Things GTA IV did better than GTA V

[slimeball supreme]

Holy sh*t Michigan, I didn't even know you were capable of typing for that long.

Incredible.

[gooeyhole]

I see no argument for V's fighting. You can do the electric slide across the sidewalk when fighting someone lmao. If they run away, don't bother chasing them, just hit them, you'll teleport across the street. Good post though.

[CarnageRacing00]

Yes, you are right.

But done what?

Michigan, do you know the definition of 'specific'?

 

EDIT: Nice quote train tho

 

You're just going to have to deal with quote trains, I avoid it when I can but again, when the quote feature automatically puts replies in a box instead of just displaying the BB code, it's not easy to trim quotes on a smart phone. Sorry.

 

And... what exactly is your question? Could you be more specific?

 

 

 

Well that's part of what I don't like about him. I also just don't find him to be a deep character, that apparently many of you do. I could easily tell where his story was going and found it very bland. He is the number 1 reason I'm not a fan of GTA IV but, he's not the only reason.

I didn't see where it was going. How the hell did you predict that Michelle was a fed who'd lead Niko into finding out where Darko was? Granted, I was a youngster in 2008.

 

 

I knew right away Michelle was hiding something, and I guessed that she was a fed. The first time you go into her apartment, it was made very obvious.

 

As far as knowing she'd reveal Darko... no, because deus ex machina. Michelle existed for one purpose: to bring Darko forth to Niko. How else would he have found Darko? He probably wouldn't have, thus the writers created Michelle.

[Haha365]

 

Well that's part of what I don't like about him. I also just don't find him to be a deep character, that apparently many of you do. I could easily tell where his story was going and found it very bland. He is the number 1 reason I'm not a fan of GTA IV but, he's not the only reason.

I didn't see where it was going. How the hell did you predict that Michelle was a fed who'd lead Niko into finding out where Darko was? Granted, I was a youngster in 2008.

 

Maybe not the Michelle part, specifically, but still the same conclusion. I knew there would be a betrayal of trust and someone would point Niko in the right direction after he "scratched their back." Pretty basic really.

 

[gooeyhole]

 

Yes, you are right.

But done what?

Michigan, do you know the definition of 'specific'?

 

EDIT: Nice quote train tho

 

You're just going to have to deal with quote trains, I avoid it when I can but again, when the quote feature automatically puts replies in a box instead of just displaying the BB code, it's not easy to trim quotes on a smart phone. Sorry.

 

And... what exactly is your question? Could you be more specific?

 

 

 

Well that's part of what I don't like about him. I also just don't find him to be a deep character, that apparently many of you do. I could easily tell where his story was going and found it very bland. He is the number 1 reason I'm not a fan of GTA IV but, he's not the only reason.

I didn't see where it was going. How the hell did you predict that Michelle was a fed who'd lead Niko into finding out where Darko was? Granted, I was a youngster in 2008.

 

 

I knew right away Michelle was hiding something, and I guessed that she was a fed. The first time you go into her apartment, it was made very obvious.

 

As far as knowing she'd reveal Darko... no, because deus ex machina. Michelle existed for one purpose: to bring Darko forth to Niko. How else would he have found Darko? He probably wouldn't have, thus the writers created Michelle.

 

Well gee I don't know, maybe when he tried to find him through the mob, or maybe he'd never find him.

[CarnageRacing00]

Holy sh*t Michigan, I didn't even know you were capable of typing for that long.

Incredible.

 

Maybe if you spent less time with your IV fanboy buddies trying to circle jerk on my head you'd have seen previous posts of mine, very lengthy posts, in which I don't just whine and bitch for no reason, but instead actually explain my thoughts and offer REASONS for why I think IV or V are better than the other in one regard or another. You jumped onto the hype train to try and bash me, and you don't even know me. Back off.

 

 

I see no argument for V's fighting. You can do the electric slide across the sidewalk when fighting someone lmao. If they run away, don't bother chasing them, just hit them, you'll teleport across the street. Good post though.

 

No, maybe a distance of 3 feet at times, but it happens. I prefer that to being locked in place in IV.

[gooeyhole]

Well in my fighting experience IRL (I'm a badass ofc) you're not exactly moving around a lot in fights. It's you, and your opponent. No electric sliding. Hell, GTA V's fighting could be a dance in TBOGT.

