Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

PatrickJr.

Official GTAV Whine and Complain Thread

Recommended Posts

Sleepwalking
10 hours ago, Lock n' Stock said:

Personally, I feel this video summed it up well (along with a host of other design flaws).

 

 

 

They sacrificed a lot in order to make that game run on a PS3.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lock n' Stock
1 hour ago, Sleepwalking said:

They sacrificed a lot in order to make that game run on a PS3.

 

 

To be fair, it's amazing that R* were able to get a game the size of GTA V running as well as it did on last-gen consoles. Doesn't change however that some of the dumber design choices still made it into future versions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
12 minutes ago, Lock n' Stock said:

To be fair, it's amazing that R* were able to get a game the size of GTA V running as well as it did on last-gen consoles. Doesn't change however that some of the dumber design choices still made it into future versions.

They actually talked about this in one of the RDR2 interviews. Rob Nelson said when they were making the next generation version, they really wanted to fix some of the issues like the NPC behavior and interiors but it wasn't simply possible because the game had some "base coding" that couldn't be changed other than possibly ruining the whole experience so they only did some minor tweaks for the next gen versions. I believe the entire game basically was held by some weird coding that made it possible but ultimately forced R* to cut many corners. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lock n' Stock
4 minutes ago, TheSantader25 said:

They actually talked about this in one of the RDR2 interviews. Rob Nelson said when they were making the next generation version, they really wanted to fix some of the issues like the NPC behavior and interiors but it wasn't simply possible because the game had some "base coding" that couldn't be changed other than possibly ruining the whole experience so they only did some minor tweaks for the next gen versions. I believe the entire game basically was held by some weird coding that made it possible but ultimately forced R* to cut many corners. 

If anything, the game should have been designed for PS4 and Xbox One from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
5 minutes ago, Lock n' Stock said:

If anything, the game should have been designed for PS4 and Xbox One from the start.

The best thing R* could've done was to push IV back to around 2009-2010 and deliver the game to it's fullest and the absolute HD GTA for the PS3/X360 era and then make V for the next gen consoles based on the experience they gain. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tycek

And what about shareholders then? R* didn't release GTA IV just for the players, but they also had their business partners that wanted their money back. Making one game for 6 years isn't good for business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
13 minutes ago, Tycek said:

And what about shareholders then? R* didn't release GTA IV just for the players, but they also had their business partners that wanted their money back. Making one game for 6 years isn't good for business.

They made RDR2 for 8 years. The shareholders were happy with that apparently.(They had the shark card money though). SA made them loads of cash and it was still going on strong. They released The Warriors in 2005,Bully in 2006 and they also had Midnight Club Los Angeles coming out in 2008.If the shareholders trusted R* with RDR2 to take their time because of the money from shark cards They could trust them with IV as well because of the money they were making of 4 games but I guess the trust wasn't that strong back then. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tycek

Did you just seriously compare the situation from 2018 with the one from 2008? Today after financial success of GTA V Dan Houser and Strauss Zelnick may be caught fisting puppies in the middle of Times Square and get away with it. Besides RDR was made actively for four - five years (since San Diego was helping in the development of GTA V after all).

 

2008 was a bit different status for R* at least imo. They were authors of heavily acclaimed San Andreas, but their position was nowhere near close they have now. Many companies tried to follow R* in their footsteps and were trying to create new open world crime games and there was basically no choice, but to act. Saints Row was already on the market for two years (2006) and even it came out only for Xbox 360, first open world crime game for the 8th generation was already there. Saints Row 2 was meant out to came out in 2008 and Mafia II was released finally in 2010. You may say their quality wasn't as good as GTA (though you will probably object since it's about IV), but these games were or were meant to be there and there was always a chance R* may lose some of their income.  

 

You can always say R* could delay premiere of GTA IV further into 2009 or even 2010, but don't forget it was already delayed once by 2008. Such decisions would slowly decay reputation of company known to release games in rather short periods of time - 1 year between III and VC and 2 years for SA. Bully and The Warriors were completely new IPs and even if these games were meant to be good (and they were), many people were still waiting for next GTA. MCLA while pretty well known, wasn't as popular as GTA either, since many people considered Need For Speed as a better racing game, especially after Underground or Most Wanted.

