2D Universe vs 3D Universe vs HD Universe

[BoringPedsDumbCops]

For me, the 3D universe is quintessential Grand Theft Auto, GTA III and Vice City in particular. I was one of a few who liked the look of GTA V because it harkened back to GTA III and Vice City a little bit.

[The Deadite]

HD universe wins, even V is better written than SA, Liberty City HD beats Liberty City 3D and Niko Bellic's story is a gold introduction to the HD universe (even though the standard got low with V)

[Felzuma]

3D has it for me. R* made their own sandbox instead of emulating real cities. So it was fun to explore them. Even though R*s best sandbox to date is IVs

[ChengizVlad09]

3D Universe universe all the way.

[Haha365]

3D Universe, for sure.

[lastmanonearth]

I`ve probably poured more hours into the 3D GTAs than in playing all the HD and 2D GTAs combined. There was ALWAYS something to do in SA and the constantly raging gang wars gave it a sense of urgency as an incentive to keep you engaged. And I have yet to get bored of the music in VC, it`s the best. If I had to choose between all the HD GTAs or only the VC SOUNDTRACK I`d choose the latter in a heartbeat.

 

I`m currently rererererererereplaying GTA2 for the nostalgia factor and to get my mind off all the things that piss me off with V (which also BTW has better radio than GTA IV and V.) Of course, if I could only ever have one GTA for the rest of my life it`d be GTA V for the PC (because of all the mods that will come along, including the San Andreas mod) but luckily I don`t have to make that choice. The way they were MADE BY R* though, 3D GTAs rule.

 

1. 3D

2. 2D

3. HD (not as FUN!)

[.Ryan.]

It might not be the most popular opinion, but I'd have to say the HD era/universe. I started off with the 2D GTAs in the late 90s, but it's been years since I played any top down GTA. The last time I played GTA I got head spins from that horrible zooming in and out camera. GTA II was a bit better, but the lack of any real point (aka a story to go with it) made it boring. Certainly not what I remember when I was a young GTA fan.

 

Then there's the 3D era/universe. VC will always be the 3D king and I was quite surprised to find a new appreciation SA. GTA III is still a classic, but I haven't played enough of VCS and LCS. To be honest though whilst the games are still mildly fun I can't lie in saying that the technology advancements made in newer games make these hard to play for hours end well at least to me.

 

Regarding the HD era/universe despite my criticisms of GTA V it's the quintessential one IMO. The way EFLC ties in with GTA IV to me puts the 3D era/universe to shame regarding how to construct an intersecting narrative and I've put more hours into GTA IV (especially) and EFLC than any previous GTA. I even have a number of hours up in GTA V.

 

Each era/universe has its pros and cons, but the HD era/universe is where it's at for me. I hope R* revisit VC again some time in the near future.

[universetwisters]

...but I haven't played enough of VCS and LCS.

 

 

It's not worth it. I dunno why, but VCS/LCS just depress the hell out of me when I go to play them, especially VCS. It makes me want to shove my head into a blender, but not because of the game itself. It's just crazy strange, like how chemicals seem to want to mix together to where I only feel that when I play VCS and nothing else.

 

OT - III era. As good as the HD era is as far as technology goes, it's just too political and serious for me. And I don't know anything about the 2D era to make a proper judgement.

[lastmanonearth]

To be honest though whilst the games are still mildly fun I can't lie in saying that the technology advancements made in newer games make these hard to play for hours end well at least to me.

I think the improved technology is the single biggest selling point of the HD games, and it does ruin the feeling when playing the 10+ year old 3D games. I however don`t buy into GTA IV, EFLC or V having any significant redeeming qualities if you take out the graphics, RAGE, Euphoria and the like. Not compared to the previous games, anyway, that were epic and amazing. It`s cool if you like those games but I don`t think they`ve been heading the right direction ever since the 3D era ended. 95% of the focus is on the graphics and the rest feels like an afterthought.

[Haha365]

 

To be honest though whilst the games are still mildly fun I can't lie in saying that the technology advancements made in newer games make these hard to play for hours end well at least to me.

