Driving physics have grown on me abit

December 21, 2015

In V the driving is straight forward, you can dodge vehicles, you can drive through gaps easily etc.

in IV its I would say nearly impossible doing it and if you do it doesn't feel nowwhere near as fun as in V.

Oh really? Because I just got done driving around LC in the Coquette then a Feltzer then a Korean Presidente then a Russian Schafter and now I'm in a Sentinel. I pulled some stunts, powerslides, had lots of fun.

Maybe the little effort it takes to pull stunts in V is fun to you but it certainly isn't to me. 1) Because I've played IV so much that pulling stunts in IV is almost effortless for me. 2) Being able to pull difficult maneuvers with ease is downright boring. If no effort is required then how is that fun?

I think the driving in V lacks any sort of thrill. It's just boring. There is no excitement, no technique, just nothingness. And they claim they tried to make it feel more cinematic but to be honest with you, I've had way more movie "moments" in IV than I ever had in V, if any.

The only way I enjoy the driving in V is driving slow. Taking my blue Carbonizzare out for a chill and realistic cruise around the map with the top down, listening to some music. Prowling around town in an Oracle II taking in the sights of the city. The only car that I enjoy driving fast is the T20 because it reminds me of the Turismo from IV. Other than that, driving fast in V often feels soulless and just flat out dull.

I drive faster in IV than I do in V. I think IV suits all of my styles of driving while V just suits me when I just want to cruise.

I could be misinterpreting you, but it sounds to me like you are hinting at the premise that "superior" gamers would like the driving better in IV and "lazy gamers" would like the driving better in V.

If that is what you're saying, then I strongly disagree.

Everyone has their own tastes and everyone has preferences as to where they want things to be challenging and where they want them to be simpler. I also do not subscribe to the elitist perception that "a more difficult game is a better game."

Not saying any of this is what you are saying, because I may be unintentionally misrepresenting your position. I just think that gaming is supposed to be fun, first and foremost, and everything else second. If you personally find the driving better in IV, I can completely respect that. But if you are disparaging people who enjoy the driving better in V, by characterizing them as "lazy" or "only wanting to cruise" then you may be losing sight of the fact that everyone derives fun in games for different reasons, and your desire to "work harder" to drive in IV is neither superior nor inferior.

Edited December 21, 2015 by ChiroVette

December 21, 2015

I could be misinterpreting you, but it sounds to me like you are hinting at the premise that "superior" gamers would like the driving better in IV and "lazy gamers" would like the driving better in V.

No.

December 21, 2015

I could be misinterpreting you, but it sounds to me like you are hinting at the premise that "superior" gamers would like the driving better in IV and "lazy gamers" would like the driving better in V.

No.

Sure sounds like it to me. I'm a fantastic driver in IV. But V beats it miles it ahead in terms of fun. At least, to me, it does.

December 21, 2015

Still prefer V's driving. At least cars don't go slip-slidey.

You do know cars in GTA IV don't slide if you actually drive them the way their supposed to be right?

Uh, that doesn't change the fact that they're still slidey. You don't have to be sh*tty driver to realize this.

IV cars are in no way slidey, unless you're trying to push the Coquette/Banshee to their limits.

That's what I'm saying, if you actually use the handbrake when turning, don't push it to much, the cars don't slide and if they do you're not doing it right. That's why I prefer IV's driving, it feels rewarding..

December 21, 2015

I could be misinterpreting you, but it sounds to me like you are hinting at the premise that "superior" gamers would like the driving better in IV and "lazy gamers" would like the driving better in V.

No.

Sure sounds like it to me. I'm a fantastic driver in IV. But V beats it miles it ahead in terms of fun. At least, to me, it does.

I think V's lacks any sort of challenge. That's what I'm saying. I even mentioned "maybe you like that but I don't" towards XenoxX.

December 21, 2015

I could be misinterpreting you, but it sounds to me like you are hinting at the premise that "superior" gamers would like the driving better in IV and "lazy gamers" would like the driving better in V.

No.

Sure sounds like it to me. I'm a fantastic driver in IV. But V beats it miles it ahead in terms of fun. At least, to me, it does.