 

I guess we stray too far from the main topic, though.

Edited by Tycek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25

@Tycek

 

I didn't exactly compare the two situations. It's clear that they are different. R* now have enough finances and freedom to do whatever the f*ck they want in any way they want.Other Open World games always exist. Right now we have Watch dogs but R* already set themselves as the king of this genre with Vice City and San Andreas and they wouldnt lose their market because of releasing their next game in 2009.Specially with the right advertising. 

 

I'm 100% certain R* already knew what they wanted to do with GTA V even before IV's release. I'm saying they basically made the wrong move by "planning" to release these two games in one generation. If they "planned" things differently they wouldn't announce IV this early and we wouldn't have the delays in that time period. If they fully focused on IV as the "ultimate PS3/X360 era GTA" instead of looking at it as "one of the two GTAs we're gonna release in this generation" things could play out differently.

 

They shouldn't have had plans for a game called GTA V before IV. I know there might not be evidence that they did but I heard the development and writing for V already was planned before IV's release which goes to show they were in some sort of a rush to release two GTAs in that time period. If experience has taught us anything is that maybe if they did consider IV the only GTA they're gonna release in that generation and fully focused to bring the best out of it, it could easily outsell San Andreas and satisfy the shareholders in the long run.

 

It's obvious that their strategy to release V as a cross-gen game in 2013 with a mass multiplayer worked out better anyways so "financially" they made the right move. But it wasn't the right move in terms of the quality of these two games.

 

All I said was what R* "should have" done to make these two games better. It's obvious that my suggestion isn't the most profitable one. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lioshenka
7 hours ago, Sleepwalking said:

They sacrificed a lot in order to make that game run on a PS3. 

 

 

I never noticed this before, but I have to admit GTA 5 looks so much better on PS3 than it does on PC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Acetaminophen
10 hours ago, Dryspace said:

But again...let's remember that GTA V was released five-and-a-half years ago, and very importantly was designed and coded for 2005 console hardware. It's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison.

GTA 4 feels like the “A Team” 

 

GTA 5 feels like the “B Team”

 

its apples to apples. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
42 minutes ago, Acetaminophen said:

GTA 4 feels like the “A Team” 

 

GTA 5 feels like the “B Team”

 

its apples to apples. 

No it's not. GTA IV doesn't have the same visual quality like GTA V. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sleepwalking

 

1 hour ago, TheSantader25 said:

No it's not. GTA IV doesn't have the same visual quality like GTA V. 

+1

 

Technically GTA V trashes GTA IV, it is amazing how they managed to do this even both games coded & designed for same hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Acetaminophen
5 hours ago, TheSantader25 said:

No it's not. GTA IV doesn't have the same visual quality like GTA V. 

I’m not talking visuals. 

3 hours ago, Sleepwalking said:

 

+1

 

Technically GTA V trashes GTA IV, it is amazing how they managed to do this even both games coded & designed for same hardware.

*graphically* 

 

GTA 4 tech is better 

 

As in Physics etc.

Edited by Acetaminophen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
23 minutes ago, Acetaminophen said:

I’m not talking visuals. 

*graphically* 

 

GTA 4 tech is better 

 

As in Physics etc.

Dude do you even understand how games work? You can't compare two games that have this amount of differences in terms of graphics in the technical aspect while they are running on the same hardware. Better Visuals use the console's power and make the developer to cut corners. GTA V used all the 360/PS3 power but IV didn't,  So it had more room for other aspects. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dryspace
7 hours ago, Lioshenka said:

I never noticed this before, but I have to admit GTA 5 looks so much better on PS3 than it does on PC.

Say what?

 

 

6 hours ago, Acetaminophen said:

GTA 4 feels like the “A Team” 

 

GTA 5 feels like the “B Team”

 

its apples to apples. 

You're just speaking in terms of whether you think one game is overall better than another. You can make that comparison between any two games from any two time periods. In fact, if one thinks an earlier game is better than a later one with newer technology, the more 'apples to oranges' the comparison, the proportionally better the earlier game appears to be, since it is at a "disadvantage".

