itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

OK...think of it like this. Pretend for a second Rockstar was building houses instead of making games.

 

When Rockstar - or then, DMA - made the first GTA back in 1997, they laid the foundation on a small, modest house. Then they added to it with GTA2. They figured that was a pretty good start to something.

 

With GTA3, they poured a new foundation and started building a brand new, even bigger house, then added onto it a couple times with Vice and SA. It had all the bells and whistles you could think of, but then there was nothing else they could do with what they had. Time to start over.

 

And with IV, they started over again on a new house. It wasn't just a matter of carrying pieces of SA or Vice over. Everything's on new hardware, new engine, new everything. Built from scratch from the ground up. I realize this isn't good enough for some people, but what you became accustomed to in GTA: San Andreas had been a work in progress for over three years, with two previous editions for finetuning. With IV they had a shorter time with new hardware they'd never worked on before. And unlike the first game in the last gen, where there were no expectations going in and it became a surprise left-field smash - there were lots and lots of expectations here and that's going to unfortunately be IV's epitaph in the series going in. People expected way too much without taking technical aspects into account. I don't think gamers, on average, think much of that. They just want and expect. Well, they pushed back the release of IV, ostensibly to bugfixed. Rockstar did not get where they are releasing buggy, half-baked games. They're one of the last ones in the business putting quality over quantity and maybe that's why we're here four years later still waiting for the next game in the flagship series.

 

V will be the next addition to that new house Rockstar started building.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.