[StellarRunner]

Bullets holes are much better in IV. When you hit a wall or a vehicle, it looks like a real shot. In V they look much worse.

[donnits]

This guy complains about IV fans believing their opinions are fact and tries to so-called bring truth, but all he does is treat his own opinion like fact and resort to insults.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Donut

[gooeyhole]

Man f*ck off with the Michigan hate, it's always good to have opposition. Can't live in an echo chamber.

[Aerovitia]

You can actually do instant-kill punch to peds on IV too. Yes, really, I've tried it.

[donnits]

There's a difference between arguing points and spite. Its obnoxious reading essays of opinionated bullsh*t dressed as fact.

[CarnageRacing00]

Well in my fighting experience IRL (I'm a badass ofc) you're not exactly moving around a lot in fights. It's you, and your opponent. No electric sliding. Hell, GTA V's fighting could be a dance in TBOGT.

 

Right, but I don't play video games to experience real life, you know? I found IV's fighting frustrating, because you'd go to punch someone and they could just walk away. Just annoying, in a video game. I prefer a little rule bending to make a game more fun. Just my opinion.

 

This guy complains about IV fans believing their opinions are fact and tries to so-called bring truth, but all he does is treat his own opinion like fact and resort to insults.

 

Insults beget insults, friendo.

 

And no, I offer my opinion, unless there IS some fact I can use to argue against someone else.

There's a difference between arguing points and spite. Its obnoxious reading essays of opinionated bullsh*t dressed as fact.

 

Then I would STRONGLY suggest you leave the IV section.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Niko himself knows he's a hypocrite and Darko calls him out on it. He accepts it, he hates himself for it. Play That Special Someone.

I've always believed Darko was meant to represent Niko's inner self. I don't think it was an accident that he just happened to look like him too, but IMO Niko's so called "hypocrisy" is often used too much as a negative aspect against him when some people don't seem to realise that's just the point.

 

Niko often has to face his own hypocrisy throughout the story, but the stuff like how he complains having to kill a single person whilst running over random peds doesn't and has never made much sense to me because that's gameplay and story segregation.

 

If that's the case why doesn't CJ ever get criticised for being a hypocrite? At the start of SA he's all about bringing back the homies together yet there's nothing stopping the player attacking/killing random Grove Street gang members in free roam is there?

 

In VCS Vic complains about drugs yet builds a drug empire. Even "CRAAAAZY" Trevor is a hypocrite as he complains to Michael that no one cares about him yet he doesn't care about Floyd, Ron, Wade etc and ultimately treats them like sh*t.

 

Love Niko or not to many GTA fans (Not just us) he is a well written character. I guess his critics have a hard time accepting it.

[gooeyhole]

 

Right, but I don't play video games to experience real life, you know? I found IV's fighting frustrating, because you'd go to punch someone and they could just walk away. Just annoying, in a video game. I prefer a little rule bending to make a game more fun. Just my opinion.

Sure, I see that I guess. But your offense is so limited in V I just don't see how anyone would prefer it. In IV you can time a one hit KO, reverse into multiple combos, etc.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Canadian Badass

[TheOneLibertonian]

I don't quite get it when Michigan always waste his time on a IV forum complaining and arguing with other members with "fanboyism". Let it be, instead of flaming each and everyone of us, try to participate with the following topic instead. That's why the topic is called " Reasons why IV is better than V lounge". Obviously, you'll see hate comments.

[gooeyhole]

I don't quite get it when Michigan always waste his time on a IV forum complaining and arguing with other members with "fanboyism". Let it be, instead of flaming each and everyone of us, try to participate with the following topic instead. That's why the topic is called " Reasons why IV is better than V lounge". Obviously, you'll see hate comments.

But you don't get how he's needed to combat against just 100% biased fanboyism. At least he makes you think about things from a different perspective.

[CarnageRacing00]

 

Love Niko or not to many GTA fans (Not just us) he is a well written character. I guess his critics have a hard time accepting it.

 

 

I still like Niko, I just don't think he's a flawlessly written character like so many of his biggest fans seem to think.

 

 

 

 

Right, but I don't play video games to experience real life, you know? I found IV's fighting frustrating, because you'd go to punch someone and they could just walk away. Just annoying, in a video game. I prefer a little rule bending to make a game more fun. Just my opinion.

