why no special missions?

[ChiroVette]

Osho it's a losing battle. No matter what we say we'll be called entitled, 3d fanboys or simply f*ckheads. i think i might hang up my Sp flag on this game and go to better fleshed out ones.

 

 

 

No, Venomsnake, the only ones who get treated like that are the ones who show NO TOLERANCE for those of us who love GTA V. I would never pick a fight with you or anyone for "daring to express your opinions" about a game one way or the other. It is only when people get pissed off at our positive opinions and act as if their displeasure over things in V are endowed with some unassailable truth that I argue with them.

 

If you say you HATE V with a bloody passion and give a litany of all you cannot stand, I may debate the issue with you, but in the end, I would agree to disagree. So long as you aren't attacking ME for liking the game.

Edited January 6, 2016 by ChiroVette

[VenomsnakeVII]

 

 

Some people really like to misinterpret my comments ( intentionally? ) often or just don't read carefully to understand the point instead of making false accidations like assuming that "Rockstar should simply focus on things that I find fun" instead of quite clearly talking about the GTA formula here. If people think Yoga fits on the formula then clearly something is wrong at their end, not me.

I stand by what I said.

 

 

@ Fuzzknuckles:

I said for the "most part" and things outside the story. Territory acquisition is part of the storyline.

Osho it's a losing battle. No matter what we say we'll be called entitled, 3d fanboys or simply f*ckheads. i think i might hang up my Sp flag on this game and go to better fleshed out ones.

 

So you'll be treated the way people that enjoyed V have been treated for the last two and a bit years? How terrible for you!

 

This further proves my statement. But damn i didn't know even older (manchild) members could lose their way as well.

[chilleverest]

I'd love to have trucking missions on SP hauling semi trucks through full moon nights, making a stop at gas stations, picking up prostitutes, drink beer and then be on the way. I seldom played vigilante mission but im sure it'd add value to the game nevertheless, at least adds a little RPG element.

[B Dawg]

 

GTA SA can be played in so many ways where you have the freedom to ignore things you don't like

 

I don't like having to feed CJ to keep him alive. I can't ignore that. I don't like having to maintain the territories. I can't ignore that.

Input the Never Hungry cheat, problem solved. Do just enough territories to be able to get to the final mission, complete it and completely ignore territories afterwards. Simple.

If you didn't like eating and any other RPG elements like workout, there was a cheat for it. There was a cheat for almost everything.

Edited January 6, 2016 by B Dawg

[VenomsnakeVII]

 

Osho it's a losing battle. No matter what we say we'll be called entitled, 3d fanboys or simply f*ckheads. i think i might hang up my Sp flag on this game and go to better fleshed out ones.

 

 

 

No, Venomsnake, the only ones who get treated like that are the ones who show NO TOLERANCE for those of us who love GTA V. I would never pick a fight with you or anyone for "daring to express your opinions" about a game one way or the other. It is only when people get pissed off at our positive opinions and act as if their displeasure over things in V are endowed with some unassailable truth that I argue with them.

 

If you say you HATE V with a bloody passion and give a litany of all you cannot stand, I may debate the issue with you, but in the end, I would agree to disagree. So long as you aren't attacking ME for liking the game.

 

I didn't ever say i hated it, but yet get bashed by expressing the fact that it's message and way of direction are all skewed. And wasn't attacking you but what the hell am i playing anymore. There is no more Sp experience here, No more reason to feel immersed in the world unless it's being forced to go online. Gta had it's time but what reason is it i'm not seeing that's good in this game?

[Fuzzknuckles]

 

Osho it's a losing battle. No matter what we say we'll be called entitled, 3d fanboys or simply f*ckheads. i think i might hang up my Sp flag on this game and go to better fleshed out ones.

 

 

 

No, Venomsnake, the only ones who get treated like that are the ones who show NO TOLERANCE for those of us who love GTA V. I would never pick a fight with you or anyone for "daring to express your opinions" about a game one way or the other. It is only when people get pissed off at our positive opinions and act as if their displeasure over things in V are endowed with some unassailable truth that I argue with them.

