Please explain the hate for fuel in cars?

[Firefighter427]

I agree with you 100%. Only problem is planes, helicopters, boats etc. it seems a bit complicated to fuel those.

This. It would be impossible to add that feature because it wouldn't make sense in my opinion of course, I mean they can put gas station for cars but what about the aircraft, watercraft, etc? I think this feature wouldn't make the game much more realistic, I think that they can keep this apart for later in the next-gen's GTA title.

Airports have refueling stations with Jet Fuel, also used in helicopters, and marinas have places for boat fuel. Simple. I agree with OP here. Although the coding could be rough, it'd be nice to have. Even as an option, although I don't think we should have many options for gameplay. R* always has cheats, maybe this game will have hundreds and fuel will be one, if not, I'll get the PC version as well and mod it.

[Killerdude]

lol

Mods add poll, OP says it's Biased, The people have spoken and majority do not want fuel, How much clearer could it get?

 

Seriously Pro-fuel guys, You're fighting an uphill battle, You will never win. Unless the majority of GTA gamers suddenly died all at once, then you'd win, But the odds of that happening is slim to none.

Its bias bcuz there is no 3rd choice for optional which basically means the "no" vote is a combination of "no" and "optional" voters. Not every "no" voter hates fuel. Some dont care and wouldnt have a problem with it being optional but there is no choice for that so... Slick move by the mod.

Optional means yes, But you want to be able to turn it off, Face it, Unless majority of that poll says yes, You won't be satisfied with it.

[meson1]

I'd say the poll is fine. Having an option for 'optional' would dilute the results. As it is, it forces people to make a definitive choice.

 

I'm sorry the results of it aren't working out for you, but it seems the people have spoken.

[Algonquin Assassin]

lol

Mods add poll, OP says it's Biased, The people have spoken and majority do not want fuel, How much clearer could it get?

 

Seriously Pro-fuel guys, You're fighting an uphill battle, You will never win. Unless the majority of GTA gamers suddenly died all at once, then you'd win, But the odds of that happening is slim to none.

Its bias bcuz there is no 3rd choice for optional which basically means the "no" vote is a combination of "no" and "optional" voters. Not every "no" voter hates fuel. Some dont care and wouldnt have a problem with it being optional but there is no choice for that so... Slick move by the mod.

In what way is it biased? You either want it in the game or not. There's no in between. I think you're a tad pissed because most of us think it's a stupid idea.

[meson1]

Its biased because there is no 3rd choice for optional which basically means the "no" vote is a combination of "no" and "optional" voters. Not every "no" voter hates fuel. Some don't care and wouldn't have a problem with it being optional but there is no choice for that so. Slick move by the mod.

I disagree, it's not biased at all. It's either 'yes' or 'no'. Do you want fuel or not? Its adding the extra option you're proposing that muddies the waters. The poll as it stands, gets to the root of what people want with respect to fuel.

 

You're just wanting 'optional', so you can co-opt the count into your 'yes' vote. But consider the people that don't want fuel, but don't mind it being optional for others. You'd be stealing and misrepresenting all their votes.

 

IF, you really wanted to poll for 'optional' properly, you'd have to do it with TWO extra options. So you'd have to have:

• Yes, I want fuel.
• Yes, I want fuel, but it should be optional so others can turn it off.
• No, I don't want fuel, but it should be optional so others can turn it on.
• No, I don't want fuel at all.

 

[BlackNoise]

Its biased because there is no 3rd choice for optional which basically means the "no" vote is a combination of "no" and "optional" voters.  Not every "no" voter hates fuel.  Some don't care and wouldn't have a problem with it being optional but there is no choice for that so.  Slick move by the mod. 

I disagree, it's not biased at all. It's either 'yes' or 'no'. Do you want fuel or not? Its adding the extra option you're proposing that muddies the waters. The poll as it stands, gets to the root of what people want with respect to fuel.

 

You're just wanting 'optional', so you can co-opt the count into your 'yes' vote. But consider the people that don't want fuel, but don't mind it being optional for others. You'd be stealing and misrepresenting all their votes.

