Does anyone feel disappointed with R*?

[killahmatic]

Given the current and recent circumstances, would you say that you are disappointed or feel let down by Rockstar?

 

 

I am disappointed, but not by R*. They're only trying to keep up with the gaming industry. Its the industry itself I;m disappointed it. It used to suit me but its gone in another direct and I'm not choosing to follow that path.

[Geralt of Rivia]

 

Given the current and recent circumstances, would you say that you are disappointed or feel let down by Rockstar?

 

 

I am disappointed, but not by R*. They're only trying to keep up with the gaming industry. Its the industry itself I;m disappointed it. It used to suit me but its gone in another direct and I'm not choosing to follow that path.

 

I don't think enough people realize that this is a big factor.

[UtterTehSEAL]

I think this has become a better venting thread than the B*tch and Moan topic.

 

Let it all out guys.

[ten-a-penny]

Disappointed at Rockstar? No. A bit, but not that much.

At GTAV? Nope. Its my second favorite game.

 

~~~~

At the freaking fanbase, or at least this forum section? Oh so f*cking much; yes. You can only see two types of people; crybabies who doesn't know what criticism means and feel the NEED of spamming their sadness about how V didn't suit their likings or the fanboys who rustle their jimmies the second a random person criticize this game. This thread alone prove it.

 

Only about 10% of the users (err, lurkers) actually criticize the game right or actually accept different opinions; SonOfLiberty, Militia and TheMasterFocker to name a few.

 

 

*Edit.... SonOfLoberty.... Yeah go f*ck yourself PC.

Edited September 16, 2014 by ten-a-penny

[B Dawg]

 

I am disappointed, but not by R*. They're only trying to keep up with the gaming industry. Its the industry itself I;m disappointed it. It used to suit me but its gone in another direct and I'm not choosing to follow that path.

I don't think enough people realize that this is a big factor.

 

But they were doing pretty well without keeping up with sh*tty new gaming industry standards. If the game itself and shark cards weren't enough, then seriously... That's just Overkill. On top of that, they're updating the game with all the wrong things. Lol new non stop pop music, give us a damn Metal station instead! Can they at least try to cater to old fans a tiny little bit?

Edited September 16, 2014 by B Dawg

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

 

 

Given the current and recent circumstances, would you say that you are disappointed or feel let down by Rockstar?

 

I am disappointed, but not by R*. They're only trying to keep up with the gaming industry. Its the industry itself I;m disappointed it. It used to suit me but its gone in another direct and I'm not choosing to follow that path.

 

I don't think enough people realize that this is a big factor.I don't think Rockstar realizes that the GTA title sells itself. They don't need to go mainstream to pull in customers. Doing that is just being greedy and dirties up the fanbase with young idiots who end up spamming these forums and making GTA:Online a living hell.

[Geralt of Rivia]

I'm gonna put my post in spoilers, because I think it's gibberish from being tired, but I don't want to delete it, either.

 

 

 

GTA IV was easily the worst received recent GTA (I consider SA recent, due to the lengths between GTA releases), and it did pretty damn well commercially and critically.

 

You could call it a success, but if they kept doing what they did with IV, with little changes, then that would've changed pretty quickly.

 

That's how GTA V was born. GTA: Online, while associated with GTA V for obvious reasons, was born 13 years ago.

 

I feel like this was random gibberish. I don't know. I'm tired.

 

Anyway,

 

With GTA IV, R* created a game and sat back and watched how the community would react to it. GTA IV was likely their vision of an HD GTA, and when it was very, very heavily criticized, decided to take the route of least resistance, which is follow the industry very closely and do what the majority of people want.

 

Here comes GTA V, it's more successful both commercially and critically, and it made them a holy sh*tton of money.

 

Still random gibberish? I honestly can't tell lol.

 

Sting:

 

Sure, the GTA name sells itself. But if that's all you have as a selling point, then that won't last very long. People (I'm talking the vast majority, because only they can alter major aspects of a game. 5,000 people being pissed at something doesn't mean sh*t to a huge corporation) have already shown that they don't like long stories in GTA, that they don't like non-arcadey driving, that they blah blah blah.

