Who else wants a more serious gta for VI?

[Drunken Cowboy]

People feel it necessary to engage in hyperbole and make things black and white to drive home their points.

"IV was serious, the other games weren't."

Play Mafia II or even Watch_Dogs and tell me IV was serious and deeply rooted in realism. Streets were still lined with the number "69", Lazlow walked into gay bars with his illegal Honduran partner on the radio, Niko blew a lawyer's head off without a mask and just sorta walked out of the building and the cops didn't care.

IV was hardly rooted in the seriousness in realism that people condemn it for. Like MVC said, it was consistent. Also, it took itself seriously, and it benefited from both those things immensely. R* chose fine detail over scale; you know, when 90% of their effort didn't go into "WOW LOOK AT THIS WACKY sh*t!" trailers. In the mid 2000's, this world of pre-orders, DLC, hype trailers, and unfinished games wasn't so overwhelming.

Of all the problems with V is that it never really established an identity more so than its identity being stupid. If they took more time to go down the heisting route; hypothetically. Michael is the only character, his family isn't a bunch of sitcom extras, professional heisting jobs are the main focus, then maybe they could have gotten a full product. But what looked good in trailers? Nostalgia gang banging, rednecks in deserts, planes, dogs, snapmatic, LifeInvader, planes, graphics, dogs, bikinis, Trevor, trains, GOLF, TENNIS, YOGA, DOGS, BIKINIS, BOATS, PLANES, GRAPHICS, GRAPHICS, FIRST PERSON, GRAPHICS!

 

In the words of JeremyJahns (a good YouTube movie reviewer, he does pretty bad reviews of games too but this statement stuck out) GTA V is a good little sample of a lot of things. Is it a great golf game? No. Is it a great shooter? No. Is it a great driving game? No. It's just a sampling.

That's why I found IV infinitely more enjoyable. Took its time, didn't over-stimulate to sell to 12-year-old fa**ot c*nts (STOP RUINING THE GAMES INDUSTRY YOU PIECE OF sh*t fa**ot WORST GENERATION EVER) and the features it had it did REALLY well. Driving, shooting, and atmosphere. I've spent more time taking friends bowling in GTA IV then I have in shootouts in GTA V, that's really pathetic.

 

Whatever the plan is for GTA VI, I hope it has some focus.

[MrDeSanta]

I find it pathetic that GTA V is rated for adults but in reality this game is just perfect for kids. Rockstar put in this game exactly what an average todays 12 year old would want:

Trevor, silly and stupid humor, Trevor, over the top crap, special superhuman abilities, Trevor, cartoonish driving, fame or shame, Trevor, life invader page, bleeter, Jimmy (their older ingame clone). Tracey (the kind of girl these kids like to follow on FB), Trevor, mission skip options, health regeneration, Trevor, FP mode, Trevor........

And of course Online, a heaven for these kids.

 

If this game wasn`t catered for the kids mainly then i`m a pope.

 

Seriously tell me why the f*ck would GTA game need an ingame clone of Facebook, Twitter and America`s got talent? Is this a GTA game or a f*cking parody simulator?

[TheOneLibertonian]

Like anyone said here, GTA V's social commentary on modern America is just too childish and too much. Who needs GTA to go over the top like Saints Row? I just want a balanced game like GTA IV and Vice City. They blended serious and funny perfectly, but those games don't go over the top.

[Chad Warden]

GTA IV showed what the media was showing in America in a light hearted way. Fear mongering, sensationalist news that produced fear and a need for government. The comedy showed through the cast and not the environment. Seeing Niko clash with different people and give witty responses felt natural. GTA V has a movie set feel, very hollow, big but...not much substance. I want a story like IV, were you can dig deeper and find things you don't know the first time.

[TheOneLibertonian]

People feel it necessary to engage in hyperbole and make things black and white to drive home their points.

"IV was serious, the other games weren't."

Play Mafia II or even Watch_Dogs and tell me IV was serious and deeply rooted in realism. Streets were still lined with the number "69", Lazlow walked into gay bars with his illegal Honduran partner on the radio, Niko blew a lawyer's head off without a mask and just sorta walked out of the building and the cops didn't care.