 

IF, you really wanted to poll for 'optional' properly, you'd have to do it with TWO extra options. So you'd have to have:

• Yes, I want fuel.
• Yes, I want fuel, but it should be optional so others can turn it off.
• No, I don't want fuel, but it should be optional so others can turn it on.
• No, I don't want fuel at all.

This is true. It's why I hate the "optional" poll choice for stuff like this. It's a cop out for people who just want to be nice. The entire point of a poll is to get an idea of how people feel about something.

 

It's so funny that BumpyJohnson calls the poll bias, but if there was an "optional" choice, he would consider it the same as yes. That's not bias at all...

[meson1]

Its biased because there is no 3rd choice for optional which basically means the "no" vote is a combination of "no" and "optional" voters.  Not every "no" voter hates fuel.  Some don't care and wouldn't have a problem with it being optional but there is no choice for that so.  Slick move by the mod. 

I disagree, it's not biased at all. It's either 'yes' or 'no'. Do you want fuel or not? Its adding the extra option you're proposing that muddies the waters. The poll as it stands, gets to the root of what people want with respect to fuel.

 

You're just wanting 'optional', so you can co-opt the count into your 'yes' vote. But consider the people that don't want fuel, but don't mind it being optional for others. You'd be stealing and misrepresenting all their votes.

 

IF, you really wanted to poll for 'optional' properly, you'd have to do it with TWO extra options. So you'd have to have:

 

Yes, I want fuel.

 

Yes, I want fuel, but it should be optional so others can turn it off.

 

No, I don't want fuel, but it should be optional so others can turn it on.

 

No, I don't want fuel at all.

 

This is true. It's why I hate the "optional" poll choice for stuff like this. It's a cop out for people who just want to be nice. The entire point of a poll is to get an idea of how people feel about something.

 

It's so funny that BumpyJohnson calls the poll bias, but if there was an "optional" choice, he would consider it the same as yes. That's not bias at all...

I agree absolutely. It is a huge cop out and I actually don't think my additional options are a good idea at all.

 

The poll is fine as it stands. As I say, it cuts out all the prevaricating and gets right to the heart of what people actually want.

[SkylineGTRFreak]

How is the act of the eating to heal,  buying ammo,  paying toll at the bridge,  changing clothes, etc fun?  and again I'm not trying to convince you of anything.  If tou dont like it then fine.  I dont care but lets stop trying to pass all these BS excuses based on personal opinion off as fact.  You dont know how R* would impliment it if they did so stop claiming it would be boring,  useless,  etc. when you're basing that claim on our own imagination.

You buy ammo and health? Seriously, I actually never ever do that. Need ammo? Pick it up from dead people or take one of the guns lying around in the city. Need health? Go to sleep or pick it up somewhere. Changing clothes? Atleast it does have an effect on your lookign etc, and you're almost never forced to buy a new suit or something. Poor arguments here.

 

Plus, it's not needed. You're not really "forced" to buy these things. But if you're driving your favourite car back home and don't have any more fuel in there... well, f*ck.

 

It's just a damn annoying feature and please enlighten me, how an "optional" feature should even work. Doesn't make sense at all.

And sorry to burst your bubbles, but most (or all) cars we've seen so far don't even have fuelcaps.

[saintsrow]

The same reason why we would hate having to go to the bathroom in GTA.

But isn't that the way the original GTAV demo opened, with Trevor on the sh*tter?

 

Maybe if you are don't take a sh*t regularly in the game, you have to sit there for a lot longer and lose health while cursing out one-liners about being constipated.

 

 

[redx165]

lol

Mods add poll, OP says it's Biased, The people have spoken and majority do not want fuel, How much clearer could it get?

 

Seriously Pro-fuel guys, You're fighting an uphill battle, You will never win. Unless the majority of GTA gamers suddenly died all at once, then you'd win, But the odds of that happening is slim to none.

Its bias bcuz there is no 3rd choice for optional which basically means the "no" vote is a combination of "no" and "optional" voters. Not every "no" voter hates fuel. Some dont care and wouldnt have a problem with it being optional but there is no choice for that so... Slick move by the mod.

In what way is it biased? You either want it in the game or not. There's no in between. I think you're a tad pissed because most of us think it's a stupid idea.