 

Maybe I construed the original comment differently than you, but I took it to mean basically, "Now, THIS is how you make a game", or something to that effect, and thought that it was referring at least in part to gameplay-related aspects. I was just pointing out that the gameplay-related aspects of GTA V were lacking because most of the 2005 console cycles went to rendering the world and its graphical realism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Acetaminophen
1 hour ago, TheSantader25 said:

Dude do you even understand how games work? You can't compare two games that have this amount of differences in terms of graphics in the technical aspect while they are running on the same hardware. Better Visuals use the console's power and make the developer to cut corners. GTA V used all the 360/PS3 power but IV didn't,  So it had more room for other aspects. 

Maybe they should have made a good game instead of making a good looking empty shell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Male01

We had SA on the PS2. We had IV on the PS3. Rockstar had one job. Coincidence? I think not.

Did V sacrifice anything or did it just discard everything? It only achieved less than nothing. Who said we needed sound effects of car engines cooling down instead of having reliable getaway cars that starts up instantly in a game whose gameplay is centered around thefts? Who wanted to turn off plane engines in the air instead of flying at the slowest possible speed? If IV had the most realistic paramedics in the series, why did V remove it instead of improving or even leaving that feature intact? Since when is dying too easily more realistic than having plenty of health? Lock n' Stock is right in showing us his this video. What is the excuse to make a PS3 game whose features are inferior to its PS2 counterpart after previously making another great game?

Edited by Male01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dryspace
1 hour ago, Acetaminophen said:

Maybe they should have made a good game instead of making a good looking empty shell. 

From my past comments you can see that I've made it clear that the gameplay and mechanics of GTA V are what I consider the worst aspects of the game. Did it have to be that way? Well, no...and yes. It did have to be that way because GTA V was designed and developed for 2005 console hardware. There was an extremely limited amount of power to be budgeted out.

 

So the question you must ask yourself is this: Do you think that the console market, reviewers, etc. would have been happy if GTA V had looked like GTA IV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
American Venom
14 minutes ago, Dryspace said:

So the question you must ask yourself is this: Do you think that the console market, reviewers, etc. would have been happy if GTA V had looked like GTA IV?

What's wrong with how GTA IV looks? I still play GTA IV to this day and other than some obvious signs of age here and there it's still a great looking game for its age. In 2013 GTA IV's graphics still looked fresh so if R* had to dial back the visuals to be slightly more "GTA IV-ish" and in turn allowed them to fix up the lacking gameplay mechanics that would only be a good thing I would think.

 

Graphics don't make a game. Look at The Order: 1886. Reviewers panned the sh*t out of that game even though its visuals were amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dryspace
2 hours ago, Miamivicecity said:

What's wrong with how GTA IV looks?

I'm not sure why you are asking me what's wrong with how it looks. When did I say there is anything wrong with how it looks?

 

2 hours ago, Miamivicecity said:

...if R* had to dial back the visuals to be slightly more "GTA IV-ish" and in turn allowed them to fix up the lacking gameplay mechanics that would only be a good thing I would think.

I'm not talking about what you think, or what I think. I asked a question about what the console market in general would think. I just played Deus Ex (2000) for the first time last year and loved it. I regularly play NES games, 1980's Adventure games, and Text Adventures. And for that matter, Crysis (2007) had the best graphics ever seen by far and was also (and still is) an extremely satisfactory first-person shooter--except for the stupid aliens.

 

Graphical realism does not make a great game--but contrary to what some like to pretend, it doesn't automatically mean a bad game, either.

 

Again, I said nothing about my preferences. My comment was regarding what would be accepted by the market in general, which is what the giants develop for.

Edited by Dryspace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
American Venom
4 hours ago, Dryspace said:

I'm not sure why you are asking me what's wrong with how it looks. When did I say there is anything wrong with how it looks?

 

I'm not talking about what you think, or what I think. I asked a question about what the console market in general would think. I just played Deus Ex (2000) for the first time last year and loved it. I regularly play NES games, 1980's Adventure games, and Text Adventures. And for that matter, Crysis (2007) had the best graphics ever seen by far and was also (and still is) an extremely satisfactory first-person shooter--except for the stupid aliens.

