The reason GTA SA's storyline was weak

[Osho]

Well said Mister Pink! Brilliantly written. Sharing your opinion in a thoughtful way, as always.

 

E: To keep it short.

Edited May 8, 2015 by Osho

[lastmanonearth]

I never said he had to be tight with his brother, nor did I insinuate that he should stay home with his mother. I'm just saying that CJ was being extremely selfish. He went to LC committing crimes of his own while the other members of his hometown were struggling and fighting against two gangs. His mom wasn't in any particular danger of being killed? They live in the f*cking hood for crying out loud. Besides the Ballas and Vagos, that place is filled with crack addicts and dope dealers For all we know, Beverly could've became a crack addict and died an insidious death before she even had a chance to get shot by drive-by shooting. Also, you say that CJ left because he didn't want to live the life of gangbanging and didn't want to end up like his brother. Well answer this question for me. If that was the reason CJ left, then why would he go to what is known to be prehaps the worst place in America? Explain that. So gangbanging is wrong yet car theft and robberies in LC is fine? Umm...ok.

 

^I don`t have an answer for everything, but I can understand why he was sick of that hood rat nigga life and wanted to see if he could do better on his own.

[roadrage19]

It's official. Mister Pink and Osho are the biggest GTA SA fanboys ever, otherwise, they would respectfully disagree instead of calling others "whiny" or saying some presumptuous sh*t such as "a whole bunch of details has gone flying over your heads". That right there is obtrusive evidence of dogmatic bullsh*t. The peripheral sh*t GTA SA fanboys get upset over. smh

Edited May 8, 2015 by roadrage19

[lastmanonearth]

^Saying someone`s whiny when they indeed are whiny isn`t unwarranted. "OMG the story is shiiiiiit..." - "You`re so whiny, the truth just goes over your head!" That`s not dogmatic bullsh*t, they explain in great detail why the whiners are dead wrong. A whiner is someone who bitches about something, I am a GTA V whiner and a SA fanboy. LOL I can live with that. The former sucks balls and the latter is the sh*t.

[Osho]

It has been the case almost that you will get some SA haters who don't give an impression either that they respectfully disagree without calling SA fans as "SA Fantards" or "SA Fanboys" or spamming other insults.

But, the moment anyone calls them "whiny" and even tries to critic all the while refraining from cursing, it'll still be a sh*tshorm of personal attacks and offtopic bullsh*t.

 

For the topic, I still enjoy SA story even with all the flaws and has provided enough fun and satisfaction over all the imperfections that exists in this game. I find the story to be simply good and entertaining. Its not perfect but still the story is absolutely fun to put into few words of appreciation and hours playing it.

[Mister Pink]

 

 

 

OK first of all, I was born in 1986, so of course I'm young. Even during the year of its release, I always said the storyline was the weak point of the whole game. Evolution is one thing, but flight school, breaking in area 69, flying jetpacks, and pointlessly stealing a jar of goo for absolutely nothing is as arbitrary as you can get. Also, what the hell does playing with RC cars and sh*t have to do with evolving?

Another thing is that CJ kills his childhood friend as if he was some random Balla. No cutscene, no drama, no feeling at all. It's as if there was never a character named Ryder in the whole game. Sweet doesn't even as about Ryder's whereabout and probably didnt even know he betrayed the GSF since CJ never mentioned Ryder to him. Overall, Ryder's betrayal, unlike Smoke, made no sense from the beginning. You're gonna tell me that was well-written?

I got no problems with anyone who disagree with me, but don't try to instigate an argument out of pique.

 

 

 

You disagree with a flight school? Why? It's serves as a game within the game. Fun flight challenges. Flying planes was also a new feature. Why not utilize it? It also gives gains you a license which "unlocks" the airports. A pretty well thought out feature that serves not only the story, it explains how our protag can fly and if you got the extra mile and get gold you unlock the Hunter. But you'll find some thing to disagree with. Frankly that's an issue with you and not the game.

 

I'll concede that a cutscene for Ryder would have been nice but not having one doesn't detract from the story for me. The good still outweighs any nit-picky stuff like that but tonnes. How are you supposed to kill your childhood friend? Tell me. What is the correct way to kill your childhood friend and have it depicted in a videogame? Was a shootout on the streets followed by a swim (new feature at the time) to a boat and a big boating shootout not epic enough for you?