IV was hardly rooted in the seriousness in realism that people condemn it for. Like MVC said, it was consistent. Also, it took itself seriously, and it benefited from both those things immensely. R* chose fine detail over scale; you know, when 90% of their effort didn't go into "WOW LOOK AT THIS WACKY sh*t!" trailers. In the mid 2000's, this world of pre-orders, DLC, hype trailers, and unfinished games wasn't so overwhelming.

Of all the problems with V is that it never really established an identity more so than its identity being stupid. If they took more time to go down the heisting route; hypothetically. Michael is the only character, his family isn't a bunch of sitcom extras, professional heisting jobs are the main focus, then maybe they could have gotten a full product. But what looked good in trailers? Nostalgia gang banging, rednecks in deserts, planes, dogs, snapmatic, LifeInvader, planes, graphics, dogs, bikinis, Trevor, trains, GOLF, TENNIS, YOGA, DOGS, BIKINIS, BOATS, PLANES, GRAPHICS, GRAPHICS, FIRST PERSON, GRAPHICS!

 

In the words of JeremyJahns (a good YouTube movie reviewer, he does pretty bad reviews of games too but this statement stuck out) GTA V is a good little sample of a lot of things. Is it a great golf game? No. Is it a great shooter? No. Is it a great driving game? No. It's just a sampling.

That's why I found IV infinitely more enjoyable. Took its time, didn't over-stimulate to sell to 12-year-old fa**ot c*nts (STOP RUINING THE GAMES INDUSTRY YOU PIECE OF sh*t fa**ot WORST GENERATION EVER) and the features it had it did REALLY well. Driving, shooting, and atmosphere. I've spent more time taking friends bowling in GTA IV then I have in shootouts in GTA V, that's really pathetic.

 

Whatever the plan is for GTA VI, I hope it has some focus.

Well said, well said. That's what I perfectly imagine what V is. A video game that combines all great things from other video games and made them sub par. If I want to play a golf game I play Tiger Woods, if I want to play a shooter I play ARMA, if I want to play a driving game I play Gran Turismo or Forza. It's just too convoluted of a game that it casually forgets the game's theme of Heists, where mostly you became an errand boy for the FIB to do these daring heists, instead of the character's wanting to do these heists for pleasure. It just ruins the game. GTA IV is a perfect example of combining things from other video games done right. At least GTA IV consistently remembers it's theme from start to end. GTA V is more of a crime game/life simulator that can't remember the identity of it's theme. I was expecting a Heat like story for GTA V instead we get a messy and more of a parody what real life is.

[jeanrjm]

I remember when GTA was all about crime.

 

Not buying cars to show to online "friends".

I hope Rockstar hasn't forgotten what GTA really is, after this mess.

 

I just want VI to be focused on crime. And that means seriousness for sure.

Edited February 20, 2015 by jeanrjm

[Rustyspanner]

I think GTA IV had a great serious storyline and the city fit perfectly (dark colours, boring weather).

Niko went there with the intention of finding someone, and he did. After that, he cut off his criminal ties and didn't become some nationwide druglord, just because he could.

 

What I didn't like about V was the utter bullsh*t alien/ghost thing. A bit too ridiculous for my taste.

Rockstar have a load of money and I hope they don't make a horrid story for the next game because they were focusing on the multiplayer to make even more.

The potential is there, and I'm sure fans of the series would love something like that, but hey, it doesn't matter because everybody is going to buy the next GTA anyway!

Edited February 21, 2015 by Rustyspanner

[Felzuma]

Vice city is the perfect mic between the 2

[sweetbrother]

The thing is the Houser Brothers will continue to write satire comedy for GTA so it will never be serious. They must have fun with it for gta, they save their serious tone for other series like max payne etc.

 

Im more interested in Rockstar making a game based on a Movie again like Warriors.

 

Maybe Kill Bill? Blade Runner? Die Hard

Edited March 29, 2015 by sweetbrother

[Haha365]

I prefer having fun over being more serious.