Cause it is a stupid idea. GTA should never have fuel. It limits your freedom which isn't what a open world game should do. You can tell Rockstar is trying to get away from some of the realistic feel that GTA IV had. Regen health and bullet time but they will still have it fill Realistic.

[Guest]

 

It's why I hate the "optional" poll choice for stuff like this. It's a cop out for people who just want to be nice. The entire point of a poll is to get an idea of how people feel about something.

 

It's so funny that BumpyJohnson calls the poll bias, but if there was an "optional" choice, he would consider it the same as yes. That's not bias at all...

You can call it a cop out but I consider it a solution which makes both sides happy. If you dont like it you can just turn it off so there is no reason to say no other than just simply wanting to deny others what they want. You say the entire point of a poll is to get an idea of how people feel about something. Well a yes/no vote doesnt cover every opinion on this subject. Its not simply black and white. Some of the ppl who dont want it wouldnt mind it in the game if you could turn it off but there is no choice for that so it stacks the no vote. Optional makes the no vote irrelevant. Allowing a no vote hides that fact which is what I mean by it being bias.

 

 

In what way is it biased? You either want it in the game or not. There's no in between. I think you're a tad pissed because most of us think it's a stupid idea.

Pissed? lol I dont give a damn about your opinion of what is stupid or not. Its not fact. Most of you who think its stupid are just ppl who are just stuck on your personal opinion. You assume it will be a certain way and base your judgement off that. Why would that piss me off? lol

Edited May 19, 2013 by BumpyJohnson

[Killerdude]

If you seriously just insulted the majority of the GTA community, it's VERY clear that you're pissed.

 

Y so mad breh?

 

Besides if you don't care about our opinions, why create this thread?

 

Safe to say OP MAY be retarded.

[RedDagger]

I'm just gonna point out my post at the bottom of page 18 for people saying fuel is bad, it should never be implemented etc. because I think it's a good point. You know, to keep this on topic and all that.

[Flashify]

NOTE: I did not request this poll. A mod did it on his own. IMO this poll is invalid bcuz for one there is no 3rd choice for "optional" as in can turn on or off. The "no" choice would definately have the smallest % if ther was an "optional" choice and 2, the poll is based purely on assumptions. When you just ask "do you want fuel in cars" ppl will answer based on how they THINK fuel will be. Most assume it will be a constant chore and are too bias to even consider the possibility that R* could impliment it in a non annoying way. Nobody knows how it will be implimented. Add in that there is no "optional" choice and its clear the poll isnt a fair representation of how ppl feel about it. It clearly favors the no option but oh well.

 

 

I was the member that requested it, just to get a a simple view on the balance between those who do and don't. Sorry...

[Racecarlock]

I see a circle in these arguments and it goes thus.

 

"What if I run out in the desert?"

 

"Then steal another car"

 

"But I don't want another car"

 

"Then get gas"

 

"But getting gas is boring"

 

"Then steal another car"

 

"But I like my car"

 

"Then get gas"

 

"But getting gas is boring"

 

Can't we just not have a fuel system? I like getting attached to a car and driving it around without having to stop for 5 minutes at a gas pump. And no, I don't care how long it takes to run out. I'm lazy, and I should be able to be lazy because I'm playing a video game, not working the cash register at mcdonalds.

[Lelouch The Zero]

 

If you seriously just insulted the majority of the GTA community, it's VERY clear that you're pissed.

 

Y so mad breh?

 

Besides if you don't care about our opinions, why create this thread?

 

Safe to say OP MAY be retarded.

IMO, I like the idea and all, but it would get really tedious at times. Also, with all these arguments in this thread, it surprises me why this thread isn't locked yet.

[Flashify]

You don't have to get fuel, but you can go up to the pump and watch an animation if you want to - just to f*ck the pump up. Thread over?

 

[redx165]

NOTE: I did not request this poll. A mod did it on his own. IMO this poll is invalid bcuz for one there is no 3rd choice for "optional" as in can turn on or off. The "no" choice would definately have the smallest % if ther was an "optional" choice and 2, the poll is based purely on assumptions. When you just ask "do you want fuel in cars" ppl will answer based on how they THINK fuel will be. Most assume it will be a constant chore and are too bias to even consider the possibility that R* could impliment it in a non annoying way. Nobody knows how it will be implimented. Add in that there is no "optional" choice and its clear the poll isnt a fair representation of how ppl feel about it. It clearly favors the no option but oh well.