Sure, I see that I guess. But your offense is so limited in V I just don't see how anyone would prefer it. In IV you can time a one hit KO, reverse into multiple combos, etc.

 

 

Oh definitely, more moves would be great, but the actual mechanics of fighting need to be spot on first, and to me, they weren't precise enough in IV. They're nice and tight in V, so it would have been a great opportunity to expand it with more moves. Honestly, different gyms where you could train for different fighting styles would have been awesome.

 

 

I don't quite get it when Michigan always waste his time on a IV forum complaining and arguing with other members with "fanboyism". Let it be, instead of flaming each and everyone of us, try to participate with the following topic instead. That's why the topic is called " Reasons why IV is better than V lounge". Obviously, you'll see hate comments.

 

Would you believe it's because I enjoy the debate? For every bitchfest that occurs, there are concessions. We begin to understand each other a little better, bridge that discord between V fans and IV fans - a discord that really wouldn't exist if it weren't for our own egos getting involved.

Edited July 16, 2015 by MichiganMuscle77

[gooeyhole]

 

Oh definitely, more moves would be great, but the actually mechanics of fighting need to be spot on first, and to me, they weren't precise enough in IV. They're nice and tight in V, so it would have been a great opportunity to expand it with more moves. Honestly, different gyms where you could train for different fighting styles would be AWESOME in a GTA game.

Yeah I like the fluidity in V, it's just very limited. IV's got more potential fight endings, if you get me. A combination of both V and IV's fighting mechanics would be top notch.

[CarnageRacing00]

 

 

Oh definitely, more moves would be great, but the actually mechanics of fighting need to be spot on first, and to me, they weren't precise enough in IV. They're nice and tight in V, so it would have been a great opportunity to expand it with more moves. Honestly, different gyms where you could train for different fighting styles would be AWESOME in a GTA game.

Yeah I like the fluidity in V, it's just very limited. IV's got more potential fight endings, if you get me. A combination of both V and IV's fighting mechanics would be top notch.

 

 

Agreed. #1 thing I miss from IV is the "shove" button. Nothing quite like fighting someone to the edge of a platform and then shoving them to their death.

[TheOneLibertonian]

 

I don't quite get it when Michigan always waste his time on a IV forum complaining and arguing with other members with "fanboyism". Let it be, instead of flaming each and everyone of us, try to participate with the following topic instead. That's why the topic is called " Reasons why IV is better than V lounge". Obviously, you'll see hate comments.

 

But you don't get how he's needed to combat against just 100% biased fanboyism. At least he makes you think about things from a different perspective.I do respect him for what is worth, but if you decided to look at his previous posts, he usually decides to flame us for no particular reason, things are going so well until he shows up. I can still remember him posting a thread about a debate on car shine between IV and V. Sure, there are many biased people here including myself and I do fanboy over certain things, but with him causing so much time going off topic just do often get overboard sometimes. Each to their own opinion I guess?

[GamesBoy316]

Are you really arguing still? But yet again, everyone has different opinions. If someone likes GTA IV better than GTA V, you can't change that.

[The Dedito Gae]

I also just don't find him to be a deep character, that apparently many of you do.

He's deep alright?

Listen to the things he says, and no, he's not an hypocrite, he knows he's not an outstanding person, he mentions it a lot of times,to Roman, to Marnie, to Phill, he has a healthy ammount of self deprecation and never thinks himself better than anyone.

(unlike Michael or Trevor)

 

If we are mentioning hypocrites, let's point to Michael, Trevor and Victor, one is "fat" asshole who gives sh*t to his son for not working out or doing something productive with his life, criticizes Trevor for being batsh*t insane and making enemies(even though he brought down a mansion like 6 missions ago, making a enemy in Martin Madrazo) he's a crydick about Trevor trying to kill him, despite he was at gun point and he couldn't even get himself to shoot him, something that Michael did on 3 chances (one at least is canon and the other one is a metaphor sorta speaking)

Ending A and B make him look like a even bigger hypocrite, in ending A he helps killing Trevor and then cuts ties with Franklin, blaming him alone of Trevor's death, in ending B tries to side with Franklin to kill Trevor, just to show how big of a sh*t he is.