[Jabalous]

I do. Everyone has his/her own taste, and for me, nothing beats a meaningful and consistent story with interesting characters and dialogue. V doesn't have any of that and that's why I really don't enjoy playing it to the point that I find it very irritating. Although I enjoy some of the humor from some TV shows, websites and talk radios, the dialogue within the story tries to throw a joke or metaphor with every line spoken, but it gets very irritating and silly.

 

Despite being set in a well-crafted world, I can't help but feel that nothing is interesting to be explored especially in Los Santos, simply because this city isn't for me. I don't enjoy exploring celebrity houses and inaccessible skyscrapers. Los Santos feels very shallow with its celebrity culture, irritating and boring charatcres; a story can make or break a well-crafted world.

 

I've grown with time to appreciate a good story and despise a bad one. I believe that Rockstar did their best in terms of story writing with Red Dead Redemption. This game was full of likeable characters who speak like if they're rooted in history, from experience and passion. Every character seems to have his/her own weight in the game's world and the humor is so subtle and smart.

 

Yes, Grand Theft Auto is a different franchise, sets in a different era and has its own limitations and rules, but from experience, IV was closer to RDR than to V. It had a unique story that has yet to be explored in gaming. An Eastern European immigrant comes to Liberty City to find no American dream, but rather underworld criminal rings threatening him and his cousin. He wants to survive and gets paid, so he goes in a journey to explore a wide spectrum of characters that V doesn't even come close to despite being set in a much bigger world.

Edited April 5, 2015 by FiS!!HeR

[American Viking]

Hell, I wanted a more serious GTA for V coming off of IV. That obviously didn't happen so yeah, fingers crossed that GTA VI can deliver the realism, integrity, and marvel storytelling that GTA IV had on full display. GTA V is the only GTA I've ever played where I literally could not beat it more than a few times, and after that first playthrough, the sequential playthroughs were struggled through to say the very least. The game is one big hyperbole parody...one that I'm ashamed is part of the GTA series. I don't consider it GTA though. GTA VI needs to listen to the core fanbase if they are to turn the ship around.

[Flesh-n-Bone]

No thanks. IV is my least favourite non-top down GTA by quite some margin. V was a huge return to form for me and I'd hate to see them go backwards again.

Exactly how I feel.

I think V overdid some things like possessing every single weapon and over the top attempts at parodying society but it was certainly a step in the right direction after the extremely bland IV. I do agree with a smaller map that has more interiors, though. Or at least if it's a huge map, more cities instead of a huge amount of countryside and desert. San Andreas was the perfect balance of the two imo.

[housedeep]

Yes, please. I hope the next GTA will have mature and self-controlled characters (meaning new characters should be created) and an original story.

I'd like the next story to be about taking control of the city, overthrowing rivals and fighting for your friends and for yourself. Whether it be about running the drug business or manipulating the politicians, it doesn't matter. A story about power, basically, not this revenge/heists type stuff.

 

I'm not concerned with realism as long as it doesn't make the game look silly.

 

But that is wishful thinking, it seems...

[Niko Montana]

I want a dark/grimey story for VI, similar to IV's feel. It would also be cool to have VI take place in a crime-ridden/dark/dangerous setting like Carcer City.

 

Rockstar should also cut down on the immature humor where they mention tits and dicks in every in game media and business name. If they do put sexual humor in, they should make it hard to understand when you first see it and include some actual clever innuendos, not just humor for 12 year olds.

 

Rockstar should also return to realism, it fits the HD-Universe so much more. Above all else my main wish is for VI to be more criminal based. I mean GTA was one of the first major action games where you weren't a cop, but the criminal. More criminal side missions are needed. There was so much opportunity for V to be more crime based. But no, they added Tennis & Yoga. It's cool, but we needed more Drug Dealing, Car Thefts, Assassination, Gambling, Arms Trafficking etc.