I think the improved technology is the single biggest selling point of the HD games, and it does ruin the feeling when playing the 10+ year old 3D games. I however don`t buy into GTA IV, EFLC or V having any significant redeeming qualities if you take out the graphics, RAGE, Euphoria and the like. Not compared to the previous games, anyway, that were epic and amazing. It`s cool if you like those games but I don`t think they`ve been heading the right direction ever since the 3D era ended. 95% of the focus is on the graphics and the rest feels like an afterthought.

 

I 100% agree. I feel the focus seemed more on gameplay improvements, in the 3D era games. The HD era, thus far, seems more about improving the graphics, the physics, draw distances etc.

[.Ryan.]

 

To be honest though whilst the games are still mildly fun I can't lie in saying that the technology advancements made in newer games make these hard to play for hours end well at least to me.

I think the improved technology is the single biggest selling point of the HD games, and it does ruin the feeling when playing the 10+ year old 3D games. I however don`t buy into GTA IV, EFLC or V having any significant redeeming qualities if you take out the graphics, RAGE, Euphoria and the like. Not compared to the previous games, anyway, that were epic and amazing. It`s cool if you like those games but I don`t think they`ve been heading the right direction ever since the 3D era ended. 95% of the focus is on the graphics and the rest feels like an afterthought.

 

 

Fair enough. I love the 3D era/universe as much as everyone else, but I don't believe in sugarcoating so I'll always speak how I feel.

 

 

I 100% agree. I feel the focus seemed more on gameplay improvements, in the 3D era games. The HD era, thus far, seems more about improving the graphics, the physics, draw distances etc.

 

 

 

Physics are game play elements are they not? I don't know about you, but core game play is just as important as surface gameplay (I suppose you could describe it like that).

 

Don't get me wrong there are things about HD GTAs I'm very vocal about not being present, but if I'm honest most people seem to have a very limited understanding of what game play actually is just from what I've observed over the years. I'd consider physics to be one of the most important parts of the game play so of course it makes sense they would keep improving it.

 

Things like graphics, draw distances etc aren't of much concern to me as they come naturally with more advanced hardware.

[Haha365]

 

 

 

To be honest though whilst the games are still mildly fun I can't lie in saying that the technology advancements made in newer games make these hard to play for hours end well at least to me.

I think the improved technology is the single biggest selling point of the HD games, and it does ruin the feeling when playing the 10+ year old 3D games. I however don`t buy into GTA IV, EFLC or V having any significant redeeming qualities if you take out the graphics, RAGE, Euphoria and the like. Not compared to the previous games, anyway, that were epic and amazing. It`s cool if you like those games but I don`t think they`ve been heading the right direction ever since the 3D era ended. 95% of the focus is on the graphics and the rest feels like an afterthought.

 

I 100% agree. I feel the focus seemed more on gameplay improvements, in the 3D era games. The HD era, thus far, seems more about improving the graphics, the physics, draw distances etc.

 

 

Physics are game play elements are they not? I don't know about you, but core game play is just as important as surface gameplay (I suppose you could describe it like that).

 

 

 

I suppose so, to a degree, but it's more based on advancement in technology than activites, side missions, etc. You assume it would get better over time.

[lastmanonearth]

 

 

To be honest though whilst the games are still mildly fun I can't lie in saying that the technology advancements made in newer games make these hard to play for hours end well at least to me.

I think the improved technology is the single biggest selling point of the HD games, and it does ruin the feeling when playing the 10+ year old 3D games. I however don`t buy into GTA IV, EFLC or V having any significant redeeming qualities if you take out the graphics, RAGE, Euphoria and the like. Not compared to the previous games, anyway, that were epic and amazing. It`s cool if you like those games but I don`t think they`ve been heading the right direction ever since the 3D era ended. 95% of the focus is on the graphics and the rest feels like an afterthought.

 

 

Fair enough. I love the 3D era/universe as much as everyone else, but I don't believe in sugarcoating so I'll always speak how I feel.

 

 

I 100% agree. I feel the focus seemed more on gameplay improvements, in the 3D era games. The HD era, thus far, seems more about improving the graphics, the physics, draw distances etc.

 

 

 

Physics are game play elements are they not? I don't know about you, but core game play is just as important as surface gameplay (I suppose you could describe it like that).