 

If you say you HATE V with a bloody passion and give a litany of all you cannot stand, I may debate the issue with you, but in the end, I would agree to disagree. So long as you aren't attacking ME for liking the game.

 

Amen to this.

 

The double standards are strong on this board.

 

People want their fellow posters to know how disappointed they are, and we listen to them, and we say OK, that's a shame. We offer solutions to some of their problems (example, all the features in Online that you can access in solo mode, without encountering a single other player, ever, unless you choose to do so), and they reject them. We offer discussion on what we like, and are told that what we like is wrong. Then we're accused of calling people wrong for not liking or being disappointed by the game, called fanboys for defending the game, even after offering suggestions on how to improve the gaming experience.

 

It's simply a massive double standard that the upset and angry can be as vocal as they want, and expect no response other than support from other embittered players, and yet feel they can be as abusive or as hateful as they want toward anyone that likes the game even one tiny bit.

 

I like V a lot, I have acknowledged it's many flaws and made many complaints about it. And yet I'm still labeled a fanboy and told I'm blindly defending the game... even though I've never once said it's perfect and without problems.

 

That, right there, should tell you everything you need to know about the way people are treated around here when they support the game. Even if they DON'T blindly defend it and go to great lengths to explain what and why they find flawed, they are still labeled as fanboys because they are able to enjoy the game in spite of these flaws.

 

This further proves my statement. But damn i didn't know even older (manchild) members could lose their way as well.

If you're going to insult me, at least have the balls to do it properly, and with full sized text. You don't need to be sneaky about it. So pathetic.

 

This is pretty much exactly the kind of sh*t this place is reduced to now.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Fuzzknuckles

[ChiroVette]

 

 

I didn't ever say i hated it, but yet get bashed by expressing the fact that it's message and way of direction are all skewed. And wasn't attacking you but what the hell am i playing anymore. There is no more Sp experience here, No more reason to feel immersed in the world unless it's being forced to go online. Gta had it's time but what reason is it i'm not seeing that's good in this game?

 

 

I understand that, and those are ALL valid opinions. I may debate some of those with you, but would not bash you for expressing them!

 

The only thing I took issue with was your lament to Osho, when he was talking to me which made it sound like you were endorsing his victim mentality.

 

You did say this:

 

"Osho it's a losing battle. No matter what we say we'll be called entitled, 3d fanboys or simply f*ckheads. i think i might hang up my Sp flag on this game and go to better fleshed out ones."

 

Which makes it sound like I was harassing or bashing him based on his opinions, when the only thing I take issue with is people not accepting our opinions as just as valid as theirs NOT that you, he, or anyone else,for that matter, has to agree with me about the game.

Amen to this.

 

The double standards are strong on this board.

 

People want their fellow posters to know how disappointed they are, and we listen to them, and we say OK, that's a shame. We offer solutions to some of their problems (example, all the features in Online that you can access in solo mode, without encountering a single other player, ever, unless you choose to do so), and they reject them. We offer discussion on what we like, and are told that what we like is wrong. Then we're accused of calling people wrong for not liking or being disappointed by the game, called fanboys for defending the game, even after offering suggestions on how to improve the gaming experience.

 

It's simply a massive double standard that the upset and angry can be as vocal as they want, and expect no response other than support from other embittered players, and yet feel they can be as abusive or as hateful as they want toward anyone that likes the game even one tiny bit.

 

 

This is precisely what I am talking about! People have the right to express their opinions and displeasure in the forum. That's what its here for.

[Osho]

Who's "not accepting our opinions" ChiroVitte?

And where exactly, could you link the post of mine or those who didn't accept your opinion?

You are forcing this thread to turn into a battleground of constant bickering and personal artacks, and forcing us to ACCEPT your loud and big "wall of texts" that hardly addresses the topic at hand.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Osho

[Grumpy Cat]

alright why not just let R* to do whatever heck they want to do.

gta san andreas and gta the balled of gay tony is my best game and this is enough for me. gta 5 is best game for other peoples but not for me, so each games has own taste. so leave R* alone, besides do you know how much time it takes to make this games, so R* is probably rushing or something

[Osho]

Actually, I feel Rockstar always did their own thing with a few major complaints taken into consideration based on the most highly publicised ones during the release of their games.