Edited April 6, 2015 by thedriver111

[lastmanonearth]

I`d like to be investigated by the cops as soon as they see me carrying a weapon, and if I run they`d start firing. You`d only talk to them for about ten seconds, during which time those cops would say some ridiculously hilarious sh*t and you`d be able to answer either rudely or politely, upon which they`d let you go if you`re being nice and cooperative. That would give me a reason to not always be carrying an uzi on foot, as it`s unrealistic although practical. Even though I want the game to feel realistic, I find myself doing what`s easiest and in GTA everything`s easy, pretty much. They should also have more different types of handguns, with varying levels of accuracy, weight, mag capacity and power, to make it more customizable and realistic. Rocket launchers etc. should be those special items that you can only acquire for a couple of missions, but should also be available through a cheat.

 

I`d like the cops to book me for speeding (only at like insane speeds) and if they see me bumping into traffic and running red lights and stop signs, but only to give me a ticket and let me go. If you pull over, they`d park themselves behind you and while they`re walking to your window you take off (like in Midnight Club LA!) The feeling of a serious police presence would impact the realism in a big way. You should of course have a cheat to disable that, if you don`t like it. If you get busted during free roam, you should wake up in jail and either pay your $50k bond or whatever or try to escape. If you don`t have the money but don`t want to wait, you should be able to call a friend to bail you out (if their favor with you is high.)

 

I agree that the story should also be more realistic and serious, and the number of people you kill in missions should be minimized for the most part to make every kill seem relevant and impactful. Maybe one mission will require you to stealth kill, another to kill only one guy but you have to crawl through a series of tunnels or air vents etc.

 

I disagree with having a smaller map, that sh*t don`t fly. IV was smaller than the previous game (SA,) V was smaller yet than IV! Enough of that bullsh*t. They should also have interiors, it won`t be a problem with the new consoles being significantly more powerful than the old gen. For crying out loud, if you take out the useless ocean SA was bigger AND had more interiors than both IV and V! In V, if it hadn`t been for the rather vast Yankton, which you only see twice and for a very short time, they could have had tons more interiors in Los Santos instead.

 

Finally, I`d like it to be more realistic by letting you figure out the best way to complete a mission, instead of having every mission scripted to the point where you may as well sit back and put the game on auto play and just watch what`s going on. It`s like I`m not even playing, because I can only do what the game tells me to do, when the game tells me to do! Like if you`re going after a kingpin in a fully guarded brothel, you can either run in the front door, guns blazing and all or dress up as a henchman, pizza boy or whatever and get up to his floor while only stealth killing one or two people to get to him, then give him the pizza you poisoned and walk out the front door. Again, these should all be things for you to figure out and decide! Enough with GTA: Hollywood Movie.

[thatstupidbug]

Well said, well said. That's what I perfectly imagine what V is. A video game that combines all great things from other video games and made them sub par. If I want to play a golf game I play Tiger Woods, if I want to play a shooter I play ARMA, if I want to play a driving game I play Gran Turismo or Forza.

 

 

I know I'm answering to an old post, but this part really is interesting... more than a decade ago, an italian reviewer (back when videogame magazines were still strong here) wrote an article about san andreas, He used the same example this user made, but to explain why GTA was superior to all of those game. he said something like:

 

"yeah, GTA is't the best shooter game. isn't the best racing game. isn't the best RPG game. But picture this: a dinner with a band playing and your girlfriend . If I wanted THE BEST dinner, i would have gone to a 5 star restaurant. if I wanted THE BEST female company, i could have paid an escort. If I wanted THE BEST music, I could have stayed at home listening to my favourite song... but mix those three elements togheter in the example above, and even if they're not THE BEST, togheter they made a magic night that is hard to repeat".

 

The metaphor with GTA is obvious: not a single minigame is the best... but being able to seamlessly go from one to another creates an idea of a rich world hard to replicate in videogames.

[lastmanonearth]

 

Well said, well said. That's what I perfectly imagine what V is. A video game that combines all great things from other video games and made them sub par. If I want to play a golf game I play Tiger Woods, if I want to play a shooter I play ARMA, if I want to play a driving game I play Gran Turismo or Forza.