 

 

Just another excuse. You now see the people have spoken and we don't want it.

[Guest]

^ ^

Yes bcuz a bunch of ppl voting no based on the "assumption" of how fuel will work is enough to exclude it. lol The ppl have spoken? So just the no voters are considerded the people? You see the poll? You just gonna ignore the fact that damn near half the community DOES want it? lol

 

 

Can't we just not have a fuel system? I like getting attached to a car and driving it around without having to stop for 5 minutes at a gas pump. And no, I don't care how long it takes to run out. I'm lazy, and I should be able to be lazy because I'm playing a video game, not working the cash register at mcdonalds.

Why cant it be an option? An option to turn it off makes all of your complaints irrelevant. You can also use a cheat but thats not good enough for you guys for some reason. You're not satisfied until you control what others can do in their home too and thats BS. If there is an option to turn it off or a cheat for it then you dont have sh*t to complain about bcuz the problems you have with it wont exist but for some reason this gets ignored tho.

Edited May 20, 2013 by BumpyJohnson

[Polish_Trucker]

It would only work if it was optional, so the people who want it in are happy, and the people who don't are also happy. Simples.

[epicluca]

It would be pretty cool but get boring and tedious to refill eventually, even if there was a cheat for it. When I used to play the earlier GTAs I thought it would be cool to have to refill cars and whenever I saw a gas station I'd stop and pretend to fill up, but I think if you had to do it for real it would get boring as hell. It wasn't that bad in Mafia 2 though.

[Racecarlock]

Can't we just not have a fuel system? I like getting attached to a car and driving it around without having to stop for 5 minutes at a gas pump. And no, I don't care how long it takes to run out. I'm lazy, and I should be able to be lazy because I'm playing a video game, not working the cash register at mcdonalds.

Why cant it be an option? An option to turn it off makes all of your complaints irrelevant. You can also use a cheat but thats not good enough for you guys for some reason. You're not satisfied until you control what others can do in their home too and thats BS. If there is an option to turn it off or a cheat for it then you dont have sh*t to complain about bcuz the problems you have with it wont exist but for some reason this gets ignored tho.

You're confusing me with redx up there dude. I actually do not have a problem with it being optional.

 

No matter how many bullsh*t slippery slopes it brings on... redx.

 

However, bumpy, you asked us to explain the hate for fuel. We did that. I have no problem with it being optional, I was only explaining why I would find it annoying if it was mandatory or enabled as an option. I have no problem if I can turn it off anyways.

 

I mean, nascar thunder lets me turn off fuel and it's a racing sim. I think it would work for GTA.

[Killerdude]

^ ^

Yes bcuz a bunch of ppl voting no based on the "assumption" of how fuel will work is enough to exclude it. lol The ppl have spoken? So just the no voters are considerded the people? You see the poll? You just gonna ignore the fact that damn near half the community DOES want it? lol

 

 

Can't we just not have a fuel system? I like getting attached to a car and driving it around without having to stop for 5 minutes at a gas pump. And no, I don't care how long it takes to run out. I'm lazy, and I should be able to be lazy because I'm playing a video game, not working the cash register at mcdonalds.

Why cant it be an option? An option to turn it off makes all of your complaints irrelevant. You can also use a cheat but thats not good enough for you guys for some reason. You're not satisfied until you control what others can do in their home too and thats BS. If there is an option to turn it off or a cheat for it then you dont have sh*t to complain about bcuz the problems you have with it wont exist but for some reason this gets ignored tho.

OP You CLEARLY have no clue what the word Biased means, The community has spoken and nobody wants f*cking fuel and sh*t.

 

Stop whining about how everything is biased and theres not enough options because you lost, I bet if it were the other way around,You wouldn't be bitching at all, NOW THAT'S BIASED!!!!!

 

 

bi·as

/ˈbīəs/

 

Noun

Prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.

 

Verb

Show prejudice for or against (someone or something) unfairly: "the tests were biased against women"; "a biased view of the world".

 

Synonyms

noun. prejudice - inclination - partiality - tendency

verb. influence - prejudice