[ChiroVette]

Who's "not accepting our opinions" ChiroVitte?

And where exactly, could you link the post of mine or those who didn't accept your opinion?

You are forcing this thread to turn into a battleground of constant bickering and personal artacks, and forcing us to ACCEPT your loud and big "wall of texts" that hardly addresses the topic at hand.

 

You are the one who has been the constant bickering voice against ALL arguments for GTA V.

 

Now, if you are telling me that you are willing to be more open-minded and willing to accept that other people like a lot of things about this game that maybe you don't, from here on out, then that's horse of a different color.

[Osho]

@ ChiroVitte

I am telling you that I am going to report you, if you continue to attack me with false charges by misinterpreting my comments. I am not going say anything else, and leave it upto the moderators.

No matter how much you shout and insult me, you can't mislead the moderators with your tactics.

Now please stay on topic. Refrain from quoting this post.

 

OT:

I actually liked the idea of chilleverest. It fits perfectly for such a big map in V. I think there's a mod as well that manages to add some trucking missions.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Osho

[ChiroVette]

One thing that I think is overlooked is that GTA V has plenty of "special missions." The only thing is that these missions are not R3 or special vehicle missions. Clearly Rockstar's intent with GTA V is to make these special missions more inextricably bound to the story and world of the game, and I believe that they see things like R3 missions as disjointed and not in context with the rest of the game in an organic way. I am not saying I completely agree with Rockstar, but I believe that this is what Sam Houser would say if he were on this forum and posted in this thread.

 

 

@ ChiroVitte
I am telling you that I am going to report you, if you continue to make attack me with false charges by misinterpreting my comments. I am not going say anything else, and leave it upto the moderators.
No matter how much you shout and insult me, you can't mislead the moderators with your tactics.
Now please stay on topic. Refrain from quoting this post.

OT:
I actually liked the idea of chilleverest. It fits perfectly for such a big map in V. I think there's a mod as well that manager to add some trucking missions.

 

I am very much on topic, and responded to you in an appropriate and measured manner.

 

Report all you please.

[Fuzzknuckles]

One thing that I think is overlooked is that GTA V has plenty of "special missions." The only thing is that these missions are not R3 or special vehicle missions.

Indeed, the side activity content is comparable to previous GTA games, at the core they're essentially the same things as we've previously had, in some cases. An activity like Trucking was reworked and made a mission in V - the mission where you collect the borer. Same thing, essentially -the player drives a big vehicle across the map and delivers it. But because this content isn't delivered in a very specific, previously used way, it's regarded as something else.

 

Vigilante missions sort of exist in the form of the bail bond missions - the two are essentially the same, but the method of accessing the two differ enough for people to be somehow bewildered into not seeing they're the same thing.

 

People are very stuck in their ways when it comes to GTA. They want everything to be exactly as it's always been. I can't help but feel that if the game were still exactly as it was in the 3D era, the people that are complaining now would be complaining that it's all to similar.

 

And yet, they are all very similar. They just don't have the same methods of access.

 

Ah to live in a world where someone could serve you up the same thing forever and it still be fresh. I mean, I like beans on toast, but I don't want to eat it every day forever on the same plate, with the same knife and fork, with the same strictly regulated number of beans on the toast, and the same strictly regulated positioning of the toast on the plate and the same...

 

OH GOD. It just sounds so boring.

[ChiroVette]

Exactly, Fuzzknuckles! The one thing you cannot accuse the Housers and Rockstar of doing is beating the same modalities to death over and over again, ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

 

Rockstar has managed to keep GTA fresh and always changing and evolving.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

If changing and evolving means going from Drug Deals to Tow Trucking then I'd prefer R* to beat those old modalities as much as they wish.