 

As for breaking in to Area 51. This is GTA we're talking about. Are you looking for some high-brow realistic story with in a GTA game from more than 10 years ago? You were working for The Truth a conspiracy theorist nut, that actually had a lot of truths to say. He had you smuggle 2 tonnes of weed in to San Fierro. He was working with Tenpenny. Having him steal some classified advanced technology in the form of a Jetpack in a video game was not really far fetched. If I was setting some of a GTA in Nevada desert, Area 51 would have to be in it. For the most part it serves as a cool military base you can try break in to now and then and steal tanks. I suspect, it would be far off that the US military would be working on something like a Jet Pack. It's not like something similar doesn't exist in public eye since the 60's any way. But you think it's unrealistic? Also, trying find fault that stealing a jetpack isn't related to 90's gang culture...therefore it's a fault. That's a terrible fallacy. That argument makes no sense.

 

https://www.google.ie/search?q=rocket+belt&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=WmxMVfuxH4m9ygPWjoAY&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=985&bih=553

 

I'm sorry, but with a statement title with air of authority about it "The Reason San Andreas Story Was Weak" - you are bound to find fans on here to contest your statement of why it was weak.

 

Your original post is a a half-assed struggle with you and your suspension of disbelief. It's actually not problems with the game's story. It's all you struggling with what you should believe and what you shouldn't.

 

For example, you complain about over-the-top events. All GTA stories are over-the-top events. Pick any GTA and I'll give you plenty of over-the-top events. But for all the over-the-top events, there's plenty of realistic attention to detail. For example, Shaun Ryder playing Maccer is like Shaun Ryder playing a parody of himself which was hilarious. The music on the radio, the fog in San Fierro, the reference that The Truth made to DMT even though not many people have heard of DMT back then yet they put it in a video game that sold millions.... I can go on.

 

You say, how can a guy from the hood learn to fly in a few days? Well, if you are being that pedantic, let's delve in to it. Most people competing for Gold medals might have taken a few days to do it or more. That might be two weeks or more in game time. That's enough time to learn the some flying. It's something like a minute per hour. Now, have you ever seen CJ fly a plane like a real pilot? No, it's usually all over the place. We can see that if CJ was a "real" pilot, he wouldn't last a day. Now, compare the amount of planes you took off in, compare it to the amount of planes you landed. You probably took off in a 1000 planes but probably only landed about 5. Why because it's probably safer to jump out and parachute. I wouldn't exactly call CJ a pilot. Getting a crash course in flying from a dodgy place in the desert in probably more likely and we don't know if his licence if even real. How would you have resolved it? If a guy from the hood can't hack learning to fly, would you have the option of flying removed? OK, maybe you'd want a guy who was trained by the army, is that it? Ever character we have to play would have to have his license in the past through the army or something. I mean guys from the hood can't fly badly.

 

How could any GTA protgag or game be realistic. You go around killing people on the streets driving at high speed, breaking lights, running over people. You die as many times as you want yet you end up in hospital.

 

Stop trying to blame a game's story. If you dislike it fair enough but you haven't provided any strong evidence that concludes that San Andreas's story is the weakest. You've only come here and argued personal emotions towards certain things and then tried to argue them as some story flaw.

 

I'll admit the story was a little incoherent for me the first time but when I replayed it, It made more sense. I'll blame me before I'll blame something critically acclaimed.

 

The Wire arguably the best or one of the best TV shows in history can be hard to follow the first time in places. Does this make it bad? No.. Does it mean the story telling is bad? No. But rewatch it, you pick up more the second time.

 

But hey, lets make shorter, linear stories that are restrictive to the players lack of imaginations and the character being bound to his traits. ie Michael can't wear hats etc.

 

Like lilweasel said games are becoming more restrictive to focus on less gameplay motives like quick-time events - "the character can't fly so let's remove planes."

 

 

@roadrage: Yes, I am a huge fan of San Andreas so I'm going to defend it because I think the op's statement that the story is weak vs the evidence he presented in his OP and the presentation of it isn't enough to convince me it's a weak story. It's personal nit-picks and feelings without providing much evidence. If he's going to go out of the way to make a topic on why the story is weak, I'm not going to sit back and go "yes, we'll agree to disagree" No, I'm going to give my side of events in how I see them.

 

I'll never say "this is the best game" or "this is the best band" I'll say "this is my favuorite game and I why I think it's brilliant" unlike the OP, who stated conclusively that the story is weak.