 

 

I know I'm answering to an old post, but this part really is interesting... more than a decade ago, an italian reviewer (back when videogame magazines were still strong here) wrote an article about san andreas, He used the same example this user made, but to explain why GTA was superior to all of those game. he said something like:

 

"yeah, GTA is't the best shooter game. isn't the best racing game. isn't the best RPG game. But picture this: a dinner with a band playing and your girlfriend . If I wanted THE BEST dinner, i would have gone to a 5 star restaurant. if I wanted THE BEST female company, i could have paid an escort. If I wanted THE BEST music, I could have stayed at home listening to my favourite song... but mix those three elements togheter in the example above, and even if they're not THE BEST, togheter they made a magic night that is hard to repeat".

 

The metaphor with GTA is obvious: not a single minigame is the best... but being able to seamlessly go from one to another creates an idea of a rich world hard to replicate in videogames.

 

Nailed it. A-f*cken-men! That`s how I feel about SA. And magazine reviewers are brilliant, so much better than internet ones, from what I`ve just observed even more so in Italy!

[TheOneLibertonian]

 

Well said, well said. That's what I perfectly imagine what V is. A video game that combines all great things from other video games and made them sub par. If I want to play a golf game I play Tiger Woods, if I want to play a shooter I play ARMA, if I want to play a driving game I play Gran Turismo or Forza.

 

 

I know I'm answering to an old post, but this part really is interesting... more than a decade ago, an italian reviewer (back when videogame magazines were still strong here) wrote an article about san andreas, He used the same example this user made, but to explain why GTA was superior to all of those game. he said something like:

 

"yeah, GTA is't the best shooter game. isn't the best racing game. isn't the best RPG game. But picture this: a dinner with a band playing and your girlfriend . If I wanted THE BEST dinner, i would have gone to a 5 star restaurant. if I wanted THE BEST female company, i could have paid an escort. If I wanted THE BEST music, I could have stayed at home listening to my favourite song... but mix those three elements togheter in the example above, and even if they're not THE BEST, togheter they made a magic night that is hard to repeat".

 

The metaphor with GTA is obvious: not a single minigame is the best... but being able to seamlessly go from one to another creates an idea of a rich world hard to replicate in videogames.

 

GTA ain't the best in shooter nor the best driving game, but GTA V went overboard with some of their stuff, the themes are not very consistent in GTA V while in other GTA's it is consistent from start to finish, while GTA V is a mess. GTA IV on the other hand, went well and knew what the game is trying to be. I had fun in both GTA IV and GTA V, but GTA V bored me after six months while GTA IV is still very fun to play even after seven years. Rockstar did not achieve that in V. But like you said, some of the things you can't do in real life can be done in GTA. It's part of that magic, but GTA V does not have that magic like what Michael said during the first trailer for GTA V in 2011.

[Son of Zeus]

Needs to be serious, not too serious. IV's story is best suited for novels and movies. When you put that story in a video game, you get boring and repeatitive missions. Which is what happened with IV, IMO.

 

But that doesn't justify the total 360 R* did with GTA V. The sh*tload of lame sexual humour is pathetic, to say the least. At times, the game feels like its been designed for children. Hope we don't get a repeat in the next title.

 

A balance between seriousness and light-heartedness is needed.

Edited April 6, 2015 by Son of Zeus

[wiizardii]

The biggest improvement that needs to happen is: One protagonist again.

 

I think most people can agree with me, I think if R* focuses on one protagonist, things will be better. They tried to focus on three protagonists so much in V and look what happened. I don't think they should get a second chance with the whole three protagonist stuff, if they are gunna use that concept: have two protagonists who don't know each other. And don't even mention the IV/TBOGT/TLAD three protagonists, it was in seperate games not one.

 

What I want is a serious villain protagonist who's mortality is more evil than anyones so far, that is better than three protagonists, in wich one of them (cough franklin, cough) has a horrible character development.