[ChiroVette]

If changing and evolving means going from Drug Deals to Tow Trucking then I'd prefer R* to beat those old modalities as much as they wish.

 

I'm actually okay either way. Based on what Rockstar showed me with the awesomeness in GTA V (yes, including the Tow Truck missions, which I enjoy) I am willing to set aside my nostalgic wish to have R3 missions again. But if they come back, along with various special vehicles missions, I won't complain either.

 

I am kind of on board with following Rockstar's lead on this, as long as they games keep being as fun as V for me.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

But don't you see the flaws in the mechanics? Don't get me wrong, V can be fun, and the mechanics work well but don't you agree that shooting is a major step back from MP3? Or Red Dead's weapon balancing?

 

The lack of animations during cover, weak gun sounds, no recoil, pointless weapon stats... these are serious downgrades of what R* has done before.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Cheatz_N_Trickz

[XenoxX]

 

 

 

It shouldn't matter if it makes sense. What matter is having fun and them cutting stuff because they don't make sense is one of the games weak point.

 

I think that this, more than anything, is the weak point of both GTA IV and V, at least weak points for my tastes.

 

The way that III, VC, SA, LCS, and VCS all play out is that Rockstar put all the fun stuff they could into the games and worried about the storyline and how the gameplay would "make sense" later on, if at all.

 

I still say that Rockstar did compromise with V. V has a lot of gameplay and cool stuff in it that makes no sense at all, which is great! But obviously Rockstar still wants to keep some things making a lot more sense in the game than, say, San Andreas, with its wild, over-the-top insanity.

 

The reason why I think Rockstar compromised with V so much is because like it or not there are still a huge number of people who want everything in a game to "make sense." So there seems to be some sort of a tug-of-war between the two opposing philosophies of GTA fans.

I don't see anything that doesnt make sense in V even the most minor thing is "explained" to the pöayer via dialouge, as if someome would ask "does this make any sense?" and an ingame NPC answers "Yes, because...".

 

A good example is in the mission Franklin, Trevor and Michael hunt the O neil brothers in the forest, Franklin at the beginning of the chase Allready explains how and why they have a rocket launcher with them.

Edited January 6, 2016 by XenoxX

[ChiroVette]

But don't you see the flaws in the mechanics? Don't get me wrong, V can be fun, and the mechanics work well but don't you agree that shooting is a major step back from the MP3? Or Red Dead's weapon balancing?

 

The lack of animations during cover, weak gun sounds, no recoil, pointless weapon stats... these are serious downgrades of what R* has done before.

 

I never played RDR, so I cannot say. And what is MP3?

 

Look, I am not a fan of GTA's gunplay. Even wearing my reading glasses, I always seem to have trouble finding that tiny, little dot on the screen. I would much prefer a more gaudy, even tacky and BIG crosshairs on the screen at all times when you have a weapon equipped. One of the things I love about SR is that even in a vehicle, as long as you have a weapon equipped, you get a nice, but targeting reticule. San Andreas and the other PS2-era GTA's are more fun for me because the targeting is in your face, even when in first person aiming.

 

Not sure what you mean by weak gun sounds, as I think they are fine. I can also live without recoil as it makes shooting easier. Not too concerned about animations while in cover, per se, but I get why you would like to see it.

 

But that's the thing: I don't see these things as being flaws just because some of them I don't like. They are just a direction Rockstar decided to go.

 

As for the Tow Truck missions you mentioned, what's wrong with them? I mean, only Rockstar could make a drug-addled hood rat like Tanya fun and entertaining, and I really enjoy the Tow Truck missions.

 

 

I don't see anything that doesnt make sense in V even the most minor thing is "explained" to the pöayer via dialouge, as if someome would ask "does this make any sense?" and an ingame NPC answers "Yes, because...".

 

A good example is in the mission Franklin, Trevor and Michael hunt the O neil brothers in the forest, Franklin at the beginning lf the chase Allready explains how and why they have a rocket launcher with them.