 

Trevor gives speeches about loyalty, yet he treats his slaves (friends) like sh*t most of the time and casually complains that everyone hates him even though he's always a huge asshole to every being on the face of the planet, he cuts ties with Franklin in ending B because he killed Michael, even though he didn't gave a f*ck when he got kidnapped by the triads, and there's plenty of examples i could give, but i get the feeling he knows the sh*t he's saying and just wants to annoy people.

 

Victor is against drugs and crime, but he creates a crime empire when given the chance, i can't imagine anything worst than going against your ideals.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Midnight Hitman

[Aerovitia]

The real problem of V's melee fighting system is it doesn't have specific attack for each button. Pressing RT or B will randomly kick or punch, no matter what button you're using. Even 3D era games had specific attack for each button AFAIK, so you could press RT for kick and press B for punch, for example.

[TheOneLibertonian]

Niko's motives always made any sense during the story and it did not break character, unlike Vic's rise to fame in VCS, and Trevor's unchalant bitching against Michael after Bury the Hatchet. Niko is really a broken person and he does tend to make mistakes, and that is the reason why I liked him so much. He is a very deep character and his cynical views on capitalism, and Modern America do show us a very deep message, but it is often not seen by many gamers due to it's indirect nature. Same with MGS2, with Raiden being just a pawn for the government with him not knowing and being part for a "simulation" for the government, and with Snake being mistaken with identity as a foil for the Patriots in order for their plan to succeed. is really political and social commentary at it's best.

 

I never initially thought that IV would be as deep as MGS2 in terms of storyline, but it did turn out to be as deep. Both feature a post modern story that entices us gamers about the reality and truth about freedom and capitalism.

[Haha365]

 

Niko himself knows he's a hypocrite and Darko calls him out on it. He accepts it, he hates himself for it. Play That Special Someone.

I've always believed Darko was meant to represent Niko's inner self. I don't think it was an accident that he just happened to look like him too, but IMO Niko's so called "hypocrisy" is often used too much as a negative aspect against him when some people don't seem to realise that's just the point.

 

Niko often has to face his own hypocrisy throughout the story, but the stuff like how he complains having to kill a single person whilst running over random peds doesn't and has never made much sense to me because that's gameplay and story segregation.

 

If that's the case why doesn't CJ ever get criticised for being a hypocrite? At the start of SA he's all about bringing back the homies together yet there's nothing stopping the player attacking/killing random Grove Street gang members in free roam is there?

 

In VCS Vic complains about drugs yet builds a drug empire. Even "CRAAAAZY" Trevor is a hypocrite as he complains to Michael that no one cares about him yet he doesn't care about Floyd, Ron, Wade etc and ultimately treats them like sh*t.

 

Love Niko or not to many GTA fans (Not just us) he is a well written character. I guess his critics have a hard time accepting it.

 

The reason CJ doesn't get a lot of hate, in that regard, is because San Andreas is a very different game compared to IV. San Andreas had so much variety and freedom the story was a backdrop to the fun (for the most part) The major point I want to make is this:

 

1. IV tries to take itself too seriously (with Niko being a big part of that) and stripped out a lot of the variety and fun of passed games. This leaves little variation to do, besides play the story which; thus brings my points to full circle.

 

2. San Andreas does not try to take itself too seriously, as the story is more a backdrop, to the INSANE amount of gameplay freedom you have. Not many care that the story is not believable or, in my case, really care about CJ in general. The gameplay takes center-stage with the story taking the back seat.

 

3. So many praise IV, as if it is some untouchable deity, where as in many other people's favorite, they can still point out the flaws. No GTA game is perfect but it appears so many refuse to see any flaws in GTA IV. It blows my mind.

[TheOneLibertonian]

@Gigs84: Even if I do call IV "flawless" at times, I am willing to admit that GTA IV has flaws, but nothing game breaking IMO.

Edited July 16, 2015 by The_Ghost

[donnits]

well there is the Things You Actually Dislike About IV thread. A lot of IV fans giving their gripes, big and small. Fan groups don't actively say bad things about their favorite thing.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Donut

[gooeyhole]

People who say IV's praised don't understood how much it's shat on literally anywhere else.

[Haha365]

People who say IV's praised don't understood how much it's shat on literally anywhere else.

And this is partly why I feel they should have split the series. I know it wouldn't have been good for R* but I think it would have been better for the fans. Now that the change has been made, and the inclusion of other elements I'll leave unsaid, I don't think the fan base will ever be fully behind the series as in the past.