Edited May 8, 2015 by Mister Pink

[SuperGTFan]

Mister Pink

 

That's TL,DR

 

Sorry

[ten-a-penny]

It has been the case almost that you will get some SA haters who don't give an impression either that they respectfully disagree without calling SA fans as "SA Fantards" or "SA Fanboys" or spamming other insults.

But, the moment anyone calls them "whiny" and even tries to critic all the while refraining from cursing, it'll still be a sh*tshorm of personal attacks and offtopic bullsh*t.

 

For the topic, I still enjoy SA story even with all the flaws and has provided enough fun and satisfaction over all the imperfections that exists in this game. I find the story to be simply good and entertaining. Its not perfect but still the story is absolutely fun to put into few words of appreciation and hours playing it.

Obviously mister Smartass will miss the entire point.

How's criticizing your precious masterpiece makes me a hater? Hows debating the weak story of this game and addressing my OPINION makes me a hater?

 

Its you people who gets butthurt the second we say something negative about your game. I even saw somebody calls MiamiViceCity a "racist" for hating CJ. Really? And let's not forget that little dude who said "oh i get it. ur CJ-hater/Niko-worshiper" or something like that to MVC just because he prefer Niko over CJ.

 

I'm sorry, but 99% of the SA fanbase I see are butthurt whiners who attack anyone on-sight the second they see someone criticize the game.

[Osho]

@ ten-a-penny

 

Nobody's getting butthurt over your/any others opinion.

Ha ha..It's not us, but YOU and those who got super butthurt over Mr. Weasels reply. lolz

Check all the things you wrote in the last pages, and how insecure you seem to be that you're expecting SA fans to get butthurt! But none of that happened. No one even bothered to mention the names of you fools unlike the one who became butthurt easily over Mister Pink and labelled him ( and me ) "SA Fanboy" .. and for what?

 

You even liked that comment. So yeah, smack yourselves because you are making no f*cking sense at all! I mean, you compare SA with Doom/Savage skies. I mean, you're absolutely way off the topic.. I really wish people like you sometimes pause, and realize what the f*ck they are even replying and to whom and in what sense?

Just.... off man.

 

For the topic, As Mister Pink again proved how awesome SA Story feels from a players perspective whose only expectations are a simple, yet a fun adventure that gives you plenty of enjoyment not only through the lines and characters you interact, but something that feels exciting to play as well, and not limited to watching cutscene progression in linear, boring fashion.

[Haha365]

For the topic, As Mister Pink again proved how awesome SA Story feels from a players perspective whose only expectations are a simple, yet a fun adventure that gives you plenty of enjoyment not only through the lines and characters you interact, but something that feels exciting to play as well, and not limited to watching cutscene progression in linear, boring fashion.

Once again, I concur.

 

[ten-a-penny]

@ ten-a-penny

 

Nobody's getting butthurt over your/any others opinion.

Ha ha..It's not us, but YOU and those who got super butthurt over Mr. Weasels reply. lolz

Check all the things you wrote in the last pages, and how insecure you seem to be that you're expecting SA fans to get butthurt! But none of that happened. No one even bothered to mention the names of you fools unlike the one who became butthurt easily over Mister Pink and labelled him ( and me ) "SA Fanboy" .. and for what?

 

You even liked that comment. So yeah, smack yourselves because you are making no f*cking sense at all! I mean, you compare SA with Doom/Savage skies. I mean, you're absolutely way off the topic.. I really wish people like you sometimes pause, and realize what the f*ck they are even replying and to whom and in what sense?

Just.... off man.

 

For the topic, As Mister Pink again proved how awesome SA Story feels from a players perspective whose only expectations are a simple, yet a fun adventure that gives you plenty of enjoyment not only through the lines and characters you interact, but something that feels exciting to play as well, and not limited to watching cutscene progression in linear, boring fashion.

I'm comparing SA (and, HEAR HEAR, Online) to Doom because both titles has too many glitches compared to Doom, even though the latter is released in 1993 meanwhile the others released a decade later.

 

And, I'm the butthurt? Where exactly? I stated once that I prefer V's wanted system over IV's and SA's, and I got called a retard by mister FEAR THE SATURN, MiamiViceCity got called a "racist" for not liking CJ, and much more. Even though we both voiced our opinions in a positive manner (I just said I prefer V's wanted system, and MVC got attacked just because he said he PREFER Niko over CJ).

 

And who the F is Mt. Weasel?