I think V's lacks any sort of challenge. That's what I'm saying. I even mentioned "maybe you like that but I don't" towards XenoxX.

That does sort of imply that people that like the driving in V aren't capable of taking on the "challenge" of IV's physics.

When you think about it, V's driving requires skill as well. If you're already good at driving games, then possibly a little less, but it takes skill none the less.

IV's driving doesn't feel rewarding to me. It's good, I like it. I prefer V's but I don't think it has objectively bad driving physics. I just find it too heavy and sluggish at times, depending on the car of course. But V's, to me, is rewarding because I can get exciting chases and Hollywood-esque fun from it without having to put in too much effort. That doesn't mean I don't like a challenge, but I want to be able to have fun easily. It shouldn't be a chore and you shouldn't need the same kind of hyper-realistic physics that you would get in a game centered on that activity to be able to get that fun.

It's horses for courses really, as ever. If you like the driving in IV, that's cool. If I like the driving in V, that should be cool too, right? It shouldn't be the case that people are told they're wrong, or are made to feel like they're wrong via the implications of people's no doubt deliberately worded statements.

IV's physics are heavy, V's physics are light. Both are enjoyable for different reasons. It really is that simple. Why on Earth are people finding literally everything a reason to argue and snipe at each other? Why can't we discuss without people resorting to saying things suck or whatever?

People have forgotten how to discuss I think. People take any kind of questioning or objection to their opinion as a personal attack, when it's really not. It's an opening for discussion, not a reason to get angry and flex your muscles.

December 21, 2015

I could be misinterpreting you, but it sounds to me like you are hinting at the premise that "superior" gamers would like the driving better in IV and "lazy gamers" would like the driving better in V.

No.

Sounds like it to me, particularly after reading your subsequent comments after my post above.

When you say things like "such and such lacks and sort of challenge," that's code for misrepresenting the people as lazy or unskilled because they "enjoy" what you have designated "as lacking challenge."

There is a challenge to ALL driving games, but the challenge is in different places. Some people, and I am one of them, don't see the enjoyment of having to keep your car from sliding out every five seconds. I think most of the people in the forum, again myself included, are skilled enough to keep all four wheels on the road in GTA IV. It isn't like really going to NASCAR and racing against pros here.

Driving in IV isn't difficult, is what most people are saying. I know I was able to do it. But I don;t find cars that slide and skid all over the road to be fun just because I was able to master using them. I think a lot of people are in that boat.

December 21, 2015

I could be misinterpreting you, but it sounds to me like you are hinting at the premise that "superior" gamers would like the driving better in IV and "lazy gamers" would like the driving better in V.

No.

Sure sounds like it to me. I'm a fantastic driver in IV. But V beats it miles it ahead in terms of fun. At least, to me, it does.

I think V's lacks any sort of challenge. That's what I'm saying. I even mentioned "maybe you like that but I don't" towards XenoxX.

Yeah, I get that. I usually prefer fun over challenges anyways.

It's horses for courses really, as ever.

Wut? Never heard of that one before.

Edited December 21, 2015 by .Smaher.

December 21, 2015

It's horses for courses really, as ever.

Wut? Never heard of that one before.

It's a very British idiom. Google says:

horses for courses

phrase of horse

1.

BRITISHproverb

different people are suited to different things.

And, frankly, that's the main gist of everything around here that ends up in people getting angry.

"I like this thing"

"Yeah but I like this thing"

"OK, fair enough. You're allowed to like that thing. I still like this thing, though"

"But this thing is better than that thing"

"That thing's just different"

"But that thing isn't as good as this thing, because it's the thing I like"

"No, that's not how it works"

"AHMAHGAHD UR SO WRANG WHAT IS WRANG WITH YOU WHY MUST YOU BE SO WRANG ABOUT EVERTHANG?"

V boards - that's you, that is.

Edited December 21, 2015 by Fuzzknuckles

December 21, 2015

It's horses for courses really, as ever. If you like the driving in IV, that's cool. If I like the driving in V, that should be cool too, right? It shouldn't be the case that people are told they're wrong, or are made to feel like they're wrong via the implications of people's no doubt deliberately worded statements.