 

Don't get me wrong there are things about HD GTAs I'm very vocal about not being present, but if I'm honest most people seem to have a very limited understanding of what game play actually is just from what I've observed over the years. I'd consider physics to be one of the most important parts of the game play so of course it makes sense they would keep improving it.

 

Things like graphics, draw distances etc aren't of much concern to me as they come naturally with more advanced hardware.

 

I agree the physics are extremely important, but it`s only fun pushing people down stairs so many times, or hitting them with your car an X amount of times... When that gets old there should be a gazillion other things to do like running businesses, playing games etc. etc. etc.

[PhillBellic]

I like the HD Era the most, especially the IV Sub-Era.

[puffy]

I wouldn't choose if I didn't have to. HD era was more fun and probably the era I'd want around if the others couldn't exist, but the 3D era built the series and meant a lot more, so without it we wouldn't even have the HD era. I never played 1 or 2 enough to care about them very much.

 

 

I 100% agree. I feel the focus seemed more on gameplay improvements, in the 3D era games. The HD era, thus far, seems more about improving the graphics, the physics, draw distances etc.

It's important to keep in mind that while there may be more improvements in certain areas in either generation, each game does tend to technically improve upon its predecessor completely. The graphics, draw distance, etc. changes might also be a lot more noticeable this gen due to Moore's law (that computers improve exponentially, rather than in linear order.) Back in the 3D generation things were limited for much longer, so you improved on what you could work with at the time, which was usually gameplay features or more creative things. Also my opinion is pretty much useless here since I'm not a game dev or involved in that sort of work in any way. Edited April 9, 2015 by puffy

[lastmanonearth]

I wouldn't choose if I didn't have to. HD era was more fun and probably the era I'd want around if the others couldn't exist, but the 3D era built the series and meant a lot more, so without it we wouldn't even have the HD era. I never played 1 or 2 enough to care about them very much.

 

I 100% agree. I feel the focus seemed more on gameplay improvements, in the 3D era games. The HD era, thus far, seems more about improving the graphics, the physics, draw distances etc.

It's important to keep in mind that while there may be more improvements in certain areas in either generation, each game does tend to technically improve upon its predecessor completely. The graphics, draw distance, etc. changes might also be a lot more noticeable this gen due to Moore's law (that computers improve exponentially, rather than in linear order.) Back in the 3D generation things were limited for much longer, so you improved on what you could work with at the time, which was usually gameplay features or more creative things. Also my opinion is pretty much useless here since I'm not a game dev or involved in that sort of work in any way.

 

 

Never mind that the improvements were mostly in the technical polishing department, but when it comes to gameplay features they have actually REVERTED back to the level they were at with Vice City. Even fewer things to do than in VC, or at least if just feels like that. If they had kept constantly improving every aspect of the game, but mostly focused on the graphics while only slightly improving the gameplay, I would have been OK with it. Even if they had SIMPLY KEPT the gameplay features from the past. But NO! They threw it all out the window in favor of the graphics! And YOGA! There`s even no gang banging or anything, it really truly sucks, a "crime game" indeed. Crime as in, it`s a crime what they`ve done to my favorite series!

Edited April 9, 2015 by bored_killed

[TheOneLibertonian]

To be honest, just as much as I like the 3D Universe with it's interconnected stories between three different decades, I really admire the beauty and realism of the HD universe, because of the political and cultural satire is on form in the HD universe as well as a more deep storytelling. Rockstar nailed it with GTA IV and EFLC by telling an interwoven story between three characters that have one thing in common - they live in the worst city in America. Liberty City is the most lively city in the whole series and Southern San Andreas is the most beautiful naturally and architecturally, despite my criticisms of the map, it is still beautiful to look at. The 3D Universe is very fun and exiting, but HD universe, especially IV is a hell lot of fun. It made you feel that you are living in the city and it is very special to me. The story and narrative is what made GTA IV special and even GTA V's first quarter has that build up that made you exiting for the forthcoming events in the game, but overall it disappointed me and it felt underwhelmed. In the HD Universe, the gameplay feels more realistic and refined, as well as the graphics.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the 3D universe and I adore it a lot. Vice City remains the quintessential GTA and it remains as a model for other games alongside GTA III. But we can all agree that Rockstar can make an open world better than any other developer.