[Haha365]

 

@ ten-a-penny

 

Nobody's getting butthurt over your/any others opinion.

Ha ha..It's not us, but YOU and those who got super butthurt over Mr. Weasels reply. lolz

Check all the things you wrote in the last pages, and how insecure you seem to be that you're expecting SA fans to get butthurt! But none of that happened. No one even bothered to mention the names of you fools unlike the one who became butthurt easily over Mister Pink and labelled him ( and me ) "SA Fanboy" .. and for what?

 

You even liked that comment. So yeah, smack yourselves because you are making no f*cking sense at all! I mean, you compare SA with Doom/Savage skies. I mean, you're absolutely way off the topic.. I really wish people like you sometimes pause, and realize what the f*ck they are even replying and to whom and in what sense?

Just.... off man.

 

For the topic, As Mister Pink again proved how awesome SA Story feels from a players perspective whose only expectations are a simple, yet a fun adventure that gives you plenty of enjoyment not only through the lines and characters you interact, but something that feels exciting to play as well, and not limited to watching cutscene progression in linear, boring fashion.

I'm comparing SA (and, HEAR HEAR, Online) to Doom because both titles has too many glitches compared to Doom, even though the latter is released in 1993 meanwhile the others released a decade later

.

 

 

Edited May 8, 2015 by Gigs84

[ten-a-penny]

^ Want to talk to me? Learn Arabic then.

 

I said, Doom was released in 1993, yet its far less glitchy than the masterpiece that is GTA:SA, which was released 11 years later.

 

Got it now, or should I say that in Arabic too? You know what I'll do it.

دووم طلعت في عام 1993 و مع هذا ماغيهاش حتى خلل أما عمتك جتا سأ اللي طلعت أحداشر سنة بعدين كلها مشاكل وعيوب

 

Hmm.

Edited May 8, 2015 by ten-a-penny

[Haha365]

^ Want to talk to me? Learn Arabic then.

 

I'm not picking on grammar or language differences. I just don't know how you compare DOOM, which has very limited gameplay options compared to SA, to San Andreas. Yes DOOM is older, and may or may not have less glitches, but it also doesn't even come close to the same gameplay scope as San Andreas. So the comparison is invalid.

 

[SuperGTFan]

 

 

^ Want to talk to me? Learn Arabic then.

I'm not picking on grammar or language differences. I just don't know how you compare DOOM, which has very limited gameplay options compared to SA, to San Andreas. Yes DOOM is older, and may or may not have less glitches, but it also doesn't even come close to the same gameplay scope as San Andreas. So the comparison is invalid.

 

Did somebody just said Arabic ?

أنا أحب جراند ثيفت أوتو

[SmokesWithCigs]

Now don't get me wrong now. I love playing GTA San Andreas. It's got the great atmosphere with amazing features. Plus the customizations were just as great. But in retrospect, while all of those things were amazing, the storyline, on the other hand, was kinda weak. The reason I think so is because the game was supposed to be based on the 90s urban gangster theme, yet it completely digressed from that topic. I know that all GTA games are unrealistic (even GTA 4 has its unrealistic moments), but the storyline of this game featured so many over-the-top events. I mean what gangster from the streets with absolutely 0 driving skills learns how to fly airplanes within days despite the fact that he has no flying experience that would take years to improve on? Also, how in any way is stealing a highly exorbitant jetpack and flying it to steal some goo from the train germane to the 90s culture? Another thing that makes the storyline weak is how Ryder was portrayed after his betrayal. The guy was CJ's childhood friend and betrayed him, yet CJ is concerned about Big Smoke betraying him and acts as if he didn't even see Ryder. Then he kills Ryder without even at least asking him why he would betray him. And then CJ starts doing jobs with Mr. Leone and two English guys despite the fact that they have absolutely nothing to do with the theme. Again, don't take this the wrong way. I still enjoy playing the game. I just felt that the game's storyline wasn't cohesive at all. That's all.

 

its a video game and a medium of entertainment like movies and tv. the rule of thumb when watching an action movie or tv show is to SUSPEND DISBELIEF. and i thought the gta v thread had it bad with story critics.

[Boyz2Society]

 

 

 

 

 

OK first of all, I was born in 1986, so of course I'm young. Even during the year of its release, I always said the storyline was the weak point of the whole game. Evolution is one thing, but flight school, breaking in area 69, flying jetpacks, and pointlessly stealing a jar of goo for absolutely nothing is as arbitrary as you can get. Also, what the hell does playing with RC cars and sh*t have to do with evolving?