If R* kept up with those things, then after a little bit, people will grow aware. People will stop buying them. R* didn't want that, and GTA V was born.

 

Call of Duty went through this. Now the newest one looks a lot different.

 

Assassins Creed went through this. Black Flag was a lot different, and this new one does as well.

 

Along with other popular franchises.

 

Am I making sense? Tell me if I'm not, as I am not thinking perfectly straight right now.

 

 

Edited September 16, 2014 by TheMasterfocker

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

IV was needed to push the series forward. Otherwise it would've stayed the same cartoony bullsh*t it was before.

 

Common sense would tell you that they would never keep doing what they did in IV though. IV was hated because it lacked a lot of features. That's pretty much the bulk of why it was hated. If V was like IV but with every feature from the past it would be just as much of a success as the real V is right now.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Sting4S

[Geralt of Rivia]

IV was needed to push the series forward. Otherwise it wouldn've stayed the same cartoony bullsh*t it was before.

Yeah, I know that's what I said.

 

 

Common sense would tell you that they would never keep doing what they did in IV though.

Yep.

 

 

IV was hated because it lacked a lot of features.

That was not the only reason. People didn't like the story, and didn't complete it. There was a big backlash with driving. I don't think people liked the gloominess of LC either.

 

People just did not like going from SA to IV, and it showed, and R* saw that.

 

 

 

If V was like IV but with every feature from the past it would be just as much of a success as the real V is right now.

 

Depends on how much like IV you mean. If it was the same setting, same story, etc. I don't think it would be. Popular; yes. As much of a success? I don't know.

Edited September 16, 2014 by TheMasterfocker

[Jvaz615]

I'm gonna put my post in spoilers, because I think it's gibberish from being tired, but I don't want to delete it, either.

 

 

 

GTA IV was easily the worst received recent GTA (I consider SA recent, due to the lengths between GTA releases), and it did pretty damn well commercially and critically.

 

You could call it a success, but if they kept doing what they did with IV, with little changes, then that would've changed pretty quickly.

 

That's how GTA V was born. GTA: Online, while associated with GTA V for obvious reasons, was born 13 years ago.

 

I feel like this was random gibberish. I don't know. I'm tired.

 

Anyway,

 

With GTA IV, R* created a game and sat back and watched how the community would react to it. GTA IV was likely their vision of an HD GTA, and when it was very, very heavily criticized, decided to take the route of least resistance, which is follow the industry very closely and do what the majority of people want.

 

Here comes GTA V, it's more successful both commercially and critically, and it made them a holy sh*tton of money.

 

Still random gibberish? I honestly can't tell lol.

 

Sting:

 

Sure, the GTA name sells itself. But if that's all you have as a selling point, then that won't last very long. People (I'm talking the vast majority, because only they can alter major aspects of a game. 5,000 people being pissed at something doesn't mean sh*t to a huge corporation) have already shown that they don't like long stories in GTA, that they don't like non-arcadey driving, that they blah blah blah.

If R* kept up with those things, then after a little bit, people will grow aware. People will stop buying them. R* didn't want that, and GTA V was born.

 

Call of Duty went through this. Now the newest one looks a lot different.

 

Assassins Creed went through this. Black Flag was a lot different, and this new one does as well.

 

Along with other popular franchises.

 

Am I making sense? Tell me if I'm not, as I am not thinking perfectly straight right now.

 

 

I understand what you mean but, in my opinion, they went way too far in the opposite direction with V.

[Geralt of Rivia]

So it wasn't gibberish!? Ok then lol.

[Mista J]

That's what everyone wanted, they wanted the f*cking older gen of GTA with HD graphics. They went as far as they could with GTA V and people complain. The driving is too Arcady, the damage sucks, the cops are too good. Before it was, the game is boring, the driving is too hard, the cops are stupid.

 

The fans don't know what the f*ck they want.

[Jimbatron]

I don't think it's arrogance as some have suggested. I think it's perfectionism. They don't always hit the bulls-eye with what they produce, but at least they have a philosophy to try to make a new release bigger and better.

 