[housedeep]

I find the stories in HD era games depressing and the characters quite dumb. it's frustrating to go through all of the protags' troubles only to lose everything (IV, TLAD).. In the 3D era you accomplish something in the end.

3D era games are much more cheerful and fun, yet they're all about crime.

 

So I choose 3D universe.

[GTA-Biker]

I do appreciate HD era for great writing of GTA 4 and some new stuff that GTA 5 introduced (first person view,multiple protagonists...) or brought back into the series (car customization,tattoos and haircuts,over the top weapons like minigun and armed vehicles...),but I still like 3D era more because games like GTA 3,Vice City and San Andreas were classics and I´m very nostalgic about them.

[Ajelfy]

The HD era. I personally prefer the story and the detail of the cities more.

[puffy]

Never mind that the improvements were mostly in the technical polishing department, but when it comes to gameplay features they have actually REVERTED back to the level they were at with Vice City. Even fewer things to do than in VC, or at least if just feels like that. If they had kept constantly improving every aspect of the game, but mostly focused on the graphics while only slightly improving the gameplay, I would have been OK with it. Even if they had SIMPLY KEPT the gameplay features from the past. But NO! They threw it all out the window in favor of the graphics! And YOGA! There`s even no gang banging or anything, it really truly sucks, a "crime game" indeed. Crime as in, it`s a crime what they`ve done to my favorite series!

Mmm, the gameplay features have just morphed into more individual things. Before you might be driving waypoint to waypoint and watching a scripted ped cutscene (which I don't mean to bring down, doing the taxi missions were some of the most fun I ever had in III), and in IV extra side stuff for the player to do became mini-games and non-physical (not sure that's the right word...) tasks like hanging out with friends or tossing money to street musicians. Rockstar seemed like they were experimenting with new stuff at the time, and I don't think they totally f*cked up with it since I personally enjoy IV's side-content.

 

There was a lot more side-content in the 3D era, and it reached its zenith in SA, but again they didn't have the technology that they did later, so to make a good open world game they had to fill it up with enough side-content to keep players playing for the open world entertained.

 

 

Liberty City is the most lively city in the whole series and Southern San Andreas is the most beautiful naturally and architecturally, despite my criticisms of the map, it is still beautiful to look at. The 3D Universe is very fun and exiting, but HD universe, especially IV is a hell lot of fun. It made you feel that you are living in the city and it is very special to me.

also brings up a good point, just being able to walk around the HD cities is a ton of fun that isn't really the same in the 3D era. The cities are big and beautiful and full of silly crap to find, which while true in the 3D era, was less true just because R* was working with less capabilities (SA especially feels copy and pasted in some areas.)

Edited April 10, 2015 by puffy

[ClaudX]

I love the 2D Era's carefree sense of humor, but serious tone at the same time. Like others, it was hard for me to get into it because of the camera. I understand it was the 90's and their first GTA games, but they could've done better at the stories and the characters.

 

The 3D Era is one I have the most memories with. It feels like a complete world because of the multiple locations. The stories were great, but Rockstar left way too many loose ends when it comes to the characters.

 

My personal favorite is the HD Era. While the 3D Era felt complete, the HD Era feels real. Although there's only two or three locations ,depending on how you look at it, I feel like I'm experiencing real conversations, real people, and real locations.

[ChengizVlad09]

It's not just nostalgia, but there's no number of polygons, textures, resolutions, draw distances or godknowswhatelse, that can compete or be compared to, murky-foggy nights of Portland, cruising down the streets of Saint Mark's towards the Red Light District and Hepburn Heights while listening to Fadeaway.

Or the same scenario in Vice City. Ocean Beach, night, pink-blue mist, Infernus, Summer Madness by Kool and the Gang...

purple skies of San Andreas state, watching city outlines from distant point of view in some remote location..

Only thing that comes near, classic Max Payne for PC.

 

Yeah, HD, like it's name implies, has better graphics, but imo, only from "technological" point of view, which is obvious and for things to be not far from the irony, it's graphics is most of the times vague and blurry, like literally you can't guess whether or not to make that turn.