 

Another thing is that CJ kills his childhood friend as if he was some random Balla. No cutscene, no drama, no feeling at all. It's as if there was never a character named Ryder in the whole game. Sweet doesn't even as about Ryder's whereabout and probably didnt even know he betrayed the GSF since CJ never mentioned Ryder to him. Overall, Ryder's betrayal, unlike Smoke, made no sense from the beginning. You're gonna tell me that was well-written?

 

I got no problems with anyone who disagree with me, but don't try to instigate an argument out of pique.

 

 

You disagree with a flight school? Why? It's serves as a game within the game. Fun flight challenges. Flying planes was also a new feature. Why not utilize it? It also gives gains you a license which "unlocks" the airports. A pretty well thought out feature that serves not only the story, it explains how our protag can fly and if you got the extra mile and get gold you unlock the Hunter. But you'll find some thing to disagree with. Frankly that's an issue with you and not the game.

 

I'll concede that a cutscene for Ryder would have been nice but not having one doesn't detract from the story for me. The good still outweighs any nit-picky stuff like that but tonnes. How are you supposed to kill your childhood friend? Tell me. What is the correct way to kill your childhood friend and have it depicted in a videogame? Was a shootout on the streets followed by a swim (new feature at the time) to a boat and a big boating shootout not epic enough for you?

 

As for breaking in to Area 51. This is GTA we're talking about. Are you looking for some high-brow realistic story with in a GTA game from more than 10 years ago? You were working for The Truth a conspiracy theorist nut, that actually had a lot of truths to say. He had you smuggle 2 tonnes of weed in to San Fierro. He was working with Tenpenny. Having him steal some classified advanced technology in the form of a Jetpack in a video game was not really far fetched. If I was setting some of a GTA in Nevada desert, Area 51 would have to be in it. For the most part it serves as a cool military base you can try break in to now and then and steal tanks. I suspect, it would be far off that the US military would be working on something like a Jet Pack. It's not like something similar doesn't exist in public eye since the 60's any way. But you think it's unrealistic? Also, trying find fault that stealing a jetpack isn't related to 90's gang culture...therefore it's a fault. That's a terrible fallacy. That argument makes no sense.

 

https://www.google.ie/search?q=rocket+belt&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=WmxMVfuxH4m9ygPWjoAY&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=985&bih=553

 

I'm sorry, but with a statement title with air of authority about it "The Reason San Andreas Story Was Weak" - you are bound to find fans on here to contest your statement of why it was weak.

 

Your original post is a a half-assed struggle with you and your suspension of disbelief. It's actually not problems with the game's story. It's all you struggling with what you should believe and what you shouldn't.

 

For example, you complain about over-the-top events. All GTA stories are over-the-top events. Pick any GTA and I'll give you plenty of over-the-top events. But for all the over-the-top events, there's plenty of realistic attention to detail. For example, Shaun Ryder playing Maccer is like Shaun Ryder playing a parody of himself which was hilarious. The music on the radio, the fog in San Fierro, the reference that The Truth made to DMT even though not many people have heard of DMT back then yet they put it in a video game that sold millions.... I can go on.

 

You say, how can a guy from the hood learn to fly in a few days? Well, if you are being that pedantic, let's delve in to it. Most people competing for Gold medals might have taken a few days to do it or more. That might be two weeks or more in game time. That's enough time to learn the some flying. It's something like a minute per hour. Now, have you ever seen CJ fly a plane like a real pilot? No, it's usually all over the place. We can see that if CJ was a "real" pilot, he wouldn't last a day. Now, compare the amount of planes you took off in, compare it to the amount of planes you landed. You probably took off in a 1000 planes but probably only landed about 5. Why because it's probably safer to jump out and parachute. I wouldn't exactly call CJ a pilot. Getting a crash course in flying from a dodgy place in the desert in probably more likely and we don't know if his licence if even real. How would you have resolved it? If a guy from the hood can't hack learning to fly, would you have the option of flying removed? OK, maybe you'd want a guy who was trained by the army, is that it? Ever character we have to play would have to have his license in the past through the army or something. I mean guys from the hood can't fly badly.

 

How could any GTA protgag or game be realistic. You go around killing people on the streets driving at high speed, breaking lights, running over people. You die as many times as you want yet you end up in hospital.