Let me put it this way, would you rather they were owned by EA, churning out a GTA every year, each one depressingly average? They ruined Bullfrog and Westwood. Thank god they didn't get their hands on DMA design - which we now know to be R*.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

That's what everyone wanted, they wanted the f*cking older gen of GTA with HD graphics. They went as far as they could with GTA V and people complain. The driving is too Arcady, the damage sucks, the cops are too good. Before it was, the game is boring, the driving is too hard, the cops are stupid.

 

The fans don't know what the f*ck they want.

That's because the fans you described are two different types of fans. This has been stated 50 million f*cking times and I don't know why it hasn't gotten through to that thick skull of yours: The people complaining about V now aren't the same people who complained about IV then. Point blank period. Don't bring that crap up again.

[Geralt of Rivia]

I've seen a couple, but they're just people who haven't liked the HD era at all.

[Lethal Vaccine]

 

That's what everyone wanted, they wanted the f*cking older gen of GTA with HD graphics. They went as far as they could with GTA V and people complain. The driving is too Arcady, the damage sucks, the cops are too good. Before it was, the game is boring, the driving is too hard, the cops are stupid.

The fans don't know what the f*ck they want.

That's because the fans you described are two different types of fans. This has been stated 50 million f*cking times and I don't know why it hasn't gotten through to that thick skull of yours: The people complaining about V now aren't the same people who complained about IV then. Point blank period. Don't bring that crap up again.

 

Also, all I know is I didn't have any problems with any subsequent GTA, just V...

 

I was just playing V actually for an hour exactly, 60 minutes, I took my All Proof Tank (Save Editor Feature to make vehicles indestructible) and it got boring really quick. Not so much from being invincible, but even the cops can still shoot me INSIDE THE TANK and I lost armor here and there. It doesn't make much sense, tbh, and then I fell off a small ledge, insta-death....WASTED....The game just isn't fun, it's entirely sucked away in this game. Also, the whole thing with flying out of the windshield is complete bullsh*t. Sometimes you bearly hit something and you die instantly. Other times you rail something going so fast, yet, not fly out. Too much nonsense to have more fun than over an hour...

 

I've seen a couple, but they're just people who haven't liked the HD era at all.

 

That'd be me. I think the 3D Era rips the sh*t out of HD, however IV is entirely awesome plus Episodes and still feels like a GTA, whereas V does not...

Edited September 16, 2014 by Militia

[minifat]

No desert like in SA, no forest like in SA. You could say I am disappoint.

[S1N0D3UTSCHT3K]

Can't say I'm disappointed... Surprised that was less focus on Heists but the other focus is still good

 

and the world map is incredible

 

the wilderness and countryside is such a huge jump over San Andreas (and obviously VC and IV lol)

[hellfury66]

the only thing im disappointed with is the game i mean rockstar had so much time focus and cash to be put into single player and added more things in it .

to make it better but instead of doing that they said screw sp long live GTA ONLINE. so they pretty much put all their time and focus in to mutiplayer

instead of singleplayer. they seriosly wanted to make gta online better than singleplayer and to make some easy money from online with their ca$h cards. becuse they want to be greedy with their$$ MONEY$$ now if rockstar did NOT think backwards like that and put more focus and stuff into SP. and less in gta online then gtav would have a better singleplayer experiance with even more things to do in it.

Edited September 17, 2014 by hellfury66

[DeafMetal]

I've been getting gang raped by stress and responsibility the entire year, so maybe I didn't catch specific info, but...

 

wat.

 

I don't really have anything to complain about. I got my game, I enjoyed it, I look forward to buying the PS4 version and the PC version. I am kind of disappointed they haven't really done anything new this year, though.

Edited September 17, 2014 by DeafMetal

[Khaos89]

That's what everyone wanted, they wanted the f*cking older gen of GTA with HD graphics. They went as far as they could with GTA V and people complain. The driving is too Arcady, the damage sucks, the cops are too good. Before it was, the game is boring, the driving is too hard, the cops are stupid.

 

The fans don't know what the f*ck they want.

Personally I love GTA V. It is probably my second favourite in the series behind San Andreas. On the other hand I thought GTA IV was utter garbage, I didn't like a single thing about it from the protagonist, to the setting, to the storyline.

 