That's how the graphics can be summarized in short.

 

Regards storytelling, they are both neck to neck and I know this can also sound like BS to many, but there's this "curse" of stories in HD Universe, trying to be movies and not games, there's this constant feel of watching the movie and not playing the game, heck even the 2D bets the HD in some ways.

Edited April 10, 2015 by ChengizVlad09

[Osho]

In the 3D era you accomplish something in the end.

3D era games are much more cheerful and fun, yet they're all about crime.

So I choose 3D universe.

Perfectly said.

Short and simple definition of what a GTA game is, this definition has been butchered, and totally changed in HD era that sucked the fun away, and leaned too much towards realism.

As awesome, living, breathing and stunning HD games feel, but my constant reaction after few hours playing around the city and drooling at the details, is utter dearth of things to do, interact, and influence without suffocating myself with all the restrictions and stupid realism. HD games are not even on par with any 3D games in terms of things available for you to enjoy freely outside the story.

And, its not about the quality > quantity bullsh*t and f*ckin' nonsense I keep reading, but more about getting the best out of the games potential and raising a bar to an even higher level in providing activities and things that puts even 3D games to shame.

Instead I have to choose something different - boring minigames, bunch of side quests, collectibles, and ... that's all I can chose in this highly detailed and technically improved gaming experience. Yeah, I know you can still drive, do random things, annoy, or punch peds/cops, do some bullsh*t photography, and just spend the time through your imagination for the rest of the entire game.

BUT .. My question is, is that it?

Is this what R* can come up with at this stage despite technically capable to throw in more possibilities, and get the max out of the obvious potential available, and also maintain a sense of good balance that would help to make this beautiful open world more immersive?

Is it so difficult for R* to not prevent the players from having a bit more unrealistic, a bit more interesting activities that reward their creativity, a bit more out-of-the-box fun and interactions, etc over a boring real life simulator, just because that would affect and go against HOW THEY THINK holds valid and true within the games context for their protagonist?

If yes, then where the f*ck is the players freedom in such HD era open worlds of limited possibilities where one has to enjoy according to how the designers dictate without any other option to change things except pay for the DLC.

Just sucks to play them.

I choose 3D era ( and still like GTA 2 ) because its totally what made me fan of the series, and still rules as the best.

[.Ryan.]

 

 

My personal favorite is the HD Era. While the 3D Era felt complete, the HD Era feels real. Although there's only two or three locations ,depending on how you look at it, I feel like I'm experiencing real conversations, real people, and real locations.

 

This. I enjoy the more down to earth feeling mostly from GTA IV and TLAD. Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but because the HD era locations generally tend to feel more life like exploring them is a better experience than the 3D era locations IMO.

 

I can't tell you how many hours I've spent exploring every nook and cranny of LC and it's something I still do even today.

[Lock n' Stock]

Am I the only one who likes them both equally?

[XNOR]

All eras, since it's GTA.

 

If you are asking to choose one, I'll go with 3D era. I had years of fun playing Vice City. But my opinion would be invalid, because I haven't played any HD(played a bit of IV on friend's Xb360) and 2D era games on the PC. And I have only played 3 3D era games (did not play Advance, VCS and LCS).

 

My opinion might or might not change after the release of GTA 5 on PC... so till it's release, I'll go with the 3D era.

[Flesh-n-Bone]

3D universe is my easy favorite. I could easily be satisfied in a deserted island with just a PS2 and my copies of III/VC/SA/LCS/VCS as my options.

 

I like the life-like feel of IV and V, specially when it concerns a fantasy future (which I often have playing these games) but the 3D era will always be my favorite. Most fun, nostalgia and all that combined.

Edited April 11, 2015 by Flesh-n-Bone

[StrafeFTW]

I prefer the HD universe because the HD universe are so detail and the story are just fantastic.. the 3D universe on the other hand are kinda boring if you are a type of guy who loves to mess around with physics during free roam and that is kinda me.. currently, GTA IV and GTA V are the only GTA games that I found fun, others are boring as heck.. 

[GreenPeas]

3D Universe in my heart (said this while playing GTA V 24/7).