Why were GTA 4 controls quite bad?

[cp1dell]

You have to be trolling if you're saying the controls were perfect. I don't have a huge problem with them, but you have to admit that the movement could be smoother - and the cover system could have been smoother as well. But you can't blame Rockstar all that much, it was their first GTA title on the new engine.

[CryptReaperDorian]

On foot, GTA IV is a very clunky game.  I think that's because R* was unable to perfect the use of Euphoria at that time.  The thing that probably annoys me the most is when you pull back on the left analog stick while sprinting, and then your character will turn around and run like five feet backwards.  That's got me killed many times.

 

Also, I hope the characters in GTA V move faster.  Niko was pretty slow (for a GTA character), and then R* made it even more painful by giving us the slower Luis and even-slower-than-that Johnny.  They don't need to be Tommy Vercetti speed, but just fast enough.

So you pull back on the left stick which is SUPPOSED to make your character turn around and run back and that is considered "very clunky"?

 

I understand the IV control scheme was difficult and maybe a little clunky. But overall it wasn't so bad that it warrants this thread.

 

Just saying.

Here's the thing. When GTA IV takes "weight" into account, forward inertia is also (supposedly) taken into account. So, a 0.2 second tap backwards on the left analog stick should stop the character (like a brake), not make him turn around and run roughly ten to fifteen feet backwards a full second after you let go of the left analog stick.

[Meezarawcks]

 

On foot, GTA IV is a very clunky game.  I think that's because R* was unable to perfect the use of Euphoria at that time.  The thing that probably annoys me the most is when you pull back on the left analog stick while sprinting, and then your character will turn around and run like five feet backwards.  That's got me killed many times.

 

Also, I hope the characters in GTA V move faster.  Niko was pretty slow (for a GTA character), and then R* made it even more painful by giving us the slower Luis and even-slower-than-that Johnny.  They don't need to be Tommy Vercetti speed, but just fast enough.

So you pull back on the left stick which is SUPPOSED to make your character turn around and run back and that is considered "very clunky"?

 

I understand the IV control scheme was difficult and maybe a little clunky. But overall it wasn't so bad that it warrants this thread.

 

Just saying.

Here's the thing. When GTA IV takes "weight" into account, forward inertia is also (supposedly) taken into account. So, a 0.2 second tap backwards on the left analog stick should stop the character (like a brake), not make him turn around and run roughly ten to fifteen feet backwards a full second after you let go of the left analog stick.

Dude if you didn't press anything the character came to a halt. You don't have to put the "brakes" on or do a .02 second tap backwards.

 

My main point with all this is people complained about the controls yet never understood how to use them. People bash the driving of IV yet it is a very intuitive control scheme. Now the same for on foot controls....really?

[redx165]

On foot, GTA IV is a very clunky game.  I think that's because R* was unable to perfect the use of Euphoria at that time.  The thing that probably annoys me the most is when you pull back on the left analog stick while sprinting, and then your character will turn around and run like five feet backwards.  That's got me killed many times.

 

Also, I hope the characters in GTA V move faster.  Niko was pretty slow (for a GTA character), and then R* made it even more painful by giving us the slower Luis and even-slower-than-that Johnny.  They don't need to be Tommy Vercetti speed, but just fast enough.

So you pull back on the left stick which is SUPPOSED to make your character turn around and run back and that is considered "very clunky"?

 

I understand the IV control scheme was difficult and maybe a little clunky. But overall it wasn't so bad that it warrants this thread.

 

Just saying.

Here's the thing. When GTA IV takes "weight" into account, forward inertia is also (supposedly) taken into account. So, a 0.2 second tap backwards on the left analog stick should stop the character (like a brake), not make him turn around and run roughly ten to fifteen feet backwards a full second after you let go of the left analog stick.

Dude if you didn't press anything the character came to a halt. You don't have to put the "brakes" on or do a .02 second tap backwards.

 

My main point with all this is people complained about the controls yet never understood how to use them. People bash the driving of IV yet it is a very intuitive control scheme. Now the same for on foot controls....really?

Even Dan Houser said the cars feel like boats. There is no deny that GTA IV had problem with its controls. But no body cared as much cause it was a new GTA. Looking at both Red Dead Redemption and Max Payne 3 we can see they improve on it a lot.

[super_slav]

There was nothing wrong with the controls of gta iv cars, way more realistic than other gta games.

[Meezarawcks]

On foot, GTA IV is a very clunky game.  I think that's because R* was unable to perfect the use of Euphoria at that time.  The thing that probably annoys me the most is when you pull back on the left analog stick while sprinting, and then your character will turn around and run like five feet backwards.  That's got me killed many times.