 

Graphical realism does not make a great game--but contrary to what some like to pretend, it doesn't automatically mean a bad game, either.

 

Again, I said nothing about my preferences. My comment was regarding what would be accepted by the market in general, which is what the giants develop for.

The reason I ask is it implies if GTA V released with GTA IV's graphics then it would alter public perception otherwise there would be no need to ask a question like how the console market, reviewers etc would be happy if the game launched with GTA IV's graphics. I've seen many games with average/ok graphics, but excellent gameplay get top reviews and same goes the other way. 

 

You guys even concede that the console limitations is the reason for GTA V's lacking gameplay mechanic' so if the visuals were dialled back a tad it would've allowed R* to fix these issues. If that was the case I don't see how the console market, reviewers etc would NOT be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
6 hours ago, Acetaminophen said:

Maybe they should have made a good game instead of making a good looking empty shell. 

They made a good game. It ain't my problem it wasn't good for you. I could say the same thing about IV. They removed half the features from SA and it's Ok. But V removes the physics and the AI and it's all the worst thing ever. I really don't wanna bash IV anymore. I love the game. But people like you push me. It's funny how people talk about "lacking gameplay mechanics". V had way more features than IV. So they managed to release a game with better graphics and BETTER GAMEPLAY. the only problem is that "BETTER GAMEPLAY" doesn't include some of the things some people liked but that's it. 

 

And now the game is being compared to the order 1886...

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
American Venom
5 hours ago, TheSantader25 said:

They made a good game. It ain't my problem it wasn't good for you. I could say the same thing about IV. They removed half the features from SA and it's Ok. But V removes the physics and the AI and it's all the worst thing ever. I really don't wanna bash IV anymore. I love the game. But people like you push me. It's funny how people talk about "lacking gameplay mechanics". V had way more features than IV. So they managed to release a game with better graphics and BETTER GAMEPLAY. the only problem is that "BETTER GAMEPLAY" doesn't include some of the things some people liked but that's it. 

 

And now the game is being compared to the order 1886...

Wait. Why is it his fault that you keep bashing GTA IV? I've seen you say that numerous times since you joined this forum. It's always someone else's fault apparently. You've got a very strange way of showing you "love" the game I must say. i could understand if you only thought it was a good game at best and found it disappointing, but you never really show that you "love" it since you spend most of your time bashing it only to say a few good things here and there to save a bit of face to deter away from your obvious bias towards San Andreas and GTA V. Atleast I have the balls to say I don't like San Andreas and GTA V very much.

 

Also GTA V might have more features technically, but that doesn't excuse it from its own flaws and doesn't make it "better". After all I bet you wouldn't give GTA IV any benefit if you applied the same "more = better" logic to the amount of missions seeing as GTA IV has way more missions than GTA V. See the flaw in your argument?

 

And I wasn't "comparing" GTA V to The Order 1886. I only used that game as an example that visuals in games really don't mean anything, but of course you would interpret that as a 1:1 comparison.🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
56 minutes ago, Miamivicecity said:

Wait. Why is it his fault that you keep bashing GTA IV? I've seen you say that numerous times since you joined this forum. It's always someone else's fault apparently. You've got a very strange way of showing you "love" the game I must say. i could understand if you only thought it was a good game at best and found it disappointing, but you never really show that you "love" it since you spend most of your time bashing it only to say a few good things here and there to save a bit of face to deter away from your obvious bias towards San Andreas and GTA V. Atleast I have the balls to say I don't like San Andreas and GTA V very much.

 

Also GTA V might have more features technically, but that doesn't excuse it from its own flaws and doesn't make it "better". After all I bet you wouldn't give GTA IV any benefit if you applied the same "more = better" logic to the amount of missions seeing as GTA IV has way more missions than GTA V. See the flaw in your argument?