 

Stop trying to blame a game's story. If you dislike it fair enough but you haven't provided any strong evidence that concludes that San Andreas's story is the weakest. You've only come here and argued personal emotions towards certain things and then tried to argue them as some story flaw.

 

I'll admit the story was a little incoherent for me the first time but when I replayed it, It made more sense. I'll blame me before I'll blame something critically acclaimed.

 

The Wire arguably the best or one of the best TV shows in history can be hard to follow the first time in places. Does this make it bad? No.. Does it mean the story telling is bad? No. But rewatch it, you pick up more the second time.

 

But hey, lets make shorter, linear stories that are restrictive to the players lack of imaginations and the character being bound to his traits. ie Michael can't wear hats etc.

 

Like lilweasel said games are becoming more restrictive to focus on less gameplay motives like quick-time events - "the character can't fly so let's remove planes."

 

 

@roadrage: Yes, I am a huge fan of San Andreas so I'm going to defend it because I think the op's statement that the story is weak vs the evidence he presented in his OP and the presentation of it isn't enough to convince me it's a weak story. It's personal nit-picks and feelings without providing much evidence. If he's going to go out of the way to make a topic on why the story is weak, I'm not going to sit back and go "yes, we'll agree to disagree" No, I'm going to give my side of events in how I see them.

 

I'll never say "this is the best game" or "this is the best band" I'll say "this is my favuorite game and I why I think it's brilliant" unlike the OP, who stated conclusively that the story is weak.

Here you go, making more assumptions. How in any way am I being pedantic? I'm just pointing out things that digressed from the main theme of the story. The story is a rags to riches theme, yet I highly doubt that breaking into area 69 and stealing goo is germane to any of that.

 

As for the pier mission, how was it a big boat shootout? All you had to do was drive-by someone who didn't even try to shoot back at you and there was no feeling to it at all. What's the correct way to kill your childhood friend you ask? Something similar to how CJ killed Smoke maybe. Ryder, on the other hand, was killed off like he was some random pedestrian. His death was dull as hell. Even f*cking Pulaski had a better death. Nobody mentioned Ryder one time after that. Even Sweet doesn't even ask about him as if Ryder was never even a character throughout the whole game.

 

Like I said before, you don't have to agree with EVERYTHING I say, but don't be so presumptuous about it.

[roadrage19]

 

 

It has been the case almost that you will get some SA haters who don't give an impression either that they respectfully disagree without calling SA fans as "SA Fantards" or "SA Fanboys" or spamming other insults.

But, the moment anyone calls them "whiny" and even tries to critic all the while refraining from cursing, it'll still be a sh*tshorm of personal attacks and offtopic bullsh*t.

 

For the topic, I still enjoy SA story even with all the flaws and has provided enough fun and satisfaction over all the imperfections that exists in this game. I find the story to be simply good and entertaining. Its not perfect but still the story is absolutely fun to put into few words of appreciation and hours playing it.

Obviously mister Smartass will miss the entire point.

How's criticizing your precious masterpiece makes me a hater? Hows debating the weak story of this game and addressing my OPINION makes me a hater?

 

Its you people who gets butthurt the second we say something negative about your game. I even saw somebody calls MiamiViceCity a "racist" for hating CJ. Really? And let's not forget that little dude who said "oh i get it. ur CJ-hater/Niko-worshiper" or something like that to MVC just because he prefer Niko over CJ.

 

I'm sorry, but 99% of the SA fanbase I see are butthurt whiners who attack anyone on-sight the second they see someone criticize the game.

I was thinking the same thing. Everytime I point out a flaw of the game, these dogmatic fanboys stomp on my throat using childidh tirades and label me as a hater. Odds are if you don't like something about the game, you're gonna get criticized. Don't worry you querulous fanboys. I won't point out any more flaws that'll make you feel overly querulous.

 

With that being said, the strong point of the whole game is the gameplay. GTA SA is the best GTA game when it comes to features and fun.

[Rollin69]

That OP is a f*cking hater. He don't like the game. Because if he did, he would admit that the storyline is great and not bad at all. One thing I will say is that that asshole ryder should be taking off of the game completely. he ruined the whole beginning of the story in Los Santos. He should've been the only character to be gotten rid of from the game. he's the worst character ever, and that's a fact too. I hate anyone who likes him. I actually punched my friend square in the nose when he said that ryder was his favorite character. With that being said, the storyline is 99% perfect and that's a fact too. The story would've been 100% perfect if ryder wasn't in it. he ruined the whole beginning of the game. f*ck this OP and f*ck anyone else who disagrees.