With that being said, Rockstar have handled everything about GTA V/Online the wrong way. From start to finish every decision they have made has been based on how much more money it will make them, not a single decision has been for the fans, no worthwhile DLC released, nothing but some extra items to get people to spend money for little effort on Rockstars behalf. This has ruined so much potential and destroyed my perception of Rockstar for good which is a huge shame as the Grand Theft Auto games have been my favourite games for many years.

Edited September 17, 2014 by Khaos89

[Official General]

That's what everyone wanted, they wanted the f*cking older gen of GTA with HD graphics. They went as far as they could with GTA V and people complain. The driving is too Arcady, the damage sucks, the cops are too good. Before it was, the game is boring, the driving is too hard, the cops are stupid.

 

The fans don't know what the f*ck they want.

 

Ha ha !! Are you f*cking serious ?? Rockstar went as far as they could with V to make it older gen GTA in HD ?? Really ?? Ok lets see......

 

* Much smaller number of interiors in Los Santos City relative to game size.

* Very little to no side missions relating to crime.

* A sh*t, boring story that revolved around f*cking feds/agents for half the game and not organized crime/gangs.

* A short SP story campaign relative to game size.

* Hardly anything very fun or interesting to do or see in both city and countryside.

* Very weak gang AI, no random shootouts between rival gangs in the streets.

* No gang or bodyguard recruitment.

* Cannot buy safehouse properties.

* Business owning feature was mediocre and poorly implemented.

* No decent non-crime side activities like gambling. Too much simple leisure activities.

* Weak and uninspiring protagonists, poor character development for them.

 

The older gen GTAs had either all or most of this stuff and they did it much better than V ever did. Rockstar nowhere near gave us older gen GTAs in HD with V. We did not even get anything like it.

Edited September 17, 2014 by Official General

[DIEXEL]

I liked "Rockstar Games 1.0" much more than I do to "Rockstar Games 2.0".

 

"Welcome to Rockstar Games 2.0. When greed take over rational thinking." - That's exactly what Rockstar are today. F-ers...

[Fuzzknuckles]

 

If they used all of their studios from across the world, it would take even longer than it's taking now.

 

That, and it would be way lower in quality.

 

Patience.

 

Unpaid PR and Damage Control specialist to Rockstar's rescue once more.

 

 

 

 

we're very accepting of opinions

Weeeeelllllllllllllll, I mean...That's kind've a stretch.

 

Some of us are. And some of us are Official General.

[tom_p1980]

Rockstar are like the f*ckbuddy you always wanted. She was hot, funny, intelligent, was a bedroom general and she even did anal. But now she's your wife, she has let herself go, she's fat, has warts on her ass, sits and watches soaps all day and only puts out on your birthday and even then she's like a sack of potatoes.

 

The good times are over. Time to move on.

 

I'm not only disappointed with Rockstar, but I'm disappointed with the whole gaming industry and the direction the industry is heading.

[ten-a-penny]

<Snip>

That was not the only reason. People didn't like the story, and didn't complete it. There was a big backlash with driving. I don't think people liked the gloominess of LC either.

One of the many gripes in IV IMO is the bloom. At daytime I almost lost my eyes while in nighttime I can't see sh*t.

[Osho]

The good times are over. Time to move on.

I'm not only disappointed with Rockstar, but I'm disappointed with the whole gaming industry and the direction the industry is heading.

You're damn right! I feel exactly the same!

[freedom]

 

That's what everyone wanted, they wanted the f*cking older gen of GTA with HD graphics. They went as far as they could with GTA V and people complain. The driving is too Arcady, the damage sucks, the cops are too good. Before it was, the game is boring, the driving is too hard, the cops are stupid.

 

The fans don't know what the f*ck they want.

 

Ha ha !! Are f*cking serious Rockstar went as far as they could with V to make it older gen GTA in HD ?? Really ? Ok lets see......

 

* Much smaller number of interiors in Los Santos City relative to game size.

* Very little to no side missions relating to crime.

* A sh*t, boring story that revolved around f*cking feds/agents for half the game and not organized crime/gangs.

* A short SP story campaign relative to game size.

* Hardly anything very fun or interesting to do or see in both city and countryside.

* Very weak gang AI, no random shootouts between rival gangs in the streets.

* No gang or bodyguard recruitment.