 

And I wasn't "comparing" GTA V to The Order 1886. I only used that game as an example that visuals in games really don't mean anything, but of course you would interpret that as a 1:1 comparison.🙄

Because I work with Justice and I hate Injustice even though it's inevitable. When I see a game getting bashed every day in every relevant and irrelevant thread(In this forum specifically) I want to defend it even though I'm aware of the flaws. But when I see a game getting praise everyday I know justice is served. There is no reason for me to praise it more. You and other IV fans pretty much pointed out every good thing about IV multiple times in every thread and you still keep doing it. What more can I add to that?If the situation was reversed and I felt injustice towards IV I would do the same for that game as well but I wasn't around this forum back in the time when things weren't in IV's favor. 

 

But still I have pointed out why I love the game multiple times as well in different posts. I always said I like certain characters in the game, I like the NPCs, the Cop Chases, the Physics, the parkour,.... IV is my 6th favorite game of all time(previously 5th but RDR2 happened) and you believing my love for the game or not won't change it. 

 

More=Better isn't "everything" . But it's "one" of the standards I have for games. A complete game should offer A LOT with QUALITY at the same time IMO.why? Cause it's harder to perfect a thing that's A LOT in comparison to a thing that's small. I said it before. I don't believe in quality>quantity. A complete game offers a good amount of both. Example:While I find IV missions enough and A LOT. they lack quality IMO. but While I find V's missions unique and full of quality(except for some of them but let's not talk about that now) I find them lower than the amount of most GTAs which I consider a flaw. I ultimately consider both games to have flaws in terms of missions eventhough they lack in completely different areas. The same example can be applied to many other features of this two games. Also how can we compare the two games in some of the aspects when IV doesn't even INCLUDE them let alone having a low quality version of them? 

 

And once again visuals aren't everything. But they do mean SOMETHING. But of course they are not as important as gameplay. They are far from even being close to gameplay in terms of importance. So once again I don't agree with you that good visuals don't make a game. They are a "part" of a good game. However Using The Order as an example made me think as if you think V has nothing to offer other than graphics which I strongly disagree. 

 

And may I say I found GTA V disappointing too. Just like I found RDR2 and IV disappointing. But " being disappointed" never means anything since people can be disappointed when something is the best thing ever as well because we can always imagine things better and that's our gift. But this gift almost always causes disappointment. All that matters is "how much" you were disappointed. 

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
American Venom
1 hour ago, TheSantader25 said:

Because I work with Justice and I hate Injustice even though it's inevitable. When I see a game getting bashed every day in every relevant and irrelevant thread(In this forum specifically) I want to defend it even though I'm aware of the flaws. But when I see a game getting praise everyday I know justice is served. There is no reason for me to praise it more. You and other IV fans pretty much pointed out every good thing about IV multiple times in every thread and you still keep doing it. What more can I add to that?If the situation was reversed and I felt injustice towards IV I would do the same for that game as well but I wasn't around this forum back in the time when things weren't in IV's favor. 

 

But still I have pointed out why I love the game multiple times as well in different posts. I always said I like certain characters in the game, I like the NPCs, the Cop Chases, the Physics, the parkour,.... IV is my 6th favorite game of all time(previously 5th but RDR2 happened) and you believing my love for the game or not won't change it. 

 

More=Better isn't "everything" . But it's "one" of the standards I have for games. A complete game should offer A LOT with QUALITY at the same time IMO.why? Cause it's harder to perfect a thing that's A LOT in comparison to a thing that's small. I said it before. I don't believe in quality>quantity. A complete game offers a good amount of both. Example:While I find IV missions enough and A LOT. they lack quality IMO. but While I find V's missions unique and full of quality(except for some of them but let's not talk about that now) I find them lower than the amount of most GTAs which I consider a flaw. I ultimately consider both games to have flaws in terms of missions eventhough they lack in completely different areas. The same example can be applied to many other features of this two games. Also how can we compare the two games in some of the aspects when IV doesn't even INCLUDE them let alone having a low quality version of them? 

 

And once again visuals aren't everything. But they do mean SOMETHING. But of course they are not as important as gameplay. They are far from even being close to gameplay in terms of importance. So once again I don't agree with you that good visuals don't make a game. They are a "part" of a good game. However Using The Order as an example made me think as if you think V has nothing to offer other than graphics which I strongly disagree. 