 

Also, I hope the characters in GTA V move faster.  Niko was pretty slow (for a GTA character), and then R* made it even more painful by giving us the slower Luis and even-slower-than-that Johnny.  They don't need to be Tommy Vercetti speed, but just fast enough.

So you pull back on the left stick which is SUPPOSED to make your character turn around and run back and that is considered "very clunky"?

 

I understand the IV control scheme was difficult and maybe a little clunky. But overall it wasn't so bad that it warrants this thread.

 

Just saying.

Here's the thing. When GTA IV takes "weight" into account, forward inertia is also (supposedly) taken into account. So, a 0.2 second tap backwards on the left analog stick should stop the character (like a brake), not make him turn around and run roughly ten to fifteen feet backwards a full second after you let go of the left analog stick.

Dude if you didn't press anything the character came to a halt. You don't have to put the "brakes" on or do a .02 second tap backwards.

 

My main point with all this is people complained about the controls yet never understood how to use them. People bash the driving of IV yet it is a very intuitive control scheme. Now the same for on foot controls....really?

Even Dan Houser said the cars feel like boats. There is no deny that GTA IV had problem with its controls. But no body cared as much cause it was a new GTA. Looking at both Red Dead Redemption and Max Payne 3 we can see they improve on it a lot.

Never said they were the best controls. Just saying they weren't so bad that they warrant a thread like this. I agree the cars handled like boats but if you got into the groove of driving in IV it is the most fun I have had driving in any game.

[AuSsIeThUnDeR36]

Yeah like the 1st time driving and I power slid into a wall I very quickly learnt that you can't go fast on bends. Just take the finger off the accelerator and brake a bit, turn, then accelerate out of the turn. You get used to it quickly.

[Algonquin Assassin]

No.

 

Sometimes it annoyed me how cover would engage randomly and placed me infront of a wall I didn't want to, but then again it still exists in RDR and MP3.

 

I would say it has more to do with learning Euphoria with each game. For a first attempt with such physics it was quite good.

[GlitzyTomb]

Pretty much.

 

GTAIV was their first attempt with a lot of things.

 

You can see how in each game afterward they improved. If GTAV applies the improvements made for Red Dead Redemption and LA Noire it's going to be pretty damn good.

 

Previews seem to indicate that they do.

 

Even if you didn't like GTAIV, if you felt the cars were too floaty and the on foot sections to clunky, surely you can still admit that the world was good. Using GTAIV as the base on which to build GTAV looks immensely promising.

[Meezarawcks]

 

Yeah like the 1st time driving and I power slid into a wall I very quickly learnt that you can't go fast on bends. Just take the finger off the accelerator and brake a bit, turn, then accelerate out of the turn. You get used to it quickly.

or if you time the turn right and hit the hand brake at the right time you can do a great slide and turn. It is tough to do and really only works if you hit a street with minimal cars around.

[meson1]

If GTA:V applies the improvements made for... LA Noire ...

L.A.Noire doesn't apply. Different developers, different engine, different mechanics. I know Rockstar helped Team Bondi finish it off and published it for them, but all the programming and underpinnings are completely different to all the RAGE developed games (RDR, MP3 etc).

[Gunde]

I definitely agree that while there's nothing wrong with the control scheme, Niko's movements were clunky. However, as has already been mentioned, this was fixed in RDR, so there's no need to worry.

[zainzombie]

Didnt the preview mentioned that it looked like that the character controls would be similar to Max Payne 3.

 

As far as IV's control goes, I didnt have a problem when I first played that game, I really liked all the physics but 3 years later when I tried to play the game again after a long break... I just hated how clunky it was.

 

V should definitely be better than IV as I assume it will be more like RDR/Max Payne than IV.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Hmmm after just playing GTA IV I really don't see how it's "clunky" at all. Niko moves fine. If you want an example of a game with clunky controls play Leisure Suit Larry: Box Office Bust. After 5 minutes you'll tear your hair out and GTA IV will feel as smooth as silk.

[Graven]

Fine for me. I just hope the 'classic' control option returns in V.

 

Hate using R2/L2 to accelerate/brake.

I thought L2 /R2 is the best way to imitate car foot pedals.

With classic, don't You need to tap continuously if needed to drive slow?

 

[Nappy]

New engine, bad design. Rest is a masterpiece tho.