[zeppelincheetah]

Absolutely not. Using IV as evidence, Rockstar are clearly not capable of a serious story. I wish the story was more in the background. Story ruins the gameplay experience if overdone. I kind of wish it was more like GTA 2, where there was almost no story at all but you could work for various different gangs. My favorite was GTA III, which imo had the perfect amount of story. The story should simply be the thing that gently glues everything together.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Hell, I wanted a more serious GTA for V coming off of IV. That obviously didn't happen so yeah, fingers crossed that GTA VI can deliver the realism, integrity, and marvel storytelling that GTA IV had on full display. GTA V is the only GTA I've ever played where I literally could not beat it more than a few times, and after that first playthrough, the sequential playthroughs were struggled through to say the very least. The game is one big hyperbole parody...one that I'm ashamed is part of the GTA series. I don't consider it GTA though. GTA VI needs to listen to the core fanbase if they are to turn the ship around.

 

I wasn't really expecting GTA V to be as serious as GTA IV, but IMO that doesn't excuse poor character development (Stretch and Wei Cheng). The thing with GTA IV is it's always felt like R* cared about the way characters interacted with eachother and their importance. Hell even unseen characters have backgrounds thanks to the LCPD database. Can we say the same for GTA V?

 

For me GTA VI doesn't need to be as drab and dark as GTA IV, but I hope it respects its characters rather than treating them like shallow, revolving doors like GTA V.

[PhillBellic]

 

Hell, I wanted a more serious GTA for V coming off of IV. That obviously didn't happen so yeah, fingers crossed that GTA VI can deliver the realism, integrity, and marvel storytelling that GTA IV had on full display. GTA V is the only GTA I've ever played where I literally could not beat it more than a few times, and after that first playthrough, the sequential playthroughs were struggled through to say the very least. The game is one big hyperbole parody...one that I'm ashamed is part of the GTA series. I don't consider it GTA though. GTA VI needs to listen to the core fanbase if they are to turn the ship around.

 

I wasn't really expecting GTA V to be as serious as GTA IV, but IMO that doesn't excuse poor character development (Stretch and Wei Cheng). The thing with GTA IV is it's always felt like R* cared about the way characters interacted with eachother and their importance. Hell even unseen characters have backgrounds thanks to the LCPD database. Can we say the same for GTA V?

 

For me GTA VI doesn't need to be as drab and dark as GTA IV, but I hope it respects its characters rather than treating them like shallow, revolving doors like GTA V.

 

The LSPD (and LSSD) don't even have computers, to begin with.

[The Dedito Gae]

completly off topic:

 

I like how almost all the time Philly Bellic replies exclusively to MVC.

he's like MVC's Ron Jakowsky.LOL

 

[Algonquin Assassin]

completly off topic:

 

I like how almost all the time Philly Bellic replies exclusively to MVC.

he's like MVC's Ron Jakowsky.LOL

 

 

 

That would make me Phil's Trevor Phillips. I see what you did there.

 

[PhillBellic]

completly off topic:

 

I like how almost all the time Philly Bellic replies exclusively to MVC.

he's like MVC's Ron Jakowsky.LOL

 

 

Hey, we speak form the same page, so to speak.

 

Edited April 7, 2015 by PhillBellic

[ClaudX]

 

completly off topic:

 

I like how almost all the time Philly Bellic replies exclusively to MVC.

he's like MVC's Ron Jakowsky.LOL

 

 

 

That would make me Phil's Trevor Phillips. I see what you did there.

 

 

 

Are you not offended? Way to disappoint me.

 

[PhillBellic]

 

completly off topic:

 

I like how almost all the time Philly Bellic replies exclusively to MVC.

he's like MVC's Ron Jakowsky.LOL

 

 

 

That would make me Phil's Trevor Phillips. I see what you did there.

 

 

 

Nah, we are more like Niko, and Roman.

 

[The Dedito Gae]

That would make me Phil's Trevor Phillips. I see what you did there

MVC,you are deranged.

IV is your meth and V fanboys are your Lost MC.

 

 

Talking seriously, as you said tons of times and i come to understand, is that IV's history is more consistent,i don't think the history is as dark as people say it is, is just ominious and it takes itself more seriously, TLAD is way darker, maybe the past of Johnny is not as tragic as Niko's but the history mode sure goes and ends with a rather pesssimistic tone,at least we have some characters and events in V that are a relief and inject Niko/the history optimism.

at the end, Niko always prevails even after losing Kate/Roman, you can sense he's gonna do well, i never felt that with Johnny.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Midnight Hitman