Edited May 8, 2015 by Rollin69

[ten-a-penny]

 

^ Want to talk to me? Learn Arabic then.

 

I'm not picking on grammar or language differences. I just don't know how you compare DOOM, which has very limited gameplay options compared to SA, to San Andreas. Yes DOOM is older, and may or may not have less glitches, but it also doesn't even come close to the same gameplay scope as San Andreas. So the comparison is invalid.

-_-

I'm talking about the number of glitches and issues. Apparently that went straight up over your damn mind. Smh.

 

I was thinking the same thing. Everytime I point out a flaw of the game, these dogmatic fanboys stomp on my throat using childidh tirades and label me as a hater. Odds are if you don't like something about the game, you're gonna get criticized. Don't worry you querulous fanboys. I won't point out any more flaws that'll make you feel overly querulous.

With that being said, the strong point of the whole game is the gameplay. GTA SA is the best GTA game when it comes to features and fun.

This entirely.

I may sound like "a geeteeyay es ay hatur" (I'm looking at you Osho), but the amount of fun I had playing SA will never be forgotten. Not even Doom and Savage Skies can surpass that.

 

That OP is a f*cking hater. He don't like the game. Because if he did, he would admit that the storyline is great and not bad at all. One thing I will say is that that asshole ryder should be taking off of the game completely. he ruined the whole beginning of the story in Los Santos. He should've been the only character to be gotten rid of from the game. he's the worst character ever, and that's a fact too. I hate anyone who likes him. I actually punched my friend square in the nose when he said that ryder was his favorite character. With that being said, the storyline is 99% perfect and that's a fact too. The story would've been 100% perfect if ryder wasn't in it. he ruined the whole beginning of the game. f*ck this OP and f*ck anyone else who disagrees.

This guy. This f*cking guy. Here's the type of people I'm aiming at when I say "SA kids/fantards/whatever".

Apparently I'm a hater for hating the game's story. Because f*ck opinions right?

[SuperGTFan]

 

 

 

 

^ Want to talk to me? Learn Arabic then.

I'm not picking on grammar or language differences. I just don't know how you compare DOOM, which has very limited gameplay options compared to SA, to San Andreas. Yes DOOM is older, and may or may not have less glitches, but it also doesn't even come close to the same gameplay scope as San Andreas. So the comparison is invalid.

-_-

I'm talking about the number of glitches and issues. Apparently that went straight up over your damn mind. Smh.

 

I was thinking the same thing. Everytime I point out a flaw of the game, these dogmatic fanboys stomp on my throat using childidh tirades and label me as a hater. Odds are if you don't like something about the game, you're gonna get criticized. Don't worry you querulous fanboys. I won't point out any more flaws that'll make you feel overly querulous.

With that being said, the strong point of the whole game is the gameplay. GTA SA is the best GTA game when it comes to features and fun.

This entirely.

I may sound like "a geeteeyay es ay hatur" (I'm looking at you Osho), but the amount of fun I had playing SA will never be forgotten. Not even Doom and Savage Skies can surpass that.

 

That OP is a f*cking hater. He don't like the game. Because if he did, he would admit that the storyline is great and not bad at all. One thing I will say is that that asshole ryder should be taking off of the game completely. he ruined the whole beginning of the story in Los Santos. He should've been the only character to be gotten rid of from the game. he's the worst character ever, and that's a fact too. I hate anyone who likes him. I actually punched my friend square in the nose when he said that ryder was his favorite character. With that being said, the storyline is 99% perfect and that's a fact too. The story would've been 100% perfect if ryder wasn't in it. he ruined the whole beginning of the game. f*ck this OP and f*ck anyone else who disagrees.

This guy. This f*cking guy. Here's the type of people I'm aiming at when I say "SA kids/fantards/whatever".

Apparently I'm a hater for hating the game's story. Because f*ck opinions right?

Sadly yes , because this nation was built on dictatorship and injustice to begin with .

 

 

And when I say " nation " I mean the internet .

[ten-a-penny]

Using that kid's logic then I should.....

Kill Osho, lil Weasel, Official General and Militia because they hate Online (I don't play Online anymore but for some reason I still 'like' that game), punch whoever hates Savage Skies or molest those who have never heard of Doom and its episodes.