 

And may I say I found GTA V disappointing too. Just like I found RDR2 and IV disappointing. But " being disappointed" never means anything since people can be disappointed when something is the best thing ever as well because we can always imagine things better and that's our gift. But this gift almost always causes disappointment. All that matters is "how much" you were disappointed. 

-There's only so much we can talk about. GTA IV is over 10 years old so clearly there's going to be point reached where we have to come around full circle, but that can be said about any GTA really and it's not's that I don't believe you I just think "love" is a very strong and emotive word and should be used with caution.

 

-Fair enough. I get what you're saying, but many of these aspects don't exist in GTA V either so aren't we kind of just coming at a crossroads?

 

-Maybe I shouldn't have said they don't mean "anything",  but I wasn't trying to imply that GTA V doesn't have anything outside of its graphics. Regardless of how I personally feel about it obviously that's not true. The only reason I mentioned The Order 1886 is because it's one of the best examples I can think of where a game had stunning visuals, but didn't resonate well with critics. There would be no point comparing them directly.

 

-Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Acetaminophen

Roblox had more love and care put into it than GTA V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lock n' Stock

I've said it before. I see GTA V as a great game with ALOT of wasted potential. I give R* props for expanding over GTA IV with better customisation, a much larger map and more weapons/vehicles among other things, but did all that really have to come at the expense of story, physics, interiors and other great features? Over the several times I've played through the game, I just can't help but get the feeling that there's elements that feel incomplete, especially in regards to side-content. Property Management was an absolute joke, as were the Bounty Hunting missions which were a pathetic replacement for Vigilante missions (only 4 guys to hunt and then it's over? Okay then). However, Stranger & Freaks, Arms Trafficking and Rampages were a step in the right direction at least.

 

Personally however, I feel there was a real wasted opportunity in expanding the game with single-player DLC. You have several protagonists and a huge-sprawling map, so the possibilities are pretty endless. But nah, Rockstar for whatever reason f*cked that off and put all their resources into Online instead, though in that respect they didn't at least stink up single-player with garbage like hover cars and flying bikes, sh*t that has NO place in GTA let alone the same timeline in which Niko's story takes place.

 

Now admittedly, R* have won alot of my respect back with RDR2, which as far as I'm concerned is a massive return to form as far as their single-player games are concerned. However, I'm still waiting to see how they'll handle Red Dead Online and if it will or won't be a debacle like GTA Online currently is (imo).

Edited by Lock n' Stock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheSantader25
5 minutes ago, Lock n' Stock said:

 I give R* props for expanding over GTA IV with better customisation, a much larger map and more weapons/vehicles among other things, but did all that really have to come at the expense of story, physics, interiors and other great features? 

I blame it on Leslie Benzies. If He wasn't obsessed too much on Online this "already great" game could've been a Legendary game. At the top spot and could be easily renamed as the SA of HD era but... 

 

Sigh

Edited by TheSantader25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ertan Soner
11 hours ago, Acetaminophen said:

Roblox had more love and care put into it than GTA V

I mean this is complain thread but let's not go that far lol

3 minutes ago, Lock n' Stock said:

I've said it before. I see GTA V as a great game with ALOT of wasted potential. I give R* props for expanding over GTA IV with better customisation, a much larger map and more weapons/vehicles among other things, but did all that really have to come at the expense of story, physics, interiors and other great features? Over the several times I've played through the game, I just can't help but get the feeling that there's elements that feel incomplete, especially in regards to side-content. Property Management was an absolute joke, as were the Bounty Hunting missions which were a pathetic replacement for Vigilante missions. However, Stranger & Freaks, Arms Trafficking and Rampages were a step in the right direction at least.

 

Personally however, I feel there was a real wasted opportunity in expanding the game with single-player DLC. You have several protagonists and a huge-sprawling map, so the possibilities are pretty endless. But nah, Rockstar for whatever reason f*cked that off and put all their resources into Online instead.

 

Now admittedly, R* have won alot of my respect back with RDR2, but I'm still waiting to see how they'll handle Red Dead Online.

Same thoughts as me. I never felt like this before for any gta game before 5. Why they deleted some great contents from previous game?A sequel should expand while keeping the previous things. 

Well rdr2 is good but it will get ruined once online releases. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 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.