Well that's not what I'm doing is it? Don't assume stuff, seriously that's getting old. I'm blunt, I'm going to say exactly what I feel and I feel that V's driving doesn't offer any sort of challenge but that's just me. I'm not secretly implying "haha ur a dumbass who can't drive" when I say that either. If I feel that way, I'm gonna say exactly that and I have before, you already know that.

December 21, 2015

It's horses for courses really, as ever. If you like the driving in IV, that's cool. If I like the driving in V, that should be cool too, right? It shouldn't be the case that people are told they're wrong, or are made to feel like they're wrong via the implications of people's no doubt deliberately worded statements.

Well that's not what I'm doing is it? Don't assume stuff, seriously that's getting old. I'm blunt, I'm going to say exactly what I feel and I feel that V's driving doesn't offer any sort of challenge but that's just me. I'm not secretly implying "haha ur a dumbass who can't drive" when I say that either. If I feel that way, I'm gonna say exactly that and I have before, you already know that.

Sorry. Where did I say that was about you? You can't be so blind as to see there's a lot of people around here that do that. If you've taken that to mean you, it was by no means intended. That was a general comment about the way people word their posts.

Apologies if you're feeling persecuted. Maybe have a think about that.

December 21, 2015

The physics in GTA 5 are so boring. There are no outside variables that make driving interesting. It's all turn left, turn right, go forward, go backward. There is no tire physics like in Mafia 2, there is no weight shifting like in GTA 4... It's boring. Thats the main reason why I don't play the game anymore. In GTA 4, my favorite thing to do was get into car chases with random npc's and see them crash in so many different ways like flipping the car or flying through the windshield. In GTA 5, they just crash into a building with no physics at all and no damage on the car.

December 22, 2015

Even on old gen I always though driving physics were fairly decent.

December 22, 2015

there is no weight shifting like in GTA 4...

This is what kind of annoys me the most. Fuzz mentioned before that in GTA IV the cars feel heavy and in GTA V they're light and it's entirely accurate. The problem (for me atleast) is this is what makes the driving in GTA V feel a bit "meh". I like cars feeling like they have mass.

Even the trucks in GTA V feel as light as a feather unlike the heavy beasts in GTA IV.

December 22, 2015

there is no weight shifting like in GTA 4...

This is what kind of annoys me the most. Fuzz mentioned before that in GTA IV the cars feel heavy and in GTA V they're light and it's entirely accurate. The problem (for me atleast) is this is what makes the driving in GTA V feel a bit "meh". I like cars feeling like they have mass.

Even the trucks in GTA V feel as light as a feather unlike the heavy beasts in GTA IV.

Weight plays a huge role in the fun-to-drive factor for me which is heavily dependent on the steering feel. And what is steering feel without a sense of weight? Nothing.

December 23, 2015

Anyone else noticed the dodgy bike physics? As in the turn radius specifically. Try slowing turning into a circle with your bike. Your front wheel looks like it's rubbing against the ground sideways. The wheel doesn't turn as much as it should so it looks very weird. That always pissed me off I don't know why, it looks so bad lol.

December 23, 2015

Here's the thing I don't like, while riding a bike at high speeds if I hit a sidewalk the wrong way I go flying or worse yet I die. They kind of need to change that.

December 23, 2015

If I can't shunt a small Vehicle out of the way, whilst I'm driving a Large Truck, then there is something wrong with the Vehicle Physics in the Game.

December 23, 2015

Driving physics:

IV>SA>V

December 24, 2015

When I first got to play GTA V on PC, I literally complained on how the cars feel like they're invincible. Using the Rapid GT on Franklin and Lamar and then hitting one of those Intruders at high speed, the car I was driving had little deformation on the front. A dangling bumper, a slightly opened hood, then a dent that looks like a hammer hit twice on the car, then that's it. The car didn't feel like it actually crashed to another car, it's just like I accidentally bumped into it while parking.

The trucks (particularly all of them on the Commercial class) didn't feel like trucks at all. They felt like they were just oversized cars. I hit a fricking Panto using a Phantom and the Phantom immediately slowed down to almost a stop. I didn't like that. At all.