 

True, most things in V make sense. I was more referring to the wild, over the top gameplay that is a step into old school GTA that I felt was lacking in IV

[XenoxX]

 

But don't you see the flaws in the mechanics? Don't get me wrong, V can be fun, and the mechanics work well but don't you agree that shooting is a major step back from the MP3? Or Red Dead's weapon balancing?

 

The lack of animations during cover, weak gun sounds, no recoil, pointless weapon stats... these are serious downgrades of what R* has done before.

 

I never played RDR, so I cannot say. And what is MP3?

 

Look, I am not a fan of GTA's gunplay. Even wearing my reading glasses, I always seem to have trouble finding that tiny, little dot on the screen. I would much prefer a more gaudy, even tacky and BIG crosshairs on the screen at all times when you have a weapon equipped. One of the things I love about SR is that even in a vehicle, as long as you have a weapon equipped, you get a nice, but targeting reticule. San Andreas and the other PS2-era GTA's are more fun for me because the targeting is in your face, even when in first person aiming.

 

 

 

You can change how big the crosshair is and the crosshair complexity in the settings.

[ChiroVette]

 

 

You can change how big the crosshair is and the crosshair complexity in the settings.

 

 

I wasn't aware of this. I will check it out, thanks!

[XenoxX]

But don't you see the flaws in the mechanics? Don't get me wrong, V can be fun, and the mechanics work well but don't you agree that shooting is a major step back from MP3? Or Red Dead's weapon balancing?

 

The lack of animations during cover, weak gun sounds, no recoil, pointless weapon stats... these are serious downgrades of what R* has done before.

Well yes, you are correct V doesn't stand a chance against Max Payne 3s third person mechanics, but does it realy have to?

Apart from the fact that this is kind of an unfair comparison since Max Payne 3 is literally the best third person shooter currently on the market, a GTA compromises everything to get it all under one hat.

Does a GTA need the facial animation system of LA Noire? No it doesnt, because it would take away developement time for other features of the game, such as driving shooting, parachuting, flying etc.

 

GTA Vs mechanics on their own are very focused and they accompany the missions design, but more importantly, they work, they are fun to play, responsive(especially on the controller) and have good and responsive camera work with them.

[KarimNTerr]

This is something I never understood on Rockstar's part. I mean, of course they want the series to be more realistic than how it was in the 3D Universe, which is cool and all, but why not make the vehicle-based side-missions consequently more realistic instead of just remove them? The "Vigilante" side-mission in GTAIV was very well-made, as well as the "Private Taxi Fare" side-mission in GTAV, and those are activities I'd really like to see continuing in upcoming GTA titles, but what about "Firefighter" and "Paramedic"? I'd have loved to enter a Firetruck, and not only be able to extinguish outdoor fires, but also enter buildings on fire and help its residents to evacuate - like a more sophisticated version of the last part of GTA: San Andreas' "Burning Desire" mission, if you know what I mean. GTA: Vice City Stories is still the GTA game that satisfies me the most on the vehicular side-missions aspect, and even though they weren't that sophisticated, they provided the game with more replayability and diversity. I'd also like to see the comeback of GTA: Vice City Stories' "Beach Patrol" - I loved the concept of that mission, and I think an updated version of it would have fitted well in GTAV.

 

Slightly off-topic, but I'd also like to see something like this: in the Beta of GTAV there was a "Kickstart" event model for the Maze Bank Arena interiors, and since then I hoped to see it added to the game with the ability to play "8-Track"/"Hotring" as Micheal, "Kickstart"/"Dirtring" as Franklin "Blood Bawl"/"Bloodring" as Trevor. I personally think it would be amazing!

 

This is just my opinion, though.

Edited January 6, 2016 by toxluv

[Cheatz/Trickz]

Well yes, you are correct V doesn't stand a chance against Max Payne 3s third person mechanics, but does it realy have to?

Apart from the fact that this is kind of an unfair comparison since Max Payne 3 is literally the best third person shooter currently on the market, a GTA compromises everything to get it all under one hat.

Does a GTA need the facial animation system of LA Noire? No it doesnt, because it would take away developement time for other features of the game, such as driving shooting, parachuting, flying etc.