[AlexnderJ]

another case where the game put realism over fun

 

not to mention the driving was trash, even when got ported to the PC; it was notoriously boat-y (cue the fanboys frothing at the mouth that their driving is rightfully criticized)

[billiejoearmstrong8]

4 hours ago, AlexnderJ said:

another case where the game put realism over fun

 

not to mention the driving was trash, even when got ported to the PC; it was notoriously boat-y (cue the fanboys frothing at the mouth that their driving is rightfully criticized)

Which GTA has better driving though? In the older games it's just basic and arcadey, and in V you feel like you're on rails and every vehicle feels like it has no weight and handles the same, boring. IV's driving isn't perfect but it has variation and detail that makes it more enjoyable. It's not even difficult either, all you have to do is get used to braking earlier/more. I'm not particularly skilled at or into the driving in GTA/games in general but I still enjoy driving in IV most. 

[AlexnderJ]

2 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Which GTA has better driving though?

simple, the older titles as REALISM wasn't their motto, V isn't perfect; but is a step in the right direction

[billiejoearmstrong8]

59 minutes ago, AlexnderJ said:

simple, the older titles as REALISM wasn't their motto, V isn't perfect; but is a step in the right direction

It's not just about it being realistic though. The cars feeling like they have real weight to them, each one having different handling etc, feeling the texture of the ground and the suspension working as you drive, the engaging aspect of having to think about when to brake, the damage the cars can take, the fun and complex physics when you do a jump/bail out/crash through the window/run people over/smash into smaller cars. This stuff isn't just for the sake of being realistic, it makes for enjoyable/varied/interesting/engaging driving and gameplay. Every car driving the same with no weight to them (the weight thing is particularly bad in V where your car feels like a toy but any car you're NOT driving is somehow as heavy as lead so hitting anything stops you dead) simply isn't as fun. 

 

Obviously it's a matter of personal preference whether you like IV's driving or the other games' better, but "realistic" isn't the only reason to enjoy driving in IV. 

Edited February 24, 2020 by billiejoearmstrong8

[Gamerwind]

GTA 4 had the most slowest and clunkiest control among HD era R* games.

Few examples, Niko stands still for few seconds before climbing a Ladder , cover system was slow and shooting from cover was hard, the running animation felt unnatural,the driving physics was ridiculous.

But I can forgive it since it was R* first test with new game engine.

They improved a lot in later games like Max Payne 3 and GTA V.

[Nappy]

I think pressing a button to climb ledders is better than how it is in V.

[Xiled]

2 hours ago, Payne said:

I think pressing a button to climb ledders is better than how it is in V.

Can't count how many times I died in gta v because the clumsy character walked over the edge of a building and died cause they don't grab the ladder. The button for grabbing the ladder was better, just sometimes the animations took a bit longer to work. 

[Nappy]

...A lot of things are better if they are in control of the player.

[Midnight Hitman]

I actually liked IV's controls back then, but I kinda get the point that people might find them kinda "clunky" or slow-paced.

 

One thing I LOVED about IV's controls was the fact that you were able to grab ledges, hang on ledges, move left or right on them, or that the protagonist grapped the ledge of the next architecture when you jumped from one platform to another.

In GTA V the protagonist doesn't even bother, he just faceplants himself on the wall when you try to jump from one building to another, and falls all the way down. Ridiculous. What a f*cking stupid decision by R* to cut the game down in that regard. Who in the world thought this would be a good idea?

Edited February 26, 2020 by Midnight Hitman

[NewGuybj]

pretty good controls actually, for me at least.

[KingAJ032304]

On 2/25/2020 at 10:28 AM, Payne said:

I think pressing a button to climb ledders is better than how it is in V.

I 100% agree. 

[El Penguin Bobo]

The only problems I had with the controls was the sticky cover system and the autoaiming and that was it. Other than that, the game does feel very smooth.

 

RDR1 definitely improved on it though.

[Nappy]

Sometimes i think i’ve been too harsh on this game’s controls. Although it isn’t ultra responsive like V or San Andreas

[Algonquin Assassin]

On 2/25/2020 at 6:34 PM, Gamerwind said:

Niko stands still for few seconds before climbing a Ladder.

To be fair I'm just glad GTA IV finally let us climb ladders. I've always found it amusing in San Andreas in particular that CJ could master flying jets and a jetpack, but coming to a ladder...…….no thanks lol.

 

A "few seconds" is quite an exaggeration just as most things are when people criticise GTA IV's controls when it's really more like half a second. What's he supposed to do? Stick himself onto it like Spiderman instantaneously with a slight press of the button? I don't know about you, but every game I've ever played that lets the players scales ladders has a slight pause between the animation and the action itself and this was one of those things about GTA IV's mechanics that was never done before in any prior GTA game just like the cover system that people seem to love to trash.

 

Granted while there are of course other games that tend to be more fast paced I don't think GTA IV's controls are as "bad" as what people say. In fact all of the games that followed used GTA IV's architecture so R* saw they had a solid platform to work with instead of scraping and starting over with each iteration.