Big vehicles didn't feel big like in GTA IV. There, I really felt that a Phantom was a large-ass truck that can hit Merits and Esperantos out of the way with ease. In V, however, I felt that the Phantom was a large-ass Coquette that has the ability to tow trailers. And that's it.

I enjoy the driving in both games, however, and they also make sense to their setting. Liberty City is packed with condensed streets with little room to swerve in and out of traffic (especially if you have traffic density to 100 in the PC version). Los Santos and Blaine County, however, have wide open streets and highways that have a lot of place for cars to get to top speeds quickly. And I respect that.

But in terms of realism, GTA IV is better. It has body roll, varying acceleration on vehicles, and, while it's exaggerated, more realistic crash physics.

December 24, 2015

I enjoy the driving in both games, however, and they also make sense to their setting. Liberty City is packed with condensed streets with little room to swerve in and out of traffic (especially if you have traffic density to 100 in the PC version). Los Santos and Blaine County, however, have wide open streets and highways that have a lot of place for cars to get to top speeds quickly. And I respect that.

IV's driving would even make more sense in V's setting. The only change it would need is more top speed.

December 24, 2015

It's easier than IV's, brakes seem less necessary. I still had the slight issue of hitting everything every 5ft of road with V as I had with IV though, just for less time. I quite like both, or I got used to both. I quite like the bikes a bit more in V though, backflips are possible on them which I prefer to just falling off, weaving in and out of traffic is easy enough. The roads help. You're better at games if you're good at IV's driving than you are if you're good at V's driving. If you can steer a BMX in San Andreas then you're a master driver, if you haven't played it for years anyway, it's quite different. Good that things can still grow on people.

Edited December 24, 2015 by CarlitoDorito

December 24, 2015

I enjoy the driving in both games, however, and they also make sense to their setting. Liberty City is packed with condensed streets with little room to swerve in and out of traffic (especially if you have traffic density to 100 in the PC version). Los Santos and Blaine County, however, have wide open streets and highways that have a lot of place for cars to get to top speeds quickly. And I respect that.

IV's driving would even make more sense in V's setting. The only change it would need is more top speed.

Minus the exaggerated body roll on the cars, and making the sports cars a bit more sporty and having the top speed at least realistic (200 km/h TS for an Adder, which is based on the Veyron, dafaq?) like you said. The Realistic Driving V mod for PC did fix some problems, such as "invincible" deformation, limited top speed, having trucks feel weightless and the cars braking to a complete halt from top speed in a second, but sometimes, it still feels too arcadey. Having that perfect balance will be awesome.

December 25, 2015

Something that people will never understand about driving in this game:

In a racing game (Forza, GT, etc) you ACTUALLY control the gas, brake, gears and steering (and even the clutch in more sophisticated simulators).

However, in a GTA game, you give the orders to the protagonist ("start the car", "stop it", "accelerate" and so).

What's the difference? Simple: the protagonist decides why, when and how much pressure apply to the action you gave to him.

I.e: While off-roading, even hard pressing the R2/W he will limit the speed to a certain stage (60 to 80 mph).

Same applies to the motorcycles: you don't control the steering, the character decides how much weight add to each side and stabilize the vehicle. That's why it feels "unrealistic", because you don't drive it, but the protagonist does.

Please don't confuse driving with physics, that's completly different.

TL,DR: You don't control the vehicle directly, instead you give actions to the protagonist and he decides how to apply it.

Hope you guys can understand it (it's the best I can do with my basic english). Cheers and merry xmas!

Edited December 25, 2015 by GtaFanatik

December 28, 2015

I prefer GTA V driving better. It feels more responsive and less sloppy. But I've gotten used to GTA 4's driving, even though I never liked

December 28, 2015

When I play IV, it's hard to like V. When I was exclusively playing V, it grew on me too. I actually really enjoyed it sometimes, which is why I know it's not bad, but as soon as I started playing IV again I hated V's driving. The camera shake just makes it look cheap IMO. Those type of decisions really ruin it for me. It doesn't even look right. There's something weird about the crash physics and effects too.