 

GTA Vs mechanics on their own are very focused and they accompany the missions design, but more importantly, they work, they are fun to play, responsive(especially on the controller) and have good and responsive camera work with them.

Have to? No. But it's disappointing to see V take such a step back after MP3's shooting was so well done. And overload you with every weapon and the useless stats when although RDR allowed you to carry all the weapons, they were more varied and created a balance.

 

I will say V is very responsive, but responsiveness was never a problem before, but the fun of shootouts is diminished due to the aforementioned static animations, no recoil, peashooter sounds etc. There's no intensity, something IV and MP3 nailed.

 

Also, LA Noire's face tech isn't necessary, hand animation vs face tech is a preference, not really a case of better or worse. That also requires the character to look exactly like the actor, and that's just again, a preference. Facial capture technology does the same thing without the actors full likeness anyway, and that's on the up and up. Then it will be a case of better and worse.

[ClaudeSpeed1911]

It doesn't have to be like MP3 but should atleast be better than RDR and especially IV.

 

The shooting just doesn't feel satisfying.

[ChiroVette]

 

But don't you see the flaws in the mechanics? Don't get me wrong, V can be fun, and the mechanics work well but don't you agree that shooting is a major step back from MP3? Or Red Dead's weapon balancing?

 

The lack of animations during cover, weak gun sounds, no recoil, pointless weapon stats... these are serious downgrades of what R* has done before.

Well yes, you are correct V doesn't stand a chance against Max Payne 3s third person mechanics, but does it realy have to?

Apart from the fact that this is kind of an unfair comparison since Max Payne 3 is literally the best third person shooter currently on the market, a GTA compromises everything to get it all under one hat.

Does a GTA need the facial animation system of LA Noire? No it doesnt, because it would take away developement time for other features of the game, such as driving shooting, parachuting, flying etc.

 

GTA Vs mechanics on their own are very focused and they accompany the missions design, but more importantly, they work, they are fun to play, responsive(especially on the controller) and have good and responsive camera work with them.

 

 

These are awesome points. Thanks for bringing them up!

[XenoxX]

It doesn't have to be like MP3 but should atleast be better than RDR and especially IV.

 

The shooting just doesn't feel satisfying.

That is entirely your opinion, IMO the shooting is done way better than GTA IV and a huge leap forward, I cannot give my two cents on RDR, but again, V is not forced to own all features of previous Rockstar Games, as Sam House said its about "taking the right compromises" what game developement is about.

You cannot compare games from entirely different developers with an entirely different focus, Max Payne 3 mastered the third person genre but does not include the wide open world and variety of features V has got.

The same is the case with RDR, R* San Diege did not need to focus on complex vehicular AI or planes physics and AI, they did not need to animate the wide array of characters there are in V(I know there are a lot in RDR too but V has just a lot more different NPC types).

[Cheatz/Trickz]

These are awesome points. Thanks for bringing them up!

Awesome points that I debunked quite clearly:

 

It's disappointing to see V take such a step back after MP3's shooting was so well done. And overload you with every weapon and the useless stats when although RDR allowed you to carry all the weapons, they were more varied and created a balance.

 

I will say V is very responsive, but responsiveness was never a problem before, but the fun of shootouts is diminished due to the aforementioned static animations, no recoil, peashooter sounds etc. There's no intensity, something IV and MP3 nailed.

 

Also, LA Noire's face tech isn't necessary, hand animation vs face tech is a preference, not really a case of better or worse. That also requires the character to look exactly like the actor, and that's just again, a preference. Facial capture technology does the same thing without the actors full likeness anyway, and that's on the up and up. Then it will be a case of better and worse.

[ChiroVette]

 

These are awesome points. Thanks for bringing them up!

Awesome points that I debunked quite clearly:

 

 

I don't agree.

 

I think you stated your opinion about why you prefer certain things, but this is not the same as debunking his position. In your defense, just because I agree with him, and could also list a bunch of reasons why, doesn't mean that my "reasons" would debunk your opinion either.