 

lol

[Haha365]

 

 

^ Want to talk to me? Learn Arabic then.

 

I'm not picking on grammar or language differences. I just don't know how you compare DOOM, which has very limited gameplay options compared to SA, to San Andreas. Yes DOOM is older, and may or may not have less glitches, but it also doesn't even come close to the same gameplay scope as San Andreas. So the comparison is invalid.

-_-

I'm talking about the number of glitches and issues. Apparently that went straight up over your damn mind. Smh.

Here let me BOLD it for you.

 

"Yes DOOM is older, and may or may not have less glitches, but it also doesn't even come close to the same gameplay scope as San Andreas. So the comparison is invalid."

 

SA could have more glitches because there is more game than Doom ie. more things can potentially go wrong.

Edited May 10, 2015 by Gigs84

[lastmanonearth]

^And it`s not like it has any gamebreaking glitches.

[Osho]

ten-a-penny just wants to voice his opinions against how much SA fanboyism irks him that he makes an assumption of associating 99% of the "fan base" with it.. pushing hate spamming, and even stooping so low that I had to report him ( here; and a nice thread got locked to poll-only one because of his irrelevant bullsh*t ) for personal attack aimed at my parents. Similar to another thread where he objected against having jetpack into the game because he believes its not realistic or whatever, and went on full blown personal attacking which I had to again report him. Moderator removed his post entirely.

I mean, disgusting to say the least! I have yet to see him practice what he preach to others, and put much efforts in discussions by staying on topic without complete nonsense. You can never have meaningful arguments with such people who are too quick to push hate using profanity.

For the topic, I find the story to be also a strong point as the gameplay. Both work nicely together in the game and wouldn't be as effective to leave an impact on its own.

[sammystarock]

The story of GTA San Andreas could be called weak for the reason of it not being realistic, or let's say very unlikely. But does that make a story weak? No. As long as it is coherent and well developed in its own, it's very enjoyable and that's what GTA San Andreas is.

 

A bad story is characterized by its incidents being only strung together for the sake of creating some sort of action, while they aren't really based on relations between the characters and events of the story. A good example for this is, and I'm sorry to all the fanboys out there, GTA V. Three characters that have little to nothing in common, accidentally meet each other and start doing heists. Am I supposed to care? What about The Lost MC? What about Trevors meth lab? What about the Grove Street? What about anything? Everything in the storyline of GTA V feels, and basically is, a cameo appearance without any substance or further development.

 

That wasn't the case in GTA San Andreas. Sure, the game had miniguns, jetpacks, all sorts of crazy things, but they were all embedded in a well set context with well developed characters that you got introduced to slowly and got to know while progressing in the game. Everything made sense at the end of the day and you felt like you played in a real world with different gangs, persons and cities, thus the game featuring the immense diversity, which makes the story a bit crazy, but not weak at all.

 

 

[SuperGTFan]

The story should have had more missions for Los Santos after CJ returned from LV .

[GR Choke]

IMO SA has the best storyline out of all GTAS

[ten-a-penny]

Wait what?

So let me get this straight, punching somebody in the face for liking a character I detest is totally legal, but making a sarcastic comment about it is wrong?

 

 

And for the last time, whenever we say "SA's storyline is weak" we're not referring to the missions, SA had the best over-the-top fun missions variety wise alongside V, we're saying that it simply don't make sense.

 

Breaking into a Navy base and stealing a Sea Harrier is kinda normal (CJ went to flight school after all), breaking into the base is normal too (we've seen Trevor do this too), but breaking into a base AND (there goes the keyword) stealing a JETPACK and somehow knowing how to fly it only to steal some goo is beyond unrealistic. Being unrealistic is something (stealing a Harrier from the Navy, breaking into a military base to steal a military helicopter, slaughtering crackheads etc), and being downright INSANE is something else.

[lastmanonearth]

^OK man, you`ve made your point that YOU THINK it was a weak story. It`s cool, I respectfully disagree however. I don`t think it`s that much more unrealistic compared to V, all it takes is a little suspension of disbelief but not much more than for when you watch an action movie. The Terminator requires more suspension of disbelief and yet no one complains about how unrealistic The Terminator is, everyone accepts it for what it is. And for a videogame, it was much better written than many other games, more like a movie or a fictional novel or something. If it had been realistic as f*ck like IV it would have been boring as hell, like IV.