* Cannot buy safehouse properties.

* Business owning feature was mediocre and poorly implemented.

* No decent non-crime side activities like gambling. Too much simple leisure activities.

* Weak and uninspiring protagonists, poor character development for them.

 

The older gen GTAs had either all or most of this stuff and they did it much better than V ever did. Rockstar nowhere near gave us older gen GTAs in HD with V. We did not even get anything like it.

 

 

I always find these lists interesting, because most of the points folks actually raise are pretty shallow & insignificant, often focusing on the lack of throw away features or functions.

 

I mean GTA V is one of my most favourite games, but I could make far more meaningful critisms to it's the base mechanics, design & the general lack of evolution in the franchise. I still love the game though.

Edited September 17, 2014 by freedom

[Official General]

 

 

That's what everyone wanted, they wanted the f*cking older gen of GTA with HD graphics. They went as far as they could with GTA V and people complain. The driving is too Arcady, the damage sucks, the cops are too good. Before it was, the game is boring, the driving is too hard, the cops are stupid.

 

The fans don't know what the f*ck they want.

 

Ha ha !! Are f*cking serious Rockstar went as far as they could with V to make it older gen GTA in HD ?? Really ? Ok lets see......

 

* Much smaller number of interiors in Los Santos City relative to game size.

* Very little to no side missions relating to crime.

* A sh*t, boring story that revolved around f*cking feds/agents for half the game and not organized crime/gangs.

* A short SP story campaign relative to game size.

* Hardly anything very fun or interesting to do or see in both city and countryside.

* Very weak gang AI, no random shootouts between rival gangs in the streets.

* No gang or bodyguard recruitment.

* Cannot buy safehouse properties.

* Business owning feature was mediocre and poorly implemented.

* No decent non-crime side activities like gambling. Too much simple leisure activities.

* Weak and uninspiring protagonists, poor character development for them.

 

The older gen GTAs had either all or most of this stuff and they did it much better than V ever did. Rockstar nowhere near gave us older gen GTAs in HD with V. We did not even get anything like it.

 

 

I always find these lists interesting, because most of the points folks actually raise are pretty shallow & insignificant, often focusing on the lack of throw away features or functions.

 

I mean GTA V is one of my most favourite games, but I could make far more meaningful critisms to it's the base mechanics, design & the general lack of evolution in the franchise. I still love the game though.

 

 

I'm criticizing a video game, not some complex work of art, or piece of literary material. I mentioned things in my list that are totally relevant and directly to do with the GTA experience and world. What else the f*ck was I was supposed to point out in my criticisms ? How the color palettes in the game did not look like it had influences from Van Gogh or Picasso paintings ? Or that the writing in the game should have drawn inspiration from the works of Scott Fitzgerald or Mario Puzo novels ??

 

Get a grip.

Edited September 17, 2014 by Official General

[theworldfamous]

I don't feel disappointed with rockstar. Looking back at past gen, no other developer has delivered me this amount of great gameplay. Other developers have caught up a bit, but no one does an open world quite like Rockstar.

 

The IV trilogy is one of the defining games of last gen. With V they delivered more than I expected. I think online is a brilliant concept although it hasn't fully realised it's potential.

 

More over..I remember very well that they took their time with last gen. For a long time, all they had was table tennis, and later a slightly upgraded bully. Xbox SA plays like sh*t on 360. When I pickup my ps4 I'll barely have time to get through the last of us (really looking forward to my first naughty dog title) before I can dip into V again. I'll enjoy redoing the single player but the main attraction will be online. Last gen online is pretty crappy at times with almost no traffic and degraded visuals. I hope the CG versions will fix that...oh and 30 players...fukyeh!!

 

I'm disappointed in ubisoft. If you remember they really went into this last gen with some refreshing and downright radical ideas, like doing away with cluttered HUDs, the original revamp of splinter cell as a sandbox, hide in plain sight experience and the original potential of AC as an open world assassin game.

 

But a couple years in they just turned into an assassins creed factory and recycle the same 3 or 4 ideas between different titles.