R* North should've improved the driving physics themselves instead of handing it off to the Midnight Club devs. It wasn't necessary in SA, but R* should've added a driving school to IV and people would've learned how to drive those cars and bikes. They could've done that with V, and they still could've made them better, but it should be based on IV's physics IMO.

The problem people were having with IV wasn't about "physics". The problem is R* was trying to showcase their physics, so they exaggerated with the vehicle specs. GTA IV driving physics are very realistic, but the cars are just set up to be slower/softer. They handle like older cars and R* could've just made them feel more modern with stuff like traction control, better brakes, suspension, aerodynamics, etc.

V's handling isn't bad, but I just hate it compared to IV's driving.

Edited December 28, 2015 by BlackNoise

December 28, 2015

There's something seriously wrong with V physics. Going on/off sidewalks and driving in rough uneven terrain looks really bad.

December 28, 2015

Honestly I don't understand why people like V driving mechanics.

I get it if people don't like driving in general and just want to get from A to B, but isn't that what taxis/fast travel are for?

Rockstar should revert to IV physics with higher top speeds and slightly less body roll and have more taxis driving around LS. Then everyone's happy.

December 29, 2015

Honestly I don't understand why people like V driving mechanics.

I get it if people don't like driving in general and just want to get from A to B, but isn't that what taxis/fast travel are for?

Rockstar should revert to IV physics with higher top speeds and slightly less body roll and have more taxis driving around LS. Then everyone's happy.

Oh, God, I sure hope not!

I hate the driving in IV. I don't find it fun or enjoyable when cars are so ready to slide all over the place. I get why games like Gran Turismo or Forza go for realism, because they are track racers and they are literally simulating the real driving experience. Plus, driving is literally all there is in games like that, and realism, oversteer, and the rear ends of your cars sliding out in various ways are part of the experience.

But GTA is a sandbox game, often with ten different things going on at once, whether you are going about your business, involved in a high speed chase, or rushing from point A to Point B to kill a bunch of guys.

I think the main difference between GTA IV and V is that the driving in IV is grounded in realism and in V the driving physics are more arcade-like and meant to be more fun and enjoyable because the cars are more prone to "doing what you want them to do" without having to think too much about it.

In terms of missions, GTA IV's driving is easier, because the game "doesn't cheat," which is good! One of the things I always get annoyed about in GTA III, for instance, is that the AI cheats. The cars you are driving have to conform to one set of physics while the cars the AI are driving (like cops and AI opponents) are governed by a much easier and more forgiving set of physics. So the AI in GTA III has a distinct advantage over you. Anyone doing Vigilante missions, for instance, will see this to be self-evident.

So the redeeming virtue of GTA IV's driving physics is that they are so bad, like driving on a sheet of ice, but as long as you slow down and give yourself more time for braking, you can kick the living crap out of the AI opponents, because they drive like maniacs and slide out all over the place. lol

So for races and chases and any driving missions where you are set against AI driver opponents, GTA IV is actually a much EASIER than V. In V, the driving is very forgiving, so once again, it is forgiving both for you AND your AI opponents. Play the first Border Patrol mission Joseph gives to Trevor, where the Mariachi dancers go off road with their crappy car and you will see what I mean. That mission is more difficult (but fun!) because the Mariachi dancers drive like absolute maniacs all over the sandy and hilly terrain and never spin out, so you really have to pay attention.

My point is that it is a red herring to suggest that driving in GTA IV requires more skill. It does, in essence, but not to excel in the game against the AI.

I like the forgiving physics of V's driving both because the car does what I want it to do while I drive at insane, breakneck (and let's face it, FUN) speeds. With IV, it isn't difficult, BUT you always have to be thinking about it. It isn't as relaxing and hedonistic as V's driving. And I play games for relaxing hedonism more than the "challenge" of keeping the nose of the car, along with the rear end, on the road.

The point is that driving in IV is okay if you want the driving itself to be more cerebral.

I don't. Even though I can do it. That isn't why I play videogames. I play games to relax and kick back and lavish in the pleasure of it, not to have to always be coaxing the cars to stay on the road and not have their tires break traction all the time.

Edited December 29, 2015 by ChiroVette

December 29, 2015